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 />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 />I <br /> <br />GUNNISON RIVER <br /> <br />The fish populations in the Gunnison River at Austin, Delta and Escalante were <br />distinctive, Flannelmouth sucker and bluehead sucker were common to abundant at all three <br />locations in 2003, Native fish comprised 62.7% of the catch at Austin, 70,1 % at Delta and <br />83.1 % at Escalante for captured fish over 15 em (Table 20). Flannelmouth sucker had the <br />greatest variability between sites and was 17% at Austin, 41 % at Delta and 29% at Escalante, <br />Bluehead sucker composition was also variable between sites and was 44% at Austin, 23% at <br />Delta and 42% at Escalante, Roundtail chub composition increased in the downstream <br />direction with one percent at Austin, six percent at Delta and 13% at Escalante (Table 20). <br /> <br />Brown trout were common at Austin but not downstream, while carp were <br />uncommon at Austin but common downstream. White sucker were common Austin and <br />Delta. Water temperature difference likely explained the higher abundance of brown trout at <br />Austin and may be a factor for white sucker, <br /> <br />Table 20. Species composition at the Gunnison River sites in 2003, <br /> <br />Gunnison River Austin Delta Escalante <br />Species 2003 2003 2003 <br />Flannelmouth sucker 17.6% 41.2% 28,7% <br />Bluehead sucker 44.4% 22,7% 41,8% <br />Roundtail ,:hub 0,7% 6,2 12,5% <br />White S. + hybrids 28% 22,7% 9,6% <br />Carp 1,8% 6,5% 6,2% <br />Brown trout 6,7% 0,6% 1,1% <br />Ra i n bow trou t 0,8% 0,1% 0% <br />Sample size 1934 1622 1475 <br /> Austin Delta Escalante <br />White sucker 43.4% 67,9% 67,6% <br />White X flannelmouth 31,9% 23,6% 18,3% <br />While x bluehead sucker 24,7% 8.4% 14,1% <br /> <br />A difference was noted in the composition of white sucker and its apparent hybrids <br />between sites, White sucker, bluehead sucker and white sucker x bluehead sucker hybrids <br />were highest at the Austin site (Table 20), White sucker x tlannelmouth sucker hybrids were <br />also highest at Austin even though pure tlannelmouth sucker were less common at Austin. <br /> <br />Species composition for native sucker and roundtail chub observed in 2003 (Table <br />20) were fairly similar to that reported for collections in 1992 and 1993 (Burdick 1995) <br />(Table 21), However white sucker composition appeared to have increased in the Gunnison <br />River during the past ten years (Table 21), <br /> <br />The native sucker percentage of total suckers (tlannelmouth, bluehead, white and <br />hybrid suckers) was similar at Austin (Reach 6) in 2003 with the 1992 and 1993 data (Table <br />22), but was somewhat less at Delta (Reach 5) and Escalante (Reach 4) (Table 22), These <br /> <br />31 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.