My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9383
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
9383
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:35 PM
Creation date
5/22/2009 12:59:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
9383
Author
SWCA, I.
Title
Recovery Goals for the four Colorado River Endangered Fish Species.
USFW Year
2000.
USFW - Doc Type
Logan.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
83
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />reported by several investigators (Hagan and Banks 1963, Vanicek 1967, Flagg 1982). This <br />. s believed to be alien to the Colorado River Basin, and transferred from other river <br />ia non-native fishes. <br /> <br /> <br />3.3.2 Nonnative Fishes <br />At least 67 species of nonnative fishes have been introduced into the Colorado River <br />Basin during the last 100 years (Minckley 1982, Tyus et al. 1982, Carlson and Muth 1989, <br />Minckley and Deacon 1991, Maddux et al. 1993, Tyus and Saunders 1996). Tyus et al. (1982) <br />reported 42 nonna . ecies established in the upper basin, and Minckley (1982) reported 37 in <br />the lower basin. M ... f these species were introduced actively as game and forage fishes, while <br />others were incidenr~llY mtroduced with game fishes or passively as bait fish. <br />Native and nonnative fishes that occupy the lower Colorado River basin overlap broadly <br />in their physical habitat and resource uses, such that spatio-temporal overlap is evident at all life <br />stages (i.e., larval, juvenile, adult; Pacey and Marsh 1998). The assemblage of nonnative fishes <br />now present in the lower basin has feeding, behavioral, and reproductive attributes that allow it <br />to displace, replace, or exclude native fi ecies, supporting the hypothesis that the presence of <br />nonnative fishes alone precludes suce . e-cycle completion of components of the native <br />fauna. Pacey and Marsh (1998) conclude that no attribute of physical habitat or resource use can <br />be identified that markedly or marginally favors one group offish over another, and that habitat <br />manipulation is not an option. Segregated management is recommended in which native fish <br />management focuses on providing aquatic habitats free of and protected from nonnative fishes, <br />and populated with native populations or assemblages deriv appropriate genetically <br />defined stocks. These recommendations are being implemen repatriated riverside habitats <br />(e.g., oxbows, flooded bottomlands) in which hatchery reare onytail are being released. At <br />least three year classes of bonytail have been reported from one of these ponds near the Cibola <br />National Wildlife Refuge ((Mueller 2000; Personal communication, e.O. Minckley 2000). <br />In the upper basin, the extent of effects from nonnative fishes is not fully known, but <br />there is compelling evidence that predation and competition from introduced species has <br />contributed to the decline of all of the Colorado River native fishes (McAda and 1980, <br />Minckley 1982, Tyus and Saunders 1996). Predation on native fishes has been doc <br /> <br /> <br />15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.