8063 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Annual report Colorado River Fish and Wildlife Council Colorado River Cutthroat Trout Conservation April 21. 1998 3) Criteria for determining population purity: When possible, all techniques will be used for determing genetic purity, including electrophoresis, mitochondrial DNA, meristics, morphometrics, stocking history, and barriers -There will be an emphasis on quatifiable standards and movement away from a subjective A, B, C rating system. When possible, populations testing 98% pure at the 95% confidence level will be used to establish new populations; if such populations are not available, the "best fish" in a GMU will be used rather than moving stocks from another GMU. Populations testing 90% pure will be used as part of the resource when evaluating population status for listing, but not for founding new populations. Populations with mixed or conflicting purity results should be protected but not mixed with other populations, and population purity will be considered unknown until evaluated with acceptable methodology. 4) Management strategies: a) Assessment strategies will 1)assess status of all populations, their risk levels, and potential to lower those risk levels, 2)identify all life forms present in each subbasin, 3)look for new populations and identify translocation sites, and 4) identify and quantify habitat conditions. b) Protection strategies will 1)protect all populations, 2) protect all life history forms, including all age groups and headwater stream, lacustrine, fluvial and adfluvial populations, 3)ensure that no population risk level is increased, and 4)protect associated aquatic wildlife community. c) Restoration strategies will 1)reconnect individual populations, 2)expand high risk populations, 3)restore two metapopulations within each subbasin to low risk status, and 4)expand or restore isolated populations and lower risk level. The Coordination Committee met on November 18, 1997, and adopted these recommendations, with the additional clarification that although two metapopulations per GMU is the overall goal, a short-term goal is to have one metapopulation per GMU and that isolated populations will "count" toward that goal. They also directed the Biology Committee to establish how "genetic purity" will be defined for each available methodology and to establish what individual population viability criteria count for both isolated populations and sub-populations within meta-populations. They specifically highlighted a need to reconcile the adult numbers criteria used for the greenback cutthroat in Colorado with the effective population size criteria favored by Utah. The Coordination Committee further directed the Biology Committee to establish a reference base or baseline of viable, 2 L