Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />of new fish to recaptured fish in 1988, the population of razorback suckers is <br />extremely low unless other small populations exist in the San Juan Arm. Most <br />of these fish were old, battered and commonly blind in one eye. No Colorado <br />squawfish were collected during the 1988 trammel netting efforts. <br /> <br /> <br />Canyon NettinQ <br /> <br />No Colorado River rare fishes were collected in the canyon reaches of the <br />San Juan River during the trammel netting efforts. Only 4 species were <br />co 11 ected: channe 1 cat fi sh, carp, b 1 uehead sucker and fl anne 1 mouth sucker <br />(Tables 2 and 5). Nets were set at 19 different locations in the two canyon <br />reaches (RMI 80.3-66.2 and RMI 55.9-23.1) for a total of 1,048.1 net-hours <br />(Appendix C and D). Seventy-five foot nets were set for a total of 778.3 net- <br />hours and 50 ft nets for a total of 269.8 net-hours. The upper canyon reach was <br />sampled between 8-10 and 16-21 July, while the lower canyon reach was sampled <br />between 3-7 and 17-20 August. <br /> <br />A total of 339 fish were collected between RMI 80.3-66.2, versus 105 fish <br />between RMI 55.9-23.1 (Table 5 and Figure 8). Catch rates (fish/net-hr) for all <br />species were considerably higher in the upper canyon reach for both the 75 ft <br />and 50 ft nets. Bluehead suckers were not collected in the lower canyon reach. <br />Catch rates (fish per mile) from 1987's electrofi~hing efforts show no evidence <br />that channel catfish, carp, bluehead sucker and flannel-mouth sucker populations <br />are lower in the lower canyon reach than in the upper canyon reach as indicated <br />by this summer's trammel netting efforts. Differences in netting catch rates <br />between the upper and lower canyon reaches are probably related to the <br />differences in river flow between July and August (Figure 9). Sampling in the <br />upper canyon reach appeared to be very efficient as a result of lower flows. <br />Mean river flows for the days in which the upper canyon reach was sampled was <br />724 cfs, versus 1,585 cfs on the days in which the lower canyon reach was <br />sampled. The true mean flows for the latter were considerably higher than 1,585 <br />cfs since washes (i.e., Chinle Creek, Butler Wash and Comb Wash) below the gaging <br />station at Bluff, Utah were flooding from storm events. Percent species <br />composition remained nearly the same between reaches for both 75 ft and 50 ft <br />nets (Table 5). Within each of the canyons reaches, habitats sampled with the <br />50 ft nets contai ned a higher percentage of channel catfi sh and a 1 esser <br />percentage of flannelmouth suckers (Table 5). <br /> <br />YounQ-of-the-Year SeininQ <br /> <br />Only one rare YOY fish was collected during the selnlng efforts <br />(standardized or incidental); a 19 mm Colorado squawfish (Tables 6 and 7). This <br />fish was collected at RMI 11.5 on 21 August. Using the formula developed by <br />Haynes and Muth (1984) to back date the hatching date, this YOY Colorado <br />squawfish was hatched on or near 26 July. Hamman (1981) reported an incubation <br />time for Colorado squawfish embryos of 90-121 hrs at 20-240C. If an incubation <br />period of 3-5 days is assumed, this fish was probably spawned between 21-23 July; <br />during a period of extremely low flows (Figure 9). In August and early <br />September, most of the backwater habitats in the lower canyon became inhabitable <br />to YOY Colorado squawfish at one time or another as a result of extreme flow <br /> <br />20 <br />