Laserfiche WebLink
4 f <br />~'. <br />y~='~lr. B~Ctloia ~. <br />- . <br />_~ ~~ =`1~ drift count, made above station #11, indicated that the num- <br />~:.=1-ors of whitefish and suckers were nearly equal in this area; a <br />_ ..~_. <br />.,:,-_ ccxuat below station #11 showed whitefish to predominate, with no <br />e~sridence of flannelmouth suckers. The disparity .af these two counts <br />points up the probably variation in species composition in adjacent <br />sections of the river, <br />The effectiveness of the reduction of the fish population below <br />station #14 by the 1961 test operation was very evident from the <br />d-rift counts. The population was made up largely of small suckers <br />and speckled dace. Only a few adult fish were found. Both species ~ <br />~,_, <br />--. . <br />- were either survivors from the test operation or immigrants into <br />the area. A few hybrid trout were taken near stations #19, #20, ,=` <br />-,. <br />and #21. These were probably migrants from nearby tributaries. <br />~^, <br />Gill netting at station #21, prior to treatment, had showed trout <br />to be present. The trout numbers seemed to be greatest near <br />~_ <br />Sheep Creek and declined up the river, _* <br />The only channel catfish observed during the 1962 treatment ~ <br />were found in Brown's Park near the detoxification station. All <br />fiah in this area were surprisingly scarce. Only„five s_quawfish <br />and no humpback chubs were reported during the treatment despite <br />intensive searching by various groups of observers. The squawfish <br />were found only below the Flaming Gorge Dam site. <br />