ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORTFISHERIES STRATEGIC PLAN

1991 - 1995

ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT 2221 WEST GREENWAY ROAD PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85023

December 1990 ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORTFISHERIES STRATEGIC PLAN

1991 - 1995

DUANE L. SHROUFE, DIRECTOR THOMAS W. SPALDING, DEPUTY DIRECTOR

COMMISSIONERS: THOMAS G. WOODS, JR., CHAIRMAN PHILLIP W. ASHCROFT GORDON K. WHITING LARRY TAYLOR ELIZABETH T. WOODIN

ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT 2221 WEST GREENWAY ROAD PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85023

December 1990 TABLE OF CONTENTS

MISSION STATEMENT ...... 1 AUTHORITY ...... 1 PREFACE ...... 2 INTRODUCTION ...... 3 CURRENT SUPPLY ...... 4 Supply of Trout Habitat ...... 4 Supply of Trout ...... 4 Supply of Angling Opportunity ...... 6 Intensive Use ...... 6 Basic Yield ...... 6 Blue Ribbon ...... 7 Wildfish ...... 7 Featured Species ...... 7 Urban ...... 7 Private/Reservation ...... 8 CURRENT USE AND DEMAND ...... 8 FUTURE SUPPLY ...... 9 Future Supply of Habitat ...... 9 Future Supply of Trout ...... 9 Future Supply of Management Concepts ...... 9 FUTURE DEMAND ...... 10 ANALYSIS OF FUTURE SUPPLY AND DEMAND ...... 10 GOAL : ...... 14 OBJECTIVES ...... 14 PROBLEMS AND STRATEGIES ...... 14 Habitat and Water Quality ...... 14 Information and Education ...... 15 General Management and Research ...... 16 Hatcheries and Stocking ...... 18 LITERATURE CITED ...... 19 GLOSSARY ...... 20 Table 1. Supply of coldwater lakes and streams by management concept managed by Arizona Game and Fish Department, 1990...... 21 Table 2. Estimated coldwater angler use days (x1 ,000) in Arizona, 1986, 1989 and projected for 1995...... 21 Table 3. Preferred species (unconstrained demand) by actual fishing (constrained demand) of 1989 survey respondents. Numbers are number of survey respondents...... 22 Table 4. Percent of trout anglers preferring different size trout catches, by avidity and primary gear type used. Number of respondents in parenthesis...... , ...... 22

APPENDIX 1 Supply of Trout Waters in Arizona by Management Concept ...... 23

APPENDIX 2 Estimated supply (angler days per year), use (angler days per year, 1986 and 1989), and projected use in 1995 by water types...... 26 ARIZONA COLDWAIER SPORTF!SllcRJES STRATJ,;GJC PLAN 1990

MISSION STATEMENT

To conserve, enhance, and restore Arizona's diverse wildlife resources and habitats through aggressive protection and management programs, and to provide wildlife resources and safe watercraft recreation for the enjoyment, appreciation, and use of present and future generations.

AUTHORITY

The authority under which this Plan has been prepared and the responsibility for the maintenance and management of the state's wildlife resources are vested in the Arizona Game and Fish Department by Arizona Revised Statute Title 17.

ARS-17-102. "Wildlife, both resident and migratory, native or introduced found in this state except fish and bullfrogs impounded in private ponds or tanks or wildlife and birds reared or held in captivity under permit from the commission, are property of the state ... ".

ARS-17-201. "The laws of the state relating to wildlife shall be administered by the game and fish department. Control of the Department is vested in the game and fish commission."

ARS-17-231. "The commission shall: ... Establish broad policies and long range programs for the management, preservation and harvest of wildlife".

Financial support for development of this Strategic Plan was provided by Arizona fishing and hunting license revenues and by the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act (Dingell-Johnson Act). This Act provides for a manufacturer's excise tax on certain fishing and boating equipment. The collected tax monies are apportioned to the states and territories on a formula basis by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and are matched with state fishing license revenues for the conservation and management of fish. Thus, the anglers and boaters are all contributors to a program which benefits everyone. ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORTflSJ!ERIES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990

PREFACE

In this Strategic Plan, we examine the current supply and demand for coldwater sportfish resources, and we project probable future trends. The Plan sets a long range goal and realistic five year objectives in relation to supply and demand. The Plan anticipates problems and suggests possible solutions. These problems and strategies will help the Department protect and manage Arizona coldwater fisheries resources.

Specifically, the Plan is designed to do four things:

1) It communicates guidelines to all Department personnel through objectives, problems and strategies;

2) it communicates to the public, the Legislature and other agencies what the Department is striving to accomplish;

3) it provides a mechanism for the Commission to evaluate and update its direction to the Department; and

4) it provides an opportunity for interested individuals and groups to inform the Commission of desired changes in-direction.

This document was prepared by the Coldwater Strategic Planning Team consisting of Fisheries Managers, Fisheries Specialists, Habitat Specialists, Fisheries Planners, Fisheries Statisticians, Hatchery Managers, Wildlife Managers, and other interested Arizona Game and Fish Department employees. Problems and possible solutions were also contributed by members of the angling public at public meetings held in Pinetop, Phoenix, Flagstaff, Kingman, Yuma, Tucson, and Mesa; and through a variety of other methods including letters, and phone calls. Problems were also identified in respons_es to the 1989 statewide angler survey mail questionnaire.

2 ARIZONA COLDWAIER SPOiffF!SJIERIES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990

INTRODUCTION

During the early years of Anglo-American settlement in Arizona only two species of trout were present. The Apache and Gila trouts, both native species, were found throughout the streams and rivers of the White Mountains, Blue River, Eagle Creek, and tributaries of the upper Verde River. The native trouts provided abundant fishing for the early settlers of the State throughout the late 1800's and into the early 1900's. By the turn of the century, Arizona's population was growing rapidly and it was believed that the demand was already exceeding the natural supply.

From the turn of the century into the early 1920's, Arizona acquired rainbow, cutthroat, and brook trout from the U.S. Bureau of Fisheries. The rainbow was the first exotic trout to reach Arizona shortly before 1900 when it was planted in Oak Creek. The cutthroat followed the rainbow and early introductions were widespread. Similarly, the brook trout arrived in 1917, brown trout in 1933, grayling in 1940, and sockeye and coho salmon in the 1950's and 1960's.

Today, the trout fisheries of Arizona are cosmopolitan. Unknowingly, Arizona anglers pursue the offspring of steelhead from the Northwest, cutthroat and grayling from Montana, brook trout from Maine, Loch Leven browns from Europe and, on occasion, a native Apache trout.

Trout fisheries can be managed in a variety of ways, depending upon the desired results. Within certain biological and physical constraints, waters can be managed to provide a range of fishing opportunity. Several investigators found that recreational fishing is a multidimensional experience whose quality depends on a variety of social, aesthetic, and psychological factors (Knopf et al. 1973; Potter et al. 1973; Talhelm 1973; Hendee 197 4; all in Harris and Bergersen 1985). What is a "quality" experience to one angler is not necessarily quality to another.

This plan is based on the assumption that Arizona anglers are varied in the type of trout fishing experience they desire and that a variety of trout fisheries should be provided. This plan works at achieving the Department's mission by providing direction to Arizona's coldwater fish management program through conservation, habitat protection, and wise use of the resources.

3 ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORTFISJif,'RJES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990 .41

CURRENT SUPPLY

Trout fishing opportunities in Arizona consist of two separate components. One is the supply of suitable habitat, the other is the supply of trout. These two components are combined through management to provide angling opportunity. Variation in management concepts provides a variety of angling opportunities. Supply is presented first as habitat, then as trout, and finally as angling opportunity by management concepts.

Supply of Trout Habitat

The supply of trout streams is limited by the natural resources of the state and by uses that may degrade habitat quality. Arizona has a total of 159 stream management reaches that have a combined length of 1,470 miles and are managed primarily for trout (Table 1, Appendix 1). There are an additional 4 streams, or 34 miles that are managed primarily for warm water species and secondarily for trout.

The supply of trout lakes is limited by the number of potential lake sites within the state and by the availability of suitable water. Presently, there are 64 trout lakes comprising approximately 3,000 acres managed primarily for trout. Ten other lakes managed primarily for warmwater fish also provide trout fishing opportunity on approximately 30,000 acres. Other trout lakes in the state are managed by private owners and Indian Reservations.

Supply of Trout

Most trout harvested in Arizona are stocked either as catchables or as fingerlings which grow to a harvestable size. Wild spawned and reared trout comprise a small percentage of the total harvest. In most Arizona coldwater streams natural trout production is dependable and sufficient to meet angling needs; but, in some of our streams, natural production is only marginal and insufficient to accommodate angling use. Catastrophic environmental events can eliminate entire populations of trout and may necessitate reintroductions. Trout do not reproduce in lakes in Arizona. A few fish migrate from inflowing streams to some lakes but this contribution to the lake fishery is usually minimal.

State and Federal hatcheries have stocked between 1 and 6 million fish annually in the state since the early 1930's. Stocking records compiled from that time show the shift from fry stockings to fingerling stockings in the early 1960's (Figure 1). Although fingerlings have dominated stocking numbers, catchable fish have dominated by weight. (Figure 2).

4 ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORTFJSHERJES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990 ..,,/}

1 ure 1. Number of rout Stocked b Arizona and Federal Hatcheries .

N • Catdlable u 4000000 t,t -~le B E OFlncJerlint R 1111 Fry s JOOOOOO T 0 C ~ 2000000 D

1000000

0 11133 11138 11143 11148 11133 111~ 111$3 11188 11173 11178 11183 11188 YEAR

400000 figure 2. Pounds of Trout Stocked by Arizona and Federal Hatcheries.I

J50000

JOOOOO :~ I G ~ 200000

L sB 150000

1961 1966 1971 1976 1981 1986

YEAR

5 ARIZONA CO/,DWATER SPORTF!Slll:RIES STRATEGIC PLAN llJ90

Supply of Angling Opportunity

The supply of angling opportunity is determined by the quantity and quality of habitat, the number of trout, and the application of management concepts. Because anglers vary in the type of trout fishing experiences they desire, variations in management application provide variety in angling opportunities. Trout fisheries can be managed in a variety of ways, depending upon the desired results. Within certain biological and physical constraints, waters can be managed to provide many small fish, a few large fish, different species, and a variety of access and facilities for many different fishing experiences.

In developing this plan, the Department has utilized management concepts used in prior coldwater plans and adapted them to the changing challenges of coldwater management in Arizona. The Department defined seven broad management concepts that describe the general types of management and fishing experiences provided in Arizona. More than one management concept can be applied to a single fishery. These management concepts are:

1) Intensive Use Management intent: Provide for harvest by stocking catchable fish where the demand for harvest cannot be supported by other management techniques.

Angler demand is met by regular stockings of catchable and incentive fish that are harvested at about the same size as they were when stocked. Fingerling or subcatchable fish may be stocked but are not the principal stocking strategy. These fisheries are usually near improved campgrounds, day-use areas, tourist centers or high use areas other than major metropolitan areas.

2) Basic Yield Management intent: Utilize the natural productivity of water to grow fish without special regulation.

Angler demand is met by seasonal stockings of fingerlings or subcatchables. Although the Basic Yield fishery is not sustained by stocking catchables, the fishery may be augmented with catchables. These fisheries are usually near improved campgrounds, day use areas, tourist centers or high use areas other than major metropolitan areas.

6 ARIZONA COLDWATt,R SPORff!Sl/ERit,'S S1RA11XJIC PLAN 1990

3) Blue Ribbon Management intent: Utilize the natural productivity of water to grow fish with the use of special regulations.

These fisheries may also be managed to provide the opportunity to catch large fish. Blue Ribbon management requires special regulations that encourage "catch-and-release" by implementing low daily bag limits, size limits and gear restrictions. Under this concept the harvest of fish is limited. Blue Ribbon waters can be maintained through natural reproduction or by stocking. This concept can be used anywhere the resource and the angler will support this management.

4) Wildfish

Management intent: Provide anglers the opportunity to catch fish that are naturally reproduced in the wild.

Wild fisheries are sustained entirely by natural reproduction and are not augmented by stocking hatchery spawned or reared fish. Presently all Arizona wildfish trout waters are streams and most are in relatively pristine settings. They frequently have poor access which partially serves to limit angler density and protects the fishery from over harvest. A designation of Wildfish Management does not preclude reintroduction of trout after a catastrophic loss of the fishery.

5) Featured Species Management intent: Provide anglers the opportunity to catch species considered to be uncommon or to have unique or unusual qualities.

Featured Species are species or subspecies that would not otherwise be commonly available to the Arizona angler. Waters managed under this concept may feature Apache trout, Arctic grayling, brook trout, brown trout, cutthroat trout or other rare species, or fish that demonstrate unusual characteristics worthy of unique status (e.g. albino rainbow trout). These fisheries are supported by either natural reproduction or stocking. This concept may be integrated with any other concept.

6) Urban Management intent: Provide local angling opportunity for residents of major urban populations.

Waters managed under this concept are within or immediately adjacent to urban population centers. Management of urban waters is often similar to Intensive Use but any other combination of concepts can be used. The Urban Concept applies only to those

7 ARIZONA COLDWA1ER SPORTFIS/lERILS STRATEGIC PLAN 1990

waters for which the Department has either total management responsibility or for which the Department has entered into a cooperative management agreement with the municipality, landowner, or a public service organization having administrative authority.

7) Private/Reservation Management intent: To enforce applicable laws, rules and regulations and to carry out those general management responsibilities vested in the Game and Fish Commission by state statute.

Private and Reservation waters are defined as all waters on which fishing opportunity is not freely available (without cost) to anglers licensed by the state. The Department generally does not participate in the direct management of these waters except as may be related to the enforcement of applicable state laws and regulations pertaining to stocking permits, prohibited species, and other factors that may affect the welfare of the state's natural resources. Included are those waters on military or Indian reservations and on private and municipal lands for which the Department has no written agreement assuring fishing access to anglers licensed by the state.

The supply of trout fishery resources currently managed under each concept is given in Table 1. A listing of all Arizona cold water fisheries, by the primary Management Concept, is given in Appendix 1.

CURRENT USE AND DEMAND

The amount of use our coldwater fisheries receive is expressed in angler-days per year. During 1989 the Department licensed more than 314,000 resident anglers and 56,000 nonresidents. Licensed resident anglers spent more than 6.7 million angler days on all waters in Arizona including almost 2.2 million angler days on coldwaters. Nonresidents expended an additional 453,000 angler days on Arizona waters including 168,000 fishing for trout (Appendix 2).

There is a demand for angling recreation in Arizona that can be met only by trout fishing. The state's warmwater fisheries provide for a separate demand that is unlike that met by trout fisheries. This is evidenced by the number of people who live near warm­ water angling opportunities but fish only for trout. More than 20% of the anglers responding to the 1989 angler survey fished only for trout in Arizona in 1989.

8 ARIZONA COLDWAIER SPORTFISJIER!t.S STRA1EGIC PLAN 1990

FUTURE SUPPLY

Future Supply of Habitat

Because of the consumptive demand for water and the complexity of Arizona water law, additional recreational fishing lakes may never be built in Arizona. However, steps can be taken to maintain and enhance existing habitat in watersheds containing trout, thereby increasing or improving the supply of trout habitat. Efforts must be made to improve riparian habitat on our National Forests since more than 50% of our trout fisheries are found there. Habitat protection of watersheds and forested riparian zones is the future of trout stream management in Arizona.

Future Supply of Trout

Given natural conditions and the great desire of Arizona anglers to fish for trout, trout populations in Arizona lakes will continue to be dependent upon hatcheries. Hatchery renovations will allow flexibility in stocking schedules, species raised, and size of fish stocked. As hatcheries age and angler preferences change from harvest to "catch-and­ release", the dependence on hatchery trout may decrease. The supply of trout available to anglers can also be increased by encouraging more "catch-and-release" fishing. Promoting the idea "limit your catch, don't catch your limit" can be an effective tool to increase the future supply of trout.

Future Supply by Management Concepts

Management concepts must be flexible to satisfy the diverse groups of anglers in the state. As angler's preferences change, so should the percent of water managed under each concept. Some areas should be managed to encourage maximum harvest, others should provide "catch-and-release".

9 ARIZONA COLDWA1ER SPORTFISJlt;RJES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990 .41

FUTURE DEMAND

Future demand was estimated from projected statewide population growth and angler use estimates. In the past, angler days appeared to increase predictably with state population (Figure 3). Angler demand is expected to increase slightly while total license sales may continue to drop. Trout stamps have dropped from 127,000 in 1985 to 106,000 in 1989, yet this 16% drop in anglers has only resulted in a 2% drop in use. It is estimated that demand of 2.6 million coldwater user days will need to be accommodated by 1995 (Table 2). Use in 1986, 1989, and projected demand in 1995 for each water type for residents and nonresidents are presented in Tables A2.2 - A2.13 (Appendix 2).

ANALYSIS OF FUTURE SUPPLY AND DEMAND

The future of Arizona's coldwater fisheries program and the demand placed on that program are different than they were when the 1985-1990 Coldwater Plan was created. Many of these identified problems were based on a lack of biological data, poor communications, worn out hatcheries, a lack of public input, poor project coordination with federal agencies and a lack of direction to our coldwater program. Many of these problems have been solved but several still exist.

It became clear during the last five years that objectives based on angler days by concept were not a practical measure of progress. This plan has only two objectives that address statewide paramaters that can be measured by conducting statewide angler surveys.

The number of trout available to the angler will increase over the next five years due to several factors. The existing hatchery renovation program will be completed and more trout will be stocked under the Intensive use concept. The supply of wild trout will also increase when coordinated habitat projects improve watershed, riparian, and instream habitat. In addition, as more anglers understand and practice "catch-and-release", trout that would have otherwise been removed from the fishery will be returned to be caught again.

10 ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORTFISHERIES STRAIEGJC PLAN 1990

figure 3. Arizona Population and License Sales .•

4000000 400000

3500000 350000

3000000 300000

p 2500000 250000 0 L. p I u C I 2000000 200000 e a n t. s I e s 0 1500000 150000 n ~

1000000 100000

Combination Licenses 500000 50000

o~~~.-f.-+-+-f--+-~1-+-t-...+-+-+-+-+-+-1-t--t-t--t--1--t-1--t-~O 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 YEAR

11 ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORTFISHERIES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990

Although the existing supply of trout habitat may not increase during the next five years the quality of existing habitat must improve. During the last five years almost every creek and stream in our National Forests of Arizona that have trout habitat have been surveyed and the results show that very few of these streams are maintaining optimum habitat. Every effort should be made to better manage Forest Service lands and protect riparian zones in and around our trout streams.

Recent declines in license sales are poorly understood and are probably due to many factors such as drought, license fee increases, economics, perceptions of decline in quality of fishing or in angling opportunities, and demographic conditions. Besides Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah, Idaho and Montana have all experienced declines in license sales in the last few years. This may continue as social and economic conditions continue to change.

Anglers are not a single group but a collection of subgroups with different desires. It is the continued responsibility of the Fisheries Manager to provide diversity and balance to the coldwater fisheries program. As angler demand for larger fish, "catch-and-release", featured species, and improved recreational facilities increase, it is the managers responsibility to identify those changes and accommodate them where the resource will allow.

Anglers were asked in the 1989 survey if they needed to keep a fish to have a satisfying trip. Sixty-seven percent said no. Only 33% needed to keep a fish to be satisfied. While this represents all anglers, 20% of those answering the question fished only for trout. It appears the demand for "catch-and-release" fishing is increasing and that demand needs to be better understood.

Angler demand is an expression of the total 'desire' to participate and may be greater than and different from the actual amount of use observed. Angler demand is based on angler actions as well as stated preferences. An understanding of the two types of demand is important in understanding motivations of anglers. Preferences that an angler expresses concerning fishing conditions often differ from what the angler actually does. Preferences reflect unconstrained desires. Angler participation reflects preferences that are constrained by any number of limiting factors (Harris and Bergersen, 1985).

As long as constrained and unconstrained demand are basically the same they should agree on the direction that management programs should take. However, the failure to recognize differences between constrained and unconstrained demand can significantly affect decision making. The 1989 survey clearly shows there are significant differences between constrained and unconstrained demand in Arizona.

12 ARIZONA COLDWATJ::R SPORTF1Sf/£RJES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990

Table 3 reflects one form of constrained demand for Arizona anglers. Forty-nine anglers stated that their preferred species was trout, yet they did not fish for trout in 1989. Likewise, 41 anglers stated a preference for largemouth bass, yet fished only for trout.

Unlike angler use, demand is difficult to measure. We attempted to measure parts of demand in the 1989 survey by asking anglers their preferences for sizes of fish and their preferred species.

Of respondents who expressed a preference, trout were the preferred species (35%). Most respondents stated that they would prefer to catch fewer 12 inch trout than more 8.5 inch trout. Trout anglers who fished fewer than 7 days expressed a preference for four - 12 inch fish. On the other hand, anglers who fished more than 7 days with artificial lures or flies expressed a preference for a single trout larger than 24 inches (Table 4).

The ability to better meet demand necessitates a clearer understanding of unconstrained demand. Some anglers prefer the primitive solitude and challenge of remote streams containing wild trout while others prefer the facilities, social interaction, and greater ease of success provided by intensive use. With increasing specialization the angler's focus shifts from exploitation to preservation, and more emphasis is placed on the setting and total experience (Bryan 1977).

The 1986 and 1989 angler surveys, along with comments received at public meetings, illustrate the types of opportunities that anglers desire. These include such things as Blue Ribbon fishing, size, slot, and bag limit regulations, better stocking practices, better facilities and access, and better information about fishing opportunities. When asked in the 1989 survey what the Department could do to improve fishing, 17% had general comments like "you are doing a good job, don't change anything", 15% addressed stocking and said "stock more fish, stock bigger fish, stock more often, 14% asked for better shoreline access and improved boat ramps and 11 % wanted stable water levels. The other 43% ranged from promote "catch and release", to conduct more law enforcement, to provide more where to fish information.

Anglers are also seeing a need for more aquatic education. Aquatic education can take place at the lake or stream, in the hatchery, in the schools, in the media, or at home. The need for more printed material, videos, clinics, and school programs was expressed quite clearly by the angling public.

13 ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORTFISlfERlES STRAlEGlC PLAN 1990

GOAL

Protect, maintain or enhance the distribution, abundance, availability and diversity of coldwater sportfishes and their habitat.

OBJECTIVES

1. Provide fishing opportunity to accommodate 2.6 million coldwater angler days by 1995 through conservation, habitat protection and wise use.

2. Provide for a mean statewide catch rate of 2.0 coldwater fish per angler day.

PROBLEMS AND STRATEGIES

To meet the objectives of this coldwater plan the following problems need to be solved. These problems are a composite generated by the angling public and Department personnel. Each is followed by a list of possible strategies for their solution.

I. Habitat and Water Quality

1. A lack of water affects coldwater sportfish management.

- lnstream water rights for fish and wildlife need to be secured. - Acquire minimum pool and minimum flow agreements that enhance coldwater sportfish populations. - Acquire water rights to create new or enhance existing coldwater fisheries.

14 ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORTF/Sf!ERIES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990

2. Poor quality coldwater habitat results from improper land and water use practices.

- Promote development and enforcement of land management practices that protect watersheds and coldwater habitat. - Seek legislation to limit environmental degradation of watersheds. - Educate watershed managers on effects of improper land use practices. - Develop a stream watch or adoption program. - Continue to maintain and improve instream habitat through the use of artificial structures. - Encourage anglers to participate in litter abatement and clean-up projects. - Work with other agencies to aggressively enforce existing water quality standards and regulations.

3. Nutrient loading often interferes with coldwater management.

- Continue weed harvester program. - Investigate lake aeration programs to reduce winter kills. - Reduce nutrient loading and high pH levels through better land management and wastewater reuse practices.

4. Some waters are relatively infertile and have small populations of coldwater sportfish.

- Develop projects to increase fish numbers where fertility is low. - Improve riparian and instream habitat to accommodate larger populations of coldwater sportfish.

II. Information and Education

1. Aquatic education does not meet demand.

- Develop a network of anglers who can help educate the public. - Expand aquatic education in schools and at state fish hatcheries. - Expand fishing clinic programs and teach people how to fish. - Provide fishing opportunity at some hatcheries. - Continue to update information and education displays at hatcheries. - Provide information and education materials to license dealers and encourage their use and display.

15 ARIZONA COLDWAIER SPORH1SIIERIES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990

- Provide additional I & E staff in regions to work with the angling public and schools.

2. The public is not aware of many of our coldwater fishing opportunities.

- Develop "Where to Fish" publications based on geographic location and management concepts. - Market one day fishing trips for resident and non-resident anglers. - Develop high profile publicity by advertising with a sponsor. - Provide a 1-800 fishing information line. - Develop a newsletter for anglers. - Create more video programs explaining coldwater management and develop marketing strategies for video distribution.

3. Coldwater use and demand by concept is not well understood.

- Survey both the angling and non-angling public using behavorial and economic surveys. - Determine composition of anglers that support "catch-and-release" and "catch-and-kill".

Ill. General Management and Research

1. The opportunity to catch larger fish does not meet demand.

- Identify waters where special regulations can increase the supply of large fish. - Investigate raising trout to a larger size in the hatchery for intensive use. - Provide waters where more than one coldwater concept is practiced. - Develop Blue Ribbon fisheries supported by special use fees or trophy permits. - Continue to determine which genetic strains of trout are most suited to Arizona waters. - Select pilot waters for supplemental stocking of "incentive" fish and evaluate angler satisfaction.

2. Access and facilities are limited at some waters.

- Evaluate, and improve where desirable, road development, trail development, fishing pier and boat ramp construction, fish cleaning stations, developed camping, parking, handicap access and toilets.

16 ARIZONA COLDWATER Sl'ORI'HSJJERIES STRAIEGIC PLAN 1990

- Update and promote Department publication "Arizona Fishing Holes".

3. Violations of Arizona fishing laws do occur.

- Sign special regulation waters. - Evaluate current regulations for compliance. - Expand, where necessary, law enforcement, information, and education efforts to reduce fishing violations. - Develop a quick reference guide to fish regulations targeted for new Arizona residents or non-residents. - Promote the Operation Game Thief program among anglers. - Develop support by other law enforcement agencies in enforcing fishing laws. - Improve distribution of Arizona fishing regulations to all license dealers and tackle stores. - Concentrate enforcement activities on stocking days.

4. Some coldwater fisheries are over utilized.

- Continue to evaluate bag limits and size limit regulations. - Advertise alternative waters and encourage use of other waters. - Increase stocking rates on Intensive Use waters. - Adapt special regulations to protect coldwater populations. - Reduce fishing pressure by restricting use. - Promote, where appropriate, the concept "limit your catch, don't catch your limie.

5. Some coldwater fisheries are under utilized.

- Redirect trout anglers to lightly fished waters. - Develop and distribute information and educational material explaining fishing opportunities. - Extend stocking seasons at intensive use waters where appropriate. - Establish coldwater fisheries where cool or warmwater species are no longer in demand.

6. Species diversity does not meet demand.

- Expand Featured Species option to additional waters.

17 ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORTFISHERJES STRAIEGIC PLAN 1990

7. Project coordination with organized conservation groups and federal agencies is inconsistent.

- Develop and distribute annual statewide and regional fisheries project schedules and work plans. - Annually coordinate research and management direction with universities and federal agencies.

8. Demand for coldwater fishing opportunity closer to urban areas exceeds supply.

- Develop additional coldwater fisheries in or near urban areas.

9. Current license structure does not meet angler demand.

- Investigate a short term license for the Colorado River. - Investigate a youth fishing license. - Investigate a winter visitor fishing license. - Continue to evaluate license types and structure so they meet demand.

IV. Hatcheries and Stocking

1. The size and quality of stocked trout does not meet angler demand.

- Develop new programs to raise larger fish. - Reduce fin damage on hatchery stocked fish. - Incorporate techniques that produce hatchery trout with wild physical characteristics. - Adjust stocking schedules to match available habitat conditions. - Enhance fish health programs at hatcheries.

2. The number of trout produced at State and Federal Fish Hatcheries is not sufficient to meet Intensive Use demand.

- Complete State Fish Hatchery renovation to enhance production. - Continue to develop techniques which make hatcheries more efficient. - Coordinate production with Federal Hatcheries.

18 ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORJFISHERIES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990 41

LITERATURE CITED

Harris, C. C. and E. P. Bergersen. 1985. Survey on demand for sport fisheries: problems and potentialities for its use in fishery management planning. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 5:400-410.

Bryan, H. 1977. Leisure value systems and recreational specialization: the case of trout fishermen. Journal of Leisure Research. 9: 17 4-187.

Miller, M. 1987. Arizona Angler survey, unpublished.

Persons, W. 1990. Arizona Angler survey, unpublished.

19 ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORTFISHERIES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990

GLOSSARY

Angler-day - One person fishing for part or all of one calendar day at one water.

Catchable - Referring to a hatchery-produced fish between 8 and 10 inches in length.

Catch-and-Release - A fishing concept where fish are caught and released but not harvested.

Catch Rate - The rate at which fish are caught but not necessarily harvested.

Coldwater Fishery - A fishery characterized by Salmonid fishes.

Demand - The total desire to participate in a specific recreational activity. Expressed in angler­ days.

Fingerling - Referring to a hatchery-produced fish less than 4 inches in length.

Goal - A general statement indicating the intent and direction of a program.

Harvest - The act of keeping a fish in possession.

Harvest Rate - The rate at which fish are harvested and removed from the fishery.

Incentive Fish - Referring to a hatchery produced fish over 11 inches in length.

Natural Productivity - The total amount of new organic matter created by photosynthesis.

Objective - A quantified goal statement which provides a target for program accomplishments; how much, by when.

Problem - Any obstacle to achieving a goal or objective.

Strategy - A broad statement of a possible approach to resolving problems and accomplishing desired goals and objectives.

Subcatchable - Referring to a hatchery produced fish between 5 and 7 inches in length.

Supply - The amount of recreational opportunity available. Includes consideration of quality.

Trout- All species of family salmonidae, including grayling.

Use - The number of recreational user-days exerted on the resource. Expressed in angler-days.

20 ARIZONA COLDWATER SPOR1FISIIER!r,S STRAIEGIC PLAN J

Table l. Supply of coldwater lakes and streams by management concept managed by Arizona Game and Fish Department, 1990.

Stream Management Lakes Reaches

Management Concept Number Acres Number Miles

Intensive Use 27 1,294 15 172 Basic Yield 17 1,215 9 69 Blue Ribbon 5 211 2 23 Urban 11 106 0 0 Featured Species 3 97 33 132 Wildfish () 0 106 1 094

Total 63 2,92.) 165 1,490

Table 2. Estimated coldwater angler use days (xl,000) in Arizona, 1986, 1989 and projected for 1995.

1986 1989 1995 Water Type (x 1,000) (x 1,000) (x 1,000)

Colorado River Reservoirs 245 143 255

Colorado River 166 291 173

Large Inland Reservoirs 245 167 259

Lakes 878 875 927

Ponds and Tanks 64 72 67

City Waters 38 14 40

Urban Program Lakes 84 105 111

Large Inland Rivers 100 76 105 Other Streams and Rivers 332 331 351

Irrigation Canals 6 8 8

Indian Reservation Waters 226 220 239

Military Base Waters 27 62 28

Total 2,411 2,364 2,563

21 ARIZONA COLDWAT£R SPORTF!SllloRIES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990

Table 3. Preferred species (unconstrained demand) by actual fishing ( constrained demand) of 1989 survey respondents. Numbers are number of survey respondents.

Actual Fishing Activity

Stated Preferred Species Trout Only Warmwater Only

Trout 334 49 Largemouth bass 41 268 Crappie 10 35 Channel catfish 8 56 Other species 25 165 Total 418 573

Table 4. Percent of trout anglers preferring different size trout catches, by avidity and primary gear type used. Number of respondents in parenthesis.

Type of Angler

Preferred Less Avid More Avid Trout Catch Bait Lure Bait Lure

Six - 8.5" fish 16 (15) 8 (6) 18 (39) 7 (12) Four - 12" fish 66 (62} 51 (44) 54 (120} 38 (71} One - 24" fish 10 (9) 33 (26} 16 (36) 41 (76) Other 3 (3) 5 (4) 8 (17} 9 (16) No Opinion 5 (5) 4 (3) 5 (10) 5 (10)

Total* 100 (94) 101 (80) 101 (222) 100 (185)

* Percentages do not always add to total N due to rounding. 'Less Avid' anglers fished less than 7 days, 'More Avid' anglers fished 7 days or more. 'Bait' anglers fished more than 50% of the time with bait, 'Lure' anglers fished more than 50% of the time with artificial lures or flies.

22 ARIZONA CO!JJWA!ER Sl'OR!HSJ!ERIES SJRAJEGIC PLAN 1990 41

APPENDIX 1 LITTLE COLORADO R., W.F. - L.R ..... RBT ... 10.4 LITTLE COLORADO RIVER - U.R...... RBT ... 20.6 OAK CREEK - U.R...... RBT ... 14.5 SUPPLY OF TROUT WATERS SILVER CREEK - U.R...... RBT ... 12.8 IN ARIZONA TONTO CREEK- SALT- U.R...... RBT ... 10.8 VERDE RIVER - CAMP VERDE REACH . RBT . . . 7.0 BY MANAGEMENT CONCEPT WEST CLEAR CREEK- L.R...... RBT ... 17.2 WET BEAVER CREEK- M.R...... RBT ... 5.2

SPECIES CODES ARE: Total ...... , ...... , .... , , .... 172.4 ARG ARCTIC GRAYLING BASIC YIELD APT APACHE TROUT Lake Acres BKT BROOK TROUT BIG LAKE ...... RBT .. 450.0 BNT BROWN TROUT BIG SPRINGS TANK ...... RBT .....8 BLACK CANYON LAKE , . , ...... , . . . RBT ... 78.0 ABT RAINBOW TROUT BUNCH RESERVOIR ...... RBT ... 20.0 COCONINO RESERVOIR , , ... , .. , , . RBT , . . 5.0 INTENSIVE USE CONCHO LAKE ...... RBT ... 60.0 Lake Acres CRESCENT LAKE ...... BKT .. 100.0 ASHURST LAKE ...... , .. , . . . . RBT .. 161.0 FOOL'S HOLLOW LAKE ... , .. , , . . . . BNT . , 149.0 BECKER LAKE ...... RBT ... 85.0 LONG TOM LAKE ..... , ...... BNT . . . 3.0 BLUE RIDGE RESERVOIR ...... RBT ... 70.0 LUNA LAKE ...... RBT ... 75.0 CATARACT LAKE ...... RBT ... 35.0 MARSHALL LAKE , , , .. , , . , . , .... , . RBT , .. 35.0 CLEAR CREEK RESERVOIR ...... RBT ... 45.0 MEXICAN HAY LAKE ...... RBT .. 100.0 DOGTOWN RESERVOIR ...... RBT , .. 50.0 NELSON RESERVOIR .. , , , , .. , .. , , . RBT , , . 60.0 FRYE MESA RESERVOIR , ... , ...... RBT . . . 4.0 PRATT LAKE ...... BNT ... 5.0 HULSEY LAKE ...... · RBT . . . 3.0 RIVER RESERVOIR ...... RBT ... 50.0 KAIBAB LAKE ...... , , ...... RBT ... 45.0 SIERRA BLANCA LAKE ...... RBT . . . 5.0 KINNIKINICK LAKE ...... , RBT . , 126.0 WHITE MOUNTAIN RESERVOIR ...... RBT ... 20.0 KNOLL LAKE ...... RBT ... 55.0 LYNX LAKE ...... RBT ... 55.0 Total ...... 1,215.8 MORMON LAKE POND ...... RBT . . . 0.3 MORTON LAKE ...... BNT ... 10.0 Stream Miles RAINBOW LAKE (LAKESIDE) ...... RBT ... 80.0 BLUE RIVER - S.F. - U.R...... BNT ... 10.4 RIGGS FLAT LAKE ...... , . , , . , RBT .. , 11.0 COLORADO R. - MOHAVE REACH , . , . RBT , . , 24.0 ROSE CANYON LAKE ...... , ... , . . . RBT . . . 7.0 COLORADO R. - UPPER TOPOCK . . . . RBT ... 14.4 RUCKER CANYON LAKE , , ...... RBT . . . 3.0 EAST VERDE RIVER - LR...... BNT 6.5 SCOTT'S RESERVOIR ..... , , ...... RBT , .. 80.0 EAST VERDE RIVER - U.R ...... RBT 1.1 SHOW LOW LAKE ...... RBT .. 100.0 LEMMON CREEK ...... , . . . . . BNT 1.8 SNOW FLAT LAKE ...... , .. , . RBT , . . 1.0 PINE CREEK - L.R...... , ..... BNT 4.1 TUNNEL RESERVOIR ...... RBT ... 15.0 SABINO CANYON CREEK - L.R ...... BNT 6.5 WHITEHORSE LAKE ...... , .. , . RBT ... 30.0 WORKMAN CREEK ...... RBT 1.0 WILLIAMS CITY RESERVOIR ... , .. , . . RBT . . . 3.0 WILLOW SPRINGS LAKE ...... RBT .. 158.0 Total ...... , . , .. 69.8 WOODLAND RESERVOIR ...... ABT ... 10.0 WOODS CANYON LAKE ...... RBT , . , 52.0

Total ...... 1,294.3

Stream Miles BLACK RIVER, EAST FORK ...... , . , . RBT ... 12.5 BLACK RIVER, WEST FORK - L.R ...... RBT ... 6.9 CHEVELON CREEK- M.R ...... , .. , . RBT ... 11.6 CHRISTOPHER CREEK ...... RBT ... 5.2 EAGLE CREEK - U.R. , ...... RBT . , . 11.6 EAST VERDE RIVER - M.R...... RBT ... 10.9 HAIGLER CREEK ... , ...... RBT ... 15.2

23 ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORTFISHERIES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990 41

BLUE RIBBON CHEVELON CREEK- U.R...... BNT ... 12.8 Lake Acres CHEVELON CREEK, WEST FORK . . . . . BNT 8.3 CHEVELON CANYON LAKE . . . . . RBT, BNT .. 200.0 CHITTY CANYON CREEK ...... RBT ... 5.7 ELK TANK ...... RBT .....5 CLEAR CREEK ...... RBT . . . 4.1 J.D. DAM LAKE ...... RBT 6.0 COLORADO R. - GRAND CANYON . . . . RBT .. 229.0 MIDDLE TANK ...... BNT 1.0 COLTER CREEK ...... BNT 5.4 PERKIN'S TANK ...... RBT 3.5 CRYSTAL CREEK ...... RBT 5.2 DANE CANYON CREEK ...... RBT 8.0 Total ...... 211.0 DEER CREEK - BLACK ...... RBT 4.0 DEER CREEK - COLORADO ...... RBT . . . . .1 Stream Miles DRAGON CREEK ...... RBT . . . 1 .2 CANYON CREEK ...... RBT . . . 5.8 DUDE CREEK ...... RBT . . . 4.6 COLORADO R. - GLEN CANYON REACH. RBT ... 17.8 EAST CLEAR CREEK - L.R ...... RBT ... 60.4 EAST CLEAR CREEK - M.R...... RBT ... 30.0 Total ...... 23.6 EAST CLEAR CREEK - U.R...... RBT . . . 4.0 ELLISON CREEK - L.R ...... RBT . . . . .6 ELLISON CREEK - U.R ...... RBT 4.1 Lake Acres FISH CREEK - LCR ...... RBT 5.5 ALVORD PARK LAKE ...... RBT ... 25.0 FOOTE CREEK ...... RBT 5.6 CANAL PARK LAKE ...... RBT ... 3.0 GENERAL SPRINGS CREEK ...... RBT 5.8 CHAPARRAL PARK LAKE ...... RBT ... 10.0 GORDON CANYON CREEK ...... RBT ... 10.2 CORTEZ PARK LAKE ...... RBT 3.0 GRANT CREEK - BLUE ...... RBT 9.7 DESERT BREEZE ...... RBT ... 4.0 GRANT CREEK - WILLCOX - L.R...... RBT 3.2 ENCANTO PARK LAKE ...... RBT ... 8.0 HALL CREEK - U.R...... RBT 5.5 KENNEDY PARK LAKE ...... RBT ... 10.0 HAVASU CREEK ...... RBT 3.5 KIWANrS PARK LAKE ...... RBT ... 13.0 HORSE CREEK ...... RBT 2.5 LAKESIDE PARK LAKE ...... RBT ... 14.0 HORTON CREEK ...... BNT 2.4 RIVERVIEW PARK LAKE ...... RBT ... 3.0 HOUSTON CREEK - TONTO ...... BNT 5.9 SILVERBELL PARK LAKE ...... RBT ... 13.0 HULSEY CREEK ...... RBT 3.5 HUNTER CREEK ...... RBT 2.5 Total ...... 106.0 K.P. CREEK ...... RBT ... 13.0 LEONARD CANYON CREEK ...... RBT ... 22.8 WILDFISH LEONARD CANYON, EAST FORK . . . . . RBT . . . 2.7 Stream Miles LEONARD CANYON, WEST FORK . . . . RBT . . . 6.5 ASH CREEK- L.R ...... RBT, BKT ... 5.0 LITTLE COLORADO R., E. FORK ...... BKT ... 10.0 BARBERSHOP CANYON CREEK ...... RBT ... 15.8 LITTLE COLORADO R., S. FORK ...... BNT . . . 7.6 BASIN CREEK ...... BNT 4.0 LITTLE COLORADO R., W.F. - U.R. .... BKT ... 3.7 BEAR CANYON CREEK - BLUE RIDGE . RBT 2.5 LITTLE COLORADO RIVER - M.R...... BNT ... 27.0 BEAR CANYON CREEK - WILLOW . . . . BKT 4.3 MARIJILDA CREEK - L.R...... RBT, BKT . . . 2.6 BEAR CREEK ...... RBT 3.9 MERRITT DRAW CREEK ...... RBT . . . 1.6 BEAVER CREEK- BLACK ...... BNT ... 10.5 MILLER CANYON CREEK ...... RBT ... 10.8 BLACK RIVER - U.R...... BNT ... 30.0 MILLER CANYON CREEK, EAST FORK RBT . . . 3.4 BLACK RIVER, N FORK OF E FORK . . . BNT ... 11.1 MULE CREEK ...... BNT . . . . .8 BLACK RIVER, WEST FORK - M.R. .... BNT ... 9.6 NANKOWEAP CREEK ...... RBT .....1 BLUE RIVER - S.F. - M.R...... BNT ... 23.1 NUTRIOSO CREEK - L.R...... RBT ... 15.8 BONEYARD CREEK ...... BNT 6.8 NUTRIOSO CREEK - U.R...... RBT . . . 6.3 BONITA CREEK- VERDE ...... RBT 2.9 OAK CREEK, WEST FORK ...... BNT ... 11.1 BENNY CREEK ...... RBT 2.0 OPEN DRAW CREEK ...... RBT 1.4 BENTON CREEK ...... RBT 3.0 PADDY CREEK - NUTRIOSO ...... RBT 5.0 BRIGHT ANGEL CREEK ...... RBT ... 12.9 PHANTOM CREEK ...... RBT 3.9 BUCK SPRINGS CANYON CREEK . . . . . RBT . . . 5.4 PINE CREEK - U.R...... RBT 2.6 BUCKALOU CREEK ...... RBT .....7 PIPE CREEK ...... RBT .....5 CAMPBELL BLUE CREEK ...... BNT ... 20.9 RESERVATION CREEK - L.R...... BNT 3.5 CASTLE CREEK ...... BNT . . . 1.4 REYNOLDS CREEK ...... RBT 1.5 CHAMBERS DRAW CREEK ...... RBT . . . 1.7 RIGGS CREEK ...... RBT 4.0 CHERRY CREEK - M.R...... BNT ... 36.5 ROSEY CREEK ...... RBT 2.0 CHERRY CREEK - U.R...... RBT ... 11.1 ROYAL ARCH CREEK ...... RBT .....7 CHEVELON CREEK - L.R...... BNT ... 62.0 RUCKER CANYON CREEK ...... BKT ... 6.2

24 ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORTF!SHERIES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990

RUDD CREEK ...... ABT ... 4.0 Total ...... 19.8

SABINO CANYON CREEK- U.R...... ' BNT ... 6.0 SALOME CREEK - L.A...... BNT ... 17.2 FEATURED SPECIES SALOME CREEK - U.R...... BNT ... 3.6 Lake Acres SAN FRANCISCO RIVER - U.R. ' ...... BKT ... 10.0 ACKRE LAKE ...... ARG ... 2.0 SHINUMO CREEK ...... '''' ...... ABT . . '. .1 BEAR CANYON LAKE ...... ARG ... 60.0 SPRING CREEK - TONTO - U.R...... BNT 7.8 LEE VALLEY LAKE ...... ARG ... 35.0 STONE CREEK ...... ABT 5.0 SYCAMORE CREEK - AQUA FRIA - U.R. ABT 7.1 Total ...... 97.0 TAPEATS CREEK ' ...... ABT 4.5

THOMAS CREEK ' ...... BNT 4.3 Stream Miles THOMPSON CREEK ...... BNT 1.0 ASH CREEK - U.R...... APT 4.0

THUNDER RIVER ' ...... ABT . ... .4 BEAR WALLOW CREEK - L.A...... APT 4.8 TONTO CREEK- SALT - M.A...... ABT ... 21.4 BEAR WALLOW CREEK, NORTH FORK . APT 2.9 TURKEY CREEK - ROCK ...... BNT 2.4 BEAR WALLOW CREEK, SOUTH FORK . APT 2.0

TURKEY CREEK - SAN SIMON ..... '' ABT 4.3 BIG CANYON CREEK ...... APT 2.9 VISHNU CREEK . '.' ...... ' ..... ABT 1.8 BOGGY CREEK - CENTERFIRE ...... APT 6.5 WEBBER CREEK - U.R...... ABT 4.6 CAVE CREEK ...... APT 2.2 WEST CLEAR CREEK - U.R...... ABT ... 22.7 CENTERFIRE CREEK ...... APT 9.2 WET BEAVER CREEK - U.R...... ABT . .. 7.2 COLEMAN CREEK ...... APT 5.3 WILLOW CREEK - BLACK ...... BNT ... 6.0 CONKLIN CREEK ...... APT 9.2 WILLOW CREEK - EAST CLEAR ...... BNT ... 26.4 CORDUROY CREEK ...... APT 5.6 WILLOW SPRINGS CREEK ...... BKT 3.8 COYOTE CREEK ...... APT 6.0 WOOD CANYON CREEK ...... BKT . .. 5.7 DEADMAN CANYON CREEK ...... APT 2.6 DOUBLE CIENEGA CREEK ...... APT 2.8 Total ...... 1,094.8 FISH CREEK - BLACK ...... APT ... 14.2 FRYE CREEK- U.R ...... APT 3.1 INTENSIVE USE+ WARMWATER GIBSON CREEK ...... APT 1 .4 Lake Acres GRANT CREEK- WILCOX - U.R...... APT 3.1 CANYON LAKE ...... ABT .. 926.0 HANNAGAN CREEK ...... APT 4.0 CLUFF RANCH POND #3 ...... ABT ... 10.0 HAY CREEK (HAYGROUND) ...... APT 4.4 DEAD HORSE LAKE ...... ABT ... 4.3 HOME CREEK ...... APT 6.5 KEARNY LAKE ...... ABT ... 12.0 LEE VALLEY CREEK ...... APT 1.0 LONG LAKE ...... ABT .. 268.0 MAMIE CREEK ...... APT 4.0 PARKER CANYON LAKE ...... ABT .. 125.0 MARIJILDA CREEK - U.R ...... APT 2.8 PATAGONIA LAKE ...... ABT .. 260.0 MINERAL CREEK - CONCHO - U.R. . . . APT 3.6 PENA BLANCA LAKE ...... ABT ... 45.0 MOONSHINE CREEK ...... APT . . . . .6 ROPER LAKE ...... ABT ... 32.0 NORTH CANYON CREEK ...... APT 4.9 SANTA FE LAKE (WILLIAMS RES.) ... . ABT ... 3.0 POST CREEK ...... APT 2.7 PUEBLO CANYON CREEK ...... APT 1.5 Total ...... 1685.3 SNAKE CREEK - BLACK ...... APT 2.4 SOLDIER CREEK - BLACK ...... APT 1.0 Stream Miles STINKY CREEK ...... , ...... APT 1.5 SALT RIVER - LOWER REACH ...... ABT ... 14.4 WILDCAT CREEK ...... APT 4.1

Total ...... 14.4 Total ...... 132.8

BASIC YIELD+ WARMWATER Lake Acres APACHE LAKE ...... ABT 2,640.0 LAKE MOHAVE ...... ABT 26,500.0

Total ...... 29,140.0

Stream Miles COLORADO R. - LOWER TOPOCK . . . . ABT ... 17.9 COLORADO R. - MIDDLE TOPOCK . . . . ABT . . . 1 .9

25 ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORTFISIJERIES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990 41

APPENDIX 2. TABLES A2.1 -A2.13

Estimated supply (angler days per year), use (angler days per year, 1986 and 1989), and projected use in 1995 by water types.

Table A2.1. Estimated use (angler days) 1986 and 1989 by water type.

Table A2.2. Colorado River Reservoirs.

Table A2.3. Colorado River.

Table A2.4. Large Inland Reservoirs.

Table A2.5. Lakes.

Table A2.6. Ponds and Tanks.

Table A2.7. City Waters.

Table A2.8. Urban Program Lakes.

Table A2.9. Large Inland Rivers.

Table A2.10. Other Streams and Rivers.

Table A2.11. Irrigation Canals.

Table A2.12. Indian Reservation Waters.

Table A2.13. Military Base Waters.

26 ARIZONA COLDWAJER SPORTHSHERIES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990

Table A2.1. Estimated angler use days (x 1,000) from Angler Surveys, 1986 and 1989, by water type, area, and angler residence.

Resident Anglers Nonresident Anglers Total Use Days

1986 USE DAYS Coldwater Wannwater Coldwater Warmwater Coldwater Wannwater Total Use Use Days Use Days Use Days Use Days Use Days Use Days Days (x (x 1,000) (x 1,000) (x 1,000) (x 1,000) (x 1,000) (x 1,000) 1,000)

Colorado River Reservoirs 165 525 80 157 245 682 927

Colorado River 131 351 35 50 166 401 567

L1rge Inland Reservoirs 239 1,820 6 55 245 1,875 2,120

Lakes 849 524 29 10 878 534 1,412

Ponds and Tanks 63 129 1 1 64 130 194

City Waters 38 85 38 85 123

Urban Program Lakes 84 190 84 190 274

Large Inland Rivers 99 304 1 4 100 308 408

Other Streams and Rivers 320 116 12 4 332 120 452

Irrigation Canals 6 63 0 3 6 66 72

Indian Reservation Waters 221 207 5 5 226 212 438

Military Base Waters 27 23 0 1 27 24 51

Total 2,242 4,337 169 290 2,411 4,627 7,038

1989 USE DAYS

Colorado River Reservoirs 117 501 26 153 143 654 797

Colorado River 216 178 75 53 291 231 522

Large Inland Reservoirs 164 1,826 3 30 167 1,856 2,023

Lakes 847 659 28 11 875 670 1,545

Ponds and Tanks 68 157 4 2 72 159 231

City Waters 14 181 14 181 195

Urban Program Lakes 104 381 1 105 381 486

Large Inland Rivers 76 213 1 76 214 290

Other Streams and Rivers 312 75 19 1 331 76 407

Irrigation Canals 7 48 1 31 8 79 87

Indian Reservation Waters 208 239 12 3 220 242 462

Military Base Waters 62 35 62 35 97

Total 2,195 4,493 168 285 2,364 4,778 7,141

27 ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORTFISHERIES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990

COLORADO RIVER COLORADO RIVER RESER\OIRS Table A.2.3. Estimated supply (angkr days per year), 1986 and 1989 use (angler Javsl. and Table A.1.2. Emmated supply (angler days per year}. 1986 and 1989 use (angler days). 1989 proJected use in 1995 for the Culorado Ri..,a including ;nainstem segments of rhe mer u~e (dngkr days), and proiected use in 1995 for Colorado Rr..-c:r reservoirs including Lakes bet',1,een Colorado River Reservoirs. Po"'e!I. '.vtead, \'tohave. and Havasu.

3~0.000 Acres {based on 1986 data) OA .-\.ngkr days per acre per week 12,600 .-\..:res i r>a;)ed on ; 986 J.:ita) ----- Weeks per year An~kr d..i)S per acre per "'eek ESTl~l-\ TED SL PPLY: 6,obO .---\ngkr Days per yeJr (xl.000) ___5_2 __ \\ieeks r,er )ear ESTI\L-\TED SLPPLY: J,276 .-\rgler Da;s per ;ear 1xl.OUO)

Res1Jent '.\unrc:s1Jent T,.Jtal Lse L\e L~e Resident Sonresu..lent Tutal (xI.tK)()) (xl,000) (xl.UOO) L;)e Lse L)e 1986 LSE: (xl.000) (xl.000) r~UH)O) Coldwater 165 80 2-+5 1986 lSE: Warmwater 525 157 682 Coldwater 131 35 ltm Total 690 231 927 Warmwater 351 50 -ll)J 1989 lSE: Total 482 85 '67 Coldwater 117 ~6 143 1989 lSE: Warmwater 501 153 654 Coldwater 216 75 291 Total 618 I 79 797 Warmwater 178 53 231 1995 PROJECTED Total 394 128 522 DE:-.IA.'ID: 1995 PROJECTED Coldwater 175 80 255 DEMAND: Warmwater 555 157 712 Coldwater 138 35 173 Total 730 237 967 Warrnwater 371 ,o ·Cl Total 5t)9 S5 ,94

L-\RGE INLAND RESERVOIRS LAKES Table .-\2.4. Est1mated supply (angler days per year), 1986 and 1989 use (angler days), and projected use m 1995 for Large Inland Reservoirs including Alamo Lake, Apache Lake. Table A2.5. Estimated supply (angler days per year), 1986 and 1989 use (angler days), and Bartlett Lake, Canyon Lake, Horseshoe Lake, Lake Pleasant, Roosevelt Lake, and Saguaro projected use in 1995 for lakes including unpounded bodies of water larger than five acres, Lake. with a maJOT emphasis on recreational fishmg.

27,500 Acres (based on 1986 data) 6,900 Acres (based on 1986 data) Angler days per acre per week 6 Angler days per acre per week ___5_2 __ Weeks per year ___5_2 __ Wec:ks per )e.Jr ESTHl-\TED SlPPLY: S.580 Angler Days per year (xl,000) ESTI\l-\TED SlPPLY: 2,153 Argler Days per .ear rx 1.1100)

Rernknt ~onres1

Total 2,059 61 2.120 Total J,373 39 1,412 1989 USE: 1989 USE: Coldwater 164 167 Coldwater 847 28 ,m Warmwater 1,826 30 1.856 Warmwater 659 11 671)

Total 1,990 33 2,023 Total l,506 39 1.545 1995 PROJECTED 1995 PROJECTED DE.\IA,'ID: DEMAND: Coldwater 253 6 259 Coldwater 898 29 927 Warmwater 1,925 55 1,980 Warm9'ater 555 10 565 Total 2,178 61 2.239 Total 1,453 39 l.4Q2

28 ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORTFISHERIES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990 ,41 PO:-.os .-\'.',O T.\'.',KS CITY WATERS

TJb[e A.2.6. Esttmated supply (angler days per year). 1986 and 19~9 use (angler days). and Table A1.7. E!>timated supp!y (angler days per year), 1986 and i989 use (angler Jays). dOd pr □ Jet:tt!d use m 1995 for ponds and tanks 'which .nc!ude smail bodies of'water less than five projected use in 1995 for city lakes which include: small bodies of water controlled by J.LTes Jnd maintained pnrnardy for purposes uiher than recreational fishing. mun1c1pdht1es or incorporated governments, secondarily managed for recreational t1shmg.

-18 .-\cres (cased on !986 data) 10 Ar:gkr dJys per :.....:re per ,..,eek ___,_2 __ Weeks pa ;,e~r EST1'1ATED SLPPLY: L\;K.\;QV..:S .-\CRE.-\GE ESTI\IATED SLPPLY: 25

Re,1dent \'onresa.knt Tmal Re~iJent '.'\onrc~1lknt Tt)ldl L'se L\e L~e Cse L~e L')e /xl.OIXIJ (.xl.llUO) 1,1.uuo1 1,1.11001 1,l.lJ00) (xl.1100) 1986 lSE: 1986 lSE: ColJwater 63 6-1 Coldwater 38 38 Warruw::1tc:r 129 130 Warmwater 85 K5 Tutal 192 I 94 Total 123 123 1989 LSE: 1989 t;SE: Coldwater 68 72 Coldwater 14 1-1 Warmwater 157 1,9 Warmwater 181 181

Total 225 6 23 t Total 195 195 1995 PROJECTED 1995 PROJECTED DE'.\IA.'iD: DE'.\IA:-OD: Coldwater 66 67 Coldwater -10 -10 Warrnwater 137 138 Warrnwater 90 9t) Total 203 205 Total iJO 131)

• Less than 50 ( Estimated to be 42 days for nonresident anglers).

LRBA.', PROGRA\I LAKES LARGE INLAND RIVERS T •ble A2.8. Estimated supply (angler days per year), 1986 and 1989 use (angler days), and Table A2.9. Estimated supply (angler days per year), 1986 and 1989 use (angler da}s), and projected use in 1995 for urban program lakes which include city lakes managed through a projected use m 1995 for large inland nvers including the mainstem segments of the Gila, cooperauve agreement between the municipaliues and the Department and for which a Salt, and Verde rivers. special 'urban liccnse· ts required.

18.200 .-\cres (based on 1986 data) 106 Acres Angkr days per acre per week 11111 Angler Ja:,s per acn: per week ___5_2 __ Weeks per year ___5_2 __ Weeks per year ESTI~IATED SUPPLY: 2,839 Angler Days per year (xl.000) ESTI\IA TED SLPPLY: 551 .-\ngler Days per ,ear (x 1,000)

Resident \"onn::sident Total Re::iH..ient :,,.;onres1dent Total C:se Lse Lse Lse Lse Lse (xl.000) (xl.000) (,I.U\)()J (xl.(l(IO) (xl.000) (xl.000) 1986 USE: 1986 lSE: Coldwater 99 JOO Coldwater 84 84 Warmwater 304 308 Warmwater 190 190 Total -103 -108 Total 274 274 1989 USE: 1989 t:SE: Coldwater 76 76 Coldwater 104 105 Warmwater 213 21-1 Warmwater 381 0 381 Total 289 290 Total 485 -186 1995 PROJECTED 1995 PROJECTED DE~ANI►. DE'.\IA.'iD: Coldwater 104 105 Coldwater 110 Ill Warmwater 322 4 326 Warmwater 404 405 Total 426 -13 l Total 514 516

•Less than 500 (Estimated to be 85 days for nonresident anglers in 1986. 29 ARIZONA COLDWATER SPORTFISHERIES STRATEGIC PLAN 1990

OTHER STREAMS A,'iD RIVERS IRRIGATION CA:-.ALS

Table ,.\.2.10. E:it1ma1ed supply (Jr.g!er J..1:,-s per Je,ir). 1986

5,000 Acres (based on 1986 J,1ta) 600 Al.'.res (based on 1986 data) r\n~kr days per ucre per week 10 Angler days per J.i.:re pa week ___,_2 __ Weeks per year ___,_2 __ Weeks per yeJ.r EST1'UTED SlPPLY: 'SO Angler Days per ;ear (xl.000) ESTI~UTED SLPPLY: 312 Angler Day:, per year ( x !.ut}O)

Re:i11.knt \unresident Tnta! L'se L'se L'se Re:,tdent '.',;on resident T1)1JI (X 1.IJ()()) (xl.UI)()) (xl.i)IX)) Lse c~e c~e (xi.()()()) (xl.l~)()) I< 1.UIJOl 1986 LSE: 1986 CSE: Coldwater 320 12 332 Coldwater 6 6 Warmwater 116 120 Warmwater ______63 _ 06 Total .J6 16 -+52 69 '72 1989 LSE: 1989 LSE: Coldwater J 12 19 331 Coldwater ., Warmwater 75 76 Warmwater ______.s _ Ji -g Total 387 20 .01 55 32 ~7 1995 PROJEcrED DDIA.'liD: 1995 PROJEcrED DE'.\IA.'-D: Coldwater 339 12 351 Coldwater Warmwater 123 127 Warmwater ____6_7 ______',_J _ Total •62 16 •'8 Total 74

• Less than 500 (Esttrnated to be 202 angler days).

INDIA,"I RESERVATION WATERS MILITARY BASE WATERS

Table Al.12. Estimated supply ( angler days per year), 1986 and 1989 use ( angler days), and Table A2.13. Esumated 1986 and 1989 use (angler days), and pro1ec1ed use in 1995 for projected use in 1995 for lndian reservation waters. Although the Department has no military base waters. Although the Depanment has no Jurisdiction over these waters this Junsdictton over these waters this information is presented to report findings of the 1986 information is presented to repon findings of the 1986 angler survey. angler survey.

3.•00 Acres (based on 1986 data) 10 Angler days per acre per week

___5_2 __ Weeks per year ESTI~UTED SLPPLY: C',K..',O~ ACREAGE ESTI~l.\TED SLPPLY: 1,768 Angler Days per year (xl,()()()J

Rc:s1dent ~onresH.knt Total Re::.1dent ~onresident Total Lse Cse Lse Cse Cse Cse (,1.000) (xi.()()()) (xi.(){)()) (xi.()()()) (.d,000) (xl.000) 1986 l.:SE: 1986 l.:SE: Coldwater 27 27 Coldwater 221 226 Warmwater 23 24 Warmwatcr . 107 212 Total 50 5 I Total HS 10 •38 1989 LSE: 1989 LSE: Coldwater 62 62 Coldwater 208 12 220 Warmwater 35 35 Warmwater :.;~ 2.Z Total 97 0 97 Total 447 15 •62 1995 PROJEcrED 1995 PROJEcrED DEMAND: DDIAND: Coldwater 28 18 Coldwater 234 239 Warmwater 24 15 Warmwater 219 224 Total 52 SJ Total •53 10 •63 "Less than 500 (Estunated to be 40 angler days).

30