Description and Identification of June, Utah, and Mountain Sucker Larvae and Early Juveniles

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Description and Identification of June, Utah, and Mountain Sucker Larvae and Early Juveniles DESCRIPTION AND IDENTIFICATION OF JUNE, UTAH, AND MOUNTAIN SUCKER LARVAE AND EARLY JUVENILES by Darrel E. Snyder and Robert T. Muth Publication No. 88-8 STATE OF UTAH NATURAL RESOURCES k) Wildlife Resources DESCRIPTION AND IDENTIFICATION OF JUNE, UTAH, AND MOUNTAIN SUCKER LARVAE AND EARLY JUVENILES by Darrel E. Snyder and Robert T. Muth Larval Fish Laboratory Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 Contribution 37 of the Larval Fish Laboratory, Colorado State University July 1988 Utah State Division of Wildlife Resources Contract 87-2891 Utah State Division of Wildlife Resources 1596 West North Temple Salt Lake City, Utah 84116-3154 88-8 CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................................. iii LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................................................... iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................................. vi ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 2 A COMBINED DEVELOPMENTAL INTERVAL TERMINOLOGY ............................................ 4 CHARACTERISTICS USEFUL IN IDENTIFICATION OF CYPRINIFORM LARVAE . 6 Myomeres ................................................................................................................................................. 7 Fins and Finfolds .......9 Other Countable Structures ................................................................................................................. 11 Morphology ............................................................................................................................................. 11 Pigmentation ............................................................................................................................................. 13 Osteology ................................................................................................................................................. 14 SPECIMENS EXAMINED ............................................................................................................................. 15 METHODS ......................................................................................................................................................... 16 Specimen Data and Observations ......................................................................................................... 16 Clearing and Staining Procedures ..................................................................................................... 20 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................. 22 Comparative Summary ......................................................................................................................... 22 Keys ......................................................................................................................................................... 29 Species Account -- Chasmistes liorus ............................................................................................. 46 Species Account -- Catostomus ardens ......................................................................................... 54 Species Account -- Catostomus platvrhynchus ............................................................................. 62 LITERATURE CITED ................................................................................................................................. 70 APPENDIX A, INDIVIDUAL MEASURES AND COUNTS ............................................................. 75 APPENDIX B, COMPARATIVE GRAPHS OF MORPHOMETRIC DATA ................................ 85 APPENDIX C, GROWTH CURVES FOR REARED SPECIMENS ................................................. 104 ii LIST OF TABLES 1 Comparison of . useful differences in size relative to state of development ................ 23 2 Comparison of diagnostically useful differences in meristics and morphometrics 24 3 Selected juvenile and adult meristics for Chasmistes liorus ................................................ 46 4 Size at apparent onset of selected developmental events for Catostomus liorus ............... 46 5 Size at developmental interval and gut phase transitions for Chasmistes liorus ............... 47 6 Summary of morphometrics and myomere counts . for Chasmistes liorus .................. 47 7 Frontoparietal fontanelle dimensions for Chasmistes liorus ................................................ 53 8 Selected juvenile and adult meristics for Catostomus ardens ................................................ 54 9 Size at apparent onset of selected developmental events for Catostomus ardens ............... 54 10 Size at developmental interval and gut phase transitions for Catostomus ardens ............... 55 11 Summary of morphometrics and myomere counts . for Catostomus ardens .................. 55 12 Frontoparietal fontanelle dimensions for Catostomus ardens ................................................ 61 13 Selected juvenile and adult meristics for Catostomus platyrhynchus ................................. 62 14 Size at apparent onset of selected developmental events for C. platvrhynchus. ............... 62 15 Size at developmental interval and gut phase transitions for C. platvrhynchus ............... 63 16 Summary of morphometrics and myomere counts . for Catostomus platvrhynchus 63 17 Frontoparietal fontanelle dimensions for Catostomus platvrhynchus ................................. 69 Appendix Tables Appendix A. Individual Measures and Counts for Fully Analyzed Specimens A-1 Individual measures and counts for . Chasmistes liorus . reared ................................ 76 A-2 Individual measures and counts for . Catostomus ardens . reared ............................ 79 A-3 Individual measures and counts for . Catostomus platvrhynchus . reared ................ 82 A-4 Individual measures and counts for . Catostomus platyrhvnchus . captured . 83 iii LIST OF FIGURES 1 Selected anatomical features of catostomid fish eggs and embryos ......................................... 7 2 Selected anatomical features of catostomid fish larvae................................................................. 8 3 Measures and counts for larval and early juvenile fishes ......................................................... 17 4 Phases of gut coil development in catostomid fish larvae and early juveniles .................... 18 5 Location of selected skeletal features of metalarval and early-juvenile catostomids . 19 6 Chasmistes liorus, adult ......................................................................................................................... 46 7 Distribution of Chasmistes liorus. ..................................................................................................... 46 8 Chasmistes liorus protolarva, recently hatched ............................................................................. 48 9 Chasmistes liorus protolarva ................................................................................................................. 48 10 Chasmistes liorus flexion mesolarva, recently transformed ......................................................... 49 11 Chasmistes liorus postflexion mesolarva ......................................................................................... 49 12 Chasmistes liorus metalarva, recently transformed ..................................................................... 50 13 Chasmistes liorus metalarva ................................................................................................................. 50 14 Chasmistes liorus juvenile, recently transformed ......................................................................... 51 15 Chasmistes liorus juvenile ..................................................................................................................... 51 16 Selected diagnostic skeletal features of Chasmistes liorus . 25.6 mm TL ........................ 52 17 Selected diagnostic skeletal features of Chasmistes liorus . 45 mm TL ............................ 52 18 Interneurals of Chasmistes liorus ......................................................................................................... 53 19 Frontoparietal fontanelle of Chasmistes liorus ............................................................................. 53 20 Catostomus ardens, adult ..................................................................................................................... 54 21 Regional distribution of Catostomus ardens ..................................................................................... 54 22 Catostomus ardens protolarva, recently hatched ............................................................................. 56 23 Catostomus ardens protolarva ............................................................................................................. 56 24 Catostomus ardens flexion mesolarva, recently transformed ....................................................
Recommended publications
  • In the Weber River, Utah
    An International Periodical Promoting Conservation and Biodiversity Southwestern United States—Mexico—Central America Una Revista Internacional para Fomentar la Conservación y Biodiversidad El Suroeste de USA—México—Centroamérica STATUS AND STRUCTURE OF TWO POPULATIONS OF THE BLUEHEAD SUCKER (CATOSTOMUS DISCOBOLUS) IN THE WEBER RIVER, UTAH P. A ARON WEBBER,PAUL D. THOMPSON,* AND PHAEDRA BUDY Colorado River Fishery Project, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 1380 South 2350 West, Vernal, UT 84078 (PAW) Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, 515 East 5300 South, Ogden, UT 84405 (PDT) United States Geological Survey, Utah Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Watershed Sciences, Utah State University, Logan, UT 8432 (PB) * Correspondent: [email protected] THE SOUTHWESTERN NATURALIST 57(3): 267–276 SEPTEMBER 2012 STATUS AND STRUCTURE OF TWO POPULATIONS OF THE BLUEHEAD SUCKER (CATOSTOMUS DISCOBOLUS) IN THE WEBER RIVER, UTAH P. A ARON WEBBER,PAUL D. THOMPSON,* AND PHAEDRA BUDY Colorado River Fishery Project, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 1380 South 2350 West, Vernal, UT 84078 (PAW) Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, 515 East 5300 South, Ogden, UT 84405 (PDT) United States Geological Survey, Utah Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Watershed Sciences, Utah State University, Logan, UT 8432 (PB) * Correspondent: [email protected] ABSTRACT—We compared two populations of the bluehead sucker (Catostomus discobolus) during 2007–2009 in the Weber River, Davis, Summit, and Weber counties, Utah. We estimated 225 and 546 individuals in these populations. Based on recaptured, PIT-tagged fish, annual survival of adults (202–575 mm total length) was high (77%); however, our top model indicated mortality increased with size (i.e., senescence).
    [Show full text]
  • Three-Species Investigations Kevin Thompson Aquatic Research
    Three-Species Investigations Kevin Thompson Aquatic Research Scientist Job Progress Report Colorado Parks & Wildlife Aquatic Research Section Fort Collins, Colorado May 2017 STATE OF COLORADO John W. Hickenlooper, Governor COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Bob Randall, Executive Director COLORADO PARKS & WILDLIFE Bob Broscheid, Director WILDLIFE COMMISSION Chris Castilian, Chair Robert William Bray Jeanne Horne, Vice-Chair John V. Howard, Jr. James C. Pribyl, Secretary James Vigil William G. Kane Dale E. Pizil Robert “Dean” Wingfield Michelle Zimmerman Alexander Zipp Ex Officio/Non-Voting Members: Don Brown, Bob Randall and Bob Broscheid AQUATIC RESEARCH STAFF George J. Schisler, Aquatic Research Leader Kelly Carlson, Aquatic Research Program Assistant Peter Cadmus, Aquatic Research Scientist/Toxicologist, Water Pollution Studies Eric R. Fetherman, Aquatic Research Scientist, Salmonid Disease Studies Ryan Fitzpatrick, Aquatic Research Scientist, Eastern Plains Native Fishes Eric E. Richer, Aquatic Research Scientist/Hydrologist, Stream Habitat Restoration Matthew C. Kondratieff, Aquatic Research Scientist, Stream Habitat Restoration Dan Kowalski, Aquatic Research Scientist, Stream & River Ecology Adam Hansen, Aquatic Research Scientist, Coldwater Lakes and Reservoirs Kevin B. Rogers, Aquatic Research Scientist, Colorado Cutthroat Studies Kevin G. Thompson, Aquatic Research Scientist, 3-Species and Boreal Toad Studies Andrew J. Treble, Aquatic Research Scientist, Aquatic Data Management and Analysis Brad Neuschwanger, Hatchery Manager,
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species
    FEATURE: ENDANGERED SPECIES Conservation Status of Imperiled North American Freshwater and Diadromous Fishes ABSTRACT: This is the third compilation of imperiled (i.e., endangered, threatened, vulnerable) plus extinct freshwater and diadromous fishes of North America prepared by the American Fisheries Society’s Endangered Species Committee. Since the last revision in 1989, imperilment of inland fishes has increased substantially. This list includes 700 extant taxa representing 133 genera and 36 families, a 92% increase over the 364 listed in 1989. The increase reflects the addition of distinct populations, previously non-imperiled fishes, and recently described or discovered taxa. Approximately 39% of described fish species of the continent are imperiled. There are 230 vulnerable, 190 threatened, and 280 endangered extant taxa, and 61 taxa presumed extinct or extirpated from nature. Of those that were imperiled in 1989, most (89%) are the same or worse in conservation status; only 6% have improved in status, and 5% were delisted for various reasons. Habitat degradation and nonindigenous species are the main threats to at-risk fishes, many of which are restricted to small ranges. Documenting the diversity and status of rare fishes is a critical step in identifying and implementing appropriate actions necessary for their protection and management. Howard L. Jelks, Frank McCormick, Stephen J. Walsh, Joseph S. Nelson, Noel M. Burkhead, Steven P. Platania, Salvador Contreras-Balderas, Brady A. Porter, Edmundo Díaz-Pardo, Claude B. Renaud, Dean A. Hendrickson, Juan Jacobo Schmitter-Soto, John Lyons, Eric B. Taylor, and Nicholas E. Mandrak, Melvin L. Warren, Jr. Jelks, Walsh, and Burkhead are research McCormick is a biologist with the biologists with the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 Author(S): Noel M
    Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 Author(s): Noel M. Burkhead Source: BioScience, 62(9):798-808. 2012. Published By: American Institute of Biological Sciences URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.1525/bio.2012.62.9.5 BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses. Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use. Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder. BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research. Articles Extinction Rates in North American Freshwater Fishes, 1900–2010 NOEL M. BURKHEAD Widespread evidence shows that the modern rates of extinction in many plants and animals exceed background rates in the fossil record. In the present article, I investigate this issue with regard to North American freshwater fishes. From 1898 to 2006, 57 taxa became extinct, and three distinct populations were extirpated from the continent. Since 1989, the numbers of extinct North American fishes have increased by 25%. From the end of the nineteenth century to the present, modern extinctions varied by decade but significantly increased after 1950 (post-1950s mean = 7.5 extinct taxa per decade).
    [Show full text]
  • Native Unionoida Surveys, Distribution, and Metapopulation Dynamics in the Jordan River-Utah Lake Drainage, UT
    Version 1.5 Native Unionoida Surveys, Distribution, and Metapopulation Dynamics in the Jordan River-Utah Lake Drainage, UT Report To: Wasatch Front Water Quality Council Salt Lake City, UT By: David C. Richards, Ph.D. OreoHelix Consulting Vineyard, UT 84058 email: [email protected] phone: 406.580.7816 May 26, 2017 Native Unionoida Surveys and Metapopulation Dynamics Jordan River-Utah Lake Drainage 1 One of the few remaining live adult Anodonta found lying on the surface of what was mostly comprised of thousands of invasive Asian clams, Corbicula, in Currant Creek, a former tributary to Utah Lake, August 2016. Summary North America supports the richest diversity of freshwater mollusks on the planet. Although the western USA is relatively mollusk depauperate, the one exception is the historically rich molluskan fauna of the Bonneville Basin area, including waters that enter terminal Great Salt Lake and in particular those waters in the Jordan River-Utah Lake drainage. These mollusk taxa serve vital ecosystem functions and are truly a Utah natural heritage. Unfortunately, freshwater mollusks are also the most imperiled animal groups in the world, including those found in UT. The distribution, status, and ecologies of Utah’s freshwater mussels are poorly known, despite this unique and irreplaceable natural heritage and their protection under the Clean Water Act. Very few mussel specific surveys have been conducted in UT which requires specialized training, survey methods, and identification. We conducted the most extensive and intensive survey of native mussels in the Jordan River-Utah Lake drainage to date from 2014 to 2016 using a combination of reconnaissance and qualitative mussel survey methods.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishes of the Jordan River Compiled by Dan Potts, Local Naturalist/Ichthyologist, Revised 2011
    Fishes of the Jordan River compiled by Dan Potts, local naturalist/ichthyologist, revised 2011 TROUTS, SALMONS (SALMONIDAE) natives Bonneville cutthroat trout Onchorhynchus clarki rare introduced exotics Brown trout Salmo trutta rare Rainbow trout Onchorhynchus mykiss locally common, stocked annually NOTE: All of the trouts are found primarily in and near tributary streams to the Jordan, except rainbows that are found in areas where they are stocked as sport fish by the State of Utah Division of Wildlife Resources. MINNOWS (CYPRINIDAE) natives Redside shiner Richardsonius balteatus locally common Speckled dace Rhinichthys osculus locally common Utah chub Gila atraria uncommon introduced exotics Common carp Cyprinus carpio common, pervasive Goldfish Carassius auratus rare Fathead minnow Pimephales promelas rare Golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucus rare NOTE: Common carp are so common that they account for the vast majority of the fish by weight throughout the Jordan River. Fathead minnow and golden shiner were introduced into Utah Lake as a prey species and have found their way downstream in very limited numbers. Goldfish were probably introduced as pets, but have persisted over the years. The three remaining natives are less common and mostly found in upstream reaches, especially below the Narrows. SUCKERS (CATOSTOMIDAE) natives Utah sucker Catostomus ardens common Mountain sucker Catostomus platyrhychus uncommon June sucker Chasmistes liorus rare NOTE: Utah sucker are the second most abundant fish species by weight in the Jordan River, and are found throughout. Mountain sucker are much less numerous and much smaller. June sucker is a “lake” species of Utah Lake, and are currently listed as an endangered species by the Federal Government.
    [Show full text]
  • Version 2020-04-20 June Sucker (Chasmistes Liorus) Species Status
    Version 2020-04-20 June Sucker (Chasmistes liorus) Species Status Statement. Distribution June sucker is endemic to Utah Lake and its tributaries. The species spends the majority of the year in Utah Lake, but conducts an annual spawning migration up the tributaries in late spring and early summer (often peaking in June, hence its name). Primary spawning locations are the Provo River, Hobble Creek, and the Spanish Fork River (Fonken, 2017). A refuge population exists in Red Butte Reservoir, and hatchery and grow-out facilities are located at the state fish hatchery in Logan, Utah and at Rosebud Ponds in Box Elder County. Table 1. Utah counties currently occupied by this species. June Sucker BOX ELDER CACHE SALT LAKE UTAH WEBER Abundance and Trends Managers estimated that fewer than 1,000 June sucker existed at the time of their Endangered Species Act listing in 1986 (USFWS, 1999). As self-sustaining populations of this species no longer existed in the wild, managers began a captive breeding program, and stocked artificially propagated June suckers into Utah Lake on an annual basis. Additionally, they established a June sucker refuge population in Red Butte Reservoir. Recent modeling has shown an increasing population in Utah Lake, with current estimates of approximately 3,000 spawning adults (Conner, 2018). Statement of Habitat Needs and Threats to the Species. Habitat Needs In addition to the main body of Utah Lake, June sucker requires complex delta habitat in order to complete its life cycle. Historically, tributaries dispersed into a series of braided channels and wetlands at their interface with Utah Lake.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishes As a Template for Reticulate Evolution
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 12-2016 Fishes as a Template for Reticulate Evolution: A Case Study Involving Catostomus in the Colorado River Basin of Western North America Max Russell Bangs University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Evolution Commons, Molecular Biology Commons, and the Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons Recommended Citation Bangs, Max Russell, "Fishes as a Template for Reticulate Evolution: A Case Study Involving Catostomus in the Colorado River Basin of Western North America" (2016). Theses and Dissertations. 1847. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/1847 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Fishes as a Template for Reticulate Evolution: A Case Study Involving Catostomus in the Colorado River Basin of Western North America A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Biology by Max Russell Bangs University of South Carolina Bachelor of Science in Biological Sciences, 2009 University of South Carolina Master of Science in Integrative Biology, 2011 December 2016 University of Arkansas This dissertation is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. _____________________________________ Dr. Michael E. Douglas Dissertation Director _____________________________________ ____________________________________ Dr. Marlis R. Douglas Dr. Andrew J. Alverson Dissertation Co-Director Committee Member _____________________________________ Dr. Thomas F. Turner Ex-Officio Member Abstract Hybridization is neither simplistic nor phylogenetically constrained, and post hoc introgression can have profound evolutionary effects.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishtraits: a Database on Ecological and Life-History Traits of Freshwater
    FishTraits database Traits References Allen, D. M., W. S. Johnson, and V. Ogburn-Matthews. 1995. Trophic relationships and seasonal utilization of saltmarsh creeks by zooplanktivorous fishes. Environmental Biology of Fishes 42(1)37-50. [multiple species] Anderson, K. A., P. M. Rosenblum, and B. G. Whiteside. 1998. Controlled spawning of Longnose darters. The Progressive Fish-Culturist 60:137-145. [678] Barber, W. E., D. C. Williams, and W. L. Minckley. 1970. Biology of the Gila Spikedace, Meda fulgida, in Arizona. Copeia 1970(1):9-18. [485] Becker, G. C. 1983. Fishes of Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI. Belk, M. C., J. B. Johnson, K. W. Wilson, M. E. Smith, and D. D. Houston. 2005. Variation in intrinsic individual growth rate among populations of leatherside chub (Snyderichthys copei Jordan & Gilbert): adaptation to temperature or length of growing season? Ecology of Freshwater Fish 14:177-184. [349] Bonner, T. H., J. M. Watson, and C. S. Williams. 2006. Threatened fishes of the world: Cyprinella proserpina Girard, 1857 (Cyprinidae). Environmental Biology of Fishes. In Press. [133] Bonnevier, K., K. Lindstrom, and C. St. Mary. 2003. Parental care and mate attraction in the Florida flagfish, Jordanella floridae. Behavorial Ecology and Sociobiology 53:358-363. [410] Bortone, S. A. 1989. Notropis melanostomus, a new speices of Cyprinid fish from the Blackwater-Yellow River drainage of northwest Florida. Copeia 1989(3):737-741. [575] Boschung, H.T., and R. L. Mayden. 2004. Fishes of Alabama. Smithsonian Books, Washington. [multiple species] 1 FishTraits database Breder, C. M., and D. E. Rosen. 1966. Modes of reproduction in fishes.
    [Show full text]
  • Chad Landress GEO 565 Spatial Analysis Final Project 12/6/2010
    1 Chad Landress GEO 565 Spatial Analysis Final Project 12/6/2010 Biotic and Abiotic Associations of the Federally Endangered June Sucker (Chasmistes liorus) in Utah Lake, UT, USA Introduction Utah Lake is an extremely large (~96,000 acres) lake located in north-central Utah. It is however, a rather featureless lake. Maximum depth is only 14 feet and average depth is 9 feet. The dominant substrate is mud although there are limited areas of rocky near-shore zones. Most of the lake is devoid of vegetation as a result of high density of common carp (Cyprinus carpio). Carp comprise approximately 90% of the biomass of the lake. There are dense stands of emergent vegetation, predominately phragmites and bulrush, which rim the lake from shoreline to an average of 100 to 200 meters from shore, although vegetative coverage can extend over 1500 meters from shore in the bays (Crowl et al 1998b). Utah Lake was once home to twelve species of native fish, including the Utah Lake strain of Bonneville cutthroat trout (Onchorhynchus clarkii utah) and the now endangered June sucker (Chasmistes liorus). Of the original fish species inhabiting the lake, only the June sucker, Utah sucker (Catostomus ardens) and Utah chub (Gila atraria) are currently found in the lake. The latter two species are common outside of Utah Lake and are of lesser conservation concern. The lake is currently dominated by non-native species such as common carp, white bass (Morone chrysops), channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus), black bullhead (Ameirus melas), and walleye (Sander vitreus) (Landress and Watson 2009). The June sucker is endemic to Utah Lake and a 2 1988 study estimated the population to be between 300 and 1100 individuals.
    [Show full text]
  • Species Status Assessment Report for the Colorado Pikeminnow Ptychocheilus Lucius
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FINAL March 2020 Species Status Assessment Report for the Colorado pikeminnow Ptychocheilus lucius U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Department of the Interior Upper Colorado Basin Region 7 Denver, CO FINAL Species Status Assessment March 2020 PREFACE This Species Status Assessment provides an integrated, scientifically sound assessment of the biological status of the endangered Colorado pikeminnow Ptychocheilus lucius. This document was prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), with assistance from state, federal, and private researchers currently working with Colorado pikeminnow. The writing team would like to acknowledge the substantial contribution of time and effort by those that participated in the Science Team. Writing Team Tildon Jones (Coordinator, Upper Colorado River Recovery Program) Eliza Gilbert (Program Biologist, San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program) Tom Chart (Director, Upper Colorado River Recovery Program) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Species Status Assessment Advisory Group Craig Hansen (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 6) Reviewers and Collaborators Upper Colorado River Recovery Program Directors Office: Donald Anderson, Katie Busch, Melanie Fischer, Kevin McAbee, Cheyenne Owens, Julie Stahli Science Team: Kevin Bestgen, Jim Brooks, Darek Elverud, Eliza Gilbert, Steven Platania, Dale Ryden, Tom Chart Peer Reviewers: Keith Gido, Wayne Hubert Upper Colorado River Recovery Program Biology Committee Members: Paul Badame, Pete Cavalli, Harry Crockett, Bill
    [Show full text]
  • 1992 Utah Fishing Proclamation
    m ftroiG wm "t let erkLte^ "IHferae you won't let go ®fl Wfo(B ttrout! The largest fish ever taken on a rod and reel, a 3,427 pound great white shark, was caught on Berkley Trilene — America's best selling fishing Rtf*rlrlctir line! SPORTSCASTLE SANDY PRICE 5600 S. 9th E., Murray 838 E. 9400 S. 730 W. Prive River Rd. 263-3633 571-8812 637-2077 ZCMICENTER CEDAR CITY SUGARHOUSE 2nd Level ZCMI Center 606 S. Main 1171 East 2100 So.. 359-4540 586-0687 487-7726 VERNAL OGDEN CITY MALL ROY 872 W. Main 24th & Washington 5585 So. 1900 W. 789-0536 399-2310 776-4453 FAMILY CENTER PROVO/UNIV. MALL ROCK SPRINGS 5666 S. Redwood Rd. 1300 S. State 1371 Dewar Drive SPORTING GOODS COMPANY 967-9455 224-9115 307-362-4208 ON THE COVER "Snagged"by Luke Frazier, oil, 16"x CONTENTS 20". J99I, To learn more about Frazier and his art work, turn to page 60, INTRODUCTION Strawberry Recreation Area Loyal Clark, US Forest Service 35 One of the most exciting Director's Message Scofield Reservoir/What the Timothy H. Provan, Director Future Holds Kevin Christophereon, things about fishing is its Division of Wildlife Resources 2 unpredictability, You simply Southeast Region Fisheries Manager 37 Utah's 1992 Fishing Season don't kno w when that big Why Rainbow Trout? Bruce Schmidt, Fisheries Chief 3 Joe Valentine, Assistant Fisheries one is going to strike, it Chief (Culture) ........39 could be on your next cast! 1992 FISHING RULES Willard Bay Shad 1992 Fishing Rules: Purpose Thomas D.
    [Show full text]