Development of an Ogeebased PITtag Detection System for
Development of an Ogee-based PIT-tag Detection System for Spillbays Presenter: Sandra Downing Eric Hockersmith , Gordon Axel, and Earl Prentice (NOAA Fisheries Service) Roger Anderson, Alex Artyukhov, and Eric Waters (Destron Fearing) Don Warf, Scott Livingston, Darren Chase (PSMFC) Jack Sands, Jon Lomeland, Stuart Gregory, & Mark Plummer (Corps) Scott Bettin (BPA)
Outline of Presentation Ø Why are PIT-tag systems needed for spillbays? Ø Design considerations Ø Development process Ø Installation schedule Ø Evaluation of installed PIT-tag system
Ø The spillway has long been considered the safest passage route for migrating juvenile salmonids at Columbia and Snake River dams. Ø A review of 13 estimates of spillway mortality published through 1995 concluded that the mortality rates for fish passing standard spillbays range from 0 to 2%. Ø Radiotelemetry has shown that the RSWs attract ~50 -60% of the fish using the spillways.
Why are PIT-tag systems needed for spillbays? Ø With spill being used as the preferred passage route, fewer PIT tagged fish are being detected at the dams. Ø 25 -35% of the salmonids detected as adults do not have any detection records as juveniles except for tagging information Ø A PIT-tag system in spillbay could potentially help to return the precision of smolt survival indices back to historical levels. • RPA 55. 7 – Investigate the feasibility of developing PIT-tag detectors for spillways and turbines. Ø Detections would provide route specific information Ø More detections could help with survival estimates for reaches and specific ESUs
Design considerations Where to install PIT-tag antennas? Forebay side, on spillbay gate, or in ogee?
Ogee-based design is attractive for several reasons: Ogee face 1) it will not affect hydraulics; 2) there will be no debris issues; 3) the design will permit multiple antennas to be installed across the length of the ogee and therefore reduce the impact of tag collisions (i. e. , multiple tagged fish being in the field simultaneously); 4) the design will permit multiple antenna arrays to be installed, which is important from an O&M perspective and to reduce the impact of tag collisions; and 5) the design will potentially worked for all styles of spillbays
Nice laminar flow along ogee face in RSW Spillbay
Ogee-based design is difficult for several reasons 390 ft 380 ft-water depth is 4. 0 ft velocity is 62 fps 380 ft 372 ft- water depth is 3. 7 ft, velocity is 66 fps 370 ft 363 ft -water depth is 3. 5 ft, velocity is 71 fps 360 ft 350 ftft 350 Black arrows represent every 5’ on face of ogee Ø How fish pass down the ogee is unknown 353 ft-water depth is 3. 2 ft velocity is 75 fps
Design Considerations for the Ogee-based PIT-Tag Detection System Ø Multiple antenna arrays Ø Multiple antennas within each array Ø Need powerful antennas Ø Test a faster tag Ø Want flexibility in generating field shapes to help minimize tag collisions and dealing with unknown fish passage behavior
Ogee-based PIT-tag Detection System Ø Four antenna arrays Ø Four or five antennas in each array Ø Transceivers will be under water Ø Faster 16 -msec PIT tag
Antenna Design: Vertical Flat Plates Each antenna has 3 subantennas This design is actually similar to the corner-collector antenna design. The design also uses what Destron Fearing learned with the antenna tests done with the spillbay gate in the repair bay at Bonneville Dam.
Why are Tag Collisions an Issue? Ø For ogee-based systems, this can happen in the X, Y, and Z directions. X Y
What to do to minimize tag collisions in different directions? X direction Ø Multiple antennas within the trenches Y direction Ø Multiple trenches Ø Reduce power so antenna field is only 3’ wide (possible? 2 subantennas? ) Z direction Ø Reduce power so antenna field is only 3’ deep Ø Reduce power so antenna field is only 2’ deep Y and Z directions at same time Ø Reduce power so antenna field is only 3’ wide and 2 -3’ deep (possible? )
Top Antenna Array Full power – option 1 5. 5’-wide at bottom and 4 -5’-wide field for top foot of water Easy to imagine multiple fish being in such a large field water depth: 4 feet water velocity: 65 fps Distance for 2 messages: 4 feet
Top Antenna Array water depth: 4 feet water velocity: 65 fps Distance for 2 messages: 4 feet This shape only helps minimize tag collisions in Z direction Middle power – option 1 5’-wide for most of field and covering 3’ of water
Top Antenna Array water depth: 4 feet water velocity: 65 fps Distance for 2 messages: 4 feet This shape only helps minimize tag collisions in Z direction (Most likely would get non-reading gaps between antennas). Low power – option 1 5’-wide for most of field and covering 2’ of water
Top Antenna Array water depth: 4 water velocity: 65 Distance for 2 messages: 4 ft Distance for 2 short messages: 2 ft This shape helps minimize tag collisions in Y and Z directions Middle power – option 2 3’-wide at bottom and covering 3’ of water
Top Antenna Array water depth: 4 water velocity: 65 Distance for 2 messages: 4 ft Distance for 2 short messages: 2 ft Adjust power down even more to minimize tag collisions in Y and Z directions Low power – option 2 3’-wide at bottom and covering 2’ of water
Development process Ø Faster 16 -msec tag completed in 2010 Ø New ogee transceiver finished in March 2011 Ø Testing at Pasco with transceivers and 6 subantennas Ø Dry and submerged testing
Installation schedule Ø MOU between BPA and Corps will dictate the schedule Ø If installed at Ice Harbor Dam, 2012 Ø If another dam is chosen, 2013 at earliest
Evaluation of installed PIT-tag system Ø How do we evaluate how well the system detects tagged fish? Ø How do we determine what modifications are needed for future systems?
Evaluation of installed PIT-tag system Ø PIT-tag only fish released above spillbay using pipes inserted at depths used for evaluation of RSWs or TSWs. Ø Fish double tag with PIT and an active tag released into the forebay.
Preseason Evaluation of Ogee-based PIT-tag Detection System S=surface and D=depth S 4 S 1 S 2 S 3 D 1 D 2 Test Release point & Group Three different water depths D 1 -A, D 2 -A, S 1 -A Three or four different locations across the entrance S 1 -A, S 2 -B, S 3 -B, ? : S 4 -B Fish tagged with 31 -msec and 16 -msec tags S 1 -A, S 1 -C ? : also S 2 Evaluate 2 or 3 different power settings or field shapes with both tag types S 1 -A, S 1 -C , S 1 -D, S 1 -E ? : also S 2 Evaluate groups of fish at 2 or 3 different power settings with both tag types S 1 -F, S 1 -G, S 1 -H, S 1 -I ? : also S 2 Minimum of 12 tests with yearling Chinook salmon, 5 tests with Steelhead and subyearlings
Preseason Evaluation of Ogee-based PIT-tag Detection System Release individually tagged hatchery into the capture velocity Evaluate detection efficiencies for Ø Individual trenches Ø All trenches together Ø Combination of individual trenches (e. g. , 1&2; 1&3; 1&4; 1, 2, &3; 1, 2, &4) Use above data to determine how many antenna arrays are needed Determine number of reads per tagged fish for Ø Different antenna sizes, trenches, species, tag types
Inseason Evaluation of Ogee PIT-tag Detection System Release double-tagged fish at Lower Monumental Dam Ø Release 500 double-tagged yearling Chinook salmon Ø Release 500 double-tagged steelhead Ø Release 1, 000 double-tagged subyearling Chinook salmon Fish will be double-tagged with PIT tags and either acoustic or radio active tags Monitor double-tagged fish at RSW Spillbay at Ice Harbor Dam
Inseason Evaluation of Ogee PIT-tag Detection System Ø If preseason testing indicated a large significant difference between power settings, use a block design to compare two settings during the normal outmigration season. Ø Monitor number of fish detected Ø Monitor number of reads per tagged fish over time Ø Monitor noise measurements for the transceivers over time
Ice Harbor Dam Nav Lock Spillway RSW NEW PIT-tag system Turbine Bypass PIT-tag system Ø Depending on the salmonid group and spill pattern, 5 -20% of the fish use the bypass and 60 -90% use the spillway. The RSW attracts ~50% of the spillway fish. Ø Therefore, we are currently detecting 5 -20% of the tagged fish with the full-flow PIT-tag system. Ø Adding the new ogee-based PIT-tag detection system, we hope to detect around 50% of the tagged fish passing the dam.
A Tr nte en nn ch a es Questions?
- Slides: 28