Laserfiche WebLink
<br />L?. <br /> <br />Because we are concerned with the effects ofnonnativc fishes on natives, analysis.of-covariance will be <br />used to test whether the repeated measures of native fish changes were affected by sites with high versus <br />low nonnative responses. This will be done either using nonnatives as categories or as continuous <br />covariates depending on the level and kind of response we observe. Vegetation type will be used in a <br />similar fashion since we are interested in whether areas dominated by .tamarisk result in different utilization <br />by the native fish community as compared to areas dominated by cottonwood and willow. Finally, to <br />answer the overall question of how floodplain enhancement affects riverine processes, both in terms of fish <br />community dynamics and productivity, we will use repeated measures ANOV A's (at both time scales) to <br />compare sampling sites with inundation to those without (controls for this year's sampling effort). <br /> <br />ReDort PreDsration: <br /> <br />Field trio summarv reoort summarizing each sampling trip (UDWR Field Crew Leader) <br /> <br />Field season summarv reDort (UDWR Field Sampling Coordinator) <br /> <br />An annual orooress reDort that (I) documents sampling gear, (2) evaluates sampling protocol (including <br />personnel, gear type, sampling intensity and frequency), (3) documents native and nonnative fish usage in <br />naturally flooded areas, (4) documents data maDagement (including creating a centralized database), and <br />(5) documents preliminary analyses and syntheses (including outlining the statistical design and the fmal <br />overall statistical analyses linking native and nonnative dynamics to habitat restoration). The report will be <br />separated into chapters (name following is the lead): Integration (participation by all authors, Crowl lead), <br />Management Applications (participation by all authors, UDWR and USFWS), Larval fish use (Bestgen), <br />Native fish use (Modde), Nonnative fish use (Thompson and UDWR contract biologist) and Fish <br />food/nutrients (Crowl). <br /> <br />Objective 3. Measure Responses in Manipulated Sites <br /> <br />Old Charley Wash Was used as a manipulated site in FY 1996. Response variables measured were as <br />follows: gear type effectiveness, relative abundance, cohort analysis between years, reproduction, relative <br />abundance and composition of fish food organisms, food habits, and growth rates for fishes. No <br />manipulated sites Were scheduled for experimentation in FY1997. If levee removal evaluation creates <br />more questions th;;(~';;' be addressed in outyears (e.g., FY1998) with manipulated sites, we envision their <br />inclusion once again. For example we could use manipulated sites to asses I) the importance of timing and <br />duration of inundation and 2) detennine the effectiveness of differenl gears in capturing different life <br />stages of endangered fish (razorback suckers). Detennine the responses (relative abundance, etc.) within <br />the river fish community (native and nonnative species) following experimentation within the manipulated <br />sites. Note: a separate scope-aI-work will be submittedfor manipulated sites. <br /> <br />VII. Task Description and Schedule (FY-1997-l999): <br /> <br />Task I: Field nata Collection (UDWR, USFWS, and USU) <br />Fish nata Collection <br />Field Collection Coordinator: (UDWR) <br />Provides groceries <br />Provides Field Sampling Equipment, including O&M <br />Personnel needed for sampling: <br /> <br />BLOCK I <br />Field Crew Leader: UDWR <br />Filed Crew: 2 UDWR technicians <br /> <br />12 <br />