Laserfiche WebLink
<br />... <br /> <br />placed in a recovery tub filled with fresh river water. The fish usually <br />recovered frOm the anesthesia in 2-3 min and were then transferred to <br />holding pens for a 72-h observation period before release. Each fish was <br />also tagged externally with a serially-numbered plastic Carlin tag <br />(Valdez et ale 1981) to identify the fish externally after the life of <br />the transmitter. <br /> <br />The eight fish modules transmitted on assigned frequencies ranging <br />from 40.370 to 40.430 MHz. Smith-Root SR-40 Search Receivers and RF-40 <br />Tracking Receivers were used to relocate the tagged fish. A Larson- <br />Kulrod whip antenae was used with the SR-40 receiver to indicate the <br />presence of a fish within the receiving range. The SR-40 has a scanning <br />feature that issues visual and audible cues when any transmitter is <br />located. A SO-ohm directional loop antenae was used with the RF-40 <br />receiver to pin-point the location of a tagged fish by triangulation. <br />The RF-40 is equipped with an adjustable frequency mode and a 2-KHz band- <br />width narrow-range reception. <br /> <br />Most monitoring was done from a boat or from shoreline, although one <br />aerial reconnaissance from a Piper Supercub was conducted. Fixed-winged <br />surveillance proved ineffective because of the limited strength of the <br />SM-l modules or the receivers. <br /> <br />Water depth and velocity as well as substrate were recorded each <br />time a fish was located and at 1/2-h intervals thereafter until the <br />signal was lost. Depth was measured with either a Lowrance model LRG <br />1510-A sonar depth finder or an extendible surveyors rod, and velocity <br />was measured with a Marsh-McBirney model 201 current meter. Water <br />temperature (OC) and conductivity (umbos/em) were measured with a Yellow <br />Springs model 33 meter. <br /> <br />A transmitter was temporarily implanted in a surrogate species- <br />roundtail chub (G. robusta)--to test the implant procedures and determine <br />the limitations of the search and tracking receivers. The roundtail chub <br />was placed in a nylon-mesh bag, freely suspended with floats and held at <br />varying depths and distances from the receivers. The maximum depth <br />received with both receivers was 6 m from within a 10-m horizontal radius <br />and the maximum range was 195 m at 1 m depth, at about 800 umhos/cm con- <br />ductivity. Use of this radiotelemetry equipment in Black Rocks was <br />restricted by high conductivity and maximum water depths of 18 m. <br /> <br />RESULTS AND DISCUSSION <br /> <br />Movement <br /> <br />Little movement was observed for any of the eight radio-tagged hump- <br />back chub released in Black Rocks. Average movement of these fish was <br />0.8 km with a range of 0.1-3.7 km (Table 2). These observations were <br />made for periods of 4-93 days starting either 3 Mayor 30 May 1981. The <br />tagged fish monitored for a short duration either left the Black Rocks <br /> <br />32 <br /> <br />. <br />I <br />, <br />r <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />t <br />I <br />i <br />1 <br /> <br />I <br />j <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />t <br />j <br /> <br />I <br />j <br />t <br />