8189 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

2 e , ~ For exar~eple, the San Marcos River in Texas contains the fountain darter and Texas wild rice. Both were listed as endan- ;fti -- -,.>_.t;~ rii[tgr..IfieS. Lllt,;ng gered species for many years w. ... ..:: ::.:..:... -•.:•__: that time, several federal projects were proposed for the river system and consultations carried out to the benefit of the listed species. In 19$0, two additional species from the San Marcos River were listed, the San Marcos gambusia and San Marcos . salamander, and critical habitat designated for all four species under the new amendment requirements. The same day the critical habitat rulemaking took effect, a lawsuit was filed against the Department of Interior and the Fish and Wildlife Service by the Edwards Underground Water District for declaring critical habitat on the San Marcos River. implementation of the Act over the past nine years has amply demonstrated that a listed species can be protected effectively without critical habitat designation. Critical habitat carries a con- notation of federal intervention to the public and to many gov- ernmental agencies. Elimination of the critical habitat require- ment would not limit the protection of limited species, but would facilitate public acceptance of reintroduction efforts and would also allow the listing program to begin functioning properly again. Coopeaative Ef/orts Towards Recou~ry r } „r ~ _ t_t.. t:• « r; r e~fi;ro ;n tenth the state and `acs .. ,. ~utta;;3C telseo.,c rersp federal endangered species programs is often overlooked. Few agencies initiated nongame work prior to the passage of the Endangered Species Act, and most nongame work that has occurred after 1973 can be attributed, at ]east in part, to that legislation. One of the most exciting memories of those first few meetings of the Colorado Squawfish Recovery Team in 1975- 76 was management and research biologists discussirig recovery efforts for a fish that many of the same biologists had been trying to eradicate only 10 years earlier. If state and federal programs continue to mature during the 1980's as they did during the 1970's, recovery results maybe spectacular. Researchers, man- agers, and politicians are now talking with and learning from one another about nongame fish species. This type of cooper- ation must be continued and compounded if recovery actions are to succeed. EPILOGUE Last September, both authors sat near one of the ponds at Dexter National Fish Hatchery and watched thousands of bony- tail chub fingerlings school continually past our view. With over 25 yeah of native fish experience in the Southwest between us, neither had captured or even seers this endangered species in the wild. On November 9, 1981, over 42,000 bonytail chubs were stocked into Lake Mohave, initiating the first phase of recovery efforts for that species. The very existence of Dexter as an endangere 's es rearing facility and the stocking of native fishes like the bonytail chub, razorback sucker, and Gila topmin- now back into historic habitats indicates the extent of present cooperative recovery actions. The fish species of the American Southwest have made remarkable adaptations to survive in inhospitable habitats, but have never reached the point they could survive in the total absence of water. Without aquatic habitats, these unique species will perish, regardless of the amount of effort that goes into reintroductions. While the above reintroduction efforts were tak- ing place, the Tecopa pupfish (Cyprinodon neuadensis colidoe) was declared extinct (USDI 1982). The long-term answer to preserving Southwestern fishes is habitat protection, and the key July -August 1982 to habitat protection is public awareness. if these organisms were terrestrial and more visible, or had fur or feathers rather than scales, the public would decry the extent of their probable loss. Without the benefit of intrinsic public acceptance, a vital recovery action for all nongame fish species involves information and education, for the scientific community as well as the general public. Some recent federal actions have been taken to preserve aquatic habitats in the Southwest. [n April 1982, San Bemardino Ranch in southeastern Arizona was purchased by the Fish and Wildlife Service to protect the only remaining Rio Yaqui aquatic habitat left in the United States. Eventually, six fish species will again reside in San Bemardino Springs, including three species that are now extirpated from the United States. Similar acqui- sitions have been made by the Nature Conservancy in several Southwestern states. But even the Endangered Species Act, acquisition of aquatic habitats, and increased public awareness of the problem facing native Southwestern fishes cannot assure survival: Working with species on the brink of extinction will always be a hazardous undertaking, and we should be prepared for some degree of failure. Hopefully, future generations will be able to see our recovery efforts swimming in historic habitats rather than pre-. served in fish collections or discussed in articles like this one pleading for nofice, understanding; and assistance.. )r LITERATURE CITED Behnke. R. d. 1979. Monograph of the native trouts of the genus Salmo in western North America USDA For. Serv., Lakewood. Colorado. 163 pp. Berne, G. 1975. Major and historical springs of Texas. Texas Water Dev. Bd. Rep. 180:1-94. Brown. D. E. and C. H. Lowe. 1980. Biotic communities of the Southwest Map. USDA For. Serv.. (FL Colkns. Colorado.) Gen. Tech. Rep. RM-41. Cole. G. A.. and D. M. Kubly.1976. Limnologic studies on the Colorado River from Lees Ferry to Diamond Creek (Nat Parse Serv., Grand Canyon, Arizona.) Colorado River Research Program Tech. Rep. 8:12. Coman, C. M. 1981. Gila trout management and recovery activities with emphasis on Uon Creek recovery efforts. Report to Gila National Forest Silver City, New Mexico. Deacon. J. E 1977. Habitat requirements of woundfin in the Virgin River in relation to the proposed Warner Valley Project fn Impact of Warner Valley Water Project on endangered fish of the V'ir5pn River. Vaughn Hansen Assoc.. Salt Lake City, Utah. 1979. Endangered and threatened fishes of the West Great Basin Nat Memoirs 3:41-64. Deacon. J. E., and W. L Minckley. 1974. Desert fishes. Pages 385--087 in Desert Biology, VoL 2, Academic Press. New York. Deacon. J. E.. G. Kobetich. J. D. W illiams. and S. Contreras. 1979. Fishes of North America. endangered, threatened. or of special concern. 1979. Fisheries 412):2914. F-hren(eld. D. W. 1976. The conservation of non-resources. Amer. Sci. 64:648-~i56. Johnson. J. E. In press. Reintroducing the native razorback sucker. Pr«. 13th Ann. Symp. Desert Fishes Council. Furnace Creek. Cali(omia. Meffe. G. K., D. A. Hendrickson. W. L Minckley, and J. N. Rinne. In press. Factors resulting in decline of the endangered Sonoran topminnow (Atherini(ortnes: Pceciliidael in the United states. BioL Conserv. Miller, R. R. 1946. The need for ichthyological surveys of the major rivers of the western North America. Science 104:512-519. .1961. Man and the changing fish fauna of the American Southwest Pap. Michigan Acad. of Sd. Arts. Len 46:36504. Minckley. W. L 1973. Fishes of Arizona. Arizona Dep. Game and Rsh. Phceni>L Arizona. 293 PP~ . In press. Status of razorback suckers. Xymuchen texonus (Abbott) in the lower Colorado River Basin. Southwest Nat Minckley. W. L. and J. E Deacon. 1968. Southwestern fishes and the enigma of "endangered species." Science 159138221:1424-1432. MincWey. W. L. J. N. Rinne, and J. E Johnson. 1977. Status of Gila topminnow and its co- «curtence with mosquitotish. USDA For. Serv. Res. Pap. RM-198:1. Naiman. R. J.. and D. L Solis. eds. 1981. Fishes in North American deserts. John Wiley and Sons. New York 552 pp. Pfister. E. P. 1974. Desert fishes and their habitats. Trans. Am. Fish. s«. 102(31531-540. . 1976. The rationale Ior the management of nongame fish and wildlife. Fisheries 1(11:11-14. . 1981. The conservation of deseR fishes. Pages 41134 in R. J. Naiman and D. L Sol¢ eds. Fishes in North American Deserts. John Wiley and Sons. New York Rinne. J. N. 1982. Movement home range. and growth of a rare Southwestern trout in improved and unimproved habitats. N. Am. J. Fah. Manage 2121.150-157. Rinne. J. N.. B. Robertson. R. Major. and K. Harper. 1980. Sport fishing for the native Arizona trout. Salmo opache. Miller in Christmas Tree Lake: A case study. Pages 158-164 in W. L King et al.. eds. Pr«eedings of Wild Trout ll. Yellowstone Nat Park Sept 24. 25. 1979.