My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9576
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
9576
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:36 PM
Creation date
5/22/2009 6:50:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
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
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
81
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
Page 30 ~ <br />Northeastern Region <br />Bluehead sucker are thought to be extirpated from a short stretch of the Green River below ~ <br />Flaming Gorge Dam, but common in the mainstem Green, Duchesne, and White rivers <br />(Bezzerides and Bestgen 2002, Brunson 2001), including major tributaries such as the <br />Strawberry River. Like the roundtail chub, the threats to the bluehead sucker in these basins are <br />similar: water diversions, non-natives, and oil exploration projects that affect water quality. Non- <br />natives in the basin include brown trout, northern pike, smallmouth bass, white sucker, green ~ <br />sunfish, red shiner, and walleye. Many higher elevation streams in the drainage that are suitable <br />for bluehead sucker are also blue ribbon trout waters and thus are intended for sportfishing. <br />Recent information shows a possible decline in numbers in the Duchesne River; however, more <br />years of continuing surveys will help verify whether this is a true trend. Detailed information <br />regarding the historical and current status of bluehead sucker and associated threats is found in ~ <br />Table 2-4. <br />Southeastern Region <br />Bezzerides and Bestgen (2002) described bluehead sucker as abundant in the Colorado and ~ <br />Dolores rivers and common in the Price, San Juan, and Dirty Devil rivers, though Valdez (1990) <br />noted that bluehead sucker were rare in the mainstem Colorado -River from Lake Powell to <br />Moab, UT in the late 1980's. Surveys for endangered. fishes in the San Juan River suggest that <br />bluehead sucker are still relatively common there, though population information has not been <br />quantified. Surveys suggest that bluehead sucker were historically abundant in the San Rafael ~ <br />River drainage, but are now only rarely found in the drainage (C. Walker, Regional Biologist, <br />Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, personal communication 2005). De-watering of stream <br />segments as a result of residential and commercial water development is exacerbated by drought. <br />Extensive diversion of instream flow can cause increases in water temperatures and declines in <br />water quality throughout the entire stream length as overall water levels decline. In addition to ~ <br />water quality, de-watering large stretches of rivers will segment migratory routes and provide <br />direct benefit to riparian invasive species such as tamarisk, which further degrade the stream. <br />Bluehead sucker in the Muddy Creek drainage show characteristics of both bluehead and <br />mountain sucker (C. Walker, Regional Biologist, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, personal <br />communication 2005) indicating that introgression may be occurring as numbers decline. ~ <br />Detailed information regarding the historical and current status of bluehead sucker and <br />associated threats is found in Table 2-5. <br />Southern Region <br />Bluehead sucker were documented by McAda et al. (1977) in the Escalante River and thought to ~ <br />be historically present in the Fremont River (Bezzerides and Bestgen 2002). They are still <br />considered common in portions of these streams, though Fridell et al. (2004) and Morvilius and <br />Fridell (2005) observed declines in many of the Escalante River tributaries (see Table 2-6). <br />Mueller et al. (1998) did not observe the species in his surveys in the lower Escalante River; <br />however, recent surveys by the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources in 2003 and 2004 revealed <br />populations of all three species and very few non-natives in upper portions of this watershed <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.