Laserfiche WebLink
FEASIBILITY OF DEVELOPING AND MAINTAINING A SPORT FISHERY IN '1T1E SALT RIVER PROJECT CANALS <br />METHODS <br />Fish Surveys <br />We used electrofishing to determine the <br />number of resident fish species (species richness) <br />in the canal. Resident fish were defined as those <br />fish found in the canal either from natural <br />reproduction or immigration. We used catch-per- <br />unit-effort (CPUE; fish/hr) as an index of relative <br />species abundance. <br />We electrofished the Arizona Canal monthly <br />from October 1992 through July 1994 using a 4.3- <br />m Alumacraft John-boat. This electrofishing <br />platform was equipped with a Honda EMS-4000 <br />generator, a variable voltage pulsator (VVP-15), <br />and a spherical electrode. Typically, the <br />electrofishing crew consisted of a netter and a <br />boat/VVP-15 operator. Electrofishing was <br />conducted at night using floodlights for better <br />visibility and to attract some fish species <br />(Minckley 1973). Typically, the range of VVP-15 <br />settings used were: 100-150 V, 10-15 A, 30-40% <br />DC pulse width, and 60-80 Hz frequency. The <br />netter used an activating footpad to control <br />electrical output. Effort was recorded in seconds <br />using a chronometer activated by the footpad. <br />The electrofishing boat was driven downstream <br />within each site, covering both sides and the <br />middle of the canal. Stunned fish were netted and <br />placed in 121-L containers with fresh canal water. <br />No anesthetics were used to sedate the fish. <br />We categorized fish into 4 general groups: <br />natives, game fish, forage fish, and others. Native <br />fish were: Sonora suckers (Catostomus insignis), <br />desert suckers (C. clarki), and roundtail chubs <br />(Gila robusta). Game fish were defined as: <br />largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), yellow <br />bass (Morone mississippiensis), channel catfish, and <br />rainbow trout. Threadfin shad (Dorosoma <br />petenense) and red shiners (Cyprinella lutrensis) <br />were designated as forage fish or prey. We <br />defined "other" species to be: white amurs, yellow <br />bullheads (Ameiurus natalis), bluegill (Lepomis <br />macrochirus), green sunfish (L. cyanellus), <br />smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), common <br />carp (Cyprinus carpio), goldfish (Carassius auratus), <br />flathead catfish (Pylodictis olivaris), oscar <br />(Astronotus ocellatus), and walleye (Stizostedion <br />vitreum). Species, total length (TL in mm), <br />weight (g), and disposition (i.e., released alive, <br />dead, preserved) were recorded. Each fish was <br />examined for fin clips, tag scars, deformities, <br />external parasites, and spinal injuries. White <br />amurs and game fish with a TL ? 250 mm were <br />tagged with a Floyo tag near the terminus of the <br />dorsal fin. FloyO tags were used to identify <br />individual fish, with known length, weight, and <br />location, in subsequent sampling efforts. All fish <br />were released back into the canal after processing, <br />except selected individuals for contaminant <br />analysis or reference collections. <br />Catch-per-unit-effort indices were also used to <br />indicate changes in fish abundance across sites and <br />over time. To determine differences in CPUE by <br />site over time, each electrofishing effort was <br />assigned to a specific season for each year. Each <br />season covered a period of 3 months: September <br />through November (Fall), December through <br />February (Winter), March through May (Spring), <br />and June through August (Summer). Two <br />exceptions were Fall 1992 when sampling started <br />in October, and Summer 1994 when sampling <br />concluded in July. <br />To assess the canal's ability to sustain fish <br />health and nutritional needs, estimates of fish <br />physiological conditions were calculated from <br />length-weight relationships. We calculated <br />condition factors (K) using Fulton's equation <br />(Anderson and Gutreuter 1983) for each species <br />by site. Comparisons of K between different <br />species cannot be calculated because of differences <br />between body shapes and sizes; i.e., the size and <br />shape characteristics of trout are different than <br />those of sunfish. Additionally, K values tend to <br />increase as fish length increases (Anderson and <br />Gutreuter 1983). Our comparisons were limited <br />to individuals of the same age group. Mean K <br />factors were not calculated for fish weighing < 10 <br />g. The precision of our field scale (1-g units) was <br />not effective in providing reliable weight <br />measurements of fish < 10 g. We considered K <br />values of >_ 1.00 to represent fish that were in <br />good physiological condition, with the <br />understanding that the range of optimum K varies <br />with different species and age groups (Anderson <br />and Gutreuter 1983). Our estimates of K were <br />intended to provide a rough estimate of fish well- <br />being in the Arizona Canal. <br />Seasonal length frequency distributions for the <br />6 most abundant species were plotted to estimate <br />age classes and growth over time. Across-season <br />length frequencies were plotted for yellow bass <br />and roundtail chub. Age classes, or cohorts, were <br />determined using the Peterson method (Jearld <br />1983), which identifies distinct peaks and ranges of <br />length into separate age groups. <br />R R. WRIGHT AND J. A. SORENSEN 1995 ARIZONA GAME & FISH DEPARTMENT, TECH. REP. 18 11