Laserfiche WebLink
<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 />· The intermediate flow year (1996) was the year for highest Colorado pikeminnow <br />YOY and NNC densities in summer and fall backwater habitats in Moab, but and was <br />also the year with the least NNC and Colorado pikeminnow drift densities in Loma. <br /> <br />· If there had been intermediate densities for Colorado pikeminnow and NNC in 1996, <br />there would have been strong correlations between flow and fish densities in the drift <br />and in backwaters. <br /> <br />· Flow generally integrates and is correlated to several physical variables that could <br />influence larval Colorado pikeminnow production such as water temperature, sediment <br />load, larval drift rates, spawning and nursery habitat availability, substrate flushing, <br />siltation on cobble spawning bars, and aspects of water quality. <br /> <br />· Non related flow variables that could influence Colorado pikeminnow production <br />independently of flow include: number of spawning adults per year, variation in <br />locations of spawning sites, physiological condition of spawning adults, larval food <br />availability, number of predators, and unpredictable water quality factors (pollution, <br />mud slides, spills, etc.). <br /> <br />· Results of this five-year study (1992 to 1996) indicated a strong relationship between <br />flows and larval pikeminnow production. However a different five-year period may <br />not have produced similar results. A longer sampling period appears to be necessary <br />to help explain seemingly anomalous years like 1992 and 1996 and the effect of, <br />multiple years. <br /> <br />29 <br />