Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />1 <br />1 <br />1 <br /> <br />1 <br />1 <br />1 <br />1 <br />1 <br /> <br />1 <br />1 <br />t <br /> <br />EJ <br />1 <br />5 <br />6. <br />7. <br />The small number of fish recovered prevented us from obtaining any <br />substantial data of the effects PIT tags may have had on fish growth and <br />survival. These small sample sizes precluded any statistical testing for <br />differences in tag retention, survival, and wound healing between the two test <br />groups, or of growth and survival between the test and control groups. <br />Consequently, some of the study objectives were not met. <br />Tagging wounds appeared to heal quickly with no deleterious effects to fish. <br />Although there are higher risks to injecting tags into the body cavity where an <br />organ may be punctured, this study demonstrated that Colorado squawfish <br />120-165 mm TL (11-28 g) could be successfully PIT tagged. <br />The scanner/decoder unit was reliable in detecting and accurately reading the <br />PIT tag in vivo. In most instances, the hand-held scanner detected and <br />decoded the tag with only one pass. <br />RECOMMENDATIONS <br />1. <br />For the reasons cited herein, ponds such as those used in this study were not <br />suitable and are not recommended for evaluating the performance of PIT tags <br />in the future, especially when frequent observation and determination of the <br />fate of the test fish are required. Attempts to recover fish from these sites <br />were time consuming and not cost effective. Controlled studies cannot be <br />adequately performed in this type of setting. <br />2. A suitable warmwater hatchery/research facility with personnel <br />knowledgeable of the cultural aspects of Colorado River endangered fishes <br />25 <br />