Simulating Trout Feeding Stations in Instream Flow Models

  • Hal A. Beecher


In recent years the Physical Habitat Simulation (PHABSIM), a portion of the Instream Flow Incremental Methodology (IFIM), has been widely used by fisheries biologists to model the relationship between stream flow (discharge) and fish habitat. PHABSIM, which is considered state-of-the-art (Loar et al. 1985), has two primary components: an hydraulic simulation and an habitat function (Stalnaker 1980; Bovee & Milhous 1978; Bovee 1982; Milhous et al. 1984).


Rainbow Trout Feeding Station Cutthroat Trout Instream Flow Hydraulic Simulation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baldridge, J. E. & Amos, D. 1981. A technique for determining fish habitat suitability criteria: a comparison between habitat utilization and availability. In: Acquisition and utilization of a aquatic habitat inventory information (Ed. by N. B. Armantrout) pp. 251-258. Western Division American Fisheries Society.Google Scholar
  2. Beecher, H. A. 1981. Instream flows and steelhead production in western Washington. Proc. 60th Ann. Conf. West. Assoc. Fish Wildlife Agencies, Kalispell, Montana, July 13–17, 1980, 396-410.Google Scholar
  3. Bovee, K. D. 1982. A guide to stream habitat analysis using the instream flow incremental methodology. Instream Flow Information Paper No. 12, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-82/26.Google Scholar
  4. Bovee, K. D. & Milhous, R. 1978. Hydraulic simulation in instream flow studies: theory and techniques. Instream Flow Information Paper No. 5, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-78/33.Google Scholar
  5. Campbell, R. F. & Neuner, J. H. 1985. Seasonal and diurnal shifts in habitat utilized by resident rainbow trout in western Washington Cascade Mountain streams. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Small Hydropower and Fisheries. (Ed by F. W. Olson, R. G. White, & R. H. Hamre) pp. 39-48. American Fisheries Society.Google Scholar
  6. Chapman, D. W. & Bjornn, T. C. 1969. Distribution of salmonids in streams, with special reference to food and feeding. In: Symposium on salmon and trout in streams. (Ed by T. G. Northcote) pp. 153–176. H.R. Mac Millan Lectures in Fisheries, University of British Columbia, Vancouver.Google Scholar
  7. CH2M Hill 1984. Lyre River instream flow assessment-prepared for Public Utility District No. 1 of Clallam County, Port Angeles, Washington, CH2M Hill, Bellevue, Washington.Google Scholar
  8. Everest, F. H. & Chapman, D. W. 1972. Habitat selection and spatial interaction by juvenile chinook salmon and steelhead trout in two Idaho streams. J. Fish. Res. Board Can. 29: 91–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Griffith, J. S., Jr. 1972. Comparative behavior and habitat utilization of brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) and cutthroat trout (Salmo clarki) in small streams in northern Idaho. J. Fish Res. Board Can. 29: 265–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Johnson, T. H. 1985. Density of steelhead parr for mainstem rivers in western Washington during the low flow period, 1984. Washington State Game Department, Fisheries Management Division, 85-6, Olympia.Google Scholar
  11. Loar, J. M., Sale, M. J., Cada, G. F., Cox, D. K., Cushman, R. M., Eddlemon, G. K., Elmore, J. L., Gatz, A. J., Kanciruk, P., Salmon, J. A. & Vaughan, D. S. 1985. Application of habitat evaluation models in southern Appalachian trout streams. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Environmental Sciences Divisions, Pub. No. 2383, ORNL/TM=9323.Google Scholar
  12. Milhous, R. T., Wegner, D. L. & Waddle, T. 1984. User’s guide to the Physical Habitat Simulation system (PHABSIM). Instream Flow Information Paper No. 11, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-81/43 Revised.Google Scholar
  13. Moyle, P. B. & Baltz, D. M. 1985. Microhabitat use by an assemblage of California stream fishes: developing criteria for instream flow determinations. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 114: 695–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Orth, D. J., Jones, R. N. & Maughan, O. E. 1981. Considerations in the development of curves for habitat suitability criteria. In: Acquisition and utilization of aquatic habitat inventory information. (Ed. by N. B. Armantrout) pp. 124-133. Western Division American Fisheries Society.Google Scholar
  15. Puget Sound Power & Light Company 1985. Thunder Creek instream flow study. Puget Sound Power & Light Company, Bellevue, Washington.Google Scholar
  16. Sheppard, J. D. & Johnson, J. H. 1985. Probability-of-use for depth, velocity, and substrate by subyearling coho salmon and steelhead in Lake Ontario tributary streams. N. Amer. J. Fish. Manage. 5: 277–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Stalnaker, C. B. 1980. The use of habitat structure preferenda for establishing flow regimes necessary for maintenance of fish habitat. In: The Ecology of Regulated Streams (Ed by J. V. Ward & J. A. Stanford) pp. 321–387. Plenum Publishing Corporation, New York.Google Scholar
  18. Stober, Q. 1984. Interpretation of IFIM results. Unpublished paper presented at Pacific Fishery Biologists 46th Ann. Conf., Ocean Shores, Washington, March 19-21.Google Scholar
  19. White, R. J. 1973. Stream channel suitability for coldwater fish. Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the Soil Conservation Society of America (Plants, Animals and Man), September 30–October 3, Hot Springs, Arkansas, 61-79.Google Scholar
  20. Wickham, M. G. 1967. Physical microhabitat of trout, M.S. thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. 42.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hal A. Beecher
    • 1
  1. 1.Washington Department of GameOlympiaUSA

Personalised recommendations