Acoustic Tag Results in Fisheries Research

Friday Harbor, San Juan IslandsFriday Harbor, San Juan IslandsJuly 19, 2011July 19, 2011

By Tracey W. Steig + Samuel V. JohnstonBy Tracey W. Steig + Samuel V. JohnstonHTI Hydroacoustic Technology Inc.HTI Hydroacoustic Technology Inc.

715 NE Northlake Way, Seattle, WA 98105715 NE Northlake Way, Seattle, WA [email protected] (206) [email protected] (206) 633-3383

Acoustic Tag Results in Acoustic Tag Results in Fisheries ResearchFisheries Research

>>> Acoustic Tag Demonstration>>> Acoustic Tag Demonstration

© 2011 Hydroacoustic Technology, Inc.

Acoustic Tag Results in Fisheries Research Friday Harbor, San Juan Islands – July 19, 2011

Friday Harbor Acoustic Tag Shrimp Study Results

Friday Harbor Diver Tracking Study Results

Fish Aggregation Device (FAD) Results

Net Pen Fish Study Results

Eel Study Results

Columbia River Results

Presentation OutlinePresentation Outline


Acoustic Tag ResultsAcoustic Tag Results

Friday Harbor Acoustic Tag Results Dock Shrimp Conducted during the Friday Harbor

Bioacoustic Workshop Study conducted in 2005, 2007, and 2009


Friday Harbor Laboratory, San Juan IslandFriday Harbor Laboratory, San Juan IslandUniversity of WashingtonUniversity of Washington


Friday Harbor Laboratory, San Juan IslandFriday Harbor Laboratory, San Juan IslandUniversity of WashingtonUniversity of Washington


Friday Harbor Laboratory Dock & BreakwaterFriday Harbor Laboratory Dock & Breakwater


Elevation

X (ft) Y (ft) Z (ft)*

A1 HD1 482.2 768 125

A2 HD2 482.2 768 109

A3 HD3 442.3 742.2 125

A4 HD4 442.3 742.2 112

B1 HD5 512.7 724.2 127

B2 HD6 512.7 724.2 99

B3 HD7 476.3 702.5 128

B4 HD8 476.3 702.5 99

Shrimp Experiment – Hydrophone PositionsShrimp Experiment – Hydrophone Positions


Dock Shrimp (Dock Shrimp (Pandalus danaePandalus danae))


Tagging the ShrimpTagging the Shrimp


Releasing the ShrimpReleasing the Shrimp


Data Collection – Equipment Set-upData Collection – Equipment Set-up


Real-Time Tracking DisplayReal-Time Tracking Display


Fish Number Fish Name Tag Code

Weight (gm)

Length (mm)

On-Screen Color Release Time

1 Rudy 2000 7.1 85 Green 8/15/05 1919

2 2023 7.8 72.5 Purple 8/15/05 1934

3 Flippy 2046 8.3 90 Dark Pink 8/15/05 1950

4 2069 6.7 85 Orange 8/15/05 2015

5 2092 6.3 80 Olive 8/15/05 2010

6 Cory 2115 6.4 86 Deep Blue 8/15/05 2040

7 Teuren 2138 8.5 90 Yellow 8/15/05 2045

8 Alison 2161 6.5 86 Turquoise 8/15/05 2045

Acoustic Tag Shrimp ResultsAcoustic Tag Shrimp Results


Acoustic Tag Shrimp ResultsAcoustic Tag Shrimp Results


Tecplot Figures & Animation by Chris Mott

Tag #2161 (Allison)Tag #2161 (Allison)


Notice up-down migration over 24 h period.

Tag #2023Tag #2023


Tag #2046 (Flippy)Tag #2046 (Flippy)


Tag #2069Tag #2069


Tag #2092Tag #2092


Tag #2138 (Teuren)Tag #2138 (Teuren)


Fish Aggregation Device (FAD) Study Results LeReunion Island, Indian Ocean Bigeye Scad Conducted in 2003




Net Pen Fish Study Results McKenzie River, Northwest Territories, Canada Lake Trout Conducted in 2003


Dolomite Lake (Inuvik), CanadaNet Pen Example, Lake Trout Roberto Racca 2003

Net Pen ExampleNet Pen Example


Dolomite Lake (Inuvik), CanadaNet Pen Example, Lake Trout Roberto Racca 2003

Net Pen ExampleNet Pen Example



Connecticut River Study Results Downstream Migrating American Eels Cabot Station, Turner Falls, MA Conducted in 2002 and 2003

Acoustic TagReceiver

Cabot Station Cabot Station on the Connecticut River on the Connecticut River

Flow

Flow


Methods: Equipment Installation

Surface Mount Hydrophone Bottom Mount Hydrophone

ATR & Computer

Unit 1Unit 5 Unit 4 Unit 3 Unit 2

SubmergedWall & Shelf

Surface Byass

Unit 6

Flow

Cabot Station

N S

E

W109876543210

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910

Depth (m)

Unit 1Unit 5 Unit 4 Unit 3 Unit 2

SubmergedWall & Shelf

Surface Byass

Unit 6

Flow

Cabot Station

N S

E

W109876543210

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 910

Depth (m)



Mid-Columbia River Results Downstream migrating salmon smolts Conducted in 2006


2006 Mid-Columbia River Smolt Studies


2006 Mid-Columbia Detection Sites

Acoustic Tag Use at Dams in the Pacific

Northwest


Key Advantages of Acoustic TagsKey Advantages of Acoustic Tags

Detection ranges in water up to 1 km. Radio tags are typically limited to 10 m in water.

Acoustic tags do not have an antenna, reducing drag and the potential for atypical behavior.

Over 500 tags in the same area can be detected and tracked simultaneously.


2006 Summary Acoustically Tagged Salmon Smolts2006 Summary Acoustically Tagged Salmon Smolts


Chinook Smolt with 1.5 g E-tag

153 mm Yearling Chinook

2006 Acoustic Tag Study2006 Acoustic Tag Study


180 mm Steelhead

Steelhead Smolt with 1.5 g E-tag



113 mm Sockeye

Sockeye with 0.75 g micro tag



2006 In-River Detection Arrays


2006 In-River Detection Arrays2006 In-River Detection Arrays


2006 Sockeye Travel Time Results Between Detection Sites Released from Wells Dam


2006 Sockeye Travel Velocity Results Between Detection Sites Released from Wells Dam


Rocky Reach Dam Project = 0.9331 (SE = 0.0121)

Rock Island Dam Project = 0.9600 (SE = 0.0108)

2006 Sockeye Project Survival2006 Sockeye Project Survival


Pph = 0.514Psp = 0.017

Psc = 0.434

2006 Sockeye Route Specific Passage2006 Sockeye Route Specific Passage


Sph = 0.966Ssp = 1.030

Ssc = 1.030

Overall Dam Survival = 0.979

2006 Sockeye Route Specific Survival2006 Sockeye Route Specific Survival


Rocky Reach Dam Showing Tag Coverage AreaRocky Reach Dam Showing Tag Coverage Area


1.6 Million Data Points (918 Individual Fish)


1

Fish Track Overlaid with Water Velocity


In-Turbine Intake Study, Wanapum DamUsing Acoustic Tags to Track Juvenile Salmonids in Three Dimensions Within a Turbine Intake


Project Objectives:Determine the Feasibility of Acoustically Tracking Fish Within a Turbine Intake For the Purpose of Evaluating a New Design of

Turbine that is Less Harmful to Passing Fish

Ultimately to Determine Areas Within the Turbine that May Be More or Less Harmful to Fish


EXTREME Environment

Tags Pushed to the Limit

Totally Confined Space

This May Not Work

at ALL

FeasibilityFeasibility


FLOW

Fish Release Pipe

Hydrophones

Turbine Runner

Diagram of DeploymentDiagram of Deployment

Turbine RunnerTurbine Runner


Fyke Net Frame

Hydrophones

DeploymentDeployment


Hydrophone

DeploymentDeployment


Predicted Position ErrorPredicted Position ErrorMethod: Ehrenberg and Steig (2002)


Acoustic Tag

Balloon Tag

Tagged FishTagged Fish


Tag Transmit SettingsTag Transmit Settings

25 Pulses per Second (0.04 s per Pulse)

3 Millisecond (0.003 s) Coded Pulse


Data CollectionData Collection

50 Minutes


Data CollectionData Collection


Data ProcessingData Processing


Data Processing – 3D TrackingData Processing – 3D Tracking


Tagged Tennis Ball TrackTagged Tennis Ball Track


Sacramento River Real-time StudySacramento River Real-time Study

Non-physical “bubble curtain” is deployed at divergence of San Joaquin River and Old River in central California.

© 2011 Hydroacoustic Technology, Inc.

Thank you.Thank you.

Tracey W. Steig + Samuel V. JohnstonHTI Hydroacoustic Technology Inc.

715 NE Northlake Way, Seattle, WA [email protected] (206) 633-3383