Laserfiche WebLink
<br />to what haDDened in the <br />Colorado River Basin over 10 years <br />ago to the razorback sucker. Because it is a very long lived fish, <br />numbers would not drop immediately after habitat change. We believe <br />we are, witnessing in the Upper Colorado River the die off of the <br />old specimens with resultant drop in total population. Habitat changes <br />associated with this drop in razorback sucker population is not known. <br />The habitat needs of the razorback sucker need to be addressed in <br />the Upper Basin while there is still time to work with this species. <br />Flows and Key Species Habitat <br />To provide the needed habitat for the key fish species various <br />flows are needed at the proper time of the year. We are addressing the <br />question of providing needed flow for providing critical habitat by using <br />the FWS Instream Flow Methodology. We have established six IFG sites <br />on the Upper Colorado River, three on the Green and three on the main <br />Colorado, to assess needed habitat by life stage of the target fishes. <br />We have only conducted a few computer runs using this IFG data, and no runs <br />using the habitat preference data we have generated under this project. <br />What we have done this past year is develop the tools to use and the <br />means to handle the vast amount of data needed for relating flows to <br />fish habitat. We will start working with our field data on specific <br />habitat needs by flow requirements during the next few months. Examples <br />of habitat available vs. flow is given in Appendix D. <br />Recovery of the Target Species <br />Our project has documented the present distribution of the target <br />fishes. The final report will cover the flow needed to provide the <br />54