9488 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

"""... light so in order not to influence chub movements, light traps were not used. Subsequent sampling collected both bonytail and razorback sucker larvae. Razorback Sucker Larvae. Ten larvae were collected by light trap during the week of March 24, 2003. The pro larvae were collected adjacent to the razorback spawning area, which was along the river levee. Six were preserved for later identity. The larvae were confirmed as razorback sucker (Snyder 1981) and ranged in size from 8.5 to 9.6 mm (avg. 9.0 mm). One larvae had been actively feeding and had a fuil gut of small Daphnia. Their distinctive eye spot made it possible to count individuals; the larvae had recently consumed 25 daphnia (Photo 7). Bonvtail. Light traps were set only two nights during the week of May 6,2003. Four larvae were taken from traps set along the river levee during the bonytail spawn. Lengths ranged from 7.8 to 15.8 mm (avg.l1.1 mm) and could contain both species. Identification ofthese larvae is pending. Trammel Netting. Trammel nets were set on May 7 to recapture bonytail used in the telemetry study. The following night, nets were set prior to sunset to capture fish leaving their cavities. A total of 28 bonytail were captured during the two efforts, and four had been used in the telemetry study (Table 2). This effort was repeated July 1 and 2 in an attempt to recapture the remaining 6 study fish. Catch rates (CPUE) for bonytail were nearly twice at high in Mayas for the other collection efforts. Only 3 bonytail were captured in July, the lowest catch rate. It appears during the heat of the summer, fish activity may drop dramatically, as fish become inactive. Table 2. Trammel net catch rates (CPUE) for bonytail and razorback suckers captured in Cibola High Levee Pond, AZ-CA. Bonytail Razorback suckers Date Number CPUE * Number CPUE * 3/17/2003 11 1.37 12 1.50 5/712003 28 2.27 3 0.24 7/1-2/2003 3 0.17 6 0.40 * fish/hour/l00 mL. of net Overall, the study fish were in good shape, and we did not observe any external parasites. We found that the tag attachment of recaptured study fish had chafed the dermis around the caudal peduncle. It appears the cable tie teeth 'sawed' through the skin due to swimming action. This might be remedied by switching to a wider banding material that does not have teeth or use something less ridged, like electrician's tape. Otherwise this approach appears to have excellent potential for short-term studies. 13