8017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Socio-Economics. Most of the sportfish (e.g., green sunfish and largemouth bass) occupying these ponds do not reach a size desired by anglers and other species (e.g., carp, white sucker, fathead minnows) are not sought by anglers. However, some ponds 3 to 6 pounds are caught each year by some anglers with some regularity (P. Martinez, 1997, Personal Communication). Stocking nonnative fish for sport fishing in select ponds would continue fo 11 owi ng II Procedures for Stocki ng Nonnative Fi sh Speci es in the Upper Co 1 orado Ri ver Bas in" that were developed and signed in a Cooperative Agreement by the Colorado Division of Wildlife; Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, Wyoming Game and Fish Department, and the U.s. Fish and Wildlife Service {Colorado Division of Wildlife et al. 1996). A final Environmental Assessment was written on these "Procedures" (Maddux 1996) and resulted in a decision of a Finding of No Significant Impact. The Colorado Division of Wildlife and U.S. Fish and ~ildlife Service intended to reach a balance between providing sportfishing opportunities to Colorado anglers in western Colorado while efforts are taken to recovery the endangered Colorado River fishes. The Colorado Division of Wildlife (Division) is actively seeking ways to provide warmwater fishing opportunities in the floodplain ponds along the Upper Colorado and Gunnison rivers. For example, the Division has already explored the possibility of raising the berms at Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) specifications on ponds such as Corn Lake, Duke Lake, and Upper Connected Lake so that they would be out of the 50-year floodplain and can be stocked under the "Procedures" (See Item B(2) on page 6 of Colorado Division of Wildl He et al. 1996). These waters are particularly important in the Grand Valley because they provide recreational fishing opportunities for youngsters and others through programs such as "Pathways to Fishing". The cottonwood-willow riparian zone in the floodplain of the Upper Colorado River is primarily (90%) in private ownership (Beidleman 1978). None of the ponds in private (or public) ownership will be chemically treated to remove nonnative fishes without the permission of the landowners. Therefore, no adverse impact will occur to landowners. C. Alternative 3 - Install Mechanical Devices in Outlets of Ponds in the Floodplain to Prevent Chronic Escapement of Nonnative Fish Species. Under this alternative, mechanical devices (i.e., screens or traps) would be installed in floodplain ponds with an outlet to either the Colorado River or Gunnison River. Only a small percentage of ponds along the Colorado River (12.7% of 253 ponds) was reported to have an outlet (10 with spillway, 20 with culvert overflow, and 2 with standpipe) by Mitchell (1995). About the same percentage of ponds along the Gunnison River (13% of 61 ponds) was reported by Mitchell (1995) to have an outlet to the river (8 with culvert overflow). Since only 40 ponds were reported by Mitchell (1995) to have outlets to either the Colorado River or Gunnison River, chronic escapement of nonnative fishes could not be controlled from the majority of ponds (268) without outlets. Therefore, this alternative could not serve as a primary method for controlling the chronic escapement of nonnative fishes. 21