DOCSLIB.ORG

Biodiversity Risk and Benefit Assessment for Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) in South Africa

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Biodiversity Risk and Benefit Assessment for Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) in South Africa Biodiversity Risk and Benefit Assessment for Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in South Africa Prepared in Accordance with Section 14 of the Alien and Invasive Species Regulations, 2014 (Government Notice R 598 of 01 August 2014), promulgated in terms of the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (Act No. 10 of 2004). September 2019 Biodiversity Risk and Benefit Assessment for Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in South Africa Document Title Biodiversity Risk and Benefit Assessment for Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in South Africa. Edition Date September 2019 Prepared For Directorate: Sustainable Aquaculture Management Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries Private Bag X2 Roggebaai, 8001 www.daff.gov.za/daffweb3/Branches/Fisheries- Management/Aquaculture-and-Economic- Development Originally Prepared By Dr B. Clark (2012) Anchor Environmental Consultants Reviewed, Updated and Mr. E. Hinrichsen Recompiled By AquaEco as commisioned by Ecosense (2019) 1 | P a g e Biodiversity Risk and Benefit Assessment for Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in South Africa CONTENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... 4 LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................................. 7 LIST OF TABLES.................................................................................................................................... 8 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 10 2. PURPOSE OF THIS RISK ASSESSMENT ................................................................................... 10 3. THE RISK ASSESSMENT PRACTITIONERS .............................................................................. 11 4. NATURE OF THE USE OF RAINBOW TROUT ............................................................................ 12 5. REASONS FOR FARMING WITH RAINBOW TROUT ................................................................. 13 6. LEGAL CONTEXT ......................................................................................................................... 14 6.1. CATEGORIZATION OF ALIEN AND INVASIVE SPECIES .......................................................... 15 6.2. STATUTORY CLASSIFICATION OF RAINBOW TROUT ............................................................ 16 6.3. LIST OF RESTRICTED ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................. 18 7. TARGET SPECIES: RAINBOW TROUT ....................................................................................... 20 7.1. TAXONOMY ................................................................................................................................... 20 7.2. ORIGINATING ENVIRONMENT .................................................................................................... 21 7.3. KEY PHYSIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS .............................................................................. 22 7.4. REPRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 23 7.5. DIETARY ASPECTS ...................................................................................................................... 24 7.6. ENVIRONMENTAL TOLERANCES .............................................................................................. 24 7.7. NATURAL ENEMIES, PREDATORS AND COMPETITORS ........................................................ 25 7.8. POTENTIAL TO HYBRIDISE ........................................................................................................ 25 7.9. PERSISTENCE AND INVASIVENESS ......................................................................................... 25 7.10. HISTORY OF TRANSLOCATION AND CULTIVATION ........................................................ 26 7.11. ABILITY TO CREATE ECOSYSTEM CHANGE .................................................................... 30 7.12. PROBABILITY OF NATURALISATION ................................................................................. 30 7.13. POSSIBLE IMPACTS ON BIODIVERSITY ............................................................................ 31 7.14. POSSIBLE IMPACTS ON OTHER NATURAL RESOURCES .............................................. 33 7.15. RAINBOW TROUT AS A VECTOR OF OTHER ALIEN SPECIES ....................................... 33 8. THE RECEIVING ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................................ 33 8.1. CLIMATE AND HABITAT MATCH ................................................................................................ 34 8.2. TOOLS TO IDENTIFY SENSITIVE AREAS .................................................................................. 36 9. THEORY BEHIND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT ............................................................. 37 9.1. THE PRECAUTIONARY AND OTHER PRINCIPLES................................................................... 38 9.2. METHODOLOGY IN THE RISK ASSESSMENT .......................................................................... 39 9.3. THE RISK PATHWAY ................................................................................................................... 41 9.4. SCALES AND CATEGORISATION OF RISK ............................................................................... 43 9.5. PERCEPTION OF RISK ................................................................................................................ 47 2 | P a g e Biodiversity Risk and Benefit Assessment for Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in South Africa 9.6. RISK COMMUNICATION .............................................................................................................. 48 10. SPECIFIC FRAMEWORK ASSESSMENT FOR RAINBOW TROUT ........................................... 48 10.1. INVENTORY OF POTENTIAL PATHWAYS AND RISKS ..................................................... 48 10.2. DISCUSSION OF RISK PATHWAYS .................................................................................... 49 10.2.1. THE PATHWAY OF ESCAPE ............................................................................................ 50 10.2.2. THE PATHWAY OF DISEASE ........................................................................................... 54 10.3. DISCUSSION OF RISK ENDPOINTS .................................................................................... 55 10.3.1. PHYSICAL ABIOTIC DAMAGE TO THE ENVIRONMENT ............................................... 55 10.3.2. PREDATOR DISPLACEMENT ........................................................................................... 55 10.3.3. COMPETITION - FOOD, HABITAT & OTHER RESOURCES ........................................... 56 10.3.4. HYBRIDIZATION ................................................................................................................ 57 10.3.5. IMPACT ON PREY SPECIES ............................................................................................. 57 10.3.6. EFFECTS OF DISEASE ..................................................................................................... 57 10.4. ASSESSMENT SCORING OF RISK LEVELS ....................................................................... 58 10.4.1. RISK PATHWAYS .............................................................................................................. 59 10.4.2. RISK ENDPOINTS/IMPACTS ............................................................................................. 62 10.5. SUMMARY OF RISK PROFILE ............................................................................................. 64 11. KEY ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND SOCIETAL CONSIDERATIONS .............................................. 69 12. BALANCED COST OF ERADICATION ........................................................................................ 72 13. RISK MONITORING ...................................................................................................................... 73 14. RISK CONTROL MEASURES AND MITIGATION ....................................................................... 74 15. BENEFIT / RISK TRADE-OFF....................................................................................................... 77 16. RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................................. 78 17. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................... 78 LIST OF APPENDIXES Appendix A: Risk Scoring Methodology for Rainbow trout and guidance supplied by the F-ISK toolkit (Copp et al. 2008). 3 | P a g e Biodiversity Risk and Benefit Assessment for Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in South Africa EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Internationally, alien species provide a valuable food source and an economic opportunity in both the fisheries and aquaculture sectors (Bartley 2006). In South Africa, aquaculture is composed of a blend of indigenous and non-indigenous species. However, breeding and domestication of indigenous species requires time, technological and financial resources, whilst there are already alien species with proven aquaculture potential that could be utilized for food production and job creation.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Feature: INTRODUCED FISH and ECOLOGY
    Feature: INTRODUCED FISH AND ECOLOGY Ecological Impacts of Non-native Freshwater Fishes Julien Cucherousset Centre for Conservation Ecology and Environmental Change, School of Applied Sciences, Bournemouth University, Poole, Dorset, United Kingdom Impactos Ecológicos de Peces Foráneos CNRS, UPS, ENFA, UMR5174 EDB (Laboratoire Évolution et Diversité de Agua Dulce Biologique), 118 route de Narbonne, F-31062 Toulouse, France Université de Toulouse, UPS, UMR5174 EDB, F-31062 Toulouse, France RESUMEN: Hay una larga historia de introducciones de especies de peces foráneos de agua dulce y la tasa Julian D. Olden de introducción se ha acelerado considerablemente a School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, través del tiempo. Si bien no todos los peces introduci- Box 355020, Seattle, Washington 98195, USA (Address correspondence dos tienen efectos notables en sus nuevos ecosistemas, to [email protected]) muchos de ellos ejercen importantes impactos ecológi- cos, evolutivos y económicos. Para los investigadores, ABSTRACT: There is a long history of introduction of non-native administradores y tomadores de decisiones que están in- fishes in fresh waters and the introduction rate has accelerated great- teresados en la conservación de la diversidad dulceacuí- ly over time. Although not all introduced fishes have appreciable cola, es de suma importancia entender la magnitud y effects on their new ecosystems, many exert significant ecological, alcance de los potenciales impactos de especies foráneas evolutionary, and economic impacts. For researchers, managers, de agua dulce. El presente estudio provee un panorama and policy makers interested in conserving freshwater diversity, un- de la literatura más reciente sobre impactos ecológicos derstanding the magnitude and array of potential impacts of non-na- asociados a la introducción de peces foráneos de agua tive fish species is of utmost importance.
    [Show full text]
  • Freshwater Fishes
    WESTERN CAPE PROVINCE state oF BIODIVERSITY 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 Introduction 2 Chapter 2 Methods 17 Chapter 3 Freshwater fishes 18 Chapter 4 Amphibians 36 Chapter 5 Reptiles 55 Chapter 6 Mammals 75 Chapter 7 Avifauna 89 Chapter 8 Flora & Vegetation 112 Chapter 9 Land and Protected Areas 139 Chapter 10 Status of River Health 159 Cover page photographs by Andrew Turner (CapeNature), Roger Bills (SAIAB) & Wicus Leeuwner. ISBN 978-0-620-39289-1 SCIENTIFIC SERVICES 2 Western Cape Province State of Biodiversity 2007 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Andrew Turner [email protected] 1 “We live at a historic moment, a time in which the world’s biological diversity is being rapidly destroyed. The present geological period has more species than any other, yet the current rate of extinction of species is greater now than at any time in the past. Ecosystems and communities are being degraded and destroyed, and species are being driven to extinction. The species that persist are losing genetic variation as the number of individuals in populations shrinks, unique populations and subspecies are destroyed, and remaining populations become increasingly isolated from one another. The cause of this loss of biological diversity at all levels is the range of human activity that alters and destroys natural habitats to suit human needs.” (Primack, 2002). CapeNature launched its State of Biodiversity Programme (SoBP) to assess and monitor the state of biodiversity in the Western Cape in 1999. This programme delivered its first report in 2002 and these reports are updated every five years. The current report (2007) reports on the changes to the state of vertebrate biodiversity and land under conservation usage.
    [Show full text]
  • The Native Trout Waters of California Details Six of the State’S Most Scenic, Diverse, and Significant Native Trout Fisheries
    NATIVE TROUT WATERS OF CALIFORNIA Michael Carl The Ecological Angler www.ecoangler.com TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUTION – THE ORIGINAL SIX 4 ABOUT THE BOOK 4 CLAVEY RIVER 5 BACKGROUND 6 TROUT POPULATION DATA 6 STREAM POPULATIONS, REGULATIONS, AND ACCESS 7 DIRECTIONS TO REACH SEGMENT 3 AND 4 (E.G., BRIDGE CROSSING CLAVEY RIVER): 7 AREA MAP 8 CLAVEY RIVER FLOW STATISTICS 9 FISHING TECHNIQUES 9 EAGLE LAKE 10 BACKGROUND 11 BIG TROUT FOOD – TUI CHUBS 11 REGULATIONS AND ACCESS 11 DIRECTIONS TO EAGLE LAKE FROM RED BLUFF, CALIFORNIA: 11 AREA MAP 12 PRODUCTIVE TIMES AND ZONES TO FISH 13 FISHING TECHNIQUES 13 SPALDING TRACT – TOPO MAP 14 PIKES POINT – TOPO MAP 15 GOLDEN TROUT CREEK 16 OVERVIEW OF THE WATERSHED 17 ABUNDANCE OF CALIFORNIA GOLDEN TROUT 17 CALIFORNIA GOLDEN TROUT GENETIC DATA 17 STREAM POPULATIONS, REGULATIONS, AND ACCESS 18 DIRECTIONS TO COTTONWOOD PASS TRAILHEAD 18 AREA MAP 19 PHOTO JOURNAL – COTTONWOOD PASS TO TUNNEL MEADOW 20 FISHING TECHNIQUES 23 HEENAN LAKE 24 BACKGROUND 25 FLY ANGLER STATISTICS – 2007 SEASON (8/3/07 TO 10/28/07) 26 REGULATIONS AND ACCESS 27 AREA MAP 27 DIRECTIONS 27 PRODUCTIVE ZONES TO FISH 28 FISHING TECHNIQUES 28 UPPER KERN RIVER 29 BACKGROUND 30 KERN RIVER RAINBOWS 30 DISTRIBUTION OF KERN RIVER RAINBOWS 30 STREAM POPULATIONS, REGULATIONS AND ACCESS 31 MAP – LLOYD MEADOW ROAD TO FORKS OF THE KERN 32 SPOTLIGHT – FORKS OF THE KERN 33 DIRECTIONS AND TRAIL DESCRIPTION 33 RECOMMENDED FISHING GEAR 33 UPPER TRUCKEE RIVER 35 OVERVIEW OF THE WATERSHED 36 ABUNDANCE AND SIZE OF LAHONTAN CUTTHROAT 37 STREAM POPULATIONS, REGULATIONS, ACCESS & DISTANCE 37 DIRECTIONS TO REACH TRAILHEAD: 38 AREA MAP 39 TRAIL DESCRIPTION 40 FISHING TECHNIQUES 40 Introduction – The Original Six The Native Trout Waters of California details six of the state’s most scenic, diverse, and significant native trout fisheries.
    [Show full text]
  • Evidence of Hidden Diversity and Taxonomic Conflicts in Five Stream Fishes from the Eastern Zimbabwe Highlands Freshwater Ecoregion
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 768: 69–95Evidence (2018) of hidden diversity and taxonomic conflicts in five stream fishes... 69 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.768.21944 RESEARCH ARTICLE http://zookeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Evidence of hidden diversity and taxonomic conflicts in five stream fishes from the Eastern Zimbabwe Highlands freshwater ecoregion Albert Chakona1,2, Wilbert T. Kadye2, Taurai Bere3, Daniel N. Mazungula1,2, Emmanuel Vreven4,5 1 South African Institute for Aquatic Biodiversity, Private Bag 1015, Grahamstown, South Africa, 6140 2 Department of Ichthyology and Fisheries Science, Rhodes University, P.O. Box 94, Grahamstown, South Africa, 6140 3 School of Wildlife, Ecology and Conservation, Chinhoyi University of Technology, P. Bag 7724, Chinhoyi, Zimbabwe 4 Royal Museum for Central Africa, Section of Vertebrates, Ichthyology, Leuvensesteenweg 13, 3080, Tervuren, Belgium 5 KU Leuven, Department of Biology, Laboratory of Biodiversity and Evolutio- nary Genomics, Deberiotstraat 32, 3000 Leuven, Belgium Corresponding author: Albert Chakona ([email protected]) Academic editor: N. Bogutskaya | Received 30 October 2018 | Accepted 25 April 2018 | Published 19 June 2018 http://zoobank.org/9621930C-8C43-40D0-8554-684035E99FAA Citation: Chakona A, Kadye WT, Bere T, Mazungula DN, Vreven E (2018) Evidence of hidden diversity and taxonomic conflicts in five stream fishes from the Eastern Zimbabwe Highlands freshwater ecoregion. ZooKeys 768: 69–95. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.768.21944 Abstract
    [Show full text]
  • The Native Trouts of the Genus Salmo of Western North America
    CItiEt'SW XHPYTD: RSOTLAITYWUAS 4 Monograph of ha, TEMPI, AZ The Native Trouts of the Genus Salmo Of Western North America Robert J. Behnke "9! August 1979 z 141, ' 4,W \ " • ,1■\t 1,es. • . • • This_report was funded by USDA, Forest Service Fish and Wildlife Service , Bureau of Land Management FORE WARD This monograph was prepared by Dr. Robert J. Behnke under contract funded by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the U.S. Forest Service. Region 2 of the Forest Service was assigned the lead in coordinating this effort for the Forest Service. Each agency assumed the responsibility for reproducing and distributing the monograph according to their needs. Appreciation is extended to the Bureau of Land Management, Denver Service Center, for assistance in publication. Mr. Richard Moore, Region 2, served as Forest Service Coordinator. Inquiries about this publication should be directed to the Regional Forester, 11177 West 8th Avenue, P.O. Box 25127, Lakewood, Colorado 80225. Rocky Mountain Region September, 1980 Inquiries about this publication should be directed to the Regional Forester, 11177 West 8th Avenue, P.O. Box 25127, Lakewood, Colorado 80225. it TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Preface ..................................................................................................................................................................... Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • DNA Barcoding Discriminates Freshwater Fishes from Southeastern Nigeria and Provides River System-Level Phylogeographic Resoluti
    Mitochondrial DNA, 2011; Early Online: 1–9 DNA barcoding discriminates freshwater fishes from southeastern Nigeria and provides river system-level phylogeographic resolution within some species CHRISTOPHER D. NWANIa, SVEN BECKERb, HEATHER E. BRAIDb, EMMANUEL F. UDEc, OKECHUKWU I. OKOGWUa, & ROBERT HANNERb aDepartment of Applied Biology, Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki, Nigeria, bDepartment of Integrative Biology, Biodiversity Institute of Ontario, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada, and cFisheries and Aquaculture, Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki, Nigeria (Received 17 August 2010; revised 28 October 2010; accepted 28 October 2010) Abstract Background and aims: Fishes are the main animal protein source for human beings and play a vital role in aquatic ecosystems and food webs. Fish identification can be challenging, especially in the tropics (due to high diversity), and this is particularly true for larval forms or fragmentary remains. DNA barcoding, which uses the 50 region of the mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (cox1) as a target gene, is an efficient method for standardized species-level identification for biodiversity assessment and conservation, pending the establishment of reference sequence libraries. Materials and methods: In this study, fishes were collected from three rivers in southeastern Nigeria, identified morphologically, and imaged digitally. DNA was extracted, PCR-amplified, and the standard barcode region was bidirectionally sequenced for 363 individuals belonging to 70 species in 38 genera. All specimen provenance data and associated sequence information were For personal use only. recorded in the barcode of life data systems (BOLD; www.barcodinglife.org). Analytical tools on BOLD were used to assess the performance of barcoding to identify species. Results: Using neighbor-joining distance comparison, the average genetic distance was 60-fold higher between species than within species, as pairwise genetic distance estimates averaged 10.29% among congeners and only 0.17% among conspecifics.
    [Show full text]
  • The Thermal Tolerance and Preference Of
    The thermal tolerances and preferences of native fish in the Cape Floristic Region: towards understanding the effect of climate change on native fish species by Jody-Lee Reizenberg Town Thesis presented for the Degree of Master of Science Cape in the Department of Biological Sciences University of Cape Town March 2017 Supervisors: Dr Helen Dallas, Dr Jeremy Shelton, and Dr Cecile Reed University The copyright of this thesis vests in the author. No quotation from it or information derived from it is to be published without full acknowledgement of the source. The thesis is to be used for private study or non- commercial research purposes only. Published by the University of Cape Town (UCT) in terms of the non-exclusive license granted to UCT by the author. University of Cape Town DECLARATION I hereby declare that the work on which this thesis is based is my original work (except where acknowledgements indicate otherwise) and that neither the whole work nor any part of it has been, is being, or is to be submitted for another degree in this or any other university. I authorise the University to reproduce for the purpose of research either the whole or any portion of the contents in any manner whatsoever. This thesis reports original research carried out under the Department of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Cape Town, between 2015 and 2016 for the M.Sc. study purpose. The data presented here are my own. I have fully acknowledged any assistance received. I know the meaning of plagiarism and declare that all of the work in the dissertation, save for that which is properly acknowledged, is my own.
    [Show full text]
  • Factors Affecting the Occurrence and Abundance of the Natal Cascade Frog
    Factors affecting the occurrence and abundance of the Natal Cascade frog, Hadromophryne natalensis, at Mariepskop, South Africa by KATRINA HEATHER DU TOIT Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN ENVIRONMENTAL ECOLOGY FACULTY OF NATURAL AND AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA PRETORIA SUPERVISOR: PROFESSOR WILLEM FERGUSON JUNE 2016 i © University of Pretoria Factors affecting the abundance and occurrence of the Natal cascade frog, Hadromophryne natalensis along streams at Mariepskop, Limpopo Student: Katrina Heather du Toit Supervisor: Professor Willem Ferguson Centre for Environmental Studies University of Pretoria Pretoria, 0002 Email: [email protected] Submitted for the degree Master of Science (Environmental Ecology) in the Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Science ii © University of Pretoria SUMMARY Amphibians have long been recognized as excellent indicators of both biological and ecological health of ecosystems, as they occupy many habitats and environments and have a diverse range of impacts on their immediate environments. It is thus important to investigate the critical habitat requirements, as well as the preferred environmental variables that are associated with different amphibian species in order to provide insight into conservation and management plans, and to predict what effects climate change and disease might have on amphibian populations. The aim of this study was to investigate the abundance and occurrence of the Natal cascade frog, Hadromophryne natalensis on Mariepskop Mountain in Limpopo, South Africa. In this regard, we investigated what environmental factors had an effect on the occurrence and temporal variation of H. natalensis (i.e. pH, water temperature, stream substrate) and, determined when the optimal breeding period of H.
    [Show full text]
  • Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan Handbook 2017
    WESTERN CAPE BIODIVERSITY SPATIAL PLAN HANDBOOK Drafted by: CapeNature Scientific Services Land Use Team Jonkershoek, Stellenbosch 2017 Editor: Ruida Pool-Stanvliet Contributing Authors: Alana Duffell-Canham, Genevieve Pence, Rhett Smart i Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan Handbook 2017 Citation: Pool-Stanvliet, R., Duffell-Canham, A., Pence, G. & Smart, R. 2017. The Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan Handbook. Stellenbosch: CapeNature. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The compilation of the Biodiversity Spatial Plan and Handbook has been a collective effort of the Scientific Services Section of CapeNature. We acknowledge the assistance of Benjamin Walton, Colin Fordham, Jeanne Gouws, Antoinette Veldtman, Martine Jordaan, Andrew Turner, Coral Birss, Alexis Olds, Kevin Shaw and Garth Mortimer. CapeNature’s Conservation Planning Scientist, Genevieve Pence, is thanked for conducting the spatial analyses and compiling the Biodiversity Spatial Plan Map datasets, with assistance from Scientific Service’s GIS Team members: Therese Forsyth, Cher-Lynn Petersen, Riki de Villiers, and Sheila Henning. Invaluable assistance was also provided by Jason Pretorius at the Department of Environmental Affairs and Development Planning, and Andrew Skowno and Leslie Powrie at the South African National Biodiversity Institute. Patricia Holmes and Amalia Pugnalin at the City of Cape Town are thanked for advice regarding the inclusion of the BioNet. We are very grateful to the South African National Biodiversity Institute for providing funding support through the GEF5 Programme towards layout and printing costs of the Handbook. We would like to acknowledge the Mpumalanga Biodiversity Sector Plan Steering Committee, specifically Mervyn Lotter, for granting permission to use the Mpumalanga Biodiversity Sector Plan Handbook as a blueprint for the Western Cape Biodiversity Spatial Plan Handbook.
    [Show full text]
  • Indigenous Fish Fact Sheet
    FACT SHEET What a landowner should know about the INDIGENOUS FISH of the Cape Floristic Region: DIVERSITY, THREATS AND MANAGEMENT INTERVENTIONS The majority of the freshwater The Cape Floristic Region, mainly within the Western Cape Province, fish of the Cape Floristic is one of the six plant kingdoms of the world. This area, however, is Region are listed as either not only home to a remarkable number of plant species but also has a Endangered or Critically Endangered and face a very number of unique indigenous freshwater fish species. real risk of extinction! INDIGENOUS FISH are a critical component of healthy aquatic ecosystems as they form an important part of the aquatic food web and fulfill several important ecological functions. These fish need suitable habitat and good quality water, free of sediment and agrichemicals, in order to survive. The presence of indigenous fish is one of the signs of a healthy riverine Cape kurper ecosystem, making indigenous fish good bio-indicators of healthy rivers. There are four main river systems in the Western Cape, namely the Berg, Breede, Gourits and Olifants, and each system has unique fish species which only occur in ecologically healthy parts of these rivers. A good example is Burchell’s redfin in the Breede and neighbouring river systems. Genetic research on this species indicates that there could be three distinct species in the Cape galaxias Breede system. The Olifants River system is however recognised as the hotspot for indig- enous fish diversity as this system has the highest number of unique indigenous species. Research is ongoing and further genetic diversity is being uncovered for other species such as the Cape kurper and the Cape galaxias.
    [Show full text]
  • Recreational Fishing in the Golden Trout Wilderness at $148,000 to $713,000 a Year
    ECONOMIC VALUE OF GOLDEN TROUT FISHING IN THE GOLDEN TROUT WILDERNESS, CALIFORNIA An Analysis By Carolyn Alkire, Ph.D. Resource Economist A Report for California Trout March 21, 2003 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thanks to the many individuals who provided essential data and information, without which this study would not have been possible: Del Hubbs, Adam McClory, and Julie Molzahn, Inyo National Forest; Cheryl Bauer and Judi Kaiser, Sequoia National Forest; Jim Shackelford, Forest Service Region 5; and Donn Burton and Dave Lentz, California Department of Fish and Game. The author is grateful for the professional review by Dr. John Loomis. Stan Stephens of the California Department of Fish and Game and Dr. Robert Richardson also offered helpful comments and suggestions. This report was expertly edited by Deanne Kloepfer. California Trout would like to thank Joseph Tomelleri for the use of his trout illustrations. California Trout thanks C. Pat Patterson and Bill Hooper for generously funding this report. Cover illustration courtesy of Michael Flynn FOREWORD By R. Brett Matzke Public Lands Director California Trout, Inc. Cattle began grazing the Kern Plateau more than 130 years ago, long before the area and surrounding environs were established as the Inyo and Sequoia national forests. Various studies have documented that cattle grazing can seriously damage water and land resources. But attempts to reform grazing management policy on the Kern Plateau and to protect native species in this case, California's state fish, the golden trout, and its close relative shave met with little success. In part, the failure to reform grazing management stems from the long-held view that cattle ranching is the cornerstone of the local economy.
    [Show full text]
  • Berg River Baseline Monitoring Programme
    BERG RIVER BASELINE MONITORING PROGRAMME FINAL REPORT - VOLUME 5: Synthesis DWAF Report No. P WMA 19/G10/00/2107 Edited by: BARRY CLARK and GEORDIE RACTLIFFE October 2007 The Freshwater Consulting Group E N V I R O N M E N T A L BERG RIVER BASELINE MONITORING PROGRAMME FINAL REPORT - VOLUME 5: Synthesis DWAF Report No. P WMA 19/G10/00/2107 Edited by: BARRY CLARK AND GEORDIE RACTLIFFE October 2007 The Freshwater Consulting Group E N V I R O N M E N T A L Department of Zoology University of Cape Town Rondebosch 7701 University of Cape Town, South Africa PO Box 34035, Rhodes Gift 7707 Cell: 082 463 0222 www.uct.ac.za/depts/zoology/anchor Tel: +27 (21) 650 4767 Tel/Fax +27 21 685 3400 Fax: +27 (21) 650 3301 [email protected] Email: [email protected] Berg River Baseline Monitoring Programme Final Report: Volume5, September 2007 Index TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 BACKGROUND ...........................................................................................................2 1.2 OVERVIEW OF THE BERG RIVER CATCHMENT, HYDROLOGY AND GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT ...............................................................................2 1.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE ABIOTIC AND BIOTIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE BERG RIVER..........................................................................................................................2 1.4 ESTUARINE ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................2 1.5 SOCIAL AND RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES ASSESSMENT......................................3
    [Show full text]