1. Can a Collaborative Restoration Really Accomplish Anything? W. Carl Saunders and Phaedra Budy (USU) Paul Burnett (UDWR) Paul Holden (Cache Anglers, TU) Paul Chase (USFS)

2. Goals & Objectives Restore BCT to tributary Restore Bonneville cutthroat trout to high quality habitat in lower Logan River

3. Evaluate alternatives for managing exotic brown trout Test effects of two brown trout removal intensities on demographics of BCT populations Test for evidence of Biotic Resistance and identify cutthroat trout density thresholds sufficient to resist brown trout invasion Goals & Objectives Restore BCT to tributary Restore Bonneville cutthroat trout to high quality habitat in lower Logan River

4. 0246810 Km N UTAH Salt Lake City Area of Detail Reference Treatment Study

5. Right Hand Fork: restoration and treatment study area - removal Logan River, mainstem Right Hand Fork, tributary Flow City of Logan SOURCE Brown ~ 100% brown trout, 5.6 km Mechanical (60-80%) removal Eventual chemical removal Isolate tributary for BCT recovery Cache Anglers (TU) -Plant BCT

6. Flow Second Dam City of Logan 85% brown trout, 2.0 km Mechanical removal (reduction); 60-80% Allow natural brown trout and cutthroat trout re-colonization Logan River, mainstem 6 km to Right Hand Fork SOURCE Logan River, Between the dams: treatment study area – reduction. Third Dam

7. Summary of Removal efforts Stream Reach Year Distance Shocked Brown Trout Removed Cutthroat Collected RHF20095.6 Km486511 RHF20105.6 Km542330 Logan20091.3 KM95987 Logan20102.0 KM1995133 Increase in effort in Logan River, 2010 (~35% ) After 1-year of removal, increase in density from 2009 to 2010 (12, 108% increase)

8. RHF – Length Distribution 2010 Strong recruitment pulse Suggests strong density dependent effects brown trout

9. RHF – Length Distribution SOURCE 2010 Strong recruitment pulse Suggests strong density dependent effects brown trout

10. RHF – Length Distribution cutthroat trout Observed first cutthroat trout recruitment in 2010

11. Logan River – Length Distribution brown trout Shift in population size structure less apparent than RHF Immigration from dams likely

12. Logan River – Length Distribution Shift in population size structure less apparent than RHF Immigration from dams likely RECOLONIZATION brown trout

13. Brown trout response 1.Dramatic recruitment response: density dependence in RHF Source for lower river, emigration of YOY 2.Rapid re-colonization by mature brown trout into Logan River Removal efforts provide opportunity to test for evidence of Biotic Resistance and evaluate management options 1.Can we identify threshold densities or configurations (size/age) above which brown trout cannot replace native trout? 2.Possible to simply reduce (but not eliminate) the abundance of exotics, to protect native populations of fish? Conclusions

14. RHF – Cumulative Length Distribution Recruitment pulse greater than observed before removal efforts brown trout

15. Logan – Length Distribution