Laserfiche WebLink
SUCKER WETLAND USE <br />Duchesne River <br />80 Kilometers <br />50 Nees <br />N <br /> <br />FiGURE 1.-Map of the study area of the Green River, Utah, and the Ouray National Wildlife Refuge. <br />the spring from 1993 to 1996 (Muth et al. 1998) <br />with floating quatrefoil light traps (modified from <br />Floyd et al. 1984) placed in no- or low-velocity <br />main-channel habitats such as backwaters and trib- <br />utary mouths. Traps were set in the afternoon and <br />retrieved before sunrise the following day. Most <br />larvae were immediately placed into 100% ethanol <br />(some in a 10% formalin solution) and brought to <br />the laboratory for identification and enumeration. <br />Sampling started in early or mid-May when <br />main-channel temperatures consistently reached or <br />1097 <br />exceeded WC and continued until the captures of <br />sucker larvae had ceased or declined to only a few <br />per collection. We sampled at least twice a week <br />with three light traps at each of four locations (two <br />near Jensen and two near Ouray, Utah). <br />Larval access to floodplain wetlands was esti- <br />mated by comparing the time periods when larvae <br />were collected in the middle Green River between <br />1993 and 1996 with those when the average flow <br />was sufficient to connect floodplain wetlands at <br />the Ouray National Wildlife Refuge (i.e., 575 m3/