9576

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 9576
• Author: Utah Department of Natural Resources.
• Title: Conservation and Management Plan for Three Fish Species in Utah - Adressing needs for Roundtail Chub ‎(Gila robusta)‎, Bluehead Sucker ‎(Catostomus discobolus)‎, and Flannelmouth Sucker ‎(Catostomus latipinnis)‎.
• USFW Year: 2006.
• USFW - Doc Type: Salt Lake City, UT.
• Copyright Material: NO

drop downstream water temperatures even further throughout the year, meaning that
temperatures are cold on a regular basis, not only seasonally as was historically the case.

Page 9
Lack of information
Compounding the preceding obstacles to the conservation of the three species is a near absence
of historical abundance and distribution information regarding the three species. Not only were
remote localities rarely sampled by wildlife agencies, information from these remote locations
~ from members of the public are not reliable even as anecdotal information due to the historical
tendency of laypersons to refer to all chubs in the Colorado River Basin (bonytail, humpback
chub, roundtail chub) as "bonetails," creating questions regarding the validity and accuracy of
historical, non-agency records (Quartarone 1995). The limited historical information on these
species makes determination of proper management and conservation tools difficult, especially
~ in heavily impacted drainages.
The three species are not classified as sport fish in most settings and managers have historically
not collected information on these species; hence, information on them is comparatively
fragmented and rare. Increasing risks from threats such as water development, nonnative fishes,
and disease, combined with increasing public and professional scrutiny, have raised the levels of
~ concern and actions for the three species concurrent with increasing potential for them to be
listed. Information regarding the distribution, status, and abundance of the three species in Utah
is just recently being organized (beginning in 2002) as a result of the three species project;
however, prior to the initiation of the Agreement, species information in Utah was oftentimes
outdated.

Both mainstem and tributary habitats are likely important for these species depending on their
life stage. A number of researchers have noted the home range of flannehnouth sucker tends to
include both mainstem and tributary habitats (Beyers et al. 2001, Chart and Bergersen 1992,
Douglas and Marsh 1998, Holden 1973, Holden and Crist 1981, Vanicek 1967), though the
~ relationship is not clear. Snyder and Muth (1990) suggest that flannelmouth sucker will
sometimes migrate depending on habitat availability and homing behaviors. In the Grand
Canyon, only limited spawning habitat is present and flannelmouth sucker will travel great
distances to get to these spawning locations (Weiss et al. 1998); in addition, some suggest that
tributaries are important for spawning in the Grand Canyon (Douglas and Douglas 2000,
~ Douglas and Marsh 1998, Maddux et al. 1987). It is also thought that roundtail chub and
bluehead sucker likely use a combination or mainstem and tributary habitats in certain locations,
though this information has not been described for any specific population of the three species in
Utah.
Relation to other conservation programs
~ Distribution of the three species among both mainstem and tributary habitats is extensive and use
of tributary systems for spawning, rearing, and/or adult habitat is well documented for the three
species (Bestgen and Propst 1989, Carlson and Platania 1984, Cavalli 1999, Martinez et al. 1994,
Miller and Rees 2000, Valdez and Ryel 1995, Wick et al. 1991). Because endangered fish
recovery program activities are conducted within mainstem habitats and certain tributaries, it is
~ expected that they will afford some amount of incidental protection or conservation measures for
the three species. At this time, the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fishes Recovery
C