7339

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7339
• Author: Valdez, R. A.
• Title: A Review of the Hatchery Program for Threatened and Endangered Fishes of the Colorado River.
• USFW Year: 1985.
• USFW - Doc Type: Logan, Utah.
• Copyright Material: NO

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

5-1

5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

The current hatchery facilities do not appear to have sufficient
capacity to produce the 500,000 fingerlings per year recommended by the FWS
for propagation and conservation needs. This lack of existing facilities
and the various restrictions to expanding these facilities to meet the
production needs shows a strong justi fication for consi dering constructi on
of one or more hatcheries for the rare Colorado River fishes.

Ideally, there should be two primary hatchery/laboratory facilities:
one for the upper basin and one for the lower basin. At an estimated $8.3
to $8.6 million for construction, such a plan may be cost prohibitive.

The current options appear to be:

1. No new construction or improvement of hatchery facilities.
2. Modify and improve existing facilities.
3. Construct two new hatcheries.
4. Build one new hatchery/laboratory facility.
5. Build a new hatchery/lab facility and improve an existing one.

Option 1 is considered viable if hatchery production of rare Colorado
River fishes is not considered a legitimate conservation and recovery
measure. There is much support for a hatchery program to propagate the
species for research as well as reintroduction (FWS 1983; Valdez and Clemmer
1982; Valentine 1983).

Option 2 appears very desirable because of possible cost savings. Why
not modify existing hatcheries to increase production of rare Colorado River
fishes? The problems behind this option are pointed out in Sections 4.l
and 4.2 of this document; Willow Beach NFH has limited land for expansion
and water quality problems, Dexter NFH is limited by its water rights,
Hotchkiss NFH is on an unstable land mass with cool water, and Logan FES is
out of the basin with 1 imited facil ities and prior trout-production
commitments. The endangered fish production of no one site or sites, except
perhaps for Logan FES, would benefit from Option 2. The Rifle Springs SFH
may benefi t from thi s opti on, but more needs to be known about its
facilities and the state legislative restrictions regarding endangered fish
production. The Page Springs SFH might also benefit, but more needs to be
known about its facilities.

Option 3 would cost $16 to $17 million, a plan that may be cost
prohibitive. However, agreements between Regions 2 and 6 of the FWS and the
upper and lower basin states may provide sufficient funding to construct two
hatcheries, one in the lower basin and one in the upper basin. Operating
and maintenance costs of $330,000 to $588,000 per year per hatchery would
also have to be considered.

Option 4 may be viable with the selection of a proper site. Of the II
evaluated, it appears that Ouray NWR is best suited, although it would
require construction essentially from the ground up. Ouray NWR is on the
Green River near a source of brood stocks and release sites to the upper
basin where fish might imprint. This site also has room for construction