WSP06185 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

turbid) areas. Also, if the periphyton community recolonizes shoreline zones at higher steady flows, it will be lost when lower, steady flows return. Is the biomass or growth rate more important below the dam? Which is more important to downstream reaches? If there is less biomass from areas exposed, how much less and how does the reduction vary with elevation above the permanently wetted area? Pg. 105, C. 1, P. 2. Your conclusion regarding one year impacts on Cladophora is speculative with little support and disagrees with Pinney's conclusion of 2-4 weeks. Would populations established under fluctuating flows be inherently unstable or is it unstable when patterns are continually changed, as during research? Even under fluctuating flows, Cladophora would reach some stable level. Pg.105, C.1, P. 3. We doubt the conditions described are typical of in situ conditions. Is the drift described an allochthonous source 'in an otherwise autochthonous system? This drift is an organic source to downstream areas. The growth rate is probably highest for Cladophora prior to reaching its maximum potential biomass. This suggests sloughing and loss of strands downstream provides a higher rate of production...a higher energy conversion rate. Why has this relationship not been discussed? ~\: ~~ ...:~ . You have not established, nor have researchers, that standing crop is, the parameter of importance. If the aoal is to maximize production (i.e., energy transfer into the aquatic system), then maximizing standing crop will prevent it. Since no goal has been set, displaying a graph which implies greater standing crop is better is premature at best. Also, another graph more indicative of the situation would be to compare light levels and turbidity levels with river miles or kilometers below the dam. This would help explain the distribution better. ::=-:. :"'::' ;.... . '.-~ Pg. 105, C. 2, P. 2. Last sentence regarding temperature seems out of place here. Pg. 105, C. 2, P. 3. Steady flows may decrease energy transfer downstream because less Cladophora is dislodged upstream and there is typically higher turbidity downstream. The decrease in energy transfer may impact humpback chub and riparian areas downstream of the main area of fluctuating flows and high productivity. Algal production is now higher than ever in this river reach; yet, apparently what has been produced still does not meet some, as yet undefined, production level. Since it is not defined, implementing measures to achieve it does not make sense. ',' ;-.:~~ .." ; ~ ,",". ". ,< ;):~ J-..:. :~:. What goal is being sought by the efforts to increase production of algae? Why is the present level considered undesirable when it exceeds anything ever seen in this area historically? 22