Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />10 <br /> <br />when young-of-the-year squawfish are generally first found (Vanicek . <br />and Kramer 1969, Holden and Selby 1979), but none were found. Sampling <br />effort in 1978 was low but still produced six 1976 year class fish, <br />17 young-of-the-year, but no yearlings, the 1977 year class. There <br />is little doubt that 1977 was in fact a very poor year for Colorado <br /> <br />squawfish reproductive success in the area between Jensen and Ouray. <br />Therefore the data in Table 1 accurately portrays reproductive status <br />of Colorado squawfish for the period 1975-1979, and all years, except <br />1977, were reproductively successful for the squawfish. <br />Comparing this data with flows in 1975-1979 (Figures 3-7) shows <br />that all years exhibited rather natural flows, except 1977 (Figure 5). <br />The loss of a high spring flow, attributable to very little runoff <br />from the Yampa River, appears to be the major factor that is different <br /> <br />in the hydrograph for 1977 (Figure 5). During most years, a high <br /> <br />spring peak occurs in either Mayor June, then recedes in late June and <br /> <br />July. Also in all normal years (1975, 1976, 1978, and 1979), the major <br /> <br />portion of the spring flow is Yampa River water because releases from <br />Flaming Gorge Dam are regulated and do not exceed 4400 cfs. In 1977, <br />the Green River provided most of the flow at the Jensen USGS gauge <br />except during May and June when about one-half of the Jensen flow was <br />due to the Yampa inflow. These data show that the Yampa River is very <br />important to the success of Colorado squawfish in the upper Green River <br />and that major reductions in its spring flow would be very detrimental to <br />Colorado squawfish. <br /> <br />I <br />I' <br />I <br />I ' <br />I ~ <br />i' <br />I <br />,I. <br />