My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7300
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
7300
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:29 PM
Creation date
5/24/2009 7:08:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
7300
Author
Tyus, H. M. and C. A. Karp.
Title
Habitat Use and Streamflow Needs of Rare and Endangered Fishes, Yampa River, Colorado.
USFW Year
1989.
USFW - Doc Type
Biological Report 89(14),
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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
Colorado squawfish vary with time of year, and that both <br />reproduction and recruitment to the juvenile stage are <br />highest in years when hydrographs approximate natural <br />flow conditions. This presumably is related to the <br />availability of nursery backwater habitat in fall. <br />Aerial photography was used to evaluate the effect of <br />seven test flows on availability of backwater habitat in late <br />summer and fa111987 at four sites (Island Park, Jensen, <br />Ouray, Sand Wash) in the upper Green River (M. <br />Pucherelli and R. Clark, written communication). It was <br />found that the greatest amount of backwater habitat <br />resulted when flows ranged from 31.15 to 50.17 m3/s, and <br />the least amount of backwater habitat was present at flows <br />of 68.57 and 148.85 m3/s. Averaging the Jensen, Ouray, <br />and Sand Wash sites (i.e., the upper Green River <br />concentration area for young Colorado squawfish drifting <br />out of the Yampa River), area of backwater habitat was <br />greatest with flows of 50.17 and 47.74 m3/s, and number <br />of backwater habitats was maximized at 47.74 m3/s. These <br />relations support the biological information and <br />emphasize that young Colorado squawfish need low flows <br />in late summer and fall. <br />Juvenile <br />Factors limiting the distribution and abundance of <br />juvenile Colorado squawfish are difficult to assess <br />because there is little information available regarding <br />their habitat requirements. Stream blockage is viewed <br />as limiting because upstream movement of juveniles is <br />necessary to maintain adult populations. <br />Evidence of predation by nonnative fishes in both <br />artificial and natural environments suggests that this <br />factor limits the survival of juvenile Colorado squawfish. <br />Hendrickson and Brooks (1987) noted predation by <br />yellow bullhead (Ictalunis rratalis) and largemouth bass <br />(Micropterus salmoides) on young Colorado squawfish <br />stocked into the Verde River, Arizona. Osmundson <br />(1987) noted predation by largemouth bass, green <br />sunfish, black crappie (Pomoris -iigromaculatres), and <br />black bullhead (Ictalunrs melas) on young Colorado <br />squawfish in gravel pits near the Colorado River, <br />Colorado, and indicated that predation by channel <br />catfish may also have occurred. In addition, Coon <br />(1965) reported channel catfish predation on Colorado <br />squawfish in the Dolores River. Flow regimens and <br />other conditions that may aid the proliferation of these <br />nonnative predators must be identified and, if possible, <br />avoided. <br />Humpback Chub <br />Spring peak flows are important to reproductive <br />success of the humpback chub, because spawning <br />occurs in shoreline eddy habitat shortly after this period. <br />Availability of these habitats is greatest during spring <br />runoff and lessens thereafter with decreasing summer <br />flows (Karp and Tyus 1989). Loss or reduction of spring <br />runoff could reduce availability of spawning habitat and <br />thus adversely affect humpback chub reproduction. <br />Habitat alteration may also promote hybridization with <br />other species (Valdez and Clemmer 1982). Flow <br />reductions- and decreased temperatures have been <br />implicated as factors curtailing successful spawn and <br />increasing competition in the Colorado River (Kaeding <br />and Zimmerman 1983). <br />Humpback chubs and channel catfish may be <br />competing for food or quality microhabitat as suggested <br />by capture of both species with baits in the same eddy <br />habitats in the Yampa River (Tyus and Minckley 1988; <br />Karp and Tyus 1989). The high number of channel <br />catfish in preferred humpback chub spawning habitat <br />(30% of the catch in 1987 and 1988; Karp and Tyus 1989) <br />suggests that this omnivorous introduced species may <br />adversely affect reproductive success of the humpback <br />chub in the Yampa Canyon. In addition, the presence of <br />bite marks on humpback and roundtail chubs may be <br />due to attempted predation by channel catfish (Kaeding <br />and Zimmerman 1983; Karp and Tyus 1989; C. O. <br />Minckley, personal communication). W. L. Minckley <br />(personal communication) also noted humpback chub <br />remains in stomachs of channel catfish captured in the <br />Little Colorado River. Flows or other conditions (e.g., <br />temperature; Tyus and Nikirk, in review) which may <br />favor growth of channel catfish in the Green River basin <br />should be determined and avoided. <br />Humpback chubs predominantly use canyon habitat <br />(Fig. 4) and availability of such habitat could be <br />adversely affected by alteration of the natural flow cycle <br />of the Yampa River (Fig. 1). <br />Bonytail Chub <br />Bonytail chubs were never reported as abundant in <br />the Yampa River and a decline is not indicated in that <br />system. However, in the Echo Park area, bonytail chubs <br />have apparently declined, possibly due to flow and <br />temperature changes resulting from closure of Flaming <br />Gorge Dam. A similar pattern has been noted in the <br />Colorado River downstream from Glen Canyon Dam <br />(Utah State Department of Fish and Game 1964,1969). <br />Although the preimpoundment poisoning of riverine <br />habitat in the upper Green River in 1962 has been <br />implicated in the decline of the bonytail chub in that <br />system, fish collections in DNM before and after the <br />poisoning (Binns et a1.1963; Vanicek and Kramer 1969; <br />Vanicek et al. 1970) suggested that the downstream <br />extent of the poison was not a factor in the almost total <br />extirpation of the species from the Echo Park area. <br />Current negotiations between the Fish and Wildlife <br />Service and Bureau of Reclamation regarding <br />management of Flaming Gorge Dam operations for rare <br />fishes may improve the future of the bonytail chub in the <br />21 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.