430 



Fishery Bulletin 105(3) 



30 



~ 25 - 



O 



s- 20 H 

 <1> 



03 



o 



b 



I" 10 



~ 5 







35 



30 



>. 25 



1 20 



15 



10 



5 







16 

 £ 12 



8 

 6 

 4 

 2 

 9 n 



7 

 6 

 5 - 



Mar 



(v^-'^t^^'^A 



Little Egg Inlet {0 km) 



Ctiestnut Neck ( 1 7-8 km) 



Lower Bank (28.3 km) 





Va-jv-'- 



VA- 





> 



r 





1/*' 



r*; 



iA 





May 



Jul Sep 



2003 



Nov 



Jan Mar 



May 



Jul Sep 

 2004 



Nov 



Jan 



Figure 3 



Monthly and annual variation in environmental parameters of the water column during 

 2003 and 2004 based on Jacques Cousteau National Estuarine Research Reserve data 

 loggers. See Figure 1 for location of data loggers. Some values are missing because of 

 ice cover and because we were unable to download data during winter. 



leaving the estuary), seasonal inlet visitors (detected 

 only at the inlet gate by hydrophones 1-4), seasonal 

 estuarine visitors, (within the estuary gate at hydro- 

 phones 13, 5-9), or as seasonal river visitors (within the 

 river gate at hydrophones 10, 11) (Fig. 1). The consis- 

 tency of these four patterns varied with individual fish. 

 Of the total number of tagged fish that could be clas- 

 sified (n = 64), 67.1% displayed a single pattern, 31.2% 

 displayed two patterns, and 1.5% exhibited three of the 



above patterns. Of these patterns there were 105 total 

 classifications. The residents made up 2.8% of all estua- 

 rine use patterns. The seasonal inlet visitors made up 

 36.1%, seasonal estuarine visitors made up 49.5% , and 

 seasonal river visitors made up 11.4% of all estuarine- 

 use patterns. Of these, 58% of all tagged fish (/! = 67) 

 that left the system returned in later seasons(42% ) and 

 years (16%) (proportions were standardized to two-year 

 tags at large for one year). 



