ОСТОВЕВ 12, 1960. Mr. PAUL BERG, River Basin Studies, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, DEAR PAUL: In accordance with your request to supply you with our recommendations concerning the fish needed for stocking the Washoe project area within Nevada from the proposed Washoe project fish hatchery, I am enclosing a chart which contains our recommendations. Upon reviewing your rough draft I noted that you had added additional waters to those which were originally utilized in the development of the production of the Washoe project hatchery. As you will recall, the original basis for the fish hatchery was Nevada's request for such a hatchery to supply a minimum stocking of 50,000 pounds of catchable sized cutthroat trout into Pyramid Lake each year. Later, the hatchery size was expanded to include an additional 25,000 pounds of fish for stocking in the waters within the Washoe project area, namely: Stampede Reservoir (10,000 pounds); Watasheamu Reservoir (7,500 pounds); Carson River below Dressler Diversion (2,500 pounds); Calvada Reservoir and Truckee River (2,000 pounds); Boca Reservoir (2,000 pounds); Dressler Reservoir (1,000 pounds). Thus, if additional waters are added other than those enumerated, the poundage would exceed the allotted 25,000 pounds, and those waters as above listed would have to be reduced in their stocking densities, to which we would be opposed at least insofar as Nevada is concerned. Thus, it appears that the objective toward which you are working, would be an expansion of the hatchery production of 75,000 pounds in order to accommodate the new waters. If this is the case, we would be favorable toward this action. In addition to the data which you had on your rough draft, I have taken the liberty of adding when the fish are to be planted, inasmuch as we have found this to be extremely significant, especially in the case of Pyramid Lake and it would be well for you to have this information on hand in planning the hatchery operations. This should be subject to change, however, in the future, depending on the findings of the technicians of the two States in which the waters are involved. I trust that you will find the attached chart and the above information as per your request. NOTE. These requirements were developed in March 1955 and were contemplated to take care of the fishing pressure that existed at that time. No effort was made to expand the figures to take care of addtional fishing pressure which even today is substantially increasing especially on Pyramid Lake. WESTERN NEVADA FISH HATCHERY Senator BIBLE. Mr. Chairman, this is in support of the fish hatchery contemplated for establishment in western Nevada. This first survey investigation was undertaken a year ago by the Fish and Wildlife people, and I have attached to my prepared statement a rather detailed analysis by the head of the Fisheries Division of the Nevada State Fish and Game Commission in support of the request we made a year ago. I am sure that Mr. Tunison is completely familiar with this project. He has been most helpful to us, and I am wondering if he could furnish a description of the hatchery facility need and the justification of the cost for the record. I do not know if you have it readily available or not. (The information referred to follows:) PROPOSED MINDEN, NEV., NATIONAL FISH HATCHERY There exists a large demand for trout for distribution into waters in the western part of Nevada. The National Government does not operate a hatchery in Nevada and efforts are made to fill applications for planting from the trout production at the Hagerman, Idaho, National Fish Hatchery. This has resulted in excessive costs for fish distribution and limited the distribution of fish into waters of western Nevada. Existing requirements in waters where there is a national responsibility now total 80,000 pounds of trout annually. Most of these requirements are for Lahontan cutthroat trout for Pryamid and Walker Lakes. As the Washoe reclamation project is developed an additional 43,000 pounds will be required. The two interstate lakes, Topaz and Tahoe, also could use trout from this hatchery under the State management program. None of these requirements takes into consideration any increase of fishing pressure that may occur in the area in years to come. Therefore, a hatchery, including facilities to produce a minimum of 125,000 pounds annually, should be established in western Nevada to eliminate the long distribution trips and to meet the national responsibility existing in this area. As a result of extensive investigations of possible hatchery sites in western Nevada, a site has been selected near Minden that is suitable for the establishment of a large trout hatchery. 7 residences___ Hatchery and service building with 36 tanks, 3 by 3 by 20 feet. 150.000 Domestic water supply--. 140,000 10.000 Sewers, roads, landscaping, and grading tory)- Equipment (automotive, maintenance, fish-cultural and labora 58,000 30.000 Senator BIBLE. I am wondering if you could indicate what amount of funds could be used by the Fish and Wildlife Service in moving this fish hatchery forward if the funds were made available this year? Mr. TUNISON. We will be glad to do that, sir. I do not have the details. The overall cost of the hatchery, as we know, and envision it, and that is without any on-the-ground engineering, would be somewhat less than $1 million. Senator BIBLE. This is my understanding. I understand, also, the figures have been furnished to me, and I do not know how fixed they are, and they may be tentative, but this year you would need something in the neighborhood of $150,000 to go into site acquisition and the necessary drilling of wells to be absolutely sure that you have adequate water supply. Mr. TUNISON. That is correct, Senator. There are about 35 acres of land involved, and, as you mentioned. there are four wells that we would need to initiate on this project. The cost, as you mentioned, would be in the neighborhood of $150,000. Senator BIBLE. I would be very happy to have you furnish the breakdown and justification for this request. Mr. TUNISON. We will be glad to do this. Senator BIBLE. This is in support of the statement I am making. (The information referred to is in preceding statement:) RESOLUTION FROM FISH AND GAME COMMISSIONS Senator BIBLE. May I query Mr. Tunison on another matter that is unrelated to a fish hatchery for western Nevada but was first directed to my attention today by the chairman of our Nevada State Fish and Game Commission, Wayne E. Kirch, who is also chairman of the Colorado River Wildlife Management Committee, and he has, I am sure, sent you a copy of this resolution. I think it is one of some concern for the fishing people. They completed their meeting of this management committee which is composed of, as I understand, the director of the Utah Department of Fish and Game, the director of the Nevada Fish and Game Department and the director of the California Fish and Game Department, and the director of the Arizona Fish and Game Department and the director of the Colorado Fish and Game Department, and, I believe, the director of the Wyoming Fish and Game Department and they have sent to me a copy of the resolution which they forwarded to you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman HAYDEN. Yes, I have it. It will be inserted in the record. (The letter referred to follows:) Hon. CARL HAYDEN, COLORADO RIVER WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, Senate Appropriations Committee, HONORABLE SIR: During the proceedings of the annual meeting of the Colorado River Wildlife Management Committee held in Las Vegas, Nev., May 3 and 4, 1961, the enclosed resolution was unanimously approved and it is the wish of the some 100 delegates to this meeting that copies be directed to you with an urgent request for your support and immediate action. The committee wishes me to express its feeling that the delay of the project for 1 year would practically eliminate any effect of such a program and increase the cost beyond reason due to scheduled prior closing of the Flaming Gorge headgates. Yours very truly, WAYNE E. KIRCH, Chairman. Whereas section 8 of the Colorado River Storage Act (Public Law No. 485) permits the authorization of funds by the Congress for mitigation and/or enhancement of wildlife resources of the Colorado River within the Colorado River storage project area, and Whereas large numbers of nongame fish inhabit Green River in the Flaming Gorge Dam area, and after impoundment these nongame fish species would seriously compete with game fish species and severely hinder the successful introduction and establishment of the game species, and Whereas both the States of Utah and Wyoming feel it necessary to eradicate the nongame fish in Green River and desirable tributaries above the Flaming Gorge Dam site to foster proper fishery management of the river segment in question, and Whereas both the States of Utah and Wyoming have requested authorization of funds through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under the Colorado River Storage Act to be made available in the 1962 fiscal year budget because: (1) Water impoundment is scheduled to start in the winter of 1962 or the early spring of 1963. (2) The fish eradication program must be accomplished at low-water stages prior to impoundment to insure maximum success at minimal cost. (3) Under the present dam construction building schedule the optimum time for the eradication program is August or September of the 1962 calendar year. (4) It is highly questionable if the manufacturers of fish toxicants can supply such large quantities of these chemicals without several months' advanced notice and the appropriation of funds in the 1963 fiscal year budget would not provide ample time for the manufacturing concerns to supply the chemicals for the fish eradication program for the fall of calendar year 1962: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Colorado River Wildlife Management Committee, composed of representatives of the States of Utah, Nevada, Arizona, and California urgently request the Appropriations Committees of the Congress to appropriate $173,000 in the 1962 fiscal year budget for the Green River fish eradication program. |