9588 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

0.027) and the lower Green River reach (0.015) than to main stem Green River sites (Desolation- Gray Canyon reach = 0.066, middle Green River = 0.054) in the middle of the study area. The negative values for net Or from the Yampa, and lower Green River reaches, suggested a net movement of fish from those areas. The positive values for net t& to the middle Green River and Desolation-Gray Canyon river reaches suggested a net movement of fish to those areas during this study; the near-zero net (#value for the White River suggested equal numbers of fish entering or leaving that area. The relatively high and positive r/s for relatively small fish in the lowermost two sections of the Green River (see length frequency histograms below) reflected an upstream transition rate. Estimates of i& for fish from the lower Green River to the Desolation-Gray Canyon reach (0.121), for fish from Desolation-Gray Canyon to the middle Green River reach (0.078), and for fish from the White River to the Desolation-Gray Canyon reach (0.080) were the largest detected in this study. Upstream 0 to the White and Yampa rivers from those areas was lower. The highest downstream O's detected were for fish from the middle Green River to Desolation-Gray Canyon (0.045) and for fish from the White River to the Desolation-Gray Canyon reach (0.080). Finite population rates of change.-We attempted to fit models that estimated X as a function of time for ISMP reaches, for middle and lower Green River reaches, and the Yampa and White rivers. Parameter estimates were imprecise or models did not converge when X was estimated as a function ofp, S, river, and time. Therefore, we dropped the river term and simply estimated a river-wide 1l over time with constant p and S, which allowed valid estimates for the first and last intervals as well. We did not use the TL covariate because fish were likely to grow 35