Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />DOUGLAS ET AL.-COLORADO RIVER CHUBS <br /> <br /> <br />40 <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />BOkm <br /> <br />\ <br />~. <br /> <br />N <br /> <br />t <br /> <br />UTAH <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />WYOMING <br /> <br />COLORADO <br /> <br />Fig. I. Sketch map of the study area and environs, Colorado and Utah. <br /> <br />( <br />ii <br />. <br /> <br />gered (USFWS, 1987a), some populations (and <br />habitats) are still not designated for recovery <br />because of unresolved questions pertaining to <br />either identity or distinctiveness. Specific reach- <br />es of stream, termed "sensitive areas," are con- <br />sidered for protection (USFWS 1987c). Such <br />areas are selected by criteria such as number of <br />adult captures within a year, presence of ripe <br />females during a spawning season, and so forth, <br />all of which demand extreme confidence in <br />identification. Gila elegans, also listed as endan- <br />gered (USFWS, 1987b), suffers similar discrim- <br />ination, again because populational variation is <br />ill-defined and the taxonomic status of individ- <br />uals remains unclear. This species is now so rare <br />it is in danger of being declared essentially ex- <br />tinct in nature (Kaeding et aI., 1986). No sen- <br />sitive areas have been designated for G. elegans, <br />due both to a lack of data and to difficulty and <br />indecision with regard to identification (USFWS, <br />1987b). These factors, singly and in tandem, <br />confuse perceived distribution of the species and <br />preclude essential habitat protection. <br /> <br />MATERIALS AND METHODS <br /> <br />The study area was in the lower Yampa River, <br />largely within Dinosaur National Monument, <br />Colorado (Fig. I). The Yampa River is the larg- <br />est tributary of the Green River, which in turn <br />is the largest tributary of the Colorado River. <br />Fishes were captured in May and June 1987 <br />primarily by angling (Tyus and M inckley, 1988), <br /> <br />l'" <br />, <br /> <br />with a few taken by electrofishing. Seven qual- <br />itative traits were tallied for morphological re- <br />gions (Table I; Fig. 2) deemed important in the <br />diagnosis of Colorado River Gila (Minckley, <br />1973; Rinne, 1976; Smith et aI., 1979). Eight <br />quantitative characters, TL and SL, head, snout, <br />and caudal peduncle lengths, body and least <br />caudal peduncle depths, and greatest depth of <br />caudal peduncle, were measured to the nearest <br />millimeter using vernier caliper or centimeter <br />rule. These characters were selected for ease <br />and speed in recording on live fishes in the field, <br />as well as for their potential discrimination of <br />taxa. Other potentially discriminating features, <br />such as head-nuchal depression (Smith et aI., <br />1979), were omitted due to ambiguity gener- <br />ated by the character among our technicians <br />and to the length of time required for the mea- <br />surement. The need to release these fishes im- <br />mediately precluded collection of additional or <br />more elaborate morphological data. Counts of <br />dorsal- and anal-fin rays and methods of mea- <br />suring followed Hubbs and Lagler (1968) ex- <br />cept for greatest depth of caudal peduncle (ver- <br />tical depth of caudal peduncle at posterior end <br />of anal-fin base). Species identifications were <br />made by WLM and HMT through use of a com- <br />bination of quantitative and qualitative char- <br />acters. All individual fish were photographed <br />for a permanent record (HMT files). <br />Qualitative characters were scored from 1- <br />5, with I representing the most reduced or least <br />apparent character state, and 5 the most ex- <br /> <br />655 <br />