My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9705
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
9705
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/11/2009 11:32:58 AM
Creation date
8/10/2009 5:12:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
9705
Author
Green River Study Plan ad hoc Committee.
Title
Study plan for the implementation and evaluation of flow and temperature recommendations for endangered fishes in the Green River downstream of Flaming Gorge Dam.
USFW Year
2007.
USFW - Doc Type
Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
84
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Table A2. Matrix of flow and temperature recommendations, hypotheses, and relevant studies for Reach 1 (Flaming Gorge Dam to <br />Yampa River confluence) of the Green River. Language for anticipated effects and uncertainties was taken from Muth et al. (2000), <br />U.S. Department of the Interior and Western Area Power Administration (2005), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2005), or U.S. <br />Department of the Interior (2006). See Table A4 for details of specific studies. Primary studies (bold) and supporting studies are <br />linked to Anticipated Effects (A) or Uncertainties (U) and ordered sequentially. <br /> <br />General Flow and Temperature Relevant Studies <br />Recommendations Anticipated Effects and Uncertainties (Hypotheses) (primary studies in bold) <br />(Muth et al. 2000) <br />Reach I-Spring Peak <br />Peak flows in Reach 1 should be of Anticipated Effects <br />the magnitude, timing, and duration to AI. Significant channel maintenance (i.e., rework and rebuild in- AI-I. USU channel monitoring studies <br />achieve recommended peak flows in channel sediment deposits, increase habitat complexity, and <br />Reaches 2 and 3. In wetter years, peak prevent or reverse channel narrowing) in Lodore Canyon in wet <br />flows should be of sufficient years or in other years when peak releases are greater than 244 <br />magnitude to restore and rebuild m3/s (8,600 cfs) (Muth et al. 2000). <br />habitats currently occupied by adult A2. Channel maintenance will improve habitat conditions for A2-I. Project 115. <br />Colorado pikeminnow in Lodore endangered fishes and could favor potential spawning of <br />Canyon. No upper limits are placed on Colorado pikeminnow in this portion of the river (Muth et al. <br />recommended peak-flow releases in 2000). <br />any hydrologic condition. Uncertainties <br /> UI. The increased frequency of bypassing water (spills) would UI-I. Project 115 <br /> result in increased entrainment of reservoir nonnative species. UI-2. UDWR tailwater fisheries studies <br /> Reach 1 monitoring should include specific efforts to evaluate the UI-3. Projects C-18/19 <br /> potential for establishing undesirable reservoir fishes, such as UI-4. Project 119 <br /> smallmouth bass in the tailwater (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service <br /> 2005). <br /> U2. The response of nonnative fish populations to spring peak U2-1. Project 115 <br /> flows (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2005). U2-2. Projects C-18/19 <br /> U2-3. Project 110 <br /> U2-4. Project 109 <br /> U2-5. Project 98a <br /> U2-6. Project 98b <br /> U2-7. Project 123 <br /> U2-8. Project 125 <br /> U2-9. Project 140 <br /> <br />~ <br />~ <br />~ <br />~ <br />~ <br />V:l <br />"-'l <br />6 <br />~ <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />> <br />I <br />...... <br />W <br /> <br />~ <br />l::J- <br />... <br />l:: <br />tl <br />~ <br />,t-..> <br />t-..> <br />o <br />o <br />'-l <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.