Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.............-...-........ <br />...............,..-.... <br />................ - -.. <br /> <br />...-.---.. ...- . <br />....'...-......................_....... <br />................... <br />.................. <br />.............. ,..... <br />................... <br />................... <br />........................,'............. <br />. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , <br />....-.............. ..... <br />................... <br />..............,...-. <br />....... ,........... <br />................. . <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 />I <br /> <br />bays such as the outlet of Gypsum Canyon (Photos A-25 and A-26). For about the first year that these <br />silt/sand bars were exposed, and while they were periodically inundated by fluctuating reservoir levels, <br />they were soft mugmires (Photo A-27). As these dried, they were invaded by thick stands of tamarisk <br />(Photo A-28). By 1987, most tamarisk st.ands were 3 to 5 feet tall, and had stabilized the silt/sand bars <br />(Photo A-29 through A-32), much as this plant has done in the upper basin. <br /> <br />Fish habitat in this region changed dramatically over a period of about 5 years (1983-1988). The <br />region was transformed from a slow flowing riverine environment lined with talus slopes to a riverine <br />channel constricted in width by tamarisk-covered silt/sand bars. The few backwaters that formed as the <br />silt/sand bars were developing were short-lived for only 1 or 2 years, and were largely eliminated by the <br />st.abilizing and const.ricting effect of the tamarisk invasion. The only backwaters in the region in 1988 <br />were located between Rapids 25 and 26 (Photo A-30). These backwaters provided habitat for YOY <br />Colorado squawfish and chubs as well as other native and non-native fishes (See Section 5.2.3). The <br />low lake level of 1988 revealed that many sand bars in upper Lake Powell had been overgrown by <br />tamarisk (Photos A-31 and A-32). <br /> <br />2.6 River Flows and Water Temperatures <br /> <br />Flow and temperature of the Green River, Colorado River, and Cataract Canyon for 1985-1988 are <br />presented in Figure 8. It should be noted that the flows in Cataract Canyon in 1983 and 1984 were <br />record highs of about 100,000 and 120,000 cfs, respectively. These two record wet years were followed <br />by two more normal flow years (1985 and 1986), but peak and base flows remained high from high soil <br />moisture content. Flows in Cataract Canyon in 1985 peaked at about 62,000 cfs, although base flows <br />generally remained above 10,000 cfs. In 1986, flows peaked at about 70,000 cfs and base flows also <br />remained around 10,000 cfs. The 2 years that followed -1987 and 1988 - were relatively dry years with <br />peak flows of about 40,000 and 28,000 cfs, and base flows of about 5,000 and 4,000 cfs, respectively. <br /> <br />These flow scenarios had a marked impact on water temperatures. During the higher water years <br />of 1985 and 1986, water temperatures did not reach 250C until mid-July and early August., respectively. <br />In 1987 and 1988, this temperature was recorded by late June. Since fish are poikilotherms, these <br />different temperature regimes manifested dramatic differences in spawning, growth and perhaps <br />overwinter survival of many species, including the endangered forms (See Section 5.1.1.3.4). <br /> <br />..............'.'...............'........ <br />..................... <br /> <br />....... . ............................................................ <br />..::.S10.::j::.MSTHSD0I10GM::.iU: <br /> <br />. . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <br />................... <br />.................. <br />................. . <br />.....,........... . <br />................... <br />.......,......... . <br />.................. . <br />.................. <br />.................. <br />.....,........... . <br />............,..... . <br />. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <br /> <br />...................... ............................. <br />..............,...,........................--.-................ <br />.... ........'...'.....'...................-............,........-................................. <br /> <br />..........--............. <br />....................... . <br />.................... . <br />. .. <br />.. . <br />..............................................-................ <br />..........................................-..-.....-.... . <br />..... -................................... -.......... <br />... ................ <br /> <br />.--....... . <br />............ ,.... <br />................. <br />................. <br />................. <br /> <br />.' ...... <br />. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <br />................ -.......... <br />........................... <br />.............. .. .. <br /> <br />3.1 Basic Study Design <br /> <br />The four basic elements of the Cataract Canyon Studies are presented in Figure 9. These st.udies <br />were conducted for 4 years, from 1985 through 1988. Five study regions were est.ablished to stratify <br />sampling by morphologically similar reaches of river. Four basic gear types were used in eight different <br />habitat types. Since a complete analyses of all data partitions of this st.udy design were too numerous <br />and largely meaningless, data analyses were performed'to address hypotheses directed at the specific <br />st.udy objectives. <br /> <br />The methodology used in the Cataract Canyon Studies was basically the same for all 4 years. <br />Generally, a team of four biologist.s (2 Reclamation and 2 BIO/WESl) participated in either of two types <br />of sample trips: (1) canyon trips or (2) confluence trips. Canyon trips were generally 7 days afield, <br />and extended for about 100 miles from Potash or Mineral Bottom to Hite Marina on Lake Powell. <br /> <br />14 <br />