My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP07697
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
7001-8000
>
WSP07697
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:28:29 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 2:32:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8240.200.10.B
Description
UCRBRIP - Riverine Fish Flow Investigations
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
7/1/2001
Author
CDOW
Title
Riverine Fish Flow Investigations 2001
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
90
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />not been analyzed at Lily Park at this time. However, the fish data strongly show that Lily <br /> <br />Park is much more productive than the two upstream sites and has a much higher density of <br /> <br />flannelmouth sucker. However the density estimates for flannel mouth and channel catfish <br /> <br />appear suspect to be an overestimate. Stream flow was highly variable between electrofishing <br /> <br />passes at Lily Park (Figure 3). On the first pass only the lower half of the site was sampled, <br /> <br /> <br />on September 13 at a flow of 70 cfs, sampling efficiency was felt to be very high. Subsequent. <br /> <br /> <br />passes were made for the entire station at flows of 420,260 and 216 cfs, respectively. It <br /> <br /> <br />appears that fish movement was restricted during low flows in August and September and fish <br /> <br />had to hold in deeper habitats. When flow increased both local and longer movements by fish <br /> <br />were possible. The low number of recaptures for flannel mouth sucker and channel catfish <br /> <br />suggests there was migration in and out of the study area between electrofishing passes. On <br /> <br /> <br />the final pass only 26% offlannelmouth caught (413) were recaptures, from 1,321 previously <br /> <br /> <br />marked. For channel catfish only 12% were recaptures in the final catch (451), with 1,093 <br /> <br /> <br />fish marked on prior passes. The Lily Park reach will be sampled again in 2001. <br /> <br /> <br />Even given the above discussion, the differences in fishery characteristics between <br /> <br /> <br />Lily Park and Sevens were very pronounced in 2000. Lily Park has eight times more total fish <br /> <br /> <br />per 1000 m2, 7.5 times more flannelmouth and 160 times more catfish compared to Sevens. <br /> <br />Lily Park is only 10 river miles downstream of Sevens, suggesting similar temperature and <br /> <br />water quality attributes at both sites. Also there appear to be a similar or larger predator <br /> <br /> <br />population of northern pike and smanmouth bass at Lily Park. Most of the differences in fish <br /> <br /> <br />density between Lily Park and Sevens appear to be a function of channel morphology. Lily <br /> <br /> <br />Park is just downstream of Cross Mountain, just upstream of the Little Snake River <br /> <br /> <br />confluence, the river in Lily Park has a steep slope and the substrate is larger rocks and <br /> <br /> <br />cobble. At Sevens the substrate is mostly sand. The habitat analysis in process should help <br /> <br />36 <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.