DOCSLIB.ORG

Red Shiner Eradication from the Virgin River, Arizona-Nevada-Utah: Background, Impacts, and Needs for Future Studies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Red Shiner Eradication from the Virgin River, Arizona-Nevada-Utah: Background, Impacts, and Needs for Future Studies O Red Shiner Eradication from the Virgin River, Arizona-Nevada-Utah: Background, Impacts, and Needs for Future Studies W. L. Minckley Professor of Zooloay. Arizona State University. Tempe. Arizona 85287-1501 Contents Introduction .......................................................... 1 Background Information: Description of the Area and its Fauna ......... 1 Events Leading to Management Efforts of 1988 .......................... 3 Proposed Remedial Actions .............................................. 4 Ichthyocide Application ................................................ 4 Actual and Potential Impacts ........................................... 5 Recommendations for Post-eradication Actions .......................... 8 Significance of the proposed program ................................... 8 Introduction Historic information in the following summary of data on the Virgin River basin, Arizona-Nevada-Utah, Is from the research files of J. E. Deacon, P. C. Marsh, W. L. Minckley, and their students and associates, some of which is unpublished, and from open literature or agency reports. Information on intent of agencies relative to application of rotenone to the Virgin River Is mostly from a U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) Environmental Assessment, and from a Service-Utah Department of Wildlife Resources briefing held at Arizona Game and Fish Department offices in Phoenix, Arizona, on 21 October 1988. Data on field activities, actions, and impacts of the operation are from first-hand field notes and written and verbal reports of personnel who participated or who observed operations in the field. Extensive literature or report citations are not included in the present document; a thorough review, with citations, will be accomplished as written summaries become available and specific proposals are prepared. Background Information: Description of the Area and its Fauna The Virgin River drains extreme southwestern Utah, flows through northwestern Arizona, and enters Lake Mead in southern Nevada. The region is chronically arid, and, under natural conditions, most streams (including the Virgin River mainstream) are intermittent in their lower reaches. Normal low flows have been exacerbated by irrigational, domestic, and other water-use demands of increasing human populations. This system may be quite old, a headwater remnant of a stream that flowed south or west before formation of the Grand Canyon. It drains the page 2 southwestern margin of the Colorado Plateau. flowing through a rugged, mountainous region formed by parts of the plateau that collapsed toward extension zones to the west and south. Runoff from montane rain and snow i s augmented by springs along faults in this highly fractured region. These enter the mainstream (1.g., Pah Tempe Spring), as well as feeding tributaries (Beaver Dam and Meadow Valley washes, and the Moapa River). which contribute significant discharge plus unique habitats and fishes to the system. The lowermost Virgin River Is now drowned by Lake Mead, which also excludes the Moapa and Pluvial White rivers from the system. Native fishes of the system (Table 1) reflect its age, habitat diversity, and Isolation. Excluding Moapa and pluvial White rivers, six native taxa are present, with evidence that at least three of them exist as two or more TABLE 1. Common and scientific names of native fishes of the Virgin River system, Arizona-Nevada-Utah. Scientific Name Common Name Habitat Rhinichthvs oscutus Speckled dace R. Q. varrowi Virgin River channel and largest tributaries R. osculus subspecies(?) Springs and spring-fed tributaries Plummterus arPentissimus Woundfin Virgin River channel, downstream from Pah Tempe Spring gill robusta g. L. seminuda Virgin River Virgin River channel, chub downstream from Pah Tempe Spring Loidomeda mollispinis L. m. mollisPinis Virgin spinedace Virgin River tributaries, rare in channel, where associated with springs Catostomus latiPinnis Flannelmouth Virgin River mainstream, sucker precise ecologic distrib- ution undefined Catostomus species(?) Virgin River largest trib- utaries, precise ecologic distribution undefined Pantosteus "clarkii Desert sucker Virgin River mainstream, precise ecologic distrib- ution undefined Pantosteus species(?) Virgin River tributaries, Including small, spring- fed systems; precise ecol- ogic distribution undefined Page 3 "forms" that are not yet taxonomically defined. The "forms" are segregated into channel habitats versus those in tributary streams or springs, as is the pattern in many such systems. Historically, the first known collections of fishes from the Virgin River were during the Wheeler Expedition of 1871-74. Carl L. Hubbs and Robert R. Miller sampled extensively between 1934 and 1959, and Deacon and his students commenced work in the area In the 1960s, continuing to the present. Federal listing of woundfin as Endangered stimulated detailed sampling of the mainstream habitat of this species, which has resulted In accumulation of an invaluable, long-term, quantitative data-base. Events Leading to Management Efforts of 1988 The Virgin River mainstream is a severe environment, hot in summer, violent In flood, and nearly dry In drought. Mainstream native fishes appear adapted to such vagaries, and although their populations fluctuate dramatically year-to-year, they have persisted under such conditions for millenia. Man's development of the Virgin River basin commenced about a century ago, consisting of clearing and irrigation of floodplains for subsistence agriculture and production of foodstuffs and livestock feeds for export, mostly to adjacent areas of colder climate and shorter growing seasons. The moderate climate also attracted winter visitors, which, with burgeoning "sun belt" trends, has become a major industry. St. George, Utah, the major population center, is growing rapidly, with vast influxes of retirees and development of winter homes. This combination of expanding agriculture and human populations resulted In increased demands for water, and planning for expanded use brought the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (as amended) to bear to protect the Endangered woundfin. Negotiations too complex to relate here resulted In agreements that may have helped the fish and local people, alike, but in the meantime, changes in the Virgin River created new problems for the woundf in. The non-native red shiner (Notropis lutrensis) had long been in the lower Virgin River, below the "Narrows" (the uppermost part of the reach within Arizona, often dry in drought, which flows in a precipitous canyon), where it had presumably invaded from Lake Mead. The species was first introduced In the lower Colorado River basin In the 1950s. Red shiners co-occurred with woundfin in the lower Virgin River for at least 25 years. It was abundant downstream from Mesquite, Nevada, to the apparent detriment of woundf in, but remained at relatively low population levels between Littlefield, Arizona, and the Narrows; woundfin remained common there. In the early 1980s, an irrigation reservoir was completed on Quail Creek. upstream from the Narrows, which allowed more constant delivery of water to downstream agriculturists. This, and perhaps other factors such as unusually high runoff in the early 1980s, stabilized flow from Utah into Arizona, and red shiners attained and densely populated the Utah segment upstream to the Washington Fields Diversion (WFD), a man-enhanced, natural barrier that prevented further upstream invasion. Page 4 With establishment and explosive expansion of red shiner populations upstream from the Narrows, those In the reach downstream (between the Narrows and Mesquite, Nevada) had a source of continuous repopulation against environmental stresses. Red shiners became Increasingly abundant, were not evidently reduced after flood or drought as had been the case before, and woundfin populations began to decline in relative and absolute abundance. Red shiners had before been implicated in decline of the related spikedace (Meda fulaida) and other species in Arizona, so managers quickly became concerned. In addition, an exotic, Asiatic tapeworm was discovered to infect red shiners, and soon invaded native fishes, including woundf in. Proposed Remedial Actions The woundfin recovery team and its advisors concluded that eradication of red shiners from below WFD was necessary to stop its potential Invasion further upstream. Opportunities existed for construction of one or more additional barriers downstream, upstream from the narrows, then to apply rotenone to the reach between barriers and maintain it in the future as a shiner-free zone. The scheme decided upon Included two barriers, one -10 km below WFD and a second -24 km below that. Rotenone applied at WFD was to be detoxified at the most downstream barrier. Arrangements were made for barrier construction, which commenced in September 1988. It was assumed that recolonization of the -34-km reach would be from movement of native fishes downstream, over WFD, and that adequate repopulation would occur In a relatively brief period of time, to re-establish the original fauna. An Environmental Assessment (EA) of this preferred alternative was prepared, comparing it to other possible, but unlikely-to-succeed alternatives. The EA was circulated for review and comment and approved with a finding of no significant impact. Ichthyocide Application In early September 1988, substantial numbers of woundfin (the major target species because of its Endangered status) and Virgin River chub (a secondary
Load more

Recommended publications
  • • UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT of the INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife
    •UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Division of Fishery Services Phoenix, Arizona Progress Report • FISHERY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Black and Salt Rivers Ft. Apache and San Carlos Apache Indian ,Reservations Arizona January 21, 1966 February 3, 1966 Initial Report Black and Salt Rivers Ft. Apache and San Carlos Apache Indian Reservations Arizona Introduction During the past several years, the Bureau of Sport'Fisheries'and Wildlife, in cooperation with the Bureau of Indian Affairs, has-intensified its fishery managementi assistance to the Ft. Apache and San Carlos Indian Reservations. During this period many reports summarizing fishery management activities have been submitted. None, however, has dealt with the important Black and Salt Rivers or their fishery potential. This report summarizes the- results of preliminary fishery investigations on the Salt and Black Rivers, including fishery potentials, and Is directed to the Tribal organization and•agencies of the San Carlos and Ft.-Apache Indian Reservations. The Black and Salt Rivers of Arizona flow through some of the most- spectacular canyons of the Southwest. The Salt River Canyon crossing at Highway 60 is often referred to as.the second-Grand Canyon of Arizona, with vividly colored canyon walls rising vertically more than 3,000. feet. The Black River follows a major - - - rift through basalt rock that is often narrow and exceeds 26000 feet in depth in many places. Canyons, alternately widening and boxing, extending from alpine to upper sonorian life zones, are characteristic of the study area Stands of virgin . spruce and ponderosa pine lend beauty to the.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Historic Bridge Inventory
    STATE OF ARIZONA HISTORIC PROF€RlY INVENTORY FORM Salt River Bridge PROPERTY IENTlRCAllON county Gila Inventory nmbu W037 milepost 262.44 inventory route SR 288 locadon 04.3 M N Jct SR 88 featwe lhsoctad Salt River citylvimnity Rooaevelt USOS quadrangle Salt River Peak disk id 83 UTM rmferma 12.507250.3719952 STRUCTURAL INFORMATION main span number 1 main rpan type 310 appr. rpan number 0 appr. type degreeof rkw 0 guardrail type 6 main span length 215.0 swstructure steel rigid-conneded Parker through truaa struave length 220.0 subatrwhre concrete abutments and wingwah on spread footlngs roadway width 18.2 fioor/docking concrwte deck over steel atringen, structuo width 19.3 othu features lower chord: 2 channels w/ double ladna; umer chord: 2 channels w/ cover plate and do-&&dng; vertlcd 2 channela wlth king: diagonal: 2 channels or 2 angles w/ Menplates; floor beam: I-beam: steel pipe gwdds' HISTORICPL INORMATION eonstruaion date 1920 deslgnsr/enginssr US Bureau of Public Rwds project number FHP 12-E builder/mntraaor information sour- ADOT brldge records structve owm Arlzona DepmZrnent of Transportation alteradon datda) alteradom NATlONA REGISTER EVAUATION For add'hnal infwrnation, sw "Vehicular Bridges in Pvirona 1880-1964" Nadonal Reglstw Multiple Propwly Documentation Form NRHP digibility bted MIHPaHwla A x 6- C~ signif. statement longest and oldest riveted through twsin Arizona FORM COMRmD BY Clayton B. Fraesr, Prhdpal FRASERdeslgn 420 South County Road 23E Loveland, Colodo 80537 31 Oaober 2004 SALT RIVER BRIDGE PHOTO INFORMPTlON dw of phom.: November 2002 vkw && south east ~na:02.11.287 02.11.288 32 1 FRASERDESIQN SALT RIVER BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION HISTORY In 1918 the newly formed U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • PRELIMINARY REPORT of INVESTIGATIONS of SPRINGS in the MOGOLLON RIM REGION, ARIZONA By
    United States Department of the Interior Geological Survey PRELIMINARY REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS OF SPRINGS IN THE MOGOLLON RIM REGION, ARIZONA By J. H. Feth With sections on: Base flow of streams By N. D. White and Quality of water By J. D. Hem Open-file report. Not reviewed for conformance with editorial standards of the Geological Survey. Tucson, Arizona June 1954 CONTENTS Page Abstract ................................................... 1 Introduction................................................. 3 Purpose and scope of investigation.......................... 3 Location and extent of area ................................ 4 Previous investigations.................................... 5 Personnel and acknowledgments ............................ 5 Geography .................................................. 6 Land forms and physiographic history ...................... 6 Drainage ................................................ 6 Climate ................................................. 6 Development and industry.................................. 8 Minerals"................................................. 9 Water ................................................... 9 Geology .................................................... 10 Stratigraphy ............................................. 10 Rocks of pre-Mesozoic age ............................. 10 Upper Cretaceous sedimentary rocks .................... 10 Tertiary and Quaternary sedimentary rocks .............. 11 Lake beds .......................................... 11 San Carlos basin
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Historic Bridge Inventory | Pages 164-191
    NPS Form 10-900-a OMB Approval No. 1024-0018 (8-86) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet section number G, H page 156 V E H I C U L A R B R I D G E S I N A R I Z O N A Geographic Data: State of Arizona Summary of Identification and Evaluation Methods The Arizona Historic Bridge Inventory, which forms the basis for this Multiple Property Documentation Form [MPDF], is a sequel to an earlier study completed in 1987. The original study employed 1945 as a cut-off date. This study inventories and evaluates all of the pre-1964 vehicular bridges and grade separations currently maintained in ADOT’s Structure Inventory and Appraisal [SI&A] listing. It includes all structures of all struc- tural types in current use on the state, county and city road systems. Additionally it includes bridges on selected federal lands (e.g., National Forests, Davis-Monthan Air Force Base) that have been included in the SI&A list. Generally not included are railroad bridges other than highway underpasses; structures maintained by federal agencies (e.g., National Park Service) other than those included in the SI&A; structures in private ownership; and structures that have been dismantled or permanently closed to vehicular traffic. There are exceptions to this, however, and several abandoned and/or privately owned structures of particular impor- tance have been included at the discretion of the consultant. The bridges included in this Inventory have not been evaluated as parts of larger road structures or historic highway districts, although they are clearly integral parts of larger highway resources.
    [Show full text]
  • The Colorado River: Lifeline Of
    4 The Colorado River: lifeline of the American Southwest Clarence A. Carlson Department of Fishery and Wildlife Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA 80523 Robert T. Muth Larval Fish Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA 80523 1 Carlson, C. A., and R. T. Muth. 1986. The Colorado River: lifeline of the American Southwest. Can. J. Fish. Aguat. Sci. In less than a century, the wild Colorado River has been drastically and irreversibly transformed into a tamed, man-made system of regulated segments dominated by non-native organisms. The pristine Colorado was characterized by widely fluctuating flows and physico-chemical extremes and harbored unique assemblages of indigenous flora and fauna. Closure of Hoover Dam in 1935 marked the end of the free-flowing river. The Colorado River System has since become one of the most altered and intensively controlled in the United States. Many main-stem and tributary dams, water diversions, and channelized river sections now exist in the basin. Despite having one of - the most arid drainages in the world, the present-day Colorado River supplies more water for consumptive use than any river in the United States. Physical modification of streams and introduction of non-native species have adversely impacted the Colorado's native biota. This paper treats the Colorado River holistically as an ecosystem and summarizes current knowledge on its ecology and management. "In a little over two generations, the wild Colorado has been harnessed by a series of dams strung like beads on a thread from the Gulf of California to the mountains of Wyoming.
    [Show full text]
  • "Non-Native Fish Control in Backwater Habitats in the Colorado River, Colorado" Melissa Trammel, SWCA, Flagstaff AZ
    1.) “Observations on the effectiveness and maintenance of the Highline Lake fish barrier net.” Patrick J. Martinez1 and Chris Foreman2 1Colorado Division of Wildlife, 711 Independent Avenue, Grand Junction CO 81505, Ph: 970-255-6164 E-mail: [email protected] 2Highline State Park, 1800 11.8 Road, Loma CO 81521, Ph: 970-858-7208 E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT—A 363 foot wide x 19 foot deep x 0.25 inch aperture spillway barrier net fabricated of Dynema was installed in Highline Lake in August 1999 to control escapement of juvenile and adult nonnative fish. The net’s placement met the screening requirement in the Procedures for Stocking Nonnative Fish Species in the Upper Colorado River Basin and allowed the stocking of bluegill and largemouth bass into Highline Lake in 1999 and 2000. Fish sampling and marking was performed in Highline Lake to evaluate fish escapement from the reservoir and downstream movement of nonnative fish toward the Colorado River. Fish were captured in June of both 1999 (1,091 fish=100% nonnative) and 2000 (1,420=99% nonnative), measured for total length, weighed and given a right pelvic fin clip (except trout) to denote their origin in the reservoir. Largemouth bass stocked into the reservoir in September of 1999 (7000 @ 4.2 in.) and 2000 (7000 @ 4.0 in.) were also marked with right pelvic fin clips. Monitoring of the net’s performance included observations on 1) maintaining a seal between the net’s bottom skirt and the lake bottom, 2) sand and gravel being wave-washed onto the net nearshore, and 3) the net’s main float-line submerging during a period of high flow through the reservoir.
    [Show full text]
  • Roundtail Chub (Gila Robusta) Status Survey of the Lower Colorado River Basin
    ROUNDTAIL CHUB (GILA ROBUSTA) STATUS SURVEY OF THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN Jeremy B. Voeltz, Wildlife Technician Nongame Branch, Wildlife Management Division Final Report to The Central Arizona Project Native Fish Conservation and Nonnative Aquatic Species Management and Control Program U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Field Office Phoenix, Arizona and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Phoenix Area Office Phoenix, Arizona Technical Report 186 Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program Program Manager: Terry B. Johnson Arizona Game and Fish Department 2221 West Greenway Road Phoenix, Arizona 85023-4399 January 2002 CIVIL RIGHTS AND DIVERSITY COMPLIANCE The Arizona Game and Fish Commission receives federal financial assistance in Sport Fish and Wildlife Restoration. Under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, the U.S. Department of the Interior prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex, or disability. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility as described above, or if you desire further information please write to: Arizona Game and Fish Department Office of the Deputy Director, DOHQ 2221 West Greenway Road Phoenix, Arizona 85023-4399 and The Office for Diversity and Civil Rights U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 4040 North Fairfax Drive, Room 300 Arlington, Virginia 22203 AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT COMPLIANCE The Arizona Game and Fish Department complies with all provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
    [Show full text]
  • 371 Tonto National Forest Salt River Canyon Wilderness Area Fact Sheet
    371 TONTO NATIONAL FOREST SALT RIVER CANYON WILDERNESS AREA FACT SHEET The following list of required equipment is designed to promote the personal safety of all visitors and to minimize the impacts of use on the unique and valuable natural resource that we all share in the Upper Salt River Canyon Wilderness Area. Each permitted boating party must be in possession of these required items. Forest Service River Rangers will check for compliance with these requirements. A Firepan - An open metal container or tray, enclosed with rigid sides at least 3 inches high. Fire pans must be large enough to prevent a campfire and its ashes from spilling onto the ground. A Container suitable for storage and removal of all charcoal and ash generated on your trip from the river corridor. A Portable Toilet System to collect all solid human waste for proper disposal at an appropriate waste facility. All solid human waste must be carried out of the river corridor (including toilet paper and personal hygiene items). ' REMINDERS V' Group size is limited to 15 people. V' Attach a boat tag to every watercraft used. V' Possession or transportation of any part of native plants is prohibited. V' Dead and down material may be collected for use as firewood for campfires only. V' Pack out all litter: garbage, food remains, and trash (Orange peels, seed shells and cigarette butts are considered litter). V' The U.S. Coast Guard recommends use of Type III or Type V Personal Flotation Device by each person, on all watercraft. Information regarding current stream flows and snow pack relevant to the Salt River may be accessed by calling the Salt River Project at (602) 236-5929 or logging on to the websites listed below.
    [Show full text]
  • Reconnaissance of Headwater Springs in the Gila River Drainage Basin, Arizona
    Reconnaissance of Headwater Springs in the Gila River Drainage Basin, Arizona GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1619-H econnaissance. of Headwater Springs in the Gila River Drainage Basin, Arizona £y J. H. FETH and J. D. HEM CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE HYDROLOGY OF THE UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1619-H UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1963 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D.C. CONTENTS Page Abstract_ _______________________________________________________ HI Introduction._____________________________________________________ 2 Location and extent of area____________________________________. 3 Previous investigations.________________________________________ 3 Geography______________________________________________________ 8 Geology._________________________________________________________ 9 Stratigraphy-_________________________________________________ 9 Rocks of pre-Mesozoic age._________________________________ 9 Upper Cretaceous sedimentary rocks.________________________ 10 Tertiary and Quaternary sedimentary rocks.__________________ 11 Lake deposits.________________________________________ 12 Travertine.,_ _________________________________________ 15 Igneous activity.______________________________________________ 17 Precambrian and Cambrian(?) intrusive rocks_________________ 17 Extrusive rocks___________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Eligibility Report for the National Wild and Scenic River System
    United States Department of Agriculture Eligibility Report for Forest Service Southwestern the National Wild and Region May 2009 Scenic River System Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326- W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TTY). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Printed on recycled paper – May 2009 Eligibility Report for the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System Compiled By: Evelyn Treiman, Recreation Planner Apache-Sitgreaves National Forests 30 S Chiricahua Street PO Box 650 Springerville, AZ 85938 Approved By: Chris Knopp Forest Supervisor June 2009 This page intentionally left blank. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 1 Background ..............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • United States Department of the Interior
    United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Colorado Ecological Services IN REPLY REFER TO: Front Range: Western Slope: l'WS/R6/ES CO Post Office Box 25486 445 W. Gunnison Avenue Mail Stop 65412 Suite 240 Denver, Colorado 80225-0486 Grand Junction, Colorado 8150 I -5711 ES/GJ-6-CO-08-F-0006 TAILS 65413-2008-F-0073-R00l December 26, 2017 Memorandum To: Deputy State Director, Bureau of Land Management, Colorado State Office, Resources and Fire, Lakewood, Colorado , \ ,,~~ From: Western Slope Supervisor, Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, Grand Junction, Colorado Subject: Programmatic Biological Opinion for Water Depletions Associated with Bureau of Land Management's Fluid Mineral Program within the Upper Colorado River Basin in Colorado. In accordance with section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and the Interagency Cooperation Regulations (50 CFR 402), this transmits the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (Service) final programmatic biological opinion (PBO) for impacts to four endangered Colorado River fish species (Colorado pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus lucius), razorback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus), bonytail chub (Gila elegans), and humpback chub (Gila cypha)) and their critical habitats from water depletions associated with Bureau of Land Managements's (BLM) Fluid Mineral Program (project) authorized by BLM within the Upper Colorado River Basin in Colorado. This PBO is a reinitiation of consultation on this project completed on December 19, 2008 (ES/GJ-6-CO-08-F-0006, TAILS65413-2008-F-0073), and is in response to your May 31, 2017, request for reinitiation of consultation, which included the May 26, 2017, programmatic biological assessment (2017 PBA) for the project.
    [Show full text]
  • Status of Loach Minnow in the Black River Drainage, Arizona Final
    & Status of Loach Minnow in the Black River Drainage, Arizona Final Report to U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Phoenix Area Office P.O. Box 9980 Phoenix AZ 85068-0980 Submitted by Paul C. Marsh Arizona State University Center for Environmental Studies Tempe AZ 85287-3211 In Fulfillment of Federal Grant 6-FG-32-00710 24 March 1997 Black River, located in Apache and Greenlee counties in eastern Arizona, joins with White River to form the Salt River. Black River is formed by East and West Forks of the Black River, which have headwaters originating near 9,000 and 11,000 feet (2743 and 3353 m) elevation, respectively. The stream drains portions of the Apache- Sitgreaves National Forests, Fort Apache (White Mountain) Indian Reservation, and private lands. The Black River system contains six native fish species: Apache trout ( Oncorhynchus apache) historically present and recently reintroduced to the system (Gee 1938, Anonymous 1988, Stephenson 1988), roundtail chub ( Gila robusta), speckled dace ( Rhinichthys osculus), loach minnow ( Tiaroga cobitis) discovered in 1996 (Bagley et al 1996), Sonora sucker ( Catostomus insignis), and desert sucker ( Pantosteus dark). Black River also is inhabited by six non-native species: rainbow trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss), Apache x rainbow trout hybrid (0. apache x 0. mykiss), brown trout (Salmo trutta), brook trout (Salvelinus font/nails), fathead minnow ( Pimephales promelas), and smallmouth bass ( Micropterus dolomiew). Black River is managed as a trout fishery (Arizona Game and Fish Department 1995, Stephenson 1988) and historically has been stocked with non-native species. Recent stockings have included federally threatened, native Apache trout. Stream renovations and surveys have typically revolved around trout management.
    [Show full text]