Laserfiche WebLink
amperage, pulse width, and frequency, etc.). When possible, the <br />support raft, with a netter positioned on the bow, would follow <br />closely behind the shocking raft and capture fish which were out <br />of the reach of the shocking raft. <br />In May, we experienced difficulties not only with high <br />runoff but also with electrical connections on two WP boxes and <br />malfunction of a third. Thus, equipment was modified in the <br />field to use alternating current (AC) for the duration of the <br />trip. The high water levels made seining at the top mile of each <br />five mile reach both futile and dangerous, so the practice was <br />discontinued. <br />The electrofishing raft was designated as the primary <br />collecting craft for surveys. However, additional data gathered <br />with the use of the electrofishing boat (from river mile 169 to <br />138) is also included in this report. Furthermore, it should be <br />noted that the use of the boat during the period of high water <br />greatly enhanced our efforts to locate target fish. The major <br />advantage of the boat was its ability to hold its position in the <br />current or move upstream to suitable habitat. On the contrary, <br />the shocking raft would frequently stun fish but drift past <br />before they became visible. The only two adult Colorado <br />squawfish captured during this survey were taken as a direct <br />result of the USBR boat. The first specimen was collected off of <br />the bow of the boat and the second specimen was stunned by the <br />boat and picked up downstream by the shocking raft. <br />During the summer and fall trips, we operated only the <br />shocking raft and were able to use pulsed direct current (DC) and <br />16