Long-Term Captive Breeding Does Not Necessarily Prevent Reestablishment: Lessons Learned from Eagle Lake Rainbow Trout

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Long-Term Captive Breeding Does Not Necessarily Prevent Reestablishment: Lessons Learned from Eagle Lake Rainbow Trout Rev Fish Biol Fisheries DOI 10.1007/s11160-011-9230-x RESEARCH PAPER Long-term captive breeding does not necessarily prevent reestablishment: lessons learned from Eagle Lake rainbow trout Gerard Carmona-Catot • Peter B. Moyle • Rachel E. Simmons Received: 7 March 2011 / Accepted: 18 July 2011 Ó Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011 Abstract Captive breeding of animals is often cited recovering as habitat. With the exception of an as an important tool in conservation, especially for abundant alien brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) fishes, but there are few reports of long-term population in Pine Creek, the habitat factors that led (\50 years) success of captive breeding programs, to the presumed near-extinction of Eagle Lake rainbow even in salmonid fishes. Here we describe the captive trout in the early twentieth century have been amelio- breeding program for Eagle Lake rainbow trout, rated, although the final stages of reestablishment Oncorhynchus mykiss aquilarum, which is endemic (eradication of brook trout, unequivocal demonstration to the Eagle Lake watershed of northeastern Califor- of successful spawning migration) have still not been nia. The population in Eagle Lake has been dependent completed. The Eagle Lake rainbow trout story shows on captive breeding for more than 60 years and that long-term captive breeding of migratory salmonid supports a trophy fishery in the lake. Nevertheless, fishes does not necessarily prevent reestablishment of the basic life history, ecological, and genetic traits of wild populations, provided effort is made to counter the subspecies still seem to be mostly intact. Although the effects of hatchery selection and that natural management has apparently minimized negative habitats are restored for reintroduction. Long-term effects of hatchery rearing, reestablishing a wild success, however, ultimately depends upon eliminat- population would ensure maintenance of its distinctive ing hatchery influences on wild-spawning populations. life history and its value for future use as a hatchery Extinction of Eagle Lake rainbow trout as a wild fish. An important factor that makes reestablishment species becomes increasingly likely if we fail to act possible is that the habitat in Eagle Lake is still intact boldly to protect it and the Eagle Lake watershed. and that Pine Creek, its major spawning stream, is Keywords Salmonidae Á Captive breeding Á G. Carmona-Catot (&) Á P. B. Moyle Hatchery effects Á Species invasions Á Endangered Department of Wildlife, Fish and Conservation Biology, species Á Conservation Á Eagle Lake University of California, Davis, Davis 95616, CA, USA e-mail: [email protected] G. Carmona-Catot Institute of Aquatic Ecology, University of Girona, Introduction 17071 Girona, Catalonia, Spain Captive breeding of animals is often cited as an R. E. Simmons Department of Animal Science, Genomic Variation Lab, important tool in conservation (Soule´ et al. 1986), University of California, Davis, Davis 95616, CA, USA especially for fish (Phillippart 1995). In some cases, it 123 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries is the final resort for the species, when the last An unusual opportunity to see if a salmonid individuals are taken into captivity, as has happened population long maintained by captive breeding can with California condor (Gymnogyps californianus), revert to a wild, self-sustaining state is found in Eagle black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes), Arabian oryx Lake rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss aquilarum). (Oryx leucoryx), European bison (Bison bonasus), and This trout is endemic to a single California watershed Owens pupfish (Cyprinodon radiosus) (Miller and but is now in widespread use in the western USA as a Pister 1971; Kleiman 1989; Snyder and Snyder 2000; hatchery fish. It has been reared in captivity for the first Perzanowski and Olech 2007; Belant et al. 2011). Most year or more of life for more than 60 years and is captive breeding programs, however, are fairly recent stocked annually into its native Eagle Lake, California, in origin and have little long-term experience with to support a trophy fishery (Moyle 2002). The stocked reestablishing wild populations. A general goal of fish, once mature, are captured, spawned, and returned captive breeding is to re-establish species in the wild to Eagle Lake. Some of their progeny are used as brood once suitable habitat is available, although this is not stock for part of the hatchery program. In this respect always possible (Snyder et al. 1996). Major concerns the captive breeding program for Eagle Lake rainbow include loss of fitness for survival in the wild during trout (ELRT) has characteristics of both a supplemen- captivity, through loss of genetic diversity, selection tation hatchery program and a put-and-grow program. for traits that improve survival in captivity but are While the hatchery program probably saved ELRT detrimental in the wild, and loss of learned behaviors from extinction, its principal purpose has been to essential for survival in the wild (Busack and Currens maintain the sport fishery in Eagle Lake and in other 1995; Araki et al. 2007, 2008). water bodies in California. Access of ELRT to their Many hatchery programs for fishes of the family major former spawning tributary (Pine Creek) has been Salmonidae (salmon, trout, charrs, etc.) are arguably completely blocked to allow for easy capture of mature captive breeding on a large scale, although they are fish. Moyle et al. (2008) suggested that the ELRT mostly designed to supplement existing wild popula- should be listed as a threatened species because of its tions or to support fisheries directly (Hilborn 1992; complete dependence on hatchery rearing for survival. Busack and Currens 1995). Fish used for the latter In this paper, we (1) describe the distinctive nature purpose can become completely domesticated (Moyle of Eagle Lake and its watershed, (2) review the 1969; Huntingford 2004); they are raised to be caught biology, history, and recent studies of ELRT, and (3) shortly after release (put-and-take fishery) or are present new information on ELRT life history and released into fairly benign conditions, such as ponds genetics. We then use this information to answer the or reservoirs, with no expectation of natural reproduc- following questions: tion (put-and-grow fishery). Fish from supplementa- • Can a self-sustaining population of ELRT be re- tion hatcheries, however, are expected to survive in the established in its native habitats after nearly wild although mortality rates once released are usually 60 years of captive breeding? extremely high. Nevertheless, supplementation pro- • If so, what changes in management of ELRT are grams have shown considerable success in maintain- required in order to re-establish a self-sustaining ing fisheries but their long-term prospects have been population in the Eagle Lake watershed? questioned (Fraser 2008; Kostow 2008). One reason for concern is loss of fitness for survival in the wild, Finally, we discuss insights gained from this study which in steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) can be in the use of captive breeding for restoration of native significant in 1–2 generations (Araki et al. 2007, 2008, fish. 2009). Fraser (2008) points out that there is little evidence that salmonids with a long hatchery history can establish self-sustaining wild populations. Most of Eagle Lake and its watershed the evidence is equivocal or anecdotal. However, Chilcote et al. (2011) show that wild populations of Eagle Lake (40.6 N, 120.7 W) is the second largest three species of anadromous salmonids have greatly natural lake (24 km long by 3–4 km wide) entirely reduced ability to be self-sustaining when fish of contained in California, with a surface area of hatchery origin are also present. ca. 8,900 ha (Fig. 1). It is situated in northeastern 123 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries Fig. 1 Eagle Lake basin, showing the location of Pine Creek, the principal spawning tributary of Eagle Lake rainbow trout, and of Bogard Spring Creek, a small tributary at the lower end of the permanent reaches of Pine Creek, that is used for experimental spawning and rearing. Stream sections shown by a dashed line are usually dry in summer. The uppermost ca. 5 km of Pine Creek, which are highly seasonal in flow, are not shown California at an elevation of about 1,555 m (lake Table 1 Species, year and fish stocked in Eagle Lake since surface elevation varies with inflow). This endorheic 1924 (King and Weidlein, unpublished data, 1976; Purdy 1988; (terminal) lake consists of three basins, two of them Pustejovsky 2007) averaging 5–6 m deep, the third averaging 10–20 m Species Year No of fish with a maximum depth of about 23 m. The shallow stocked basins are similar in their limnology and water Coregonus clupeaformis 1879 225,000 temperatures sometimes exceed 21°C in the summer, Ameierus nebulosus 1879 – although the deep basin stratifies, providing a cool Micropterus salmoides 1901–1902/1930 1047 water refuge for trout. The lake is highly alkaline (pH Salmo trutta 1914/1931–1933 310,000 8.4–9.6) with alkalinity increasing during dry periods Oncorhynchus mykiss 1920’s/1932/1953 [21,000 as lake levels decline (Huntsinger and Maslin 1976). Salvelinus namaycush 1924 25,000 The fish species present in Eagle Lake are all native: Pomoxis spp. 1930 150 ELRT, tui chub (Siphateles bicolor), Lahontan redside Lepomis macrochirus 1930 650 (Richardsonius egregius), speckled dace (Rhinichthys Oncorhynchus kisutch 1934–1935 478,416 osculus) and Tahoe sucker (Catostomus tahoensis). Oncorhynchus nerka 1952–1956 886,750 Eagle Lake is the only large lake in California without alien species (Moyle 2002), although more than 11 Salmo clarkii henshawi 1955–1956 243,200 alien fishes were stocked at various times (Table 1). Oncorhynchus mykiss 1953/1956/ 10–15 million aquilarium 1960–now Most of the species failed to become established and those that did disappeared from the lake during periods All introductions ultimately failed when lake levels were low and pH levels were high, presumably inhibiting reproduction (Purdy 1988).
Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • 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]
  • Fish Stocking Plan
    Draft Application for a New License Major Project – Existing Dam New Bullards Bar Reservoir Fish Stocking Plan Security Level: Public Yuba River Development Project FERC Project No. 2246 Draft – December 2013 ©2013, Yuba County Water Agency All Rights Reserved Yuba County Water Agency Yuba River Development Project FERC Project No. 2246 Table of Contents Section No. Description Page No. Glossary – Definitions of Terms, Acronyms and Abbreviations ........................................... GLO-1 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Background .......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1.1 Yuba River Development Project ............................................................ 1-1 1.2 Purpose of the New Bullards Bar Reservoir Fish Stocking Plan ......................... 1-5 1.3 Objectives of the New Bullards Bar Reservoir Fish Stocking Plan..................... 1-5 1.4 Contents of the New Bullards Bar Reservoir Fish Stocking Plan ....................... 1-5 2.0 Regulatory Framework, Fish Assemblage, and Stocking History ................................... 2-1 2.1 Regulatory Framework for Fish Stocking in New Bullards Bar Reservoir ......... 2-1 2.1.1 Forest Service and Cal Fish and Wildlife – Memorandum of Understanding .......................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.2 California Fish and Wildlife Code ..........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Redband Trout Sub-Sp. (Oncorhynchus Mykiss Sub-Species) Data: Trout and Salmon of North America, Behnke, 2002; Various State and Federal Documents Partners: CA, OR
    Redband Trout Sub-Sp. (Oncorhynchus mykiss sub-species) Data: Trout and Salmon of North America, Behnke, 2002; Various state and federal documents Partners: CA, OR. WA, NV, ID, MT, FS, FWS, BLM, Tribes__________________ Status of the Redband Trout: Various forms Historic Distribution of Redband Trout of the Redband trout (RBT) were petitioned to (modified from Behnke, 1996) be listed as Threatened or Endangered in the late 1990’s, but the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service determined that the sub-species, in the various drainages, did not need the protection of the Endangered Species Act. The various forms of Redband trout in California, Oregon, Washington, Nevada, Idaho and Montana are considered to be sensitive species or species of concern in all the states. The BLM also considers several populations of Redband Trout to be a “sensitive Species”. Sportfishing Status of Redband trout: Native populations of redband trout provide diverse and popular recreational angling opportunities. Their willingness to take a variety of fishing gear, impressive fighting ability when hooked, spectacular appearance and potential to reach large size all contribute to their popularity. Special regulations for waters possessing redband trout population are Although the current distribution is not used to balance angling opportunities with accurately described, regionally located surveys conservation needs. For example, in Nevada, do give some good information. For the recreational angling is allowed for redband purposes of this status assessment, distribution trout with harvest and possession limits ranging in four geographic population groups is from five to ten trout. Angler use on these described. They include 1) the upper redband trout streams and rivers has averaged Sacramento River Basin; 2) The upper interior approximately 7,000 angler use days per year Great Basin in Oregon and Nevada; 3) the since 1993.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 EAGLE LAKE RAINBOW TROUT Oncorhynchus Mykiss Aquilarum
    EAGLE LAKE RAINBOW TROUT Oncorhynchus mykiss aquilarum (Snyder) Status: High Concern. The Eagle Lake rainbow trout (ELRT) does not exist as a self-sustaining wild population because of dependence on hatchery propagation. Habitat degradation and the presence of alien brook trout in Pine Creek, the ELRT’s principal spawning grounds, along with continued reliance on hatchery production to maintain the ELRT population will make it increasingly difficult to re-establish a wild population. Description: This subspecies is similar to other rainbow trout in gross morphology (see Moyle 2002), but differs slightly in meristic counts, especially in having finer scales than coastal rainbow trout. It is also distinctive in possessing 58 chromosomes, rather than the 60 typical of other rainbow trout (Busack et al. 1980). Taxonomic Relationships: Snyder (1917) described this trout as a subspecies of rainbow trout, Salmo gairdneri aquilarum. However, Hubbs and Miller (1948) examined Snyder's specimens and concluded that ELRT were derived from hybridization between native Lahontan cutthroat trout (presumed to have occupied Eagle Lake prehistorically) and introduced rainbow trout. Miller (1950) later retracted the hybridization theory. Needham and Gard (1959) then suggested that ELRT were descended from introduced or immigrant rainbow trout from the Feather or Pit River drainages. Behnke (1965, 1972) proposed a redband-rainbow hybrid origin, although redband trout are now considered to be rainbow trout subspecies. Busack et al. (1980), in an extensive electrophoretic, karyotypic and meristic analysis, suggested that ELRT were derived either from immigration or an unrecorded introduction of a rainbow trout with 58 chromosomes. The distinctive morphology, ecology, and physiology of this form all point to ELRT being derived from natural colonization from the Sacramento River drainage.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Importance of Zoonotic Bacteria
    EVALUATING THE IMPORTANCE OF ZOONOTIC BACTERIA, ANTIMICROBIAL USE AND RESISTANCE IN AQUACULTURE AND SEAFOOD A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of Graduate Studies of The University of Guelph by NATASA TUSEVLJAK In partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of Master of Science April, 2011 © Natasa Tusevljak, 2011 Library and Archives Biblioth6que et Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'^dition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre r6f6rence ISBN: 978-0-494-80085-0 Our file Notre r^f6rence ISBN: 978-0-494-80085-0 NOTICE; AVIS; The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans le loan, distribute and sell theses monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non­ support microforme, papier, electronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in this et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. Ni thesis. Neither the thesis nor la these ni des extraits substantiels de celle-ci substantial extracts from it may be ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement printed or otherwise reproduced reproduits sans son autorisation.
    [Show full text]
  • III. Eagle Lake Rainbow Trout/Tishes of Pine Creek and Eagle Lake
    III. Eagle Lake Rainbow Trout/Tishes of Pine Creek and Eagle Lake It is from a storied prize catch that comes a secretive past: the Eagle Lake rainbow trout of disagreed upon origin is no longer naturally reproducing. History has been less than kind to the ELRT as actions of the past created potential extinction. Timely intervention and persistence in restoration efforts has brought the ELRT to a sort of crossroads today: hatchery production provides a quality fishing experience for visitors to Eagle Lake (and other waters in the western United States), while efforts to improve habitat has likely made spawning grounds accessible once again. The missing link at this point is whether the fish still have the capability to ascend Pine Creek at an opportune time to spawn and return (or for progeny to return) to complete their life cycle. All fish have been completely stopped by the dam in their upstream quest to migrate at the trapping and spawning facility near Spalding. From 1959 through 1994, ELRT were known to migrate past the dam during years of high flow when conditions allowed them to pass. Reconstructed in 1995 to more effectively prevent erosion and upstream movement of fish, it is highly unlikely that any ELRT have made it over the barrier. Questions arise as to the ability of these "hatchery" fish to know when to migrate, and where or how far upstream to go. Have we raised fish that are prograrnmed to spawn earlier now than in the past? If fish today are many generations removed from upstream migration, will they know how far to go, or know which stream or segment provides spawning gravels? Is it important to have these fish spawn naturally and occupy their "original" habitat? The CRMP group must continue to work on the answers to these questions.
    [Show full text]
  • Sympatric Relationship Between Redband Trout and Non-Native Brook Trout in the Southeastern Oregon Great Basin
    Environ Biol Fish DOI 10.1007/s10641-013-0157-z Sympatric relationship between redband trout and non-native brook trout in the Southeastern Oregon Great Basin Stephanie A. Miller & Stephanie Gunckel & Steve Jacobs & Dana R. Warren Received: 17 May 2012 /Accepted: 18 July 2013 # Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013 Abstract Brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) and rain- between sympatric and allopatric locations that would bow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) have been widely indicate differentiation in site level habitat preferences introduced outside their respective ranges within North for each trout species. We found that sympatric loca- America causing declines and displacement of native tions had more wood but similar fish community struc- trout. Yet, successful coexistence of native and non- ture. Mean length and densities of redband trout were native trout has received little attention. Here we eval- higher at allopatric locations. However, in most years uated the effect of introduced brook trout on the size at sympatric locations total trout density was twice that and density of native redband trout in two invaded sub- of allopatric redband trout sites. Using comparable data basins in southeastern Oregon. In a multi-year study, from an eastern United States system where brook trout we investigated whether habitat and fish communities are native, sympatric sites had lower densities of brook differed between streams and stream reaches where trout; however, total trout density did not differ. We redband trout were allopatric versus where redband conclude that invading trout negatively impact native trout were sympatric with brook trout. We hypothe- trout densities; but in southeastern Oregon system the sized that redband trout would be less dense and have negative impact is minimized.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report for Redband Trout Status and Evaluation Project
    Final Report For Redband Trout Status and Evaluation Project WNTI project number RTSPE2008-2 For the Period January 1, 2008 – November 30, 2009 Submitted by: Charmane Ashbrook1,Michael Mizell, and Arleta Agun Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Sheri Sears Colville Confederated Tribes Chris Butler & Deanne Pavlik-Kunkel Spokane Tribe of Indians 1 Corresponding author Email address: [email protected] Address: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Fish Science 600 Capitol Way N. Olympia, WA 98501-1091 Table of Contents Table of Contents…….………………………………………………………………………..i List of Figures ……………………………………………………………………………..…ii List of Tables………………………………………..……………………. ..... …………… .. iii Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................... 1 Abstract……… .......................................................................................................................... 2 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 3 1.2 Methods ........................................................................................................................ 5 1.3 Results .......................................................................................................................... 9 1.4 Discussion .................................................................................... …………………..26 References……………. ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment I Trout Temperature Requirements
    Amended Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment (APDEA) FERC Project Nos. 2085, 2175, 67 and 120 5.2.4 Aquatic Resources ATTACHMENT I TROUT TEMPERATURE REQUIREMENTS (LITERATURE REVIEW) Copyright 2007 by Southern California Edison Company February 2007 Attachment I Attachment I – Rainbow Trout Temperature Requirements Introduction In the PDEA, water temperature was evaluated with respect to criteria for trout found in the literature. These criteria were used to evaluate which bypass reaches may have temperatures that potentially affect habitat suitability for trout and thereby could affect meeting water quality objectives. This attachment summarizes recent literature for O. mykiss, with an emphasis on rainbow trout, in support of these criteria. Literature values for other fish species are summarized in Attachment H - Life History and Habitat Requirements of Fish Species in the Project Area. Daily mean temperature criteria were developed to assess whether temperatures would be suitable for fish growth and daily maximum temperature criteria were developed to assess conditions that would stress fish. Preferred temperatures are often considered a reasonable estimator of beneficial/optimal temperatures. Fish can withstand short-term exposure to water temperatures higher than those needed for longer-term growth or survival without significant negative effects. Based upon the best available information for regional streams, the temperature evaluation criterion applied to assess conditions for suitable trout growth is a mean daily water temperature at or below 20°C. A daily maximum temperature of 24°C was applied as a criterion for short-term high- temperature exposure, above which temperatures are expected to be stressful for trout. This section reviews studies that were used to develop these criteria.
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution and Status of Redband Trout in the Interior Columbia River Basin and Portions of the Klamath River and Great Basins
    Redband Trout: Resilience and Challenge in a Changing Landscape Oregon Chapter, American Fisheries Society, 2007 Distribution and Status of Redband Trout in the Interior Columbia River Basin and Portions of the Klamath River and Great Basins RUSSELL F. THUROW* AND BRUCE E. RIEMAN U.S. Department of Agriculture- Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station 322 East Front Street, Suite 401, Boise, Idaho 83702 DANNY C. LEE U.S. Department of Agriculture-Forest Service, Southern Research Station 200 WT Weaver Blvd., Asheville, North Carolina 28804 PHILIP J. HOWELL U.S. Department of Agriculture-Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station 1401 Gekeler Lane, LaGrande, Oregon 97850 RAYMOND D. PERKINSON U.S. Department of Agriculture-Forest Service, Washington Office EMC 4077 Research Way, Corvallis, Oregon 97333 Abstract.—We summarized existing knowledge (circa 1996) of the potential historical range and the current distri- bution and status of non-anadromous interior redband trout Oncorhynchus mykiss ssp. in the U.S. portion of the interior Columbia River Basin and portions of the Klamath River and Great Basins (ICRB). We estimated that the potential historical range included 5,458 subwatersheds and represented about 45% of the species’ North American range. Two forms of interior redband trout were considered, those sympatric with steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss ssp. and allopatric forms that evolved outside the range of steelhead. Data were compiled from existing surveys and expert opinions of over 150 biologists during the scientific assessment for the Interior Columbia River Basin Eco- system Management Project (ICBEMP). We also predicted fish presence and status in unsampled areas, using statis- tical models to quantitatively explore relationships among redband trout status and distribution, the biophysical environment, and land management.
    [Show full text]
  • Alberta Athabasca Rainbow Trout Recovery Plan 2014-2019
    Alberta Athabasca Rainbow Trout Recovery Plan 2014-2019 Alberta Species at Risk Recovery Plan No. 36 Alberta Athabasca Rainbow Trout Recovery Plan 2014–2019 Prepared by: The Alberta Athabasca Rainbow Trout Recovery Team Lisa Wilkinson, Team Leader, Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development George Sterling, Species Lead, Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development Rick Bonar, Alberta Forest Products Association Curtis Brock, Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development Ward Hughson, Parks Canada Agency, JNP Carl Hunt, Athabasca Bioregional Society Al Hunter, Alberta Fish and Game Association Sharad Karmacharya, Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development Brian Meagher, Trout Unlimited Canada Shane Petry/Sam Stephenson, Department of Fisheries and Oceans Joe Rasmussen, University of Lethbridge Jason Spenst, Coal Valley Rob Staniland, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers September 2014 ISBN: 978-1-4601-1849-8 (On-line Edition) ISSN: 1702-4900 (On-line Edition) Cover photos: George Sterling (top); Ryan Cox (bottom left); Mike Blackburn (bottom right). For copies of this report, contact: Information Centre – Publications Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development Main Floor, Great West Life Building 9920 – 108 Street Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T5K 2M4 Telephone: (780) 422-2079 OR Visit the Species at Risk Program website: http://esrd.alberta.ca/fish-wildlife/species-at-risk/ This publication may be cited as: Alberta Athabasca Rainbow Trout Recovery Team. 2014. Alberta Athabasca Rainbow Trout Recovery Plan, 2014–2019. Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development, Alberta Species at Risk Recovery Plan No. 36. Edmonton, AB. 111 pp. ii PREFACE Albertans are fortunate to share their province with an impressive diversity of wild species. Populations of most species of plants and animals are healthy and secure.
    [Show full text]