My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE130584
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
400000
>
PERMFILE130584
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:31:30 PM
Creation date
11/25/2007 10:32:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981016
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Doc Name
Aquatic Resources
Section_Exhibit Name
APPENDIX D CONTINUED
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
58
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).
View images
View plain text
bear <br />Of the eight species captured in the November survey, six were taken at <br />Stations X and E, five at Station D, four at F, and three at C (Table 6.0-2). <br />The number of fish caught per minute shocked (f/ms) was relatively uniform, <br />ranging from 1.5 f/ms at Station X to 2.5 f/ms at Station D. <br />Coefficients of condition (K) were calculated for the four dominant <br />species (Table 6.0-2). Coefficient of condition reflects fluctuations in <br />weight relative to length. It does not function independently of length or <br />other variables, but allows for comparison between populations with different <br />length-weight relationships and is often used to indicate physical well- <br />being based on relative body proportions (Lagler 1952). Mean K values <br />calculated for each of the four dominant species fell well within the range <br />of mean K values reported by Carlander (1969) for these same species in other <br />river systems. Some of the plumpness exhibited by brown trout captured in <br />• the North Fork during the survey can be attributed to their being in <br />spawning condition. Brown trout are normally late-fall spawners throughout <br />their range, and six of the ten captured during this study were fully gravid. <br />The distribution of trout within the sample reaches of the North Fork <br />appeared to be determined largely by the availability of suitable cover. <br />Trout were found in abundance only at Station C where there was substantial <br />cover provided by undercut banks, fallen trees, roots, or brush. The re- <br />maining length of river examined was generally dominated by relatively shallow <br />riffle-run type gradients, variable riparian and subsurface cover, and lack <br />of deep pools (Table 3.0-1). As such, preferred trout habitat or "lies" <br />were minimal. It should be noted that these findings may vary with flow <br />conditions. Higher flow would be expected to increase the amount of preferred <br />• trout habitat. <br />6 -4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.