Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />.. I <br /> <br />'00 <br /> <br />1981 <br /> <br />'00 <br /> <br />wae <br /> <br /> <br />'00 <br /> <br />'00 <br /> <br />~.; J <br />1 <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />Fig. 14. Relation between discharge and spawning period for <br />razorback sucker, Yampa River, 1975, 1981, 1988, and <br />1989 (discharge data incomplete for 1989). Vertical bars <br />delineate spawning period. (One collection of ripe fish in <br />1988.) <br /> <br />and the absence of juvenile and subadult life history <br />stages (McCarthy and Minckley 1987; Tyus 1987). The <br />apparent decline of the razorback sucker toward <br />extinction throughout the Colorado River basin <br />emphasizes the need for more immediate measures <br />toward recovery of this species. <br /> <br />II Limiting Factors <br />\ Aa evaluation of limiting factors is difficult because <br />~ of complex relations between environmental and <br />biological variables that limit the distribution and <br />abundance of organisms. A limiting factor is simply one <br />component of a multidimensional system. Thus, single <br />factor studies (e.g., determination of temperature <br />threshold for successful reproduction) should be <br />evaluated from a holistic perspective for application in <br />natural systems and not in isolation. We stress the need <br />for system-level cognizance and interpretation in <br />evaluating factors that are potentially limiting to species <br />in decline. <br />Studies of factors limiting the distribution and <br />abundance of rare fishes in the Yampa River are <br />complicated by the variability of the environment (e.g., <br />seasonal fluctuations in discharge, temperature, food <br /> <br />base, and species abundance) and by logistical problems <br />associated with studying fishes in large, turbid rivers. <br />The determination of limiting factors for rare fishes is <br />further complicated because of limited life history <br />information. Habitat use by the rare fishes may only <br />reflect temporary, seasonal, or marginal habitat <br />availability. Thus, caution must be exercised when <br />determining habitat needs and limiting factors for fishes <br />in decline, and professional biological judgment must be <br />recognized as critical in data interpretation. <br />Some factors that may be limiting the distribution and <br />abundance of rare fishes in the Yampa River are <br />summarized in Table 6. This information is presented <br />for consideration in future updates of the Sensitive <br />Areas report (Upper Colorado River Basin <br />Coordinating Committee 1984) and for aiding the <br />Recovery Implementation Program (U.S. Fish and <br />Wildlife Service 1987) for the Yampa River. Each <br />species is discussed separately in the following sections. <br />Although more information is available regarding <br />habitat needs and limiting factors for the Colorado <br />squawfish, we do not suggest that protection of a single <br />species or a single life history stage will adequately <br />protect all- we emphasize that each species is unique <br />and has different requirements for survival. <br /> <br />Colorado Squawftsh <br /> <br />An evaluation of factors limiting the distribution and <br />abundance of Colorado squawfish in the Green River <br />system is complex because of the wide range of habitat <br />and flow conditions required by the different life history <br />stages. High spring flows, in addition to increasing <br />water temperatures, are necessary for the initiation of <br />the spawning migration (Figs. 7 and 8). Decreasing <br />flows and warming river temperatures in early and <br />mid-summer are necessary for successful spawn and <br />downstream transport of drifting larvae (Tyus et al. <br />1987; Fig. 11). Low flows in late summer and fall are <br />correlated with availability of nursery habitat and young <br />fish abundance and growth (Tyus et al. 1987; M. <br />Pucherelli and R. Clark, written communication). A <br />stable winter base-flow is necessary for maintenance of <br />winter habitats (Wick and Hawkins 1989). <br /> <br />Adult <br /> <br />The potamodromous migrations and homing <br />behavior of Colorado squawfish (Wick et al. 1983; Tyus <br />and McAda 1984; Tyus 1985) from downstream Green <br />River and upstream Yampa River to Yampa Canyon <br />mandates protection of known migration routes, since <br />feasibility of fish passage facilities for this species has yet <br />to be demonstrated. We presume that blockage of these <br />river sections by dams or water diversions will directly <br />result in the local extinction of Colorado squawfish <br />(Tyus 1984), as evidenced by the recent loss of 80 km of <br /> <br />18 <br />