My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9292
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
9292
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:34 PM
Creation date
5/22/2009 7:40:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
9292
Author
Trammell, M. and T. Chart.
Title
Aspinall Unit Studies Nursery Habitat Studies Colorado River 1992--1996.
USFW Year
1998.
USFW - Doc Type
Moab, Utah.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
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
13 <br />Habitat Classification <br />Habitats were classified into 6 geomorphological types, as defined in the appendix (Table A1). <br />~Vlost habitats were associated either with secondary channels (SC) or migratory sandwaves (MS). <br />Other types of habitat such as those associated with horseshoe vortexes (HS) or flooded tributaries <br />(FT) were relatively uncommon. Furthermore, the vast majority were. true backwaters rather than <br />isolated pools or azeas with flow, so results were pooled for backwaters. <br />Selectivity analysis of Colorado squawfish use of habitat by geomorphological type revealed a <br />preference for Secondary Channel (SC) habitats. In the Green River NH data, chi-squared analysis <br />showed a clear preference for SC habitats, which was significant for all seasons. Although the same <br />analysis of Colorado River data also showed a preference for SC, it only approached significance for <br />the lower;. section, in fall (Table 7). Colorado squawfish used all the habitats to some extent. In <br />particular, HS habitats were used in a greater proportion than they occurred, particularly in the upper <br />section where they were more frequently encountered. We observed in the field -that juvenile <br />squawfish seemed to preferentially use HS habitats, but too few were collected to provide an analysis. <br />Most other species, particularly the NNC, also used the SC habitats in at least the same proportion <br />by which the habitats occurred. No preference was determined, because NNC were present in almost <br />every habitat. However, densities (catch rates) of NNC in the SC habitats were usually higher than <br />the MS habitats. In any case, the NNC overwhelm squawfish in pure numbers in all habitats. <br />In general, SC habitats were lazger in azea and volume, and deeper on average and by maximum <br />depth than MS habitats, and provided the majority of the available habitat (Table 8). Usually, the <br />average maximum SC temperature was less than MS habitats in low/medium water years, and greater <br />in high water years, but this was not a consistent phenomenon. The amount of SC habitat available <br />was less closely correlated with peak flows and sampling flows than total habitat availability. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.