My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6001
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
6001
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/11/2009 11:32:54 AM
Creation date
8/10/2009 12:14:31 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
6001
Author
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, C. R. F. R. T.
Title
Colorado Squawfish Recovery Plan.
USFW Year
1978.
USFW - Doc Type
\
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
70
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
~ '' <br />t <br />t <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />of red shiners (Notropsis lutrensis) which compete directly <br />with young Colorado squawfish for food. In addition, most <br />backwaters also contain large numbers of green sunfish and <br />bluegills which .act as predators on Colorado squawfish eggs, <br />fry, and fingerlings. There is little doubt that Colorado <br />squawfish reproduction on the lower San Juan River would be <br />:difficult, if not impossible, under current biological con- <br />ditions. <br />-Page 5 - Lt seems that two very important actions taken by <br />the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the State Game and <br />Fish agencies on the Green and San Juan Rivers, which have <br />affected the Colorado squawfish, have not-been discussed. <br />Specifically, we refer to the rotenone fish eradication <br />program in 1962 carried out on the Green River in conjunc- <br />tion with the closure of Flaming Gorge .Dam and a similar <br />program initiated in conjunction with closure of Navajo Dam. <br />Both of these activities most certainly contributed signifi- <br />cantly to the decline of the endemic species in the Colorado <br />River and its tributaries and should be discussed in the <br />Recovery Plan. There may have been other such programs <br />carried out on other sections of the Colorado River and its <br />tributaries, and we feel strongly that the results of these <br />programs and. how they may have affected the decline of the <br />Colorado squawfish in the Colorado River Basin should be dis- <br />cussed. <br />Section 14 - In both the step-down plan and step-down narrative <br />of this section, several future research requirements are listed. <br />J-3 It is important that research includes plans to describe micro- <br />habitat requirements of all life stages of the Colorado squaw- <br />fish. Until these requirements are known, the effects of flow <br />depletions on critical habitat cannot be adequately answered. <br />Section 1221 - In the step-down narrative of this section, it <br />states: "Trend zones in the Colorado River drainage will be <br />J-4 established where Colorado squawfish are known to exist." The <br />trend zones proposed for monitoring include the San Juan River <br />from Bluff, Utah, downstream to Mexican Hat and the Salt River <br />from the confluence of the White River and Black River down- <br />stream to the State Route 288 bridge. Although both of these <br />areas are historical habitat, no Colorado squawfish are cur- <br />rently known to inhabit these sections. <br />Page 27, Proposed Budget - Job 1144 - The CES, which the Bureau <br />is presently writing, will compile a list of most of the major <br />water-related projects in the Colorado River drainage. <br />2 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.