Laserfiche WebLink
<br />It is also recommended that annual progress reports emphasize the summary <br />of accomplishments more fully. Accomplishments provide the basis for <br />evaluating whether objectives identified in the proposal were <br />accomplished. Summaries and evaluations of data as collected provides the <br />most complete information for making effective management decisions or <br />refinements in study designs. <br /> <br />Summarization of available information through Recovery Program efforts <br />may be close to a success story. The Colorado squawfish and humpback chub <br />populations in the Upper Basin are considered to be stable by Recovery <br />Program participants (Wydoski 1994b) and these species appear to have <br />responded to certain streamflows. However. measurable recovery objectives <br />should be identified to evaluate Program success in recovery of the four <br />endangered fishes (i.e.. development of self-sustaining populations). <br />Only then can Program efforts be directed at expanding the range of the <br />Colorado squawfish into unoccupied historic habitat or <br />recovery/reintroduction of razorback sucker populations and reintroduction <br />of the bony tail into designated critical habitat within their former <br />ranges. <br /> <br />3. Inteqration of Available Information. Information that has been collected <br />from a variety of disciplines should be carefully examined to determine if <br />integration is possible to make informed decisions on the Upper Basin <br />ecosystem. The Program attempt to determine the relationship of <br />streamflow. geomorphology. and food web dynamics demonstrates the correct <br />approach. However. the Program researchers should make the first <br />integration of this information since they are most familiar with the <br />objectives of their respective studies. the methods or approaches used. <br />the data available for analyses. and the results of their studies. The <br />interpretation of how information from various disciplines was integrated <br />by Recovery Program researchers can then be evaluated by peer reviewers. <br />The peer reviewers could provide recommendations for consideration in <br />experimental study designs or the final integration of data. It is <br />recommended that future research proposals be developed so that basin-wide <br />processes are examined rather than site specific processes. The <br />integrated approach identified by Stanford (1994) should be implemented <br />more fully in future research thrusts. emphasizing integration of data <br />from the various disciplines. <br /> <br />4. Identification of Research Gaps. Many of the early studies were <br />concentrated on the ecological requirements of the Colorado squawfish. <br />Although this information will be beneficial for management of the <br />Colorado squawfish Ca species considered to be stable by Recovery Program <br />participants), it will be inadequate for making recovery and management <br />decisions on the other three endangered fishes. Future emphasis should be <br />placed on critical life stages of the other species. <br /> <br />The Interagency Standardized Monitoring Program should be expanded to <br />monitor all endangered fishes as well as nonnative fishes. It should also <br />include the critical life stages of these fishes. Such monitoring will be <br />key to evaluating the responses of the endangered and nonnative fishes to <br />various recovery efforts. <br /> <br />10 <br />