Efficacy of Portable PIT Detectors for Tracking Long‐Term Movement of Colorado River Cutthroat Trout in a Small Montane Stream

Hodge, Brian W.; Henderson, Richard C.; Rogers, Kevin B.; Battige, Kyle D.

doi:10.1080/02755947.2015.1012280

Cited by 11 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In June 2012, CRCT were absent from the 1.0-km reach immediately upstream of the culvert but were present at very low density in the reach immediately downstream of the Vaughan Lake dam (the fish presumably escaped from the lake, which is stocked for recreation). During a fish movement study at Poose Creek (2012-2013), the observed median range of CRCT below the culvert was 10-20 m (Hodge et al 2015); however, the range of movement might have been underestimated because CRCT spawning movements tend to occur between mid-April and late June (Young 1996;Hodge et al 2017), whereas the tracking surveys commenced in mid-June and early July (Hodge et al 2015).…”

Section: Study Site-poosementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effectiveness of a Fishway for Restoring Passage of Colorado River Cutthroat Trout

Hodge

Fetherman

Rogers

et al. 2017

N American J Fish Manag

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Little is known about the effectiveness of fishways for restoring passage to inland (nonanadromous) salmonids. We used PIT telemetry to evaluate the biological effectiveness of a vertical‐slot fishway constructed to restore passage of adult Colorado River Cutthroat Trout Oncorhynchus clarkii pleuriticus (CRCT) in a small Rocky Mountain stream. Our objectives were to assess (1) fishway efficacy (whether or not the fishway restored fish passage), (2) approach efficiency (the probability that a tagged fish encountered the fishway; an index of population use), (3) attraction efficiency (the probability that a fish near the fishway located its entrance), and (4) passage efficiency (the probability that a fish entering the fishway navigated successfully through it). To account for antenna detection probabilities and avoid biases that can result from simple, proportion‐based calculations, we used a variation of the Cormack–Jolly–Seber model to derive efficiency estimates. The fishway restored passage of adult CRCT to long‐vacant habitats. Approach efficiency was 4%; attraction and passage efficiencies were 100%. We conclude that fishways can effectively restore passage of inland salmonids, and we recommend that additional fishway monitoring studies be conducted to inform decision‐making and elucidate which designs and conditions will best facilitate passage. Received April 19, 2017; accepted September 26, 2017Published online November 6, 2017

show abstract

Section: Study Site-poosementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fish capture and tagging.-In 2012-2015, we captured and PIT-tagged CRCT in Poose Creek via the methods outlined by Hodge et al (2015). Briefly, we used backpack electrofishing units to capture CRCT in the 1.7-km stream segment immediately downstream of the culvert.…”

Section: Study Site-poosementioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of a Fishway for Restoring Passage of Colorado River Cutthroat Trout

Hodge

Fetherman

Rogers

et al. 2017

N American J Fish Manag

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The use of PIT tags to estimate fish growth, movement, and mortality has become an important tool for biologists due to their relatively low cost, longevity, ability to identify unique individuals, ease of application, and minimal effects on fish survival, growth, feeding behavior, and swimming performance Newby et al 2007;Ficke et al 2012). Radio frequency identification (RFID) systems have been used in small, wadeable rivers to detect PIT-tagged fish via both stationary (Horton et al 2007;Connolly et al 2008;Fetherman et al 2015;Ficke 2015;Fox et al 2016) and mobile designs (Roussel et al 2000;Cucherousset et al 2005;Hill et al 2006;Lokteff et al 2013;Fetherman et al 2014;Holmes et al 2014;Hodge et al 2015). Stationary antennae have been used to analyze fish survival and movement patterns in rivers (Compton et al 2008;Connolly et al 2008;Fetherman et al 2015) and to examine habitat use on inundated floodplains (Conrad et al 2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The detection efficiency (detection probability) for stationary and mobile arrays can be affected by stream discharge, tag size, tag orientation, power source, proximity to other antennae Fetherman et al 2014), tag collision (Axel et al 2005;O'Donnell et al 2010), and electromagnetic interference (Greenberg and Giller 2000;Bond et al 2007;Horton et al 2007). Hodge et al (2015) utilized a backpack PIT tag detector with internal GPS (manufactured by Biomark) and suggested that the utility of that system in mountain streams might be limited to lowflow, ice-free seasons and relatively small study reaches due to limited detection distance and time constraints. Mobile RFID arrays are also more likely to detect ghost tags (O'Donnell et al 2010) because they are an active gear type.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Incorporation of mobility and GPS technology into RFID systems permits a range of applications, including linking the spatial distribution of fish to individual characteristics, such as species, length, sex, and age (Morhardt et al 2000;O'Donnell et al 2010;Holmes et al 2014;Hodge et al 2015). Combining individual characteristics with spatial data leads to a number of research possibilities, including investigating fish migration patterns, the effects of instream barriers and fish passage structures on population dynamics, habitat utilization, mark-recapture population estimation, the response of aquatic organisms to climate change, and the impact of land use on aquatic species.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Incorporating GPS and Mobile Radio Frequency Identification to Detect PIT‐Tagged Fish and Evaluate Habitat Utilization in Streams

Richer

Fetherman

Kondratieff

et al. 2017

N American J Fish Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of mobile radio frequency identification (RFID) systems to detect PIT tags has increased in support of research on fish movement, population dynamics, and habitat use. We describe the development and application of a mobile RFID system that incorporates GPS to detect PIT‐tagged fish and evaluate habitat utilization in streams. The study was conducted in two distinct phases. First, development and testing of the RFID–GPS system were conducted using georeferenced, PIT‐tagged rocks to evaluate detection probability and GPS accuracy. Second, the system was field deployed to estimate the abundance of PIT‐tagged fish and evaluate habitat utilization. Detection probability was negatively influenced by stream width, distance from the stream center, and water depth, whereas detection probability increased with the number of passes. The GPS error between detected and surveyed positions averaged 4.5 m, with greater error observed in longitude than in latitude. Because of high capture and recapture probabilities, abundance estimation of PIT‐tagged fish was not only possible but also relatively precise. All detections during field deployment were assigned habitat types using the “intersect,” “closest,” and “buffer” methods in ArcGIS. Analysis of habitat utilization was limited to two bedform classes, riffles and pools, because the average area of runs and glides was smaller than the average GPS error. More Brown Trout Salmo trutta were detected in pools (76–80%) than in riffles, and all Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss and cutbow trout (Cutthroat Trout O. clarkii × Rainbow Trout) were detected in pools. The detection field covered more cross‐sectional area in pools than in riffles, which could have influenced the analysis of habitat utilization. The influence of GPS error on habitat evaluations will depend on stream size, as erroneous habitat associations should diminish as stream size increases. The flexibility of the RFID–GPS system makes it useful for a variety of studies related to habitat utilization, fish migration, and population trends. Received March 31, 2017; accepted August 19, 2017 Published online October 20, 2017

show abstract

Seasonal and temperature‐related movement of Colorado River cutthroat trout in a low‐elevation, Rocky Mountain stream

Hodge

Battige

Rogers

2017

Ecology and Evolution

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mobile species will migrate considerable distances to find habitats suitable for meeting life history requirements, and stream‐dwelling salmonids are no exception. In April–October 2014, we used radio‐telemetry to examine habitat use and movement of 36 Colorado River cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarkii pleuriticus (CRCT) in a 14.9‐km fragment of Milk Creek, a relatively low‐elevation stream in the Rocky Mountains (Colorado). We also used a network of data loggers to track stream temperature across time and space. Our objectives were to (1) characterize distribution and movement of CRCT, (2) evaluate seasonal differences in distribution and movement of CRCT, and (3) explore the relationship between stream temperature and distribution and movement of CRCT. During the course of our study, median range of CRCT was 4.81 km (range = 0.14–10.94) and median total movement was 5.94 km (range = 0.14–26.02). Median location of CRCT was significantly further upstream in summer than in spring, whereas range and movement of CRCT were greater in spring than in summer. Twenty‐six of the 27 CRCT tracked through mid‐June displayed a potamodromous (freshwater migratory) life history, migrating 1.8–8.0 km upstream during the spring spawning season. Four of the seven CRCT tracked through July migrated >1.4 km in summer. CRCT selected relatively cool reaches during summer months, and early‐summer movement was positively correlated with mean stream temperature. Study fish occupied stream segments in spring and fall that were thermally unsuitable, if not lethal, to the species in summer. Although transmitter loss limited the scope of inference, our findings suggest that preferred habitat is a moving target in Milk Creek, and that CRCT move to occupy that target. Because mobile organisms move among complementary habitats and exploit seasonally‐unsuitable reaches, we recommend that spatial and temporal variability be accounted for in delineations of distributional boundaries.

show abstract

Efficacy of Portable PIT Detectors for Tracking Long‐Term Movement of Colorado River Cutthroat Trout in a Small Montane Stream

Cited by 11 publications

References 17 publications

Effectiveness of a Fishway for Restoring Passage of Colorado River Cutthroat Trout

Effectiveness of a Fishway for Restoring Passage of Colorado River Cutthroat Trout

Incorporating GPS and Mobile Radio Frequency Identification to Detect PIT‐Tagged Fish and Evaluate Habitat Utilization in Streams

Seasonal and temperature‐related movement of Colorado River cutthroat trout in a low‐elevation, Rocky Mountain stream

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About