Laserfiche WebLink
2500 <br />2000 <br />T1500 <br />u <br />3 <br />0 <br />U. 1000 <br />500 <br />LOWER GUNNISON RIVER <br />2.2-Mile Reach <br />2.2-Mile Reach <br />COMMON CARP <br />SUB-ADULTS AND ADULTS <br />Flow<2,000 We <br />r=0.21 <br />n=12 <br />n, d7 <br />2500 <br />2000 10 <br />T1500- <br />U. 0 <br />1000 13 <br />500- <br />0- <br />Total Catch Effort (Fish1h) <br />2500 <br />2000 <br />T1 Soo <br />Z <br />3 <br />O <br />ILL 1000 <br />500 <br /> <br />2.2-Mile Reach <br />WHITE SUCKER <br />SUB-ADULTS AND ADULTS <br />Flow<2,000 We <br />r=-0.40 <br />n=12 <br />18 38 55 <br />Total Catch Effort (Fishlh) <br />2.2-Mlle Reach <br />CHANNEL CATFISH <br />SUB-ADULTS AND ADULTS <br />Flow<2,000 cfe <br />® r=-0.41 <br />n=12 <br />M <br />0 <br />,A „ 28 <br />Total Catch Effort (Fish/h) <br />Figure E.4. Plot of total catch per unit effort (Fish/h) versus mean <br />daily discharge for sub-adult and adult common carp, white <br />sucker, and channel catfish collected in the 2.2-mile reach <br />of the Lower Gunnison River, Colorado, March 1994 to November <br />1995. Note: 217-2,000 cfs was the range of flows analyzed; <br />goodness-of-fit line fitted by computer. <br />E-6