Steven J. Cooke, Christopher M. Bunt, and R. Scott
McKinley, Waterloo Biotelemetry Institute, Department of Biology, University of Waterloo,
Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1; Voice 519-885-1211; FAX 519-885-0534; E-Mail sjcooke@sciborg.uwaterloo.ca
Keywords: smallmouth bass, movement, telemetry, electromyogram,
mark-recapture
A variety of techniques are commonly used to monitor the movements of
fish. It is generally accepted that mark-recapture studies are biased against the
detection of movement, leading many to undertake manual telemetry projects where fish are
located at regular sampling intervals. However, this method of data collection may also
underestimate fish movements. Fixed telemetry systems consist of a series of continuously
scanned antennas and are useful for studying movement patterns of fish on a more continual
basis. Fish may also spend a significant amount of time undertaking localized movements on
scales that would be difficult to detect using conventional telemetry. Axial musculature
activity collected using electromyogram telemetry devices relay information, which when
calibrated in a respirometer, can be used to estimate daily movements. Although many of
these techniques have been used independently, it was unclear as to how each compares
under field conditions. Results on differences in fish movements obtained simultaneously
using each of these four data collection techniques will be compared. Field results are
based upon observations collected on smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu) in an
impounded area of Lake Erie during the summer of 1998. The benefits, biases, and
limitations of each method, and the consequences of underestimating fish movements and
activity will be discussed.
