SEQUOIA

1
Presentation on the Proposed Restoration of
Native Species in High Elevation Aquatic
Ecosystems
Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks
Danny Boiano, Aquatic Ecologist Nancy Hendricks,
Environmental Protection Specialist
2
The Purpose of the Presentation

• WHY - is restoration necessary?
• WHAT - has occurred so far? What are the main
  issues? What are we proposing for the future?
• HOW - can you be involved and provide input?
• WHERE - do we go from here?

3
The Purpose of the National Park Service
to conserve the scenery, the natural and
historic objects, and wild life therein, and to
provide for the enjoyment of those resources in
such a manner as to leave them unimpaired for
future generations. Organic Act 1916
Photo by Nancy Hendricks, 2009
4
The National Park Service Mandate

• The NPS will strive to restore native species to
  parks when
• Adequate habitat is available.
• The species was diminished or reduced due to
  indirect or direct human influence.
• Potential impacts have been carefully considered.
• Management Policies 2006

Photo by Bryan Czibesz, 2004
5
The National Park Service Mandate

• Exotic species will be managed when
• They interfere with natural processes, natural
  habitats or native species, or
• They disrupt the genetic integrity of native
  species.
• Management Policies 2006

Photo by Danny Boiano, 2002
6
Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks Our
Mission

• To protect forever the greater Sierran ecosystem
  including the sequoia groves and high Sierra
  regions of the parks and its natural evolution.
• To provide appropriate opportunities to present
  and future generations to experience and
  understand park resources and values.

Photo from Wikipedia Commons
7
Project Purpose and Need

• To fulfill the NPS mandate to preserve and
  restore populations of native species in selected
  high elevation lakes and streams.
• To restore naturally functioning aquatic
  ecosystems within the restoration areas,
  particularly those disrupted by past human
  actions.

Photo by Bryan Czibesz, 2004
8
High Elevation Aquatic Ecosystem (native species
follow)
Photo by Erik Meyer, 2009
9
Cladoceran Zooplankton (predator and prey)
Photos from Wikipedia Commons
10
Copepod Zooplankton (predator and prey)
Image provided from Dr. Roland Knapp, Sierra
Nevada Aquatic Research Lab, CA
Photo from Wikipedia Commons
11
Mayfly (predator and prey)
Photo from Wikipedia Commons
12
Caddisfly (predator and prey)
Photos from Wikipedia Commons
13
Predaceous Diving Beetle (predator and prey)
Photos from Wikipedia Commons
14
Dragonfly (predator and prey)
Photos from Wikipedia Commons
15
Pacific Treefrog (predator and prey)
Photo by Kevin Skeen, 2007
16
Mountain Yellow-Legged Frogs (MYLF predator and
prey)
Photo by Erik Meyer, 2009
16
17
High Elevation Lake (typical MYLF habitat)
Photo by Danny Boiano, 2003
18
Mountain Garter Snake (predator)
Photos by Erik Meyer, 2009 and Kevin Skeen, 2007
19
Brewers Blackbird (predator)
Photo from Wikipedia Commons
20
Clarks Nutcracker (predators) Gray-crowned
Rosy Finch
Photos from Wikipedia Commons
21
Long-tailed Weasel (predator)
Photo from Wikipedia Commons
22
Yosemite Toad (predator and prey)
Photos by Jennifer Rains Jones, 2009 and Joyce
Gross, 2001 (from CalPhotos)
23
Arctic Willow
Photo by Danny Boiano, 2003
24
High Elevation Basin (upper slopes often have
permanent snow)
Photo by Danny Boiano, 2003
25
Mount Lyell Salamander (predator and prey)
Photo by Dr. Vance Vredenburg, 2000 (from
CalPhotos)
26
High Elevation Aquatic Ecosystems (SEKI protects
a lot)
Photo by Danny Boiano, 2003
27
FOCUS - Mountain Yellow-legged Frogs (MYLF)

• Endemic to high elevation
• waters in SN and So. CA
• Were one of most abundant
• vertebrates in high Sierra
• Predator, prey and critical
• agent of nutrient cycling
• Very important species to
• these ecosystems

Photo by Bryan Czibesz, 2004
28
Mountain Yellow-Legged Frogs - Egg Masses
Photo by Dr. Vance Vredenburg, 2000 (from
CalPhotos)
29
Mountain Yellow-Legged Frogs - Tadpoles
Photos by Danny Boiano 1997, 2002 and Harold
Werner, 2006
30
Mountain Yellow-legged Frogs - Adults
Photos by Bryan Czibesz, 2004 and Danny Boiano,
2002
31
Mountain Yellow-legged FrogsNew Taxonomy
Rana muscosa (so. sp.) southern mountain
yellow-legged frog
Rana sierrae (no. sp.) Sierra Nevada
yellow-legged frog
Photos provided by Dr. Roland Knapp, Sierra
Nevada Aquatic Research Lab, CA
32
Mountain Yellow-legged Frogs (MYLFs) in Severe
Decline

• Disappeared from 94
• of historic localities in SN
• 2003 - given a warranted
• but precluded listing under
• the federal Endangered
• Species Act
• Likely to be listed as threatened or endangered

Photo by Dr. Vance Vredenburg, 1998 (from
CalPhotos)
33
Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks

• More than 3,000 lakes, ponds and wet meadows
  (1000 lakes, 2000 ponds...)
• All at high elevation and naturally fishless due
  to cascade barriers left by glaciers (some native
  species shown to right)
• 1860s-1988 non-native trout were introduced to
  majority of lakes (packstock, airplane)

Photos by Dr. Roland Knapp, Danny Boiano, and
from CalPhotos
34
Fish Stocking
1860s-1940s
Present in national forests
Photo from www.mylfrog.com
1940s-1970s
Photo from Johnston, H. 1995. Yosemite trout
Photo from www.mylfrog.com
35
Rainbow Trout
Photo by Danny Boiano, 1996
36
Golden x Rainbow Trout Hybrids
Photo by Danny Boiano, 2002
37
Eastern Brook Trout
Photo by Danny Boiano, 1996
38
Distributions of Non-native Trout andMountain
Yellow-legged Frogs

• Maps from University of California Davis,
  Information Center for the Environment

39
Sierra Nevada (Today)

• Trout introductions in national
• parks stopped in 1988-1990,
• but continue in national forests
• Majority of large lakes now
• contain trout
• 90 of large lakes in NFs
• 50 of large lakes in NPs
• Many studies have determined that trout
  negatively impact native animals, and food webs /
  ecosystems

Photo by Danny Boiano, 2003
40
Introduced Trout Change the Food Webs
Data from Finlay and Vredenburg. 2007. Ecology
882187-2198
41
Non-native Trout versus Other Threats
Non-native trout are a proven major factor in
frog decline

• Other Threats
• Disease
• Contaminants
• Climate change
• Largely out of park control

Managing trout populations is mostly within park
control
Photo by Danny Boiano, 1996
42
Ongoing Restoration Project

• In 2001 the NPS Regional Director approved trout
  removal by gill netting and electrofishing (EA
  2001)
• 2001 - Initiated trout removal on 6 lakes
• 2004-05 - Initiated trout removal 5 lakes
• Ongoing
• Reclaiming habitat for existing frog populations
• Testing feasibility and thresholds
• Surveys to measure frog density in restoration
  and control habitats

42
43
Ongoing Restoration Sites
44
Selection Criteria Headwater Habitats
Photo by Danny Boiano, 2002
45
Selection Criteria Good MYLF Breeding Sites
Photo by Danny Boiano, 1997
46
Ongoing Restoration 2001-2008Total of 23,677
non-native trout removed from 11 lakes and
streams
Number of Trout Removed
2001
2003
2004
2005
2006
2002
2007
2008
47
Ongoing Restoration 2001-2008Frog density
increased in 11 lakes as fish were removed
Average MYL individuals /10m detected per
survey per lake
15-fold
16-fold
Initial Survey
2008
2008
Initial Survey
48
LeConte Restoration Site
Fishless MYLF Breeding Pond
Waterfall Barrier
UL-3
UL-2
Restoration Lakes
UL-4
Photo by Danny Boiano. 2003.
49
Lake UL-2 2001-2008MYLF abundance increased as
fish were removed
Maximum detected per survey
62-fold
27-fold
2001
2008
2001
2008
2004
2004
50
Lake UL-3 2001-2008MYLF abundance increased as
fish were removed
77-fold
Maximum detected per survey
75-fold
2001
2008
2001
2008
2004
2004
51
LeConte Restoration Site
MYLFs Counted Per Year(Frogs Only, No Tadpoles
Included)
2001
154
Photo by Danny Boiano, 2003
52
LeConte Restoration Site
MYLFs Counted Per Year(Frogs Only, No Tadpoles
Included)
2002
10
504
1
Photo by Danny Boiano, 2003
53
LeConte Restoration Site
MYLFs Counted Per Year(Frogs Only, No Tadpoles
Included)
2003
5
990
3
Photo by Danny Boiano, 2003
54
LeConte Restoration Site
MYLFs Counted Per Year(Frogs Only, No Tadpoles
Included)
2004
5670
19
6
Photo by Danny Boiano, 2003
55
LeConte Restoration Site
MYLFs Counted Per Year(Frogs Only, No Tadpoles
Included)
2005
5333
22
19
5
Photo by Danny Boiano, 2003
56
LeConte Restoration Site
MYLFs Counted Per Year(Frogs Only, No Tadpoles
Included)
2006
4595
154
64
13
Photo by Danny Boiano, 2003
57
LeConte Restoration Site
MYLFs Counted Per Year(Frogs Only, No Tadpoles
Included)
2007
4969
753
139
47
Photo by Danny Boiano, 2003
58
LeConte Restoration Site
MYLFs Counted Per Year(Frogs Only, No Tadpoles
Included)
2008
5269
667
131
48
Photo by Danny Boiano, 2003
59
Ongoing Restoration 2001-2008Garter snakes
increased in 11 lakes as fish were removed
7-fold
Average garter snakes detected per survey
per lake
2 detected in 28 surveys
10 detected in 25 surveys
Initial Surveys
Most Recent Surveys
60
Physical Trout Removal Limitations

• Gill Netting
• Initial estimate for max. lake area 7 acres
• SEKI 99 eradicated 11 ac lake
• (46 ft max depth)
• YOSE 99 eradicated 30 ac lake
• Electrofishing
• SEKI 99 eradicated 1.1 miles of stream
• Idaho Fish Game no progress after
• 3 seasons in 4.9 miles of stream

Photos by Melissa Jones, 2007 and Sean Giery, 2002
61
New Issue - Arrival of the Amphibian Chytrid
Fungus (Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis)

• Throughout Sequoia, currently spreading across
  Kings Canyon.
• Arrival results in population crash, including
  possible extinction.

Slide provided by Dr. Roland Knapp, Sierra Nevada
Aquatic Research Lab, CA
62
SPREAD OF FUNGUS ACROSS SEKI lt1990
Slide provided by Dr. Roland Knapp, Sierra Nevada
Aquatic Research Lab, CA
63
SPREAD OF FUNGUS ACROSS SEKI - 1994
Slide provided by Dr. Roland Knapp, Sierra Nevada
Aquatic Research Lab, CA
64
SPREAD OF FUNGUS ACROSS SEKI - 1998
Slide provided by Dr. Roland Knapp, Sierra Nevada
Aquatic Research Lab, CA
65
SPREAD OF FUNGUS ACROSS SEKI - 2002
Slide provided by Dr. Roland Knapp, Sierra Nevada
Aquatic Research Lab, CA
66
SPREAD OF FUNGUS ACROSS SEKI - 2004
Slide provided by Dr. Roland Knapp, Sierra Nevada
Aquatic Research Lab, CA
67
SPREAD OF FUNGUS ACROSS SEKI - 2006
Slide provided by Dr. Roland Knapp, Sierra Nevada
Aquatic Research Lab, CA
68
Amphibian Chytrid Fungus

• A few MYLF populations are
• persisting while infected all had
• high abundance upon infection
• LeConte and Bubbs no
• restoration sites infected
• 60 Lake Basin - all five restoration
• sites infected

Photo by Bryan Czibesz, 2004
Will high frog abundance achieved at 2 out of 5
infected sites help prevent population extinction
by chytrid ?
69
More restoration is needed

• While good work is occurring, we are not meeting
  our mandate to preserve native species and
  natural ecosystems.
• There is an immediate need to restore more
  habitat to fishless condition to create large
  MYLF populations and native refugia.
• Trout removals are beneficial to frogs, other
  native animals and high elevation aquatic
  ecosystems.
• Other alternatives need to be considered due to
  larger scale.

Photo by Danny Boiano, 2002
70
Alternatives under consideration Expanding the
current program

• Up to 15 of 560 fish-containing waters are
  proposed for restoration.
• Up to 85 lakes/ponds and 55 mi of stream over
  30 yrs are proposed for restoration.
• At least 475 self-sustaining trout populations
  would remain.
• Additional techniques will be evaluated in the
  EIS (some sites too large for manual eradication).

Photos by Danny Boiano, 2002 and Bryan Czibesz,
2004
71
Fish containing waters in Sequoia and Kings
Canyon National parks
72
Alternatives under consideration Fish
Eradication Using Piscicides

• Piscicide Pesticide used to eliminate
  undesirable fish from a body of water
• Rotenone Natural toxin found in several
  leguminous plants from Asia, Africa SA
• Used by indigenous peoples for centuries to
  capture fish for food
• First registered by USEPA in 1947 and widely
  used for fisheries management
• CFT Legumine reregistered by USEPA in 2007
  following a comprehensive risk assessment for
  human and ecological health

Derris plant (from Wikipedia Commons)
73
Rotenone

• Toxic to gill-breathing organisms by disrupting
  cellular aerobic respiration
• Use is highly regulated by USEPA - specific
  instructions required for rotenone application
• CFT Legumine concentration limited to
• 1 ppm (50 ppb rotenone) in streams
• 4 ppm (200 ppb rotenone) in lakes
• Degrades rapidly into non-toxic components and
  does not persist or bioaccumulate
• Neutralized with potassium permanganate

Rotenone stream application (from Rotenone Use in
Fisheries Management, AFS 2000)
74
Hybrid Treatment Technique
75
SEKI needs to restore native populations as
quickly as possible, creating robust sites like
below in several basins across the park.
2008
5269
667
131
48
75
Photo by Danny Boiano, 2003
76
Recreational angling opportunities will continue
to be available in hundreds of lakes and ponds
across SEKI.
77
Expanding restoration program will protect
native species diversity across SEKI and increase
resiliency of native populations to uncertain
future conditions
Photos by Danny Boiano (1997), Bryan Czibesz
(2004), and from CalPhotos.