evaluation of the pit-tag detection arrays in the priest rapids dam adult ladders steve anglea,...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the
Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders
Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc.
Eric Lauver – Grant County PUD
![Page 2: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Objectives
• The overall goal of the project is to provide Grant County PUD with detection of upstream migrating anadromous salmonids at Priest Rapids Dam
– Detection efficiency specification of 95% with a Destron Technologies TX1400ST “supertag”
• Estimate detection efficiency of ladder arrays based on detection of salmonids from 1998-2002 migration years
![Page 3: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Priest Rapids Dam
![Page 4: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Priest Rapids Dam
![Page 5: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Adult PIT Tag Detection
Adult Trap
![Page 6: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Adult PIT Tag Detection• Two detection weirs in non-overflow segment of each ladder
– Left Ladder : Weirs 3 and 7– Right Ladder: Weirs 3 and 5– Two submerged orifices in each weir– Inside dimensions of antenna range: 22.5” x 45” to 24” x 55”
• Mounted to “video count box” at Weir 3 (Right Ladder) and Weir 7 (Left Ladder)
• Mounted to wall at other detection weirs
• Operational in spring 2003
![Page 7: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Left Ladder Adult Trap
• Denil entrance in Weir 4 orifice
• Sample platform between Weirs 1 and 2
• Not scanned for PIT tags
• Fish returned to river at ladder exit
![Page 8: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Video Count Box
• Weir 3 (Right) and Weir 7 (Left)
• Operational in 2005
![Page 9: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Video Count Box Antenna
• 6” aluminum transition• 5’ 1” channel• Internal shield
![Page 10: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Wall Mounted Antennas
![Page 11: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Two Weir Detection Probability• Detection of run-of-river adult salmonids • Assumptions
– Fish detected traveling in an upstream direction– Fish continued traveling upstream after being detected at
downstream weir
• P7 = probability of detection at Weir 7:
• P3 = probability of detection at Weir 3:
– m = number detected at both weirs– n1 = number detected at Weir 7– n2 = number detected at Weir 3
• P = 1 – (1-p7)(1-p3)
7
2
mp
n
3
1
mp
n
![Page 12: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Adult Salmonid Run-Timing
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1004
/1
4/1
5
4/2
9
5/1
3
5/2
7
6/1
0
6/2
4
7/8
7/2
2
8/5
8/1
9
9/2
9/1
6
9/3
0
10
/14
10
/28
11
/11
Date
Nu
mb
er o
f U
niq
ue
Det
ecti
on
s
Chinook Steelhead Coho Sockeye
![Page 13: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Ladder Use
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Pas
sag
e E
ven
ts
Chinook Steelhead Coho Sockeye
Right Ladder
Left Ladder
![Page 14: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Ladder Re-Ascension
Species Passage Events Re-Ascensions
Chinook 2,163 99 (4.6%)
(81% released at PRA)
Steelhead 43 0
Coho 244 5 (2%)
Sockeye 19 0
![Page 15: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Detection Weir to Detection Weir Transit Time
Species Mean Median Minimum Maximum
Chinook 23 min 4.3 min 13 sec 14.25 hrs**
Steelhead 21.5 min 4.75 min 30 sec 10 hrs*
Coho 45.3 min 8 min 20 sec 13 hrs*
Sockeye 8 min 5 min 1.3 min 18.5 min
* Delay during trap operation
** Movement between Weir 7 and Weir 3, ~12 hr gap
![Page 16: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Chinook Detection History
East/Left Ladder West/Right Ladder
Weir 7 292 Weir 5 254
Weir 3* 206 Weir 3* 17
Both Weirs
650 Both Weirs
784
P7 0.759 P5 0.979
P3 0.690 P3 0.755
PLEFT 0.925 PRIGHT 0.995
* Upstream weir
** Four fish with downstream detection histories in Right Ladder
![Page 17: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Detection ProbabilitySpecies Left Ladder Right Ladder
Chinook 0.925 (1,148) 0.995 (1,055)95% CI (0.912, 0.937) (0.992, 0.997)
Steelhead 0.963 (33) 1.0 (24)95% CI (0.875, 0.994) NA
Coho 0.898 (155) 0.991 (114)95% CI (0.849, 0.937) (0.975, 0.998)
Sockeye 0.978 (11) 1.0 (8)95% CI (0.851, 0.999) NA
![Page 18: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Left Ladder Detection Probability Incorporating Trap Operation
Species All Hours Trap Off Hours
Chinook 0.925 (1,148) 0.931 (1,053)
Steelhead 0.963 (33) 0.967 (29)
Coho 0.898 (155) 0.915 (128)
Sockeye 0.978 (11) 0.978 (11)
![Page 19: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Trap EffectMean Number of Weir 7 Detections
Species Trap On Trap Off
Chinook 4.4 (80) 1.7 (788)*
Steelhead 3.5 (2) 1.2 (29)*
Coho 2.8 (21) 1.5 (101)*
* P < 0.03
![Page 20: Evaluation of the PIT-Tag Detection Arrays in the Priest Rapids Dam Adult Ladders Steve Anglea, Anthony Carson – Biomark, Inc. Eric Lauver – Grant County](https://reader030.vdocuments.mx/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d015503460f949d32f0/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Future Actions/Recommendations
• Shorten length of exciter cables for antennas mounted to video count boxes
• Re-evaluate detection efficiency with “supertags”• Compare estimates of transit time, re-ascension, DE,
trap delay,… to results from other locations • Require scanning of salmonids caught in trap for PIT
Tags