Final Approved 14 July 2020 1 SAN JUAN RIVER BASIN RECOVERY

Final Approved 14 July 2020 1 SAN JUAN RIVER BASIN RECOVERY

Final approved 14 July 2020 SAN JUAN RIVER BASIN RECOVERY IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM (SJRIP) BIOLOGY COMMITTEE 12 May 2020 MEETING SUMMARY BIOLOGY COMMITTEE (BC) MEMBERS: REPRESENTING: Matthew Zeigler State of New Mexico, Chair Harry Crockett State of Colorado Jacob Mazzone Jicarilla Apache Nation William Miller Southern Ute Indian Tribe Vincent Lamarra Navajo Nation Colin Larrick Ute Mountain Ute Tribe Brian Westfall U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs Stephen Davenport U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mark McKinstry U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Benjamin Schleicher U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ryan Besser U.S. Bureau of Land Management Tom Wesche Water Development Interests Absent Conservation Interests COORDINATION COMMITTEE (CC) MEMBERS: Jason Davis U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Chair Jojo La State of Colorado Cathy Condon Southern Ute Tribe Stanley Pollack Navajo Nation Ryan Christianson U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Dale Ryden U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Roland Becenti U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs PROGRAM OFFICE (PO): Melissa Mata, Program Coordinator U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Scott Durst, Science Coordinator U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Eliza Gilbert, Biologist U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES: Adam Barkalow, BC Alternate New Mexico Department of Game and Fish Daniel Lamarra, BC Alternate Navajo Nation Bobby Duran, BC Alternate U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Carrie Padgett, BC Alternate Water Development Interests Christina Noftsker, CC Alternate State of New Mexico Colleen Cunningham, CC Alternate State of New Mexico Crystal Tulley-Cordova, CC Alternate Navajo Nation Rudy Keedah, CC Alternate U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs Kathleen Callister, CC Alternate U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 1 Final approved 14 July 2020 Ben Zimmerman Southern Ute Indian Tribe Rachel Vaughn Southern Ute Indian Tribe Jerrod Bowman Navajo Nation Department of Fish and Wildlife T. Kim Yazzie Navajo Nation Department of Fish and Wildlife Nathan Franssen U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Seth Willey U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Nathan Caswell U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Daniel Kaus U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Steve Mussmann U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Melody Saltzgiver U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Susan Behery U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Marc Miller U.S. Bureau of Reclamation David Speas U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Melissa Trammel U.S. National Park Service Brian Hines Utah Department of Wildlife Resources Katie Creighton Utah Department of Wildlife Resources Steven Platania American Southwest Ichthyological Researchers Michael Farrington American Southwest Ichthyological Researchers Stephani Clark Barkalow American Southwest Ichthyological Researchers Aaron Chavez San Juan Water Commission Henry Day Arizona Public Service Pamela Norris Arizona Public Service Cameron Corley Arizona Public Service Introductions and changes to agenda A Colorado Pikeminnow broodstock collection update will be included in the Annual Work Plan (AWP) discussion. An agenda item about the potential to rear Colorado Pikeminnow at the Navajo Agricultural Products Industry (NAPI) ponds was added. Miller requested clarification on the agenda item “Finalize habitat workshop summary” and asked what it would entail since no summary was distributed prior to the meeting. The PO clarified that it will be listed as an Action Item and a draft summary will be sent for review and comment. The BC should make an assessment if more needs to be done on this summary before it is provided to the CC. Approve draft summary from 19-20 February 2020 BC meeting; review action item list Responses from Barkalow, Zeigler, Wesche, Westfall, Miller, and Schleicher were incorporated into the summary. The action item list was reviewed. Crockett moved to approve the summary, Wesche seconded, and the summary was approved with no objections. Discuss draft fiscal year (FY) 2021 AWP Scopes of Work (SOW) Stocking Razorback Sucker in Lake Powell (SOW New 1) The Principle Investigators (PIs) said the intent was to understand if Lake Powell and/or the inflow area provides a better rearing habitat than the San Juan River. The test would be to stock small (~200 millimeter [mm]) Razorback Sucker to see whether they survive based on passive integrated transponder (PIT) tag antenna detections or recaptures. Recaptures would occur in subsequent years during a separate U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) project targeting adult fish. Although the fish for this project would be produced at Ouray National Fish Hatchery, there would be no 2 Final approved 14 July 2020 impact on that facility’s San Juan River production commitment (2,000-4,000 Razorback Sucker ≥ 300 mm TL). The number of fish to stock into Lake Powell (~4,000 fish ≤ 200 mm TL) was determined based on the number of excess fish the hatchery could produce and number of fish that could be transported to the stocking location. If tag loss occurs for these smaller stocked fish it would complicate our understanding if recruitment is occurring in the inflow/lake area. Double tagging stocked fish was suggested as a possible solution to distinguish between hatchery and wild fish. The BC asked the PIs to clarify the question and hypothesis they were interested in addressing in the SOW and to include a method for distinguishing stocked fish from wild should the PIT tag be lost. The PIs said they would revise and resubmit the SOW. SJRIP spawning bar creation at Piute Farms Waterfall (SOW New 2) This project would place cobble in areas just below the waterfall to provide spawning substrate to the approximately 2,000 Razorback Sucker that appear to be making a spawning migration and are prevented from reaching upstream spawning habitat by the waterfall. The intent of this project is to provide spawning habitat for those individuals below the waterfall so they can potentially contribute to annual reproduction, possibly resulting in recruitment in the inflow area and/or Lake Powell. Comments included a concern that the evaluation plan measuring larval fish upstream and downstream of the spawning bar would need a SOW to sample larvae below the waterfall (either included in this SOW or as a separate SOW). There was also concern that the constructed spawning habitat would not persist. Some BC members suggested a proof of concept or a feasibility study might need to be conducted first to determine the longevity of constructed spawning habitat in this location. Ideas included marking and tracking cobble or obtaining assistance from the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center bathymetry group or Reclamation’s Technical Center. The PIs suggested the project itself could be the proof of concept since experimentation and geomorphological studies could be more expensive than the suggested project and a low-cost analysis such as assessing aerial imagery was unlikely to determine how long the habitat would remain. The U.S. National Park Service has interest in the project and a BC member thought it might be worth a try. The PIs will withdraw the SOW from consideration for the FY2021 AWP because Mata indicated it could be revised and submitted outside of the normal AWP schedule since it would likely be funded as a capital project. Physical and biological monitoring and evaluation of Phase III habitat restoration (SOW New 3) This project will monitor the physical parameters of the Phase III wetland and assess the biologic response of the site. Lamarra suggested that additional water quality monitoring site be added to the wetland and the PIs consider measuring river and wetland elevation to assess subsurface infusion. Zeigler asked for the contingency plans that were in prior drafts of the construction SOW to be listed in the monitoring SOW. An additional contingency plan was discussed (because Razorback Sucker larvae are present in the drift for most of May), that if no larvae are detected after the first larval sample, then the wetland could be drained and refilled as a second attempt to entrain larvae. Miller asked that a graphic be included to show monitoring locations. The PIs said they would make these changes and resubmit the SOW. Mitigating stress related mortality in Colorado Pikeminnow during field collection and transport (SOW New 4) The intent of this SOW is to test an anesthetic to mitigate Colorado Pikeminnow stress during broodstock collection and transportation. Personnel from Southwestern Native Aquatic Resources and Recovery Center (Southwestern ARRC) would conduct a laboratory experiment to identify a suitable 3 Final approved 14 July 2020 anesthetic and dosage rates and funding from this SOW would be used to experimentally assess the response from wild young-of-year (YOY) Colorado Pikeminnow captured in the middle Green River under suboptimal field conditions (i.e., high water temperatures in August when YOY are typically more abundant). Christian Smith (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Green River Basin Fish and Wildlife Conservation Office) will provide field logistics. This project would be a separate effort from any broodstock collection (and would not diminish broodstock collection efforts in FY 2021). The PIs have contacted the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program (UCREFRP) for field study approval. Some BC members thought the benefits of a study to mitigate stress during broodstock collection may be limited because broodstock collection may cease by 2022 or 2023. The PIs suggested stress mitigation anesthetic could be used during other fish handling efforts. The PIs clarified that each seine haul would be a replicate and transport trucks would be sectioned so samples sizes for experimentally treated and control fish would be 30 each. Colorado Pikeminnow broodstock collection from the Green and Colorado Rivers, Utah (SOW New 5) Broodstock collection would follow the UCREFRP annual monitoring which would provide fish location and abundance data in the Green and Colorado rivers. Broodstock collection would be in the fall when temperatures are cooler, and fish are easier to identify because of their larger size. A spring pilot study was conducted but few fish were captured (n=11).

View Full Text

Details

  • File Type
    pdf
  • Upload Time
    -
  • Content Languages
    English
  • Upload User
    Anonymous/Not logged-in
  • File Pages
    11 Page
  • File Size
    -

Download

Channel Download Status
Express Download Enable

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

  • Not to be reproduced or distributed without explicit permission.
  • Not used for commercial purposes outside of approved use cases.
  • Not used to infringe on the rights of the original creators.
  • If you believe any content infringes your copyright, please contact us immediately.

Support

For help with questions, suggestions, or problems, please contact us