Laserfiche WebLink
<br />2 <br /> <br />1 <br />I <br />, <br />I <br />'J <br />I <br />1 <br />~ <br />1 <br />I <br />1 <br />t <br />I <br />.'. <br />I <br />I <br />,I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />suitability for each cel1 in the cross-sectional grid. Habitat availability is measured by an <br />index cal1ed weighted useable area (WUA), the summation of cell areas weighted by its <br />suitability index. When plolled versus discharge WUA typically peaks at a single flow <br />that is considered the flow that maximizes habitat. PHABSIM has been criticized <br />because of assumptions implicit with micro-habitat suitability curves, assumptions of <br />positive relationships between habitat availability and fish abundance, and the tendency <br />of users to recommend flows at the peak of the WUA-discharge relation regardless of <br />natural flow occurrence. These assumptions have been obstacles for using PHABISM to <br />model impacts ofreduced flows on large warm water rivers of the west slope (Rose and <br />Hahn 1989). <br /> <br />The Meso-Habitat method of this study is also an integration of hydraulic and <br />biologic analyses. We used a 2-D flow model to simulate depths and velocity. Fish <br />habitat suitability was derived from density estimates made at each site. Two- <br />dimensional (2-D) !low models have been found to have high potential for application in <br />instream flow studies (Leclerc et al., 1995; Bovee, 1996; Kondolf et al. 2000). Two- <br />dimensional models offer a significant improvement over one-dimensional (I-D) <br />modeling by increasing spatial resolution. This allows for a highly accurate <br />quantifkation of the physical habitat for each flow of interest. 2-D models are not <br />dependent on micro-habitat suitability curves for predicting habitat availability. Meso- <br />habitat scale precision is more efficient for sampling biological data. Criteria can be <br />established for individual species and also by guilds (syrnpatric species) (Parasiewicz <br />200]). A relationship between habitat availability to fish abundance assumes that fish <br />distribute themselves in the river primarily as a function of habitat. A large part of this <br />study was to develop meso-habitat criteria for two native suckers. This was <br />accomplished by examining the relationship between their abundance and meso-habitat <br />availability. The output of the meso-habitat methodology was the relationship among <br />meso-habitat availability and the range of modeled flows. <br /> <br />Species Used for rite Biological Analysis <br /> <br />The primary species used in the instream flow analysis were the bluehead sucker <br />(Catostonllls discobollls), flannelmouth sucker (Catostomlls latipinnis) and roundtail <br />chub (Gila robllsta). These species, quite common in the Colorado River, comprised <br />about 80 percent of fish sampled between Rifle and Palisade. Anderson (1977) <br />speculated that fishery abundance was likely at carrying capacity set by the physical <br />habitat. Samples made by the Recovery Program (ISMP) in the Colorado River <br />downstream of Grand Junction to Loma found native fish were about 90% of the catch <br />(Elm bald 2003). Osmundson (1999) reported high catch rates of native suckers in the <br />Colorado River, with the highest catch rate in the IS-Mile Reach. The thriving <br />populations of these three native species suggest that habitat, base flow alternations or <br />non-native introductions have not negatively impacted their life history requirements in <br />the river. In fact, studies suggest the Colorado River is an excellent location to study <br />dynamics between these three native fish and physical habitat. <br />