Laserfiche WebLink
A detailed description of the Recovery Program is provided by the U.S. <br />Fish and Wildlife Service (1987a), an environmental assessment of its <br />implementation is provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service <br />(1987b), and its evolution along with pertinent background is summarized <br />by Wydoski and Hamill (1991). <br />The Recovery Program consists of five major elements for recovery of <br />endangered fishes in the Upper Colorado River Basin: (1) provision of <br />in-stream flows; (2) habitat development and maintenance; (3) native <br />fish stocking; (4) management of nonnative species and sport fishing; <br />and (5) research, monitoring, and data management (U.S. Fish and <br />Wildlife Service 1987a, 1987b). <br />Representatives of the cooperating agencies and organizations serve on -- <br />several committees to oversee the Recovery Program within the framework <br />of the Endangered Species Act, existing states' water rights, and terms <br />of the Colorado River compacts (Rose and Hamill 1988). All decisions <br />by the Recovery Program participants are made on the best available <br />information and refined as new information becomes available using the <br />adaptive management approach (Walters and Hillborn 1978; Walters 1986). <br />2. Recoverv Issue Discussed in this Draft Environmental Assessment. Human <br />alteration of the Upper Colorado River and its tributaries had a major <br />negative impact on some of the native fishes -- to the point where they <br />are now listed as endangered. Some of the native fishes, adapted to the <br />highly variable aquatic environment of the natural ecosystem, are still <br />able to maintain self-sustaining. populations, despite the drastic <br />altered state of the present river environment. In less altered river <br />reaches, native-fish species dominate the fish fauna (Anderson 1997; <br />Burdick 1995) while, in more altered reaches, nonnative fish species are <br />more successful (Miller et al. 1982; Tyus et al. 1982). <br />(A) Introduction of Nonnative Fishes in the Upper Colorado River Basin <br />and Impacts on Native Fishes The introduction of fish species <br />not native to the Colorado River Basin began in the late 1800's. <br />Such introductions occurred for a variety of reasons including <br />establishment of sport fish populations, forage for the sport fish <br />species, biological control of unwanted pests, aesthetic or <br />ornamental purposes, release of unwanted pets or bait fish, and <br />accidental releases (Taylor et al. 1984). Some of these <br />introductions were not successful in becoming established while <br />other introductions resulted in establishing self-sustaining <br />populations in various parts of the Upper Colorado River Basin. <br />The species composition of a fish community can be altered <br />dramatically and quickly. For example, pre-impoundment <br />investigations of Taylor Draw Dam on the White River, Colorado in <br />1983-1984 was dominated (97%) by native fishes above, within, and <br />below the reservoir basin. By 1989-1990, nonnative fishes <br />comprised 90% of the fishes collected in the reservoir and 80% of <br />the fishes collected in the river below the dam (Martinez et al. <br />1994). Generally, the successful nonnative fishes expanded their <br />ranges throughout the Upper Basin wherever habitats were suitable <br />