WSP04979 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

J!! Co) 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 o 7/24 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8/3 8/13 9/12 10/2 10/12 10/22 8/23 9/2 9/22 Date Figure 2. Mean daily flows from the Maybell gauge during the sampling period, July to October 1998. FISH SAMPLES MATERIALS AND METHODS Fish were electroshocked and netted from an Achilles raft using a Smith-Root Electro-fisher powered by a 5000-watt generator with the anode mounted on a forward boom. The boat was maneuvered by either oars or by a battery operated 40 pound trolling motor. Two netters caught as many fish as possible while the shocker was in operation. All fish were measured to the nearest millimeter. Only fish over 150mm were marked and, therefore, used for mark and recapture population estimates. The Darroch multiple mark method (Everhart and Youngs 1981) was used to estimate abundance with ninety-five percent confidence intervals. The surveyed study site (SS site) at Duffy was from RM 110.0 to 109.25 (Figure A3.1). The SS site at Sevens was from RM 62.2 to 61.5 (Figure A3.2). In the SS site a block net was set up to distinguish between fish occupying the deep (>3ft) part from those in the shallow end of the run. Multiple electrofishing passes were made both in upstream and downstream directions within the surveyed study sites. A net was set up to hold fish during multiple passes. All fish caught were marked with either single or double holes in the tail. Different marks were used to indicate whether a fish was taken from the deep part of the run versus the shallow part of the run. In order to determine how representative the study sites were to a larger river reach, longer sections of the river were sampled with electrofishing. At Duffy, the representative reach station (RR station) was 5.2 mile long and was from RM 110.0 to 4