07/01/2022

06/30/2023

2023

The recovery plan (USFWS 1999) identified recovery criteria for the downlisting of the species to threatened status and interim criteria for the eventual delisting of the June sucker. Under the recovery plan, downlisting required the development of a permanent, self-sustaining refuge population to prevent extinction of the species, the protection of flows in the Provo River, habitat enhancements in the Provo River and Utah Lake, the reduction or elimination of nonnative species that present a significant threat to June sucker existence, and increasing numbers of spawning adults in the Provo River whose spawning activity results in significant recruitment over ten years. Downlisting and reclassifying the June sucker from endangered to threatened became effective on February 3rd, 2021. This action was based on "a thorough review of the best scientific and commercial data available, which indicates that the June sucker no longer meets the definition of an endangered species under the Act." (50 CFR part 17). Under the recovery plan, delisting or removing the species from protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires achieving criteria in addition to those identified for downlisting the species. The delisting criteria focus on the establishment of a refuge population within the Utah Lake basin, the creation of an additional self-sustaining spawning run in a Utah Lake tributary in addition to the Provo River, and the removal of any other threats to the continued existence of June sucker. These were considered to be interim criteria at the time the recovery plan was finalized with the intention that new criteria would be developed as additional information was learned about the June sucker, including the determination of appropriate population objectives to achieve a self-sustaining population. Current Program research should identify the population levels needed to achieve a self-sustaining population. Population Information June sucker were historically abundant, numbering in the millions, but effects attributed to the settlement and subsequent development of Utah Valley reduced the adult population to fewer than 1,000 individuals at the time of listing in 1986. The UDWR began efforts to establish a hatchery population in the late 1980s, with the intention that this captive population could eventually be part of a captive breeding and augmentation program to supplement the wild population of June sucker in Utah Lake. This augmentation program received considerable support from the Program and the stocking of suckers has resulted in significant gains in the sucker population in Utah Lake. A variety of methods have been employed to monitor the June sucker population in Utah Lake since the time the species was listed. The majority of these methods are geared toward the capture of adult fish, and thus sub-adult size classes (<300mm) are sampled less frequently than adult size classes. Size diversity across the general Utah Lake sucker population is reflective of a lack of natural reproduction and recruitment as well as size bias in methodologies. Despite this sampling bias, the June sucker population in Utah Lake appears to be dominated by adult fish, consisting primarily of those fish stocked into Utah Lake through augmentation efforts (Watson and Landress 2011). Spawning Adults The large size of Utah Lake and the small population of June sucker makes locating and sampling suckers within the lake difficult, thereby presenting problems for tracking the status of the entire population. However, the movement of adult fish upstream for spawning purposes has provided an opportunity to compare the number of spawning adults in tributaries across multiple years. Various methods were used to monitor the number of spawning adults over the past several years. Efforts in the late 1990s and early 2000s relied on locating the fish at night with the use of spotlights and handheld dip nets. In addition, streamside counts, and snorkeling were used to enumerate spawning fish. In 2007 and 2008, advances in technology allowed the use of stationary passive integrated transponder (PIT) tag arrays to record the number of PIT tagged fish that passed over specific areas of spawning tributaries. Water conditions have impacted some monitoring efforts within spawning tributaries. During periods of high flow, crews may not be able to access the tributaries or visibility of suckers may be reduced. Both factors have resulted in times where monitoring of specific tributaries has not been possible. High flows can also impact the use of stationary PIT tag arrays by decreasing the portion of the water column that is within the reading distance of the array or by dislodging portions of the array and disrupting the collection of data. Variations in monitoring methods and difficulties presented by water conditions have resulted in anomalies within spawning adult datasets and makes the analysis of actual population trends difficult. Biologists responsible for monitoring the number of adult spawning fish have gone to great effort to overcome these challenges and report the best numbers possible given the respective challenges. The best available estimates suggest that the current June sucker spawning population is between 30,695 and 49,738 with the mean of 40,216 individuals and is showing an increasing trend (Figure 1) (USU 2022). When the recovery plan was finalized, the Provo River was the only known spawning tributary for the species. As the number of suckers in the lake increased through augmentation efforts, observations of spawning suckers in other Utah Lake tributaries increased (Figure 1). In 2008, the lower reach of Hobble Creek was restored to provide access to spawning June sucker and enhance larval rearing habitat. June sucker were observed spawning in Hobble Creek in 2009 (Watson and Landress 2011). Prior to this habitat restoration, water was acquired by the Department of the Interior (Interior) to provide in-stream flows to support the June sucker within Hobble Creek. Subsequently, the number of spawning suckers utilizing Hobble Creek has been monitored by the UDWR and continues to display a stable trend. Spawning also occurs, at least in some years, in American Fork Creek, Spring Creek (near Lehi), Battle Creek, and the lower reaches of the Spanish Fork River (Hines 2011, Watson and Landress 2011). While increasing numbers of spawning adults have been documented in other tributaries, the Provo River continues to support the large majority of June sucker spawning activity. The number of spawning suckers observed in the Provo River is consistently greater than the combined total for all other tributaries to Utah Lake (see Figure 2 and Table 1).Young-of-Year As mentioned above, the Utah Lake June sucker population consists primarily of adult fish that were produced through a captive breeding program and released into Utah Lake. In recent years, efforts have been made to utilize gear types (i.e., beach seines, small trap nets, minnow traps) more conducive to capturing smaller fish (<300mm), however there have been relatively few captures of small June sucker (UDWR 2015). The lack of small suckers (<300mm) indicates limited natural recruitment of June sucker in Utah Lake. This lack of recruitment was identified as a threat in the 1999 recovery plan. Some recruitment may have occurred in the early 1980s (Scoppettone unpub. data 1992; Belk 1998). All fish stocked into Utah Lake are implanted with a PIT tag or a Coded Wire Tag which identifies origin, yet 20% of adult June suckers encountered in Utah Lake are unmarked, meaning they either recruited naturally in Utah Lake or simply shed their identifying tag. To address this data gap, biologists began taking fin ray segments from unmarked June suckers in 2017 and matched chemical signatures in fin rays to water samples from Utah Lake, thus determining natal origin for every sampled fish. This study showed 12.9% of unknown origin of June suckers were classified as originating from Utah Lake thus suggesting June sucker recruitment is occurring even with the lack of capturing small June suckers (Barkalow and Urioste 2022). The lack of suitable rearing habitat near tributary mouths and within the lake, as well as predation and competition from the large populations of nonnative fish are thought to be the major factors contributing to the lack of substantial natural recruitment to the adult population. The Utah Lake June sucker population has made continuous progress since the recovery plan was finalized in 1999. At that time, the population was estimated to be about 300 individuals and the threat of extinction was the paramount concern. Due to the efforts of an aggressive captive rearing and augmentation program, the number of adult June suckers in Utah Lake has increased dramatically and the recovery plan criterion of reversing the population decline in Utah Lake has been accomplished. In 2021, The counts of spawning adults in one year (4,342) now outnumber the estimate of the total population size at the time of listing (~300) (see Table 1). The risk of extinction for this species that seemed imminent in the 1990s has been eliminated.While there has been a sizable increase in the number of adult June sucker in Utah Lake, there is still concern about the long-term survival of the species due to the lack of sufficient natural recruitment to the adult population. Currently, the population remains dependent on the ongoing augmentation from captive rearing facilities to replace any individual suckers lost due to mortality. The presence of captive reared individuals in the spawning runs shows that the suckers stocked to Utah Lake are capable of contributing to the long-term survival of the species. Habitat restoration efforts at Hobble Creek have also shown that conditions that support survival of young suckers can be produced. In order for the species to progress to a self-sustaining status, the Program and its partners have begun the restoration of the Provo River Delta which will restore roughly 300 acres of land to brood rearing habitat for the June sucker which should be completed in 2024.

The Program grouped recovery tasks identified in the June Sucker Recovery Plan (USFWS 1999) into six recovery elements. These recovery elements were established to organize recovery actions by threats that they were intended to address. The recovery elements also ensure a diversified and balanced approach to the implementation of recovery actions so that funding and effort can be applied at the appropriate level for each recovery element. The recovery elements are: 1. Nonnative and Sport Fish Management 2. Habitat Development and Maintenance 3. Water Management and Protection 4. Genetic Integrity and Augmentation 5. Research, Monitoring and Data Management 6. Information and Education Each recovery element is implemented by the Program and evaluated on an ongoing basis to assess its contribution toward recovery and to ensure a broad approach to addressing threats to the species and implementation of recovery actions. This document is intended to report the progress towards recovery for the period of Program operation from 2016 through 2021. Significant activities and accomplishments of the Program over this time period are broken down by recovery element and described below. The following sections provide a brief description of the recovery elements, associated challenges, and corresponding action strategies. Nonnative and Sportfish Management Numerous species of nonnative fish have been introduced into Utah Lake and while not all introductions resulted in establishment of stable populations, those that have become self-sustaining have cumulatively resulted in changes to the lake's fish community and impacted habitat quality and availability. One nonnative species currently presenting a large threat to June sucker recovery is the common carp (Cyprinus carpio). Common carp dominate the Utah Lake fish community and make up a vast majority of the fish biomass in Utah Lake (Valdez et al. 2006). Through their feeding behavior, common carp have removed the majority of submerged aquatic vegetation in Utah Lake and hinder the establishment of new aquatic vegetation beds. This loss of vegetation greatly reduces the amount of cover available for young June sucker and subsequently increases predation, leading to the lack of natural recruitment within the June sucker population. The impacts of common carp are greatest in shallow lakes, such as Utah Lake, where they can cause a shift in the ecosystem to a system where primary productivity is dominated by algae and the diversity of plants, fish, and wildlife is thereby reduced (Scheffer 1998). In response, the Program has initiated a carp removal program and successfully reduced carp biomass by 75% in 2017 and worked to maintain that level below that goal since. Nonnative fish species posing the greatest predatory risk to June sucker include white bass (Morone chrysops), channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus), walleye (Stizostedion vitreum) and Northern pike (Esox lucius). In addition to preying on young of year and sub adult June sucker size classes, individuals of some of these species can reach sizes large enough to prey upon adult June sucker. While the natural history of June sucker included coexisting with large, predatory Bonneville cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki utah), the impacts of predation are increased with the loss of refuge habitat in the current Utah Lake system. Northern pike only recently became established in Utah Lake but have the potential to have a huge impact on June sucker populations. Recent evidence indicates an expansion of Northern pike populations. In response, the Program funded the development of a Northern pike strategy for Utah Lake, and is conducting a telemetry project to inform management recommendations of Northern pike moving forward. Habitat Development and Maintenance Virtually all habitat types in Utah Lake have been altered since the settlement of Utah Valley. The habitat changes that have had the largest impacts on June sucker include: the channelization and diking of tributaries that reduced habitat complexity, altered thermal regimes, and changed flow dynamics; diversion structures on tributaries that limit access to potential spawning and nursery areas; and filling of tributary floodplain habitats and wetlands associated with tributaries and the lake shore, which reduce habitat for early life stages of June sucker (USFWS 1999). Habitat restoration efforts on Hobble Creek resulted in increases in spawning activity and the survival of naturally produced young of year suckers in 2010 and 2011 (Landress 2011). Modifications to the Fort Field Diversion structure on the Provo River allowed fish passage, providing additional spawning habitat for adult June sucker (CUWCD 2009). However, further work is necessary to restore lost habitat, with an emphasis on increasing the amount of quality rearing habitat to overcome the lack of natural recruitment to the adult June sucker population. Such projects are underway, and include the Provo River Delta Restoration Project, which will restore a naturally functioning river delta and provide additional rearing and nursery habitat for the early June sucker life stages. Water Management and Protection to Benefit June Sucker Water development within the Utah Lake Basin has been necessary to support the growing human population along the Wasatch Front. Ongoing water development has also altered the hydrology of Utah Lake and its tributaries and resulted in impacts to the June sucker. The anthropomorphic changes to river hydrology during the June sucker spawning season have contributed to the need to list the species under the Endangered Species Act. The Program has faced significant challenges in acquiring and managing water resources to benefit the species while still allowing all water delivery operations to continue. However, due to the CUWCD's Water Management Improvement Program (WMIP), 21,172 acre-feet of water has been acquired by Interior to be used for instream flows for the June sucker. Of this 21,172 acre-feet of water, 7,070 acre-feet is temporary annual water that has been acquired for the Provo River to support June sucker recovery. Under the WMIP, from 1995 through 2021, over 420,000 acre-feet of water was acquired by Interior to benefit the June sucker. On Hobble Creek 8,500 acre-feet of water has been acquired for supplemental flows to benefit the June sucker and since 2013, the releases to Hobble Creek have totaled over 90,000 acre-feet. The Program has worked with the flow workgroup (a multi-agency group that annually recommends an appropriate delivery pattern of reservoir and pipeline releases) to develop flow recommendations and deliver supplemental releases of water to Provo River and Hobble Creek from water acquired by Interior. Despite these successes in managing instream flows for June sucker, the long-term and continual acquisition and delivery of water presents challenges for the Program because of the increasing demand for limited water resources within the Utah Lake Drainage Basin. Genetic Integrity and Augmentation Prior to the establishment of the Program, the UDWR, with support from other agencies, began a captive breeding program for the June sucker. Efforts included the capture and artificial spawning of adult suckers from the Provo River. The goal of these efforts was to develop a brood stock of adult sucker that represents to the maximum extent possible, the full genetic composition of the wild sucker population. This brood stock is integral to the full operation of a captive rearing and augmentation program. Construction of a recirculating, warm water hatchery at the Fisheries Experiment Station (now Logan Hatchery) in Logan, Utah and intensive research on proper culture techniques have resulted in the production of large numbers of healthy June suckers that, once stocked, survive in Utah Lake, and contribute to the spawning population. These captive rearing and augmentation efforts have resulted in increases in the number of adult suckers observed in tributary spawning runs (see Figure 1). In addition to the active hatchery program, a self-sustaining refuge population was established at Red Butte Reservoir that meets NEPA commitments. It was determined in 2015 by the Service that "Red Butte Reservoir is no longer needed as a June sucker refuge site. The Service considers the commitment made in NEPA documents for both the Utah Lake Drainage Basin Water Delivery System and Diamond Fork to establish a refuge population in Red Butte Reservoir to be fulfilled." (USFWS 2015). The number of stocked June suckers present in Utah Lake is encouraging and has resulted in increases in the adult population. The Program must continue augmentation efforts while evaluating the goals and effectiveness of the stocking program to ensure that an adequate number of suckers are being stocked into the lake to support healthy population dynamics. In 2017, the stocked size of fish was increased from 200 mm to 300 mm to increase stocking survival rates, this increase decreased the number of fish stocked each of the following years. Research, Monitoring and Data Management When the Program was established, little was known about the basic biology and habitat needs of the June sucker. Research activities have provided important information on June sucker habitat use, interactions with nonnative species, growth patterns, spawning and feeding behavior, and many other aspects of the species' biology and ecology. Through an adaptive management process, this increasing knowledge base has improved the implementation of recovery actions and allowed for effective contributions to the species' recovery. Considerable effort has also been expended in monitoring the June sucker population within Utah Lake and its spawning tributaries. While challenges exist when monitoring a rare species in a large body of water, Program partners have worked to develop effective monitoring techniques. The Program will continue to refine its monitoring approach and work to develop the proper data analysis tools to get the most out of the data collected and ensure accurate species status assessments. Future research will focus on areas where additional knowledge will improve the implementation of recovery actions and allow for the evaluation of the effectiveness of those actions, such as radio telemetry studies, isotope analysis of unknown origin June sucker, and completion of a population/ecosystem modeling to develop realistic population targets for June sucker. Additionally, the Program will remain engaged in the overall status of the Utah Lake ecosystem to be able to assess the effectiveness of recovery actions and to detect changes that may have positive or negative impacts on the status of June sucker. Information and Education The recovery of June sucker and the promotion of recovery actions have been hindered by the negative reputation of Utah Lake as a polluted water body with little value. The Program has worked to improve the reputation of the lake and provide information on the benefits of recovery actions for the June sucker. Early efforts by the Program were to educate the public on the rich history of Utah Lake as a gathering place for recreational use and the diverse recreational opportunities that the lake provides, such as fishing, sailing, canoeing, kayaking, and wildlife viewing. Efforts by the Program such as the development of the Utah Lake Legacy book and documentary, the Utah Lake Festival, the Utah Lake Symposium, and promotion of Utah Lake through media outlets have improved the reputation of Utah Lake. In addition, the Utah Lake Commission (now Utah Lake Authority 2022) was established, perhaps as a result of Program outreach activities, to provide a forum for discussion of lake management and to promote the benefits of a healthy Utah Lake ecosystem. Increased community support for the health of Utah Lake is likely the result of the Program's early outreach efforts to reverse public perceptions of the lake. Improving local public awareness of the June sucker and the Program, however, is an ongoing process. Those aware of the program and its goals feel the program has been somewhat to moderately successful (UDWR 2017). Therefore, the Program must continue to provide information and education on the benefits of June sucker recovery actions.

Declines in the adult June sucker population have been reversed through the efforts of captive rearing and stocking of sub-adult suckers to Utah Lake. The reversal of these declines is evidenced through increasing numbers of adult suckers observed in spawning runs. The primary challenge for full recovery of the June sucker is the restoration of natural recruitment to the adult population. The recovery actions, listed in Table 2, have been identified to address the factors limiting recruitment to the adult population. For the Program to continue to make progress towards recovery, Program participants will implement actions to address existing threats. Significant accomplishments towards recovery of the June sucker species have occurred since the Program was initiated in 2002. These accomplishments have resulted from implementing the actions identified in the June sucker recovery plan (USFWS 1999) through an adaptive management process. The recovery actions that have been of particular significance to June sucker recovery include the captive rearing and augmentation of June suckers to Utah Lake, habitat restoration work to restore a delta at the mouth of Hobble Creek, and acquisition and provision of additional water to the Provo River and Hobble Creek. These actions have been instrumental in stopping the decline of the adult June sucker population and resulted in measurable increases in the size of the population. The Program has continued to make progress towards recovery of the species over the time period (2016 to 2021) covered by this memo and also since the Program was initiated. As an indication of the significant progress of the Program, the USFWS downlisted and reclassified the June sucker from endangered to threatened, effective February 3, 2021. Since 2016, over 233,000 June sucker were stocked into Utah Lake from hatcheries and grow out facilities, bringing the total number of fish stocked to the lake through augmentation efforts to over 940,000 since the Program was initiated (numbers compiled through annual reports from Utah Division of Wildlife Resources). These captive reared suckers have been observed spawning alongside wild individuals in tributaries and now comprise the majority of the extant June sucker population. Without the stocking of these individuals, the June sucker population would have continued to decline, and the species may no longer have occurred in Utah Lake or might have declined to population numbers too low to allow for effective captive rearing to be implemented. The success of the augmentation program is the result of considerable research on culture techniques and the construction of facilities where proper culture methods could be implemented, both of which were accomplished through the efforts of the Program and its partners. Prior to 2009, no June sucker spawning activity was documented in Hobble Creek. While the species may have spawned there historically, historic habitat alterations made access to the creek from Utah Lake difficult and there was no documentation of June sucker spawning activity. Through Program efforts, land adjacent to Hobble Creek and Utah Lake was acquired in 2006 and a habitat restoration project to reroute the creek and restore rearing habitat within the floodplain was started in 2008. Acquisition of water by Interior provided adequate flows for spawning and for the inundation of rearing habitat. The habitat project and acquisition of instream flows was instrumental in restoring access to Hobble Creek from Utah Lake, and in the first spawning season following completion of the project, June sucker were documented migrating up the creek and successfully spawning. The number of June sucker using the creek has increased over the time since the habitat restoration was completed. Additionally, off-channel ponds constructed in the flood plain of the creek have been shown to provide adequate rearing habitat for young of the year June sucker. In 2010, 2011, and 2018, naturally produced young June sucker were documented surviving in these ponds (Watson and Landress 2011, UDWR 2019). The survival of these young June sucker indicates that habitat restoration and accompanied water acquisition can be successful in creating the conditions necessary to address the lack of natural recruitment. Over the past five years, an average 20,552 acre-feet of water was provided annually to the Provo River to supplement flows in support of June sucker recovery efforts (Figure 2). Since 2016 an average of 7,252 acre-feet of water was provided to Hobble Creek for the same purpose. These water sources were acquired by Interior under the WMIP at significant cost. Flow recommendations were also developed to guide the use and distribution of this water to ensure that June sucker benefited. The supply of this water has allowed for successful spawning to occur within the Provo River every year since the Program was initiated and ensured that no adult sucker mortalities occurred due to the lack of water in the river. The acquisition and delivery of this water has been instrumental in addressing the threat of water development to the species' survival identified at the time of listing and identified in the 1999 recovery plan. The acquired water needs to be managed to ensure continued deliveries to support the species and necessary habitat. Continuing efforts to stock sub-adult suckers to Utah Lake, pursue habitat restoration efforts, control nonnative species, and supplement tributary flows in support of June sucker are necessary to continue progress towards recovery of the species. Efforts in reducing the carp population in Utah Lake are effective and may provide for the establishment of aquatic vegetation as refuge habitat for young June sucker. The presence and apparent increase in Northern pike in the lake is cause for concern and the Program is currently engaged in efforts to evaluate this potential threat to recovery efforts. The highest priority habitat project is the restoration of deltaic conditions in the Provo River to provide necessary rearing habitat for the large numbers of larval suckers that are produced there naturally. The Program has demonstrated the ability to identify and implement necessary recovery actions, and its effectiveness in doing so has resulted in significant improvements in the status of the species and incremental accomplishment of the goals of the Program.