My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP03464
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
3001-4000
>
WSP03464
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:50:32 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 11:45:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8240.300.31.J
Description
San Juan River - Environmental Studies
Basin
San Juan/Dolores
Water Division
7
Date
5/12/1995
Title
Biological Evaluation of a Proposal to Stock Non-Native Fishes into Ponds within the 0- to 50-year Floodplain of the Upper Colorado River Basin in Critical Habitat of Endangered Fishes
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />o <br />:tj <br />(:" <br />~>) <br />~ <br />o <br /> <br />8 <br /> <br />ponds. However, most (estimated 75%) of those ponds are on <br />private property, and without DOW and private landowner <br />support, we believe little success in the eradication effort <br />would be achieved. <br /> <br />17. Control of rotenone after it is applied to ponds may pose a <br />problem by seepage into the river that comprises critical <br />habitat of the endangered fishes. There is some likelihood <br />that water seepage into the floodplain ponds may provide <br />refugia from the ichthiocide. In addition, with reduced <br />river flows rotenone could seep out of the ponds through the <br />gravel or flow out through interconnecting canals and enter <br />the mainstream. Presumably there would be sufficient <br />dilution in the Colorado River to eliminate large die-offs, <br />but that should be considered when planning for the <br />reclamations. <br /> <br />18. We believe that DOW should use a strong concentration of <br />rotenone (at least 3 ppm) in order to insure total <br />elimination of nonnative fishes. As rotenone does not kiJ ", <br />fish eggs, the ponds should retain the rotenone <br />concentrations for at least 10 days to allow eggs to hatch <br />and the larvae to be affected. <br /> <br />19. We wonder about the cost/benefit of implementing the <br />proposal, It seems that this effort will be very expensive <br />in terms of personnel, for a relatively small surface area <br />of fishing water available to the public, Who will assess <br />the overall cost/angler day or cost/creeled fish? Who wiD. <br />pay for the overall project? Can the project be maintained <br />ove~ time? Is it affordable over the long term? <br /> <br />20. What will happen to "10-50 ponds" that are sampled for the <br />first time and found to contain only bass/bluegills? Will <br />they be reclaimed and restocked? Sampling procedures <br />(electrofishing, netting) are not perfect, and undesirable <br />fishes may also be in these ponds. However, if undesirable <br />fishes are not found in the sample, it may mean that their <br />numbers are low and of little importance. <br /> <br />21. There are concerns that private landowners may stock their <br />ponds with undesirable fishes that would be <br />counterproductive to the stocking proposal, <br /> <br />22, Finally, we suggest that this effort is going to be a major <br />undertaking for the agencies involved, and we recommend that <br />a full-time biologist be assigned to the job for the lO-year <br />test period, In addition, 4 to 6 summer employees will be <br />necessary to locate ponds and landowners, survey fishes, and <br />reclaim ponds. <br /> <br />In conclusion, with the above considerations and development <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.