7899 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . This draft stocking analysis, prepared in response to Colorado Wildlife Commission direction, predicts potential impacts of tiger muskie1 introduction in select western Colorado reservoirs. The report does not recommend whether the Colorado Division of Wildlife should expand tiger muskie management to western Colorado, rather this document is intended to openly solicit internal input and careful evaluation from external agencies and the general public. This report evaluates tiger muskie management in light of the dual mission of the Colorado Division of Wildlife to protect wildlife as well as to provide for recreational wildlife opportunities. Therefore, an objective of this draft stocking analysis is to assess the impacts, risks, and uncertainties of introducing tiger muskie into select western Colorado waters. This report attempts to address means of providing new angling opportunities for tiger muskie while protecting the existing aquatic resource. A total of nine waters, six from the Northwest Region and three from the Southwest Region, were reviewed as potential introductory sites. A risk assessment evaluation included review of the following criteria for candidate waters: (1) escapement potential to connecting waterways; (2) potential impact on threatened and endangered fish species if escapement occurs; (3) potential impact on other native fish species if escapement occurs; (4) on-site impact on existing sportfish populations; (5) off-site impacts on existing sportfish populations; and (6) potential of tiger muskie to enhance sportfishing value. On the basis of this evaluation process, six western Colorado reservoirs are potential candidates for tiger muskie stocking: Green Mountain Reservoir, Hallenbeck Reservoir, Harvey Gap Reservoir, Juniata Reservoir, and Rio Blanco Reservoir in the Northwest Region, and Sanchez Reservoir in the Southwest Region. Stocking and monitoring procedures are described for these waters to further describe how tiger muskie could be managed in western Colorado. Stocking would be characterized by conservative introductory rates, and bi-annual rather than annual supplemental stocking. Any introductions would be monitored by annual standardized inventorying of reservoir(s) and associated drainages for the first five years after . . . . . . . 1 Only common names of fishes are used in this report; these conform to common names prescribed by Rubins et. al. 1991 A List of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States and Canada, 5th Edition, American Fisheries Society Special Publication Number 20. 11 .