Laserfiche WebLink
67 <br />Green River staticn #1 should have taken about 125 hours to travel <br />the distance to Green River City. <br />An original objective of this study was to determine the dis- <br />tance the rotenone remained effective downstream from the last <br />rotenone introduction station. The decision to establish a detoxifi- <br />cation station at Brown's Park eliminated all possibility of realizing <br />this objective. <br />Post-treatment fish investigations , <br />During the fall and early winter of 1962, an intensive fish <br />sampling program was undertaken to determine the extent of fish ^-~`' <br />population reduction in the treated area. Special attention was <br />given to the deep holes in the mainstream and the side channel „' <br />sloughs and backwaters where fish were known to over-winter prior <br />to treatment. Overnight gill-netting and multiple dynamite explo- <br />sions were the principal collection methods used in the mainstream; <br />rotenone was used for checkingaff-channel areas, Figures 22 and <br />23 show the longitudinal distribution of flannelmouth suckers, carp, ? <br />brown trout, and whitefish during the study. Mainstream fish, <br />populations consisted of whitefish, brown trout, and various <br />cyprinids, mostly redside minncws, These populations were found <br />oniy_in_the upper sections of the treated area. Whitefish were <br />found 15 miles down the treated Green River and in the upper five <br />