{"Bibliographic":{"Title":"Evaluation of the effectiveness of radio-telemetry methods to monitor passage routes of juvenile salmonids at Ice Harbor Dam, 1996","Authors":"","Publication date":"1997","Publisher":""},"Administrative":{"Date created":"08-16-2023","Language":"English","Rights":"CC 0","Size":"0000042986"},"Pages":["SH153\n.I2GS2\nEvaluation\nof the effectiveness\nof radio-telemetry\nmethods to monitor\nCZES\npassage routes\nof juvenile salmonids\nCoastal Zone and\nat Ice Harbor Dam,\nEstuarine Studies\nDivision\n1996\nNorthwest Fisheries\nScience Center\nby\nNational Marine\nGeorge A. Swan, M. Brad Eppard,\nFisheries Service\nByron L. Iverson, and Mark A. Kaminski\nSeattle, Washington\nOctober 1997\nCenter","NWFSCOSO\nEVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF RADIO-TELEMETRY METHODS\nTO MONITOR PASSAGE ROUTES OF JUVENILE SALMONIDS\nSH\nAT ICE HARBOR DAM, 1996\n153\nI2\nGS2\nby\nGeorge A. Swan\nM. Brad Eppard\nByron L. Iverson\nand\nMark A. Kaminski\nAnnual Report of Research\nFunded by\nU.S. Army Corps of Engineers\nWalla Walla District\nDelivery Order E86-96-0096\nand\nCoastal Zone and Estuarine Studies Division\nNorthwest Fisheries Science Center\nNational Marine Fisheries Service\nNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration\n2725 Montlake Boulevard East\nSeattle, Washington 98112-2097\nOctober 1997","","iii\nCONTENTS\nPage\nEXECUTIVE SUMMARY\nV\nINTRODUCTION\n1\nOBJECTIVES\n4\nMATERIALS AND METHODS\n6\n10\nTest Sites\n16\nSimulated Fish\n17\nTest Fish\n17\nTest Sequence\n18\nRESULTS AND DISCUSSION\nPhase I\n18\n24\nPhase II\n31\nSUMMARY\nRECOMMENDATIONS\n32\nACKNOWLEDGMENTS\n32\nREFERENCES\n33","","V\nEXECUTIVE SUMMARY\nRadio-telemetry research has provided considerable knowledge on adult salmonid\nbehavior. Recently, miniaturization of electronic components has led to construction of\ntransmitters small enough for implantation in juvenile salmonids and has provided the\nmeans to monitor smolt behavior during downstream migration. The objective of this study\nwas to determine the feasibility of monitoring all potential passage routes of juvenile\nsalmonids through a hydroelectric dam. Ice Harbor Dam in the Snake River (RKm 15.6)\nwas the study site.\nThe study was conducted in two phases. In Phase I, radio tags were embedded in a\nneutrally buoyant object about the size and shape of a juvenile salmonid and released into a\nturbine intake, spillbay, and the juvenile bypass/collection system at Ice Harbor Dam to test\nequipment and initial tag-detection probabilities. In Phase II, radio tags were surgically\nimplanted in live fish, which were subsequently released through the different passage\nroutes.\nWe used a 30-MHZ telemetry system that combined individually coded 1.0 and\n0.5 second pulse rate tags (with battery durations of 3, 7, or 15 days) and fast scanning\nreceivers. This allowed us to monitor tagged fish passing through all passage routes even\nunder high water-velocity conditions. Tags were procured from commercial vendors and\nwere built to meet specifications of equipment developed by the National Marine Fisheries\nService.\nNew designs for supporting underwater antennas were tested for detecting passage of\nradio-tagged juvenile salmonids through a spillbay and a turbine unit (representing unguided","vi\nfish passing through the draft tubes). Standard methods were used to install underwater and\nair antennas at gatewell and juvenile bypass monitoring sites.\nOne hundred percent of both the simulated and live radio-tagged fish that were\nreleased through the turbine/draft tubes and gatewell tests were detected. Detections for\nradio-tagged live fish passing through the bypass channel and over the spillway were 90\nand 70%, respectively. Detection of tagged fish at the juvenile sampling facility was 40%.\nModified equipment needs to increase tag detections at spillway and juvenile bypass system\nmonitoring sites were identified, and further improvements are currently underway.","INTRODUCTION\nRadio-telemetry is an effective research tool for monitoring the behavior of adult\nsalmonids in rivers, reservoirs, and at hydroelectric dams. More recently, this methodology\nhas been applied to monitor the behavior of juvenile salmonids during downstream\nmigration. Miniaturization of electronic components has led to improvements in transmitter\nsize, making them suitable for implantation in juvenile salmonids. Giorgi et al. (1988)\ndetermined that juvenile salmonids with gastric-implanted radio tags could provide\nacceptable estimates of powerhouse and spillway passage.\nA floating hypalon curtain with a depth of 18.3 m and stretching diagonally across\nthe forebay of a hydroelectric dam about 0.8 km upstream from the juncture of the spillway\nand powerhouse to a shoreline has been proposed for guiding juvenile salmonids away from\nthe powerhouse to the spillway for downstream passage. A proposed evaluation of this\ndevice has been considered for Ice Harbor Dam at river kilometer (RKm) 15.6 on the Snake\nRiver (Fig. 1) and if found successful, the floating curtain would be installed at Lower\nGranite Dam (RKm 173).\nIf a floating curtain test is conducted at Ice Harbor Dam, a minimum acceptable\nfish passage efficiency (FPE) of 80% must be met or the floating curtain will be removed.\nThe FPE will be determined in part from monitoring radio-tagged smolts. Therefore,\naccurate monitoring of all passage routes selected by radio-tagged smolts will be essential\nduring testing.\nIn preparation for the proposed floating curtain experiment at Ice Harbor Dam, the\nU. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla District, (COE) requested that the National\nMarine Fisheries Service (NMFS) develop baseline radio-telemetry information on juvenile","","3\nIce Harbor Dam\nJuvenile\nFacility\nFlow\nUSGS\nGaging Station\nSnake River\nT\nGoose Island\nN\nFigure 1. Study area of Ice Harbor Dam.radio-telemetry project, 1996.","4\nfish passage routes, applicable not only to Ice Harbor Dam but other dams as well. To\nmeet the request, NMFS refined procedures for installing and operating a radio-telemetry\nsystem that accurately monitors all routes of passage available to radio-tagged smolts. In\npreparation for a future curtain study, the research outlined in this report evaluated the\neffectiveness of the NMFS radio-telemetry methods and equipment. Ice Harbor Dam, due\nto its close proximity to the NMFS maintenance and field electronic shop facilities at Pasco,\nWA, was chosen as the study site.\nOBJECTIVES\nThe primary objective of the 1996 baseline radio-telemetry research was to evaluate\nthe effectiveness of NMFS radio-telemetry methods and equipment used to monitor passage\nroutes through a powerhouse (turbine intake and smolt bypass system) and spillway. The\nstudy was conducted in two phases. Specific goals for this study were covered by the\nfollowing research tasks:\nPhase I\nTask 1: Determine the efficiency and effectiveness of NMFS radio-telemetry\nequipment and procedures required to monitor the passage of radio tags, embedded\nin simulated fish, through specific routes of passage (turbine intake, spillway,\ngatewell/bypass orifice and collection channel, and tailrace) at a hydroelectric dam.\nTask 1.1: Determine tag range and reliability of prototype 30 MHZ radio\ntransmitters designed for tagging and tracking of juvenile chinook salmon and\nsteelhead.\nTask 1.2: Determine optimum locations and positioning techniques for\ninstallation of underwater or air antennas at a turbine intake, a spillbay, the\njuvenile bypass/collection system, and the tailrace.","5\nTask 1.2.1: Determine source and impact of radio interference\naffecting reception at proposed test dam (Ice Harbor Dam) and\ndevelop methods for eliminating any resultant deleterious effects.\nTask 1.3: Determine antenna range and reliability at a turbine intake, a\nspillbay, the fish bypass/collection system, and the tailrace.\nTask 1.4: Monitor passage of radio tags embedded in simulated fish through\na turbine intake, a spillbay, the gatewell/bypass orifice and collection channel,\nand the tailrace.\nPhase II\nTask 2: Determine the efficiency and effectiveness of NMFS radio-telemetry\nequipment and procedures to monitor the passage of radio tags implanted in live\nhatchery juvenile salmonids through specific routes of passage (turbine intake,\nspillway, juvenile bypass/collection system, and tailrace) at a hydroelectric dam.\nTask 2.1: Confirm tag range and reliability of prototype radio transmitters\ndesigned for tagging and tracking of juvenile chinook salmon and steelhead\nwith live radio-tagged fish.\nTask 2.2: Confirm optimum locations and positioning techniques for\ninstallation of air and underwater antennas at a turbine intake, a spillbay, the\njuvenile bypass/collection system, and the tailrace with live radio-tagged fish.\nTask 2.3: Confirm antenna range and reliability at a turbine intake, a\nspillbay, the fish bypass/collection system, and the tailrace with live radio-\ntagged fish.\nTask 2.4: Determine efficiency and effectiveness of NMFS radio-telemetry\nmethods and equipment required for recording the passage of radio tags\nimplanted in live fish, through the turbine intake (unguided fish), from the\nturbine intake to the juvenile bypass/collection system (guided fish), through\na spillbay, and in the tailrace.\nTask 2.5: Determine effectiveness of NMFS radio-telemetry methods and\nequipment required for monitoring the passage of radio tags, implanted in\nlive fish, under tainter gates with standard deep spill.\nTask 2.6: Determine effectiveness of NMFS radio-telemetry methods and\nequipment required for monitoring the passage of radio tags, implanted in\nlive fish, through a spillbay incorporating stop logs covered with metal \"skin\"\nplates (surface skimming spill condition).","6\nMATERIALS AND METHODS\nThis study utilized the 30-MHZ radio-telemetry system developed by NMFS. Self-\ncontained, nine-channel, radio-telemetry receivers were strategically installed to record the\npresence of radio-tagged fish within specific areas of test locations. Specifically monitored\nareas of the dam included Spillbay 1, Turbine Unit 3 draft tubes, Gatewell 3B, juvenile\ncollection channel, fingerling sampling facility, and the tailwater area about 2 km\ndownstream from the dam (Figs. 1 and 2 and Table 1).\nTwo types of telemetry receivers were used to monitor passage of simulated fish and\nmovement and behavior of radio-tagged juvenile salmonids during the study period. Both\nreceivers consisted of a radio receiver, data processor, internal clock, and data logger and\nallowed monitoring up to nine channels simultaneously. Each unit was powered by a\n120 VAC power converter, or could be operated using 12 VDC battery in conjunction with\nsolar panels.\nThe first type of receiver was originally developed and assembled by NMFS\nelectronics shop personnel. The NMFS receiver unit was used in situations where the\nscanning rate (1.25 seconds) was of primary importance. The second type of telemetry\nreceiver, Model SRX-400, was purchased from Lotek Engineering Inc., 1 Newmarket,\nOntario, Canada and due to a slower scanning rate (12.45 seconds), was used in locations\nwhere water velocities were lower, and radio tags were present for longer durations.\n1\nReference to trade names does not imply endorsement by the National Marine Fisheries Service,\nNOAA.","7\nFlow\n6 : 5 1 4\n3\n2 I 1\n10\n9\n8\n7\n6\n5\n4\n3\n2\n1\nPowerhouse\nSpillway\nSmolt bypass\nsampling facility\nOverhead view of Ice Harbor Dam\nFigure 2. Overhead view of Ice Harbor Dam (circles indicate areas where specific tests were\nconducted).","8\nTable 1. Location of radio-telemetry monitors at Ice Harbor Dam, 1996.\nMonitor number\nMonitor Location\n1-12\nTurbine draft tubes (unit 3)\n13\nDownstream side of spillbay 1\n14\nUpstream side of spillbay 1\n15\nSmolt bypass collection channel\n16\nGatewell (Turbine Unit 3, Slot b)\n17\nSmolt bypass sampling facility\n18\nDownstream from dam on Goose Island\n20\nDownstream from dam at USGS gaging station","9\nRadio tags suitable for implantation in juvenile chinook salmon and steelhead smolts\nwere purchased from Advanced Telemetry Systems Inc. (ATS). The radio tags for the\nstudy had a tag life of 3, 7, or 15 days. The effective range of these transmitters was\nunknown at the beginning of this study but was expected to be about 60-100 m by air\nreception and 2-6 m by underwater reception. The tags transmitted, with either 60\npulses/min or 120 pulses/min (base pulse rates of 1 or 0.5 second, respectively), on one of\nnine frequencies spaced 10 KHz apart (30.170 MHZ to 30.250 MHZ). However, Channel 6\n(30.220 MHZ) was not utilized due to excessive radio interference. Each tag transmitted a\nunique identification code number, which was obtained through a double pulse transmission\nby the tag every 0.5 or 1 second (depending on the base pulse rate).\nThe ATS tags were sealed in an epoxy capsule measuring about 1.8 cm in length,\n0.5 cm in diameter, and weighed 1.4 g in the air and were equipped with a flexible external\nwhip antenna measuring 30 cm.\nRadio tags were used to tag both simulated and live fish. \"Simulated fish\"\n(transmitters embedded in neutrally buoyant objects about the size and shape of a juvenile\nsalmonid) were released to follow the same passage routes that a smolt might follow.\nSimulated fish allowed testing of equipment and collection of preliminary baseline\ninformation without the use of live fish.\nTwo types of antennas (underwater and air) were utilized for radio-tag signal\nreception. Underwater antennas identified radio-tagged fish as they approached and passed\na specific point. Underwater antennas consisted of coaxial cable with the shielding and\nprotective cover stripped off 10 cm from the distal end and were used to isolate an area of","10\nreception. Types of air antennas included, 1) directional tuned-loop antennas used at fixed\nsites for general area tracking and fish passage where underwater antennas were not\neffective, and 2) multiple element Yagi antennas installed at sites downstream from the dam\nto monitor large expanses of the river. A 4-element Yagi antenna was installed at Monitor\nSite 20 on a hill above the north shoreline. Monitor Site 18, on Goose Island, was\nequipped with a 2-element Yagi antenna to monitor the narrower channel on the south side\nof the island, and a 3-element Yagi antenna monitored the wider, main river expanse on the\nnorth side of the island.\nTest Sites\nTurbine Intake\nTwo draft tubes direct all discharge from each turbine to the tailrace (Figs. 3 and 4).\nWater velocity through the draft tubes was estimated to be about 3.66 m/s (Pers. comm.,\nMartin L. Ahmann, Walla Walla District, COE). Therefore, a specially constructed frame\nwas required to monitor each draft tube of Turbine Unit 3. Fixed-site receivers with 12\nunderwater antennas attached to each draft tube frame (Fig. 5) identified tagged fish as they\napproached and passed a strategic location in the draft tube.\nSpillbay\nTwo tuned-loop antennas were mounted on the forebay side of Spillbay 1 to record\nthe approach of tagged fish but were used only in preliminary testing for depth range of\ntags. Two tuned-loop antennas were also mounted on the downstream side of the spillbay\nto record tagged fish that had passed over the spillbay.","11\nC. slot\nB slot\nA slot\nFlow\nTurbine\nDraft tubes\nFigure 3. Overhead schematic of an Ice Harbor Dam turbine unit.","12\nEl. 453.0\nSmolt bypass\ncollection channel\nGatewell\nSTS\nFlow\nEl. 321.87\nDraft-tube\nframe\nEl. 267.07\nFigure 4. Cross section of the powerhouse at Ice Harbor Dam.","13\nUnderwater antennas\nsupported by 10mm cable\nFigure 5. Support frame for underwater antennas placed in each draft tube of Turbine Unit 3.","14\nIn order to detect radio tags at precise underwater locations near the spill gate, we\ndeveloped a tube structure to house and position underwater antennas in the forebay about\n2.5 m in front of and above the bottom of the tainter gate. A single underwater antenna\nwas housed in a 6.35 cm diameter pipe on the upstream side of Spillbay 1 to record tagged\nfish passing under the tainter gate from the forebay to the tailwaters via the spillway\n(Fig. 6). A lead weight attached to the distal end of the underwater antenna facilitated\nlowering the antenna through the tube structure to the desired depth. Therefore, the antenna\ncould easily be pulled to the surface to check its condition and returned to the monitoring\nposition.\nJuvenile Bypass/collection System\nTwo underwater antennas, each with the distal end weighted, were suspended in the\ngatewell to detect the presence of radio-tagged fish.\nTwo air antennas (loop) were mounted in the juvenile bypass/collection system to\nverify passage of tagged fish (representing fish guided from the turbine intake) from the\ngatewell to the bypass channel. One underwater antenna located in Gatewell 3-B verified\npresence of fish. In addition, tagged fish exiting gatewells through the orifices were\ninterrogated in the bypass channel.\nAir antennas were placed in the bypass/collection channel to verify the passage of\nradio tags from the gatewell into the bypass system. Passage from the bypass channel to\nthe sampling facility was monitored by air antennas mounted on the flume upstream from\nthe juvenile separator.","15\nEl. 453.0\nTainter gate\nNormal pool\nEl. 440.0\nAir antenna\nAntenna\nsupport\nUnderwater\nantenna\nEl. 391.0\nOgee\nFigure 6. Cross section of Spillbay 1 during testing at Ice Harbor Dam, 1996.","16\nTailwaters\nOne 4-element Yagi air antenna was mounted on the north shore and two 3-element\nYagi air antennas were mounted on Goose Island to detect radio-tagged fish passing\nthrough the tailwaters.\nSimulated Fish\nWe considered a variety of objects for use as simulated fish and chose two for initial\ntrials with test tags. First, we inserted a juvenile radio tag through a hole drilled in a\nracquet ball and added a sufficient amount of lead shot to achieve the buoyancy required\nfor the ball to float just under the water's surface. Finally, we filled the ball with insulation\nfoam from a pressurized can (as used to fill spaces around house windows) and sealed the\nhole with silicone caulking compound. The racquet ball version of the simulated fish was\nfound to be unsatisfactory. Apparently, water was forced into the balls when they were\ncompressed by about six atmospheres of pressure in the turbine intake and draft tubes.\nIn the second effort to develop a simulated fish, we used a foam rubber, key chain\nfloat (as used with boats). We removed the key chain and inserted the radio tag into the\nhole in the float and applied silicone to keep the tag in place. Both, balls and floats, were\nspray painted a fluorescent orange color to aid in locating and recovering the simulated fish\nin an effort to reuse the radio tags.\nThe key chain float functioned very well as a simulated fish. The simulated fish\nappeared to pass through the release hoses and the passage routes in a manner similar to\nlive fish. A total of 18 radio tags were embedded in simulated fish and utilized throughout\nPhase I of this study.","17\nTest Fish\nTest fish were hatchery juvenile chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and\nsteelhead (0. mykiss) held on site for the evaluation of the juvenile bypass at Ice Harbor\nDam (a separate study). Forty-four juvenile hatchery salmonids served as live test fish\nduring Phase II of the radio-telemetry study.\nIn our studies at Ice Harbor Dam in 1995 (Swan et al., 1995), we radio tagged\njuvenile salmonids using the gastric implant method. We had experienced some\nregurgitation of radio tags in holding containers prior to release of tagged fish. In addition,\nsome regurgitation subsequent to the release of radio-tagged fish was also suspected. As a\nresult of that experience, in 1996, we used a surgical implant technique similar to methods\ndescribed by Hockersmith et al. (1995). The surgical implant method proved highly\nsatisfactory. During this study, we recorded only one mortality prior to the release of\ntagged fish.\nBoth simulated and live fish were released one at a time. Releases at the spillway\nwere made through a 7.6 cm hose attached to a 7.6 cm steel pipe that housed the\nunderwater antenna. Releases for the draft tube tests were made through a 7.6 cm hose that\nextended from the intake deck through Gatewell 3-B to the submerged traveling screen\n(STS). The distal end of the release hose was attached to the downstream side of the STS.\nTest Sequence\nTesting focused on separate routes of passage (e.g. a turbine intake and a spillbay)\nand was conducted in two phases. Initial testing utilized radio tags imbedded in simulated","18\nfish and addressed tag detection and signal range and location and efficiency of antennas\nand receivers.\nDuring Phase I, radio-tagged simulated fish were released into a single turbine\nintake, a single spillbay, the gatewell and bypass/collection channel. During each trial, data\nincluding identification of tags and respective number of detections recorded per tag were\ncollected along with anecdotal observations. To determine tag range, tags were released\nupstream from Monitor Sites 18 and 20 and allowed to drift with the river current past the\nmonitor sites while suspended at depths of about 1-3 m. Four types of tags (3-day tags\nwith pulse rates of 60 or 120 pulses/min and 7- day tags with 60 or 120 pulses/min) were\nused during the range testing. Phase II provided data with live radio-tagged fish for\ncomparison with the results of Phase I.\nSimulated fish were released into the spillbay and turbine intake through a 7.6 cm\nhose and were placed into the gatewell and bypass channel by hand. Test fish were\nreleased by lowering them in buckets of water.\nRESULTS AND DISCUSSION\nInstallation of test equipment began in March. Phase I of the testing focused on the\nindividual tasks in succession, using simulated fish (test tags), and was conducted during\nApril. Phase II, with radio-tagged live fish, was conducted during May.\nPhase I\nTask 1: Determine the efficiency and effectiveness of NMFS radio-telemetry\nequipment and procedures required to monitor the passage of radio tags,\nembedded in simulated fish, through specific routes of passage (turbine","19\nintake, spillway, gatewell/bypass orifice and collection channel, and tailrace)\nat a hydro-electric dam.\nDuring the initial testing in Phase I, some difficulty was experienced in detecting\nsimulated fish when they were at the surface of the water. After the project was completed\nand during consultation with the manufacturer of the radio tags, we concluded that because\nthe tags were tuned for total immersion in water, if any portion of the tag antenna protruded\nfrom the water, a substantial decrease in signal strength could occur. Subsequent tests with\nthe simulated fish attached to weighted lines at a depth of at least 1 m resulted in a\ndetection rate of 100% by the Yagi air antennas at the downstream monitor sites.\nAlthough recovery of the simulated fish was desirable for subsequent reuse of the\nradio tags few were recovered downstream from the dam. The low recovery rate may have\nbeen resulted in part from erratic flows, high velocities, and water pressures in the spill\nbasin and tailrace, and excessive radio interference, collectively reducing the chances of\nlocating the tags either visually or by telemetry.\nTask 1.1: Determine tag range and reliability of prototype 30-MHZ radio\ntransmitters designed for tagging and tracking of juvenile chinook salmon and\nsteelhead.\nAll transmitters were recorded with adequate signal strength output up to a distance\nof about 330 m with Yagi antennas. Underwater antennas were effective for tag detection\nup to 3-4 m. The ATS juvenile radio tags tested were judged reliable for conducting a\nbehavior study with live juvenile salmonids.\nTask 1.2: Determine optimum locations and positioning techniques for\ninstallation of underwater or air antennas at a turbine intake, a spillbay, the\njuvenile bypass/collection system, and the tailrace.","20\nDuring this task, we had not received our full supply of radio tags; therefore, most\nof our testing with simulated fish was accomplished with tags having a 7-day battery life\ncombined with a signal output of 60 or 120 pulses/min (Table 2). Mounting underwater\nantennas on a support frame positioned in a draft tube was the most practical method for\nboth equipment installation and detection of unguided radio-tagged juvenile salmonids. All\nsimulated fish (100%) released into the turbine intake were detected by the draft tube\nantenna array and monitors, the tube-mounted underwater antenna monitoring the forebay\nside of the tainter gate detected 100% of the simulated fish, and 100% of the simulated fish\nintroduced into the test gatewell were detected.\nAt the upstream side of the spillway, tuned-loop air antennas located on the parapet\nwall overlooking the near forebay were found to be of limited value. These antennas were\nonly effective in recording radio-tagged fish and simulated fish near the surface, to a depth\nof about 3 m. However, the tuned-loop air antennas installed on the downstream side of\nSpillbay 1 were 100% efficient at detecting simulated fish as they passed over the spillbay.\nNone of the 7-day test tags in simulated fish were recorded in the collection channel.\nDetection of these tags may have been affected by the tag antenna's partial exposure to air\nat the surface of the water. In addition, a low gain setting was required on the receivers for\nSites 15 and 17 due to high interference levels. Lower gain settings can contribute to lower\ndetection rates especially if signal output is weak.\nTwo of four test tags were detected at the smolt bypass sampling facility. In\naddition to intense radio interference in this area, a very short exposure time for detection\nexisted due to the flow in the flume at the upstream end of the sampling facility. NMFS","21\nTable 2. Detection efficiency of radio-telemetry monitors at downstream sites for\nradio-tagged simulated fish released during testing at Ice Harbor Dam, 1996.\nNumber of\nNumber\nNumber of detections\nMonitor\nTest site\ntags tested\ndetected\nRange\nMedian\nefficiency\nn\n(%)\nDraft tubes\n7\n7\n16,158\n31-5,294\n89\n100\nBypass\n4\n2\n50\n--\n--\nsystem\na\nSpillway\n3\n3\n17\n1-5\n2\n100\nTotal\n14\n12\n86\n--\n--\nAll simulated fish were detected in the gatewell, none in the collection channel, and two\na\nwere detected at the juvenile facility.","22\nmonitors were not utilized at Monitor Site 17 due to limited space and apparently the Lotek\nmonitors were unable to scan at an adequate rate to detect tags efficiently in the high\nvelocity. However, partial exposure of the tag antennas to the air may also have reduced\ndetection efficiency at this site.\nTask 1.2.1: Determine source and impact of radio interference affecting reception at\nproposed test dam (Ice Harbor Dam) and develop methods for eliminating any\nresultant deleterious effects.\nAmbient \"noise\" (interference created by general electrical fields such as by\noperating turbines and electrical and internal combustion engines or frequencies such as\ncreated by flowing water) all contribute various radio frequencies which can be confused\nwith or even block valid signals from radio tags. Simulated fish passing through the bypass\nchannel and the juvenile sampling facility were poorly detected, most likely due to\nexcessive interference (electrical and frequency noise). We found that changing the\norientation of antennas, lowering the gain setting on receivers, or moving the monitoring\nsite to a new location were of some value in reducing radio interference. However, more\nconcentrated testing in the vicinity of the tailrace deck of hydroelectric dams is needed.\nTask 1.3: Determine antenna range and reliability at a turbine intake, a\nspillbay, the fish bypass/collection system, and the tailrace.\nAntenna range is partially determined by the signal strength from a transmitter. Due\nto the inherent variability stemming from the electronic components used in the\nconstruction of radio tags, signal strength of transmitters will vary. Consequently, the\nefficiency of detection equipment can be greatly affected, especially when the effects of\nsignal strength variability are compounded with other factors such as interference, depth,\nrange, and antenna orientation. The NMFS monitor/receiver equipment detected radio tag","23\nsignals with underwater antennas at ranges of 3-4 m. Radio tags positioned at depths of 3-\n4 meters were detected with 3- and 4-element Yagi air antennas. When used in a noise\n(electrical or frequency) saturated area, NMFS receiving equipment combined with tuned-\nloop air antennas, provided a detection range of about 100 m. Detection was limited to\n20 m or less with the Lotek receivers.\nTask 1.4: Monitor passage of radio tags, embedded in simulated fish, through a\nturbine intake, a spillbay, the gatewell/bypass orifice and collection channel, and the\ntailrace.\nDuring the primary series of simulated fish testing, 14 radio-tagged, simulated fish\nwere used. All were 7-day tags (8 at 60 pulse/min and 6 at 120 pulse/min).\nSeven radio-tagged simulated fish were released into the turbine intake. All seven\ntags were detected as they passed through the draft tubes by the complex of Monitors 1-12\nwith underwater antennas mounted on the draft-tube frames. There were a total of 16,158\nrecords, ranging from 31-5,294 and a median of 89 detections per tag.\nThree radio-tagged simulated fish were passed through Spillbay 1. All tags were\ndetected by both the upstream (underwater antennas) and downstream monitors (air\nantennas). The upstream monitor recorded a total of eight detections, with a median of two\ndetections per tag, ranging from one to five detections. The downstream monitor performed\nsimilarly with nine total detections, with a range from two to five and a median of two\ndetections per tag.\nFour radio-tagged simulated fish were released into the gatewell and passed from it\nto the bypass/collection system. All tags were detected from the time of introduction into\nthe gatewell until exiting through the bypass orifice. There were a total of 175 detections,","24\nwith a range of 24-95 and a median of 28 detections per tag. The tags were not detected\nwhile passing through the collection channel, probably due to the antennas partially\nprojecting from the water into the air resulting in a low signal output. However, when the\nfour tags reached the juvenile sampling facility, two were detected with a total of three\ndetections.\nPhase II\nTask 2: Determine the efficiency and effectiveness of NMFS radio-telemetry\nequipment and procedures to monitor the passage of juvenile radio tags, implanted in\nlive hatchery juvenile salmonids, through specific routes of passage (turbine intake,\nspillway, juvenile bypass/collection system, and tailrace) at a hydroelectric dam.\nForty-two radio-tagged hatchery juvenile salmonids were released during Phase II.\nTwenty-two were released into the turbine intake for the draft-tube tests. Ten fish were\nreleased in the spillway and 10 fish were released in the gatewell/bypass channel tests\n(Table 3). All of the 42 radio-tagged live fish were recorded by at least one monitor after\nthey were released.\nOf the 10 fish released in the gatewell/bypass channel tests, 5 were released into\nGatewell 3B and allowed to pass into the bypass channel via the orifice. All five fish were\nrecorded on Monitor 16. Four of those fish passed into the bypass collection channel, and\nthe fifth fish remained in the gatewell for at least 96 hrs when the power cord for Monitor\n16 was unplugged in order to move the gantry crane. Therefore, a total of nine radio-\ntagged fish were either released into and passed from the gatewell into the bypass collection\nchannel or were released directly into the bypass channel where all nine were recorded on","25\nTable 3. Detection efficiency of radio-telemetry monitors installed on Ice Harbor Dam for\ndetection of radio-tagged hatchery juvenile salmonids, 1996.\nNumber\nNumber\nNumber of detections\nMonitor\nTest site\nreleased detected\nRange\nMedian\nefficiency\nn\n(%)\nDraft tube\nAll receivers\n22\n22\n2,426\n21-322\n69.5\n100\nBypass system\nGatewell\n5\n5\n100\n9b\nCollection channel\n5\n1,186\n2-850\n33.0\n100\nSampling facility\n10\n4\n13\n1-9\n2.0\n40\nSpillway\nUpstream\n10\n9\n57\n2-13\n4.0\n90\nDownstream\n10\n7\n60\n1-23\n4.0\n70\na Radio-tagged fish remained in the gatewell for some time before exiting resulting in\nexceptionally high numbers of detections.\nb\nIncludes four of the five fish released into the gatewell.","26\nMonitor 15. However, only four (44%) of those nine fish were recorded at the sampling\nfacility.\nA downstream detection efficiency of 71% was determined for fish released into the\ngatewell/collection channel (Table 4). However, the fates of other radio-tagged fish after\ndeparting downstream from the passage routes were undetermined. Range and reliability of\nthe transmitters used in this study were determined to be acceptable for conducting behavior\nstudies with juvenile salmonids.\nTask 2.1: Confirm tag range and reliability of prototype radio transmitters designed\nfor tagging and tracking of juvenile chinook salmon and steelhead with live radio-\ntagged fish.\nA total of 70 radio tags were used throughout the study. Two tags (2.9%) failed\nprior to release of the radio-tagged fish and were removed from the study. It is possible that\nthe tags did not actually fail, but the batteries were drained of power when magnets taped on\nthe tags may have been inadvertently moved out of position on the tags when transported or\nmoved about while in storage resulting in a power drain of the batteries.\nTask 2.2: Confirm optimum locations and positioning techniques for installation of\nair and underwater antennas at a turbine intake, a spillbay, the juvenile\nbypass/collection system, and the tailrace with live radio-tagged fish.\nThe monitor/receiver and antenna locations utilized in Phase II of this study (with the\nexception of the downstream spillway loop air antennas) were in locations that detected\nradio-tagged juvenile salmonids passing through all routes of passage through Ice Harbor\nDam and were based on testing with radio-tagged, simulated fish during Phase I.","27\nTable 4. Detection efficiency of radio-telemetry monitors at downstream sites for\nradio-tagged hatchery juvenile salmonids released during testing at Ice Harbor Dam,\n1996.\nNumber of\nNumber\nNumber of detections\nMonitor\nTest site\nfish released\ndetected\nRange\nMedian\nefficiency (%)\nn\nDraft tubes\n22\n13\n168\n1-51\n11\n59\nBypass system\n10\n10\n226\n1-66\n14\n100\nSpillway\n10\n7\n76\n2-16\n12\n70\nTotal\n42\n30\n470\n1-66\n12\n71","28\nThe air antennas for the downstream location might have performed better if they had\nbeen positioned closer to the water column passing over the ogee. However, transmitter\norientation and exposure to the air may have affected detection.\nTask 2.3: Confirm antenna range and reliability at a turbine intake, a spillbay, the\nfish bypass/collection system, and the tailrace with live radio-tagged fish.\nAll of the 22 radio-tagged test fish that passed through Turbine Unit 3 were detected\nby the underwater antenna array mounted on the draft tube frames. A total of 2,426\ndetections with a range of 21-322 detections per fish (median = 69.5) were recorded.\nThe air antennas used at the tailwater monitor sites appeared to function satisfactorily.\nAn improvement might result from installing more antennas to span the greater expanse of\nthe river (i.e., antennas mounted on buoys).\nTask 2.4: Determine efficiency and effectiveness of NMFS radio-telemetry methods\nand equipment required for recording the passage of radio tags implanted in live fish,\nthrough the turbine intake (unguided fish), from the turbine intake to the juvenile\nbypass/collection system (guided fish), through a spillbay, and in the tailrace.\nEfficiencies of the 30-MHZ radio-telemetry monitors utilized at all test sites at Ice\nHarbor Dam in 1996 are shown in Figure 7. Monitors 1-12 recorded 100% of the radio-\ntagged hatchery juvenile salmonids passing through the draft tubes of Turbine Unit 3.\nDetection efficiencies for monitor sites at the gatewell, bypass channel, and sampling\nfacility were 100, 100, and 44%, respectively.\nMonitor 13 with 2 loop air antennas, located at the downstream side of Spillbay 1,\nwas 70% efficient at recording the passage of radio-tagged fish. Nine of 10 radio-tagged fish\n(90%) released were recorded on Monitor 14 on the upstream side of Spillbay 1. The fish\nthat was not recorded on monitor 14 was recorded on the downstream side of Spillbay 1.","29\n120\n100\n80\n60\n40\n20\n0\n1-12\n13\n14\n15\n16\n17\n18 & 20\nMonitor number\nFigure 7. Detection efficiency of 30-MHz radio-telemetry equipment installed at Ice Harbor\nDam for detection of radio-tagged hatchery juvenile salmonids, 1996. (See Table 1 for\nmonitor locations)","30\nDetection efficiency of the downstream monitor sites was 71%.\nTask 2.5: Determine effectiveness of NMFS radio-telemetry methods and equipment\nrequired for monitoring the passage of radio tags, implanted in live fish, under tainter\ngates with standard deep spill.\nThe method developed for positioning upstream underwater antennas at the spillway\nwas highly effective for both monitoring (90% detection efficiency) and antenna maintenance.\nTwo or three underwater antennas per spillbay would probably ensure maximum detection\nefficiency at that location. However, more testing is needed at the downstream spill antenna\nlocation (40% detection efficiency) for verifying spill passage of radio-tagged fish.\nThe lower detection rate of radio tags at the downstream side of the spillway may\nhave been the result of the undetected radio-tagged fish being out of the water column when\npassing over the spill. The lower detection rate for the downstream side of the spillway was\nmore apparent when the spill gate was set at larger openings.\nTask 2.6: Determine effectiveness of NMFS radio-telemetry methods and\nequipment required for monitoring the passage of radio tags, implanted in live fish,\nthrough a spillbay incorporating stop logs covered with metal \"skin\" plates (surface\nskimming spill condition).\nDue to logistical concerns at Ice Harbor Dam during the 1996 research season,\ninstallation of stop logs in the test spillbay was not possible. Therefore, this task was not\ncompleted.","31\nSUMMARY\n1.\nWe determined that entry, passage behavior, and passage verification, relative to\nindividual surface collection devices, of radio-tagged juvenile salmonids at collection and\nbypass facilities of hydroelectric dams are highly feasible. NMFS' 30-MHZ radio-\ntelemetry system utilizing a combination of individually coded 1 and 0.5 second pulse rate\ntags and the fast scanning receivers permitted monitoring radio-tagged fish passing\nthrough short dimensional openings under high velocity flows. Further testing of minor\nmodifications should correct detection problems encountered at the spillway (downstream\nside). and juvenile sampling facility.\n2. Range and reliability of radio tags used in this study were determined to be acceptable for\ndetection up to distances of 330 m with Yagi antennas, 3-4 m with underwater antennas.\nWhen used in a noise (electrical or frequency) saturated area, tuned-loop air antennas,\nNMFS receiving equipment combined with tuned-loop air antennas provided a detection\nrange of about 100 m to a depth of 3-4 m. Detection range was 20 m or less with Lotek\nreceivers.\n3. Antenna configurations and locations utilized in this study (with some modification to\ndownstream spillway and juvenile sampling facility sites) were determined to be in\noptimal for the detection of radio-tagged juvenile salmonids passing through all routes of\npassage through Ice Harbor Dam.\n4. Underwater antennas mounted on support frames positioned in the draft tubes were\ndetermined to be the most practical method for both equipment installation and detection\nand protection of radio-tagged juvenile salmonids passing through a turbine intake.","32\n5. The method developed during this study for positioning underwater antennas at the\nupstream side of the spillway was highly effective for both monitoring radio-tagged fish\nand antenna installation and maintenance.\nRECOMMENDATIONS\n1. A radio-telemetry study should be conducted at a hydroelectric dam to completely\nmonitor all routes of passage available to juvenile salmonids.\n2. Radio interference (electrical and frequency noise) occurs at extreme levels at\ndownstream, near-dam vicinities of tailrace, collection facilities, and spill basin areas of\nhydroelectric dams. Further testing of radio-telemetry methods for detection of juvenile\nradio tags in near-surface situations is needed for fine tuning of technique.\nACKNOWLEDGMENTS\nWe thank the many COE personnel who provided information and assistance: Teri\nBarila, and Dan Kenney from the Walla Walla District office; Donald Phillips, Jim Hay,\nMark Plummer, Ford Shockman, Randy Reynolds, Buddy Black, Lester Maier, Don Plucker,\nDolores Owen, David Woodland, and Pat Slape from Ice Harbor Dam.\nLast, but of equal importance, we acknowledge the help of the following NMFS\npersonnel: Wally Iceberg, Jim Simonson, Scott Davidson, Ron Marr, Eric Hockersmith,\nJohn Vella, Mike Gessel, Bill Ryan, Bill Wassard, Thomas Ruehle, and Penny Smith.","33\nREFERENCES\nGiorgi, A. E., L. Stuehrenberg, and J. Wilson. 1988. Juvenile Radio-tag study: Lower\nGranite Dam, 1985-86, 50 p. plus Appendices. Report to U.S. Department of\nEnergy, Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, OR, Project Number 85-35,\nContract DE-A179-85BP21237. (Available from Northwest Fisheries Science Center,\n2725 Montlake Blvd. E., Seattle, WA 98112-2097.)\nHockersmith, E., Vella, J., and Stuehrenberg, L. 1995. Yakima River Radio-telemetry\nStudy: Rainbow Trout. Annual Report 1993, 24 p. plus Appendices. Report to U.S.\nDepartment of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, OR, Project\nNumber 89-089, Contract Number DE-A179-BP00276. (Available from Northwest\nFisheries Science Center, 2725 Montlake Blvd. E., Seattle, WA 98112-2097.)\nSwan, G. A., M. B. Eppard, E. E. Hockersmith, B. P. Sandford, B. I. Iverson, P.A.\nOcker, M. A. Kaminski, and R. N. Iwamoto. Juvenile Radio-telemetry Study: Ice\nHarbor Dam, 1995. Report to U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, Contract E86-95-\n0113. (In preparation)"]}