My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP12249
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
12000-12999
>
WSP12249
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:14:23 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 5:28:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8240.200.10.B
Description
UCRBRIP - Riverine Fish Flow Investigations
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
6/1/2004
Author
CDOW
Title
Riverine Fish Flow Investigations 2004
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.
/
103
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 />Table 10, Species composition at Lily Park, Yampa River, 2000 to 2003, <br /> <br />YAMPA RIVER Lily Park Lily Park Lily Park <br />Spec,es 2000 2001 2003 <br />Flannelmouth sucker 48% 68% 54,7% <br />Bluehead sucker 9% 7% 7.5% <br />Roundlail chub 0,02% 0,03% 0% <br />Colo, Pikeminnow 0,1% 0,0% 0,1% <br />White S. + hybrids 0,3% 0.2% 0,6% <br />Channel catfish 40% 18,0% 27.9% <br />Carp 2.1% 2,1% 3.4% <br />Smallmouth bass 0,8% 5.0% 5.0% <br />Northern pike 0,2% 0,2% 0,1% <br />Sample size 4058 2989 2129 <br /> <br />An abundant channel catfish population was unique to the Lily Park site, Channel <br />catfish density and biomass estimates were highly different between years. In 2000 the <br />density estimate was 513 fishlha and biomass was 224 kgiha, In 2001 density was 137/ha <br />and biomass was 57 kgiha. In 2003 density was 276/ha (Table II) and biomass was 64 kg/ha <br />(Table 12), The variability in channel catfish composition between years resulted from the <br />presence of a large migrating population that passed through Lily Park during the summer to <br />upstream habitats. The low tlows in July and August 2000 could have stopped migrating <br />channel catfish at Cross Mountain Canyon, This increased their number at Lily Park that <br />year. In 200 I and 2003 either the size of the migrating population was less or it was more <br />dispersed, <br /> <br />The size and timing of the channel catfish migration wave meant their abundance can <br />vary greatly within and between years. Recapture rates on catfish in all three years was only <br />fair, with confidence intervals of20 to 40% of the estimate, Even so, widely different <br />population sizes were indicated between years, <br /> <br />Density estimates for tlannelmouth sucker, bluehead sucker and northern pike were <br />highest in 2000, The 2001 and 2003 estimates were lower, but similar to each other (Table <br />11), In contrast estimates for smallmouth bass, white sucker and carp were lowest in 2000 <br />and highest in 2003 (Table 11), This was the same trend for the other Yampa River sites, <br /> <br />Biomass is a function of both density and size so when mean length is constant <br />biomass varies only with density, Mean length varies between years mainly due to <br />differences in year-class strength and growth rates. Typically mean length varies due to the <br />number of Age-I fish in the sample. During the study period Age-O and Age-I fish were <br />rarely observed in the community and very few to no Age-I bluehead sucker and <br />tlannelmouth sucker were observed at Lily Park in 2003 (Figures A 1- 3 and A 1-1 0), <br /> <br />22 <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.