Laserfiche WebLink
<br />416 <br /> <br />CONNOLL Y ET AL. <br /> <br />2oolb. Swvival of juvenile salmonids passing through <br />bypass systems, turbines, and spillways with and without <br />tlow deflectors at Snake River dams. North American <br />Journal of Fisheries Management 21:135-146. <br />Nunnallee, E. P., E, F. Prentice, B. F. Jonasson, and W. <br />Patten. 1998. Evaluation of a flat-plate PIT tag <br />interrogation system at Bonneville Dam. Aquacu]tural <br />Engineeling 17:261-272. <br />Ott, L. 1977. An introduction to statistical methods and data <br />analysis. Duxbury Press, North Scituate. Massachusetts. <br />Peterson Engineeling Services. 2002. Super lag and standard <br />tag comparison test. Report to Pacific States Marine <br />Fisheries Commission, Portland, Oregon. <br />Peterson, N. P., E. F. Prentice, and T. P. Quinn. 1994. <br />Comparison of sequential coded wire and passive <br />integrated transponder tags for assessing overwinter <br />growth and survival of juvenile coho salmon. North <br />American Journal of Fisheries Management i4:870-873. <br />Prentice, E. F., T. A. Flagg, and C. S. McCutcheon. 1990. <br />Feasibility of using implantable pa.ssive integrated <br />transponder (PIT) tags in salmonids. Pages 317-322 in <br />N. C. Parker, A. E. Giorgi, R. C. Heidinger, D. B. Jester, <br />Jr., E. D. Prince, and G. A. Winans. editors. Fish- <br />marking techniques. American Fisheries Society, Sym- <br />posium 7, Bethesda. Mary land. <br />Prentice, E. F.. D. L. Park. T. A. Flagg. and C. S. <br />McCutcheon. 1986. A study to detennine the biological <br />feasibility of a new fish tagging system. 1985-1986. <br />Report to Bonneville Power Administration, Project 83- <br />19, Portland, Oregon. <br />Riley, W. D., M. O. Eagle, and S. J. Ives. 2002. The onset of <br />downstream movement of juvenile Atlantic salmon, <br />Sall1lO salar L., in a chalk stTeam. Fisheries Management <br />and Ecology 9:87-89. <br />Riley, W. D., M. O. Eagle, M. J. Ives, P. Rycroft, and A. <br />Wilkinson. 2003. A portable passive imegmted tmnspon- <br />der multipoint decoder system for monitoring habitat use <br />and behaviour of freshwater fish in small streams. <br />Fisheries Management and Eco]ogy 10:265-268. <br /> <br />Roper, B., and D. L. Scarnecchia. 1996. A comparison of trap <br />efficiencies for wild and hatchery age-O Chinook salmon. <br />North American Journal of Fisheries Management <br />16:214-217. <br />Roussel, J.-M., R. A. Cunjak, R. Newbury, D. Caissie, and A. <br />Haro. 2004. Movement.s and habitat use by PIT-tagged <br />Atlantic salmon parr in early winter: the influence of <br />anchor ice. Freshwater Biology 49:1026-1035. <br />Ruttenberg, D. 2007. An evaluation of fish passage at rock <br />vortex weirs. Master's thesis. University ofIdaho, Moscow. <br />SAS Institute. 1988. SAS procedures guide, release 6.03 <br />edition. SAS Institute, Cary. North Carolina. <br />Seber, G. A. F. 1982. The estimation of animal abundance and <br />related parameters. Macmillan. New York. <br />Skalski. J. R.. S. G. Smith, R. N. Iwamoto, J. G. Williams, and <br />A. Hoffman. 1998. Use of passive integrated transponder <br />tags to estimate survival of migrant juvenile salmon ids in <br />the Snake and Colwnbia rivers. Canadian Journal of <br />Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55:1484-]493. <br />Thedinga, J. F., M. L. Murphy, S. W. Johnson, J. M. Lorenz, <br />and K. V. Koski. 1994. Detennination of salmonid smolt <br />yield with rotary-screw traps in the Situk River, Alaska, <br />to predict effects of glacial flooding. North American <br />Journal of Fisheries Management 14:837-851. <br />USFS (U.S. Forest Service). 2004. Beaver Creek stream <br />survey report 2004. Okanogan-Wenatchee National <br />Forest, Methow Ranger District, Winthrop. Washington. <br />Zabel. R. W.. and S. Achord. 2004. Relating size of juveniles <br />to survival within and among populations of Chinook <br />s.1.lmon. Ecology 85:795-806. <br />Zydlewski, G. B., A. Haro, K. G. Whalen, and S. D. <br />McCormick. 2001. Performance of stationary and <br />portable passive transponder detection systems for <br />monitoring of tish movements. Journal of Fish Bio]ogy <br />58:1471-1475. <br />Zydlewski. G. B., G. Horton, T. Dubrenil, B. Letcher, S. <br />Casey, and J. Zydlewski. 2006. Remote monitoring of <br />tish in small streams: a unified approach using PIT tags. <br />Fisheries 31:492-502. <br /> <br />Appendix 1: Calculation of Detection Efficiencies <br /> <br />The formulae below show how we calculated <br />detection efficiencies (which we equate to probabilities <br />of detection) for our 3 X 2 PIT tag interrogation system. <br />The 3 X 2 system consisted of a serial arrangement of <br />three arrays of two antennas each, which we labeled <br />(from upstream to downstream) as arrays A, B, and C. <br />A PIT -tagged fish that passed the system and was <br />detected could have one of seven array detection <br />histories. The fish with the different array detection <br />histories were summed (S) as follows: <br /> <br />Sa = fish detected only on array A <br />Sab = fish detected on both array A and array B <br />but not array C <br />Sac = fish detected on both array A and array C <br />but not array E <br /> <br />Sabc = fish detected on array A, array E, and array <br />C <br />Sb = fish detected only on array E <br />Sc = fish detected only on array C <br />She = fish detected on both array B and array C but <br />not array A <br /> <br />To calculate the detection efficiency of array A, four <br />values were required. These were generated from the <br />numbers of fish within each an'ay detection history as <br />follows: <br /> <br />NA = fish detected on array A (Sa + Sab + Sac + <br />Sabc), <br />NABC = fish detected on array A and at least one <br />other array (Sab + Sac + Sabc), <br />