Laserfiche WebLink
<br />00275? <br />-" <br /> <br />hatchery-reared fish would survive and reproduce successfully in the wild, than a hatchery production <br />program would be implemented. It was recognized that additional hatchery facilities would be needed <br />to produce individuals for reintroduction into the wild (U.S, Fish and Wildlife Service 1987). <br />Existing hatchery capabilities were to be evaluated under the Recovery Program to determine if they <br />could provide the number of hatchery-reared endangered fishes needed to support research. The <br />hatchery facilities were to be capable of raising disease-free, genetically healthy endangered fish. <br /> <br />The Recovery Program also called for adequate rearing areas for the endangered fishes. These areas <br />could be artificially created through the use of grow-out ponds, instead of hatcheries, to accelerate <br />growth and increase survival. Predatory fish occurring in these ponds would be removed prior to <br />stocking of the rare species. After the fish had been reared to the desired size, they would be released <br />into the nearby river through a channel. Different sizes of marked fish would be released from the <br />grow-out ponds to determine the relationship between size of introduced fish and survival in the <br />upper basin (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1987). <br /> <br />To maintain a genetically healthy hatchery stock that was needed for research, the Recovery Program <br />determined that it must obtain immediately (a) a limited number of wild individuals of the endangered <br />fishes as hatchery broodstock and (b) milt from wild males which would be used to fertilize eggs of <br />female broodstock in the hatchery. Genetic studies would be needed on all species to test for <br />variation among wild individuals from the different subbasins (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1987). <br />To guard against disease and possible extinction, the Recovery Program called for refugia to be <br />maintained for all four endangered species in two or more locations. <br /> <br />2.2 Endangered Fish Recovery Plans <br /> <br />Prior to the initiation of the Recovery Program, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) had <br />completed recovery plans for the Colorado squawfish, bonytail chub and humpback chub. These <br />plans described stocking and genetics activities associated with the recovery of each species. The <br />Recovery Program was intended to provide for the implementation of the individual recovery plans <br />in the Upper Colorado River Basin for all aspects of recovery, including propagation and genetics <br />management Therefore, USFWS considers the Recovery Program a step-down effort of the <br />individual recovery plans and the primary mechanism for implementing the recovery plans in the <br />Upper Colorado River basin. The roles of stocking and genetics management as defined in the <br />recovery plans for the Colorado squawfish, bonytail chub and humpback chub are provided in this <br />section. <br /> <br />2.2.1 Colorado Squawfish <br /> <br />The original recovery plan for the Colorado squawfish was finalized in March, 1978. Revisions were <br />made to this plan in August, 1991 which reflected the establishment of the Recovery Program. <br />Included in the revised plan was a step-down outline that detailed those elements required for <br />delisting of the Colorado squawfish. Of the five major actions listed in the revised recovery plan, one <br />element primarily involved stocking and genetic management efforts (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service <br />1991 a). Within this element, the revised recovery plan called for the actions described below. <br /> <br />2 <br />