My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8091
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
8091
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:32 PM
Creation date
5/18/2009 12:45:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
8091
Author
Miller, W. H., et al.
Title
White River Fishes Study
USFW Year
1982.
USFW - Doc Type
Final Report.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
93
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
above the water when mounted on a boat, or mounted directly to an air- <br />plane wing strut. The loop antenna (directional) was used only to tri- <br />angulate fish location by boat or from shore. <br />It was necessary to use aircraft to keep contact with several fish <br />at one time. The most successful aircraft used were a helicopter and a <br />Piper Supercub. The aircraft were operated as slow as practicable at <br />low elevation. <br />The radiotelemetry program utilized two different methods for <br />recording information about habitat preferences and movement. Long <br />distance movement was determined by attempting to locate all radiotagged <br />fish during a one to two day interval. (The location of a fish was <br />recorded on a one-time basis when encountered). In order to obtain more <br />specific information on movement and habitat preferences, a diel sampling <br />procedure was employed which consisted of observations made continuously <br />over a 24h basis as follows: <br />F 1. The day was divided into three, eight-hour periods and one <br />selected at random. A fish was then observed during this <br />period, with depth, velocity and substrate determinations made <br />every 15 minutes. Habitat measurements were not recorded <br />unless fish were stationary for 30 minutes. <br />2. After a fish had been monitored for three, eight-hour periods, <br />the fish with the next tag number was then selected for study. <br />Data Storage and Retrieval <br />The MANAGE data base management system developed by the Western <br />Energy and Land Use Team (WELUT) in Fort Collins, Colorado was used for <br />the project. This system provided storage, retrieval and manipulation <br />of large volumes of data. In addition, data analysis capability was <br />integrated into the MANAGE system by integrating certain features of the <br />IMSL (International Mathematical and Statistical Library) Package <br />(Shumate et al. 1981). <br />Field data were organized into four data sets in the Vernal data <br />base. Data sheets and the following data sets were developed: <br />1. PHYSICAL: Physical and chemical data, including water and air <br />temperature, dissolved oxygen, conductivity, salinity, turbidity, <br />and stream width and depth. <br />2. CATCH: Catch data for fishes; included sample time, <br />duration, gear type, habitat, area sampled, depth, velocity, <br />and substrate for each fish species (endangered and non-en- <br />dangered) by age groups. <br />3. RARE: Included sample time, duration, gear type, habitat <br />_ area sampled, depth, velocity, substrate type, sex, length, <br />weight, tag size and number, and macroscopic external parasite <br />load for each endangered or threatened fish captured. <br />15.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.