My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP01006
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
WSP01006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:28:50 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:05:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8141.600.20
Description
Fryingpan-Arkansas Project - Studies - Environmental Studies
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
5
Date
4/16/1975
Author
US DoI BoR
Title
Final Environmental Impact Statement Volume 1 of 2, Pages IV-30 to IX-32
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
EIS
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
177
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 />442E <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />In California suckers often occur in the finest trout <br />streams, but are not considered a problem (Burns, 1966). <br />The western longnose sucker has become competitive with <br />trout in some reservoirs in Colorado, including Turquoise <br />Lake. On the other hand, the suckers and trout coexist in <br />Twin Lakes without apparent effects on the game fish. In <br />general, problems involving suckers vary with the lakes <br />and streams where they exist, and ~ust be identified and <br />solved from case to case (Lagler, 1956). <br /> <br />The Colorado Division of Wildlife has been attempting to <br />establish opossum shrimp (Mysis relicta) in reservoirs in <br />Colorado. This species is restricted to deep cold waters <br />and cannot survive in streams at all. The shrimp have <br />become an important food source for trout in up to 45 lakes <br />and reservoirs in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming, during the <br />late 1960's and early 1970's. South Dakota has recently <br />been receiving mysis transplants. <br /> <br />Dams, including diversion dams and structures, create a <br />barrier to the upstream migration of fish. Since many fish <br />species migrate upstream to spawn, the total spawning area <br />available is effectively reduced by dams. There is a <br />total of 20 additional dams that are planned for the full <br />Project. <br /> <br />The dams will also regulate the downstream flows. The <br />stabilization of flows will eliminate the scouring effect <br />of the spring runoff during dry years. During wet years, <br />spilling over the diversion dams will occur and, conse- <br />quently, the scour as well. Without the scouring, sediment <br />tends to accumulate in gravel beds. In order for these to <br />be utilized for spawning beds, they must be clean and well <br />aerated. Sedimentation on the beds following spawning can <br />suffocate the embryos as well. Sedimentation to varying <br />degrees can occur during construction. This can also <br />eliminate or reduce the benthic community. However, when <br />Ruedi Dam was constructed, sedimentation basins were con- <br />structed below the construction site. In the process, <br />gravel beds were exposed that have been instrumental in <br />increasing the spawning success of the resident brown <br />trout population. The downstream reach has been experi- <br />mentally maintained through natural reproduction since <br />Ruedi became operational. <br /> <br />Downstream migrations will cause an intermingling of <br />aquatic organisms and fish due to interbasin and inter- <br />drainage transfers of water, and cause the establishment <br />of subpopulations at stream headwaters, in the impound- <br />ments, diversion pools, and below impoundment structures. <br /> <br />IV-36 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.