1. Commercial Fisheries Bycatch Monitoring on Utah Lake David Tinsley and Jackie Watson Utah Division of Wildlife Resources

2. Project History  Series of studies conducted during 2002-06 determined common carp significantly impact the recovery of the federally endangered June sucker  Studies determined mechanical removal was viable  Funded by the June Sucker Recovery Implementation Project (JSRIP)

3. Purpose of Carp Removal  Benefit June sucker  Allow for increased macrophyte growth  Reduce phosphorous concentrations  Increase water clarity

4. Why Monitor Bycatch?  Document harvest methods/efficiency  Species composition and volume of bycatch/target species  Reduce June sucker mortalities

5. Ice Fishing

7. Open Water Fishing

9. Methods  Subsample 30 fish per species, per seine haul (target & bycatch)  Take length and weight  Suckers are weighed, measured, checked for tags, sexed, and tagged with a 134kHz PIT tag

10. Carp Removed/Observed  3,142,600 lbs removed between October 2009 and October 2010  Utah Division Of Wildlife Observed 335,310 lbs 335,310 lbs 17 days Open Water - 179,710 lbs 17 days Open Water - 179,710 lbs 7 days Ice - 155,600 lbs 7 days Ice - 155,600 lbs

11. Results  Percent Similarity Ice vs. Open Water  82.63% similarity

12. Bycatch Summary * Number of white bass and carp individuals estimated based on mean weight (n=100) ** Weight of carp is reported from commercial fisherman via scale tickets. All other weights are estimated based on mean weights (n=100) multiplied by # of individual tallies

13. Common carp Commercial range: 222mm – 755mm Mean = 581.2mm Trap net range: 59mm - 754mm Mean = 492.6mm

14. White bass Commercial range: 132mm – 332mm Mean = 254.8mm Trap net range: 42mm – 306mm Mean = 217.6mm

15. June Sucker Captures   247 June sucker captures   66% caught in 3 hauls   5 sucker mortalities observed

16. Final Thought   Ongoing Project Revising protocols Data collection Improving harvest/efficiency

17. Any Questions?