My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP09463
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
9001-10000
>
WSP09463
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:53:49 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 3:39:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8240.200.14.F
Description
UCRBRIP Biology Committee
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
1/1/1995
Author
USFWS
Title
Peer Review and Roundtable on Relationship of Streamflow, Geomorphology and Food Web Studies in Recovery of the Endangered Fishes in the Upper Colorado River Basin
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />in a way where integration of various studies could be easily accomplished. <br />The present manner in which research proposals are solicited by the Recovery <br />Program was qusstioned by the peer reviewers. Priorities in selecting studies <br />may serve the principal investigator(s) interest but may not serve the <br />Recovery Program's goals. Also, the best person or group, based on expertise <br />or credentials, may not be conducting the research. It was evident to the <br />peer reviewers that the same individuals (who were not the principal <br />investigators) appeared on numerous studies. This observation indicated that <br />thrusts for continuing research on the endangered fishes were being directed <br />by a few persons rather than through a comprehensive strategic plan. <br /> <br />While it is impossible to cover the roundtable discussion in detail, some of <br />the relevant comments that were made by the peer reviewers to individual <br />studies are summarized in this paragraph. Recommended streamflows were <br />established based on fish use so that optimal streamflows required by the <br />endangered fish remain unknown. In addition, there appears to be uncertainty <br />about defining streamflows that will be sufficient to recover the fish. <br />Proposed test streamflows have no controls for evaluating physical changes and <br />biological responses and the Recovery Program does not appear to be able to <br />arrange for recommended test streamflows. Also, the responses of the <br />endangered fish may be related to factors other than the test streamflows <br />(e.g., habitat loss and nonnative fish interaction). Responses of the <br />endangered fishes and nonnative fishes to enhanced or restored habitats might <br />be a better criterion for evaluation than the actual test flows.. The ehort- <br />term study of physical changes is not indicative of streamflow effects. <br />Studies such as sediment and channel dynamics (Recovery Program Project 37) <br />provide an eseential first step to understanding geomorphological effects in <br />Upper Basin rivers. <br /> <br />Backwaters that have been shown to be important to the early life stages of <br />the endangered fishes will change in relation to discharge and channel <br />morphology. It is crucial to consider the hydrological and geomorphological <br />processes-responses upstream and downstream of reaches that are critical to <br />producing suitable habitat for the endangered fishes. This approach was not <br />apparent in the present scopes-of-work. The current method used in the food <br />web study may not adequately describe the energy flow through the ecosystem. <br />The food web study is largely limited to describing the distribution snd <br />relative abundance of invertebrates. The use of stable isotope analyses is <br />effective in separation of organic matter sources and food web components <br />(Angradi 1994; Peterson and Fry 1987) that would provide a more comprehensive <br />method for food web dynamics. Little effort appears to be devoted to <br />collecting data on the status and trends of nonnative fishes. Yet predation <br />and competition by nonnative fishes on the endangered fishes during the early <br />life stages appear to be important factors related to the absence of or low <br />recruitment. [NOTE: The present Recovery Program thrust on control of <br />nonnative f~BheB and changes in management of aportfishes (i.e., stockin9 <br />procedures) were not initiated when this review was made.] During the <br />roundtable discussion, it became apparent to the peer reviewers that Recovery <br />Program participanta are beginning to integrate the design and results of the <br />various disciplines. However, the expected results of proposed studies and a <br />discussion of how the results would be integrated were not clearly documented <br />in the scopes-of-work. <br /> <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.