Laserfiche WebLink
protected as endangered species under provisions of the Endangered Species Act <br />of 1973 {U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1986). The razorback sucker, a <br />candidate species for federal listing, is protected by state statutes in <br />Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, and Utah (U.S. Fish and Wildlife <br />Service 1985, 1987a). <br />In the lower Colorado River basin (below Lee Ferry, AZ), the Colorado <br />squawfish has been extirpated, relict populations of bonytail chub and <br />razorback sucker remain in some impoundments but neither species are presumed <br />self-sustaining, and humpback chub reproduce only in the Little Colorado River <br />(Hinckley 1973, 1983; Kaeding and Zimmerman 1983; C.O. Hinckley,-pers. <br />comm.). In the upper Colorado River basin, Colorado squawfish persists in the <br />Yampa and lower Green {below the confluence of the Yampa River) rivers, the <br />upper Colorado River mainstream, and the lower San Juan River (Archer et al. <br />1985; Meyer and Moretti 1988; Tyus 1990). The humpback chub is presently <br />self-sustaining in the Yampa River and upper Colorado River (Archer et al. <br />1985; Karp and Tyus, in review). The razorback sucker persists in the lower <br />Yampa and Green rivers, the mainstream Colorado River, and the lower San Juan <br />River, but there is little indication of recruitment in these remnant <br />populations (McAda and Wydowski 1980; Meyer and Moretti 1988; Lanigan and Tyus <br />1989; Tyus and Karp, in review). Bonytail chub are extremely rare in the upper <br />Colorado River basin (Valdez and Clemmer 1982; U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service <br />1987a). All four fishes have been extirpated in the Green River between <br />flaming Gorge Dam and the Yampa River confluence, presumably due, in part, to <br />the loss of usable habitat following closure of the dam (Vanicek et al. 1970). <br />The Yampa River supports all of its native fish fauna including self- <br />sustaining populations of some of the rare species and is considered important <br />to the maintenance and availability of usable rare fish habitat in the <br />downstream Green River (Tyus and Karp 1989). <br />Study Abstracts <br />The following section abstracts all reports completed under the Flaming <br />Gorge Interagency Agreement of 1986. These reports are generally organized <br />under the appropriate study; however, there was some overlap between study <br />reports. Abstracts-were taken from each respective report. <br />Study 1: Summer and Fall Requirements of Age-0 Colorado squawfish in the Green <br />River. <br />Report 1- Distribution, Abundance, Habitat use, and Growth of Young Colorad o <br />squawfish in the Green River Basin, Colorado and Utah (Tyus and Haines, in <br />review). <br />Larval and postlarval Colorado squawfish were collected in stream drift <br />(N=601) and shoreline habitat (N=3,079] in July and August. The young fish <br />appeared in drift nets about 36d following peak spring discharge and <br />thereafter for 4-7 weeks. Drift netting and shoreline seining in 1979-85 and <br />1987-88 indicated that young Colorado squawfish moved an average of about <br />160km downstream of two spawning areas by August of each year. Postlarval <br />squawfish were most abundant in shoreline embayments (backwaters) in September <br />and October (N=6,459), and two nursery areas differed in average backwater <br />temperatures and maximum depths (18.7°C and 29.6cm in one area, 13.1°C and <br />36.6cm in the other). The fish occurred most frequently (80%, N=5,043) in <br />6 <br />