7030 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

sand and gravel as rubble areas became increasingly scarce. Flow velocities decreased and were less variable at the lower stations. The entire river was extremely turbid. The entire length of river on the Reservation was sampled by boat. The river on the Reservation was generally wide, silt laden and moderate in velocity. A few riffles were present after river bends but shallow pools and runs characterized most of the habitat (Lanigan et al. 1979). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Table 1 shows the total number of each fish species collected and identified during each sampling trip in 1978 on the White River, Utah. The total number of fish collected and identified to species was 16,178 with 12 species of fish represented. Red shiners were the most commonly found species (66.1%), followed by roundtail chubs (10.5%), flannelmouth suckers (8.3%), speckled dace (6.6%), fathead minnows (4.1%), carp (3.2%) and channel catfish (.7%). Bluehead suckers, black bullheads, green sunfish, and brown trout individually comprised less than .5% of the total number of fish collected. Native fish dominated the fish fauna at 3 stations in the upper part of the White river and exotic fish dominated the fauna at one station in the upper part of the White River and all middle and lower stations. During a 1974-75 White River, Utah study, Crosby (1975) found red shiners (51.8%) dominant, followed by speckled dace (24.8%), flannelmouth suckers (10.8%), bluehead suckers (4.2%), fathead minnows (2.6%), channel catfish (2.4%), roundtail chubs (2.2%) and carp (.8%). However, endemic fish were more abundant than exotics at all 6 upper stations; only at the 2 stations in the lowest section of the river were exotics more abundant. The dominant fishes collected during 1977 by Prewitt et al. (1978) in the White River in Colorado were flannelmouth suckers (71%), mountain whitefish (11%), bluehead suckers (8%) and roundtail chubs (6%), all native species. It is evident that exotic fish have replaced endemic species in the lower section of the White River. This pattern of endemic fish displacement is similar to several other western rivers and streams (McAda et al. 1977; Holden and Irvine 1975; Deacon and Bradley 1972; Cross 1976). McAda et al. (1977) noted that in the San Rafael River the displacement of native by exotic species was probably due to the difference of habitat between the upper and lower sections of the river. The White River fish fauna may also be influenced by habitat. The lower section of the river is wide and silty with a relatively uniform habitat, the type of area where exotics are best able to compete with endemic species.