7615

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7615
• Author: McAda, C. W.
• Title: Evaluation of the Interagency Standardized Monitoring Program.
• USFW Year: 1989.
• USFW - Doc Type: Grand Junction, Colorado.
• Copyright Material: NO

Table 3. Files that contained data that corresponded to the criteria described
for post-larval Colorado squawfish monitoring.
File Sample
Name Designl Agency River(s) Reach(s)2 Year(s)
C079DATA SSP FWS CO 1 79
C080DATA SSP FWS CO 1 80
COYOYC86 ISMP CDOW CO 2 86
GJYOY82 YOY FWS CO 1,2 82
GJYOY83 YOY FWS CO 1,2 83
GJYOY84 YOY FWS CO 1,2 84
GJYOY85 YOY FWS CO 1,2 85
GR79Y YOY FWS GR 3,4 79
GR80Y YOY FWS GR 3,4 80
GR81Y YOY FWS GR 3,4 81
GR82Y YOY FWS GR 3,4 82
GR83Y YOY FWS GR 3,4 83
GR84YFC YOY FWS GR 3,4 84
GR85YFC YOY FWS GR 3,4 85
UTYOY84 YOY UDWR GR 3 84
UTYOY85 YOY UDWR GR 3 85
UTYOYC86 ISMP UDWR GR,CO 1,3,4 86
1See Appendix A, Tables 16 and 17 for a description of sampling designs.
2See Appendix A, Table 9 for a description of the sampling reaches.
the current monitoring program. Fall young-of-the-year samples in the
Colorado River included two complete sampling trips -- one in September and one
in October. Only the October samples were considered for this analysis.
There are some minor differences between the two programs, however. The early
post-larval sampling programs only sampled one backwater per 5-mi reach, so
comparisons with the current program must be done with primary backwaters only.
The ISMP specifies a minimum size for a backwater, while no minimum size was
specified previously. Also, the ISMP specifies that, whenever possible, the
first seine haul must include the deepest part of the backwater. No specific
sites were required in earlier efforts. However, even with these differences
12