Laserfiche WebLink
<br />10/23/200~ 10:40 FAX <br /> <br />I <br />~ <br />t <br />t <br />1- <br />1 <br /> <br />, <br />1 <br />i <br />~ <br />~ <br />t <br />a <br />~ <br />~ <br />~ <br />f <br /> <br />l. <br />!. <br />I <br />! <br />l <br /> <br />1 <br />Ii <br />I <br />~ <br />~ <br /> <br /> <br />i <br />~. <br />4 <br />) <br />~ <br />5 <br />s: <br />-:; <br />J <br />.;. <br />;; <br />i! <br />'1. <br />j <br />j <br />~ <br />'~ <br />~ <br />~ <br />~ <br />{ <br />~ <br />5 <br />i <br /> <br />. . <br /> <br />erali~ed model!? Lb~t are 'Widely available to predict <br />di schatge 1 n 'Watersh c-ds lacking gaging stations. Sur- <br />vjval estimates ~nd age and iTowth data are widely <br />avdilapl.t fOl' differ'ent trout species. <br />Our appl~oach acC"ourus for variation in stream hab- <br />itat over the lengrh of a stream or among streams In a <br />wat.ershed. The model of Hubert lilJ"ld others (1996) <br />acca un ted for variation in tr'ou t abundance mat was <br />primarily assoeiated with insn-cam cover. Use of aerial <br />photographs to estimate ~he amount of in~tream cover <br />in individual reach~5 ofJow"'gra.dicnr. streams appears' to <br />be a relatively accu:ra. te technique (Gtcentree and Al- <br />drich 1976. :Prlch~rd and o(hets 1. 99 6.. COvill.gton and <br />I-Iuberl 2000). Tlle condition of woody riparian vege- <br />tarion has heen shown to affect the a.bundante of in- <br />strC;Ltn cover for trout in several ttudles (Hubert 43.nd <br />others 1985~ PlattS an d others 1987 I \rVesche artd orb ers <br />· 1987, Marcus a.l1d. others 1990). SiJnUarly, the abun"" <br />da.nce of ins-tream. cover has been relatt.::d to troUt bioI" <br />n'1as.s (Lewis 1969. DeVore and White 1978, Binn:; and <br />EiserOt3.n 1979, Wesche 1980)~ ~pA:cially brown trout <br />{Wesdle 1980, Sl1uler ~nd Nehring 1994~ Jowett Ig92s <br />1995). H'owever, it mlJst be ~tlecognized that restoranon <br />of insr.rea.m flows may al~o affect riparian vegetation <br />and inscream cover, thereby influeneiog the i.ndepen- <br />denol variables used to predict .a.bundarlce of ~f01)t* <br />The cumulative: effects ofvanous jnstream flows over <br />Inrge: portions of a watershed can b~ ~eBSed wing the <br />dtscrtbed approach~ For example, cffecr.s of va.rious <br />sum.mer flows on bro'Wn !fout biomass and abundance <br />in several trib\1[aries and the Upper Satt River were <br />e...;timatedi Because we approach is to be 1.1sed in an <br />iterative nlanner to identify the effi=C[S of different flows <br />on troUt biom:1SS and abundallce.. minimum it1st:reiUn <br />R01~ levels may be identified that produce an accept., <br />able biomass or abundar.cc of trout while ma~ntaining <br />agricultul'"a] or municipal uses~ For eX:lTnple,. iterative <br />assessmenc.s for the Salt River Valley ldt:nufied the <br />stream segment with the greatest potential for produc- <br />ing ~he highest ilbundanc~ ofbruwn troUt 'Nith a givcn . <br />::tmounr ofWilter (i.c:., Upper Salt River). <br />Answers 1:0 questions. concerning trade-offs in agri. <br />c=ultural production :and fish production can be <br />wclghed usjng the approach. For example, We! com- <br />pa.....cd the use of water for production of alfalfa relative <br />to water oce~s to mai:nta.in bro'WO trOut in the sttldy <br />streams. .A.Jfalfa comprisc$ the m.PJor irrig3.red crop in <br />th~ valley (RavenhoJt and others 1976). The annual <br />r.unoun t of irrigation water net:d~d [0 raise alFalfa in the <br />Salt River Valley has been estima.ted to be 2715 m! jha <br />(Brosz 1997) ~ If 0.25 m~ Isec of W3.ter were converted <br />from .agricultu~ us3ge to instream flow, approxhnately <br />196 ha of la:od cO';lJd no longer be inigated. This is a <br /> <br />~ {Jl.J <br />p.l0 <br /> <br /> <br />Trout Responses 10 Flaw RestOration 143 <br /> <br />reiatively gm~n amonnl of ';Inn (0-42%) '-\lhc::,' COJH.. <br />parelX to the 47.000 ha of irrigated land in th e &llt Rh'cr <br />Valll:Y (Sando .198.5). However. co retu."-n naLltJ~1 S\U1J" <br />mer flows to th~ Upper S~1t Rive.~ (1.0 m1- /~ec), 748 h~ <br />of land could no longer be irrigated in the Salt River <br />Vall ey. <br />We ,=,stimat.ed brown trolH bio!n3SS: aJ1d 4lbUhd~YJce <br />in sU'cams.J but the estimates wert' limited by th e pTC~ <br />djcrive models that we used. For example, the biomass <br />model Wa.~ highly significant (P < a,OOl) and h;.d been <br />tested an d validatr:d fol" broad application across Wyo- <br />ming (Hllbet~ and others 1996), bu[ the mode. ac- <br />cQunted for ::to limited amount of varia(ion in trOut <br />biomass (JtZ =: 0.40). Additiooall)'r the: model was not <br />built usi n g- da 1.il fro..n ~pring sa-earns or streams rhar <br />h3.~ populations of Ttu::'unr.ain whitefish,.. but flows in <br />one study srream were aftected by springs 'and moun- <br />rain whitefish occur in the Salt River and <:ould colonjzc <br />iSom e aib\ltatie9.o Consequen tly I the estim3.te$. of bio- <br />mass and abundanc:c nlust be assessed with knowledge. <br />[hat the prediccive modtls provide estima[e$; that hi:lve <br />substandal u:pcen.ainty assQctak'd ~th them. <br />Errors ca~l also occur when es.timating the indcpen-- <br />den [ V3~riables used in the model LO predict U-O\11 bio... <br />m~s. Ell'eV~tion ;lnd channel ~di~nt estimates can be <br />afFc:cted by inaccurare mfcrp<:Jlations frQm tDpogr~phjc <br />maps. Estimates of wetted width were measured on site <br />during s'UfI1me.. base flow pCliod" and C~ be affected by <br />discharge at the: time of measurelneot. In~tream ct)ver <br />measuremel~lS are suJ:neetive (Scarnecnia and f;crg- <br />ersen 1987, Hogle and others 1995) and may bt:: J("ss <br />precise: wh en estimated from riparian fcanlres. <br />Accurate estimates of .A1lF under narural conditions <br />arc: an important c::omponen~ of our approach, Estimates \ <br />ofADF can be made: in SC'VerAI different wa~ bu[ the b~t <br />data sources are strc3Jl~ gaug.es 'With long periods of <br />).ecotd. Howeve2:', gauged Streams a're not 3bun.d,:'iTH in <br />many 'Watersheds, For example, in [he Sall River V.alley <br />mere were fow- ~ugai strcoons with langwtcnn data, and <br />we extt'apoIir.ed etidmates to the other streams. Anor.he}~ <br />approach to esr.i.rnadng ADF could be t.h e use of ma de]s <br />based on geomorph{c feawres of the warershcdtl For ex- <br />3nlpleJ Lowham (198B) :il1d Miselis .(1999) found th3~ <br />bankfuU welted l'Jid r.b 'VfiU a signific.an t factor in p.redic:ting <br />discharge ttJ all regions of Wyoming.. However} when we <br />cOJ;npared cst;mares of ADF 1.15mg their modeb [0 recor.cls <br />from the gauged s~eams in the Salt rover drajnage~ their <br />model eStimates were considerably higher rh.:ln those <br />from gauge records. <br />We assumed a line: ar relati onsh ip b~tween trOUt nab-- <br />itat and discharge for streams (Jowet.t 1997). but rhis <br />relationship rnay noC be at::r:uratc far all stream". Influ... <br />.:nee, of channel geomorphology can affe~t available <br />