Laserfiche WebLink
generally exceeding 14 °C (range: 14-22°C in the Green River from May 23-July <br />27; Tyus, in review). <br />Homing behavior in Colorado squawfish is indicated by long-distance <br />movement patterns and repeated recaptures of the same fish on spawning grounds <br />in subsequent years (Wick et al. 1983; Tyus 1985, Tyus, in review). The <br />absence of any fish using more than one spawning area also supports the <br />concept of spawning fidelity in Colorado squawfish. Different genetic stocks <br />may be separated by homing fidelity to spawning areas (reviewed by Smith <br />1985). Colorado squawfish spawning areas are considered unique and critical to <br />the conservation of the species. <br />The Groundwater Seepage Hypothesis, proposed for other species by Harden- <br />Jones (1981), may be implicated as a possible homing mechanism for Colorado <br />squawfish (Tyus 1985).. Migrating adult Colorado squawfish pass through many <br />kilometers of potentially good spawning habitat (e.g., canyon-bound cobble <br />bars in Split and Whirlpool canyons in the Green River, and Cross Mountain and <br />Juniper Mountain canyons in the Yampa River) to reach specific spawning <br />grounds in Yampa and Gray canyons. Observations at the two confirmed spawning <br />grounds in upper Green River basin suggest that migrating individuals may be <br />orienting to these areas in response to freshwater inflow from spring-fed <br />tributaries (e.g., Florence Creek, Green River; Warm Springs Creek, Yampa <br />River), sandstone-limestone seeps (e.g., at Coal Creek, Green River; at <br />Cleopatras Couch, Yampa River), and chemical inputs from runoff, snowmelt and <br />inundated shorelines (Lake 1967; Tyus, in review). Thus, significance of <br />groundwater and surface inflows in these areas, relative to possible <br />orientation mechanisms in Colorado squawfish, should be further investigated. <br />The potamodromous migrations and homing behavior of Colorado squawfish <br />mandates protection of known migration routes, since feasibility of fish <br />passage facilities has yet to be demonstrated for this species. Migrations of <br />Colorado squawfish are vulnerable to stream blockage (Tyus 1984) as evidenced <br />by the recent loss of 80km of occupied habitat in the White River due to <br />blockage (Martinez 1986). Lack of access to spawning grounds is implicated in <br />the decline of Colorado squawfish (Joseph et al. 1917; Tyus 1984). <br />Spawning <br />Two Colorado squawfish spawning areas have been identified in the Green <br />River basin by tracking radio-tagged migratory fish. These include riffle and <br />pool habitats in Yampa Canyon of the lower Yampa River and Gray Canyon of the <br />Green River (Tyus and Karp 1989; Tyus, in review). <br />As indicated in Figure 5, the annual spawning period (as indicated by <br />presence of migrating radio-tagged fish on spawning grounds, collections of <br />ripe fish, ar calculated dates of larval emergence in spawning reach) lasted <br />about 4 to 5 weeks. An optimum spawning period was also calculated by <br />averaging the dates in which radio-tagged fish and ripe fish were present in <br />the spawning reach and back-calculated dates of egg deposition. The length of <br />the estimated optimal spawning period (about 26 days) was similar in both <br />spawning areas all years. Spawning generally occurred earlier in low-water <br />years, 1981, 1987 and 1988, and later in high-flow years of 1983 and 1984. <br />Discharge was variable between years during the optimum spawning period, but <br />average temperatures ranged from about 22-25°C. <br />Vanicek and Kramer (1969) first suggested that discharge and temperature <br />influenced spawning in Colorado squawfish. FWS data from 1981 to 1988 <br />indicated that spawning occurred during the period of declining flows <br />following spring peak runoff and increasing temperatures (Figure 6; Tyus, in <br />17 <br />