WSP02694 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

UM'5 and life stages (e.g., razorback juveniles and adults, bony tail larvae, etc,). Some site configurations and locations may prove to be better than others, in which case the focus of site restoration will shift to those configurations and locations with the highest likelihood of success. For example, predation levels may not be equal throughout the Upper Basin and, therefore, chances for survival of razorback larvae may prove to be greater in certain areas; or sites which flood and drain may prove to be better than sites which hold water year-round. Evaluation of sites, then, will become experiments which compare a variety of site configurations and locations, to identify the best combinations. Other comparisons among sites might include an assessment of relative amounts of vegetative cover; surface area of inundation (i.e., large versus small); deep versus shallow; proximity to spawning sites; intensively managed versus natural (unmanaged); part of a network complex of wetlands versus isolated; etc. Based on results of the aforementioned comparisons, some sites may be abandoned, some sites may be reconfigured, and new sites and locations will likely be added over time. Work will continue until the conditions necessary to sustain razorback suckers (and possibly bony tail) are restored to the degree necessary for razorback populations to respond positively, and ultimately become self- sustaining. 2. Basin-wide Evaluation This form of evaluation will monitor the status and trends of fish species' populations (including razorbacks) throughout the Green River sub-basin initially, and eventually the Colorado River sub- basin. If we can design a meaningful monitoring program, then status and trends indicators will tell us if floodplain habitat restoration activities, or recovery activities in general. are favoring the razorback sucker over other species. This is the only form of evaluation that will work for many floodplain habitats. Floodplain terraces and depressions which have no water or fish control structures, and no way to efficiently harvest fishes, cannot be easily evaluated on a site-specific basis. And if we hope to eventually restore "natural floodplain functions", most sites will have no control structures. Therefore, only a basin-wide, long-term monitoring program will detect overall species' response to recovery actions. The monitoring program will be the mirror that reflects the results of our recovery actions; the feedback loop that tells us if we are doing the right things for the endangered fishes. 11