Laserfiche WebLink
METHODS <br />Sampling Reaches <br />Sampling reaches were delineated based upon the Sensitive Areas Document <br />(Biological Subcommittee 1984) which summarized river reaches important to the endangered <br />fishes. Designation of the sensitive reaches was based on distribution and abundance data <br />collected by earlier investigators (e.g. Wick et al. 1981, 1985a,b, 1986; Tyus et al. 1982b; <br />Valdez et al. 1982; Archer et al. 1985). The reaches selected for ISMP contained more <br />Colorado pikeminnow than other areas of the four rivers. Sampling was limited to flat-water <br />sections because canyon-bound reaches required specialized equipment and extended <br />sampling trips. Participants recognized that the ISMP reaches did not include the entire range <br />of Colorado pikeminnow, but they felt that the reaches comprised a sufficient amount of <br />habitat to monitor trends in abundance. <br />When ISMP began 186 miles of four rivers in the upper basin were sampled -the <br />Green (five reaches, 77 mi), Colorado (three reaches, 54 mi), White (two reaches, 30 mi), and <br />Yampa (three reaches, 25 mi} rivers (Figure 1). These 13 reaches were sampled every year. <br />Additional reaches were added in 1994 that were sampled in alternating years to expand the <br />sampling program and increase the number of Colorado pikeminnow handled each year. The <br />additional reaches added 189 mi to the total sampling area, but only 10-60 mi of the extra <br />habitat were sampled in a given year. All sampling reaches and the years they were sampled <br />are described in Table 1. Because ISMP reaches had different lengths (5- 22 mi), they were <br />divided into at least two, but no more than five subreaches ranging between 2.5 and 6 mi Iong. <br />These subreaches remained constant-after being established in the first year of ISMP. <br />Sampling included both left and right shorelines of each reach (often sampled on different <br />days). <br />Sampling Protocol <br />Colorado pikeminnow monitoring was conducted annually in April or May, prior to <br />peak runoff. All sampling was conducted from rigid-bottom, outboard-powered <br />electrofishing boats equipped with 4- or 5-kilowatt generators and WP-15s (or equivalent) to <br />adjust the voltage transmitted to the water column. Electrofishing boats used two spherical <br />anodes suspended from booms in front (use of spheres began in 1989, stainless steel cables <br />were used 1986-1988) and stainless steel cables (cathodes) suspended from the sides. <br />Electrode size, voltage, and amperage were adjusted to minimize the possibility of injuring a <br />rare fish while maximizing electrofishing efficiency as much as possible. Adjustments were <br />made to keep amperage at 6-8 amps to the extent possible. One or two netters were <br />positioned on the front of the boat to capture fish. <br />2 <br />