7824

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7824
• Author: Miller, W. H., et al.
• Title: Colorado River Fishery Project, Part III, Final Report, Contracted Studies.
• USFW Year: 1982.
• USFW - Doc Type: \
• Copyright Material: NO

• availability had been accounted for. The humback chub adult curves were
to be applied only at the Black Rocks PHABSIM study site, thus eliminat-
ing the need to account for available habitat.
The YOY squaw£ish curves were derived from all YOY data from both
Colorado and Green Rivers. This combination was made after examination
of major data partitions and determination of significant differences.
While statistically significant differences may have occurred among small
data partitions, neither the preferences expressed in the Colorado River
sample nor those from the Green River collections differed significantly
from those of the combined Colorado-Green sample. A major subsample of
Green River data (derived from collections from strata A, D, and E) also
did not differ significantly from the Colorado, Green, or Colorado-Green
data sets (Table 1). In all cases, there were very few collections at
velocities greater than .5 fps, with the greatest number of collections
at less than .1 fps. In all cases, depths were less than 2.5 feet, with
the peak preference consistently in the .6 to .7 feet range. Substrate
preferences varied among the samples but only with respect to sand
preference. The final YOY curves reflected an average preference based
on Colorado and Green River differences (Figure 1).
The humpback chub adult curve was derived from fish captured at both
the Black Rocks reach and in Westwater Canyon on the Colorado River.
Data from original histograms were smoothed to create a rather broad
velocity curve and an extremely broad depth curve (Figure 2). The
substrate curve was a step function (non-continuous) which is usually
• more suitable for use in PHABSIM analyses because of the integer nature
of substrate values from the hydraulic simulation program.
Water Temperature Modeling
The instream water temperature model described in this report
was developed after careful consideration of available technology. It
was basically a physical process model, but used certain regression
techniques to calculate initial water temperatures and those temperatures
used in validation checks.
Analysis of certain components of the SSAM IV temperature model
(specified in the initial SOW) showed that missing or inadequate compon-
ents were used under a wide range of conditions. This model had certain
retainable features, however, and served as a basis for further develop-
ment. A literature search was conducted and modeling components from
several sources were extracted and tested (Cinquemani et al. 1978;
Pluhowski 1970; Tennessee Valley Authority 1972). Resulting model
components were modified and synthesized into an instream water temper-
ature model suitable for use in predicting temperatures in an entire
river basin. A prototype model was developed on a HP-41C hand calculator
to test components and to verify the final main frame computer model.
The instream water temperature model required three basic subsets
• of input data: 1) stream system structure, 2) hydrology, and 3) meter-
ology. The stream system structure for the computer model was specific
to selected sites in the UCRB. The meteorology data consisted of his-
torical records from 1964 through 1980 and was similarly site specific.
7