Laserfiche WebLink
"Fast' <br />(95% per year, <br />early-life <br />mortality) <br />W <br />N_ <br />(A <br />Z <br />O <br />Q <br />J <br />4. <br />t].. <br />W <br />J <br />Q <br />W <br />u_ <br />"Fast' <br />(99% per year, <br />early-life <br />mortality) <br />"Slow" <br />(95% per year, <br />early-life mortality) <br />"Slow" <br />(99% per year. <br />early-life mortality) <br />TIME <br />FIGURE 4. Comparison of theoretical growth of adult-female <br />populations of fast-growing, early-maturing Colorado squawfish <br />("fast") with those of populations of slow-growing, late- <br />maturing fish ("slow"), in a li-nitless environment, under <br />conditions of 95 or 99~ early-life mortality. <br />MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS <br />Agencies charged with management of Colorado squawfish in the <br />upper basin must develop programs to recover the species from near <br />extirpation. However, understanding both the causes of the <br />population decline and the factors limiting the population is <br />problematic and essential to such development. Although <br />extirpation of Colorado squawfish from former range is generally <br />agreed the result of widespread and often profoundly evident <br />effects of water-resources development, introduction of non-native <br />fishes, and poor land-use practices (Miller 1961, Minckley and <br />Deacon 1968, Minckley 1973), many upper basin river reaches show no <br />obvious man-induced physical change. A17 have been successfully <br />colonized by non-native fishes, however (Tyus et al. 1982). <br />-114- <br />