CWT Retention
Documents with information about the CWT Program and related information can be accessed from this document table.
| File | Description | File Date |
|---|---|---|
| Nason Tag Loss memo 1999 | Memo from Kristin Nason to Ron Olson. Subject: Detecting a difference in tag loss rate. This memo is in response to the request for an estimate of the sample size needed to test whether or not there is a difference in the tag loss rates of the clipped and unclipped groups of either a coho or chinook double index tag group. | 1999 |
| Newman Tag Loss memo1987 | Memo from Ken Newman to Ron Olson. Subject: Review of Bob Vreeland's memo on sample size for tag loss estimation | 1987 |
| Random-Sampling Design to Estimate Hatchery Contribution to Fisheries | American Fisheries Society Symposium 7:691-707, 1990 Author: Robert R. Vreeland The results from this case study illustrate some important points that may be relevant to a wide variety of mark-recapture experiments. The sampling effort required to produce reasonably precise parameter estimates was very high. However, the required precision of such estimates depends on the purpose of the study and the intended use of its results. If a lower level of precision is adequate, the required sampling effort can be reduced. [Note: document includes information on tag retention.] | 1990 |
| Vreeland Tag Loss memo 1977 | Memo from Robert R. Vreeland to Kenneth Johnson. Table to help determine the number of fish to sample for wire tag retention. | 1977 |
| ISRP Response to BPA Project (198201302) Annual Stock Assessment – Coded Wire Tag Program (ODFW) | Response by BPA Project Sponsors to ISRP comments in the preliminary review of Fiscal Year 2003 Mainstem and Systemwide Proposals (ISRP 2002). Questions addressed related to stock selection, mass-mark selective mortality, tagging quality and time tagged groups are held prior to release. | 2003 |
| Coded-Wire Tag Loss Study (WDFW Technical Report No. 65) | Author: Lee Blankenship For each year from 1973 thru 1978, the Washington Department of Fisheries (WDF) has published a report documenting the estimated catch of WDF’s coded-wire tagged (CWT) fish. These have been published as part of the WDF Progress Report series and provide estimated catch by fishery, area and time for each tag group with one or more tag recoveries during that year (WDF, 1976, 1976; Rasch 1977, 1978; Rasch and O’Connor, 1979; and O’Connor, 1980). These reports have treated tag loss inconsistently (tag loss refers to the shedding of CWT’s which had been implanted in the snout of fish). In the 1974 report, a 15% tag loss was used to adjust release figures. The studies in this report were conducted to gain insight into tag loss rates, factors affecting tag loss, length of time over which tag loss occurs, and the numerical significance of naturally occurring adipose fin marks. | 1981 |
| Comparative Injury, Adipose Fin Mark Quality, and Tag Retention of Spring Chinook Salmon Marked and Coded Wire Tagged by an Automated Trailer and Manual Trailer at Carson National Fish Hatchery | Authors: William R. Brignon, Rod O. Engle, David M. Hand, Jesse Rivera, and Douglas E. Olson The United States Fish and Wildlife Service’s Columbia River Fisheries Program Office has been marking and tagging salmon with automated trailers consistently since 2006, in addition to the historically used manual trailers. Some hatchery managers have expressed concern that automated trailers may cause injuries at rates higher than historic marking and tagging techniques. To begin addressing these concerns, in 2006 we evaluated the two types of marking trailers at Warm Springs National Fish Hatchery, Oregon. To complement the study at Warm Springs National Fish Hatchery, in 2008 spring Chinook salmon at Carson National Fish Hatchery were adipose fin marked and coded wire tagged using both an automated and manual marking trailer | 2008 |
| PSC Workshop on Hatchery CWT Methodology (Regional Information Report1 No. 1 J95- 12) | Preliminary summary edited and condensed by Norma Jean Sands. This workshop on hatchery coded-wire-tag (CWT) methodology was sponsored by the Pacific Salmon Commission (PSC); its purpose was to compare methods currently used in producing CWT data, to review uses of the data, and to make recommendations for standardizing and improving technologies where possible. The workshop was attended by 40-60 people each day with almost 100 different people in total, coming from Alaska, the Yukon, B.C., Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California. A schedule of the meeting is attached. The last half of the third day consisted of panel workgroups with participation by interested audience members as well as panel participants. There were spirited discussions in all workgroups and each workgroup put together a summary of findings, discussions, and recommendations. These summaries, along with summaries of each panel talk, will be will be compiled in a workshop proceeding which will be published through the PSC | 1995 |
| Preliminary Review of Fiscal Year 2003 Mainstem and Systemwide Proposals (ISRP 2002-13) | This report provides preliminary comments and recommendations of the Independent Scientific Review Panel (ISRP) and Peer Review Groups on Mainstem and Systemwide projects submitted for Fiscal Year 2003 funding. The Mainstem and Systemwide review is the final segment of the rolling review process, which began in the spring of 2000 and covers all projects funded through the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program. This preliminary report provides project sponsors and the public an opportunity to respond to ISRP concerns before the ISRP makes its final recommendation to the Council on October 23, 2002. This report also provides information to the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority (CBFWA) for its use in project prioritization and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Action Agencies’ (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, and the Bonneville Power Administration) Research, Monitoring and Evaluation Group in its project review and potential revision efforts. | 2002 |