My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9555
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
9555
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:36 PM
Creation date
5/22/2009 7:28:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
9555
Author
Bestgen, K. R., C. D. Walford, A. A. Hill and J. A. Hawkins.
Title
Native Fish Response to Removal of Non-native Predator Fish in the Yampa River, Colorado.
USFW Year
2007.
USFW - Doc Type
140,
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
48
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
6 of 56; 2004, 9 of 20; 2005, 24/95; 2006, 25/78). The proportion was high in 2004 because we <br />chose to sample relatively more isolated pools, places where native fishes tended to reside, and <br />obtained relatively few samples in other habitat types. <br />Patterns of native fish abundance in the Yampa River were also supported by logistic <br />regression analysis and showed essentially the same patterns as those for native fish presence. <br />The proportion of native fish in a sample was significantly higher if it was from an isolated pool <br />habitat but lower if it was from main channel habitat (Table 8, Chi-syua,-e = 197.2, p < 0.0001); <br />the large chi-square value indicates again that this was, by far, the largest effect. Proportion of <br />native fish in the sample was higher if smallmouth bass were absent in the sample (Chi-square = <br />18.4, p < 0.0001) but decreased as number of smallmouth bass in the sample increased (Chi- <br />square = 3.9, p < 0.049). Solving the equation in the table, assuming that the sample was from <br />an isolated pool with no smallmouth bass, predicted that the proportion of native fish in the <br />sample (as a %) should be 15%. Note that the 15% value matches up well with previous <br />descriptive data reported for isolated pools (e.g., 16.7% native fish in isolated pools where bass <br />abundance was very low). Solving the equation in the table, assuming that the sample was from <br />the main channel and bass were present (n = 1), predicted that the proportion of native fish in the <br />sample (as a %) should be < 0.1 %. The proportion of native fish in a sample was not affected <br />by whether the sample was from a control or treatment reach (Chi square value = 0.31; p = <br />0.58). Again, one would expect the proportion of native fish in samples collected in the <br />treatment reach to be higher than in the control reach if treatment reach predator removal was <br />having a significant and positive effect on survival of native fishes. <br />Most smallmouth bass and native fishes captured in isolated pools were age-0 fish, based <br />on their size at capture. Higher relative abundance of native fishes in isolated pools could be a <br />function of timing of reproduction relative to high flows. Areas that eventually become isolated <br />pools may be available to fish in the main channel mostly during higher flow events relatively <br />early in the summer, but are cut off only after native fishes invade these areas and are <br />subsequently isolated. Perhaps the majority of smallmouth bass do not spawn in time to access <br />areas that eventually become isolated pools, and thus, are relatively rare. It may also be that <br />17 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.