As there was no Fish and Wildlife Service observer stationed at Lake 

 Dock, the values in the table for 1951 are based on accurate records kept 

 by guides in the fishing record books furnished by the Fish and Wildlife 

 Service. 



Again, "t" tests of the grand means of the ri,eans of biweekly periods 

 for the two seasons were made for both rates of effort and catch-per=unit= 

 effort. As in the rowboat analysis, no significant difference was indi- 

 cated (table 6), 



Table 6 



"t" test of catch-per-unit-effort and 

 effort, guideboat fishery. Fishing Bridge Dock^ 1950, 1951 



Effort 



Year 19^0 1951 1950 1951 



Biweekly means 



Grand mean 2.006 2.125 



n 8 8 



"t" 0.697 



d.f. 2h 



The increase in both number of parties and number of persons fishing 

 from guideboats is again considered the factor responsible for the in- 

 crease in total catch from this unit of the fishery (fig, 5). The results 

 do not suggest either an increase or decrease in the availability of fish 

 to the fisherman. 



12 



