Laserfiche WebLink
<br />C) <br />(.'_' <br />-" <br />""" <br />~ <br />c.o <br />e..:, <br /> <br />Figure 3.5 also shows the distribution of the general habitat categories in the study area. Because run <br />habitat dominates the San Juan River, the scale on this figure was adjusted so that rarer habitat categories <br />could be compared. Key habitats for the endangered fishes are fairly well distributed across the study area, <br />except for the section from RM 20.0 to about RM 65.0, which is generally within Reach 2. This canyon- <br />bound area has very few backwaters at any flow. It has relatively high amounts of slackwater and low- <br />velocity habitats at all flows, and it has little inundated vegetation during high flows because of the canyon. <br />The lack of backwater habitat in this section is the likely reason why stocked yay Colorado pikeminnow <br />retention was low in this reach. <br /> <br />Key habitats for adult Colorado pikeminnow and razorback sucker included edge pools, pools, eddies, <br />slackwaters, and backwaters. These habitats fit into the low-velocity, slackwater, and backwater habitat <br />categories (Table 3.2). Figure 3.7 shows the amount of pool and eddy habitat at various flow levels. Pool <br />habitat area declined with increased flow, whereas eddy habitat increased with increased flow. Eddies <br />were most available during high-flow periods, and pools were most available during low-flow periods. The <br />two endangered fishes' habitat use followed this same pattern; eddies were used extensively during high- <br />flow periods, and pools and eddies were used at lower-flow periods, suggesting the fish used the type of <br />low-velocity habitat most available at the time. <br /> <br />Slackwater habitats did not change with flow (Figure 3.8) (Bliesner and Lamarra 2000). Backwater <br />habitats, used by adult fish during high-flow periods and by yay during late summer and autumn, were <br />generally most abundant at low-flow periods, and varied at medium- and high-flow periods by reach. <br />Reaches I and 2 were similar, as were Reaches 3, 4, and 5, but these two groups of reaches differed from <br />each other (Figures 3.9 and 3.10). This variation in the relationship of the amount of backwater habitat <br />versus flow results from the timing of flushing flows that clean the backwaters and the timing of the habitat <br />mapping runs in relation to storm events and flushing flows (Bliesner and Lamarra 2000). Even though <br />backwater habitat varied with flow and varied with the timing of flushing flows, stocked yay Colorado <br />pikeminnow primarily used backwater habitats and survived well in the San Juan River (Trammel and <br />Archer 2000). This suggests that, even in low abundance, backwater habitat was sufficient for at least the <br />mnnber of stocked fish that survived in the San Juan River. It remains to be seen if this habitat type is <br />sufficient for a larger, self-sustaining population of Colorado pikeminnow. Flooded vegetation was used <br />by stocked razorback sucker during the high-flow period. As shown in Figure 3.7, that is the only time this <br />habitat type is available. <br /> <br />Larval and yay razorback sucker habitat use was not determined for the San Juan River. Flooded <br />bottomland habitat, similar to that used by razorback sucker along the Green River, was essentially non- <br />existent along the San Juan River because of its narrow floodplain, steep floodplain gradient, and lack of <br />water-holding floodplain depressions. Inundated vegetation was an available habitat during high-flow <br />periods in the San Juan River, but it disappeared rather quickly as flows receded (Figure 3.5). <br /> <br />September 2000 <br /> <br />3-21 <br /> <br />Program Evaluation Report <br />