1 / 3

Eric Ellis, executive director of the Utah Lake Authority, gives opening remarks during the Utah Lake Symposium at Utah Valley University on Tuesday, Oct. 17, 2023

Carlene Coombs, Daily Herald

2 / 3

Timothy Walsworth gives a presentation on carp removal during the Utah Lake Symposium at Utah Valley University on Tuesday, Oct. 17, 2023

Carlene Coombs, Daily Herald

3 / 3

Audience members listen to a speaker during the Utah Lake Symposium at Utah Valley University on Tuesday, Oct. 17, 2023.

Carlene Coombs, Daily Herald

❮ ❯

Utah Lake Authority hosted an all-day symposium on Tuesday to discuss conservation efforts for Utah Lake and provide updates on current projects.

The event saw presentations on June sucker recovery, water quality and common carp removal from various organizations such as the Utah Division of Water Quality and Division of Wildlife Resources and from researchers at Utah Valley and Utah State universities.

June sucker recovery and the Provo River Delta project

Efforts to recover June suckers began in 2002 after the population was reduced to just 300 in 1998. Since then, conservation efforts have slowly begun to recover the native fish species, with it being downlisted from endangered to threatened in 2021.

The Provo River Delta restoration project began in 2020 with the goal of revitalizing the June sucker population by providing a safe haven for young fish.

“The delta provides spaces for those baby fish to hide from predators and it’s a key component of the June sucker recovery,” said Eric McCulley with the Utah Reclamation Mitigation & Conservation Commission while presenting updates on the project.

Andrew Nagy from the DWR said they have tagged 7,000 June suckers in Provo River and Hobble Creek. According to Nagy, they tag about 10% of the fish captured, so it’s estimated there are about 70,000 June suckers in those areas.

The goal of the recovery efforts is to delist the June sucker from the threatened list, but that is still several years away, said Sarah Seegert from the Division of Natural Resources.

There are still challenges the native fish face, such as drought, water quality and nonnative fish species like common carp, she said during her presentation.

While the Provo River Delta project’s mission is to assist with the recovery of June suckers, other wildlife also have benefited.

McCulley shared that this year, monitoring in the delta has shown that many water birds have moved out of Utah Lake State Park and into the delta.

Because the lake happens to be in the flight path for flights going into the airport, the movement of the birds will improve aviation safety and protect the birds, McCulley said during his presentation.

A diverse amount of aquatic plants have also been found in the delta, McCulley said.

Common carp removal

Tuesday’s symposium also contained a lot of discussion on reducing the population of common carp, which is nonnative to Utah and is estimated to have been introduced to the lake in the 1880s. By the 2000s, common carp accounted for over 90% of the lake’s fish population.

Carp’s forging behavior has a negative effect on the lake’s ecosystem, impacting both plants and other fish species, said Timothy Walswork, a professor at USU.

Carp control in Utah Lake first began in 2009, with control efforts leading to a decline in population through 2019. But the carp population increased in 2020 with little change between 2021 and 2022, Walsworth said, though the numbers aren’t nearly as high as when carp removal efforts first began.

There have been some challenges in removing carp, Walsworth said, with many of the current tactics only catching the larger, adult fish rather than younger fish before they begin spawning. As control efforts have continued, conservation groups have also learned carp are harder to capture when lake levels are higher due to the fish dispersing more and limits on equipment.

Because of how lake levels impact the effectiveness of catching carp, Walsworth suggested that in the future, they may focus on increasing their removal efforts when the lake levels are lower to maximize efficiency. Additionally, they also plan on monitoring how the fish respond to removal efforts and testing out alternative methods.

Przemyslaw Bajer, a professor from the University of Minnesota, provided the keynote presentation on carp removal, sharing insight from his work and research in the Midwest.

In his research, Bajer said they found managing young carp was much more effective than removing adult carp, something conservation groups in Utah have been struggling with.

Bajer also said he believes that in the future, genetic engineering may be used to reduce carp population through things like creating female fish who only produce male offspring.

Algal blooms and water quality

Toxic algal blooms are a constant concern on Utah Lake as they are harmful to both humans and animals.

Bradley Roth, a representative from the lake management company Aquatechnex, gave a presentation on the company using algaecides in weekly treatments to successfully address algal blooms.

Roth presented graphs of data collected from the Utah Lake State Park marina and Lindon Marina, each showing some success in managing harmful algal blooms.

Roth added that this is only a short-term solution to help reduce harm to the public and allow for safe recreation, and he said long-term reduction in nutrients like phosphorus in the water are needed.

“This is an effective management approach to meet short-term goals in reducing cyanobacteria and associated toxic in enclosed marinas … which can keep them open and safer for recreational access,” he said, concluding his presentation.

Improving water quality goes along with reducing the harmful algal blooms. The Utah Lake Preservation Grant fund has awarded $30 million locally to help improve the lake, such as $7 million to Spanish Fork to upgrade its water reclamation facility.

Agencies have also made an effort to educate the public on identifying harmful blooms and the dangers surrounding them.

This year, poison control saw fewer calls related to exposure to toxic algal blooms compared to the last few years. Hannah Bonner, from the DWQ, said this reduction in calls could likely be attributed to public education, not that there was a decrease in harmful algae.

“This, to me, is a hopeful indication that people are beginning to be able to understand these blooms and able to make those informed decisions,” she said.

Newsletter