Roundtail Chub

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Roundtail Chub PETITION TO LIST THE ROUNDTAIL AND HEADWATER CHUBS (Gila robusta and nigra) AS ENDANGERED SPECIES IN THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY April 2, 2003 Ms. Gayle Norton Secretary of the Interior Office of the Secretary Department of the Interior 18th and "C" Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20240 The Center for Biological Diversity and Noah Greenwald hereby formally petition to list a distinct population segment of the roundtail chub (Gila robusta) in the Colorado River basin below Glen Canyon Dam, and the headwater chub (Gila nigra) throughout its range as endangered (or threatened) pursuant to the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. (hereafter referred to as "ESA"). This petition is filed under 5 U.S.C. 553(e) and 50 CFR 424.14 (1990), which grants interested parties the right to petition for issue of a rule from the Assistant Secretary of the Interior. Petitioners also request that Critical Habitat be designated concurrent with the listing, as required by 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b)(6)(C) and 50 CFR 424.12, and pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act (5 U.S.C. 553). Petitioners understand that this petition action sets in motion a specific process placing definite response requirements on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and very specific time constraints upon those responses. See 16 U.S.C. § 1533(b). Petitioners: Center for Biological Diversity is a non-profit public interest organization dedicated to protecting the diverse life forms of western North America. It has offices in New Mexico, Arizona, and California. 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Like many southwestern native fish, roundtail and headwater chub have declined precipitously due to a combination of habitat loss and degradation related to livestock grazing, dams, diversions, groundwater pumping, mining, recreation, and human population growth, competition and predation from non-native fish, and inadequate existing laws and regulations. In the lower Colorado River basin, roundtail and headwater chub occupy only 18% and 40% of their historic ranges respectively, and their status is poor and declining. The small and isolated nature of remaining populations puts both species at a high risk of extinction. Many of the factors that lead to this significant diminution of range continue to threaten remaining populations. As a result, both the roundtail and headwater chub meet four of five factors for determination as threatened or endangered species: Present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of habitat or range: Ø Livestock grazing is occurring in the watersheds of 29 of 30 remnant populations of roundtail or headwater chub. Forest Service documents determined that grazing is impacting chub populations on at least 17 allotments spread across five national forests and that livestock grazing on two allotments would eventually lead to a trend towards federal listing. The Forest Service failed to analyze impacts on 15-23 allotments, where the species is known to occur and there is active livestock grazing. Adverse effects from grazing also occur on other Federal, State, and private lands where the two chub persist. Ø A growing human population threatens to dewater substantial portions of the upper Verde River and its tributaries, where there are a number of remnant populations of roundtail and headwater chub, and one of the most intact native fish communities remaining in the Southwest. Dewatering also threatens at least 11 other chub populations and precludes recovery in large portions of their historic range. Ø At least 18 major dams have been constructed throughout the ranges of the roundtail and headwater chub in the lower Colorado River basin. They have destroyed substantial areas of historic range. Operations of these dams prevents or inhibits recovery in major areas and adversely affects chub populations in others. The reservoirs are stocked and managed for nonnative sport fishes, which are highly detrimental to roundtail and headwater chub. Ø Ongoing urban and suburban development threatens existing chub populations and limits recovery on the Verde, East Verde, Salt, San Pedro, and Gila Rivers and Oak, West Clear, Wet Beaver, Aravaipa, and Tonto Creeks. Ø Roads, mining, recreation and other factors continue to impact many roundtail and headwater chub populations. 3 Ø Stream channel alteration and channelization has destroyed extensive areas of roundtail and headwater chub habitat. Ongoing channelization and incremental channel alteration continue to alter chub habitat making it unsuitable for the two species and resulting in population losses. Other natural or manmade factors affecting the continued existence of the roundtail and headwater chubs: Ø Non-natives have been documented in 28 of the 30 streams with known populations of roundtail or headwater chub. Competition and habitat alteration by these non-natives has been highly detrimental to the two chub. New detrimental nonnative species continue to invade. Ø Stochastic disturbances, such as fire and drought, threaten remaining populations of roundtail and headwater chub. Serious ongoing drought may lead to losses of already highly stressed populations of both species. Disease or predation: Ø Largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, green sunfish, flathead catfish, channel catfish, black bullhead, yellow bullhead, and crayfish are all known or suspected to prey on native fish and have been introduced into the ranges of roundtail and headwater chub. Some stocking of these species is still ongoing within, or adjacent to, populations of roundtail and headwater chub. Ø Increased rates of parasitic infection, particularly anchor worm, have been observed in roundtail chub in recent decades. These observations in combination with observations of infestation occurring in habitat stressed fish suggest that declining habitat quality may be increasing disease rates for roundtail chub. Inadequacy of existing regulations: Ø No existing Federal laws, regulations, or policies provide sufficient protection to stem the ongoing decline of roundtail and headwater chub. Protections for federally listed species or habitat have not prevented the decline of these species or other native fish in the southwest and are insufficient to protect roundtail or headwater chub. Ø Existing State laws, regulations, and policies are inadequate to protect roundtail and headwater chub. In addition, substantial adverse activity is ongoing under existing State provisions. Conflict of interest between income from, and mandates for, sport fish stocking and conservation of native fish result in contradictory actions by State wildlife agencies that often harm native fish. Ø On private lands, little protection is available for roundtail and headwater chub. 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS: Introduction 1 I. Natural History 2 A. Description 2 B. Taxonomy 2 C. Reproduction/ontogeny/growth 4 D. Diet 6 E. Associated fish species 10 F. Habitat requirements 12 G. Historic and current distribution 19 II. The roundtail chub in the lower Colorado River basin constitutes a distinct population segment 25 III. Population status 37 IV. Present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of habitat or range 40 A. Livestock grazing 41 B. Water withdrawal 52 C. Dams 54 D. Roads and Logging 55 E. Recreation 56 F. Mining 56 G. Urban development 56 H. Channelization 57 I. Cumulative effects 58 V. Other natural or manmade factors affecting the continued existence of roundtail and headwater chub 59 A. Nonnative species 59 B. Stochastic disturbance and population isolation 61 VI. Disease or predation 63 VII. Inadequacy of existing regulations 65 A. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 68 B. U.S. Forest Service 72 C. Bureau of Land Management 76 D. Bureau of Reclamation 77 E. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 78 F. Other Federal Agencies 78 G. States 79 H. Private lands 94 I. Tribal lands 94 VIII. Request for Critical habitat designation 94 Literature cited 95 5 INTRODUCTION The unique and highly endemic fish fauna of the Colorado River basin has been decimated by a century of habitat degradation and non-native fish introductions (Miller 1961). Carlson and Muth (1989) report that of 54 species or subspecies in the Colorado River basin, “17 are either endangered, threatened or extinct, and most have experienced drastic abundance and range reductions.” Presently, 21 Colorado River basin fish species or subspecies are Federally listed as endangered or threatened or proposed for listing, one species is extinct, and one is being managed under a conservation agreement in-lieu of listing (50 CFR §17.11). In the genus Gila alone, of the six species endemic to the Colorado River basin, four are listed or proposed for listing and the other two are the subject of this petition. Non-native fish species dominate most fish communities in the Colorado River basin, and include at least 67 introduced species (Minckley 1973, Carlson and Muth 1989, USFWS 2001a). These introductions have been facilitated by drastic habitat modification, which favors non-natives over natives (Rinne et al. 1998, Minckley 1999). A majority of waters in the Colorado River basin are now regulated with associated changes in the hydrograph, channel geomorphology, water temperatures and mineral and sediment concentrations (Carlson and Muth 1989). Less than 1% of the river’s historic flow reaches the Colorado River delta. These changes have been compounded by groundwater pumping and diversion that reduce flows, and habitat altering activities, such as livestock grazing, construction of roads,
Recommended publications
  • Arizona TIM PALMER FLICKR
    Arizona TIM PALMER FLICKR Colorado River at Mile 50. Cover: Salt River. Letter from the President ivers are the great treasury of noted scientists and other experts reviewed the survey design, and biological diversity in the western state-specific experts reviewed the results for each state. RUnited States. As evidence mounts The result is a state-by-state list of more than 250 of the West’s that climate is changing even faster than we outstanding streams, some protected, some still vulnerable. The feared, it becomes essential that we create Great Rivers of the West is a new type of inventory to serve the sanctuaries on our best, most natural rivers modern needs of river conservation—a list that Western Rivers that will harbor viable populations of at-risk Conservancy can use to strategically inform its work. species—not only charismatic species like salmon, but a broad range of aquatic and This is one of 11 state chapters in the report. Also available are a terrestrial species. summary of the entire report, as well as the full report text. That is what we do at Western Rivers Conservancy. We buy land With the right tools in hand, Western Rivers Conservancy is to create sanctuaries along the most outstanding rivers in the West seizing once-in-a-lifetime opportunities to acquire and protect – places where fish, wildlife and people can flourish. precious streamside lands on some of America’s finest rivers. With a talented team in place, combining more than 150 years This is a time when investment in conservation can yield huge of land acquisition experience and offices in Oregon, Colorado, dividends for the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Roundtail Chub
    Roundtail Chub - Gila robusta Abundance: Rare Status: NSS1 (Aa) NatureServe: G3 S3 Population Status: Greatly restricted in numbers and distribution and extirpation is possible. Limiting Factor: The biggest limiting factor for roundtail chub is invasive species. This threat has significant impacts through competition and predation. The threat of invasive species is growing with introductions of new species and the expansion of existing species. This is particularly true of predatory fish. Population of roundtails in Wyoming are imperiled due to limited distribution and declines in numbers. Comment: NSS Ranks are reviewed and revised with each SWAP revision. No changes were made for this species in this revision. Introduction Roundtail chub, along with flannelmouth sucker Catostomus latipinnis, and bluehead sucker C. discobolus are all relatively large-bodied species native to the Colorado River drainage. These three imperiled fish are collectively called “the three species” and their conservation has been a cooperative effort spanning state lines (Utah Department of Natural Resources 2006, updated in 2011). Once common throughout the drainage, roundtail chub currently occupy approximately 45% of their historic range in the Colorado River Basin (Baxter and Stone 1995; Bezzerides and Bestgen 2002). They still occur in relatively low numbers throughout the Green River drainage of Wyoming, with lentic populations in the Finger Lakes of the New Fork Drainage (Baxter and Stone 1995; Gelwicks et al. 2009). Roundtail chubs are omnivorous. Larvae feed on diatoms and filamentous algae (Neve 1967). Juveniles feed on aquatic insects, crustaceans, and algae. (Bestgen 1985). Adults consume these food items as well as terrestrial gastropods, insects, and reptiles (Rinne 1992).
    [Show full text]
  • Literature Cited for the Withdrawal of the Proposed Rule on Threatened Species Status for the Headwater Chub and Roundtail Chub Distinct Population Segment
    Literature Cited for the Withdrawal of the Proposed Rule on Threatened Species Status for the Headwater Chub and Roundtail Chub Distinct Population Segment Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD). 2006. Arizona statewide conservation agreement for roundtail chub (Gila robusta), headwater chub (Gila nigra), flannelmouth sucker (Catostomus latipinnis), Little Colorado River sucker (Catostomus spp.), bluehead sucker (Catostomus discobolus), and Zuni bluehead sucker (Catostomus discobolus yarrowi). December 2006. Arizona Game and Fish Department, Wildlife Management Division, Nongame Branch Native Fish Program, Phoenix, Arizona. 63 pages. Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD). 2017. February 1, 2017, letter to Steve Spangle, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service re: Conservation commitment for roundtail chub (Gila robusta). 2 pages. Baird, S. F. and C. Girard. 1853. Report of an expedition down the Zuni and Colorado Rivers. Report of the Secretary of War. Fishes: 147-154. Brandenburg, W. H., J. L. Kennedy, and M. A. Farrington. 2015. Determining the historical distribution of the Gila robusta complex (Gila chub, Gila intermedia, headwater chub, Gila nigra, and roundtail chub, Gila robusta) in the Gila River Basin, New Mexico, using morphological analysis. Final Report to New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, Santa Fe, New Mexico. 19 pages. Carman, S. M. 2006. Colorado River Basin chubs, roundtail chub (Gila robusta), Gila chub (Gila intermedia), headwater chub (Gila nigra), recovery plan. New Mexico Department of Game and Fish, Conservation Services Division, Santa Fe, New Mexico. 63 pages. Carter, J. M, M. J. Clement, A. S. Makinster, C. D. Crowder, and B. Hickerson. 2017. Classification success of species within the Gila robusta complex using morphological and meristic characters – a reexamination of taxonomic designations.
    [Show full text]
  • Roundtail Chub (Gila Robusta Robusta): a Technical Conservation Assessment
    Roundtail Chub (Gila robusta robusta): A Technical Conservation Assessment Prepared for the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region, Species Conservation Project May 3, 2005 David E. Rees, Jonathan A. Ptacek, and William J. Miller Miller Ecological Consultants, Inc. 1113 Stoney Hill Drive, Suite A Fort Collins, Colorado 80525-1275 Peer Review Administered by American Fisheries Society Rees, D.E., J.A. Ptacek, and W.J. Miller. (2005, May 3). Roundtail Chub (Gila robusta robusta): a technical conservation assessment. [Online]. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region. Available: http:// www.fs.fed.us/r2/projects/scp/assessments/roundtailchub.pdf [date of access]. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to thank those people who promoted, assisted, and supported this species assessment for the Region 2 USDA Forest Service. Ryan Carr and Kellie Richardson conducted preliminary literature reviews and were valuable in the determination of important or usable literature. Laura Hillger provided assistance with report preparation and dissemination. Numerous individuals from Region 2 national forests were willing to discuss the status and management of this species. Thanks go to Greg Eaglin (Medicine Bow National Forest), Dave Gerhardt (San Juan National Forest), Kathy Foster (Routt National Forest), Clay Spease and Chris James (Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Gunnison National Forest), Christine Hirsch (White River National Forest), as well as Gary Patton and Joy Bartlett from the Regional Office. Dan Brauh, Lory Martin, Tom Nesler, Kevin Rogers, and Allen Zincush, all of the Colorado Division of Wildlife, provided information on species distribution, management, and current regulations. AUTHORS’ BIOGRAPHIES David E. Rees studied fishery biology, aquatic ecology, and ecotoxicology at Colorado State University where he received his B.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Edna Assay Development
    Environmental DNA assays available for species detection via qPCR analysis at the U.S.D.A Forest Service National Genomics Center for Wildlife and Fish Conservation (NGC). Asterisks indicate the assay was designed at the NGC. This list was last updated in June 2021 and is subject to change. Please contact [email protected] with questions. Family Species Common name Ready for use? Mustelidae Martes americana, Martes caurina American and Pacific marten* Y Castoridae Castor canadensis American beaver Y Ranidae Lithobates catesbeianus American bullfrog Y Cinclidae Cinclus mexicanus American dipper* N Anguillidae Anguilla rostrata American eel Y Soricidae Sorex palustris American water shrew* N Salmonidae Oncorhynchus clarkii ssp Any cutthroat trout* N Petromyzontidae Lampetra spp. Any Lampetra* Y Salmonidae Salmonidae Any salmonid* Y Cottidae Cottidae Any sculpin* Y Salmonidae Thymallus arcticus Arctic grayling* Y Cyrenidae Corbicula fluminea Asian clam* N Salmonidae Salmo salar Atlantic Salmon Y Lymnaeidae Radix auricularia Big-eared radix* N Cyprinidae Mylopharyngodon piceus Black carp N Ictaluridae Ameiurus melas Black Bullhead* N Catostomidae Cycleptus elongatus Blue Sucker* N Cichlidae Oreochromis aureus Blue tilapia* N Catostomidae Catostomus discobolus Bluehead sucker* N Catostomidae Catostomus virescens Bluehead sucker* Y Felidae Lynx rufus Bobcat* Y Hylidae Pseudocris maculata Boreal chorus frog N Hydrocharitaceae Egeria densa Brazilian elodea N Salmonidae Salvelinus fontinalis Brook trout* Y Colubridae Boiga irregularis Brown tree snake*
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Fishing Regulations 3 Fishing License Fees Getting Started
    2019 & 2020 Fishing Regulations for your boat for your boat See how much you could savegeico.com on boat | 1-800-865-4846insurance. | Local Offi ce geico.com | 1-800-865-4846 | Local Offi ce See how much you could save on boat insurance. Some discounts, coverages, payment plans and features are not available in all states or all GEICO companies. Boat and PWC coverages are underwritten by GEICO Marine Insurance Company. GEICO is a registered service mark of Government Employees Insurance Company, Washington, D.C. 20076; a Berkshire Hathaway Inc. subsidiary. TowBoatU.S. is the preferred towing service provider for GEICO Marine Insurance. The GEICO Gecko Image © 1999-2017. © 2017 GEICO AdPages2019.indd 2 12/4/2018 1:14:48 PM AdPages2019.indd 3 12/4/2018 1:17:19 PM Table of Contents Getting Started License Information and Fees ..........................................3 Douglas A. Ducey Governor Regulation Changes ...........................................................4 ARIZONA GAME AND FISH COMMISSION How to Use This Booklet ...................................................5 JAMES S. ZIELER, CHAIR — St. Johns ERIC S. SPARKS — Tucson General Statewide Fishing Regulations KURT R. DAVIS — Phoenix LELAND S. “BILL” BRAKE — Elgin Bag and Possession Limits ................................................6 JAMES R. AMMONS — Yuma Statewide Fishing Regulations ..........................................7 ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT Common Violations ...........................................................8 5000 W. Carefree Highway Live Baitfish
    [Show full text]
  • Quantitative PCR Assays for Detecting Loach Minnow (Rhinichthys Cobitis) and Spikedace (Meda Fulgida) in the Southwestern United States
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Quantitative PCR Assays for Detecting Loach Minnow (Rhinichthys cobitis) and Spikedace (Meda fulgida) in the Southwestern United States Joseph C. Dysthe1*, Kellie J. Carim1, Yvette M. Paroz2, Kevin S. McKelvey1, Michael K. Young1, Michael K. Schwartz1 1 United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, National Genomics Center for Wildlife and Fish Conservation, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Missoula, MT, United States of America, 2 United States a11111 Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southwestern Region, Albuquerque, NM, United States of America * [email protected] Abstract OPEN ACCESS Loach minnow (Rhinichthys cobitis) and spikedace (Meda fulgida) are legally protected Citation: Dysthe JC, Carim KJ, Paroz YM, McKelvey with the status of Endangered under the U.S. Endangered Species Act and are endemic to KS, Young MK, Schwartz MK (2016) Quantitative the Gila River basin of Arizona and New Mexico. Efficient and sensitive methods for moni- PCR Assays for Detecting Loach Minnow ’ (Rhinichthys cobitis) and Spikedace (Meda fulgida)in toring these species distributions are critical for prioritizing conservation efforts. We devel- the Southwestern United States. PLoS ONE 11(9): oped quantitative PCR assays for detecting loach minnow and spikedace DNA in e0162200. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0162200 environmental samples. Each assay reliably detected low concentrations of target DNA Editor: Michael Hofreiter, University of York, UNITED without detection of non-target species, including other cyprinid fishes with which they co- KINGDOM occur. Received: April 27, 2016 Accepted: August 18, 2016 Published: September 1, 2016 Copyright: This is an open access article, free of all Introduction copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used Loach minnow (Rhinichthys cobitis) and spikedace (Meda fulgida) are cyprinid fishes that were by anyone for any lawful purpose.
    [Show full text]
  • Population Status of Humpback Chub, Gila Cypha, and Catch
    Population Status of Humpback Chub, Gila cypha, and Catch Indices and Population Structure of Sympatric Roundtail Chub, Gila robusta, in Black Rocks, Colorado River, Colorado, 1998- 2012 Picture 1. Humpback chub on grid board (2012). Photo credit: T. Francis, USFWS. Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program Project Number 131 (22a3) Final Report April, 2016 Travis A. Francis U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Colorado River Fishery Project 445 West Gunnison Avenue, Suite 140 Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 -and- Dr. Kevin R. Bestgen Dr. Gary C. White Colorado State University Larval Fish Laboratory Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 i Suggested Citation: Francis, T.A., K.R. Bestgen, and G.C. White. 2016. Population status of humpback chub, Gila cypha, and catch indices and population structure of sympatric roundtail chub, Gila robusta, in Black Rocks, Colorado River, Colorado, 1998-2012. Larval Fish Laboratory Contribution 199. Final Report from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program, Project Number 131. Grand Junction, Colorado. ii Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................................... vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................... vii INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • (ALSC) Caldecott Medal & Honor Books, 1938 to Present
    Association for Library Service to Children (ALSC) Caldecott Medal & Honor Books, 1938 to present 2014 Medal Winner: Locomotive, written and illustrated by Brian Floca (Atheneum Books for Young Readers, an imprint of Simon & Schuster Children’s Publishing) 2014 Honor Books: Journey, written and illustrated by Aaron Becker (Candlewick Press) Flora and the Flamingo, written and illustrated by Molly Idle (Chronicle Books) Mr. Wuffles! written and illustrated by David Wiesner (Clarion Books, an imprint of Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing) 2013 Medal Winner: This Is Not My Hat, written and illustrated by Jon Klassen (Candlewick Press) 2013 Honor Books: Creepy Carrots!, illustrated by Peter Brown, written by Aaron Reynolds (Simon & Schuster Books for Young Readers, an imprint of Simon & Schuster Children’s Publishing Division) Extra Yarn, illustrated by Jon Klassen, written by Mac Barnett (Balzer + Bray, an imprint of HarperCollins Publishers) Green, illustrated and written by Laura Vaccaro Seeger (Neal Porter Books, an imprint of Roaring Brook Press) One Cool Friend, illustrated by David Small, written by Toni Buzzeo (Dial Books for Young Readers, a division of Penguin Young Readers Group) Sleep Like a Tiger, illustrated by Pamela Zagarenski, written by Mary Logue (Houghton Mifflin Books for Children, an imprint of Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company) 2012 Medal Winner: A Ball for Daisy by Chris Raschka (Schwartz & Wade Books, an imprint of Random House Children's Books, a division of Random House, Inc.) 2013 Honor Books: Blackout by John Rocco (Disney · Hyperion Books, an imprint of Disney Book Group) Grandpa Green by Lane Smith (Roaring Brook Press, a division of Holtzbrinck Publishing Holdings Limited Partnership) Me...Jane by Patrick McDonnell (Little, Brown and Company, a division of Hachette Book Group, Inc.) 2011 Medal Winner: A Sick Day for Amos McGee, illustrated by Erin E.
    [Show full text]
  • Science Magazine Podcast Transcript, 17 May 2013
    Science Magazine Podcast Transcript, 17 May 2013 http://podcasts.aaas.org/science_news/SciencePodcast_130517_ScienceNOW.mp3 Promo The following is an excerpt from the Science Podcast. To hear the whole show, visit www.sciencemag.org and click on “Science Podcast.” Music Interviewer – Sarah Crespi Finally today, I’m here with David Grimm, online news editor for Science. He’s here to give us a rundown of some of the recent stories from our daily news site. I’m Sarah Crespi. So Dave, first up we have “dam” deforestation. Interviewee – David Grimm Sarah, this story is about hydropower. This is a major source of power in the world; turbines hooked up to dams, the water flows down, spins the turbine, and can power a lot. In fact, there is a dam that’s being constructed in Brazil called the Belo Monte Dam, which is a 14 billion dollar project. And when it’s complete, it will have the third greatest capacity for generating hydropower in the world. Interviewer – Sarah Crespi Okay, so what about the trees? Interviewee – David Grimm Well, there’s a problem: to build these dams you’ve got to cut down a lot of trees, and that has its own ecological problems. But engineers didn’t worry about the cutting down the trees themselves as a problem for the dam power; in fact, they thought that cutting down the trees would actually improve hydroelectric power, the reason being that trees suck up a lot of water from the soil. It’s a process known as evapotranspiration, where the water gets sucked up into the trees, the trees transpire the water through their leaves, and that water enters the atmosphere.
    [Show full text]
  • Verde Watershed Fisheries Management Plan Inside This Issue: Beginning in 2013, the Arizona Game and Fish Department Led a Multi-Agency Team #TRENDINGNOW
    Volume 1 | Issue 3 | September 2015 Verde Watershed Fisheries Management Plan Inside this issue: Beginning in 2013, the Arizona Game and Fish Department led a multi-agency team #TRENDINGNOW ................. 2 that was tasked with developing a watershed-based, fisheries management plan A New Conservation Tool: the for the entire Verde River watershed that would balance sport fish opportunities Chub CCAA ........................... 2 and native fish conservation. That watershed plan is nearing completion. Apache Trout Research ......... 2 IN THE FIELD ........................ 3 The Verde Watershed Fisheries that resources will typically be be available to the public Management Plan was applied to address the primary online at www.azgfd.gov. Recent and Upcoming AZGFD- developed using the emphasis first. led Activities ........................... 3 The Verde Watershed Department’s new Watershed- Gartersnake and Leopard Frog A Verde Watershed Fisheries Fisheries Management Plan is based Fish Management Recovery Updates ................. 3 Process. This process is Management Plan web map the first plan developed using systematic, data-driven, and was developed as the main this process. The team also BACK AT THE PONDS .......... 4 communication tool for evaluated the effectiveness of addresses socio-political Desert Fish Research and concerns. Department fisheries and the planning process, and Recovery at ARCC ................ 4 aquatic management decisions provided recommendations The team—which included in the Verde River watershed. for future watershed-based state and federal biologists— The web map displays each fish management planning delineated management units individual management unit efforts. and identified a primary and on an interactive map, secondary management allowing users to easily The Verde Watershed emphasis for each unit so that identify high-priority Fisheries Management Plan is more specific prescriptions management units and the in the final stages of review under those categories could primary emphasis for that unit.
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species
    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
    [Show full text]