(DRAFT) - Taxonomy
                         Species TROUT, CUTTHROAT, GREENBACK
                                Species Id ESIS256005
                                   Date 13 MAR 96



TAXONOMY

NAME - TROUT, CUTTHROAT, GREENBACK OTHER COMMON NAMES - TROUT, CUTTHROAT, GREENBACK;TROUT, BLACK-SPOTTED; TROUT, NATIVE; TROUT, REDTHROAT; TROUT, GREENBACK; TROUT, CUTTHROAT; TROUT and MOUNTAIN ELEMENT CODE - CATEGORY - Fish PHYLUM AND SUBPHYLUM - CHORDATA, CLASS AND SUBCLASS - OSTEICHTHYES, ORDER AND SUBORDER - SALMONIFORMES, FAMILY AND SUBFAMILY - SALMONIDAE, GENUS AND SUBGENUS - SALMO, SPECIES AND SSP - CLARKI, STOMIAS SCIENTIFIC NAME - SALMO CLARKI STOMIAS AUTHORITY - TAXONOMY REFERENCES - COMMENTS ON TAXONOMY - Greenback Cutthroat Trout Salmo clarki stomias Cope, 1872 KINGDOM: Animal GROUP: Fish PHYLUM: Chordata CLASS: Osteichthyes ORDER: Salmoniformes FAMILY: Salmonidae The greenback cutthroat trout, Salmo clarki stomias, is a brightly colored subspecies of cutthroat trout that can be characterized, in general, as having the largest spots on the body and more scales in the lateral series (180-230) and above the lateral line (45-55) than any other subspecies of S. clarki (01,02,03). There is, however, broad overlap in taxonomic characters between stomias and its neighboring subspecies, the Colorado River cutthroat, S. c. pleuriticus. No clear-cut separation can be made between these two subspecies, other than S. c. stomias is indigenous to the headwaters of the South Platte and Arkansas River drainages and S. c. pleuriticus is indigenous to the Upper Colorado River basin (01,02,03). The taxonomy of stomias has a confusing history due to the fact that it is not known if the type specimens came from the South Platte drainage. Specimens of cutthroat were collected during an 1856 U.S. Taxonomy - 1 (DRAFT) - Taxonomy Species TROUT, CUTTHROAT, GREENBACK Species Id ESIS256005 Date 13 MAR 96 Army expedition under the command of Lt. F. T. Bryant, which traveled from Fort Riley, Kansas, to Fort Bridger, Wyoming, and returned to Fort Riley. Dr. W. T. Hammond, the surgeon with the expedition collected fish specimens along the route, which traversed parts of the Kansas, North Platte, South Platte, and Green River drainages of Kansas, Nebraska, Colorado, and Wyoming. All of the fish specimens collected on this expedition were simply labeled "Fort Riley, Kansas" and shipped to the Philadelphia Academy of Sciences (02). Many of these specimens were described as new species, with the erroneous type locality of "Fort Riley, Kansas" (02). Two of these specimens, Philadelphia Academy of Sciences 7825 and 7826, were designated as the types of a new species, Salmo stomias Cope 1872 (04), with the type locality given as: "South Platte River, Fort Riley, Kansas". Evidently, Cope later realized that the South Platte River does not enter Kansas and changed the type locality to the "Kansas River, Fort Riley" (05). The original description is not sufficiently detailed to be useful in the diagnosis of subspecies of cutthroat trout. R. R. Miller (06) examined the type specimens of stomias and estimated only about 150 scales in the lateral series (about 40-50 fewer scales than expected from cutthroat trout native to the South Platte drainage), but the specimens were in poor condition and accurate scale counts were not possible. Behnke (02) pointed out that cutthroat trout specimens collected during the 1856 expedition could have come from either the Green River (Colorado River cutthroat) or the South Platte drainage (greenback cutthroat), and that specimens collected by early exploratory expeditions often became mixed in museum collections and the type specimens of stomias may actually have been collected in the Rio Grande drainage (Rio Grande subspecies). The resolution to this problem is found in an 1891 publication by Jordan (07) who acted as first reviser for the taxon stomias by redescribing the taxon. He pointed out that trout do not occur in Kansas and declared stomias to be the native trout of the headwaters of the South Platte and Arkansas River drainages of Colorado. Jordan was also the first person to use the common name greenback trout in literature and the first to relegate stomias to subspecific status -- originally (1891) as Salmo mykiss stomias. The first designation as Salmo clarki stomias was by Jordan and Evermann, 1898 (08). All Subsequent literature has regarded the cutthroat trout indigenous to the South Platte and Arkansas drainages as the greenback cutthroat trout, Salmo clarki stomias Cope 1872. The most up-to-date description of stomias are found in Behnke (01,02,09,10). Common names used to refer to all subspecies of S. clarki are: black-spotted trout, native trout, and redthroat trout, cutthroat trout, and mountain trout. Taxonomy - 2
                                  (DRAFT) - Status
                         Species TROUT, CUTTHROAT, GREENBACK
                                Species Id ESIS256005
                                   Date 13 MAR 96



STATUS

Coded Status T: Federal Threatened Commercial/consumption Game (Consumptive Recreational) Non-consumptive recreational COMMENTS ON STATUS - U.S. STATUSES AND LAWS: The Greenback cutthroat trout (Salmo clarki stomias) has been designated as Threatened 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 subspecies has this status wherever found including the States of Colorado and Wyoming. Special rules concerning "take" for this subspecies can be found in 50 CFR 17.44(f). This subspecies 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 (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. DOD -Responsible for the law enforcement/protection of this species with applicable State and Federal laws on public land under their control. Also responsible for management/recovery on Department of Defense lands. 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 Status - 1 (DRAFT) - Status Species TROUT, CUTTHROAT, GREENBACK Species Id ESIS256005 Date 13 MAR 96 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: Colorado DESIGNATED STATUS: Nongame Fish ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY: Colorado Division of Wildlife STATE STATUTE: 2 CO Code of Regulations 406-8 #1000,10001; CO Revised Status 33-8-104 (protected from take and possession) (CRS - Colorado Revised Statutes). STATE: Wyoming DESIGNATED STATUS: Recognized Threatened ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY: Wyoming Game and Fish Dept. STATE STATUTE: WY Stat. Annot. 23-1-101 INTERNATIONAL STATUSES, TREATIES, AND AGREEMENTS: The greenback cutthroat trout is listed in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals (1986) as Threatened under the name cutthroat trout (Salmo clarki (subspecies)). The greenback cutthroat trout is also listed by the U.S. in the Convention on Nature Protection and Wildlife Preservation in the Western Hemisphere Convention Annex (1970). ECONOMIC STATUSES: The greenback cutthroat trout has value as a recreation source (consumptive and nonconsumptive fishing). 67/03/11:32 FR 04001/ - Pre-Act 1, Listed as Endangered 70/10/13:35 FR 16047/16048 - Pre-Act 7, Listed as Endangered 75/05/16:40 FR 21499/21500 - Notice of Intent with Critical Habitat Status - 2 (DRAFT) - Status Species TROUT, CUTTHROAT, GREENBACK Species Id ESIS256005 Date 13 MAR 96 77/09/26:42 FR 48901/ - Proposed Reclassification Threatened 78/04/18:43 FR 16343/16345 - Final Rule, Reclassified as Threatened 83/12/08:48 FR 55100/55102 - 5 Year Review 85/07/22:50 FR 29900/29901 - 5 Year Review Status - 3
     

HABITAT ASSOCIATIONS

HABITAT - AQUATIC INLAND AQUATIC SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTRY TYPES SAF TYPE STAGE CLOSURE Interior Ponderosa Pine mature tree Interior Ponderosa Pine Old Growth mature tree Old Growth Lodgepole pine mature tree Lodgepole pine Old Growth LAND USE - Herbaceous Rangeland Evergreen Forest Land Mixed Forest Land Streams and Canals Lakes NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY CODES NWI NWICLS NWIMOD NWISPEC Riverine, upper perennial SB1 3RS Riverine, upper perennial RS1 Riverine, upper perennial RB2 Riverine, upper perennial RB1 Riverine, upper perennial OW0 Riverine, upper perennial FL1 Lacustrine, littoral UB3 Lacustrine, littoral UB3 Lacustrine, littoral UB2 Lacustrine, littoral UB1 Lacustrine, littoral RS2 2RS Lacustrine, littoral RB2 Lacustrine, littoral RB1 Lacustrine, littoral OW0 Lacustrine, littoral AB2 Lacustrine, littoral AB1 Lacustrine, limnetic UB3 Lacustrine, limnetic UB2 Lacustrine, limnetic UB1 Lacustrine, limnetic RB2 Lacustrine, limnetic RB1 Lacustrine, limnetic AB1 COMMENTS ON HABITAT ASSOCIATIONS - All of the present habitat where greenback cutthroat trout occur is essentially undisturbed headwater parts of the drainages from 7,000 to 11,000 feet elevation in the Rocky Mountain National Park, on U.S. Forest Service lands (Roosevelt, San Isabel, and Pike National Forest) and in one spring fed pond on Fort Carson (Dept. of Defense, Army). With the exception of the Fort Carson Pond, all habitats are associated with montane conifer forests and meadows. Some streams contain beaver dams and beaver ponds. There is nothing special or Habitat Associations - 1 unique about greenback habitat. Essentially greenback trout can live in any habitat and tolerate any water quality that supports other species of trout. The greenback cannot, however, coexist with other species due to competition and/or hybridization (01,02,09). Cover and shelter requirements are similar to other trout species. Young-of-year and juvenile fish select shallower, more open habitat; larger, older fish select deeper areas with more cover (boulders, log jams, particularly undercut streambanks). Present habitat of most greenback populations are very small streams (5-20 ft. wide) and habitat parameters are "small scale" (01,14,17). Reproductive site requirements are similar to other trout species: suitable gravel substrate (0.25-2.0 inches) with adequate flow to maintain oxygen requirements of incubating eggs is necessary for successful reproduction (01,17). Simply, any "trout habitat" can be greenback habitat if no other species of trout are present. Any impact on any trout habitat such as loss of riparian vegetation, flow depletion, accelerated erosion, etc., would effect a greenback population in the same manner as it would other species of trout. The greenback cutthroat trout also occurs in pond/lake habitats (i.e., Lythe Pond - Fort Carson, and various lakes in Rocky Mountain National Park). Habitat Associations - 2
                                (DRAFT) - Food Habits
                         Species TROUT, CUTTHROAT, GREENBACK
                                Species Id ESIS256005
                                   Date 13 MAR 96



FOOD HABITS

TROPHIC LEVEL - CARNIVORE LIFESTAGE FOOD FOOD PART General Zooplankton General Arthropods General Crustaceans General Worms General Fish General Amphibia General Molluscs Food Habits - 1
                         (DRAFT) - Environment Associations
                         Species TROUT, CUTTHROAT, GREENBACK
                                Species Id ESIS256005
                                   Date 13 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 Inland Wetland: vegetated stream banks G Aquatic Features: Pool areas G Terrestrial Features: Downed logs Environment Associations - 1
                               (DRAFT) - Life History
                         Species TROUT, CUTTHROAT, GREENBACK
                                Species Id ESIS256005
                                   Date 13 MAR 96



LIFE HISTORY

FOOD HABITS: Because of the status of the greenback cutthroat trout, large samples have not been examined to determine food habits. Jordan (07) and Juday (12) provided some data on greenback feeding in Twin Lakes where they predominantly fed on zooplankton. There is no evidence to suggest that greenback trout have any unique feeding preferences, distinguishing from other trout species. It can be assumed that a greenback trout of similar size and existing in similar habitat as other trout species will feed on similar food items -- predominantly aquatic insects in streams and predominantly zooplankton and benthic crustaceans and insects in lentic environments. The largest known greenbacks (to 4 pounds) occur in Lytle Pond, Fort Carson, where they have been found to feed on larval tiger salmanders (Ambystoma tigrinum), and probably on the Arkansas darter (Etheostoma cragini) which abound in the pond (13). The quality and quantity of food is not a serious limiting factor to the success of a greenback population. They will utilize a wide range of organisms (including worms) as an opportunistic feeder as long as no other species of trout is present in their habitat. HOME RANGE/TERRITORY: Home rang and territory of greenback cutthroat trout is similar to other trout species. Typically a dominance hierarchy is established according to size. The size of a territory depends on the area, volume, and complexity of a particular habitat area. Within a pool-riffle habitat sequence in a stream, the dominant greenback selects the most choice micro-habitat, a protected site with good cover and low flow velocity near the main flow of the current for easy access to invertebrate drift (07,17). PERIODICITY: Mainly diurnal with peak activities typically at low intensities (dawn and dusk) similar to other subspecies of cutthroat trout (01,17). MIGRATION PATTERNS: No innate migration patterns exist, only movements during spawning to the nearest site with suitable spawning substrate. If suitable spawning gravel is available near its home range, then the entire life history of most greenback trout is essentially stationary (01,17). COVER/SHELTER REQUIREMENTS: Cover and shelter requirements are similar to other trout species. Young-of-year and juvenile fish select shallower, more open habitat; larger, older fish select deeper areas with more cover (boulders, log jams, particularly undercut streambanks). Present habitat of most greenback populations are very small streams (5-20 ft. wide) and habitat parameters are "small scale" (01,14,17). REPRODUCTIVE SITE REQUIREMENTS: Life History - 1 (DRAFT) - Life History Species TROUT, CUTTHROAT, GREENBACK Species Id ESIS256005 Date 13 MAR 96 Reproductive site requirements are similar to other trout species: suitable gravel substrate (0.25-2.0 inches) with adequate flow to maintain oxygen requirements of incubating eggs is necessary for successful reproduction (01,17). REPRODUCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS: Greenback trout attain sexual maturity at two or three years of age. Spawning in steams occurs annually after first maturation. Maximum life span in small streams is typically four or five years. Greenbacks may live eight to ten years in lakes. The female constructs a redd in gravel, several males, typically are in attendance with dominant male constantly driving away subdominant males. The dominant male fertilizes most of the eggs during the spawning act but smaller, subdominant males may dart in, shedding sperm, and fertilize some eggs. The female may construct and spawn in two or three redds over several days. Spawning occurs in spring-early summer with rising temperatures. Spawning typically peaks when daily water temperature exceeds 45 deg. F. Average fecundity of females is from 700 to 1,000 eggs per pound of body weight (01,17). PARENTAL CARE: After the eggs are spawned and fertilized the female covers the eggs with gravel. After this, no additional parental care is given to eggs or offspring. POPULATION BIOLOGY: The present populations of greenback trout are not faced with serious threats from disease, predation, or competition, unless non-native trout gain access to their habitats. The introduced populations attain carrying capacity within a few years of the original stocking from natural reproduction. Based on electroshocking data, greenback trout populations in 10 streams totalling 61 km (38 miles) in length exhibit standing crops from 9-95 kg/ha (8-85 pounds per acre) (15). SPECIES INTERRELATIONSHIPS: Greenback cutthroat trout cannot be expected to coexist indefinitely with any other species of trout. This statement is based on empirical evidence of the greenbacks rapid extinction throughout its native range in the few sites where it was isolated from contact with non-native trouts and from the observed rapid decline of greenback trout established in Black Hollow Creek after brook trout appeared (due to an incomplete kill or from an illegal introduction) (01). Brook trout also appeared in 1976, three years after an eradication program in Hidden Valley Creek, Rocky Mountain Natonal Park, but an annual active removal program and special fishing regulations (keep brook trout, release greenbacks) has maintained a viable greenback poulation in Hidden Valley Creek and in its beaver ponds. Despite the differential elimination of brook trout, they are dominant in numbers over the greenbacks in the beaver ponds (03). OTHER LIFE HISTORY DESCRIPTORS: There is no life history parameter that is unique to greenback Life History - 2 (DRAFT) - Life History Species TROUT, CUTTHROAT, GREENBACK Species Id ESIS256005 Date 13 MAR 96 trout, distinguishing it from other subspecies of cuttroat trout or from other species of trout, that would be of significance in their preservation and restoration -- only that they cannot be expected to coexist with any other form of trout. Life History - 3
                           (DRAFT) - Management Practices
                         Species TROUT, CUTTHROAT, GREENBACK
                                Species Id ESIS256005
                                   Date 13 MAR 96



MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

RESULT MANAGEMENT PRACTICE Beneficial Restricting/regulating human disturbance of populations Beneficial Developing/maintaining stream structures Beneficial Maintaining/Controlling Water Flow Beneficial Developing/maintaining/protecting wetlands Beneficial Controlling/Restricting Mining Beneficial Controlling/Restricting Road Maintainance Actions Beneficial Controlling/Restricting Agricultural Practice Beneficial Reforestation Beneficial Restricting Timber Harvest Beneficial Stocking captive-reared wild-strain animals Beneficial Transplanting wild animals Beneficial Controlling/Restricting Noncommercial Harvest Beneficial Controlling/Removing Exotic Vertebrates Beneficial Controlling/Removing Domestic Animals Adverse Hybridization Existing Hybridization Adverse Surface Mines Existing Surface Mines Adverse Rural Residential/Industrial Areas Existing Rural Residential/Industrial Areas Adverse Recreational development Existing Recreational development Adverse Highway/Railroads Existing Highway/Railroads Adverse Siltation Existing Siltation Adverse Water Temperature Alteration Existing Water Temperature Alteration Adverse Irrigating Existing Irrigating Adverse Environmental Contamination/Pollution Existing Environmental Contamination/Pollution Adverse Competition Existing Competition Adverse Exotic/Feral/Introducted Species 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 Management Practices - 1 (DRAFT) - Management Practices Species TROUT, CUTTHROAT, GREENBACK Species Id ESIS256005 Date 13 MAR 96 COMMENTS ON MANAGEMENT PRACTICES - In the late nineteenth century the greenback cutthroat trout was greatly reduced in abundance by toxic mine pollution, and irrigation diversions (for agriculture). Problems that have added to the decline of the trout which are linked to the irrigation projects and agricultural practices directly are: water diversion and drawdown, water temperature alteration, siltation, and erosion (linked to grazing and general agricultural practices). Timbering (i.e., forest clearing, alteration, and resulatnt vegetation changes); hydroelectric power diversions; man-made pollution caused by effluents from industrial, human sewage, and agricultural practices; and physical damage to watersheds caused by such construction activities as highways, ski areas, and housing developments (01,02,03,16). Also non-native trouts (brook, rainbow, brown and other subspecies of cutthroat trout) were widely introduced throughout the range of the greenback. Brook trout replaced the greenback in small tributary streams and brown trout replaced greenback in the large rivers. Rainbow trout hybridized with greenback trout, and since the hybrids are fertile, population purity was irretrievably lost (01,02,03). The decline of the greenback was so rapid that in 1937, Greene (11) declared them extinct. Behnke establised a basis for the diagnosis of pure greenback trout from examination of museum specimens (01,02,03). Intensive collections during the past 15 years have discovered four pure populations of S. c. stomias (10). All of these populations occur in tiny headwater streams above barriers to upstream migration that protect the greenback populations from non-native trouts. It has been obvious that greenback cutthroat trout cannot coexist long with any other species of trout. Restoration efforts have selected small sites above barriers where the non-native trout are are eradicated and greenbacks are then stocked. The success of restoration projects depend on obtaining a complete kill of non-native trout and prevention of their reintroduction. Brook trout, Salvelinus frontinalis, have reappeared in several resoration streams two or three years after chemical treatment, either due to lack of a complete kill or to stocking by uninformed persons. APPROVED PLAN: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1983. Greenback Cutthroat trout Recovery Plan, Revision. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Denver, CO. 32 pp. The objective of the revised greenback cutthroat trout recovery plan is the removal of this subspecies from its current status of threatened. This species will be considered recovered when 20 stable greenback cutthroat trout populations are documented within its native range. This implies the expansion of the range of pure greenback cutthroat trout to a level where isolated disruptions in population or habitat, and controlled angler harvest of greenbacks will not result in the subspecies likely becoming in danger of extinction throughout a significant portion of its historic range. To attain this goal the following tasks are necessary: Management Practices - 2 (DRAFT) - Management Practices Species TROUT, CUTTHROAT, GREENBACK Species Id ESIS256005 Date 13 MAR 96 1. Maintain and enhance historic and stable greenback trout populations and their habitat. A. Conduct population and habitat monitoring. B. Habitat improvement (physical manipulation of habitat). C. Maintain stream barriers to prevent non-native salmonid species from entering the habitat. D. Prevent introduction of non-native species. E. Promote sound land and water use guidelines (i.e., control domestic grazing, preserve riparian habitat, control silviculture practices, control mining, instream flow maintenance, control and restrict water diversions and reservoirs, control and limit road construction and maintenance, and limit human activity and access). F. Enforce regulations. 2. Establish or document the existence of 20 stable populations of pure greenback cutthroat trout within the species historic range. A. Conduct surveys for historic populations. B. Prepare and maintain list of potential habitat. a. Identify suitable habitat. b. Survey potential habitat. c. Promote interagency cooperation. C. Prepare habitat for reintroduction. a. Habitat manipulation (which may involve channel and wetland modification). b. Construct or improve barriers. c. Remove all non-native salmonids. D. Introduce pure greenback cutthroat trout. E. Monitor and document the success of introduction. 3. Establish hatchery and wild populations of pure greenback cutthroat trout for broodstock. A. Establish one lake/stream environment within the South Platte River drainage. B. Establish one lake/stream environment within the Arkansas River drainage. C. Establish a hatchery propagation program. D. Investigate feasibility of establishing Colorado hatchery propagation of greenback cutthroat trout. 4. Document response to angling pressure. A. Assess effects of mixed species fishing and special regulations. B. Assess effects of mono-species fishing and special regulations. C. Study other, or alternative, sites. 5. Conduct information and education program. 6. Prepare a long-term management plan and cooperative agreement for the management of greenback cutthroat trout. Management Practices - 3
                                   (DRAFT) - References
                           Species TROUT, CUTTHROAT, GREENBACK
                                  Species Id ESIS256005
                                      Date 13 MAR 96



     

References

***** REFERENCES FOR ALL NARRATIVES EXCEPT N-OCCURRENCE ***** 01 Behnke, R.J., and M. Zarn. 1976. Biology and management of threatened and endangered western trouts. U.S. Forest Serv. Gen. Tech. Rept. RM-28 45 pp. 02 Behnke, R.J. 1976. Summary of information on the status of the greenback cutthroat trout, Salmo clarki stomias. Prepared for: U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Salt Lake City, UT. 30 pp. 03 Behnke, R.J. 1985. Greenback cutthroat trout. Trout Magazine 26(1):42-46. 04 Cope, E.D. 1872. Report on recent reptiles and fishes obtained by naturalists of the expedition. U.S. Geol. Surv. Wyoming and portions of contiguous territories (Hayden's Survey):432-442. 05 Cope, E.D., and H.C. Yarrow. 1875. Report on collections of fishes made in portions of Nevada, Utah, California, New Mexico, and Arizona durring the years 1871, 1872, 1873 and 1874. Rept. Geogr., Geol. Explor., Surv., W. 100th Meridian (Wheeler Survey) 5:635-703. 06 Miller, R.R. 1985. Pers. comm. Univ. of Michigan. 07 Jordan, D.S. 1891. Report on explorations in Colorado and Utah during the summer of 1889 with an account of the fishes found in each of the river basins examined. U.S. Fish Comm. Bull. 9:1-40. 08 Jordan, D.S., and B.W. Evermann. 1898. The fishes of North and Middle American. U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 47, pt. 3:21832-3136. 09 Behnke, R.J. 1979. Monograph of the native trouts of the genus Salmo of western North America. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Denver, CO 215 pp. 10 Behnke, R.J. 1985. Greenback cutthroat trout from Hunters Creek, Rocky Mountain National Park. Prepared for: U.S. Fish & Wildl. Serv., Golden, CO. 4 pp. 11 Green, W.S. 1937. Colorado trout. Colo. Mus. Nat. Hist. Popular Ser. 2:48 pp. 12 Juday, C. 1906. A study of Twin Lakes, Colorado, with especial consideration of the foods of the trouts. U.S. Fish Comm. Bull. 26:147-178. 13 Rosenlund, Bruce. 1985. Pers. comm. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Golden, CO. 14 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1983. Greenback Cutthroat Trout Recovery Plan Revision. U.S. Fish & Wildl. Serv., Denver, CO 32 pp. 15 Anonymous. 1985. Greenback trout recovery program. Prepared for: Director, Colorado Div. of Wildl., Golden, CO 5 pp. 16 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1977. Greenback Cutthroat Trout Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Denver, CO. 20 pp. 17 Behnke, R.J. 1985. Pers. observ. Fort Collins, CO 80523. ***** REFERENCES FOR N-OCCURRENCE NARRATIVE ONLY ***** 01 Behnke, R.J., and M. Zarn. 1976. Biology and management of References - 1 (DRAFT) - References Species TROUT, CUTTHROAT, GREENBACK Species Id ESIS256005 Date 13 MAR 96 threatened and endangered western trouts. U.S. Forest Serv. Gen. Tech. Rept. RM-28 45 pp. 02 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1983. Greenback Cutthroat Trout Recovery Plan Revision. U.S. Fish & Wildl. Serv., Denver, CO 32 pp. 03 Davis, J.A., and S.R. Culver. 1984. Greenback cutthroat trout recovery project, 1984 progress report. CO Div. of Wildl. Golden, CO. 39 pp. 04 Behnke, R.J. 1985. Greenback cutthroat trout from Hunters Creek, Rocky Mountain National Park. Prepared for: U.S. Fish & Wildl. Serv., Golden, CO. 4 pp. 05 Rosenlund, Bruce. 1985. Pers. comm. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv., Golden, CO. References - 2