ISSUES SUBMITTAL FORM

Transcription

1 ISSUES SUBMITTAL FORM Date: 08/14/2018 ISSUE: Should the special fishing regulations that currently exist on the Rio Grande River from the lower boundary of River Hill Campground downstream to the west fence of Masonic Park be extended downstream to the Highway 149 bridge? The upper Rio Grande River has been managed as a quality fishery for several decades, including a section that is designated as Gold Medal Waters. The upper Rio Grande has increasingly become a destination of choice for the quality rainbow and brown trout fishing it has to offer. However, there is a section of river from the west fence of Masonic Park downstream to the Highway 149 bridge that currently has no special regulations. Public access is limited primarily to floating this section, since most of this stretch is privately held land. Standard bag and possession limits and method of take requirements apply in this section. Currently, if an angler puts a boat in the river at Coller SWA and floats to County Road 19, they float through three different regulation sections on the river. This can be confusing to anglers, and difficult for officers to enforce regulations. The primary purpose of this issue paper is to move towards consistency throughout the reaches of the Rio Grande, while taking into account how this resource is currently utilized by the fishing public. Through many years of field contacts and managing recreation along the Rio Grande we have learned that the vast majority (> 90%) of anglers using the river are fishing with flies and lures. The few bait fishermen that we have encountered have been caught fishing in the already restricted sections of the river. Therefore, loss of any bait fishing opportunity due to this change is negligible. STATE LAW REQUIRES CPW TO SOLICIT INPUT FROM STAKEHOLDERS THAT MAY BE AFFECTED POSITIVELY OR NEGATIVELY BY THE PROPOSED RULES. THE FOLLOWING STAKEHOLDERS HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF AND INVITED TO PROVIDE INPUT ON THE REGULATORY CHANGES PROPOSED IN THIS ISSUE PAPER: *IT IS ASSUMED THAT ALL NECESSARTY INTERNAL PARTIES HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED*. [List stakeholder groups and briefly summarize comments received] PRIVATE LAND The two main private land stakeholders that would be affected by the regulation change are Elk Creek Ranch and Masonic Park. There are some small subdivisions along the river that would be affected as well. DWM Jeremy Gallegos visited with the manager from Elk Creek Ranch, and he was in favor of the change, saying that the bait fishermen have the option of fishing their ponds and only sees fly fishing on the river from the homeowners within the ranch. This confirmed what DWM Gallegos had been seeing as well. Masonic Park was also approached, and they were between managers at the time of contact. The vast majority of the anglers that DWM Gallegos has checked while wade fishing the river have all been fly and lure fishing, and more specifically fly fishing. It should be noted that other than easements at Masonic Park and at the HWY 149 bridge, no public access to wade fishing is permitted in this stretch. The majority of the general public that fish these stretches fish via boat. DWM Gallegos and DWM Woodward have floated these stretches several times, and have yet to contact an angler that is bait fishing, either in a boat or wade fishing. The few fishermen that officers have contacted bait fishing on the river have been bait fishing in areas where the use of bait is prohibited, either up river of Masonic Park or down river, in the Gold Medal Waters section. FISHING OUTFITTERS DWM Gallegos has visited with the commercial fishing guide outfits in the South Fork area, including Rio Outfitters, South Fork Anglers, and Wolf Creek Anglers, and they are in support of changing the 1

2 regulation. They all practice catch and release fly fishing with their clients. 1. *Preferred Alternative*: Change WCR 108-B (323)(a) Rio Grande River to extend downstream to the Highway 149 bridge. This would eliminate the use of bait, and make the entire stretch artificial fly and lure only. It would also make the bag and possession limit and maximum size for brown trout, two fish with a maximum length of 12 inches. Rainbows would have to be returned to the water immediately. 2. Status Quo no change Issue Raised by: DWM Jeremy Gallegos (South Fork), DWM Brent Woodward (Creede) Author of the issue paper (if different than person raising the issue): AWM Rick Basagoitia, Aquatic Bio Estevan Vigil PATT DORSEY REQUIRES NEW SPACE IN THE BROCHURE? YES NO ARE ADEQUATE STAFF AND FUNDING RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO IMPLEMENT? YES NO REGION, BRANCH, OR SECTION LEADING IMPLEMENTATION SW REGION 2

3 ISSUES SUBMITTAL FORM Date: 08/14/2018 ISSUE: Should there be a regulation at Upper Seepage Lake in Mineral County, CO limiting bag and possession of trout to 2 trout over 16 inches and fishing by artificial flies and lures only? Upper Seepage Lake is an irrigation reservoir owned by the Rhoads family. In the past, Upper Seepage Lake was known for its ability to grow large trout. There are mounted rainbow trout that local fishermen caught there (30-35 years ago) in the 10 lb. range. For the past 25 years, this fishery has been unavailable due to an inconsistent water supply. CPW has entered into an agreement with the Rhoads family to keep water in Upper Seepage Lake to maintain it as a viable trout fishery. Trout will grow quickly in Upper Seepage Lake and there is potential to manage the lake as a trophy fishery. Logistically, the last.5 miles of access road to Upper Seepage Lake is passable only in a high clearance 4WD vehicle or OHV. Therefore, regular stocking by a hatchery truck is not possible. The proposed regulation would protect the limited amount of stocked trout available for Upper Seepage Lake. Currently, the only limited take regulations within the Creede District are on the Rio Grande River. There are several area lakes open to bait use all year long including Road Canyon Reservoir, Regan Lake, Continental Reservoir, and Rito Hondo Reservoir. This proposed regulation would also not further limit an existing opportunity. Upper Seepage Lake will provide a new and unique angling opportunity for anglers in the area.. [List stakeholder groups and briefly summarize comments received] RESERVOIR OWNER: The Rhoads family has expressed an interest to have Upper Seepage Lake managed as a trophy trout fishery. In the past, Upper Seepage Lake has had a reputation as a lake that contained large trout. The Rhoads family would like the lake to have that reputation again. LOCAL TACKLE SHOPS: DWM Woodward has visited with local tackle shops in the Creede area, including The Ramble House, and they are in support of the regulation. LAKE ANGLERS: During fishing license checks at Upper Seepage Lake, DWM Woodward has talked with many anglers at Upper Seepage Lake. The majority of anglers expressed support of a regulation to manage the lake as a trophy trout fishery. The opportunity to catch large trout was more important to these anglers than the ability to keep 4 trout. 1. *Preferred Alternative*: Limit the manner of take on Upper Seepage Lake to artificial flies and lure only and make the bag and possession limit for trout; 2 trout over 16 inches. 2. Implement only a bag and possession limit for trout; 2 trout over 16 inches. 3. Status Quo no change Issue Raised by: DWM Brent Woodward (Creede) Author of the issue paper (if different than person raising the issue): AWM Rick Basagoitia, Aquatic Bio Estevan Vigil PATT DORSEY REQUIRES NEW SPACE IN THE BROCHURE? YES NO ARE ADEQUATE STAFF AND FUNDING RESOURCES YES NO AVAILABLE TO IMPLEMENT? REGION, BRANCH, OR SECTION LEADING IMPLEMENTATION SW REGION 3

4 ISSUES SUBMITTAL FORM Date: 08/14/2018 ISSUE: Should a catch and release angling regulation for flies and lures only be adopted for Dry Gulch? The greenback cutthroat trout, Colorado s state recognized fish, is listed as a Threatened species under the Endangered Species Act, with management of this sub-species guided by the Greenback Recovery Team (GBRT). The Bear Creek greenback cutthroat trout (referred to hereafter as greenback) was recently discovered (and recognized by the GBRT) as the only lineage of cutthroat trout native to the South Platte Basin. At the time of discovery, the native greenbacks remained extant in only one stream (Bear Creek). Fortunately, in the past five years CPW and GBRT partners have worked intensively to expand the distribution of these fish to other waters. Dry Gulch is one such location that supports one of only three populations of the greenback within the South Platte Basin. Like most greenback reintroduction streams, Dry Gulch is a relatively small stream incapable of supporting a robust population of trout. As a result, harvest of the native trout from Dry Gulch has the potential to limit the success of this reintroduction. Moreover, the greenback is currently at risk of being up-listed to Endangered due to limited distribution and abundance. While harvest of trout from Dry Gulch should be regulated, CPW believes this water should remain open to angling in order to increase awareness regarding the recovery of this species. Allowing anglers to catch and safely handle the native cutthroat in a tangible fashion, is an effective way to build an alliance of support amongst the angling community for greenback recovery efforts. Located in Clear Creek County, west of Georgetown, Dry Gulch (Figure 1.) originates at approximately 12,500 elevation and descends 4 miles southward, joining Clear Creek immediately east of the Eisenhower Tunnel. Dry Gulch travels underneath I-70 through a culvert, roughly 200 upstream of its confluence with Clear Creek. This culvert serves as a velocity barrier that prevents migration of trout from Clear Creek upstream into Dry Gulch. In 2016, CPW biologists treated Dry Gulch from its headwaters downstream to the I-70 culvert with rotenone to eradicate non-native trout from the stream. Following survey work that verified the treatment was successful, 360 Age 1 greenbacks were stocked into Dry Gulch during An additional 800 age 1 greenbacks are scheduled to be stocked during CPW anticipates sexually mature greenbacks will be present in Dry Gulch at some point during 2019, at which time these fish will be capable of reproduction and supporting recreational angling. However, given the sensitive nature of this population and the unknowns regarding natural reproduction, the harvest of greenback cutthroat trout is not advised. In addition, CPW and the GBRT recommends limiting angling methods to flies and lures only to reduce hooking mortality. STATE LAW REQUIRES CPW TO SOLICIT INPUT FROM STAKEHOLDERS THAT MAY BE AFFECTED POSITIVELY OR NEGATIVELY BY THE PROPOSED RULES. THE FOLLOWING STAKEHOLDERS HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF AND INVITED TO PROVIDE INPUT ON THE REGULATORY CHANGES PROPOSED IN THIS ISSUE PAPER: *IT IS ASSUMED THAT ALL NECESSARTY INTERNAL PARTIES HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED*. Internal publics include anglers, trout conservation groups (e.g. TU), Greenback Recovery Team (GBRT) Signatory Agencies (i.e. USFS, USFWS, USNPS, BLM, and CPW). Both the GBRT and TU are strongly supportive of regulations that would prevent harvest. Through recovery planning, other entities that have been engaged include Loveland Ski Area, Clear Creek County Commission, and the town of Silver Plume. The general public have not been engaged through outreach efforts regarding this regulation change at this time 1. Preferred Dry Gulch Clear Creek 4

5 FROM HEADWATERS DOWNSTREAM TO THE CONFLUENCE WITH CLEAR CREEK: 1. Artificial flies and lures only. 2. Trout must be returned to the water immediately. Alternative 2. Dry Gulch Clear Creek FROM HEADWATERS DOWNSTREAM TO THE CONFLUENCE WITH CLEAR CREEK: 1. Fishing is prohibited. 3. Status Quo Statewide General Regulation of 4 trout bag limit and 8 trout possession limit. Issue Raised by: Joe Walter (DWM) and Boyd Wright (Aquatic Biologist) Author of the issue paper (if different than person raising the Boyd Wright (Aquatic Biologist) issue): Mark Leslie, Mark Lamb, Jeff Spohn Matt Nicholl REQUIRES NEW SPACE IN THE BROCHURE? YES NO ARE ADEQUATE STAFF AND FUNDING RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO IMPLEMENT? YES NO REGION, BRANCH, OR SECTION LEADING IMPLEMENTATION Aquatics, NE Region Figure 1. Dry Gulch. 5

6 6

7 Date: 08/14/2018 ISSUE: Should the angling closure on the dam at Chatfield Reservoir during the annual spring walleye spawning operation be extended to March 1? Walleyes are captured in gill nets every spring from approximately March 15 to April 15 at Chatfield Reservoir to collect walleye eggs for CPW warmwater hatcheries. The current fishing regulation regarding the walleye spawn closure at Chatfield Reservoir states Fishing prohibited from dam and within 100 feet of dam or walleye spawning nets March 15-April 15, or until walleye spawning operations are complete. However, due to warmer spring weather patterns experienced in recent years, it has been necessary to start spawning operations prior to March 15 due to earlier fish spawning activity compared to previous years. The proposed regulation change would protect the walleye spawning nets if it is deemed necessary to begin spawning operations prior to March 15. STATE LAW REQUIRES CPW TO SOLICIT INPUT FROM STAKEHOLDERS THAT MAY BE AFFECTED POSITIVELY OR NEGATIVELY BY THE PROPOSED RULES. THE FOLLOWING STAKEHOLDERS HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF AND INVITED TO PROVIDE INPUT ON THE REGULATORY CHANGES PROPOSED IN THIS ISSUE PAPER: *IT IS ASSUMED THAT ALL NECESSARTY INTERNAL PARTIES HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED*. [List stakeholder groups and briefly summarize comments received] External: None Internal: Northheast Regional Staff, Area 5, Chatfield State Park Staff, Northeast Aquatics Staff 1. *Preferred Alternative*: Change the regulation to Fishing prohibited from dam and within 100 feet of dam or walleye spawning nets March 1-April 15, or until walleye spawning operations are complete. 2. Status Quo: Fishing prohibited from dam and within 100 feet of dam or walleye spawning nets March 15-April 15, or until walleye spawning operations are complete. Issue Raised by: Author of the issue paper (if different than person raising the issue): Paul Winkle, Denver Metro Aquatic Biologist Jeff Spohn, Northeast Region Senior Aquatic Biologist Mark Leslie, Matt Nicholl, Scout Roush, Crystal Chick, Justin Olson MATT NICHOLL REQUIRES NEW SPACE IN THE BROCHURE? YES X NO ARE ADEQUATE STAFF AND FUNDING RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO IMPLEMENT? XYES NO REGION, BRANCH, OR SECTION LEADING IMPLEMENTATION NE Aquatic Section 7

8 Date: 08/14/2018 ISSUE: Should the angling closure on the dam at Cherry Creek Reservoir during the annual spring walleye spawning operation be extended to March 1? Walleyes are captured in gill nets every spring from approximately March 15 to April 15 at Cherry Creek Reservoir to collect walleye eggs for CPW warmwater hatcheries. The current fishing regulation regarding the walleye spawn closure at Cherry Creek Reservoir states Fishing prohibited from dam and within 100 feet of dam or walleye spawning nets March 15-April 15, or until walleye spawning operations are complete. However, due to warmer spring weather patterns experienced in recent years, it has been necessary to start spawning operations prior to March 15 due to earlier fish spawning activity compared to previous years. The proposed regulation change would protect the walleye spawning nets if it is deemed necessary to begin spawning operations prior to March 15. STATE LAW REQUIRES CPW TO SOLICIT INPUT FROM STAKEHOLDERS THAT MAY BE AFFECTED POSITIVELY OR NEGATIVELY BY THE PROPOSED RULES. THE FOLLOWING STAKEHOLDERS HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF AND INVITED TO PROVIDE INPUT ON THE REGULATORY CHANGES PROPOSED IN THIS ISSUE PAPER: *IT IS ASSUMED THAT ALL NECESSARTY INTERNAL PARTIES HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED*. [List stakeholder groups and briefly summarize comments received] External: None Internal: Northheast Regional Staff, Area 5, Cherry Creek State Park Staff, Northeast Aquatics Staff 1. *Preferred Alternative*: Change the regulation to Fishing prohibited from dam and within 100 feet of dam or walleye spawning nets March 1-April 15, or until walleye spawning operations are complete. 2. Status Quo: Fishing prohibited from dam and within 100 feet of dam or walleye spawning nets March 15-April 15, or until walleye spawning operations are complete. Issue Raised by: Author of the issue paper (if different than person raising the issue): Paul Winkle, Denver Metro Aquatic Biologist Jeff Spohn, Northeast Region Senior Aquatic Biologist Mark Leslie, Matt Nicholl, Jason Trujillo, Crystal Chick, Justin Olson MATT NICHOLL REQUIRES NEW SPACE IN THE BROCHURE? YES X NO ARE ADEQUATE STAFF AND FUNDING RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO IMPLEMENT? XYES NO REGION, BRANCH, OR SECTION LEADING IMPLEMENTATION NE Aquatic Section 8

9 ISSUES SUBMITTAL FORM Date: 08/14/2018 ISSUE: Should the angling closure of the Pueblo Reservoir dam during the annual spring walleye spawning operations be simplified by removing the daily time constraints? Should the closure be extended to March 1? Should the closure end when spawning operations end? Walleyes are collected every spring from about March 10 to April 15 at Pueblo Reservoir. The current fishing regulation walleye spawn closure at this lake in part states Fishing prohibited from dam and within 100 feet of dam from 4:00 PM to 9:00 AM March 15-April 15. This regulation protects the nets from vandalism and the accidental snagging of the nets by anglers and boaters. The proposed change is intended to simplify a current regulation and provide added employee, volunteer, and public safety during the annual walleye spawning operation. Expanding the fishing closure to 24 hours will give park rangers the ability to write citations when people are caught in the nets or fishing near them. Secondly, it will give spawning crews more leeway on the timing of retrieving and setting the gill nets. Third, this will allow the nets to be set so wind and weather does not impact employee safety and it will reduce the number of lures in the nets, which is a safety hazard for staff and volunteers pulling nets and picking fish. On a number of occasions, boaters have entangled their propellers in our nets which poses a significant risk of sinking during windy days and unnecessary damage to gillnets. Furthermore, due to warmer spring weather experienced in recent years, it has been necessary to start spawning operations before March 15 due to fish spawning activity. Also, biologists do not want to miss the peak of spawning by not collecting fish before March 15 and have a need to collect a growing number of walleye eggs every year to meet stocking demands. Spawning operations at Pueblo Reservoir often finish before April 15, so an additional provision to this regulation would allow this fishing closure to end when the spawn ends. This information would be posted on the Park website and released via social media. This addition would increase angler opportunity by allowing fishing to resume as soon as our netting operations are completed. STATE LAW REQUIRES CPW TO SOLICIT INPUT FROM STAKEHOLDERS THAT MAY BE AFFECTED POSITIVELY OR NEGATIVELY BY THE PROPOSED RULES. THE FOLLOWING STAKEHOLDERS HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF AND INVITED TO PROVIDE INPUT ON THE REGULATORY CHANGES PROPOSED IN THIS ISSUE PAPER: *IT IS ASSUMED THAT ALL NECESSARTY INTERNAL PARTIES HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED*. [List stakeholder groups and briefly summarize comments received] External: Angler roundtables in Pueblo and Colorado Springs on June 19 and June 21 respectively. Comments: Almost all anglers expressed no comments towards this proposed regulation change. One angler noted that he understood the reasoning for this proposed change, but was frustrated by ever tightening restrictions in all waters in Colorado. Internal: Southeast Regional Staff, Area 11, Lake Pueblo State Park Staff, SE Region Aquatic Section. Discussion has already taken place between Aquatic Biologist and Area 11. Aquatics staff has engaged the Park manager at Lake Pueblo State Park for their support. 1. *Preferred Alternative*: Change the regulation to Fishing prohibited from dam, within 100 feet 9

10 of dam and within 100 feet of any walleye spawning nets from March 1 April 15, or until walleye spawning operations are completed. 2. Status Quo: Fishing prohibited from dam and within 100 feet of dam from 4 p.m. 9 a.m. March 15 April 15. Issue Raised by: Author of the issue paper (if different than person raising the issue): Carrie Tucker, Area 11 Aquatic Biologist Josh Nehring, Southeast Region Senior Aquatic Biologist Matt Nicholl, Dan Prenzlow, Monique Mullis, Mike Trujillo, Josh Nehring MATT NICHOLL REQUIRES NEW SPACE IN THE BROCHURE? YES X NO ARE ADEQUATE STAFF AND FUNDING RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO IMPLEMENT? XYES NO REGION, BRANCH, OR SECTION LEADING IMPLEMENTATION SE Aquatic Section 10

11 ISSUES SUBMITTAL FORM Date: 08/14/2018 ISSUE: Should Colorado Parks and Wildlife implement a 10 minimum size and a reduction in the bag and possession limits for crappie at Pueblo Reservoir? Anglers at Pueblo Reservoir regularly harvest their full bag limit of crappie (20 fish) as the fish populations have rebounded in recent years during high water. It has been noted that these anglers also harvest crappie starting at 4-6 inches long, even though they provide very little meat for consumption. The main issue with harvesting crappie less than 10 inches long is that they do not reach maturation until 2-4 years of age. Males mature at approximately 2 years old, while females do not mature until 4 years old; therefore, they cannot spawn until they reach these ages (Wallus and Simon 2008). Aquatic biologists have analyzed data from crappie populations in Colorado s northeastern plains reservoirs. They have found that crappie do not reach age 2 until they are 5.6 inches long on average, and do not reach age 4 until they are 9.3 inches long on average. Therefore, crappie that are being harvested at 5 inches long never get a chance to spawn, and many of the fish that get harvested before they reach 9.3 inches long do not get to spawn either. Without a 10-inch minimum size limit in place, many crappies in there plains reservoirs never get the chance to reproduce, particularly the females. This is an issue in Colorado s reservoirs where CPW biologists are trying to build naturally reproducing crappie fisheries. The matter is further exacerbated by water-level fluctuations. Pueblo Reservoir, as with most waters in Colorado, is drawn down, sometimes to extreme levels, for irrigation and other purposes. Water levels have the potential to be drawn down too far and too quickly during the crappie spawn, eliminating habitat and/or drying out spawned eggs. When this happens, the reservoir would be missing a year class of crappie if it were not for hatchery stockings. Due to this, it becomes even more important to protect crappie less than 10 inches in anticipation of low water years. By protecting these fish up to 10 inches long, the few females who do mature before reaching this size have the potential to reproduce at least once before they are 10 inches and are subject to harvest. Another issue Pueblo Reservoir faces is the heavy angling pressure and increasing popularity of the fishery through promotion on social media and fishing forums. Crappies are a fish species that have the potential to congregate in large numbers in one location. Therefore, once anglers locate a school of crappie, it is very easy for these anglers to catch their limit of crappie (or more) in a short amount of time. Many times the fish will be located in the same spot for several days, so as word gets out, anglers can essentially eliminate all of the crappies in one area of the reservoir. By dropping the bag and possession limits to 10 instead of 20, we can help reduce the amount of fish anglers harvest and hopefully maintain higher numbers in the population for reproduction. SITUATIONAL REASONING: Due to the high water levels that Pueblo Reservoir has enjoyed since 2015, the crappie population has rebounded to higher numbers and quality size. Many anglers have reported regularly catching crappie inches, with some crappie reaching the master angler size of 14 inches; some crappie have been reported up to 17 inches in length. Therefore, anglers would not be restricted to only being able to harvest a small portion of the crappie populations by setting the size limit to a minimum of 10 inches. HATCHERY/PRODUCTION: In 2012, aquatic biologists at CPW made a difficult, but necessary, decision to give up production of smallmouth bass for crappie production, due to decreasing hatchery/pond space, yet increasing angler demands for crappie. An analysis of hatchery requests from CPW s fish stocking program shows that from 2001 (that being the first year all regions were requesting crappie) to 2014 there was a 241% 11

12 increase in crappie requests, from 457,138 fish to 1,103,054 fish. Further analysis shows that those requests were not met in any of the years requested due to lack of space and infrastructure. Thus, hatcheries are already having a difficult time meeting crappie requests, but have fallen just shy of the total requests of fish in As the Wray Hatchery, one of Colorado s three warm water hatcheries continues to lose water each year, space and production capabilities will likely continue to decrease, making it more difficult to meet crappie requests. The Pueblo Hatchery has had issues with diminished pond space as requests for all warm water species have dramatically increased in the past several years. The effort to increase the number of fish through natural reproduction mitigates the need for artificial stocking of a species to provide for a viable recreational fishery, and decreases the demands on the hatcheries. A 10-inch minimum size on crappie has been implemented in six reservoirs throughout Colorado with great success. Implementing a 10-inch minimum and reducing the bag and possession limits on crappie at Pueblo Reservoir to 10 would allow for more natural reproduction and a decreased demand on Colorado s warm water hatcheries. REFERENCES: Wallus, R., and T. P. Simon Reproductive Biology and Early Life History of Fishes in the Ohio River Drainage, Vol 6: Elassomatidae and Centrarchidae. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida. 472 pp. STATE LAW REQUIRES CPW TO SOLICIT INPUT FROM STAKEHOLDERS THAT MAY BE AFFECTED POSITIVELY OR NEGATIVELY BY THE PROPOSED RULES. THE FOLLOWING STAKEHOLDERS HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF AND INVITED TO PROVIDE INPUT ON THE REGULATORY CHANGES PROPOSED IN THIS ISSUE PAPER: *IT IS ASSUMED THAT ALL NECESSARTY INTERNAL PARTIES HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED*. [List stakeholder groups and briefly summarize comments received] Internal: Area 11, Lake Pueblo State Park staff, SE Region Aquatic Section, and SE Regional Staff External: Angler roundtables in Pueblo and Colorado Springs on June 19 and 21 respectively Input: Originally, CPW was proposing only implementing a 10 minimum on crappie in Pueblo Reservoir. Anglers said they would also support CPW reducing the bag and possession limits on crappie to 10 fish in addition to adding a 10 minimum size limit on crappies. 1. *Preferred Alternative*: Minimum size for crappie is 10 inches long. Bag and possession limit for crappie is *Alternative 2*: Minimum size for crappie is 10 inches long. 3. Status Quo: Do not implement a 10 inch minimum size limit for crappie and keep the bag and possession limits at 20 fish. Issue Raised by: Author of the issue paper (if different than person raising the issue): Carrie Tucker, Area 11 Aquatic Biologist Josh Nehring, SE Senior Aquatic Biologist Matt Nicholl, Dan Prenzlow, Monique Mullis, Mike Trujillo, Josh Nehring REQUIRES NEW SPACE IN THE BROCHURE? X YES NO ARE ADEQUATE STAFF AND FUNDING RESOURCES XYES NO AVAILABLE TO IMPLEMENT? REGION, BRANCH, OR SECTION LEADING IMPLEMENTATION SE Aquatic Section 12

13 ISSUES SUBMITTAL FORM Date: 08/14/2018 ISSUE: Should the bag and possession limit be changed for wiper at Pueblo Reservoir? Should a 1 fish greater than 21 regulation be put into place? Pueblo Reservoir supports an amazing diversity of sport fish species for a Colorado reservoir. Anglers can catch three species of bass and catfish, two species of pan fish, walleye, wiper, trout, and a few species of sunfish. It is also one of the busiest reservoirs in Colorado in terms of boating and recreation pressure. There is a delicate balance to maintain healthy numbers of all species of fish for anglers to enjoy. In addition, Pueblo Reservoir is one of three very important walleye brood lakes for the State of Colorado. Anglers like to refer to the hey-day of the 1990 s when wipers were extremely abundant in Pueblo Reservoir, but with this reservoir serving as an important walleye brood source, CPW plans to keep the population below those previous levels. Aquatic biologists believe the reservoir currently has an excellent balance of the various sport fish species mentioned above. Out-of-state production: Currently, Colorado relies on out-of-state trades to obtain wiper fry for stocking into Colorado reservoirs. Mostly, we receive wiper fry from Texas or Oklahoma in May or June. These states have warmer climates than Colorado, so their white bass and striped bass (the parents of the wiper hybrid) spawn in late April or early May, while our striped bass and white bass do not typically spawn until June. In previous years, we have received our wiper fry for stocking in April or May during snowstorms or other inclement weather, or while our water temps are significantly lower than 63 F. This has resulted in poor stocking success due to shock from the extreme temperature swings and weather, even with the biologists best attempts at finding ideal conditions. The lack of stocking success has resulted in missing year classes in the populations of wipers in various Colorado reservoirs. The hatchery section has worked closely with these states to request wiper fry as late in the spring as possible to allow our waters to warm up. Furthermore, the Wray hatchery has started a five-day feeding program for incoming wiper fry. This consists of feeding wiper fry brine shrimp for five days so that the fish have a full belly before being stocked to further increase their chances of survival. The hatchery section and the aquatic biologists can also coordinate stockings around unfavorable weather conditions. However, there are still instances of unsuccessful stockings due to unfavorable water temperatures or weather conditions. In-state production: Aquatic biologists have been working for several years to perfect our in-state wiper production. We currently have a strong population of white bass at John Martin Reservoir and a population of striped bass at the Pawnee power plant in Fort Morgan, CO. However, the pond at the power plant experienced a fish kill in and is currently being rebuilt. Striped bass females are extremely sensitive to stress during their spawn. We cannot hold these fish in pens like we do other species because they will get too stressed and die. There is also an extremely small window in which we can harvest their eggs for fertilization to produce wiper. Striped bass do not reach sexual maturity for six years, so the fish kill has set back our in-state production for another three years. We are completely dependent on out-of-state trades for wipers. Pueblo Reservoir: The aquatic biologist has been working on rebuilding the wiper population in Pueblo Reservoir to acceptable levels with many young (10-13 ) fish found in the 2017 fall sampling. The population is looking very good and anglers have reported catching many quality wipers in the past two years. 13

14 Wiper numbers in Pueblo Reservoir from 1990 to Green bars indicate fish >21, red bars indicate fish between 15 and 20.9, and blue bars indicate fish <15. Wiper numbers in Pueblo Reservoir from 2010 to Green bars indicate fish >20, red bars indicate fish between 15 and 19.9, and blue bars indicate fish <15. Anglers have expressed interest in CPW reducing the bag limit on wiper in Pueblo Reservoir for the past several years. A wiper summit was held in Denver between wiper anglers and aquatic biologists to show the public s support for putting stricter regulations on wipers across the state and to discuss the 14

15 breeding population. During this summit, anglers particularly expressed interest in seeing a reduced bag limit at Pueblo Reservoir more in line with other drainages in the state where the limit is 10 fish. The Arkansas drainage and the South Fork of the Republican drainage are currently the only areas of the state where you can catch and keep 20 wipers. In addition, anglers have expressed a desire to see a protection of quality wipers found in Pueblo Reservoir by only allowing harvest of 1 fish 21 in length. Due to all of these factors: trouble with in-state production, the timing of out-of-state fry availability, missing year classes in the fish populations, and angler sentiments, we believe a reduction in the bag limit of wipers is advisable along with a trophy component of only allowing harvest of 1 fish 21. Anglers from the public wanted the regulation at 20, but in an effort to reduce confusion, we have suggested 21 to keep it the same as walleye. STATE LAW REQUIRES CPW TO SOLICIT INPUT FROM STAKEHOLDERS THAT MAY BE AFFECTED POSITIVELY OR NEGATIVELY BY THE PROPOSED RULES. THE FOLLOWING STAKEHOLDERS HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF AND INVITED TO PROVIDE INPUT ON THE REGULATORY CHANGES PROPOSED IN THIS ISSUE PAPER: *IT IS ASSUMED THAT ALL NECESSARTY INTERNAL PARTIES HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED*. [List stakeholder groups and briefly summarize comments received] Internal: Area 11, Lake Pueblo State Park employees, SE Region Aquatic Section, SE Regional Staff External: Angler roundtables in Pueblo and Colorado Springs on June 19 and June 21 respectively Input: CPW originally proposed dropping the bag and possession limit on wipers to 10 fish with no size restrictions. The public at the angler roundtables expressed that they felt there was no difference between 20 fish and 10 fish and had a desire to see the bag limit dropped to 5 fish. Furthermore, the angling public wanted to protect the quality sized wipers in Pueblo Reservoir by only allowing harvest of one fish larger than *Preferred Alternative*: Bag and possession limit for wiper is 5. Only 1 wiper longer than 21 inches may be taken per day. 2. *Alternative 2*: Bag and possession limit for wiper is *Alternative 3*: Bag and possession limit for wiper is Status Quo: Bag and Possession limit for wiper is 20 fish in the Arkansas and South Fork of Republican River drainages, in aggregate Issue Raised by: Carrie Tucker, Area 11 Aquatic Biologist Josh Nehring, SE Region Senior Aquatic Biologist Author of the issue paper (if different than person raising the issue): Matt Nicholl, Dan Prenzlow, Monique Mullis, Mike Trujillo, Josh Nehring MATT NICHOLL REQUIRES NEW SPACE IN THE BROCHURE? XYES NO ARE ADEQUATE STAFF AND FUNDING RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO IMPLEMENT? XYES NO REGION, BRANCH, OR SECTION LEADING IMPLEMENTATION SE Aquatic Section 15