Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />DISCUSSION <br /> <br />The biological data resulting from this study was disappointing due to its <br />paucity. Most of the information is from one fish. The question remains whether <br />this fish exhibited normal behavior or whether he was operating aberrantly. <br />The downstream movement exhibited byfish 40.670, and to some degree fish <br />40.612, was not anticipated. Generally, it was thought that the fish may move <br />downstream shortly after surgery, but would stop and either take up residence in <br />an area or move upstream. One explanation for the observed movement of 40.670 <br />is that it was sick and moved passively with the current whenever it was in the <br />river. However, the wariness of the fish to motors, and his readiness to move <br />into the current rather than hide, suggests the fish was not weak, and probably <br />not sick. <br />The selection of backwaters as sites where most of its time was spent is <br />similar to observations that others have made during high flows (Holden and <br />Stalnaker, 1975; Holden, 1977). Utilizing backwaters during high flow periods <br />is apparently a common practice by adult squawfish. <br />The observations that 40.670 appeared to be feeding in the backwaters also <br />seems normal. Young fish conmonlyutilize such areas more heavily than areas of <br />current (Holden, 1977). During high flows, this phenomenon may be even more pro- <br />nounced due to the swift current of the main channel, but no quantitative data <br />is available to substantiate this hypothesis. <br /> <br />21 <br />