My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9350
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
9350
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:34 PM
Creation date
5/22/2009 4:43:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
9350
Author
Hawkins, J., T. Modde and J. Bundy.
Title
Ichthyogauna of the Little Snake River, Colorado, 1995 with Notes on Movements of Humpback Chub.
USFW Year
2001.
USFW - Doc Type
Denver.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
62
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />18 <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />DISCUSSION <br /> <br />Discharge, water temperature, and water quality <br /> <br />The 1 995 water year exemplified the seasonal nature and extreme variability <br />of the Little Snake River. Annual runoff volume in 1995 was 1.5 times higher than <br />the average of 415,200 acre feet lCrowfoot et al. 1996) and three times wetter <br />than the previous year which discharged about half the average volume (Ugland et <br />aJ. 1995). The unregulated characteristics of the river and the nature of the <br />hydrograph in 1995 were represented by the extreme peak to base-flow ratio <br />(165: 11 primarily caused by extremely low base flows which are typical for the <br />Little Snake River. Low baseflow dewatered all reaches but was most evident in <br />the sandy and braided middle reach. Fish habitat was maintained in the lower and <br />upper reaches by scattered refugia pools, connected with minimal surface flows <br />that were very shallow and created a barrier to fish movement between pools. <br />Shallow, widely dispersed flows also had a tremendous influence on water <br />temperature and caused diel variations of a greater magnitude than those in the <br />Yampa River. These and other physical influences likely caused a significant, but <br />unknown, role in initially attracting and eventually repelling humpback chub and <br />Colorado pikeminnow and structuring the fish community of the Little Snake River. <br /> <br />Fish community sampling <br /> <br />Humpback chub and Colorado pikeminnow occupied the lower 15 km of the <br />Little Snake River during summer runoff. Locations and dates of their capture in <br />1995 matched those of previous collections of these species lMiller et al. 1982, <br />Wick et al. 1 991), demonstrating that both species use the Little Snake River on a <br />regular basis. We found no evidence of their occurrence in the middle or upper <br />reaches even though a Colorado pikeminnow was previously captured at about <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.