Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ENDANGERED SPECIES <br /> <br />377 <br /> <br />populations, but other subspecies can be conserved by protecting only a few <br />populations. Their data suggested that some subspecies of cutthroat trout have <br />long evolved separately from others and that taxonomic revision of the species is <br />needed to (1) reflect these distinct evolutionary histories, and (2) allow develop- <br />ment of good conservation plans for the diverse groups now considered a single <br />species. <br />Rearing and reintroducing endangered fishes have generally met with limited <br />success. Ono et aI. (1983) discussed several failed attempts to propagate rare <br />fishes. But, for some species such as the endangered cui-ui of Pyramid Lake, <br />Nevada, artificial propagation is the key to survival. State and federal agencies at <br />first seemed reluctant to embrace reintroduction because of its potential to limit <br />other water uses. Nonetheless, reintroductions of rare fishes began in the <br />southwestern United States in the early I 980s. Elimination of the requirement that <br />critical habitat be designated when species were listed and provision of experi- <br />mental populations by the 1982 ESA amendments initially stimulated increased <br />interest in reintroduction. However, regulations6nalized in 1984 were so com- <br />plicated that many reintroduction plans were disrupted again (Rinne et at. 1986). <br />Williams et aI. (1988) examined recovery plans for 39 endangered and threatened <br />U.S. fishes and found that 82% of them called for reintroductions to establish new <br />populations, begin artificial propagation, or set up educational exhibits. <br />Many fishes have been introduced to North America, primarily to provide sport <br />and food (Courtenay and Kohler 1986), and others have been moved within North <br />American countries to areas outside their native ranges. Effects of such introduc- <br />tions may include habitat alteration, introduction of parasites or diseases, <br />reduction in growth or survival (or even elimination) of native fishes, and changes <br />in community structure. Adverse effects of introduced exotics have contributed to <br />66% of fish extinctions in North America in the past century (Miller et at. 1989). <br />When an introduction seems the only solution to a problem, guidelines to facilitate <br />sound decision making should be followed (see Chapter 12). <br />Artificial barriers have been used to separate endemic rare fishes from potential <br />predators, competitors, or sources of hybridization (Ono et al. 1983). Threatened <br />fishes may be the objective of properly managed sport fisheries. Kucera et at. <br />(1985) and Gresswell (1988) described introductions of threatened greenback and <br />Lahontan cutthroat trouts to establish sport fisheries. Sport fisheries should not be <br />developed at the expense of natural populations or habitats. Although exploitation <br />of endangered fishes is controlled as mandated by the ESA, regulations may be <br />necessary to restrict their incidental catch or limit the extent to which they are <br />taken by mistake. Such regulations are often considered a form of people <br />management. <br /> <br />15.5.2 Managing People <br /> <br />Economic, political, and social constraints often have strong bearing on <br />decisions related to managing endangered fishes. The snail darter controversy and <br />other case histories illustrate this point. Conflicts between endangered fishes and <br />construction projects or other human activities with significant economic, politi- <br />cal, and social support are certain to continue. Simply gaining funding for research <br />on and management of endangered fishes requires consideration of these factors. <br />Fish and game agencies continue to struggle to support nongame programs with <br /> <br />~ <br />