Modoc Sucker Recovers, Leaves Endangered Species List

Once official, it will become only the second fish to leave the protection of the Endangered Species Act

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


A tiny fish just got a big—and slightly overdue—victory.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) announced this week that the Modoc sucker (Catostomus microps), a rare fish from California and Oregon, has recovered and will now leave the protection of the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

This is actually the second attempt to delist the fish. It almost left the ESA earlier this year but FWS forgot to post an announcement in local newspapers, as required by law, forcing them to delay their plans.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Now that the full legal requirements have been met, the sucker will become the second endangered fish to recover in the U.S., following the Oregon chubb (Oregonichthys crameri), another small fish that left the ESA earlier this year. The chubb’s population boomed from fewer than 1,000 when it was protected in 1993 to more than 140,000 fish in 80 locations today.

The Modoc sucker hasn’t enjoyed quite the same level of success, but it is doing much better than it was when it was first protected in 1985. Back then it was restricted to just seven streams totaling about 21 kilometers. Today it swims in 12 streams with a range of more than 70 kilometers. The population, meanwhile, has doubled from 1,300 to more than 2,600.

Protecting the Modoc sucker required efforts on two fronts. First, both the California and Oregon fish and wildlife departments had to stop stocking the sucker’s habitat with non-native brown trout (Salmo trutta) for recreational fishermen. The larger European fish preyed upon the suckers and took a toll on their populations. The invasive fish still exist in the sucker’s streams, but they are no longer thought to pose a major risk since their populations are no longer being artificially supplemented.

The second challenge involved protecting the sucker’s rivers themselves. Livestock used to graze at the banks of the rivers and the loss of native vegetation resulted in erosion that filled in the deep pools the suckers use to stay cool during hot summer months. The degradation also connected previously separate streams and allowed a related species, the Sacramento sucker (C. occidentalis) to move into the area and hybridize with the Modoc suckers. Livestock fences, replanting programs and back-breaking work to remove debris and place boulders helped to restore the habitat, efforts that were made possible by collaboration between FWS, state agencies and local landowners.

With those threats out of the way and populations stable, this appears to finally by the right time to delist the Modoc sucker, a change that will become official in 30 days. FWS will continue to monitor the fish’s population for five years in order to make sure that populations remain healthy following delisting. That will remain important, as new threats could emerge. According to the Center for Biological Diversity, climate change and drought could pose future risks for these tiny fish. For now, though, they’re swimming just fine.

Photo courtesy of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

John R. Platt is the editor of The Revelator. An award-winning environmental journalist, his work has appeared in Scientific American, Audubon, Motherboard, and numerous other magazines and publications. His "Extinction Countdown" column has run continuously since 2004 and has covered news and science related to more than 1,000 endangered species. John lives on the outskirts of Portland, Ore., where he finds himself surrounded by animals and cartoonists.

More by John R. Platt

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe