THE GILA TROUT OF NEW MEXICO: AN ENDANGERED SPECIES
Researched and Written on behalf of an Undergraduate Wildlife Major in April of 1998 by
Art Madsen, M.Ed.
Archeological evidence throughout specifically pin-pointed locations in Eastern Arizona and Western New Mexico indicates that, over 500 years ago, Mongollon Indians and other native populations, although they often demonstrated restraint and were aware of their environment, began to interfere with the breeding patterns of Gila Trout which were indigenous to these areas. By diverting water for agricultural use, these cultures initiated a trend which has essentially lasted well into contemporary times. (Pittenger, 1993)
The history of the Gila Trout, currently listed as an endangered species, has been turbulent for centuries. Because its prevalence is limited to certain restricted areas of the two Southwestern states mentioned, it has never been an exceptionally strong or resistant species. The Apache Trout, for example, has had a more successful history of survival and wider territorial dispersion.
The Gila Trout has also been subjected to natural competition over the centuries, making it even rarer in sectors where it might have otherwise flourished. Beavers are notoriously industrious and have led to damage to the species whenever their dams obstruct or divert flow. Other operative factors, such as hybridization have also adversely impacted the Gila.
There are epochs, however, where the Gila trout apparently thrived, on condition that interference from man was limited and natural competition for territory or food in aquatic zones was minimal.
More recently, human progress has demonstrably interfered with the Gila Trout, particularly in three areas where such factors as human habitation, grazing or light industrial growth may have substantially interfered with Gila breeding or feeding patterns. These three principal areas include: The Gila River Drainage, the San Francisco Drainage and the Verde / Aqua Fria Drainage, all within the State of New Mexico. Other regions are also affected by the encroachment of man although to a lesser degree, namely Trail Canyon, The Upper Mogollon, Mekeena, Little Creek, and Iron Creek. Within this context, of special note is the Gila River where, in 1918, a road was proposed and finally built in 1921, damaging watershed and altering the eco-system. (Young, 1990)
Glancing, on Figure I below, at other factors which have led to dwindling Gila Trout populations in these areas, in relation to the cause of such depletion, we can postulate that there may be a distinct trend toward on-going endangerment in the years ahead. Such degradation of the status of this species has clearly justified the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's having classified, as early as the 1960's, the Gila trout as officially "endangered."
Location.................. Natural Causes............Competition..............Human Incursion
Gila River Fire, Hybridi- Various Salmonoid Light to Moderate Drainage zation San Francisco Intermittent Flow Cutthroat, Rainbow Light Drainage Verde / Aqua Fria Predation, Various Salmonoid Moderate Drainage Over-fishing
Source: Condensed from "Gila Trout Recovery Plan" U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, N.M., Ecological Services State Office, Albuquerque, N.M., Dec. 1993.
FIGURE I
In light of the historic trend toward depletion of the Gila in regions indicated, and elsewhere, the policy of the Fish and Wildlife Service, both at the state level and at the federal level, has been to bolster Gila Trout populations in the areas most popular with sport enthusiasts.
In recent years, for example, the Mescalero Fish Hatchery, among others, has sponsored the process of rearing, stocking and monitoring of Gila throughout Southwestern New Mexico. Their efforts have included emphasis on protection of the Gila Trout, largely because of its historical popularity with fishermen. Other species have also benefited from their efforts to preserve natural ecosystemic equilibrium. Policy of this hatchery has frequently shifted annually as decisions are made concerning which species are to be highlighted in a given season.
The Gila Trout, however, due to its increasing vulnerability, is currently receiving special attention. Historically, fluctuations have characterized its progress and, now, because the Gila is at a low point in terms of both distribution and numbers, it is essential that a concerted effort be made, many legislators feel, to save this species from further endangerment.
What strategies should be employed to ensure, on the one hand, public satisfaction with Federal Wildife policy and guarantee, on the other hand, adequate restocking of Gila and other species in critical areas?
Gilford Pinchot, widely regarded as the Father of Forestry, once stated that, in order to properly conserve resources, "man must conserve for the greatest good, for the greatest number, for the longest time."
The underlying challenge of this definition is that it consists of three variables. How, in economic terms, can each output be maximized? That is the dilemma confronting conservationists when assigning priorities to each segment of the Pinchot equation.
In the case of the Gila Trout, an endangered species indigenous to the waters of specific sectors of Arizona and New Mexico, the problem assumes additional components. In this essay, the Gila Trout's survival will be explored and the factors which are being considered to ensure its recovery will be briefly analyzed.
There are two sides to every issue. Pinchot felt that conservation efforts should take into account the opinions of the greatest number of people when establishing priorities, given limited resources with which to work. Indeed, funding is generally limited when attempting to restore a specific species or a designated habitat.
Both sides, therefore, of the Gila Trout question (the majority and the minority positions) must be carefully considered, irrespective of the evaluator's personal feelings. Conservation economists refer to these dichotomous positions as "market and non-market" stances. If there is a substantial non-market, in surveys conducted with respect to the Gila, then major efforts should not be expended to revive this species on a broad geographic basis. On the other hand, if popular support is strong for this species, then extensive efforts should be made to ensure its proliferation in recreational and natural habitats. Viewed in a more concrete fashion, these dynamics are related to the supply and demand curve. If there is a perceived "market" demand for Gila, then the supply must be increased through restoration and conservation programs.
In addition to determining whether a market exists or not for preservation of the species, significant macro-economic variables also determine whether it is feasible to embark on a serious effort to preserve the Gila. Indeed, availability of funds for restoration is frequently a deciding factor in implementing a given project.
The Federal Reserve or Central Banking System of this country, and of others, controls two primary variables which affect the availability of credit on a nationwide scale. The funds rate is actually a more meaning ful indicator of credit conditions within a country, since it affects a wide range of government and private institutions. If the funds rate is low, money is readily available for projects of all sorts. The same is also true of the second rate controlled by the Federal Reserve, the discount rate. Because the Federal Reserve discourages borrowing at the discount window, except for short-term purposes to cover momentary banking insolvencies, these funds are not always as significant a factor in determining the fate of conservation projects as the funds rate. However, both of these important interest-sensitive parameters set a "mood" or "climate" in which planning takes place.
When credit is "tight" and funding is difficult to obtain at reasonable rates of interest, then social opportunity cost (SOC) methodologies can be utilized as strategic approaches to raising project funds. These SOC funds represent "ready-money", raised from the community to underwrite necessary programs deemed important by resident taxpayers, usually locally or on a statewide basis. Contingent evaluation methods may be necessary, in the course of a survey, to determine the public's willingness to pay for such programs. Decisions are, of course, geared to the results of such surveys and assessments.
When monetary policy is less restrictive, and the discount rate is low, federally available funds can be utilized to capitalize restoration projects. Under this scenario, the rate of return is optimal and repayment feasible.
Turning to the particular situation of the Gila Trout in New Mexico, it can be said that the Mesalero Fishery, for example, is well aware of the dynamics of funding and routinely conducts surveys and analyses to establish restoration and conservation policies for each fiscal year. Because, in 1997, the discount rate was not changed, it is likely that the Mescalero programs for 1998 and 1999 will remain relatively static. They will not be either reduced in scope or expanded dramatically.
In summarizing our observations, it can be said that, when considering the importance of the funds rate and the discount rate, Federal Agencies, and particularly those dealing with the Gila Trout in the Southwest, should also work into their calculations the opinions and priorities of the general public. Communities may be of considerable assistance in future years when these important economic parameters shift, and there is a shortage of federally available funds.
The present paper will attempt to address key aspects pertaining to the "least cost", or most effective method is of preserving the Gila trout. The Gila trout is native to the Gila Wilderness and is an endangered species. According to legislation, it is mandated by the Endangered Species Act passed in 1973 that such a species be preserved. (1)
The ordinance is in effect for a valid reason. Today there is world wide extinction of many species, due to over population and man's tendency to exploit and dominate. It is essential that the species be preserved to maintain biodiversity. That is the basic argument, but there are many others. For instance, speaking from an economic point of view, conservation of the Gila trout ensures future use of this natural resource.
In the market place, there are two types of valued uses. There are consumptive uses as well as non-consumptive uses. The consumptive uses entail, for example, going to a market place and purchasing equipment, engaging in recreation, performing a job and so forth. Non-consumptive use has to do with just knowing something exists. The public assigns values to whether they feel a resource's benefits outweigh the cost of conserving a resource. Depending on which valued resource is involved, the individual may be in favor of or against it. The debate to preserve an endangered species is a classic example.
One method of quantifying "intrinsic value", if that is truly possible in the case of an endangered species, is by conducting a benefit-cost-analysis (BCA). This analytical methodology often constitutes an effective means for determining whether fair value is received for funds and efforts expended. For this reason, such an analysis is often deemed indispensable for making a decision to prioritize conservation of a given species.
A benefit cost analysis should contain assessment of many variables. For example, in his letter of 18 August 1992, Arizona State University professor, Dr. Robert D. Ohmart, of the Center for Environmental Studies, confirms that overgrazing is a factor contributing to depletion of various trout species in selected riparian areas. (2) This is one component of the cost equation which must be considered. Of course, as shall be seen, there are also many subjective factors concerning the need to preserve Gila trout now threatened by a multiplicity of impinging factors.
According to social and political interests, there have been great strides taken to ensure the continued existence of the Gila trout, but much has yet to be accomplished. It is with reluctance that economists note that the amount the public is willing to pay to preserve an endangered species, as resources become more limited, will determine its very future.
As we speak about benefit cost analysis, it is important to consider short term effects as well as long term goals. The short term effect of the Gila trout recovery plan is to upgrade this species from endangered status by the year 2000. The long term goal , of course, is to establish a population that will propagate itself.
Placing a dollar value on the Gila trout's inherent worth to the public is a valid approach in determining whether benefits outweigh cost. Nonetheless, how can the potential benefits or costs of preserving Gila trout be validly quantified? To phrase the question somewhat differently: Would it be possible to quantify a resource that was no longer present? The "answer" to such a question would simply be "no response."
There are many aspects or consequences to consider when determining whether benefits outweigh the cost and whether funds should be allocated to saving a species from extinction. From social, biological and economic viewpoints, it would make sense that such efforts continue.
To validate and support Gila conservations efforts, it is important to be able to justify such actions in the eyes of interested parties. In order to do so requires conducting a "contingent valuation" study to determine willingness to pay (WTP) on the part of the public and to illustrate that there exists a substantial non-market value for preserving the Gila trout.
NOTES
(Part III)
(1) Reference is made to a Telephone Interview conducted on Monday, April 27, 1998 with Barbara ________, Director of the Mescalero Fish Hatchery. Although benefit cost-analysis has proven to be an indispensable tool for determining the "value" of conserving specific species, such as the Gila trout, it was surprising to note that the Director of the Mescalero Fish Hatchery is unaware of any such study or analysis that has been undertaken within the last five years. She referred to one 1993 publication which, when verified later, included essentially outdated data: Pittengen, J. Gila Trout Recovery Plan, New Mexico Biological Services, State Office, Albuquerque, NM, 1993. Please see Appendix A for further details concerning the Mescalero Fish Hatchery's Annual Gila trout Budget, as specified during the referenced telephone interview.
(2) Ohmart, R.D., Center for Environment Studies, Arizona State University, 18 August 1992, cited in Gila Trout Recovery Plan, 84.
With reference to the telephone interview conducted on April 27, 1998 with Barbara __________, Director of the Mescalero Fish Hatchery, the following budgetary information concerning her Hatchery's Gila Trout Conservation Plan was elicited:
The Director confirmed that Paul Turner, Wildlife Biologist, has been conducting further economic research on the Gila trout , but that data have not been published with the exception of figures available in the Gila Trout Recovery Plan brochure issued in 1993.
In light of the foregoing information, it would seem fair to assert that, if figures had been available from a recent Benefit Cost Analysis, more private and community donations, not to mention Federal or State funding, might have been generated on the basis of such statistical findings.
Ohmart, R.D., Center for Environment Studies, Arizona State University, 18 August 1992, cited in Gila Trout Recovery Plan, N.M. Biological Services State Office, Albuquerque, NM, 1993.
Pittenger, J. Gila Trout Recovery Plan, New Mexico Biological Services State Office, Albuquerque, NM, 1993.
Young, R. Introduction to Forest Science, Second Edition, Wiley & Sons, New York City, 1990.