2011 Annual Report - USGS and... · 2019-05-10 · 2011 Annual Report Operations and Maintenance of...

2011 Annual Report

Operations and Maintenance of the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission Los Lunas Silvery Minnow Refugium

Grant Agreement No. 08-FG-40-2803

January 31, 2012

Prepared by

Douglas Tave, Ph.D. and Alison M. Hutson, Ph.D.

New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission Bataan Memorial Building

407 Galisteo Street Room 101

Santa Fe, NM 87501

Los Lunas Silvery Minnow Refugium 1000 Main Street NW

Building H Los Lunas, NM 87031

New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission 2011 Annual Report for Grant Agreement No. 08‐FG‐40‐2803

January 31, 2012 page 2

Period of Investigation This federal grant is funded as an ongoing Middle Rio Grande Endangered Species Collaborative Program project.

NMISC Principal Investigator

Douglas Tave, Refugium Manager Los Lunas Silvery Minnow Refugium New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission (505) 841-5202 [email protected]

Introduction Federal grant 08-FG-40-2803, issued by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is intended to provide financial assistance in the operations and maintenance of the Los Lunas Silvery Minnow Refugium (Refugium), which is owned and operated by the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission (NMISC), a member of the Middle Rio Grande Endangered Species Collaborative Program. The Refugium was designed and built by the NMISC to partially satisfy the Reasonable and Prudent Alternative (RPA) of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 2003 Biological Opinion. The facility is located on the State of New Mexico’s Los Lunas Program Campus. There is an outdoor stream system, an indoor hatchery, an outdoor tank system, a quarantine building, and a storage building. Details about the facility are in our grant submission, and the facility and its operation are described in a peer-reviewed paper: Tave, D., G. Haggerty, C.N. Medley, A.M. Hutson, and K.P. Ferjancic. 2011. Los Lunas silvery

minnow refugium: a conservation hatchery. World Aquaculture 42(2):28-34, 67.

A copy of the paper was sent to Reclamation.

This annual report presents activities that have been performed or occurred in the calendar year 2011. Some of the work has been performed under contracts not directly associated with federal grant 08-FG-40-2803, but are permitted by the USFWS TE permit for the facility.

Refugium personnel The NMISC currently employs three full-time personnel to operate and manage the facility. Dr. Douglas Tave was hired in November 2007 as the Refugium Manager. Dr. Alison Hutson was hired in January 2009 as the Assistant Refugium Manager. Louie Toya was hired full-time in June 2008 as an engineering technician.

mailto:[email protected]



USFWS TE Permit At the beginning of 2011 we operated under TE Permit 169770-3.

We submitted TE Permit amendments to USFWS on February 18 to be able to conduct the following activities:

• Culture 25,000 YOY Rio Grande silvery minnow in 2011. • Conduct a spawning study with Rio Grande silvery minnow that is funded by a contract

from Reclamation to Dr. Hutson. • Conduct survival trials in the new Phase II construction outdoor tanks and the new

quarantine building and, when the reports are approved, be able to use these new facilities to hold /culture Rio Grande silvery minnow in them.

• Conduct a food availability study-gut study with faculty at the University of New Mexico.

• Preserve 2-year-old and 3-year-old fish. • Be able to culture wild-caught Rio Grande silvery minnow eggs and raise the fish to

brood fish.

We received a new TE Permit on April 27, 2011 that enabled us to conduct the project listed above and we currently operate under ESA permit TE169770-4.

We wrote new permit amendments to be able conduct the following activities:

• Culture up to 25,000 YOY Rio Grande silvery minnow in 2012. • Culture up to 40,000 YOY Rio Grande silvery minnow in 2013. • Culture up to 60,000 YOY Rio Grande silvery minnow in 2014. • Conduct a fatty aid proximate analysis profile on fish raised in the outdoor refugium (fish

will have access to natural food organisms), on fish raised in outdoor tanks (fish will have access to both artificial feed and natural food organisms), on fish raised in indoor tank (fish will have access to artificial feed), and on fish from each of the three Middle Rio Grande reaches.

• Conduct a second year of the food organism-gut study of fish raised in outdoor refugium.

NM Department of Game & Fish Permit We received a new NM Department of Game and Fish permit to enable us to conduct USFWS TE permitted activities on November 22, 2011. It expires on December 31 2015.



2011 Fish Culture in the Outdoor Refugium

Introduction

Management during the 2011 fish culture season was similar to that described by Hutson and Tave (2010) for the Phase III yield trial when 10,000 fish were stocked. The differences in management were: 1) number of fish stocked was 23,000; 2) fish were younger and smaller at stocking (4-days-old and 5 mm in 2011 vs. 42 days-old and 21.7 mm in 2010); 3) fertilization was based only on inorganic fertilizer; 4) slightly less fertilizer was used in 2011; 5) a Great Lakes aeration system which powered twelve air stones was installed and used; 6) un-ionized ammonia was monitored three times per times a week rather than seven times per week.

As was the case in 2010, extensive management was used to produce the fish; i.e., production was based on the use of fertilizer to produce a natural food web for the fish. Allowing the fish to forage on natural food organisms and not using artificial feed is a major goal in the production of fish at a conservation fish hatchery.

The outdoor refugium is unique system; as such, its production capabilities are unknown. By steadily increasing the number of fish stocked from 10,000 in 2010 to 60,000 in 2014, the carrying capacity of the system can be determined, which means we will be able to determine the number fish that can be produced annually for augmentation.

Growth rate of the fish was monitored via monthly samples.

The survival and mean harvest weight benchmarks for success were the same as those for the Phase III trial (Hutson and Tave 2010) and are listed in Supplement 1 of the original TE Permit application. For survival, it was: high success = >35%; moderate success = 30-34%; low success = 20-29%. For mean harvest weight, it was: high success = >0.9 g; moderate success = 0.6-0.89 g; low success = 0.4-0.59.

Methods

Stocking--In 2011, we planned on stocking 20,000-25,000 YOY Rio Grande silvery minnow obtained from Dexter National Fish Hatchery and Technology Center. We requested fish that were 15 mm TL.

On June 14, we were told that the fish we would receive on June 20 for stocking would be only 5 mm TL. This meant that a comparison of the 2011 results to those from the 2010 fish culture trial would be impossible, because the fish in the two years would be of different ages. Because the 2011 fish would be 6 weeks younger at harvest than the 2010 fish, it meant that it would be unlikely that the desired mean harvest size of 0.9 g could be achieved. It also meant that the back-up management option of feeding the fish to achieve this goal would also be unsuccessful.



Because the fish were swim-up fry that could barely swim, the pumping rate was set at 984 L/min prior to stocking and Sand Bar #4 was raised to minimize water circulation and thus minimize water velocity. The fish were received and were stocked June 20. Half were stocked in Pond 1 and half were stocked in Pond 2 to try and prevent the fish from entering the stream.

Fertilization--Production was based on liquid 11-37-0 N-P-K fertilizer. A total of 350 mL was used in the study. The system was fertilized twice before stocking and three times after stocking:

Date Amount

June 14 50 mL

June 17 50 mL

July 4 50 mL

August 9 100 mL

September 7 100 mL

Pumping rate—Pumping rate from June 20 (stocking) until October 5 ranged from 984 to 1,514 L/min, except for brief periods when it was 1,515 to 2,555 L/min, which was needed to restore balance. On October 5, an imbalance raised the pumping rate to 5,677 L/min. Pumping rate was gradually lowered between October 5 and October 12; thereafter, it ranged from 1,060 to 1,741 L/min until harvest.

Water management—The outdoor refugium was filled with well water between June 13 and June 19 to normal culture level (stream, ponds and shelves inundated); volume was approximately 605,600 L. During the growing season, 2,462,108 L was added to make up evaporative loss and to exchange water in order to maintain temperature and dissolved oxygen (DO) in their permitted ranges. Water turnover during the growing season was 407%. Well water was used until August 2; dechlorinated municipal water was used thereafter.

Water quality monitoring--Water quality monitoring was done as described by Hutson and Tave (2010) and Hutson et al. (in press), with the following exception: un-ionized ammonia was monitored three times a week rather than daily. Data from the 2010 fish culture trial (Hutson and Tave 2010) showed that un-ionized ammonia did not rise to a concentration that would cause fish health concerns.

Water quality was assessed twice daily at seven sites (Hutson and Tave 2010; Hutson et al. in press). At dawn, dissolved DO, temperature, and pH were taken at all seven sites. At mid-afternoon (ca. 1400) DO, temperature pH, and Secchi disc readings were taken at all seven sites. Afternoon un-ionized ammonia was taken at six of the sites (Sites B-K) on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. The following parameters were measured at six sites (Sites B-K) on Wednesday



afternoon: nitrite, chloride, alkalinity, and turbidity. Hardness was determined at the beginning of the study.

Water quality management of pH--One of the water quality management goals is to prevent pH from exceeding 9.0. As described in Hutson and Tave (2010), agricultural gypsum is added when pH approaches or slightly exceeds 9.0 in the afternoon. In 2011, a total of 490.32 kg of agricultural gypsum was added to control pH:

Date Amount

June 30 36.32 kg

July 1 36.32 kg

July 11 36.32 kg

July 13 54.48 kg

July 19 72.64 kg

July 28 72.64 kg

August 8 72.64 kg

August 31 36.32 kg

September 13 72.64 kg

Water quality management of dissolved oxygen—One of the water quality goals is to keep DO >5 ppm. To help maintain DO in the desired range, a Great Lakes aeration system that operated 12 air stones and an air bubble curtain composed of 8 air stones was used in front of the rotating barriers.

Sampling for growth rate--To assess growth rate, fish were sampled on July 24, August 26, and September 20. Thirty fish were sampled each time, and each fish was measured (TL) to the nearest millimeter and weighed to the nearest 0.01 g.

Harvest—Fish were harvested in October. Six hundred four fish were harvested on October 6, 11, 12, and 18. The system was drained and the remaining fish were harvested October 24-28.

TL and SL were measured to the nearest millimeter and weight was taken to the nearest 0.01 g on 1,125 fish at harvest. Individual lengths and weights were taken on samples of fish every day during harvest; 377 fish were weighed to the nearest 0.01 g, but TL and SL were not taken. The



remaining fish were counted and batch-weighed to the nearest 0.01 g to obtain total biomass harvested and mean weight at harvest.

Results and Discussion

Number harvested—Five thousand five hundred fifty-three fish were harvested; survival was 24.14%. The survival rate of 24.14% meant that this yield trial was successful; take is this study was 75.86%, so we did not exceed the permitted take of 80%. In terms of our pre-stocking level of success, the survival rate of 24.14% means that our success is classified as “low success.”

The decrease in survival rate from 2010 (58.92% [Hutson and Tave 2010; Hutson et al. in press]) was not surprising; in fact, it was expected since fry were stocked, and survival of fry will be lower than if fingerlings are stocked, as was done in 2010. Another reason for the lower survival rate is insect predation. The fry that were stocked were incapable of swimming behavior that would enable them to avoid predaceous aquatic insects until the fish were several weeks old. There were numerous predaceous insects in the outdoor refugium, including many species of dragonfly nymphs, diving beetles, and Dobson fly larvae.

We do not know if fish were lost to disease. We did not see sick or moribund fish. However, the small size of the fish meant that dead fish decomposed quickly.

Growth rate and size at harvest--While the mean harvest weight benchmarks for success were the same as those for the Phase III trial (high success = >0.9 g; moderate success = 0.6-0.89 g; low success = 0.4-0.59 [Hutson and Tave 2010]), these production benchmarks were not realistic, because the fish stocked in 2011 were far smaller than those stocked in 2010 (5 mm vs. 21.7 mm). In 2010, fish averaged 0.1 g at stocking; in 2011, estimated mean stocking weight was only 0.0044 g (Dexter estimated that there were 225 fish/g). The fish used in 2010 were 42 days old at stocking, while those used in 2011 were only 4 days old. The fact that we used younger and smaller fish meant that we would not be able to produce fish as large as those produced in 2010, even if the fish were fed.

Mean size during the first 70 days (Table 1; sample 1 mean length and weight were 21.77 mm and 0.10 g and sample 2 mean length and weight were 33.27 mm and 0.33 g) indicated that the growth rate of the fish in 2011 was similar to that from 2010 (Hutson and Tave 2010; Hutson et al. in press), and was also similar to that from Dexter in 2010 (Hutson and Tave 2010). Lengths and weights of samples 1 and 2 were significantly different (P = 0.05). Even though predicted mean size at harvest would not reach the desired 0.9 g mean weight, feeding them would not allow us to achieve that goal due to the small starting size. Therefore, a decision was made on day 70 of the 2011 yield trial to not feed the fish in 2011. Growth rate slowed after 70 days. The growth curve is shown in Fig. 1. Growth was curvilinear. The equation for growth was: weight = 45.865 + (8.321) ln length; R2 = 0.9025.



Based on the pre-stocking benchmarks for success, the mean harvest weight for the 2011 yield trial missed being successful by 0.04 g. This was not surprising since the fish were only 0.0044 g at the end of June when they were stocked. Additionally, the mean temperatures for September and October were lower in 2011 (Table 2) than in 2010 (Hutson et al. in press), which decreased growth rate.

Yield was 2.486 kg or 22.6 kg/ha. Yield in 2011 was less than that from the 2010 yield trial (Hutson and Tave 2010), because mean harvest size was lower than in 2010 due the small size at stocking.

While the 2011 yield trial was not as successful as the 2010 yield trial, in terms of the desired production benchmarks, we learned the survival and growth rate that can be expected if fry are stocked at the end of June.

Water quality—Monthly means for water quality parameters are shown in Table 2. Water quality during the 2011 growing season was excellent. Water quality is presented in Table 2 as was requested by the Journal of the World Aquaculture Society for the paper we submitted on the Phase III (2010) yield trial; that paper was accepted and is in press (Hutson et al. in press). Secchi disc readings were always to the bottom (A = 55 cm; B = 57 cm; E = 66 cm; F = 65 cm; H = 77 cm; I = 48 cm; K = 58 cm). Hardness was 80 ppm.

References

Hutson, A., and D. Tave. 2010. Phase III Yield Trial of Rio Grande Silvery Minnow in the Outdoor Refugium at the Los Lunas Silvery Minnow Refugium. Report submitted to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, Endangered Species Division. New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission, Los Lunas Silvery Minnow Refugium Los Lunas, NM.

Hutson, A.M., L.A. Toya, and D. Tave. In press. Production of the endangered Rio Grande silvery minnow, Hybognathus amarus, in the conservation rearing facility at the Los Lunas Silvery Minnow Refugium. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society.

Tave, D., G. Haggerty, C.N. Medley, A.M. Hutson, and K.P. Ferjancic. 2011. Los Lunas silvery minnow refugium: a conservation hatchery. World Aquaculture 42(2):28-34, 67.



Table 1. Mean lengths (TL) and weights and standard deviations (SD) of Rio Grande silvery minnow at stocking (6/20/11), at the three monthly samples, and at harvest (10/11) during 2011.

Sampling Time No. TL Mean TL (mm) SD No. Weight

Mean Weight (g) SD

6/20/11 50 4.99D 0.21 50 0.004C 0.00

7/24/11 30 21.77C 3.62 30 0.10B 0.06

8/26/11 30 33.27B 3.44 30 0.33A 0.09

11/20/11 30 32.83B 5.66 30 0.30A 0.13

10/11 1125 36.56A 6.84 1502 0.36A 0.22

Duncan Grouping (Different Letters are Significantly Different P = 0.05)

Table 2. Monthly means and standard deviations (SD) for dissolved oxygen (ppm), temperature (C), pH, un-ionized ammonia (ppm), alkalinity (ppm), nitrite (ppm), turbidity (FTU), and chloride (ppm). Water quality was measured daily at seven sites.

Parameter June July August September October Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Dissolved oxygen am 6.11 0.71 5.74 0.64 5.70 0.62 6.50 0.71 8.08 0.54Dissolved oxygen pm 8.07 0.73 7.74 1.28 8.16 1.19 8.54 1.15 8.98 0.63Temperature am 21.76 0.68 23.46 0.89 23.63 0.57 19.19 1.84 13.43 1.97Temperature pm 27.79 2.61 27.90 1.29 28.05 0.99 23.43 1.69 17.11 1.30pH am 8.41 0.15 8.41 0.18 8.29 0.09 8.33 0.11 8.49 0.11pH pm 8.83 0.14 8.86 0.16 8.82 0.10 8.82 0.15 8.85 0.12Un-ionized ammonia 0.03 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00Alkalinity 186.92 7.51 163.75 30.54 124.44 8.38 135.28 16.13 178.00 24.63Nitrite 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00Turbidity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Chloride 2.18 0.37 2.44 0.85 2.07 0.61 2.96 0.89 2.47 1.03

Fig. 1. Curvilinear regression growth curve from stocking to harvest of Rio Grande silvery minnow raised in the outdoor refugium during 2011. Length is TL.

y = 8.321ln(x) + 45.86R² = 0.902

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

Growth

Length (m

m)

Weight (g)



Food Availability-Gut Study: Resource utilization by Rio Grande silvery minnow at the Los Lunas Silvery Minnow Refugium

Introduction

One of the management goals when raising Rio Grande silvery minnow in the outdoor refugium at the Los Lunas Silvery Minnow Refugium is to culture the fish without the use of artificial feeds (Hutson and Tave 2010; Hutson et al. in press; Tave et al 2011). Production of Rio Grande silvery minnow in the outdoor refugium is based on extensive management; i.e., it is based only on the use of fertilizers to develop a natural food web. It is hoped that this management will produce an environment that is similar to that in the Rio Grande. It is hoped that this type of management will produce fish that have increased survival once they are stocked in the Rio Grande, because they were raised in an environment that is similar to that of the river and because they developed the kind of foraging behavior that they will need in the wild.

This study is designed to assess the food organisms that exist in the outdoor refugium under this management regimen and to determine which food organisms the fish consumed. The results of this study will help us to manage the outdoor refugium more efficiently, especially as we increase stocking rate over the next several years. In addition, the data from this study will help us determine how many fish we can raise using this type of management. These data could also help us understand the life history of the fish in the river.

Three papers have been published on gut contents of the Rio Grande silvery minnow (Cowley et al. 2006; Shirey et al. 2008; Watson et al. 2009). These studies have been from contemporary Rio Grande silvery minnow from hatcheries or from museum specimens. We will be able to compare the results in this study to assess how similar the conditions in the outdoor refugium are to other systems.

This study assessed the food organisms (e.g., diatoms and other algae, zooplankton, and benthic micro- and macroinvertebrates and other organisms) that were present in the outdoor refugium during the 2011 growing season and will correlate the food organisms and their abundance with those consumed by the fish by analyzing the gut contents of Rio Grande silvery minnow. The questions that will be evaluated in this study are:

1. What natural food resources were available for Rio Grande silvery minnow? 2. Were there temporal changes in these food resources over the growing season? 3. What food items were consumed by Rio Grande silvery minnow? 4. Were there temporal changes in diet of the Rio Grande silvery minnow? 5. Does the Rio Grande silvery minnow have selective feeding habits in the outdoor

refugium?



6. How do gut contents of Rio Grande silvery minnow compare to the food resources that are available in the outdoor refugium?

Methods

Water, benthic and pelagic algae, invertebrates, and fish were sampled four times during the 2011 growing season; samples were taken on July 26, August 26, September 20, and October 18.

Water quality measurements--Physical and chemical measurements (i.e., pH, salinity, dissolved oxygen, conductivity) were taken at three locations along the water course, using a multiparameter water quality meter (YSI Model 556 MPS). Water samples were collected in replication (n = 3) from the water column and were analyzed for nitrate and soluble reactive phosphorus, using a Dionex DX-100 Ion Chromatograph. Ammonium was analyzed using a spectrophotometric method.

Food resource sampling from natural substrates--Monthly samples of water and various substrates were obtained to determine the food organisms in the outdoor refugium. Benthic algae and macroinvertebrates were sampled from three substrates in the outdoor refugium to investigate the food resources available from natural substrates.

To investigate the food resources available from natural substrates, algae and invertebrates were collected from three ponds, three reaches of the stream (sections between sand bars), three water column samples, and from three samples of emergent macrophytes. This has resulted in 48 natural substrate samples for algae and invertebrates.

Replicate samples were collected from each habitat and preserved in 10% formalin. Densities of filamentous cyanobacteria, unicellular green algae and diatoms were determined using a Palmer-Maloney counting chamber at 400× magnification (brightfield optics) on a Zeiss Universal research microscope. Taxa were identified to genus and enumerated along one or more transects until 300 live cells/units are recorded. Some cyanobacterial filaments that lack cell differentiation were counted in 10 micrometer lengths (one length = one unit) (Lowe and Laliberte 2006).

Specimens along transects were examined under oil immersion at 1250× magnification, using brightfield optics. Three hundred valves were enumerated from each sample. In samples with extremely low diatom densities, counting ceased after 10 transects. Diatoms were enumerated and identified to species. A database of digital images of Rio Grande diatoms were utilized for identification verification, as well as archived diatom slides accessioned at the Museum of Southwestern Biology, University of New Mexico. These methods are similar to other studies that have examined gut contents of fish and invertebrates for diatoms and other algae (Edlund and Francis 1999; Rosati et al. 2003).



Gut content analysis--Twenty-five Rio Grande silvery minnow were sampled by seining on July 26, August 26, September 20, and October 18 (n = 100 total for project). The fish were immediately euthanized with an overdose of MS-222 to prevent gut evacuation. Fish were then placed in a 10% formalin solution and transported to the University of New Mexico for gut content analysis.

Total length of each fish was measured to the nearest millimeter.

The alimentary canal of each fish was then removed from the esophagus to the anus and preserved in 10% formalin. The gut was washed with distilled water and contents rinsed into a Bogorov counting chamber (Grey et al. 2002). Macroinvertebrates and zooplankton were identified and enumerated in the chamber.

Following invertebrate identification and enumeration, the periphyton were analyzed from the gut samples using the Palmer-Maloney method.

For diatom species-level identification, the gut was boiled in 30% hydrogen peroxide to remove organic material. These samples were rinsed six times with distilled water to remove oxidation by-products. Processed samples were evaporated onto coverslips and mounted to microscope slides with Z-Rax mounting medium, making permanent slides. Analysis and enumeration followed the methods described above.

Data analysis--The benthic samples will be reported as relative abundances and in units/sample area. However, the algal and invertebrate data will be reported as relative abundances because of the difficulty in quantifying sample size. Comparisons between natural substrates and gut content will be calculated using the Ivlev’s index of electivity (Ivlev 1961), which will be used to determine feeding preferences. Additional statistics will be utilized to determine differences among habitats, prey items, and seasonality using t-tests and ANOVAS (Gelwick and Matthews 2006).

After completion of the project, the fish and the gut contents (as permanent prepared microscope slides) will be accessioned to the Museum of Southwestern Biology, University of New Mexico.

Results

Data analysis has not been completed.

Natural substrate samples--All of the samples have been prepared as permanent slides necessary for diatom species analysis. To date, 49 diatom species have been identified from nine samples. The diatom community is composed of the same taxa in each sample type, but these taxa occur in different relative proportions depending on habitat and sampling date. The diatom community is an interesting mix of taxa found in the Rio Grande in general, some diatom taxa with nitrogen-



fixing cyanobacteria that are characteristic of low nitrogen environments like upstream Rio Grande, and taxa that not been recorded from the Rio Grande. Soft algae analyses are in progress.

More than half of the invertebrate samples have been processed. Very low densities of invertebrates occurred in the water column and on macrophytes, particularly on the last sample date. Extremely high densities of ostracods have been found in the run habitat (mean = 1,770 ostracods/paver). The invertebrate community is surprisingly diverse and includes several microcrustacean taxa (Ostracoda, Cladocera, Copepoda) and many insect taxa (e.g. Odonata, Ephemeroptera, Diptera, Hemiptera). Many of the taxa are also found in the Rio Grande but in lower abundances. For example, ostracods were only occasionally found in previous Rio Grande surveys but occurred in extremely high abundances in the outdoor refugium, and some of the damselflies and mayflies found in the outdoor refugium were rarely found in Rio Grande surveys.

Gut content samples--Gut content analyses are in progress.

References

Cowley, D. E., P. D. Shirey, and M. D. Hatch. 2006. Ecology of the Rio Grande silvery minnow (Cyprinidae:Hybognathus amarus) inferred from specimens collected in 1874. Reviews in Fisheries Science 14:111-125.

Edlund, M. B. and D. R. Francis. 1999. Diet and habitat characteristics of Pagastiella ostansa (Diptera: Chironomidae). Journal of Freshwater Ecology 14:293-300.

Gelwick, F. P. and W. J. Matthews. 2006. Trophic relations of stream fish. Pages 611-635 in R. M. Hauer and G. A. Lamberti, editors. Methods in Stream Ecology. Elsevier, New York.

Grey, J., S. J. Thackeray, R. I. Jones, and A. Shine. 2002. Ferox Trout (Salmo trutta) as 'Russian dolls': complementary gut content and stable isotope analyses of the Loch Ness foodweb. Freshwater Biology 47:1235-1243.

Hutson, A., and D. Tave. 2010b. Phase III Yield Trial of Rio Grande Silvery Minnow in the Outdoor Refugium at the Los Lunas Silvery Minnow Refugium. Report submitted to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, Endangered Species Division. New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission, Los Lunas Silvery Minnow Refugium Los Lunas, NM.

Hutson, A.M., L.A. Toya, and D. Tave. In press. Production of the endangered Rio Grande silvery minnow, Hybognathus amarus, in the conservation rearing facility at the Los Lunas Silvery Minnow Refugium. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society.



Ivlev, V. S. 1961. Experimental ecology of the feeding of fishes. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.

Lowe, R. L. and G. D. Laliberte. 2006. Benthic stream algae: distribution and structure. Pages 327-356 in R. M. Hauer and G. A. Lamberti, editors. Methods in Stream Ecology, Second Edition. Elsevier, New York.

Rosati, T. C., J. C. Johansen, and M. M. Coburn. 2003. Cyprinid fishes as samplers of benthic diatom communities in freshwater streams of varying water quality. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 60:117-125.

Shirey, P.D., D.E. Cowley, and R. Sallenhave. 2008. Diatoms from gut contents of museum specimens of an endangered minnow suggest long-term ecological changes in the Rio Grande (USA). Journal of Paleolimnology 40: 263-272.

Watson, J.M., Sykes, C. and T. H. Bonner. 2009. Foods of age-0 Rio Grande silvery minnow (Hybognathus amarus) reared in hatchery ponds. Southwestern Naturalist 54: 475-479.

Tave, D., G. Haggerty, C.N. Medley, A.M. Hutson, and K.P. Ferjancic. 2011. Los Lunas silvery minnow refugium: a conservation hatchery. World Aquaculture 42(2):28-34, 67.



Spawning study The first year of a spawning study of Rio Grande silvery minnow in the outdoor refugium, with two additional option years, was started in 2011. There are two objectives: first, determine if Rio Grande silvery minnow have a spawning habitat preference; second, determine larval rearing grounds and assess survival. 2011 accomplishments for this activity will be described in the annual report that descries activities under Reclamation Contract R09PC40009. We received 700 brood fish from Dexter on December 13. They are in being held in the small tank system in the indoor hatchery. These fish will be used in year two of the spawning study. Display aquarium The original fish were removed from the display aquarium, the aquarium was cleaned, and the aquarium was restocked on June 15 with 8 survivors of the spawning study. The original fish were placed in the indoor hatchery system A tanks with the survivors of the spawning study. One fish died from what appeared to be senescence. There was a spawn in the display aquarium which produced a single surviving offspring. Reference collection Five 4-day old fish, 5 one-month-old fish, 5 two-month-old fish, 5 three months old fish, 5 four-month-old fish, 7 two-year-old, 3 three-year-old fish were preserved. End-of-year fish inventory Three hundred forty-two harvested fish that were too small to tag and 850 brood fish are in a B system tank. Fish health assessment index A Fish Health Assessment Index was conducted by fish health personnel at Dexter on October 12. Thirty fish were used in the Health Assessment Index. A copy of their preliminary report is included with the annual report. Genetic monitoring samples Caudal fin clips from 50 randomly selected fish were sent to Tom Turner at the University of New Mexico so that they could be used in the genetics monitoring program. Fish collected for Museum of Southwestern Biology They requested that we collect and deposit 10 fish from the 2011 yield trial for their reference collection. This was done on October 18.



Augmentation Under USFWS supervision, fish harvested from the outdoor refugium were given a VIE tag at the Refugium on October 28 and November 2. We tagged 3,245 fish. We only tagged fish >40 mm TL; 215 died between tagging and augmentation. USFWS personnel stocked 3,030 fish in the Middle Rio Grande at the Neil Cupp site, which is approximately 4 miles upstream of the 380 bridge near San Antonio on November 14. New sewer line completed The new sewer line was completed in September. This upgrade to the Refugium sewer line was funded by NMISC. Tour by Reclamation Deputy Commissioner Deputy Commissioner David Murillo and Albuquerque office Reclamation personnel Joseph Maestas and Jim Wilber toured the Refugium on July 26. Los Lunas Silvery Minnow Refugium featured in two books Photographs and a description of the Los Lunas Silvery Minnow Refugium were featured in two new books: Carver, R. 2011. A Year or So in the Life of New Mexico: An Uncensored Look at Life in the

Land of Enchantment. Fresco Fine Art Publications, Inc, Albuquerque, NM. Phillips, F.M., G.E. Hall, and M.E. Black. 2011. Reining in the Rio Grande: People, Land, and

Water. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, NM.

Publications A paper submitted for publication in 2010 was published in 2011: Tave, D. G. Haggerty, C.N. Medley, A.M. Hutson, and K.P. Ferjancic. 2011. Los Lunas silvery

minnow refugium: a conservation hatchery. World Aquaculture 42(2):28-34, 67.

A copy was sent to Reclamation. Two papers were submitted for publication in 2011; both were accepted. One is scheduled to be published in 2011; the other is in press and is scheduled for publication in February, 2012: Coleman, R., A.M. Hutson, L.A. Toya, and D. Tave. 2011. Using native plants to provide

natural ecosystem functions in a conservation fish hatchery. Native Plants Journal 12(3):216-225.



Hutson, A.M., L.A. Toya, and D. Tave. In press. Production of the endangered Rio Grande

silvery minnow, Hybognathus amarus, in the conservation rearing facility at the Los Lunas Silvery Minnow Refugium. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society.

Copies of these papers will be sent to Reclamation when we receive reprints. Report Status We are in compliance with reporting requirements for the USFWS permit, NMDGF Permit, and the Reclamation grant. Project state The project is ongoing. Changes affecting program elements None. Problems affecting project None. Financials The project is currently within budget, and reimbursements to the grant are reported separately.

2011 Annual Report - USGS and... · 2019-05-10 · 2011 Annual Report Operations and Maintenance of...

Documents

Transcript of 2011 Annual Report - USGS and... · 2019-05-10 · 2011 Annual Report Operations and Maintenance of...