Laserfiche WebLink
<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 />Table 23. Comparison of seining catch rates between habitat typesl for the Dolores <br /> River, 1990. <br />I I BA I TFBA I ED I EM I SH I SC I RU I RI I PO I IP I <br />BB 0.43 0 0 0 1.8 0 0 0 3.6 0 <br />BH 3.5 1.6 0 0 0 3.5 0.93 0 0 4.0 <br />CC 0.43 0 6.2 1.7 10.0 7.0 0.70 0 0 0 <br />CP 0.37 0 0.19 0 0 1.2 0 0 0 0 <br />FH 196.6 7.3 12.4 105.8 21.5 15.1 13.5 0 7.5 14.3 <br />FM 24.4 0 0 2.9 2.3 14.0 14.7 0 0 21.4 <br />GS 0.74 0 0 1.2 0.46 0 0 0 0.95 0.79 <br />PK 0.12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.79 <br />RS 2928 2.4 18.6 198.8 71.2 14.0 57.2 0.95 31.4 2.4 <br />RT 14.7 1.6 0 9.2 2.7 8.1 2.1 0.95 1.7 7.1 <br />SD 7.7 0 0.69 0 1.8 9.3 9.1 15.2 0.71 8.7 <br />SS 173.2 26.0 15.9 164.7 38.8 18.6 36.3 0.95 22.9 4.8 <br /> <br />1- BA=backwater <br />TFBA=through-flow backwater <br />ED = eddy <br />EM = embayment <br />SH = shoreline <br />SC=side channel <br />RU=run <br />RI=riffle <br />PO = pool <br />IP=isolated pool <br />