Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Final Report <br /> <br /> <br />Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun <br /> <br />Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov <br /> <br />50 <br />45 <br /> <br />1992 <br /> <br />40 <br /> <br />35 <br />30 <br /> <br />w <br />ti 25 <br />20 <br />15 <br />10 <br />5 <br /> <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Noy <br /> <br />50 <br /> <br />45 <br /> <br />40 <br /> <br />35 <br /> <br />30 <br />w <br />ti 25 <br /> <br />20 <br /> <br />15 <br /> <br />1993 <br /> <br />10 <br />5 <br />o <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov <br /> <br />Fig.7. Monthly geometric mean catch per effort, CPE (GMCPE <br />#fish/100 ft/100 hr) for adult humpback chub captured in nets <br />within RM 60.0-61.9 (LCR Inflow), 1991-93. Standard error <br />bars are shown. <br /> <br />and ramping rate. Adult radio-tagged humpback <br />chub were more active and in shallower water at <br />night and during the daytime when river turbidity <br />was high (NTU>30). Adults used deep water (>4.5 <br />m) more frequently during the day, particularly in <br />clear water conditions. Catches of subadults <br />indicate that this life stage exhibited similar <br />photosensitivity. Movements during low light <br /> <br />conditions were attributed to the use of <br />turbidity as cover from predators and to <br />increased feeding activity from increased loads <br />of suspended and drifting material. <br /> <br />Movement by adults was greater during high <br />magnitude discharges and during highest <br />ramping rates, probably in response to <br />changing river hydraulics or to increased drift <br />food availability, or both. The proportion of <br />times that adults moved was significantly <br />greater when flows were above 10,000 cfs, <br />although the greatest movement occurred <br />during increasing flows or decreasing flows. <br />Movement was reduced when flows stabilized <br />at higher magnitudes (Fig. 8). The proportion <br />of times adults moved was also greater when <br />local ramping rates (measured at the nearby <br />LCR USGS stream gage) were greater than <br />300 cfslhr during a full range of flow <br />magnitudes, although this movement was <br />significantly greater only at flows above <br />10,000 cfs. The fish probably moved in <br />response to changing hydraulic characteristics <br />(e,g., water velocity, depth, current direction), <br />as well as to increases in drift food items. <br />Densities of drifting macroinvertebrates <br />increased during descending flows and volume <br />of Cladophora glomerata (dominant green <br />algae) increased during ascending flows. <br /> <br />Movement of sub adults (<200 mm TL) was <br />attributed primarily to downstream dispersal <br />resulting from unstable shoreline habitats and <br />cold mainstem temperatures. This movement <br />was deduced from reduced densities of <br />sub adults between the LCR (RM 61.3) and <br />Hance Rapid (RM 76.6). We believe that this <br />dispersal resulted from a combination of <br />destabilized shoreline habitats (caused by daily <br />flow regulation) and reduced swimming ability <br />of young fish (caused by cold water <br />temperatures); laboratory tests (Bulkleyet al. <br />1982) showed a 98% reduction in fatigue time <br />of juvenile humpback chub in 0.51 mps velocity <br />water at 200C (85 min) compared to water at 140C <br />(2 min). It was hypothesized that displacement of <br />sub adults from sheltered shorelines exposed these <br />fish to predation, increased their energy expenditure <br />in fmding new habitat, and transported young into <br />reaches with little shoreline habitat, such as the <br />Inner Gorge. The combination of cold water <br />