7862

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7862
• Author: Andrews, E. D., M. B. Bain, K. S. Lubinski, W. L. Minckley, J. A. Stanford, E. Wohl and R. S. Wydoski.
• Title: Highlights Of A Peer Review And Roundtable Discussion On The Relationship Of Streamflow, Geomorphology, And Food Web Studies In Recovery Of The Endangered Fishes In The Upper Colorado River Basin.
• USFW Year: 1996.
• USFW - Doc Type: Denver, Colorado.
• Copyright Material: NO

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

The persons selected as peer reviewers in these three disciplines were:

Geomoroholoqy
E.D. Andrews, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado

Ellen Wohl, Colorado State University, Fort Collins

Larqe River Ecoloqy
Ken Lubinski, National Biol. Service, Onalaska, Wisconsin
Jack StanfordJ University of Montana, Polson

Food Web Relationships

Mark B. Bain, New York Coop. Fish and Wildlife Res. Unit,
Cornell University, Ithaca

Wendell L. Minckley, Arizona State University, Tempe

METHODS

The six peer reviewers were provided with Fiscal Year 1994 scopes-of-work for
projects under the Aspinall Unit and Flaming Gorge Flow Recommendation
Investigation as well as annual project reports for the Aspinall Unit and
Flaming Gorge completed during Fiscal Year 1993. These documents served as
the basis for the peer review of the relationship between streamflows,
geomorphology, and food web dynamics. A review of Program efforts and
recommendations for instream flows (Stanford 1994) and a description of the
physical changes in the Gunnison and Colorado rivers from construction of the
Aspinall Unit and related projects (McAda and Kaeding 1991) provided valuable
background information. In addition, general background describing the
Recovery Progam was provided. A new Recovery Program thrust related to
habitat enhancement or restoration of off-channel habitats was not covered
under Fiscal Year 1994 scopes-of-work. Therefore, the perceived ecological
value of flooded bottomland habitats to the endangered fishes, summarized by
Wydoski (1994a), was provided to the peer reviewers.

Format for Conductinq the Peer Review. The review materials were provided to
the peer reviewers in September 1994 for their review and comment. Although
written comments on the Flaming Gorge and Aspinall Unit projects were
solicited after the materials were provided to the peer reviewers, only
general comments were received from several of the reviewers. During followup
telephone conversations, it became apparent that the scopes-of-work and annual
reports were incomplete and did not provide adequate information for a
detailed evaluation. The peer reviewers recommended that a workshop be
organized so that they could discuss the study proposals and annual reports
with the principal investigators. Therefore, a workshop was arranged by the
Propagation and Nonnative Fish Program Coordinator so that the projects could
be discussed in more depth.

4