<br />,. ",
<br />~ CH~'l
<br />-r.",,"lAnOr~'
<br />. PARK'"'
<br />,J ,;
<br />I '
<br />
<br />,/ ..In.,.1 t..... .:....b
<br />Bo"om
<br />
<br />/ .~:-"....../. I [RKl
<br />// .1 . I G _____/!QJ
<br />/......:.1 J ~'
<br />( i~.1 ~ i CAN~~~S I '\'PDI..h
<br />REGION 1 ... ...., 'II, PARK : \ .1. S.I Juclion
<br />l i 'h'-
<br />........ . ..J \
<br />r--_ ~.......'.J t. REGj>N 2
<br />REGIPN 3 4- -1"::::-'::" ~ L - - /RKl
<br />L _ --..,d _ " l.QJ
<br />r--- I r- ---..:."':\-_,
<br />REGION 5 ---i-~<,~o<' ._._. I REGION 4
<br />l..r":'l__ L. ~'-o I --....--....-J
<br />'. - 0; '-,...
<br />I.... .- .~& '_'-..'
<br />.~ ~..J ,-0 !~'IDI c.~ ~
<br />
<br />! i~ ~ ~
<br />
<br />,'- J . J HliE-'WUNA ,_J~l
<br />I ~ I -L11
<br />. ~ ~. GLEN CAHYOtl
<br />;- 'IIA nONAl
<br />... ! RECREATION AREA
<br />,J" r l
<br />
<br />J'-~: ~:.r J~
<br />. "-\.'\.. .
<br />. . . . . I
<br />Lllh
<br />''>.': ,< P~tud' Miles 10
<br />
<br />r'-
<br />
<br />
<br />Cr...,,' Junction
<br />.
<br />
<br />/RKl
<br />~
<br />
<br />.HonklYiUe
<br />
<br />
<br />Region 4-Cataract Canyon (RK 326-344); and
<br />Region 5-Lake Powell innow (RK 316-326).
<br />
<br />The river in region I was low-gradient, meandering, and lined with
<br />tamarisk (Tamarix spp.) and willow (Salix spp.), with a primarily sand and
<br />silt substrate and intennillent deposits of alluvial cobble and rock outcrops.
<br />The river in region 2 was similar with a greater proportion of sand substrate.
<br />In region 3, the river was a continuation of this channel geomorphology
<br />between the connuence and Cataract Canyon, whereas in region 4 (Cataract
<br />Canyon), the river was unique for the only extensive rocky habitat for more
<br />than 150 km upstream. It was also the deepest region in the upper basin, with
<br />a maximum water depth of 30 m at RK 341 (Valdez et a!. 1982). Region 5
<br />consisted of deep deposits of silt and sand, which filled lower Cataract
<br />Canyon in the Lake Powell innow.
<br />Fish habitat in each region was largely detennined by shoreline type,
<br />because much of the main channel had a shifting sand bollom with Iillle cover
<br />for fish. Five types of shorelines were classified including (I) tamarisk-
<br />willow, (2) talus-scree, (3) rock ledges, (4) vertical walls, and (5) sand
<br />beaches. The tamarisk-willow habitat was the most common, particularly
<br />along silt and sand banks in regions 1,2 and 3. This habitat was characterized
<br />by dense growths of tamarisk and willow with overhanging and submerged
<br />branches and root wads. Talus-scree habitat was present below steep uncon-
<br />solidated slopes where boulders and other colluvial materials had spilled into
<br />the river, sometimes fonning large whitewater rapids. This habitat was preva-
<br />lent in region 4 and occurred intennillently in regions I, 2, and 3. The boulder
<br />and cobble jetties fonned by these talus slopes created large eddies with
<br />sandy reallachment bars and associated eddy return channels (backwaters)
<br />that were important fish habitat. Rock ledge habitat was present where low
<br />walls of metamorphic or igneous rock overhung the river in the lower reaches
<br />of regions I and 2. These ledges were characterized by depressions and
<br />pockets worn by water action and were good fish habitat when associated
<br />with rock substrate. Shifting sand substrate provided Iillle cover and low
<br />productivity; reducing the fish habitat value of rock ledges, particularly for
<br />native roundtail chub (Gila robllsta)-a species with close affinity for rock
<br />substrate (Valdez et a!. 1982). Vertical wall habitat was prevalent in the
<br />lower reaches of regions I and 2 and throughout region 4. This habitat was
<br />created by steep, high walls of sedimentary or metamorphic rock that emerged
<br />from below the water surface. These smooth walls had few irregularities, and
<br />the absence of an associated rock substrate negated their value as lateral
<br />cover for chubs. Sand beach habitat generally had an associated shifting sand
<br />bOllom and usually fonned the banks of nursery backwaters. This shoreline
<br />habitat was common in regions I and 2 but occurred intennillently in regions
<br />3, 4, and 5.
<br />Flow and temperature of the Colorado and Green rivers varied dramati-
<br />cally during our investigation. Before the study, record high nows of about
<br />
<br />,~
<br />
<br />lo4ontit-.llo
<br />.
<br />
<br />
<br />Fig. I. Five study regions of the Colorado and Green rivers in and adjacent to
<br />Canyonlands National Park.
<br />
<br />of 1,128 m), depending on lake level. The study area was divided into five
<br />regions:
<br />
<br />Region I-Green River, above the connuence with the Colorado River
<br />(RK 0-80);
<br />Region 2-Colorado River, above the connuence with the Green River
<br />(RK 0-80);
<br />Region 3-Connuence, to the first rapid in Cataract Canyon (RK 344-350);
<br />
|