My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP10318
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
10001-10999
>
WSP10318
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:58:18 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 4:16:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8240.200.10.B
Description
UCRBRIP
Basin
Yampa/White
Date
9/1/1995
Author
UCRBRIP
Title
Historical Accounts of Upper Colorado River Basin Endangered Fish
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.
/
7
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 />i <br /> <br />tification quiz where I showed seniors a group of photographs that included both <br />endangered and non-endangered fish, The seniors were asked to identify each <br />one. Included in the photographs were the four endangered fish, a flannel mouth <br />sucker, a roundtail chub, a rainbow trout and a northern pike. <br />Although the identification quiz was a necessary part of my interviews, in <br />some ways it did not prove useful. Many of the seniors had not seen the endan- <br />gered fish since childhood, and while they could verbally describe the fish, they <br />had a very hard time identifying them. <br />Also, many seniors who incorrectly identified the fish were under the <br />strong assumption or perception that recovery efforts were being directed <br />toward flannelmouth suckers or roundtail chubs. Those perceptions contributed <br />strongly to their attitudes toward the endangered species and efforts to recover <br />them, This led me to conclude that when considering interviewees' attitudes <br />toward the fish, accurate species identification on their part was not ultimately <br />important- rather, their perceptions were. <br />Each of the 1 I I interviews was taped and transcribed, From the mass of <br />dialogue gathered in those transcriptions, I wrote this report. <br />In writing it, I have tried to leave myself out of the text as much as possible <br />to let the seniors tell their stories. To do that I organized the text into broad <br />chapters that use subheadings to give the reader a sense of direction, At times <br />the organization may seem loose but that is part of giving the seniors "the run" <br />of the report. <br />To provide reference and keep the text moving, I placed seniors' home- <br />towns in parentheses following their names, References to technical works are <br />included in the appendix, as is a complete list of interviewees, their hometowns <br />and ages. <br />Colorado squaw fish, humpback chubs, bony tail chubs and razorback suck- <br />ers are native to the Colorado River Basin and are believed to have been com- <br />mon in the early 1900s, For purposes of this report, these fish species are <br />referred to as "endangered fish," even though these species were not endangered <br />when the seniors were catching and using them. <br />The last chapter offers a brief conclusion. <br /> <br />ii <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.