7781

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7781
• Author: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
• Title: Recovery Plan for WOUNDFIN,
• USFW Year: 1979.
• Copyright Material: NO

making to exclude the reach between Riverside, Nevada, and
Lake Mead and the reach within the Virgin River Gorge. The
woundfin critical habitat proposal was withdrawn in the March 6,
1979, Federal Register and will have to be reproposed.
C-4. The Vaughn Hansen Report provides conflicting data on flow volume
requirements for maintenance of viable woundfin habitat. A Fish
and Wildlife Section 7 consultation with the Bureau of Land
Management set minimum stream flows for the Virgin-River using
median minimum flows, but additional information is needed.
C-5. These estimates have partially been incorporated into the final
Recovery Plan.
C-6. Critical habitat. See B-13.
C-7. This has been clarified in the final Recovery Plan. There is
little doubt that woundfin numbers have declined dramatically
throughout their historic range over the past 150 years. However,
no specific data is available on the Virgin River woundfin population
except that they are now significantly less abundant in the reach
below Bunkerville, Nevada, than they were in 1942 when Dr. Carl
Hubbs collected them there.
D-1. This suggestion has been incorporated into the final Recovery
Plan.
D -2. See B-13 and C-3. The Arizona portion of the Virgin River was
included in the proposed critical habitat for woundfin.
D-3. Riparian communities play an important role in most aquatic
habitats. However, the impact of the Virgin River riparian
community on woundfin habitat has not been well documented.
Extremely variable flows, unstable channel and the broad, shallow
nature of the river valley and the river itself indicate the
aquatic habitat is less influenced by the riparian community
in the Virgin River than most other desert rivers.
D-4. This suggestion has been incorporated into the final Recovery
Plan.
D-5. The Bureau of Land Management manages little land in the area
of the proposed reintroduction on the Gila River. However, nego-
tiations have been underway for more than two years in an attempt
to coordinate this reintroduction with state and federal agencies,
including the Bureau of Land Management.
D-6. Costs for the identified action should be borne by the lead agency
unless other plans are made with one or more of the potential
cooperating agencies.
51