7124 ‎(2)‎

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7124
• Author: McAda, C. W. and R. S. Wydoski.
• Title: Technical Papers
• USFW Year: 1980.
• USFW - Doc Type: \
• Copyright Material: YES

12
1 A4 C1 E1
N
E3
63
E2 A2
62
A5
A3
~ C2 Al
tL ti i
~ D
w YAMPA RIVER
1L 0 0.5
~ kilometers
Fig. 5. Movement of five razorback suckers (A-E) equipped with ultrasonic transmitters, in the Green and Yampa rivers, May
1975. The sites of release (e.g., Al) and of last contact (e.g., A5) are encircled. Fish A (released 3 May) moved upstream to A2
for 2 days, downstream to A3 and A4 for 24 h each, and was located at A5 twice, 14 and 15 days after release. Fish B
(released 5 May- moved upstream for 1 h, reversed direction at B2 and moved downstream to B3, where it remained for 7 h
when contact was lost. Fish C (released 7 May) remained at C1 for 24 h, when contact was temporarily lost; 5 days later it
was relocated at C2, where it remained for 48 h. Fish D (released 7 May) remained at D1 for 24 h; contact was then lost. Fish
E (released 8 May) moved upstream to E2, remained there for 5 h, and moved downstream to E3, where contact was lost.
near shore consisted of a 10- to 20-cm layer of mud
with cobble (10 to 20 mm in diameter-. The water tem-
perature was 12± 0.5 C throughout the pond.
During the following spring, the activities of this
female and two males were monitored. The fish spent
most time in the deep end of the gravel pit. One male
remained in the northwest corner of the pit, and the
other two fish moved throughout it. These -fish were
never tracked together in the pond and appeared to be
moving independently.
During May 1975, ultrasonic transmitters were
inserted into five male razorback suckers in an at-
tempt to track their movements and determine spawn-
ing sites in the Yampa River. We were not able to
track the fish successfully with the transmitters due to
problems with the equipment. In addition, turbulence
in the river reduced the range of the transmitters (D.
Brumbaugh, personal communication, and objects
such as rocks or vegetation between the receiver and
the transmitter blocked the signal. In general, contact
could be maintained with a tagged fish when it
remained stationary or was in quiet water near the
shore; if the fish moved into fast water, contact was
usually lost and considerable time often elapsed before
the fish was relocated.
None of the fish equipped with ultrasonic tags
moved farther than 1 km up the Yampa River before
returning to the mouth. The first two suckers that
were released after tagging were followed continuously
for 24 h. After 1 day, their positions were recorded
whenever the fish were relocated.
The first fish (A, ~'ig. 5) released 3 May was observed
periodically for about 2 weeks. It was usually found in
quiet water near shore. However, it was detected twice
in relatively swift, shallow water on the outer edge of a
gravel bar at the confluence of the Green and Yampa
rivers. On one occasion it remained near this gravel
bar for 4 h. The physical characteristics of this site
were similar to those of nearby spawning areas
(Table 9-, except that water was shallower (0.3 m-.
Water flowed past the eastern edge of the bar at a
velocity of 0.8 mis, and past the northern side of the
bar at 0.42 m/s. Fish A remained in the slower water
(0.42 m/s) most of the time, but moved into the faster