(DRAFT) - Taxonomy
                                Species MINNOW, LOACH
                                Species Id ESIS252020
                                   Date 14 MAR 96



TAXONOMY

NAME - MINNOW, LOACH OTHER COMMON NAMES - MINNOW, LOACH; DACE and BROWN ELEMENT CODE - CATEGORY - Fish PHYLUM AND SUBPHYLUM - CHORDATA, CLASS AND SUBCLASS - OSTEICHTHYES, ORDER AND SUBORDER - CYPRINIFORMES, FAMILY AND SUBFAMILY - CYPRINIDAE, GENUS AND SUBGENUS - TIAROGA, SPECIES AND SSP - COBITIS, SCIENTIFIC NAME - TIAROGA COBITIS AUTHORITY - TAXONOMY REFERENCES - COMMENTS ON TAXONOMY - Loach Minnow Tiaroga cobitis Girard, 1856 KINGDOM: Animal GROUP: Fish PHYLUM: Chordata CLASS: Osteichthyes ORDER: Cypriniformes FAMILY: Cyprinidae The loach minnow, Tiaroga cobitis, is an elogate, somewhat fusiform minnow that reaches a maximum total length (TL) of about 80 mm (01). The ventral surface is somewhat flattened, the body streamlined, eyes are placed high on the head, and the gas bladder is reduced, attributes apparently relating to its use of benthic, swiftwater microhabitat. The mouth is small and nearly oblique. Scales are somewhat reduced or absent except on the lateral portion of the body. Lateral line scales average about 65, dorsal and anal fin rays are eight and seven, respectively, and pharyngeal teeth are in two rows, 1,4-4,1 (02). Coloration is olive-green dorsally, and blotched with darker pigment (02,03,04). The sides are lighter and the ventral side is white to dirty-white. There is also a distinctive light band on the base of the caudal fin that nearly surrounds the dark basicaudal spot. Breeding males develop an intense red color ventrally and on the lips, females are much less intensely colored. Taxonomy - 1 (DRAFT) - Taxonomy Species MINNOW, LOACH Species Id ESIS252020 Date 14 MAR 96 Breeding coloration and sexual dimorphism in loach minnow have been described (03). Small breeding tubercles develop over the head, body, and pectoral fins of male loach minnow, breeding females have a scattering of tubercles on the head (03). The loach minnow is one of two endemic genera in the Gila River basin (the other is Meda). Its overall appearance is similar to that of fish in the genus Rhinichthys. It is presumed that the loach minnow is derived from the speckled dace, Rhinichthys osculus (05), which seems plausible given the zoogeographic considerations. Other investigators researching the relationships of North American cyprinid genera have suggested that Tiaroga is phylogenetically closer to the longnose dace, R. cataractae, on the basis of shared/derived osteological characters, and that Tiaroga may more logically be placed in the genus Rhinichthys (07). Other historical common names for the loach minnow include brown dace (04). The loach minnow was described from specimens taken in the San Pedro River, Arizona (05,06). Type specimens are apparently extant and housed at the Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia. The fish collections at Arizona State University, University of New Mexico, and the University of Michigan Museum of Zoology have substantial holdings of loach minnow specimens. Taxonomy - 2
                                  (DRAFT) - Status
                                Species MINNOW, LOACH
                                Species Id ESIS252020
                                   Date 14 MAR 96



STATUS

Coded Status T: Federal Threatened Game (Consumptive Recreational) COMMENTS ON STATUS - U.S. STATUSES AND LAWS: The loach minnow (Tiaroga cobitis) has been designated a Threatened species pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (50 CFR 17.11; P.L. 93-205, 87 Stat. 884; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1540), as amended. The species has this status wherever found including the States of Arizona, New Mexico, and in Sonora Mexico. Special rules concerning "take" for this species can be found in 50 CFR 17.44(q). This species is protected by the Lacey Act (P.L. 97-79, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 3371 et seq.) which makes it unlawful to import, export, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase any wild animal (alive or dead including parts, products, eggs, or offspring): (1) in interstate or foreign commerce if taken, possessed, transported or sold in violation of any State law or regulation, or foreign law; or (2) if taken or possessed in violation of any U.S. law, treaty, or regulation or in violation of Indian tribal law. It is also unlawful to possess any wild animal (alive or dead including parts, products, eggs, and offspring) within the U.S. territorial or special maritime jurisdiction (as defined in 18 U.S.C. 7) that is taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any State law or regulation, foreign law, or Indian tribal law. RESPONSIBLE FEDERAL AGENCIES: USFWS -Responsible for the management/recovery, listing, and law enforcement/protection of this species. BIA -Responsible for the law enforcement/protection of this species with applicable State and Federal laws on public lands under their control. Also responsible for management/recovery on Bureau of Indian Affairs lands. BLM -Responsible for the law enforcement/protection of this species with applicable State and Federal laws on public land under their control (43 CFR 4140). Also responsible for management/recovery on Bureau of Land Management lands. Status - 1 (DRAFT) - Status Species MINNOW, LOACH Species Id ESIS252020 Date 14 MAR 96 NPS -Responsible for the law enforcement/protection of this species with applicable State and Federal laws on public lands under their control. Also responsible for conservation (Nat. Park System Organic Act - 16 U.S.C. 1, 2-3)/management/recovery on National Park Service lands. Taking, possessing, or disturbing of Federally listed species is prohibited on NPS lands (36 CFR 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3). USFS -Responsible for the law enforcement/protection of this species with applicable State and Federal laws on public lands under their control. Also responsible for management/recovery on Forest Service lands. The Forest Service is responsible for integrating management, protection, and conservation of Federally listed species into the Forest Planning process (36 CFR 219.19 and 219.20). Management practices that would cause detrimental changes in water temperature or composition, water course blockage, or sediment deposits within 100 feet of the edges of perennial streams, lakes or other bodies of water are prohibited (36 CFR 219.27(e)). All Federal agencies have responsibility to ensure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by that agency is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of Critical Habitat (50 CFR 402), and to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of the species. STATE STATUSES AND LAWS: STATE: Arizona DESIGNATED STATUS: Recognized Threatened, Group 3 ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY: Arizona Game and Fish Department STATE STATUTE: Admin. Rules and Regs. Sec. 12-4-319 and 12-4-210. Arizona Rev. Stat. Sec. 17-306. STATE: New Mexico DESIGNATED STATUS: Endangered, Group II ADMINISTRATIVE STATUS: New Mexico State Game Commission STATE STATUTE: New Mexico Stat. Annotated, Reg. 624, Sec. 17-2-41. INTERNATIONAL STATUSES, TREATIES, AND AGREEMENTS: This species was listed as vulnerable by the IUCN Red Data Book in 1977 and the IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals (1986). ECONOMIC STATUSES: This species may have been used as a bait fish. It has value as a component of New Mexico and Arizona's natural heritage of biotic diversity. Status - 2 (DRAFT) - Status Species MINNOW, LOACH Species Id ESIS252020 Date 14 MAR 96 82/12/30:47 FR 58454/58460 - Notice of Review 85/06/18:50 FR 25380/25387 - Proposed Rule 86/10/28:51 FR 39468/39478 - Final Rule, Threatened Status - 3
     

HABITAT ASSOCIATIONS

HABITAT - AQUATIC INLAND AQUATIC SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTRY TYPES SAF TYPE STAGE CLOSURE shrub--seedling young tree mature tree Old Growth Interior Ponderosa Pine shrub--seedling Interior Ponderosa Pine young tree Interior Ponderosa Pine mature tree Interior Ponderosa Pine Old Growth LAND USE - Mixed Urban or Built-up Land Cropland and Pasture Herbaceous Rangeland Shrub and Brush Rangeland Mixed Rangeland Deciduous Forest Land Evergreen Forest Land Mixed Forest Land Streams and Canals NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY CODES NWI NWICLS NWIMOD NWISPEC Riverine, upper perennial UB2 Riverine, upper perennial UB1 Riverine, upper perennial SB2 Riverine, upper perennial SB1 Riverine, upper perennial RS Riverine, upper perennial RB Riverine, upper perennial FL2 Riverine, upper perennial FL1 Riverine, upper perennial BB2 Riverine, upper perennial BB1 COMMENTS ON HABITAT ASSOCIATIONS - The loach minnow belongs to a suite of small- to moderate- sized fishes that occur in mid-elevation (600-2200 m), cool to warmwater, low gradient streams and rivers (01,02,10,14) in the Gila River basin. These kinds of streams flow through a variety of riparian habitats ranging from coniferous, Ponderosa pine-dominated communities in upstream reaches, to Chihuahuan and Sonoran desertscrub at lower elevations (19). Streamside vegetation includes willow, cottonwood, sycamore, and a variety of shrubs, grasses, and sedges (19). Loach minnows inhabit only perennial lotic habitats of moderate temperature (generally < 32 degrees Celsius max.) and velocity that are well aerated. Little is known regarding the salinity, pH, conductivity, or turbidity tolerances of loach minnows. Currently occupied habitats have moderate levels of the above parameters that permit a wide variety of aquatic life to survive (01,02,10,14,20). Microhabitat parameters of loach minnows have been extensively investigated over geographic and ontogenetic variables (01). Spawning Habitat Associations - 1 sites are under cobble-sized substrate particles located in shallow (< 30 cm), moderate velocity (30 cm/sec) riffle and near-shore run habitat (01,09). Geographic variation of spawning site selection (09) is probably an artifact of habitat availability. Larval loach minnows occupied shallow (mean depth = 10 cm), nearshore areas with low water velocities (mean 8 cm/sec), and were usually over sand or gravel substrate. Juvenile and adult loach minnows occupy distinctly faster microhabitats (mean = 35 and 52 cm/sec, respectively), and there was a positive relationship between fish size and water velocity. Depths occupied by loach minnow remained similar between juveniles and adults (mean=17 cm). These data (01) are not intended to infer that loach minnows are actively using the water column and maintaining in such water velocities. Loach minnows are poor swimmers and sink rapidly because of their small gas bladder. Observations of loach minnows in riffles indicate that the interstitial spaces in the substrate are used as current breaks where fish are subject to little or no current. Also, the large paired fins of the loach minnows are held such that the current pushes the fish to the substrate helping it maintain position. Although some geographic variation of microhabitat use has been observed, this was an artifact of habitat availability (01). Loach minnows in areas of limited habitat variability (e.g., Tularosa River) were found in a subset of water velocity microhabitats that were utilized by loach minnow where a wider range of microhabitats existed (e.g., Gila River in the Cliff-Gila Valley, Forks area). Water depth occupied by these fish varied little between any sites. Seasonal variation in microhabitat use is unknown. Habitat Associations - 2
                                (DRAFT) - Food Habits
                                Species MINNOW, LOACH
                                Species Id ESIS252020
                                   Date 14 MAR 96



FOOD HABITS

TROPHIC LEVEL - CARNIVORE LIFESTAGE FOOD FOOD PART General Bacteria General Algae General Zooplankton General Crustaceans General Arthropods Food Habits - 1
                         (DRAFT) - Environment Associations
                                Species MINNOW, LOACH
                                Species Id ESIS252020
                                   Date 14 MAR 96



ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATIONS

G = General A = Adult LIM = Limiting RA = Resting Adult J = Juvenile FA = Feeding Adult RJ = Resting Juvenile BA = Breeding Adult FJ = Feeding Juvenile P = Pupae L = Larvae E = Egg RL = Resting Larvae FL = Feeding Larvae
LIFESTAGE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSOCIATIONS G Aquatic Features: Pool areas G Aquatic Features: Springs [flowing] Environment Associations - 1
                               (DRAFT) - Life History
                                Species MINNOW, LOACH
                                Species Id ESIS252020
                                   Date 14 MAR 96



LIFE HISTORY

FOOD HABITS: Loach minnows are primarily carnivorous and feed on a variety of aquatic invertebrates (01,02,09,21). Most studies document a rather restricted diet (01,21) with a preponderance of nymphal mayflies (Ephemeroptera) and Diptera larvae in stomachs, and lesser amounts of stoneflies (Plecoptera), caddisflies (Tricoptera). Most food items consumed are small (2-5 mm), but vary widely with size of the fish. Young fish ate predominantly small, immature Diptera (mostly Chironomidae and Simulidae), while adult fish consumed more Ephemeroptera nymphs (01,21). Loach minnows in Aravaipa Creek consumed almost exclusively riffle-dwelling invertebrates (21). Loach minnows ate more Diptera larvae in the winter (01,21) and spring (09), but relied more heavily on mayfly nymphs the rest of the year. The highest number of empty stomachs occurred in the winter, perhaps indicating inactive feeding (01,09). Even though loach minnows have restricted diets, they appear to consume those food items that are most abundant in the stream, and have no trouble switching prey base when a particular item becomes seasonally scarce (21). Thus, it is doubtful that any particular food item is absolutely essential to loach minnow survival. It is important, however, that a large and healthy invertebrate community be maintained, especially in the spring when habitats are inundated with large numbers of larval fish that consume primarily the same kinds of food items (22). Loach minnows in aquaria were difficult to maintain as they would not eat commercially prepared food. HOME RANGE/TERRITORY: Little is known regarding the home range or territoriality in the loach minnow. The possibility exists that male loach minnows are polyganous (01) and they may defend spawning sites from intruders. PERIODICITY: There appears to be some level of periodicity in seasonal feeding habits as loach minnows feed most actively during spring, summer, and fall (01,09). MIGRATION PATTERNS: Little is known about the seasonal or daily movements of loach minnows. They are presumably capable of inhabiting the same riffle throughout life after hatching. Their small size and poor swimming ability would also inhibit long range movements. Loach minnow larvae dissappear from drift samples earlier (seasonally), and at smaller sizes than spikedace, and are less susceptible to downstream transport (14,22). Loach minnows do not exhibit erratic changes in distribution and abundance, perhaps indicating less dispersal potential. COVER/SHELTER REQUIREMENTS: None are specifically known other than those described in the HABITAT ASSOCIATIONS section. Microhabitat parameters of loach minnows have been extensively investigated over geographic and ontogenetic variables (01). Spawning sites are under cobble sized Life History - 1 (DRAFT) - Life History Species MINNOW, LOACH Species Id ESIS252020 Date 14 MAR 96 substrate particles located in shallow (< 30 cm), moderate velocity (30 cm/sec) riffle and near-shore run habitat (01,09). Geographic variation of spawning site selection (09) is probably an artifact of habitat availability. Larval loach minnows occupied shallow (mean depth = 10 cm), nearshore areas with low water velocities (mean 8 cm/sec), and were usually over sand or gravel substrate. Juvenile and adult loach minnows occupy distinctly faster microhabitats (mean = 35 and 52 cm/sec, respectively), and there was a positive relationship between fish size and water velocity. Depths occupied by loach minnow remained similar between juveniles and adults (mean = 17 cm). These data (01) are not intended to infer that loach minnows are actively using the water column and maintaining in such water velocities. Loach minnows are poor swimmers and sink rapidly because of their small gas bladder. Observations of loach minnows in riffles indicates that the interstitial spaces in the substrate are used as current breaks where fish are subject to little or no current. Also, the large paired fins of the loach minnows are held such that the current pushes the fish to the substrate helping it maintain position. Although some geographic variation of microhabitat use has been observed, this was an artifact of habitat availability (01). Loach minnows in areas of limited habitat variability (e.g., Tularosa River) were found in a subset of water velocity microhabitats that were utilized by loach minnow where a wider range of microhabitats existed (e.g., Gila River in the Cliff-Gila Valley, Forks area). Water depth occupied by these fish varied little between any sites. Seasonal variation in microhabitat use is unknown. REPRODUCTIVE SITE REQUIREMENTS: Loach minnows spawn in swift, turbulent, shallow riffles and runs. Spawning occurs in the spring as daytime high water temperatures reached 15 degrees Celsius. Water is generally clear and spring runoff declining when spawning occurs. Low turbidity, clean substrate, and well-aerated water is probably important to successful spawning. Eggs are adhesive and deposited on the underside of cobble sized substrate particles, usually 3-5 X 10-18 cm (two dimensions). Most egg deposition sites are found on smooth, flattened particles; cobbles of igneous origin that weather to produce a pocked, rounded surface are not used. Spawning sites are found at a variety of water depths and velocities, but most are found in water flowing less than 43 cm/sec and less than 20 cm deep (01,09). Eggs observed on stones in water flowing less than 15 cm/sec often exhibited heavy fungal infections (01). REPRODUCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS: Gonadal development in female loach minnow begins in early September as developing ova are evident in Age 0 and Age I fish. Ovaries develop slowly through the winter and accelerate in March coincident with increasing water temperature. Eggs in the ovaries also show the same seasonal pattern of development, but only a fraction of the total number of eggs in the ovary mature at once, presumably because of limited space in the body cavity. Ovaries of reproductively mature loach minnows comprise about 15-30 percent of body mass. Loach minnows spawn in the spring as water temperatures Life History - 2 (DRAFT) - Life History Species MINNOW, LOACH Species Id ESIS252020 Date 14 MAR 96 reach daytime highs of 15 degrees Celsius. Initiation of spawning varies across years from March to June and is probably dependant on water temperature and flow levels. Ripe eggs are dark yellow, 1.3-1.8 mm in diameter, and are laid in clutches of varying size. Clutches of 100-300 similarly-sized eggs develop at the same time (01,09), but examination of spawning sites indicates that as few as four eggs are laid in a single spawning bout. The maximum numbers of eggs found at a single site was 250, the average was 52, but it is not known if eggs at spawning site were from a single or multiple spawn or one or more females (01). Although two age-classes of loach minnows spawn, Age I fish outnumber Age II fish 4:1 and contribute more to total reproductive output (01). Fecundity of mature mode eggs is positively correlated with size and age (01). Females outnumbered males on nearly all sample dates, usually by a margin of greater than 2:1 (01). Duration of spawning season is four to six weeks. Fertilized ova held in aquaria all hatched in less than five days. Actual incubation time is unknown, but 4-7 days is probably a reasonable estimate based on development intervals of other Gila River cyprinids (14,22). PARENTAL CARE: Male loach minnows are often observed darting away from rocks are developing ova, but it is not known if adults protect eggs. No care is given to young. POPULATION BIOLOGY: Little is known about the population biology of loach minnow. It has maintained fairly stable population levels over time at three sites in the Gila River drainage, New Mexico, and constituted from about 2.5 to 15 percent of the community in individual samples. Populations do not exhibit the large fluctuations in distribution or abundance as have been documented for spikedace (14). Predation by native fishes on the loach minnow is limited (01,23) because of non-overlapping uses of habitat. Predation by non-native fishes on loach minnow has been documented (15,16,17). Food supplies are probably not limiting in any currently occupied habitat (11,17). Natural mortlity levels are greatest on newly hatched larvae and remain high until fish are about 25 mm TL. Mortality is also high on Age II post-spawning loach minnows. The maximum age for the loach minnow is about 24 months (01,09). Population fluctuations and abundance levels of loach minnows are probably controlled by the amount and quality of available habitat and the frequency of flooding. SPECIES INTERRELATIONSHIPS: The reduction in distribution and abundance of the loach minnow is thought to be a combination of factors including habitat degradation and interaction with and replacement by non-native fishes (01,08,10,13). Red shiners (Notropis lutrensis) have been especially implicated with the decline of the spikedace, and the loach minnow has probably been affected in a similar manner (02,13). What has not been adequately demonstrated is whether the reductions in the ranges of native fishes, like the loach minnow and spikedace, were caused by prior habitat alterations, or by direct interactions with red shiners. Life History - 3 (DRAFT) - Life History Species MINNOW, LOACH Species Id ESIS252020 Date 14 MAR 96 This pattern of complementary, non-overlapping distribution was observed in the lower Gila River, New Mexico. Examination of historical distribution patterns and tracking the progress of invading red shiners clearly demonstrated that either native fishes never occupied the area or, more likely, that prior habitat alterations (flow reductions and subsequent high water temperatures) precluded native fishes, and that red shiners simply moved into unoccupied habitat (14,22). In areas of suitable habitat in the Gila River in the Cliff-Gila Valley, native fishes including loach minnows, remain common and red shiners very rare (01,14,22). OTHER LIFE HISTORY DESCRIPTORS: Loach minnows hatch at 5-6 mm TL (01,09,22), and grow to 30-39 mm SL by fall. Some variation in growth rates of Age 0 fish was observed between years and was probably due to time of hatching (01). Pre-spawning Age I fish averaged 37 mm and Age II fish were 49 mm SL (01). The largest female loach minnow captured in the Gila River, New Mexico, was 56 mm SL, the largest male captured was 62 mm SL (01). Loach minnows do not live more than 24 months (01). Life History - 4
                           (DRAFT) - Management Practices
                                Species MINNOW, LOACH
                                Species Id ESIS252020
                                   Date 14 MAR 96



MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

RESULT MANAGEMENT PRACTICE Beneficial Controlling/Restricting Off-Road Vehicles Beneficial Developing/maintaining stream structures Beneficial Maintaining/Controlling Water Flow Beneficial Controlling water levels Beneficial Maintaining undisturbed/undeveloped areas Beneficial Land Acquisition Beneficial Water Right Acquisition Beneficial Controlling/Restricting Pesticide Use Beneficial Controlling/Restricting Herbicide Use Beneficial Reforestation Beneficial Restricting Timber Harvest Beneficial Transplanting wild animals Beneficial Controlling/Removing Feral Animals Beneficial Controlling/Removing Domestic Animals Adverse Off Road Vehicles Existing Off Road Vehicles Adverse Climate Alteration Existing Climate Alteration Adverse Inherent Reproductive Characteristics Existing Inherent Reproductive Characteristics Adverse Predation Existing Predation Adverse Underground Mines Existing Underground Mines Adverse Surface Mines Existing Surface Mines Adverse Soil compaction by heavy equipment in mine areas Existing Soil compaction by heavy equipment in mine areas Adverse Siltation Existing Siltation Adverse Water Temperature Alteration Existing Water Temperature Alteration Adverse Water Level Fluctuation Existing Water Level Fluctuation Adverse Groundwater drawdown Existing Groundwater drawdown Adverse Irrigating Existing Irrigating Adverse Reservoirs Existing Reservoirs Adverse Migration barriers Existing Migration barriers Adverse Dredging Existing Dredging Adverse Environmental Contamination/Pollution Existing Environmental Contamination/Pollution Adverse Competition Existing Competition Adverse Exotic/Feral/Introducted Species Management Practices - 1 (DRAFT) - Management Practices Species MINNOW, LOACH Species Id ESIS252020 Date 14 MAR 96 RESULT MANAGEMENT PRACTICE Existing Exotic/Feral/Introducted Species Adverse Erosion Existing Erosion Adverse Grazing Existing Grazing Adverse Existing Adverse Vegetation Composition Changes Existing Vegetation Composition Changes Adverse Forest Alteration Existing Forest Alteration Adverse Harvesting Existing Harvesting COMMENTS ON MANAGEMENT PRACTICES - Reasons for the decline of the formerly widespread loach minnow can be grouped under two general headings. The first, habitat destruction, is related mostly to incompatable land and water use practices. Valleys generally surround loach minnow habitat and these areas were among the first occupied by settlers moving west in the 1800's (08). Water diversion reduced streamflow, water quality, and increased water temperatures. Livestock grazed in the valley bottoms, trampled and removed vegetation, and increased erosion and sedimentation in lotic environments. Large-scale timber removal also increased erosion, and, in combination with overgrazing and climatic changes, resulted in changes in the timing and erosive power of runoff and streamflow. Widespread downcutting of streambeds resulted in deep arroyos where low gradient, vegetated stream valleys used to exist. As the Southwest was further settled, high demand for water for municipal and irrigation purposes resulted in construction of mainstream dams. These dams radically changed the nature of the lotic systems by evening out high flow events, lowering average discharge, and in bottom release dams, lowering water temperature. Ground water pumping further reduced flows to the point of streambed dessication. These modifications greatly reduced available habitat for southwestern fishes, especially the loach minnow. This species is an obligate riffle dweller and lays its eggs under cobble-sized substrate in riffles (01,02,09,10) in a fashion similar to many darters in the genus Etheostoma. Restricted habitats and specialized habits make loach minnows especially susceptible to dewatering and sedimentation because these processes affect riffle habitat first and most adversely. Loach minnows were, however, able to persist beyond the periods of major physical change in a relatively large portion of their former range (02,08,11,14). Importation of non-native species placed a further strain on loach minnow and other southwestern fish populations through competitive and/or predatory interactions. Some of these introduced species, both piscivores and baitfish, were lotic-adapted in their native ranges and spread quickly through depauperate southwestern streams (02,12,13). Predation on loach minnow by channel catfish Management Practices - 2 (DRAFT) - Management Practices Species MINNOW, LOACH Species Id ESIS252020 Date 14 MAR 96 (Ictalurus punctatus) (15,16), and rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri) (17) has been documented. Minckley and Deacon (13) reported that the red shiner (Notropis lutensis) was replacing the spikedace throughout much of its range and surmised that a similar pattern was occurring in the loach minnow. The long-term consequences of the coexistence of red shiners and native species including loach minnow is yet undetermined. Past studies have failed to consider the effects of habitat changes and its effects on native fish distribution and abundance, prior to the invasion of red shiners. Interactions between the loach minnow and red shiner are currently under study by biologists from Arizona State University. Future threats to loach minnow include many of the same factors that precipitated their initial decline. Especially critical to loach minnow survival is the maintenance of streamflow and natural flow regimes including occasional flooding. Flooding removes fine particles from interstitial spaces in riffles and rejuvenates habitat for loach minnow (01,09). Reservoirs provide a reserve pool of predator fishes that disperse into loach minnow habitat. Dams radically alter natural streamflow patterns and construction of these should be avoided. Further transplantation of additional non-native species increases the probability of greater predation pressure and introduction of deleterious diseases. UNAPPROVED PLAN: There is no recovery plan for the loach minnow at the current time. The recovery plan is scheduled for initiation in January of 1988. Recovery of the loach minnow will include insuring its survival in its current range and reestablishing the species in areas of historic occupancy. Perpetuation of the species in the wild depends on a thorough knowledge of its life history and ecology. Extensive studies were conducted by New Mexico Game and Fish personnel and contractors resulting in a detailed status report completed in 1987. That status report made a series of recommendations that are summarized herein. It will be important to develop cooperative agreements among private landowners, state, Federal agencies, and others as necessary to protect and enhance the occupied or potential habitat of the loach minnow in New Mexico and Arizona. The introduction of non-native warmwater fishes should be discontinued to the Gila drainage. Any human activities or development which disturb, modify or destroy occupied or potential loach minnow habitat should be carefully evaluated. Where and when such activities are determined to be detrimental to the loach minnow, they should be halted. Loach minnow studies should continue and be expanded to provide the information necessary for development and implementation of appropriate conservation measures. Of particular need are studies to delineate the effects of human-induced modifications of streams upon native fish communities. Integral to the above are investigations of the impacts of introduced fishes on native fish communities. These studies should be holistic in overall design, yet sufficiently specific to provide baseline data on all components. Management Practices - 3 (DRAFT) - Management Practices Species MINNOW, LOACH Species Id ESIS252020 Date 14 MAR 96 Areas that should be secured for management to ensure the survival of the species include, but are not limited to, the Cliff- Gila Valley, East Fork of the Gila River, the lower Tularosa River, and the San Francisco River in New Mexico. The feasibility of reintroductions into areas of historic range should also be evaluated. Considerations should include habitat suitability and the non-native predator/competitor load in proposed reintroduction sites. First phase of reintroduction effort will be the attempted establishment of the species in suitable habitat. State legislation should be passed that provides the mechanisms necessary to provide for and maintain permanent flows in streams for the benefit of fish and wildlife. Agencies should establish guidelines and an infrastructure to provide advice and assistance to entities (public and private) that propose instream or riparian modifications that might damage existing loach minnow habitat. Loach minnows should be provided the full protection mandated by Federal, New Mexico, and Arizona laws. This includes Section 7 Consultation on Federal projects and lands. Finally, public awareness of the uniqueness of the loach minnow should be increased through the preparation of information pamplets, interpretive programs, and use of broadcast and print media. Management Practices - 4
                                   (DRAFT) - References
                                  Species MINNOW, LOACH
                                  Species Id ESIS252020
                                      Date 14 MAR 96



     

References

***** REFERENCES FOR ALL NARRATIVES EXCEPT N-OCCURRENCE ***** 01 Probst, D.L., K.R. Bestgen, and C.W. Painter. 1987. Distribution, status, biology, and conservation of the loach minnow, Tiaroga cobitis, Girard, in New Mexico. Endang. Species Rept. No. 17. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Albuquerque, NM. 02 Minckley, W.L. 1973. Fishes of Arizona. Ariz. Game and Fish Dept., Phoenix, AZ. 03 Minckley, W.L. 1965. Sexual dimorphism in the loach minnow, Tiaroga cobitis (Cypriniformes). Copeia 1965:380-382. 04 Koster, W.J. 1957. Guide to the fishes of New Mexico. Univ. of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, NM. 05 Minckley, W.L. 1980. Tiaroga cobitis Girard, loach minnow. P. 365 IN, D.S. Lee et al. Atlas of N. Amer. Freshwater Fishes. NC State Mus. of Nat. Hist., Raleigh. 06 Girard, C. 1856. Researches on the cyprinoid fishes inhabiting the United States of America, west of the Mississippi Valley, from specimens in the museum of the Smithsonian Institution. Proceed. of the Acad. of Nat. Sci. of Philadelphia 8:165-213. 07 Coburn, M. 1986. Pers. comm. Biol. Dept., John Carrol Univ., Cleveland, OH. 08 Miller, R.R. 1961. Man and the changing fish fauna of the American Southwest. Papers of the Mich. Acad. of Sci., Arts, and Letters 46:365-404. 09 Britt, K.D. 1982. The reproductive biology and aspects of the life history of Tiaroga cobitis in southwestern New Mexico. MS thesis. NM State Univ., Las Cruces. 56 pp. 10 Minckley, W.L. 1985. Native fishes and natural aquatic habitats in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region II west of the Continental Divide. Rept. to the U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Albuquerque, NM. Dept. of Zool., Ariz. State Univ., Tempe, AZ. Pp. ix + 158. 11 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1986. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; determination of the threatened status for the laoch minnow. Fed. Reg. 51:39468-39478. 12 Hubbs, C.L. 1954. Establishment of a forage fish, the red shiner (Notropis lutrensis), in the lower Colorado River system. Calif. Fish and Game 40:287-294. 13 Minckley, W.L., and J.E. Deacon. 1968. Southwestern fishes and the enigma of "endangered species." Sci. 159:1424-1432. 14 Probst, D.L., K.R. Bestgen, and C.W. Painter. 1986. Distribution, status, biology, and conservation of the spikedace, Meda fulgida, in New Mexico. Endang. Species Rept. No. 15, U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Albuquerque, NM. 15 Montgomery, J.M., Inc. 1985. Wildlife and fishery studies, Upper Gila Water Supply Project. Part 2: Fisheries. Final Rept. prep. for U.S. Bur. of Reclamation, Boulder City, NE. 16 Hendrickson, D.A. 1987. Pers. comm. Ariz. Game and Fish Dept., Phoenix, AZ. 17 Brooks, J.E. 1987. Pers. comm. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Dexter Natl. Fish Hatchery, Dexter, NM. 18 Barrett, P.J., W.G. Kepner, J.E. Burton, and M.D. Jakle. 1985. References - 1 (DRAFT) - References Species MINNOW, LOACH Species Id ESIS252020 Date 14 MAR 96 Draft Verde Rivdr aquatic study. Joint study; U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Ariz. Game and Fish Dept., and U.S. Bur. of Reclamation, May. 19 Brown, D.E. (ed.). 1982. Biotic communities of the American Southwest: United States and Mexico. Desert Plants 4:1-342. 20 Minckley, W.L. 1981. Ecological studies of Aravaipa Creek, central Arizona, relative to past, present, and future uses. Final Rept. for the U.S. Bur. of Land Mgmt. Contract YA-512-CT6-98, Safford District, Safford, AZ. Ariz. State Univ., Tempe. 21 Schreiber, D.C. and W.L. Minckley. 1982. Feeding interrelations of native fishes in a Sonoran Desert stream. Great Basin Nat. 41(1981):409-426. 22 Bestgen, K.R. Unpubl. data. Dept. of Biol., Univ. of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM. 23 Bestgen, K.R. 1985. Distribution, biology, and status of the roundtail chub, Gila robusta, in the Gila River drainage, New Mexico. MS thesis. Colo. State Univ., Fort Collins. 104 pp. ***** REFERENCES FOR N-OCCURRENCE NARRATIVE ONLY ***** 01 Miller, R.R. and H.E. Winn. 1951. Additions to the known fish fauna of Mexico: three species and one subspecies from Sonora. J. of the Wash. Acad. of Sci. 41:83-84. 02 Koster, W.J. 1957. Guide to the fishes of New Mexico. Univ. of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, NM. 03 Minckley, W.L. 1973. Fishes of Arizona. Ariz. Game and Fish Dept., Phoenix, AZ. 04 Minckley, W.L. 1980. Tiaroga cobitis Girard, loach minnow. p. 365 IN, D.S. Lee et al. Atlas of North American Freshwater Fishes. North Carolina State Museum of Natural History, Raleigh, NC. 05 Minckley, W.L. 1985. Native fishes and natural aquatic habitats in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region II west of the Continental Divide. Rept. to the U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Albuquerque, NM. Dept. of Zool., Ariz. State Univ., Tempe, AZ. Pp. ix + 158. 06 Barber, W.E. and W.L. Minckley. 1966. Fishes of Aravaipa Creek, Graham and Pinal counties, Arizona. The Southwestern Naturalist 11:313-324. 07 Minckley, W.L. 1981. Ecological studies of Aravaipa Creek, central Arizona, relative to past, present, and future uses. Final Rept. for the U.S. Bur. of Land Mgmt. Contract YA-512-CT-98, Safford Dist., Safford, AZ. Ariz. State Univ., Tempe, AZ. 08 Probst, D.L., P.C. Marsh, and W.L. Minckley. 1985. Arizona survey for spikedace (Meda fulgida) and loach minnow (Tiaroga cobitis): Fort Apache and San Carlos Indian Reservations and Eagle Creek, May. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Albuquerque, NM. 09 Probst, D.L., K.R. Bestgen, and C.W. Painter. 1987. Distribution, status, biology, and coservation of the loach minnow, Tiarogo cobitis, Girard, in New Mexico. Endangered Species Rept., No. 17. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Albuquerque, NM. 10 Montgomery, J.M. 1985. Wildlife and fishery studies, Upper Gila Water Supply Project. Part 2: Fisheries. Final Rept. Prepared References - 2 (DRAFT) - References Species MINNOW, LOACH Species Id ESIS252020 Date 14 MAR 96 for U.S. Bur. of Reclamation, Boulder City, NE. 11 Brooks, J.E. 1987. Pers. comm. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Dexter Natl. Fish Hatchery, Dexter, NM. 12 Anderson, R.K. and P.R. Turner. 1977. Stream survey of the San Francisco River. Final Rept., Contract No. 516-65-24. NM Dept. of Game and Fish, Santa Fe. 13 Anderson, R.K. 1978. The distribution and aspects of the life history of Meda fulgida in New Mexico. MS Thesis. New Mexico State Univ., Las Cruces. 62 pp. 14 U.S. Forest Service. 1979. Habitat study of roundtail chub (Gila robusta grahami), and loach minnow (Tiaroga cobitis). Gila Natl. For., Silver City, NM. Contract No. RFQ-R3-6-79-10B, P.O. 43-8399- 9-238. 15 Britt, K.D. 1982. The reproductive biology and aspects of the life history of Tiaroga cobitis in southwestern New Mexico. MS thesis. New Mexico State Univ., Las Cruces, NM. 56 pp. 16 Schrieber, D.C. and W.L. Minckley. 1982. Feeding interrelations of native fishes in a Sonoran Desert stream. Great Basin Nat. 41(1981):409-426. 17 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1986. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; determination of the threatened status for the loach minnow. Fed. Reg. 51:39468-39478. 18 Bestgen, K.R. Unpubl. data. Dept. of Biology, Univ. of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM. 19 Minckley, W.L. and R.W. Clarkson. 1979. Fishes. Pp. 510-531, IN: W.L. Minckley and M.R. Sommerfeld. Res. Inv. for the Gila River Complex, Eastern Ariz. Final Rept., Contract YA-512-CT6-216, U.S. Bur. of Land Mgmt., Safford Dist., Arizona. Ariz. St. Univ., Tempe. References - 3