7384 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e C~vr~v2 S ~a b~tb ~7 (vvd'" 71~~r~ ~-,,-~ L ~ and 300-1500cfs for staging using habitat utilization curves developed in 1984. Curves produced in 1987 (Valdez et al.(~1987) produced different results: J ~~ ~pp~v°xY~ '1"o I~cr2z(,~ w ~tCburlw~ '~1~9•r~ ----._~-- ~o ~ adult habitat des optimized 0 dfs, and spawning habitat w s optimized at `~ 1 ~ -~r~-t~,~ w.o~l ~ -.>~ ~ ~ ~, a Z~ s~,A,.- Iz I~~o~- s~_6 eFs ~!-~°t~~1500 cfs. Some flows optimizing habitat for other species also confilicted ~kbl~ y~ ~ ~r,(,~{ f ~~~~,~ ~j?~ ro~Y1~Aj'~'G ~ L~ 1i`~ with flows for Colorado squawfish (Rose and See 1989). a rejected these model ~ Zm ~` ~ outputs in deference to our int rpretatio~1 f empir cal data. As indicated by ~ CFs 1 ~,~ ~ ~ w~.~ dl~ .p ~ rc~ca'F -~-~ deb-sl~ld+r clews -~rs.K,.- ~~Jh ~.s ~ -~ ~~c ;Soo Valdez et al (1987), many constraints were placed on the use of habitat IZ~I ~~~ ~~,~\ICsuitability curves developed by a team of experts, and our findings supported t~ the recommendations of these experts that current simulations are not able to ~v~ descr hi between fish habitat and river flow in the Colorado null( ~ t ~ ~~.. b1~11Q~~ River Systems An apparent incompatibility between heterogeneous habitats used ~I~ .~ ~~~ s s+Z ~~ e er y spawning Colorado squawfish and hydrologic data collected as data input I ~ ~ 1 ~~z ~ I ~` ~'~i~rz s ~ 1 ~ into the IFIM model was presented by Tyus (1988). ~' ~~~ e t~ b~ B~ a J` Habitat Development and Management .~1 x ~ ~ } JS ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ` ~ l 1 1} ~ J ~ J W ~1 Z ~ vLr 'c111~11 ~~ M~ . '~'tfT1~7 ~ `I tG~Nlq v(S V ~ 10 \ I w -~L ,12~~ V ~~'~d Vv The~developme~rt-and Vmainta`ea ~a€- new habitats, anrd por~oovision of access tllo p fz~ 7 Lev~~~-~s~ s o,-._ -}~~ ~- P Is ~,es~~as ~ see I~ ~-ab. ~e~c I~ P s n,2~~~. t, ~z,51b(~~ new area are considered a 1 by ~TSFWS (1987). One category ~'('IEr,~~ rcc e.Kry nc ~l iTti1 e s includes the application of xperi ental techniques to existing areas to ~~,~~L11? ~r:~c ~ ~-+r~1~Z~'s determine if t-hey/~will be acceptable for use by endangered fishes. This potentially includes construction of artificial spawning channels, or~ conversion of existing (but not currently suitable) stream areas to spawning habitats, construction of nursery habitats, and others. Another category would include opening up new areas, or restoring access ~ other areas that may be blocked by dams, diversions, etc. The construction of fish passageways is an example. ~-o ewt_ o ~ o~ ~~~~s~M Q~Za, TVl I s w ~ro~ 2 ~1 S t-v ~ I ~~~ ~ C~~'Y'Cw~l~ v ~ C,pV~G~ ~L lo"~, v } N-fJ~S1Y"~ 2~ 'ne~Cf' ~~ ~ ~ } ~e as ` `n 1 ~ ~~ S ~\ ~ ~ N ~ ~ Gj,V~.r~ r `¢-VL~ ~S ~ ~~~r~ '1'001 Z- ~a ~- ~.».. ....I I n... .. s...n ~ -~ -~ C.e~A~ Y~P'V I ~w.