Difference between revisions of "FISHERY"

• Lees Ferry Anglers / Cliff Dwellers Lodge
• A local perspective on the Lees Ferry trout fishery by Terry Gunn, owner of Lees Ferry Anglers and Cliff Dwellers Lodge
• Lees Ferry Fishing Report
• AZGFD: Managing for Blue Ribbon Rainbow Trout at Lee's Ferry
• GCDAMP: Lees Ferry Recreational Trout Fishery Management Recommendations
• State of Arizona Lees Ferry Fish Management Plan
• National Park Service Comprehensive Fisheries Management Plan
• 2016 Fish Protocol Evaluation Panel (PEP)

• The Trout Ad Hoc Group Page
• Trout Management Flows Page
• Brown Trout Page
• Humpback Chub Page
• Aquatic Foodbase Page
• Water Quality Page
• Nutrients Page

• Natal Origins Project (NO)
• Spring and Fall Lees Ferry Trout Monitoring and CREEL surveys
• Rainbow Trout Early Life Stage Study (RTELSS)
• Bioenergetics
• Individual Based Modeling (IBM)
• Bright Angel Creek Non-Native Trout Reduction

2017

• Lees Ferry Trout Fishery Status and PPT
• Is Rainbow Trout Control Necessary, and if so, What is the Most cost-effective approach? PPT
• Lees Ferry Long Term Monitoring PPT
• Boom-and-Bust Cycles in the Population of Rainbow Trout in Glen Canyon and Effect of Fall High Flow Experiments PPT

2016

• Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center Science Updates (BO Compliance, Trout Updates, Green Sunfish, Fisheries PEP, Partners in Science)
• Bair et al. 2016 Economic Value of Angling on the Colorado River at Lees Ferry: Using Secondary Data to Estimate the Influence of Seasonality: North American Journal of Fisheries Management, no. 6, vo. 36, p. 1229-1239,
• Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center Science Updates (BO Compliance, Trout Updates, Green Sunfish, Fisheries PEP, Partners in Science)
• Current Status of the Lees Ferry Fishery - Spring 2016
• Brown Trout Update Lees Ferry
• Trout Ad Hoc Group Report
• Lees Ferry Recreational Trout Fishery Management Recommendations: The Voice of Lees Ferry Recreational Anglers, Guides, and Businesses
• Memo from Scott VanderKooi to TWG Chair Dated 12/9/15, Subject: Technical Review of the Lees Ferry Recreational Trout Fishery Management recommendations
• [ Natal Origins of Rainbow Trout Project, Years 1-4 (Nov 11 – Dec 15)]
• [ Bioenergetic Modeling of Glen Canyon Rainbow Trout Fishery: Exploring effects of temperature, trout population size and biomass on benthic invertebrate consumption]
• Long-Term Monitoring of the Lees Ferry Fishery: Update
• Economic value of angling on the Colorado River at Lees Ferry: Using secondary data to estimate the influence of seasonality
• Bright Angel Creek Non-Native Trout Reduction, Grand Canyon National Park
• Prey size and availability limits maximum size of rainbow trout in a large tailwater--insights from a drift-foraging bioenergetics model

2015

• Lees Ferry Recreational Trout Fishery Management Recommendations: The Voice of Lees Ferry Recreational Anglers, Guides, and Businesses
• GCMRC Science Update - Trout
• Update on the 2015 decline in fish condition and abundance at Lees Ferry
• GCMRC review of the Lees Ferry Anglers Trout Fishery Recommendations
• Management Prescription
• Mercury levels in Glen Canyon trout
• Potential Application of an Individual-Based Model to the Glen Canyon
• Glen Canyon Tailwater Fishery “Integrating Fish and Channel Mapping
• State of the Fishery Lees Ferry and Lees Ferry and Marble Canyon Rainbow Trout Update
• Lees Ferry Recreational Trout Fishery
• Lees Ferry Management Plan Update and handout
• Rainbow Trout Growth, Condition, Population Dynamics and Modeling in Glen Canyon
• Drift-Foraging and Bioenergetics Growth Model for Rainbow Trout in the Lees Ferry Tailwater
• Bright Angel Creek Non-Native Trout Reduction Grand Canyon National Park

2014

• Modeling Long Term Effects of HFEs on Trout and HBC
• Fisheries Update
• Context and Comparison: Status of Tailwater Fisheries in the Western United States (Dibble)

2013

• GCMRC Update - Status of Resources and Sediment Conditions
• Science Update: Fisheries
• Fact Sheet: Native and Nonnative Fish Populations of the Colorado River are Food Limited--Evidence from New Food Web Analyses
• GCMRC Science Update on Sediment and Fisheries
• Rainbow trout monitoring update
• Diets of trout in Bright Angel Creek
• Nonnative fish control in GCNP tributaries
• Grand Canyon Rainbow Trout 2012 Monitoring Results
• Diets and Food Availability of Nonnative Trout in Bright Angel Creek, Grand Canyon: Implications for Native Fish Conservation
• Non-native Fish Control in Tributaries: Grand Canyon National Park

2011

• Trout piscivory in the Colorado River, Grand Canyon: Effects of turbidity, temperature, and fish prey availability

The river is a living creature. Just because you caught fish in a certain spot in years past, don’t think that you are going to experience the same success this year. Fishing is changing daily. It is our goal and desire that everyone have a great trip to the Ferry. Be sure to stop by the shop to see the flies that are currently working. The flies change on a daily basis and every day LFA guides let everyone at the shop know the top producing flies and how to use them. We are anxious to share this knowledge with you – even where to fish!

There is an ongoing aquatic food base study that has taken place over the past couple of years. The purpose of this study is multifaceted and is studying the relationship of flows on food production, taking inventories of and monitoring populations of aquatic insects and invertebrates that live in the river and other very important aspects of the aquatic food base. I believe that this is by far the most important study that has ever been conducted on this river. Previously, hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent studying sediment while ignoring the aquatic food base and resource. Common sense dictates that fish, birds and animals do not live off of dirt or sand. The aquatic food base and habitat are the foundation for all that lives in the Colorado River. One of the long term goals of the food base study is to determine how to enhance the populations and production of aquatic insects in the river which will benefit native fish, trout, and migratory bird populations. This is a study and a goal that we can all embrace!

Quagga mussels have become established in Lake Powell and we are now seeing some in the river below the dam. Their arrival in the river happened sooner than I expected. So far, there has not been a major infestation and there is some thought by experts that they will not become very well established in the river due to the current. Be aware and remember to dry waders and boots before using them in any other body of water. Also, all private boats should drain all water from the boat and live-wells as soon as you exit the river. We all need to do our part to limit the transport of this and all invasive species.

Tier 1 Trigger – Early Intervention Through Conservation Actions:

• 1a. If the combined point estimate for adult HBC (adults defined ≥200 mm) in the Colorado River mainstem LCR aggregation; RM 57-65.9) and Little Colorado River (LCR) falls below 9,000 as estimated by the currently accepted HBC population model (e.g., ASMR, multi-state).

-OR-

• 1b. If recruitment of sub-adult HBC (150-199mm) does not equal or exceed estimated adult mortality such that:

1. Sub-adult abundance falls below a three-year running average of 1,250 fish in the spring LCR population estimates, or
2. Sub-adult abundance falls below a three-year running average of 810 fish in the mainstem Juvenile Chub Monitoring reach (JCM annual fall population estimate; RM 63.45-65.2).

Tier 1 Trigger Response:

• Tier 1 conservation actions listed below will be immediately implemented either in the LCR or in the adjacent mainstem. Conservation actions will focus on increasing growth, survival and distribution of HBC in the LCR & LCR mainstem aggregation area.

Tier 2 Trigger - Reduce threat using mechanical removal if conservation actions in Tier 1 are insufficient to arrest a population decline:

Mechanical removal of nonnative aquatic predator will ensue:

• If the point abundance estimate of adult HBC decline to <7,000, as estimated by the currently accepted HBC population model.

Mechanical removal will terminate if:

• Predator index (described below) is depleted to less than 60 RBT/km for at least two years in the JCM reach and immigration rate is low (the long term feasibility of using immigration rates as a metric still needs to be assessed),

-OR-

• Adult HBC population estimates exceed 7,500 and recruitment of sub-adult chub exceed adult mortality for at least two years.

If immigration rate of predators into JCM reach is high, mechanical removal may need to continue. These triggers are intended to be adaptive based on ongoing and future research (e.g., Lees Ferry recruitment and emigration dynamics, effects of trout suppression flows, effects of Paria River turbidity inputs on predator survival and immigration rates, interactions between humpback chub and rainbow trout, other predation studies).