Quiero saber acerca de...

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 1 / Monday, January 4, 2021 / Rules and Regulations species removal see Carp Removal, below.
Modifications of the Fort Field diversion structure on the Provo River, located within critical habitat, were completed in October 2009. This modification made an additional 1.2 mi 1.9 km of spawning habitat available for the June sucker, permitting fish passage farther upstream in the historical range URMCC 2009, pp. 89;
JSRIP 2008, p. 12. During the 2010
spawning season, June suckers were observed in the Provo River upstream of the modified Fort Field Diversion structure UDWR 2011, pp. 78. In cooperation with the JSRIP, the CUWCD
and URMCC are working with other diverters on the Provo River to evaluate further diversion structure removal or modification.
The JSRIP is also implementing a large-scale stream channel and delta restoration project for the lower Provo River and its interface with Utah Lake, called the Provo River Delta Restoration Project PRDRP. This project will restore, enhance, and create habitat conditions in the lower Provo River for spawning, hatching, larval transport, rearing, and recruitment of the June sucker to the adult life stage, thus increasing the species resiliency Olson et al. 2002, p. 15; BIOWEST 2010, p.
3. The PRDRP will reestablish some of the historical delta conditions in the Provo River, thereby increasing habitat complexity and providing appropriate physical and biological conditions necessary for egg hatching, larval development, growth, young-of-year survival, and recruitment of young fish into the adult population. A final environmental impact statement EIS
for the PRDRP was released in April 2015, with a record of decision signed in May 2015. Federal agencies have acquired lands needed for the PRDRP
and developed a detailed design to provide optimal rearing habitat for June sucker PRDRP 2017, entire. Work began spring of 2020, and is expected to be completed in 2024 Stamp 2020, pers. comm..
Shortly after formation of the JSRIP, and based on delisting criteria identified in the 1999 June Sucker Recovery Plan Service 1999, pp. 56, several Utah Lake tributaries were evaluated for the purpose of establishing a second spawning run of June sucker in addition to the Provo River spawning run Stamp et al. 2002, p. 13. Depending on the availability of water in any given year, June suckers will use multiple other tributaries for spawning, including Spanish Fork, American Fork, and Current Creek. However, not all tributaries are available in every year,
VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:06 Dec 31, 2020

Jkt 253001

due to changing lake levels and water availability. Therefore, we determined that an additional, reliably available i.e., available every year spawning run would improve redundancy for the species by providing security in the event that a catastrophic event eliminated the Provo River spawning habitat. Hobble Creek provides the best opportunity of the available spawning tributaries for establishing a second consistent spawning run Stamp et al.
2002, p. 13. Hobble Creek is more frequently available to fish in low water years compared to other tributaries.
However, Hobble Creek would still require habitat enhancements to make it suitable for consistent, annual June sucker spawning runs and allow for the development of quality rearing habitat for young suckers Stamp et al. 2002, p.
13.
In 2008, the lower 0.5 mi 0.8 km of Hobble Creek was relocated and reconstructed on land purchased by the JSRIP to provide June sucker spawning habitat, a more naturally functioning stream channel, and suitable nursery habitat for young suckers. The JSRIP
partnered with the Utah Transit Authority to implement the habitat restoration project on the purchased property DOI 2008, p. 14. The project re-created a functioning delta at the interface between Hobble Creek and Utah Lake, and allowed the reestablishment of a June sucker spawning run. The restoration resulted in more active river processes and includes numerous seasonally inundated off-channel ponds, which serve as larval nursery and rearing habitat to increase larval fish growth and survival DOI 2008, p. 22.
In 2009, June suckers spawned in the restored Hobble Creek, with verified larval production Landom and Crowl 2010, pp. 112, and in 2010, juvenile June suckers from 2009 spawning were found in ponds within the Hobble Creek restoration area Landress 2011, p. 4.
Due to the success of the restoration, additional reaches of Hobble Creek have been selected for habitat enhancements to increase the amount of available spawning habitat. For example, approximately 1 mi 1.6 km upstream of the lower Hobble Creek restoration area, the East Hobble Creek Restoration Project was completed to enhance the stream channel by increasing floodplain width, sinuosity, and floodplain connectivity; modify or remove diversion structures; and provide additional stream flows for Hobble Creek JSRIP 2016b, p. 17. An age-1
June sucker was observed in this area in January 2018, indicating that June
PO 00000

Frm 00007

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

197

suckers are using this area for rearing Fonken 2018, pers. comm..
Improving water quality in Utah Lake is also an important part of enhancing June sucker habitat. In the interest of supporting June sucker recovery through increased water quality, the Utah Division of Water Quality UDWQ
became a member of the JSRIP in 2017
JSRIP 2017. As part of the States commitment to water quality management and improvement in Utah Lake, UDWQ formed a science panel composed of independent experts and representatives of all stakeholder agencies for the express purpose of furthering scientific understanding of the conditions in Utah Lake and creating a comprehensive plan for improvement. This plan will support June sucker recovery by including recommendations for actions and threshold limits of nutrients and other anthropogenic inputs for the benefit of June sucker specifically and the Utah Lake ecosystem as a whole UDWQ
2017, entire.
Carp Removal The third downlisting criterion requires that nonnative species that present a threat to the continued existence of June sucker are reduced or eliminated from Utah Lake. We consider this criterion met, but ongoing. The common carp was identified as the nonnative species having the greatest adverse impact on June sucker habitat and resiliency, due to the large-scale changes in water quality and macrophytic vegetation caused by these fish see Distribution and Habitat, above.
In 2009, a mechanical removal program was instituted to remove common carp from Utah Lake. Between 2009 and 2017, over 13,000 tons 11,750
metric tons of common carp were removed from the lake UDWR 2017c, p.
2. This removal resulted in a decline of the common carp population. Catch-perunit effort of common carp has decreased over the past 4 years, while average weight of individual common carp has increased, thus indicating a trend of reduction in common carp density in Utah Lake Gaeta and Landom 2017, p. 7.
In 2015, after 6 years of common carp removal, native macrophytes were observed in Utah Lake vegetation monitoring studies for the first time Landom 2016, pers. comm.. As of 2017, multiple sites in the lake have native littoral vegetation, including sites with increasing complexity supporting more than four native macrophytic species at one site Dillingham 2018, entire. Sites with more complex
E:FRFM04JAR2.SGM

04JAR2