The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAPA4114QL •61&.3 .H92 1986 Hydroacoustic Study of upstream Migrating Adult Salmon in the Susitna River during 1985 FINAL REPORT & BioSonics" BioSonics,Inc.4520 Union Bay Place NE,Seattle,Washington 98105 U.S.A. ADF&G LIBRARY COMMERCIAL FISHE~IES HABITAT DIVISION -LIBRARY ALASKA r,!7Pl\r:rf··'.~r·~T 0;.FISH &GAM!:' 333 R.L\~PBERRY ROAD ANCHORAGE,ALASKA 99518 -1599 Hydroacoustic Study of upstream Migrating Adult Salmon in the Susitna River during 1985 FINAL REPORT prepared for Alaska Department of Fish &Game P.O.Box 3-2000 Juneau,Alaska 99802 Prepared by Bruce H.Ransom William R.Ross Jeffry Condiotty BioSonics,Inc. 4520 union Bay place NE Seattle,WA 98105 January 7,1986 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Susitna River is one of the primary producers of salmon in the Upper Cook Inlet drainage.In order to quantify the spa tial and temporal distributions of migrating adult salmon in the lower river,Alaska Department of Fish and Game contracted BioSonics,Inc.to cOnduct a fixed-location hydroacoustic study during the summer of 1985. The objectives of this study were to estimate the horizontal and vertical distributions and acoustic size of migrating adult salmon.Hydroacoustic monitoring took place from July 15 to August 8.Two dual-beam hydroacoustic systems were used to moni tor salmon wi thin nine sampling cells along a predetermined transect at river mile 28.Data were digitized and recorded on video tape and processed post-season. Between July 24 and August 1,91%of the adult salmon passed. Fifty percent had passed by July 28. Upstream-and downstream-moving fish had similar horizontal distributions across the river.For the total season,approxi- mately 88%of the estimated upstream fish passage passed through the cell nearest the west shore (cell 9),7%through the cell nearest the east shore (cell 1),and 5%through the shallow cell near the middle of the river (cell 4).Approximately 75%of the salmon run passed within 60 f-t (18.3 m)of the west shore (cell 9),and 86%wi thin 80 ft (24.4 m). Due to concerns that hydraulic conditions below Petes point were contributing to milling of salmon along the west shore,a test site (cell X)above petes Point was monitored.Supplemental horizontal distributions were calculated substituting data from cell X for cell 9 data.For period IV,25%,35%,and 40%of the upstream moving fish passed through cells 1,4,and 9, respectively.A total of 35%of the fish passed within 60 ft (18 m)of the west shore.It is felt that the true horizontal distribution lay somewhere between the cell 9 and cell X distributions. Along the west shore (cell 9)fish tended to be oriented near the bottom,the upstream moving fish more so than downstream- moving fish.Horizontal and vertical distributions suggested that fish were oriented toward low water velocity (i.e.,near the shores,shallow areas,and bottom of the river). For the entire study period,the mean acoustic sizes of upstream-and downstream-moving fish were -35.4 and -34.4 dB, respectively,corresponding to mean total fish lengths of approx- imately 53 and 60 em. Fish target velocities for the study period were faster for upstream-moving fish than downstream-moving fish.For cell 1, target velocities were 2.2 fps (0.69 m/secl and 1.8 fps (0.55 m/sec)for upstream and downstream moving fish,respectively. Cell 4 velocities were similar.Estimated mean velocities for cell9 were 1.2 fps (0.36 m/sec)and 1.1 fps (0.33 m/sec). During the study period,48%of the monitored fish were moving upstream,and 52%downstream.This high incidence of down- stream movement was probably due in large part to hydraulic conditions caused by water being forced around Petes Point just upstream of the study site. Apparently some upstream moving fish passed undetected. Undetected fish were probably located near the bottom and near shore.Several improvements to the application of the hydro- acoustic technique are noted that should improve,monitoring of the near-bottom and near-shore fish: A more hydraulically stable test site upstream of Petes Point was sampled;79%of the fish monitored here were moving upstream.This site or another in the vicinity should prove a more representative sample than cell 9. Elliptical dual-beam transducers could be used to better monitor near the bottom and at close ranges to the trans- ducer.TwO transducers could be used in tandem to more efficiently sample near the surface and across an irregular bottom. Results from 1985 suggest that transducer aiming angles shallower than 45°(e.g.,30°or 15°),could be effectively used.This would increase the signa 1-to-noi se ra tio by approxima tely 50%-100%,allowing closer aiming of the acoustic beam near the bottom. Sample time at cells without fish should be reduced in the future.This would increase sample time elsewhere,and reduce variability in fish passage estimates. A more stable work platform is important for accurate aiming of acoustic beams.A stable boat or semi-permanent bottom mount for transducers would greatly benefit monitoring near the bottom. Monitoring of the fish nearest shore would be enhanced by a weir to deflect fish away from shore,although during high water periods a weir may be difficult to maintain. A fish tracking computer program was used to analyze the data in this report.There is potential for a program based on this routine to be modified to enumerate migrating adult salmon in the Susitna River on a real-time basis. Since a large pink salmon run and fish horizontal distributions,any strategy should incorporate plans to horizontal distributions of fish across other factors future fish periodically the river. could affect enumera tion examine the It is recommended that hydroacoustic monitoring of migrating adult salmon in the Susitna River be continued in 1986. Improvements to the technique developed in 1985 data collection and analysis could be implemented.Objectives ~ould include enumeration of the adult salmon escapement,periodic estimation of horizontal distributions,estimates of vertical distributions,and estimation of acoustic size. 1 .0 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 • 1 1 .2 1 .3 Background ..•••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Study Objectives •.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••. Site Description •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••. 2.0 GENERAL METHODS •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Introduction ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.••• Data collection •.•••.••••••••••••••••••••••••.•.•. 4 4 4 42.2.1 2.2.2 Sample Design ...•••••••.••••••••••••••••••• Hydroacoustic Equipment,operation, and Calibration •••••••••••••••••••••.•••.•·•7 2.3 Data Reduction,storage,and Analysis •••••••••••••8 3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••12 3.1 Objective Migrating 1:Horizontal Distribution of Adult salmon ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••12 3.1.1 3.1.2 Detailed Methods •••••••••••••••••••••••••••12 Results and Discussion •••••••••••••••••••••13 3.2 Objective Migrating 2:vertical Distribution of Adult Salmon ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••30 Detailed Methods •••••••••••••••••••••••••••30 Results and Discussion •••••••••••••••••••••30 Objective 3:Acoustic Size of Migrating Adult salmon ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••33 3.3.1 3.3.2 Detailed Methods ••••••••••••••••••••••••••.33 Results and Discussion •••••••••••••••••••••33 4.0 CONCLUSIONS .••...••..••..••••••••••.•••••••.•••••••..••36 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ••••••••••••38 5.1 5.2 Objectives •••••••••.•••••••• Methods ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 38 38 5.2.1 5.2.2 5.2.3 Improved sampling Near Shore •••••••••••••••38 Improved Sampling Near the Bottom........42 Reduce Effects of Fish Milling: Improved Siting ••••••••••••••••43 5.2.4 5.2.5 TABLE OF CONTENTS -CONT. Increased Sample Time ••••••••••••••••••••••43 Compare Horizontal Distributions Between 5.2.6 5.2.7 5.2.8 5.2.9 5.2.10 5.2.11 5.2.12 1985 and 1986 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Hydroacoustically Sample Cell 3 •••••••••••• Sample During High Water ••••••••••••••••••• Sample High Densities of Fish •••••••••••••• Equi pmen t se tup .. Flexibility of Applications •••••••••••••••• Development of a Real-Time Fish Counter •••• options to Reduce Costs •••••••••••••••••••• 44 44 44 44 45 45 45 46 ACKNOWL EDG EMENTS .. .. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .................... .... .. .. .. .. ...... .. .. .. ...... .. ...... .. .. ......47 REFERENCES CITED........................................................................................48 APPENDICES Appendix A:Depth profile,Water Levels,and water velocity Profile of Susitna River •••A1 Appendix B:sample Times for ·Each Shift •••••••••••••••B1 Appendix C:Summary of Data Collection Parameters •••••C1 Appendix D:Hydroacoustic System Equipment, Operation,and Calibration ••••••••••••••••01 Appendix E.Dual-Beam Target Strength Heasure- ments and Interpretation ••••••••••••••••••E1 Appendix F.operation and Quality Control of the Automatic Fish Tracking program,TRACKER ••F1 Appendix G.Data Reduction and Analysis •••••••••••••••G1 Appendix H.Summary by Period of Typical Data and weighting Procedures ••••••••••••••••••••••H1 APpendix I.statistical Analysis of Variability in Horizontal Distributions Between shifts •••11 Appendix J.Run Timing:Relative Percentage of Season Total Fish passage by 12-h periods •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••Jl Appendix K.Flathorn Station Fishwheel Catch Results .........................•.........Kl TABLE OF CONTENTS -CaNT. Appendix L.Horizontal Distributions by Shift •••••••••Ll Appendix M.Horizontal Distributions of Adult salmon Across the River,weighted for Fish Abundance ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••M1 Appendix N.Mean Horizontal Distributions of Adult Salmon Across the River,Based on Distributions by Shift •••••••••••••••••Nl Appendix P.Relative Percentage of Upstream-vs. Downstream~Moving Adult Salmon ••••••••••••P1 Appendix Q.Mean Fish Target Velocities •••••••••••••••Q1 Appendix R.Individual Samples for vertical Dis- tribution of Fish over TWo Strata in Cell 9 on July 28 •••••••••••••••••••••••••R1 Appendix S.Acoustic Size of Fish •••••••••••••••••••••S1 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Susitna River drainage,showing Susitna Station and the 1985 study site location ••••••••••••••••••••3 2 3 Study site,sample transect,and sample cell loea tions at RM 28 ••III III ••••••III •III •••••••••III ••••••••III •• Sample cells and depth profile along the transect sampled hydroacoustically in 1985 •••••••••• 5 6 4 Location and orientat~on of transducers on sample boat ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.9 5 Transducer mounts ••••••••••••••••••••••·•••••••••••••10 6 Run timing:relative percentage by 12 h of season total fish passage •••••••••••••••••••••••••••14 7 Horizontal distribution of adult salmon across the river ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••••••20 8 Horizontal distributions within cells and 9 •••••••22 9 Horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river for Period IV ••••.••••••••••••••••••.••••.24 10 Horizontal distributions within cells 9 and X, for Period IV •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••••26 11 Acoustic size distribution of fish at side- aspect 45°during periods I-IV ••••••••••••••••••••••35 12 Elliptical transducer proposed for use in side-aspect ••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••••••••••.•..•40 13 Two side-aspect elliptical transducers monitoring.in tandem ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••41 LIST OF APPENDIX FIGURES Figure page 01 Bi050nics dual-beam system for echo surveys •••••••••02 02 Fish movement through an oblique ensonified sphere resulting in change-in-range for fish traces on echograms •••••••••••••••••••••.•.•••••••••06 03 Echogram from side-mounted horizontal transducer looking into the river and aimed 45°downstream •••••D7 E1 Beam patterns of narrow-and wide-transducer elements showing a fish within both beams •••••••••••E3 E2 polar plot of fish directivity in the yaw plane •••••E7 E3 plot of mean smoothed fish directivity ••••••••••••••E8 H1 Format of summary file output from TRACKER ••••••••••H2 H2 Sampling sequences ••••••••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••H3 J1 Run timing:cumulative percentage of 12 h of season total fish passage •••••••••••••••••••••••••••J2 J2 Ml-5 M6-12 Nl-6 N7-12 51-6 Run timing:relative percentage of 12 h season total fish passage ••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••J3 Horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••M2 Horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9 •••••••M7 Mean horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river,based on distributions by shift, for periods I through IV separately,for Periods I and II combined,and periods I-IV combined ••••••••N2 Mean horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9,based on distributions by shift,for periods I through IV separately,for Periods I and II combined,and for periods I-IV combined •••••••••••••N8 Acoustic size distribution of fish during Periods I through IV separately,for periods I and II combined,and for Periods I-IV combined ••••52 LIST OF TABLES Table Run timing of fish passage by 12-h period •••••••••••15 2 Summary of horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river,weighted for fish abundance •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••19 3 Summary of horizontal distributions of adult salmon within the near-shore cells,weighted for fish abundance •.••.•.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••23 4 Horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river,weighted for fish abundance,using cell X fish passage rates •••••••••••••••••••••••••••25 5 Horizontal distributions of adult salmon within cell X above Petes Point,weighted for fish abundance •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••27 6 Vertical distribution of fish over two strata in cell 9 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••31 7 Mean acoustic size of adult salmon ••••••••••••••••••34 A1 Summary of depth profile along hydroacoustic sample trans~ct••••••••••·•••••••••••••••••••••••••••A1 A2 Water levels,based on daily Susitna Station staff gauge readings •••••••••••••••••••••~••••••••••A2 A3 Mean water velocity profile and depths during low water period ••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••A3 C1 Date,time,sample length,maximum range,and location for sample sequences performed on the Susitna River ••••••••••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••C2 01 Manufacturers and model numbers of electronic equipment used by BioSonics,Inc.at susitna River,1985 •••••••••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••.••••.03 E1 Difference between dorsal and 45°side-aspect target strength ......................•'E6 E2 Difference between side-aspect target strength at 15°,30°,and 45°aiming angles ••••••••••••••••••E8 LIST OF TABLES,cant. Table I1 Summary of test for variance differences between horizontal distributions of low and high passage rates 12 J1 Run timing of fish passage by 12 h period for downstream moving fish .•••••.••••••..••••.••.•••••••J4 J2 Run timing of fish passage by 12 h period for upstream and downstream moving fish combined ••••••••J6 Kl Relative run timing from the Flathorn Station fishwheel catch data ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••K1 K2 Flathorn Station fishwheel catches during the period of hydroacoustic sampling ••••••••••••••••••••K2 Ll Summary of horizontal distributions of upstream migrating adult salmon,by shift ••••••••••••••••••••L2 L2 Summary of horizontal distributions of downstream migrating adult salmon,by shift ••••••••••••••••••••L3 L3 Summary of mean horizontal distributions of upstream adult salmon within the near-shore cells by shift •••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••••••L4 L4 Summary of mean horizontal distributions of downstream adult salmon within the near-shore cells,by shift •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••L5 N1-2 Summary of mean horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river,based on distributions by shift ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••N4 P1 Relative percentage of upstream and downstream movement of adult salmon by shift for the whole river •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••P2 P2 Relative percentage of upstream and downstream movement of adult salmon by shift at cell 1 •••••••••P3 P3 Relative percentage of upstream and downstream movement of adult salmon by shift at cell 4 •••••••••P4 P4 Relative percentage of upstream and downstream movement of adult salmon by shift at cell 9 •••••••••p5 S1-2 Target strength frequency distribution by period ••••58 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background The Susitna River is one of the primary producers of salmon in the upper Cook Inlet drainage.In order to maximize production from the salmon stocks of the inlet,the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)has in the past attempted to enumerate the Susitna River runs in-season.In the lower river,multiple chan- nels,rapidly changing physical and hydrological conditions,and lack of fish passage data in the offshore area of the river have frustrated these attempts. In order to quantify the spatial and temporal distributions of migrating adult salmon in the lower Susitna River,ADF&G con- tracted BioSonics,Inc.to conduct a fixed-location hydroacoustic study during the summer of 1985. 1.2 Study Objectives The primary objectives of this study were to estimate the following: 1)horizontal distribution of migrating adult salmon, 2)vertical distribution of migrating adult salmon,and 3)acoustic size (target strength)of migrating adult salmon. 1.3 Site Description The Susitna River lies northwest of Anchorage,Alaska,and drains into the upper Cook Inlet (Figure 1).Susitna station is located approximately 31 miles (50 km)north-northwest from Anchorage at river mile (RM)26,and served as base camp for the field study.At RM 28,the Susitna River is joined by its first main tributary,the Yentna River.Approximately 2 miles downstream of this confluence,the Susitna River splits into multiple channels separated by islands with established vegetation.Below the Yentna River,the only significant reach where the river flows in a single channel is between susitna Station (RM 26)and the mouth of the Yentna River.The study transect was located in this reach,at approximately RM 28. Typical flows at Susitna station during July and August are 80-120 kcfs.During the 1985 field study,water levels fluctuated 3.4 ft (104 em).At times debris was present in the river.water visibility was usually less than 2 inches (5 em).water tempera- tures ranged from 48-56 of (9-13.5 °C). The Susitna River is the primary producer of chum (Onchorhynchus keta),pink (~gorbuscha),and chinook salmon (~tshawytscha),and one of the primary producers of sockeye salmon (0.nerka)in the upper Cook Inlet.Silver salmon (0. kisutch)also occur. 2 Talachul itna R. /9p :Ta 1 keetna R. .. N site 25 ml , I I I 50 km Figure 1.Susitna River drainage,showing Susitna Station and the 1985 study site location. 3 2.0 GENERAL METHODS 2.1 Introduction Over the last several years hydroacoustic technology and applications have been developed to allow accurate measurements of fish abundance,distribution,size,and behavior under a wide variety of conditions (Burczynski 1979,Kanciruk 1982,,Ransom and Raemhild 1985,wirtz and Acker 1979 and 1981).Hydroacoustic techniques are non-obtrusive;they do not inj ure fish or affect their behavior. In a traditional mobile survey,the hydroacoustic equipment is mounted on a moving boat and samples fish as the acoustic beam passes over them.In a fixed-location hydroacoustic study,the location and aiming angle of the transducer remain stable and the fish are monitored as they pass through the acoustic beam.Fixed- location hydroacoustics have been used to study juvenile salmonids'migration on the Columbia River (Raemhild et ale 1984), striped bass behavior on the Hudson River (BioSonics 1984),and the migrational characteristics of various South American species in the Rio Parana (Ransom et ale 1985,steig et a1.1985).In a typical fixed-location study,the transducer is attached to a permanent structure or an anchored buoy or boat. 2.2 Data Collection 2.2.1 Sample Design Fixed-location hydroacoustic sampling was conducted along an established transect across the Susi tna River.The sample tran- sect was located where the river was contained in a single channel,was relatively narrow,and had minimal turbulence.The transect was 1851 ft (564.3 m)long from the anticipated high water boundary,and was divided into nine sample cells numbered from east to west (Figure 2).The transect was measured with a hand-held range finder and marked wi th buoys and shore markers. The three cells nearest each shore were each 200 ft (61.0 m)wide, and the remaining three cells in the center of the river were each 217 ft (66.2 m)wide.The maxim urn depth·along the transect (28.4 ft (8.4 m)at low water)occurred in cells 6 and 7,as did the maximum velocity (over 6 fps (1.8 m/s)at the surface during low water)(Figure 3).A shallow sand bar was located just upstream from cell 4.water velocities were very low there and near both shores «0.5 fps (0.15 m/sec)throughout the water column).A depth profile summary appears in Appendix A. 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I to sca 1e :p tent ...east shore '..'0 cab in 2 ...... 200 ft (61.0 m) f\ow 1 Fig tire 2.sttidY site.sample transect.and sample cell locations at R~28.5uSitoa River,1985. Gsao d ,.~9"-88f--7"7'~6:-t55-+-~4'~:-+-->- 200 -;--j (6 t.ea.217-;'1•\)m),t.e-J!,66.2 m). ,', cabin .c.··.·}..__pe tes point .~test sitetee"1-) west snor~: oila.... ~ >-6...-4~ GI 2,. I- GI... ~ West Shore river bottom East Shore 5 3 max.depth·28.4 ft.(8.7 m) a.Water velo<:lty near shores estimated at <0.5 fps. b.Due to varIations In boat speed,horizontal dimensions vary 51 ightly. number:9 8 ..7 6 5 4 3 --2 1 200 fL_J_200 ft,,-----.J 200 ft.~217 ft.__..L217 ft."J_217 ft.J_200 ft.-L 200 ft.~200 ft. (61.0 m)1(61.0 m)l(61.0 m)----r-(66.2 m)~66.2 m)~(66.2 m)~61.0 m)~61.0 m)~61.0 ml I.185-1 ft.~ (564.3 Ill) ce'l 0"'\ Figure 3.Sanple cells and depth profile along the transect sampled hydroacoustically in 1985.Transect was recorded July 18.Transducer was 21 inches (53 em)below the water surface.Susitna Station staff gauge was 0.9 feet-(Q7 em)above the lowest water level observed durin-g-th-e -sttfdy (Kugust -6).Susitna River,1985. ,,-.;.~ Hydroacoustic sampling of migrating salmon took place for 25 days from 2200 h on July 14 to 1800 h on August 8,1985.Sampling was conducted daily in two 10-h shifts:2200-0800 hand 0800-1800 h.The 4-h period from 1800-2200 h was us~ally not sampled. Shifts were numbered sequentially.A list of 'dates and times for each shift appears in Appendix B. Hydroacoustic sampling was conducted from a boat which was anchored sequentially in each of the sample tells.During each I 10-h shift,each cell was sampled once for 45 ~in,with the excep- tion of the near-shore cells (cells 1 and 9).Within each of these two cells,two different locations were;sampled for 30 min each.Sample locations within cells were chosen randomly,except for cells 1 and 9,which were sampled fro~as near shore as practical and near the center of the off-sho~e half of the cell (i.e.,150 ft (45 m)from shore).The sequence in which cells were sampled was rotated each,day.Infrequen~exceptions to the sampling plan described above were manda~ed by high water velocities,floating debris,high winds,or equipment maintenance requirements.' An additional site,cell x,:'was moni tore~periodically from July 29 to August 8."This site was loc~ted along the ~est shore approximately 600 ft (183 m)upstream from petes point (Figure 2). A description of typical data collection:parameters appears in Appendix C.A detailed record of the p~rameters for each individual sample is held in files at BioSon~cs,Inc.in Seattle and at the soldotna,Alaska offices of ADF&G~These parameters include sample date,start time,and duration;'type and orienta- tion of deployment;sample location along the ~ample transect;and maxim urn sample range. During the low water period,water velocities were measured on July 24 and August 6 with a Marsh-McBir~ey portable water current meter.Water velocities were taken ~t six depths,near the center of each cell except cells 1 and 9,where they were taken approximately 150 ft offshore. Concurrent with hydroacoustic sampling,AqF&G conducted fish- wheel sampling along the east bank at cell 1 (Figure 2).Gill net drift sampling also took place near the sample transect.Down- stream approximately 6 mi (10 km),four additional fishwheels were sampled at Flathorn Station (Figure 1). 2~.2 Hydroacoustic Equipment,operation,and :Calibration TwO dual-beam hydroacoustic systems were ~ounted in a boat 24 ft (7.3 m)long by 5 ft (1.5 m)wide.Dual-beam systems were used so that the acoustic size (i£.,target streng~h)and direction of movement of individual fish could be estimated,as described below. A complete description of the hydroacoustic equipment,including operation and ca~ibration,is presented in App~ndix D. 7 primary data were obtained from surface-mounted transducers attached to the boat (Figures 4 and 5).Where;depth permitted,a transducer was deployed and oriented 30°downw~rd and downstream. This was denoted a "downward-aimed transducer.'"In the two sample cells nearest shore (Le.,cells 1 and 9):and in cell 4,a transd~cer was aimed horizontally into the river and 45° downstream.This was denoted a "side-aspeqt transducer."In cells 1 and 9,transducers were positioned as near the shore as practical.In cell 4 the boat was located near the shallowest area and the transducer was aimed toward the middle of the river. Frequently in deep water cells 2,3,and 5,a side-aspect trans- ducer was aimed 45°downstream and near the surface. At cell 9,a second side-aspect transducer'was aimed from the sample boat (typically 20-30 ft (6-9 m)offshore)into shore,45° downstream.In deep-water cells 2,3,and 5,secondary informa- tion was occasionally provided by a bottom-~ounted transducer aimed upward 30°off vertical,and downstream., The procedure for aiming side-aspect transducers was to slowly rotate,them toward the bottom until th~y began to -pick up strong bottom returns,then rotate them up slightly until the- maximum bottom returns were less in amplitude than the mark threshold (which corresponded to.the return;from the smallest anticipated salmon).The ensonified volume included the river substrate to a degree.This is possible with~:>Ut obscuring fish traces when the bottom (usually mud or sand),is less reflective than the smallest targets of interest (i.e.,;the bottom has a smaller target strength and is more acoustically absorptive than the smallest fish). Off-axis orientations of transducers (i.e.:,non-perpendicular to fish movement)enabled determination of a fish's general direc- tion of movement from change-in-range information,as described in Appendix D. 2.3 Data Reduction,storage,and Analysis All dual-beam data were digitized and recorded on video tape in the field.These tapes stored the primary data base.At BioSonics'Seattle laboratory,data were played back through the I Model 181 Dual-Beam processor,converted to computer files,and stored on floppy diskettes.Maximum amplitudes of the echo signals for both channels were used to calculate fish acoustic size (Le.,target strength),as detailed in AI:?pendix E. Because the dual-beam transducers were aimed at either 30°or 45°downstream (for downward-aimed and side-a~pect transducers, respecti ve ly),the resul ti ng dua i-beam da ta fi les could be analyzed with custom software (TRACKER)to tra,ck a fish's general change-in-range.That is,the TRA~KER proiram automatically 8 anchor flow side-aspect transducer downward-aimed transducer bottom mount TOP VIEW electronics bottom mount ...'".".":. SIDE VIEW downward-aimed transducer .'. anchor Figure 4.Location and orientation of transducers on sample boat. Susitna River,1985. 9 (a)Downward-aimed mount (b)Side-aspect mount ~~::::=::::;-r,1"""""'--bra eke t II II dI'11"'I~rrl---trans ucer -.:::::r dl---~:lILL"ib''''''''E----9 i mba 1ll-~==:ii=---U weight transducer --..-........ .l-olf---·t ran sduce r (c)Bottom mount 'U----:~~rr{f"f-----gi mba 1 we i ght ---+-I Figure 5.Transducer mounts.Susitna River,1985. 10 determined the fish's direction of movement (i~.,either upstream or downstream).The output from TRACKER for:all samples was checked against the fish counts from the corresponding chart recorder echograms.These procedures are detailed in Appendix F. Occasionally,samples included spurious bqttom returns,and TRACKER would overestimate fish passage.The data tapes for these samples were processed separately.The indi~idual fish traces from sam pIes were en tered manually from the chart recorder echograms and then weighted as for all other ,data as described below. The only data not incorporated in the res~lts was that from the offshore side-aspect transducers monitored :in cells 1 and 9, aimed toward shore and 45 0 downstream.These transducers moni to red the same general area as the onshore side-aspect transducers.During data analysis it was determined that the data from the latter was of higher integrity since it had much less interference and better sampled the geometry of'the cells. Individual fish detections were sorted by direction of move- ment and weighted as follows.Each fish was sorted into a specific range stratum (i;e-~,for horizontal,side-aspect transducers these corresponded to a sectipn)and weighted proportionately to two factors •.The first ,weighting factor expanded the raw fish detections wi thin a section for the proportion of the cross-sectional area of the se;ction that was not acoustically sampled.The second weighting factor was equal to the full width of the section divided by the width sampled.The raw fish sampled within each section were multiplied by the appropriate weighting factors for that section,resulting in weighted fish.Fish passage rates (quantity pf fish/min)were obtained by section by dividing the weighted number of fish by the elapsed sample time for the sample in consider~tion.All further analysis was conducted from these estimates:of weighted fish passage rates.The data analysis procedure is'explained in more detai I in Appendix G. A description of typical raw and weighted fish data appears in Appendix H.A detailed record of data parameters for individual samples are held in files at Bi:osonics,Inc.in seattle,and the Soldotna,Alaska offices :of ADF&G.These parameters include,by sample and section,the number of raw fish detections,weighting factor,number of weighted fish,and weighted fish/min. In addition,computer diskettes containi,ng the unweighted data base from which the results were obtained have been supplied to ADF&G (Soldotna).Their contents are described in Appendix H. 1 1 3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3.1 Objective 1:Horizontal Distribution of Migrating Adult Salmon 3.1.1 Detailed Methods In order to determine multi-day periods for which to calcu- late mean horizontal distributions,a daily run timing index was "I calculated as the percentage by shift (expanded to 12 h)of the total passage throughout the sample season (Section 3.1.2).This index indicated an initial 7-d period of very low escapement (period 0),followed by four periods of higher passage: I:July 22-25 (4 d), II:July 26-30 (5 d), III:July 31-August 3 (4 d),and IV:August 4-8 (5 d). In addition,distributions were calculated for the following two combinations of periods: I-II:July 22-30 (9 d),and I-IV:July 22-August 8 (18 d). Horizontal distributions across the river were calculated as the relative percentage wi thin each cell of tptal river passage. Distributions were calculated for each shifi,for upstream and downstream migrating fish separately.In the field it became apparent that most fish passed through the two shore-most cells (cells 1 and 9),so within these cells distributions were further divided into six sections numbered from the :shore out into the river.Sections 1-5 were each 20 ft (6.1 m)wide,and section 6 was 100 ft (30.5 m)wide. Horizontal distributions for each of the six periods were calculated in two manners.To obtain measu~es of variability around horizontal distributions by period,mean distributions for a given period were calculated from individual distributions by shift.That is,each shift represented a ,replicate.These distributions are denoted below as "mean horizontal distributions~In the second method,the fish passage by shift (expanded to 12 h)was totaled by cell for a given period. Horizontal distributions for that period were then calculated from the total passage in individual cells during that period.These distributions are denoted "horizontal distributions weighted for abundance."This latter method was adopted wlienit became clear that distributions were highly variable when 'passage rates were low (Appendix I). 1 2 Midway through the study,it was felt that hydraulic conditions caused by the river passing around petes Point could be contributing to milling of salmon along the west shore.A high proportion of downstream moving fish was observed.In an effort to examine this situation,several test sites along the west shore upstream of Petes point were investigated.One,cell X,was chosen and was periodically monitored from July 29 to August 8. supplemental horizontal distributions were calculated for appropriate periods by substituting cell X fish passage estimates for cell 9 estimates. 3.1.2 Results and Discussion Run Timing The run timing indices are presented in Figure 6,Table 1, and Appendix J. Fish passage rates from shift to shift were highly variable. Fish numbers were very low from July 15-21,:followed by maj or passage peaks July 24,27,and 29,.and moderate peaks July 26 and August 1.Fish numbers decreased thereafter.:The highest mean fish passage rates occurred during period II,with lower rates in periods I,III,and IV,respectively.The run timing index by shift for the whole season indicated that 91%of the adult salmon passed between July 24 and August 1. Hydroacoustic run timing generally tracked the trends of Flathorn Station fishwheel catches but were,more variable and approximately a day later (Figure 6 and Table K1).Fifty percent cumulative passage was reached on July 28 according to both indices. ADF&G fish wheel catches from Flathorn St~tion for periods I and II were comprised mostly of sockeye salmon,with the balance primarily of pink and coho salmon.periods ill and IV yielded mostly pink salmon,with the balance primarily sockeye and coho salmon (Table K2). The higher variability in the acousti~estimates can be attributed in large measure to the smoothed nature of fishwheel data,which consists of total numbers of fish collected over typically a 24-h sample period.Examination of the acoustically- derived run timing (Table 1)and the Flathorn'station fishwheel catches (Table K1)during the same period bears this out.The acoustic estimate is less smooth,partly becau~e they are for 12-h periods,but also because they are based on samples taken at three locations (cells 1,4,and 9),taken typ:ically for 30-45 min/sample per location per shift. 1 3 (17.2) 16 upstream acoustic Index downstream acoustic Index '.:. 14 F1 a thorn f i shwhee 1 I ndex by 24 h ; 9876 Period IV ------j s43 -....,","\"", '"\;', "\,'--.\, 2 August Period III ......\ •••••••°0 3130 \ \ -\ .', 000f.~ '\ Date Period II 27 28 2926 '", 2S Period I 23 24 ~:~ ,.·,·.·.:. ,. I; 1 :, I I,, I,, I,. I I I I,, 22 t-- 2120 ""--J 19 6 2 I '-..._-,...... o I I i I 1S 16 17 18 July 4 8 10 12., '"......... a. ~...- LA..... 0., '"..... Cf--'., .t:-v...., a.., >.....-.; '" Figure 6.Run timing of fish passage by 12 h period,by direction of movement.Susitna River,1985. Table 1.Run timing of fish passage by 12-h period for upstream- moving fish (Susitna River 1985)• Shift Relative Cumulative Date Number percentage percentage July 15 1 0 0 2 0 0 16 3 0 a 4 0 0 17 5 0 0 6 0 0 18 7 0 0 8 0 0 19 9 0 0 10 0 b 20 11 0 0 12 0 0 21 13 0.1 0.1 14 0.1 0.2 22 15 0 0.2 16 0 ..2 0.4 23 17 0.3 0.7 18 0.1 0.8 24 19 3.0 3.8 20 12.8 16.6 25 21 5.1 21.7 22 0.9 22.6 26 23 4.8 27.4 24 1.5 28.9 27 25 9.7 38.6 26 6.7 45.3 28 27 5.8 51 .1 28 2.0 53.1 29 29 9.7 62.8 30 10.5 73.3 30 31 2.6 75.9 .32 1 .0 ,76.9 31 33 2.0 78.8 34 3.0 81.8 15 Table 1,cont. Shift Relative Cumulative Date Number percentage Percentage August 35 5.8 87.6 36 4.5 92.2 2 37 0.2 92.4 38 1.8 94.2 3 39 0.4 94.6 40 0.8 95.4 4 41 1 .5 96.9 42 0.5 97.4 5 43 0.4 97.8 44 0.4 98.2 6 45 0.4 98.6 46 0.1 98.7 7 47 0.1 98.8 48 0.1 98.9 8 49 0.9 99.8 50 0.2 100.0 16 We would expect longer hydroacoustic sample times at individual cells to result in a reduction of.this variability. The ideal situation would be to sample at each cell continuously, although this is probably impractical. Variability Among Individual Horizontal Distributions by 'Shift Individual horizontal distributions for each shift appear in Appendix L.All distributions show that all of the fish were located in the shoremost cells (cells 1 and 9)and the shallow cell in the middle of the river (cell 4). An examination of individual horizontal di'stributions reveals much variability in percentages for cells 1,4,:and 9 among shifts (Tables L1 and L2).While it is true that there is variability within distributions from shift to shift regardless of the fish passage rate,the magnitude of the variablility appears to be correlated with the magnitude of fish passage during the shift (Figure 6 and Table 1).That is,high variability appears to accompany low passage rates,and low variability accompanies high passage rates.A visual selection of distributions from shifts with corresponding low passage rates and high passage rates,from Table 1 (relative run timing)and.Table L1 (horizontal distribu- tions of upstream moving fish by shift),seems:to bear this out. Such a relationship pointed to a fundamen:tal question:could we justifiably treat the replicates (individual distributions by shift)as independent samples taken from a homogenous population, since this should be a prerequisite for any further parametric statistical manipulations such as calculations of means and measures of variability.We felt we could not prudently do so. While the species composition within individual periods I-IV may have remained relatively stable,the rates iwith which the fish passed the hydroacoustic sample transect was apparently highly variable (Table 1).The acoustic estimates were less smooth, partly because they were for 12-h periods,but also because they were based on samples taken at three locations (cells 1,4,and 9),taken typically from 30-45 min/sample shifts.In a statisti- cal context,this suggested that the statistical populations sampled at a given location were different;not homogeneous, between samples.A schooling or pulsed manner of fish migration, or changes in hydraulic conditions between samples could contri- bute to this. To test this,data were blocked into high and low passage groups,and the variances between blocks tested.The variances were found to be significantly different,and ,thus from different populations (Appendix I).That is,the high,passage block was from a different statistical population than the low passage block.This being the case,samples from the two blocks should not be mixed and treated as replicates from a homogenous popula- tion. , 7 Based on these findings,we felt it prudent to stress hori- zontal distributions by period calculated from the sum of estimated fish passage,by cell,throughout a:given period (dis- tributions weighted for fish abundance)as more representative of the fish runs than the mean distributions.How~ver,mean horizon- tal distributions from distributions by shift were calculated for comparison,and are presented below. Horizontal Distributions weighted for Fish Abundance The horizontal distributions weighted for fish abundance are presented by period in Table 2 and Appendix M. The vast majority of the fish occurred in the westernmost cell (cell 9).For the entire study period (~eriods I-IV),the weighted distributions showed approximately 88%of all estimated upstream fish passage occurred in cell 9,and approximately 7%and 6%in cells 1 and 4,respectively (Figur~7 and Table 2). percentages by period for cell 9 varied from 61-92%.For cells 1 and 4,percentages varied from 4-13%and 3-18%,respectively. The weighted distributions ov~r the seaso~were nearly iden- tical for upstream and downstream moving fish.The largest difference between upstream and downstream distributions occurred in period III,where in cell 1 a higher proportion of downstream moving fish (31%of river total)was observed than for upstream fish (11%). Mean Horizontal Distributions from Distributions by Shift The mean horizontal distributions appear by period in Appen- dix N.All mean distributions indicate the majority of the upstream-moving fish (53-84%)occurred in the westernmost cell (cell 9),although not as many as for the distributions weighted for abundance.For the total season,approximately 17%and 13%of the fish were observed in cells 1 and 4,respectively.By period, cell 1 and 4 mean percentages ranged from 4-34%and 8-20%,respec- tively. Horizontal Distributions within Cells 1 and 9 Figures and tables of distributions within cells 1 and 9 appear by period in Appendices M and N for abundance-weighted and mean horizontal distributions,respectively. 1 8 Table 2.Summary of horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river, weighted for fish abundance (Susitna River 1985). Relative Percentage of Fish Period Fish East Shore Cell Number west Shore Number Dates Direction 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Total I 7/22-25 Upstream 8.8 0 0 3.2 0 0 0 0 88.0 100.0 Downstream 5.4 0 0 5.7 0 0 0 0 88.9 100.0 II 7/26-30 Upstream 4.0 0 0 5.0 0 0 0 0 91 .0 100.0 Downstream 4.7 0 0 3.6 0 0 0 0 91.8 100.0 III 7/31-8/3 upstream 10.8 0 0 7.7 0 0 0 0 81 .6 100.0 Downstream 31.2 0 0 7.4 0 0 0 0 61.4 100.0 IV 8/4-8 Upstream 13.1 0 0 18.2 0 0 0 0 68.7 100.0 Downstream 13.1 0 0 12.4 0 0 0 0 74.5 100.0 I-II 7/22-30 upstream Downstream 5.4 4.9 o o o .4.5 o 4.3 o o o o o o o o 90.1 90.8 100.0 100.0 I-IV 7/22-8/8 upstream Downstream 6.7 6.8 o o o o 5.7 4.9 19 o o o o o o o o 87.6 88.3 100.0 100.0 UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM (I) .....0'1o~ VI (I)VI .0'1 ~ ~a.. oJ C~ (I)VI U .- L-l.&.. (I) a..L- (I) (I)>>.-.-a:: oJ ~ -III (I)oJ a::0 I-- Q) ~0'1o~ III (I)III 0'1 III ~a.. oJ C~ (I)III U .- L-l.&.. (I)a..L- (I) (I)>>.-.-a:: oJ ~- -III(I)4J a::0 I- 100- 80 - 60- 40- 20- a I I I I I I I I I I east 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 west shore Cell Number shore 100 - 80 - 60 - 40- 20- o east shore I I I I I 2 3 I I I I 4 5 6 Cell Number I 7 8 9 west shore Figure 7.Horizontal distribution of adult salmon across the river, weighted for fish abundance,for Periods I-IV (July 22 -August 8). Susitna River,1985. 20 Distributions within these two near-shore cells were heavily weighted toward shore,with some drop off in fish percentages in sections 1 and 2 (to 20 and 40 ft (6.1 and 12.•2 m)from shore). The distributions by period show that most of the fish within cells 1 and 9 were found wi thin 60 ft (18.3 m)of shore.Indeed, the total study period distribution weighted for abundance indi- cates that 75%of the fish across the whole river passed within 60 ft (18.3 m)of the west shore,and 86%wi thin 80 ft (24.4 m)While the magnitudes of the percentages were smaller on the east bank, the fish were similarly shore-oriented.within cell 1,6%of the total river passage passed within 60 ft (18.3 m)of the shore,and 7%within 80 ft (24.4 m)(Figure 8 and Table 3). Horizontal Distributions Based on Cell X above Petes Point Substituting the results from cell X for those of cell 9 for shift 31 and for period IV,horizontal distributions were calcu- lated and are presented in Figure 9 and Table 4. While the saine trend of highest passage through cell 9 are usually apparent,the magnitude is lower.For period IV,25%, 35%,and 40%of the upstream moving fish passed through cells 1, 4,and 9,respectively.A total of.35%of the fish passed within 60 ft (18 m)of the wes t shore (Figure 10 and Table 5). Discussion While no fish were monitored in cell 3,ADF&G did net some fish here.After cell 4,cell 3 had the lowest mean water column velocity of any cell. Cell 3 was sampled in the same fashion as other deep cells, wi th a down ward-aimed transducer and a side-aspect transducer. Occasionally a bottom-mounted transducer aimed up toward the surface was also sampled.The downward-aimed transducer was aimed 30°downstream and toward the bottom.The side-aspect transducer was aimed toward the surface and to the west,45°downstream. The mean water veloci ty in ce 11 3 was re la ti vely high (1.5 fps (0.46 m/sec»,and over seven times that of cell 4 (Appendix A).EXamination of the cell 3 bottom profile reveals a quick drop in depth just east of the cell 3/4 boundary (Figure 3).Due to the apparent pulsed nature of the upstream passage of adult salmon,it is possible that some fish passed undetected in cell 3. It is highly unlikely that the numbers were near the magnitude of fish passing through either cells 1 or 4. 21 UPSTREAM 50 ~ 0 ;:0 ~(1) III - 40 -Ill ~ ;:0 -.-.< 30 <(1) (1)-,"(l) "T!-, 20 -.(l VI (1) :::r:J ~ "Ill 10 1ll\D .III (1) III lll'O \D ~ 0 (l) 23 cell 9 456 r l- I-- I-- .---- I I 65432 50 c'ell (I) "-O'l 0 t1l III (I)III 400'lt1l t1la.. ~ c..c 30(I)III U .- LlL. (I) a..L 20Il.I (I)>>.- .-0:::: ~10t1l--t1l (I)~ 0::::0..-0 St ra tum Number Stratum Number east shore west shore DOWNSTREAM cell 1 50 ~ 0 ;:0 ~(l) III - 40 -Ill ~ ;:0 -.-.< <(l) 30 (1)-,"(1) "T!-,_.n 20 III (l) :::r:J ~ "Ill 1ll\D 10 VI (l) VI III 0 \D ...... (l) 0 23 cell 9 456 .- t- '- r- I-- I I 65432 (I)50 "-O'l 0 t1l III 40(I)III 0'lt1l t1la.. ~ c..c 30Il.I III U .- LlL. (I) a..L 20(I) (I)>>.- .-0:::: ~10t1l--t1l Il.I ~ 0::::0 t-O Stratum Number Stratum Number east shore west shore Figure 8.Horizontal distributions within cells :1 and 9,weighted for fish abundance,for Periods I-IV (July 22 -~ugust 8).Susitna River,1985. 22 Table 3.Summary of horizontal distributions of adult salmon within the near-shore cells,weighted for fish abundance (Susi tna River 1985). Relgtiye ~~rcentage of Fish Period Fish Cell 1 (East Shore)Section*Cell 9 (West Shore)Section* No.Dates Direction 1 2 3 4 5 6 Sum 1 2 3 4 5 6 Sum I 7/22-25 Upstream 1.6 2.5 1.6 3.1 0 0 8.8 12.1 41.7 24.4 6.5 3.3 0 88.0 Downstream 0.4 3.1 0.8 1• 1 0 0 5.4 26.0 34.6 19.3 7.4 1 .7 0 88.9 II 7/26-30 upstream 0.2 3.0 0.7 0 0 0 4.0 24.9 14.9 34.6 14.1 2.6 0 91.0 Downstream 0.7 3.3 0.6 0.1 0 0 4.7 12.7 31.6 35.3 10.2 2.0 a 91.8 III 7/31-8/3 Upstream 2.2 5.3 3.2 0 0 0 10.8 28.0 30.9 15.5 6.4 0.9 a 81.6 Downstream 2.0 2.9 6.2 0 0 0 31.2 9.2 17.5 13.1 19.0 2.7 a 61.4 IV 8/4-8 Upstream 0 0.2 2.9 0 0 0 13.1 7.4 12.5 30.6 16.1 2.0 0 68.7 Downstream 2.2 6.5 4.4 0 0 0 13.1 0 21.8 25.1 23.1 4.5 a 74.5 N w I-II 7/22-30 Upstream 0.6 2.9 1.0 0.9 0 0 5.4 21.2 22.7 31.6 11.9 2.8 0 90.1 Downstream 0.6 3.2 0.7 0.5 0 0 4.9 17.3 32.7 29.8 9.2 1.9 0 90.8 I-IV 7/22-8/8 Upstream 0.9 3.7 1.5 0.7 a 0 6~7 21.8 23.7 28.6 11 .1 2.4 0 87.6 Downstream 1 .5 3.9 1• 1 0.4 0 0 6.8 15.8 30.7 29.3 10.5 2.0 0 88.3 *Section 1 is nearest shore.Each section is 20 ft (6.1 m)wide,except section 6 which is 100 ft (30.5 m)wide. 100 ~80....0\ 0 ~ III ~III O\~ ~a.. 4J 60c.c ~III U --UPSTREAM \..lL. ~a..\.. ~ ~>40>--.-a: 4J ~- ~ ~4Ja:0 20f- a - - - ----- r ----I wi th I :~ce 11 XI----,I I -I I I •I wi th ~cell 9 I I I I eas t shore 2 3 4 5 6 Cell Number 7 8 9 or X wes t shore DOWNSTREAM ~ ....0\o ~ III ~III O\~ ~a.. 4J c.c ~III U .- \..lL. ~a..\.. ~ ~>>.-.-a: 4J ~--~~4Ja:0 t- 100 80 60 40 20 a - - - ---_..,..-- -_.. -I I I I I I wi th I ,I XIII+-ce 11,III1I-I I I I 1 I I I wi th ---- ~cell 9 I I I I east shore 2 3 456 Cell Number 7 8 9 or X wes t shore Figure 9.Horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river, weighted for fish abundance,calculated with cell 9 or cell X,for Period IV (August 4-8).Susitna River,1985_ 24 Table 4.Horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river,weighted for fish abundance,using cell X fish passage rates (Susitna River 1985). Period East 1 Relative Percentage of Fish by Cell 2 3 456 7 8 west X Total Upstream Shift 31 0 0 0 34.4 0 0 0 0 65.6 100.0 (cell 9 0 0 0 16.1 0 0 0 0 83.9 100.0)* IV 25.0 0 0 34.5 0 0 0 b 40.5 100.0 (cell 9 13.1 0 0 18.2 0 0 0 0 68.7 100.0) Downstream shift 31 16.1 0 0 36.1 0 0 0 0 47.8 100.0 (cell 9 2.9 0 0 6.6 0 0 0 0 90.5 100.0) IV 47.5 0 0 43.2 0 0 0 0 11 .1 100.0 (cell 9 13.1 0 0 12.4 0 0 0 0 74.5 100.0) *The original horizontal distribution (weighted for fish abun- dance)with results from cell 9 below Petes Point is presented for comparison. 25 UPSTREAM ce 11 9 or X ,- r- ce 11 X r- J.- I ce 11 9~I----- ------ r I SO -i 0 ::0,...ro OJ - 40 -OJ,... ::0 _. -.< 30 <C1l C1l.,'U C1l "Tl., 20 _.('I '"ro "I:J,... 'UOJ 10 OJ<D '"C1l '"OJ 0 <D -...a I1l 6 s 4 3 2 DOI,JNSTREAM Stratum Number west shore ce 11 9 or X - - ce 11 X - Jce119----..r- ~ I --- r r 50 -i 0 ::0,...C1l OJ - 40 -OJ,... ::0 _. -.< <I1l 30 I1l.,'U I1l ~., -.('I 20 '"I1l "I:J,... 'UOJ OJ<D 10 '"I1l '"OJ 0<D -... I1l 0 6 5 4 3 2 Stratum Number west shore Figure 10.Horizontal distributions within cells 9 and X, weighted for fish abundance,for period IV (August 4-8) (Susitna River,1985). 26 Table 5.Horizontal distributions of adult salmon within cell X above Petes Point,weighted for fish abundance (Susitna River 1985). Relative Percentage of Fish by Section Period Direction 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total IV Upstream 5.6 19.4 10.4 5.1 0 0 40.5 (cell 9 7.4 12.5 30.6 16.1 2.0 0 68.7)* IV Downstream 7.8 3.3 0 0 0 0 11 .1 (cell 9 0 21.8 25.1 23.1 4.5 0 74.5) *The original horizontal distribution (weighted for fish abun- dance)with results from cell 9 below Petes Point is presented for comparison. 27 The horizontal distributions weighted for fish abundance were calculated from the total numbers of fish passing through each cell during a given period.Due to the variability in horizontal distributions among shifts with low passage rates,it is believed that the weighted distributions are more representative of all fish passing within a given period than the mean distributions calculated from the individual horizontal distributions by shift. Much milling was observed,as indicated by the high propor- tion of downstream moving fish (Appendix pl.If the rate of milling were not equal in each cell,then milling would bias the distributions toward the cells with the highest milling rates. Due to the hydrological condi tions caused by Petes point,it is possible that the rate of milling was higher at cell 9 than at cells 1 or 4.This could have resulted in a horizontal distri- butions that were biased high at cell 9. Also,the Flathorn station fishwheel samples collected 6 mi (10 km)downstream from the hydroacoustic sample transect indicated a less pronounced distribution of fish on the west bank (37.8').The mean percentage of the west bank fishwheel was the highest of all four fishwheels,however (Table K2). The distributions based on cell X indicate a west shore percentage closer to that of the west shore fishwheel at Flathorn station.The cell X results should be interpreted with caution, however,since they were obtained during a period of reduced fish passage,and at reduced sample times (typically 20 min vs.30-45 min at cell 9).It is likely that the true horizontal distribution across the river lies somewhere between the cell X and cell 9 distributions. The extremely shore-oriented distributions of migrating salmon could be attributed in large part to the low water velocities observed at these locations.Remembering that most fish were wi thin 60 ft (18m)of the two shores,a comparison of Figures 3 and 7 suggests a correlation between fish distribution and low water velocities.Most fish were located where water velocities were <0.5fps (0.15 m/s). Mean fish target velocities are presented in Appendix Q. Estima ted mean veloci ties throughout the season for cell 1 were 2.2 fps (0.69 m/s)and 1.8 fps (0.55 m/s)for upstream and downstream moving fish,respectively.Cell 4 velocities were similar.Estimated mean velocities for cell 9 were 1.2 fps (0.36 m/sec)and 1.1 fps (0.33 m/sec)for upstream and downstream moving fish,respectively.In order for these fish to swim upstream in the dee'p water cells 6-8,where water velocities averaged 3.3-4.3 fps (1.0 -1.3 m/s)(Appendix A),they would have had to expend much more energy. As the within-cell distributions show,there was a drop in fish numbers in the section nearest shore.This drop could be attributed in part to shallower depths near-shore,and thus a smaller cross-sectional area with which to accommodate fish 28 passage.It is more likely that some fish nearest the transducer passed undetected.Non-detection could have been due to the small sample volume nearest the transducers,or to the fish being bottom-oriented (section 3.2).If the unmonitored fish were more dense than those monitored (the probable case if fish were bottom oriented),these instances would result in an underestimate of fish numbers.Throughout the course of data collection and analysis,several improvements to the hydroacoustic applications of this study were suggested that would improve the probability of detecting these fish (Section 5.0). It should be emphasized that the horizontal distributions presented here were based on data from only one sample season. For a variety of biological,hydrological,and climatic reasons, distributions may vary from year to year.This was not a year of a large pink salmon run;in 1986 numbers of pinks should be much larger.How similar horizontal distributions in 1986 will be to those of 1985 remains to be seen. 29 3.2 Objective 2:Vertical Distribution of Migrating Adult Salmon 3.2.1 Detailed Methods Vertical distribution analysis was planned for each deep water cell for the same six periods for which the horizontal distributions were developed.Since virtually no adult salmon were observed in these deep cells,the only vertical distributions available were from the shallow,near-shore areas which were monitored by the side-aspect,horizontally aimed transducers. Twice on July 28,during relatively high fish passage,a side-aspect transducer was aimed alternately near the surface and near the bottom.The standard procedure for aiming side-aspect transducers was to slowly rotate them toward the bottom until they began to pick up strong bottom returns,then rotate them up slightly until the maximum bottom returns were less in amplitude than the mark threshold (which corresponded to the return from the smallest salmon anticipated).For sampling in cell 9 for vertical distribution estimates,we aimed the transducer down slightly farther than usual (1°).This orientation monitored the bottom stratum,and was aimed into the sqbstrate to a degree.This is possible without obscuring fish traces when the bottom (usually mud or sand)is less reflective than the smallest targets of interest (i.e.,the bottom has a smaller target strength and is more acoustically absorptive than the smallest fish. The surface stratum was monitored by tilting the transducer up a slight amount (approximately 3°)fro,m this lower posi tion. The two acoustic volumes overlapped each other at a range of approximately 40 ft (12.2 m).The maximum range sampled was 79 ft (24 m),but 82%of the fish were detected at ranges of 16-43 ft (5-13 m).Fish detections were counted by direction of movement, and relative percentages of fish numbers between the two strata were calculated. The small sample size was the result of allocation of the very limited sample time available to more important tasks. 3.2.2 Results and Discussion Results from individual samples are presented in Appendix R. Results from each sample were similar.seventeen percent of the fish were located in the upper stratum,and 83%in the bottom stratum (Table 6). 30 Table 6.vertical distribution of fish over two strata in cell 9 (Susitna River 1985). Mean Relative Percentage of Fish* stratum Upstream Downstream Total vertical Distribution By Direction of Fish Movement 1 Surface 13.0 21.2 16.6 2 Bottom 87.1 78.9 83.5 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 Fish Movement by Direction within Surface Stratum Surface 38.9 61.2 100.0 Fish Movement by Direction"within Bottom Stratum 2 Bottom 52.8 47.2 100.0 *Means of two tests completed July 28. 31 Of the upstream moving fish,13%were located in the upper stratum~and 87%in the lower one.Downstream-moving fish were also found primarily in the bottom stratum,but tended to be less bottom oriented than upstream-moving fish (79%vs.87%,respec- tively)• Examining the results on a stratum by stratum basis,39%of the fish in the upper stratum were moving upstream and 61%down- stream.In the bottom stratum,53%were moving upstream and 47% downstream. While not quantified,similar trends toward bottom orientation of fish were observed throughout the study while aiming side-aspect transducers in cells 1,4,and 9. It is conceivable that the same factor that caused fish to orient near the shores also tended to affect their vertical dis- tribution.The highest water veloci ties.occurred near the surface,decreasing with depth until the minimum velocities were observed at the bottom (Appendix A).It is also conceivable that salmon actively swimming upstream tended to be more bottom orien- ted than those moving downstream.Unlike upstream -moving fish, downstream-moving fish would gain no great benefit from an extreme bottom orientation. 32 3.3 Objective 3:Acoustic size of migrating adult salmon 3.3.1 Detailed Methods Target strength (acoustic size)was calculated for individual fish.Mean target strengths were calculated for each of the six periods,for upstream and downstream moving fish separately,and converted to approximate total fish lengths.These procedures are explained in detailed in Appendix E. 3.3.2 Results and Discussion Mean target strengths and corresponding fish lengths appear in Table 7.Target strength frequency distributions for the total study period appear in Figure 11,and distributions by indi- vidual period appear in Appendix s. The mean target strengths for the season were -35.4 dB and -34.4 dB (equivalent to approximate~y 53 and 60 cm)for upstream- and downstream-moving fish,respectively.The largest mean target strengths were observed in period I (-33.8 dB and -33.2 dB,(65 cm and 69 cm)for upstream and downstream fi~h).Mean target strengths for periods I-IV ranged from -36.9 dB to -33.2 dB (44-69 cm). The large spread in target strength distributions (approximately 14 dB)could be partly a function of variability in orientation of fish relative to the horizontal aiming angle of the transducer.The conversion from target strength to length assumes that fish remained oriented parallel to flow,and 45°to the transducer.Variability in this orientation would result in a larger spread in the distribution (Figure E2). ADF&G fishwheel catches from Flathorn station for periods I and II were comprised mostly of sockeye salmon,with the balance primarily of pink and coho salmon.periods III and IV yielded mostly pink salmon,with the balance primarily sockeye and coho salmon (Table K2). 33 Table 7.Mean acoustic size of adult salmon (Susitna River 1985). Period Upstream Downs tream No.Dates TS*SO N Length**TS*SO N Length** I 7/22-25 -33.8 3.12 808 64.5 -33.2 3.41 969 69.3 II 7/25-30 -36.1 2.14 1279 48.9 -35.0 2.52 1479 55.8 III 7/31-8/3 -36.9 2.05 136 44.4 -36.1 2.56 107 48.9 IV 8/3-8 -36.2 2.18 87 48.3 -34.9 2.98 97 56.5 I-II 7/22-30 I-IV 7/22-8/8 -35.3 -35.4 2.80 2087 2.77 2310 53.8 53.2 -34.3 -34.4 3.05 2448 3.05 2652 60.7 60.0 * ** At side aspect,45°toward head-on from broadside. Predicted total length in cm,calculated as described in Appendix c. 34 26 ""T"""--------:---------------------, 24 T5 =-35.4 dB 22 20 upstream -20-25-30-35-40-45 0~-,..-............--"T"""__r__.---.-~...,....£;~LIOl~.ll?~~1.I(1~~JZ1"?Li?___._.J::T=I-~__.J -50 2 16 4 8 6 18 14 12 10 "0-o..-c "u... "0- ">';;o "a::: Torget Strength (dB) 26 ....,....---------------'----------------, 24 T5 =-34.4 dB 22 20 downstream -20-25-30-35-40-45 O~-.--....---.,....-..,....-,--....---.---.-_,__J~~JJO~~JJO~~JJ;:..LW~.lQ.Q...--.~_.J -50 2 4 6 8 18 16 14 12 10 "0-o..-c "u... tl 0- tl ~o "a::: Torget Strength (dB) Figure 11.Acoustic size distribution of fish at side-aspect 45° during Periods I-IV (July 22 -August 8).Susitna River,1985. 35 4.0 CONCLUSIONS 1.Hydroacoustic monitoring of migrating adult salmon in the Susitna River took place from July 15 to August 8,1985. 2.Between July 24 and August 1,91%of the upstream migrating adult salmon passed.Fifty percent had passed by July 28. 3.During the study period,approximately 88%of the estimated upstream fish passage passed through the cell nearest the west shore (cell 9),7%through the cell nearest the east shore (cell 1),and 6%through a shallow cell near the middle of the river (cell 4). 4.During the study period,approximately 75%of the estimated upstream fish passage passed within 60 ft (18.3 m)of the west shore (cell 9),and 86%within 80 ft (24.4 m).This trend of shoreward orientation was also observed on the east shore (cell 1). 5.Due to concerns of the effect of hydraulic conditions on milling of salmon along the west shore,a test site (cell X) above Petes Point was monito~ed.Supplemental horizontal distributions were calculated substituting data from cell X for cell 9 data.For period IV,25%,35%,and 40%of the upstream-moving fish passed through cells 1,4,and 9, respectively.A total of 35%of the fish passed within 60 ft (18 m)of the west shore.It is felt that the true horizon- tal distribution lay somewhere between the cell 9 and cell X distributions. 6.Along the west shore (cell 9)fish tended to be oriented near the bottom,upstream moving fish more so than downstream- moving fish. 7.Horizontal and vertical distributions suggested that fish were oriented toward low water velocities (i.e.,near shore, in shallow areas,and near the bottom of the river). 8.For the entire study period,the mean acoustic sizes of upstream-and downstream-moving fish were -35.4 dB and -34.4 dB,respectively~corresponding to mean total fish lengths of approximately 53 and 60 cm. 9.During the study period,48%of the fish monitored were moving upstream,and 52%downstream.It is believed that this high incidence of downstream movement was due in large part to hydrological conditions caused by water being forced around petes Point upstream of the sample site. 10.At a more hydraulically stable test site upstream of petes point (cell X),79%of the monitored fish were moving upstream. 36 11.Fish target velocities for the study period were faster for upstream moving fish than downstream fish.For cell 1, target velocities were 2.2 fps (0.69 m/sec)and 1.8 fps (0.55 m/sec)for upstream and downstream moving fish,respec- tively.Cell 4 velocities were similar.Estimated mean velocities for cell 9 were 1.2 fps (0.36 m/sec)and 1.1 fps (0.33 m/sec). 12.It appears that some upstream-moving fish passed undetected. These fish were probably located near the bottom and near shore.Several improvements in the application of the hydroacoustic technique were developed which would improve monitoring of the near-bottom and near-shore fishes.The flexibi Ii ty of this technique lends i tse If to ti me 1 y implementation of these improvements. 37 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE EFFORT The 1985 Susitna River hydroacoustic study was initiated with very little direct knowledge of the spatial distributions of adult salmon in the river.This necessitated a flexible sampling strategy based on a wide variety of sampling contingencies. During data collection in the field and data analysis in the laboratory,refinements to the acoustic sampling technique were developed that enhanced hydroacoustic enumeration of adult salmon in the river.These developments have resulted in the following recommendations for future monitoring of adult salmon in the Susitna River. 5.1 Objectives The 1985 study demonstrated the ability of fixed-location hydroacoustics to monitor salmon in the Susitna River.It is recommended that hydroacoustic monitoring of migrating adult salmon in the Susitna River be continued in 1986.The objectives of that study would be as follows:. 1)estimate escapement of adult salmon in the Susitna River in the general vicinity of Susitna Station, 2)during periods of high fish passage,periodically esti- mate the horizontal distribution of salmon across the river, 3)estimate the vertical distribution of fish within the near-shore cells,and 4)estimate the target strength of adult salmon. 5.2 Methods Based on the experience gained in 1985,we recommend monitoring Susitna River salmon in a manner similar to that used in 1985,but with significant improvements. 5.2.1 Improved Sampling Near shore Since adult salmon were shore oriented in 1985,effective sampling of the near-shore areas is of paramount importance. Developments which should be implemented to monitor the fish in these areas are listed below. 38 Elliptical Transducers Dual-beam transducers with elliptical beam patterns are available with a 3°x 10°narrow beam and 7°x 21°wide beam (Figure 12).(Circular-beam transducers of 6°and 15°were used in 1985.)These transducers would better monitor near shore and at close ranges to the transducers.Since·their eilsonified volumes are wider in the horizontal plane than normal dual-beam transducers (10°vs 6°),their use would result in 67%more enson- ifications of fish passing through the acoustic beam,and improved detection of fish near the transducer. Two Stacked Transducers in Tandem Two elliptical transducers would more effectively sample the areas near shore and at close ranges (Figure 13).using a m ul tiplexer,these transducers could be sampled simultaneously. This orientation would also permit estimation of vertical distributions for the two strata sampled.Multiple transducers could also be strategically placeq and aimed to compensate for irregular bottom profiles. short Weir Fish target velocities were slow enough to allow ample ensonifications at all but the closest ranges.In 1985,migrating adult salmon were visually observed very close to the west shore, in water as little as 6-12 inches (15-30 cm)deep. A weir 5-10 ft (2-3 m)would greatly enhance detectability of near shore fish.Any weir used should require as little mainten- ance as possible and retain provisions to deal with rapid hydraulic changes,i~.,be quickly deployable and retrievable. Ba t tery Power To reduce the possibility of boat avoidance by migrating adul t salmon,batteries ins tead of gasoline powered electrical generators should be used to power the hydroacoustic electronics. 39 , ! .J ! I.. I .1 Transducer !... ,.. J Side View of Beam Pattern o10 ----....:....---...--..Bo~tom I .J I j i I.. I,.. I.. I ..! i J ! J Figure 12.Eili;tica1 transducer proposed for use in side-aspect.Susitna River,-1985 40 Transducers Plan View Flowy Side View .~. 5hor,e Transd~cers .....~ ,', Water Surface " Figure 13.Two side-aspect elliptical transducers monitoring in tandem. Susitna River,1985. 41 5.2.2 Improved Sampling Near the Bottom Since adult salmon were bottom oriented in 1985,it is important to efficiently sample near the substrate.This is best done with side-aspect transducers,and as noted below. Elliptical Transducers Elliptical transducers place a wider sample volume nearer the bottom than do circular transducers.Since fish near the bottom would be wi thin an elliptical beam longer,this would result in more ensonifications per fish,and improved detectability. Shallower Side-Aspect Aiming Angles The data from the side-aspect,horizontally-scanning trans- ducers were collected at an aiming angle of 45°downstream.For fish detected in the side aspect,signal strength is greatest at 90 °to the longitudinal axis of the fish,(i.e.,broadside) (Figure E2).By aiming transducers ~ownstream 15-30°,the signal strength of returns can be increased by approximately 3-6 dB (50- 100%),over returns at a 45°aiming angle (Appendix E).This increased signal-to-noise ratio would allow closer aiming of transducers to the bottom,thereby improving the probability of detecting fish near the bottom. More Stable Work platform . Occasional ambiguity was introduced into the 1985 data by an inabili ty to hold steady the side-aspect transducers,and hence their corresponding ensonified volumes.Boat movements hindered critical aiming close to the substrate of the river.A more stable boat or semi-permanent transducer mount placed on the bottom would benefit aiming near the river bottom. Boat movement in the roll axis most affected the data, particularly that from the side-aspect transducers,since the aiming of these transducers was most cri tical.The most severe effect of boat movement was the intermittent introduction of bottom returns of amplitude greater than the,minimum target thres- hold.This would result in the bottom drifting in and out of the echogram.Strong bottom returns severely impacted the ability of the automatic fish tracking software to count the fish,since the pr~gram would periodically count the bottom as fish.This had the effect of ei ther reducing the amount of acceptable sam ple ti me, increasing the amount of analysis time,or both.probably as little as a 2°roll would add significant interference to the data.The roll of the boat used in 1985 was occasionally much 42 more than this.A boat such as a 16-20 ft Boston Whaler should provide ample stability. Light,semi-permanent mounts can be used in 1986.These will be highly mobile and allow transducer aiming adjustments from the surface.These mounts would have the benefit of allowing sampling of the exact same area from sample to sample,and would be unaffected by boat movement. 5.2.3 Reduce Effects of Fish Milling:Improved Siting The west shore just below Petes Point (cell 9)exhibi ted a high proportion of downstream-moving fish (52%)(Table P4),and similar trends were observed at cells 1 and 4 (Tables P2 and P3). From July 30 to August 8,supplemental monitoring was conducted 10 times at cell X,where hydrological conditions were improved. Here,79%of the detected fish were moving upstream.This site and others along the west shore will be investigated in 1986. The most desirable near-shore sites would have a smooth bottom profile,a soft substrate,a minimum of turbulence,and a relatively rapid initial drop in depth at shore.Moving the west shore sample site to cell X and adopting a diagonal sample transect from cell X to cell 1 would be one alternative. 5.2.4 Increased Sample Time Reduce Sample Time at Cells without Fish Limiting hydrocoustic sampling to cells where fish were moni- tored in 1985 would permit longer sample times at these cells. This should provide less variable estimates of fish passage rates from shift to shift.If sampling were limited to three locations instead of the eleven sampled in 1985,sample times at each cell could be increased from 30-45 min to 3 h,approximately five fold. Cell 3 could be sampled simultaneously with cell 4. Tandem Transducers Multiplexing between two stacked elliptical transducers would further double the sample power devoted to a cell. 43 5.2.5 Compare Horizontal Distributions Between 1985 and 1986 Since a large pink run or hydrological conditions could affect fish horizontal distributions,any enumeration strategy should incorporate plans to periodically examine the horizontal distributions of fish across the river.During periods of high fish passage,sample time could probably be devoted to this task without jeopardizing other objectives. During periods of high fish passage,all nine cells across the river could be periodically sampled for one shift to estimate the horizontal distribution of fish across the river.If fish densities were high enough,mobile surveys along the sample tran- sect could prove a quicker means of estimating horizontal distributions. 5.2.6 Hydroacoustically Sample Cell 3 ADF&G personnel captured some salmon in cell 3 during the 1985 study.using a multiplexer,acoustic sampling of cell 3 could take place concurrent with s~mpling of cell 4.Elliptical transducers will be aimed horizontally into cells 3 and 4 from a sample boat anchored at the boundary between the two cells. 5.2.7 Sample During High Water To sample during high water or rapidly fluctuating water levels and debris loads,boa t-moun ted transducer mounts wi 11 be retained.In addition,semi-permanent bottom mounts will be tested in the shallow cells. Any weirs used will need to require as little maintenance as possible and retain provisions to deal with hydraulic changes. Weirs should be short (5-10 ft (2-3 m»,and like bottom mounts, quickly deployable and retrievable. 5.2.8 Sample High Densities of Fish Any sampling strategy in even numbered years will require enough flexibility to deal with high densities of pink salmon,and large numbers of spawned out fish drifting downstream.All data will be digitized and recorded on video tape.Where densities require,these tapes can later be played through a digital echo integrator to estimate total biomass (Bursczynski 1979,Kanciruk 1982).Trace type distributions from echograms can be used to apportion biomass to upstream-and downstream-moving fish. 44 5.2.9 Equipment setup The data collection crew should arrive at least one week prior to commencement of actual sampling in order to search for optimum sampling sites,determine bottom profiles,test elliptical transducers,test transducer mounts,and perform standard target measurements to better define sample locations relative to the surface and bottom. The location of the sample volume relative to the bottom and surface can be verified in the field as described below.This would assist evaluation of other improvemen~s in their ability to enhance monitoring near the bottom. The degree to which acoustic beams can be aimed near the bottom and surface is largely a function of the bottom type and surface conditions.Accurate measurement of the location of sample volumes relative to boundaries (the bottom substrate and the surface)is a manpower and time consuming endeavor requiring use of a standard target,preferably of the target str.ength of the smallest fish anticipated. 5.2.10 Flexibility of Applications The flexibility of the hydroacoustic technique applied in this study lends itself to timely evaluation and implementation of the improvements discussed above.Conditions can change rapidly in the Susitna River.On occasion,1985 water levels and debris loads rose quickly,mandating changes in transducer placements and placement techniques.The basic mounts and sampling techniques employed in 1985 were flexible enough to permit rapid altering of sampling strategies to compensate for these changes,and will be retained in 1986. 5.2.11 Development of a Real-Time Fish Counter A fish tracking computer program was used to analyze the data in this report.There is potential for a modification of this routine to be developed to enumerate migrating adult salmon in the Susi tna Ri ver on a near real-time basis.Such a system could be ready for field trials in 1986.An alternative would be to regularly count fish from chart recorder echograms in the field, enter them into a portable computer,and expand the counts appropriately. 45 5.2.12 Options to Reduce Costs While collecting and analyzing data in 1985,several areas of potential cost reduction were noted.All require reductions in the volume of da ta collected and analyzed,and would presumably result in an increase in variability around estimates of fish passage rates. Single Shift Operation By reducing sampling from two to one shift per day,manpower in the field can be reduced from four to three.This would also reduce analysis time,and save approximately two man months of labor costs.In addition,time would be available for other periodic tasks such as mobile transects to obtain horizontal distributions. Non Real-Time Fish Counting By not attempting to produce ,estimates of fish passage in near real-time,the costs of one data analyst and associated computer equipment can be saved. Training of ADF&G Personnel up to one ADF&G employee per shift could be trained in the deployment and operation of the hydroacoustic equipment.By retaining supervision of the operation by experienced BioSonics personnel,monitoring of deployment,data collection,and data processing for quality control can be assured.Training would lead to ADF&G operation and processing of the data under BioSonics direction,and eventually to total ADF&G operation of the hydro- acoustic enumeration system. 46 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS BioSonics,Inc.would like to thank the following ADF&G personnel for their able and unselfish contribution to the success of this project:Ken Tarbox,.Bruce King,Randal Davis,Mark Clark, and the rest of the ADF&G crew at Susitna Station. We would also like to thank Kurt Shuey for his very helpful assistance with data collection in the field,and Lisa Russell for her able assistance with dual-beam data processing and data analysis in Seattle. 47 REFERENCES CITED Albers,V.M.1965.·Underwater Acoustics Handbook--II.The Penn. State Univ.Press,University Park,Penn.356 p. BioSonics,Inc.1984.Day night studies.Hydroacoustic investigations of fish abundance and distribution around piers affected by the wes tway proj ect.4 parts.Report to New Jersey Marine Sciences Consortium,BioSonics,Inc., Seattle,Wash.,USA. Burczynski,J.1979.Introduction to the use of sonar systems for estimating fish biomass.FAO Fish.Tech.pap.No.191. Burczynski,J.and J.Dawson.1984.Dual-beam techniques for fish sizing and quanti ty estimates.Applicatio.n Memo #104, BioSonics,Inc.Seatle,Wash.,USA. Burczynski,J.J.,G.Marrone,and P.Michaletz.1983.Echo survey on Lake Oahe for rainbow smelt abundance estimation in July 1983.BioSonics,Inc.Seattle,Wash. Burczynski,J.and R.Johnson. so6keye salmon on Cultus International pacific Biosonics,Inc.,Seattle, 19~3.Dual-beam echo survey of Lake,B.C.,July 1983.Report to Salmon Fisheries Commission. Wash.,USA. Dahl,P.H.1982.Analysis of salmonid target strength and doppler structure for riverine sonar applications.Masters Thesis for Univ.of Wash.School of Fisheries,Seattle,WA. Ehrenberg,J.E.1984a.The BioSonics dual-beam target strength measurement system.Submitted to FAO,February 1984. BioSonics,Inc.,Seattle,Wash.,USA. Ehrenberg,J .E.1984b.principles of dual-beam processing for measuring fish target strengths.Technical Note #41. BioSonics,Inc.,Seattle,Wash.,USA. Haslett,R.W.G.1977.Automatic plotting of polar diagrams of target strength of fish in roll,pitch,and yaw.Rapp.P.-v. Reun.Cons.into Explor.Mer,170:74-81. Haslett,R.W.G.1969.The target strength of fish.J.Sound Vib.,9:181-191. Johnson,S.J.1985.Experimental testing of a dual-beam acoustic fish size classifier.Report to Alaska Dept.Fish and Game. BioSonics,Inc.,Seattle,Wash.,USA. 48 Kanciruk,D.1982. Environ.Sci. Tennessee. REFERENCES,con t. Hydroacoustic biomass estimation techniques. Div.,Oak Ridge National Labs.,Oakridge, Love,R.H. fish. 1971.Dorsal aspect target strength of individual J.Acoustic Soc.Am.,49:815. Love,R.H.1977.Target strength of an individual fish at any aspect.J.Acoustic Soc.Am.,62(6):1397. McCartney,B.S.and A.R.Stubbs.1970.Measurements of the target strength of fish in dorsal aspect,including swim bladder resonance.proc.of the Inter.Symposium on BioI. Sound scattering in the Ocean,Maury Center for Ocean Sci., Rep.MC-115:180. Raemhild,G.A.,T.W.steig,E.S.Kuehl,S.Johnston,·and J. Condiotty.1985.Hydroacoustic assessment of downstream migrating salmonids at Rock Island Dam in spring 1984. Report to Chelan Co.PUD No.1,by BioSonics,Inc.,seattle, Wash. Ransom,B.H.,P.A.Nealson,and P.A.Tappa.1985.Hydroacoustic evaluation of fish migration in the vicinity of the Corpus Dam project on the Rio parana.Report to Comision Mixta Argen tino-paraguaya del Rio parana,by BioSonics,Inc., Seattle,Wash. Ransom,B.H.,and G.A.Raemhild.1985.Application of fixed- location hydroacoustics to the management of fisheries in reservoirs.proceedings Colorado-Wyoming Chapter American Fisheries Society,Laramie,Wyoming,March 20-21,1985. Steig,T.W.,G.A.Raemhild,and J.J.Burczynski.1985. Hydroacoustic evaluation of fish migration near the Yacyreta Dam project on the Rio Parana.Report to Entidad Binacional Yacyreta,by BioSonics,Inc.,Seattle,Wash. Urich,R.J.1975.principles of Underwater Sound.MCGraw-Hill Book Co.,San Francisco,Calif.384 pp. wirtz,A.R.and W.C.Acker.1979.A versatile sonar system for fisheries research and management applications.IEEE OCeans '79 Conference Record. Wirtz,A.R.and W.C.Acker.1981.A versatile sonar system for ocean research and fisheries applications.IEEE Trans.OCean Eng.,VoIOIE-6(3):107-109. Zar,J.H.1974.Biostatistical Analysis.prentice-Hall,Inc., Englewood Cliffs,N.J.620 p. 49 APPENDIX A:Depth Profile,water Levels,and Water Velocity Profile of the Susitna River Table Al.Summary of depth profile along hydroacoustic sample transect (Susi tna River 1985). Distance in feet* from Shore Depth in feet by cell** or Boundary 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 0 14.8 18.9 7.1 13.1 17.5 26.3 22.3 0 10 3.2 1 .2 20 5.4 1 5.1 18.3 7.4 13.6 18.7 27.0 23.4 1.5 30 8.1 --1.6 40 8.9 15.8 19.3 6.3 14.2 19.4 27.2 22.0 1.9 50 9.8 1.9 60 10.1 16.3 18.4 6.9 13.8 19.5 27.7 20.6 2.1 70 10.4 2.1 80 10.8 16.5 18.3 7.6 15.0 19.7 27.4 19.7 2.6 90 1 2.1 3.0 100 13.6 16.5 17.3 8.1 14.1 20.4 16.9 19.5 3.6 120 14.2 16.6 16.8 8.8 13.8 21.8 25.8 17.7 4.2 140 14.6 17.4 15.4 9.5 13.1 22.4 25.4 15.4 4.8 160 14.7 17.9 13.6 9.7 14.3 24.3 24.5 15.7 6.6 180 14.9 18.1 10.8 11• 1 15.3 25.9 23.6 12.3 8.3 200 14.8 18.9 7.1 1 2.1 16.1 25.7 22.3 9.7 9.7 217 1 3.1 17.5 26.3 *All distances from east shore,except cell 9 from west shore. **Relative to lowest water level on August 6. A1 Table A2.water levels,based on daily Susitna Station staff gauge readings (Susitna River 1985). July August Date 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 water Level (feet) (Relative to 8/6 Low)* 1 • 1 0.8 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.3 2.1 3.4 2.3 1.1 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.0 0.3 0.3 *Relative to lowest water level on August 6. A2 Table A3.Mean water velocity profile and depths during low water period (susitna River 1985). velocity in fps Depth Range*percen tage of Total Depth** Cell ft (m)Surface 20%40%60%80%bottom Mean 1 0-14.1 (0-4.3)3.4 3.2 2.8 2.8 2.4 2.2 2.8 2 14.1-16.9 (4.3-5.2)3.4 2.8 2.6 2.8 2.2 2.2 2.7 3 6.8-17.1 (2.1-5.2)2.4 2.0 2.6 1.4 0.6 0.2 1.5 4 5.7-12.0 (1.7-3.7)0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 5 12.0-15.8 (3.7-4.8)2.4 3.1 2.8 2.2 1.4 1.4 2.2 6 15.9-25.7 (4.8-7.8)7.0 6.2 3.4 3.0 3.0 3.0***4.3 7 22.4-28.4 (6.8-8.7)6.2 3.4 3.2***4.3 8 7.5-22.6 (2.3-6.9)5.2 3.0 3.0 1.8***3.3 9 0-7.5 (0-2.3)4.1 3.0 2.4 2.2 2.0 2.0 2.6 * ** *** At lowest water level during study,on August 6. Veloci ties measured July 24 to August 6,during stable low wa ter per iod. The end of the deploymen t cable (18ft (5.5m»was reached before flow meter reached the bottom. A3 APPENDIX B:Sample Times for Each Shift Shift Day/Start End Number Night Date Hour Date Hour Period a 1 N 7 14 2200 7 15 800 2 D 7 15 800 7 15 1800 3 N 7 15 ·2200 7 16 800 4 D 7 16 800 7 16 1800 5 N 7 16 2200 7 17 800 6 D 7 17 800 7 17 1800 7 N 7 17 2200 7 18 800 8 D 7 18 800 7 18 1800 9 N 7 18 2200 7 19 800 10 D 7 19 800 7 19 1800 11 N 7 19 2200 7 20 sao 12 D 7 20 sao 7 20 1800 13 N 7 20 2200 7 21 sao 14 D 7 21 sao 7 21 1S00 Period I 15 N 7 21 2200 7 22 800 16 D 7 22 sao 7 22 1800 17 N 7 22 2200 7 23 SOO lS D 7 23 800 7 23 1800 19 N 7 23 2200 7 24 sao 20 D 7 24 800 7 24 1800 21 N 7 24 2200 7 25 800 22 D 7 25 800 7 25 1800 period II 23 N 7 25 2200 7 26 800 24 D 7 26 800 7 26 1800 25 N 7 26 2200 7 27 800 26 D 7 27 800 7 27 1800 27 N 7 27 2200 7 28 SOD 2S D 7 28 800 7 28 lS00 29 N 7 28 2200 -,29 sao 30 D 7 29 800 7 29 1800 31 N 7 29 2200 7 30 SOO 32 D 7 30 sao 7 30 1800 81 APPENDIX B,cant. Shift Day/Start End Number Night Date Hour Date Hour Period III 33 N 7 30 2200 7 31 800 34 D 7 31 800 7 31 1800 35 N 7 31 2200 8 1 800 36 D 8 1 800 8 1 1800 37 N 8 1 2200 8 2 800 38 D 8 2 800 8 2 1800 39 N 8 2 2200 8 3 800 40 D 8 3 800 8 3 1800 Period IV 41 N 8 3 2200 8 4 800 42 D 8 4 800 8 4 1800 43 N 8 4 "2200 8 5 800 44 D 8 5 800 8 5 1800 45 N 8 5 2200 8 6 800 46 D 8 6 800 8 6 1800 47 N 8 6 2200 8 7 800 48 D 8 7 800 8 7 1800 49 N 8 7 2200 8 8 800 50 D 8 8 800 8 8 1800 B2 Appendix C:Summary of Data Collection Parameters Table C1 is a sample of the detailed summary of data collec- tion parameters supplied to ADF&G.Parameters were supplied for each sample collected beginning with shift 15.Parameters include the start date and time of the sample,and the duration of the sample.The maximum range sampled is included,as is the cell number.For cells 1 and 9,the location of the sample boat (on- shore (as near shore as practical)or offshore (usually at 15 ft (46 m)from shore))is included.The distance from shore is en tered,along wi th which shore it was measured from.The las t entry designates whether a side-aspect or downward-looking trans- ducer was sampled. Downward-aimed transducers were located 12 inches (30 cm) below the surface.Side-aspect transducers were 12 inches (30 cm) deep in cell 9,and 24 or 36 inches (61 or 91 cm)deep in cells 1 and 4. C1 Table C1.Date,time,sample length,maximum range,and location for sample sequences performed on the Susitna River July 21 2250-July 23,1722 h,1985. month/start sample maximum sample distance E or W transducer date time length range cell from shore bank or ien ta tion (min)(feet)(feet) 7/21 2250 30 65.6 9 ON 25 W SIDE SCAN 7/21 2329 32 65.6 9 OFF SIDE SCAN 7/22 10 46 131.2 4 630 E SIDE SCAN 7/22 108 30 42.7 1 ON 10 E SIDE SCAN 7/22 145 60 19.2 1 OFF SIDE SCAN 7/22 255 13 2 300 E DOWN LOOK 7/22 314 45 3 558 E DOWN LOOK 7/22 408 29 23.0 5 957 E DOWN LOOK 7/22 448 32 8 252 W DOWN LOOK 7/22 525 17 11.5 7 540 W DOWN LOOK 7/22 552 13 6 600 W DOWN LOOK 7/22 844 46 5 957 E DOWN LOOK 7/22 952 50 6 780 W DOWN LOOK 7/22 1055 45 8 375 W DOWN LOOK 7/22 1153 41 7 580 W DOWN LOOK 7/22 1304 32 65.3 9 OFF SIDE SCAN 7/22 1346 26 131 .2 9 ON 20 W SIDE SCAN 7/22 1432 31 105.0 1 ON 6 E SIDE SCAN 7/22 1509 30 78.7 1 OFF SIDE SCAN 7/22 1545 30 131 .2 4 630 E SIDE SCAN 7/22 1624 31 2 297 E DOWN LOOK 7/22 1702 45 3 540 E DOWN LOOK 7/22 2227 30 7 570 W DOWN LOOK 7/22 2306 29 8 390 W DOWN LOOK 7/22 2355 31 65.6 9 ON 20 W SIDE SCAN 7/23 32 30 45.9 9 OFF SIDE SCAN 7/23 112 60 65.6 1 ON 8 E SIDE SCAN 7/23 149 30 75.5 1 OFF SIDE SCAN 7/23 230 43 131 .2 4 620 E SIDE SCAN 7/23 327 45 19.7 3 588 E DOWN LOOK 7/23 420 45 2 300 E DOWN LOOK 7/23.517 45 5 967 E DOWN LOOK 7/23 610 46 6 780 W DOWN LOOK 7/23 838 42 7 450 W DOWN LOOK 7/23 936 45 23.0 8 291 W DOWN LOOK 7/23 1039 30 72.2 9 OFF SIDE SCAN 7/23 1119 30 45.9 9 ON 12 W SIDE SCAN 7/23 1225 25 114.8 1 OFF SIDE SCAN 7/23 1312 30 78.7 1 ON 6 E SIDE SCAN 7/23 1408 46 131.2 4 625 E SIDE SCAN 7/23 1504 45 2 255 E DOWN LOOK 7/23 1554 44 19.7 3 510 E DOWN LOOK 7/23 1644 30 18.0 5 947 E DOWN LOOK 7/23 1722 30 6 805 W DOWN LOOK C2 APPENDIX D:Hydroacoustic System Equipment,Operation,and Cali- bration Equipment Description Each BioSonics dual-beam hydroacoustic data collection system consisted of the following components:a dual-beam 420 kHZ transducer,a dual-beam echo sounder/transceiver,a chart recorder,and an oscilloscope.A video tape recording system was also used to record the echo sounder output for later laboratory analysis.Equipment was powered by a portable gasoline generator. A block diagram of the basic system is shown in Figure Dl.Table Dl lists specific manufacturers and model numbers of the elec- tronic equipment used. Equipment Operation The echo sounder is the core of the system,and is described in detail by Wirtz and Acker (1979 and 1981)and Ehrenberg (1984a, 1984b)• •The hydroacoustic data collection system works as follows: when tr iggered by the Modell 01 Echo Sounder,a high-frequency transducer emits short sound pulses in a relatively narrow beam aimed toward an area of interest.As these sound pulses encounter fish or other targets,echoes are reflected back to the transducer which then reconverts the sound energy to electrical signals.The signals are then amplified by the echo sounder at a time-varied- gain (TVG)which compensates for the loss of signal strength due to absorption and geometric spreading of the acoustic beam.wi th distance from the transducer.Thus,equally-sized targets produce the same signal amplitudes at the echo sounder output regardless of their distance from the transducer.A target's range from the transducer is determined by the timing of its echo relative to the transmi tted pulse.This process is descr ibed in more detail by Albers (1965),Burczynski (1979),and Urich (1975). The echo sounder relays the returning TVG-amplified signals to the chart recorder and the oscilloscope.The return signals are visually displayed on the oscilloscope for monitoring of echo strengths and durations.Individual fish traces are displayed on the chart recorder's echograms which provide a record of all targets detected throughout the study.The threshold circuit on the chart recorder eliminates signals of strengths less than the echo levels of interes~ 01 ECHO SOUNDER DIGITAL 40 109 R +2aR CASETTE RECORDER 40 109 R +2aR OSCILLOSCOPE DATA TO BE PROCESS~D AFTER SURVEY IN SEATTLE -----l DUAL-BEAM I L !R~CrS~R_I r - - - -I FISH FLUX AND I MICROCOMPUTER 1-1-_.TARGET STRENGTH (PRED I CTEDI..J FISH LENGTH) CHART RECORDER MON ITOR FOR L-~PRESENCE OR ABSENCE OF FISH & FISH TRACES CLASSIFICATION DUAL-BEAM TRANSDUCER Figure 0.1.BioSonics dual-beam system for echo sunreys. 02 Table D1.Manufactu~e~s and model numbe~s of elect~onic equipment used by BioSonics,Inc.at Susitna Rive~,1985. Item Manufactu~e~Model Numbe~ Echo Sounde~/T~ansceive~s BioSonics,Inc. Dual-Beam Processo~BioSonics,Inc. Chart Recorders BioSonics,Inc. 101 181 115 Dual-Beam Transducers (6°x 15°) Oscilloscopes Digital Audio Processors Video Recorders Tape Recorder Interfaces Microcomputers Computer p~inters Generators BioSonics,Inc. Hitachi Denshi,Ltd. Sony Sony Biosonics,Inc. Compaq IBM NorthStar Epson Honda SP06 V-352 PCM-F1 B VCR 171 Portable XT(hard disk) Advantage FX-80 LX-80 EM-3000 Note.:Specifications for equipment can be obtained by contacting BioSonics,Inc. D3 Pulse rates were 10 pings/sec.This was sufficient to obtain ample ensonifications of fish to determine change-in-range and classify direction of movement. Due to the near-range limits of the time-varied-gain amplifi- cation,effective acoustic sampling did not take place at ranges closer than 1.0 m (3.28 ft)to the transducer.For side-aspect transducers the maximum range sampled varied due to changes in water levels,river bathymetry,and specific sampling locations. Pas t experience has indica ted tha t with a smooth,sandy bottom,a side-aspect transducer can see a -42 dB target to within 2-3 inches (5-8 em)of the bottom.Since Susitna River salmon were typically of much larger target strength (-37 dB minimum at 45°side aspect),and the substrate was typically sand or mud, Susitna'River transducers should have seen closer to the bottom. The maximum range sampled is presented in the data collection parameter summaries (Appendix C). System Calibration The acoustic system was calibrated before the study began and after returing to Seattle.Calibration assured that an echo from a target of known acoustic size passing through the axis of the acoustic beam produced a specific output voltage at the echo sounder.Once this voltage was known,an accurate(~0.5°)esti- mate of the actual sensitivity beamwidth (or "effective" beam width)for a given target strength could be determined for each transducer,based on sensitivity plots and target strengths. Based on the calibration information,the adjustable print threshold on the chart recorder was set to the equivalent of -37 dB (for 30°off dorsal and 45°off horizontal side-aspect).This size target would be seen to the -3 dB points (1 way)of the transducer (typically 6°).This target strength corresponded to a fish approximately 44 cm total length.A detailed description of the calibration of hydroacoustic systems can be found in Albers (1965)and Urich (1975). Migrant Detection Criteria Within the analysis software,potential fish targets had to satisfy two criteria to be classified as fish:1)the strength of target echoes had to exceed a predetermined threshold;and 2)the targets had to exhibit redundancy (i.e.,had to be detected by consecutive pulses). D4 The data collection system was calibrated so that the chart recorder would mark targets with target strengths greater than -37 dB within the specified beamwidth (at the -3 dB points 1 way)of the transducer.This target strength was chosen to correspond to the smallest adult salmon sampled from 1975 to 1985 by ADF&G (female pink salmon in 1982,age 0.2,approximately 44 cm total length).The conversion was based on the target strength/size relationship discussed in Appendix ~ At least four successive ensonifications were required for a target to be classified as a fish.The vast majority of fish observed were sequentially detected more than four times.The reasons for this high redundancy were:1)the relatively wide beam,widths of the transducers;and 2)the high pulse repetition rates (10 pings/sec);and 3)the relatively slow target velocity of the fish (Appendix Q).This redundancy criterion enhanced fish detectability in the presence of background interference,and was necessary to obtain sufficient change-in-range information to determine direction of fish travel. Direction of Movement Since transducers were in fixed locations at aiming angles that were not perpendicular to the direction of fish travel or river flow,it was possible to distinguish direction of movement for individual fish.As a fish passed through an ensonified volume,a succession of echoes on the echogram indicated a fish's change-in-range relative to the transducer.Since the tr an sd uce r's pos i tion-i ng was kno w n,th i s change-in-range information expressed the fish's direction of movement.Figure 02 shows typical fish movement through an ensonified volume,and a corresponding echogram trace caused by such a fish.A copy of an echogram from the &usitna River study shows actual fish traces wi th change-in-range (Figure 03). 05 Direction of Movement Since transducers were in fixed locations at aiming angles that were not perpendicular to the direction of fish travel or ri ver flow,it was possible to dis tinguish di rec tion of movemen t for individual fish.As a fish passed through an ensonified volume,a succession of echoes on the echogram indicated a fish's change-in-range relative to the transducer.Since the transducer's positioning was known,this change-in-range information expressed the fish's direction of movement.Figure D2 shows typical fish movement through an ensonified volume,and a corresponding echogram trace caused by such a fish.A copy of an echogram from the Susi tna Ri ver study shows actual fish traces with change-in-range (Figure 03). transducer- ~-"-'''-''-''''''''''''''-''~surfClce ".&......: ::.:..'bot tom ( I )I I 1'1 I '(2) 1,1 ~cha r t mOVCr.lcn t Figure D2.Fish movement through an obl~que ensonified sphere resulting in change- i~-range for fish traces on echogram. D6 on-shore transducer ....•.~.,.1 ,,:.:.:: ".. fish trace ~.. ~.;I ::~:l.;" ,1.'~~.rt=:.1 .','":('.::""':'~ I' I':,, ~i'ott.':~-; .\t.-·;~.~:'.~}.,. 1 bottom returns Figu~e D3.Echogram from side-mounted horizontal transducer,looking into the river and aimed 45°downstream.Susitna River,1985. D7 APPENDIX E:Dual-beam Target Strength Measurements and Inter- pretation Target Strength and Backscattering Cross Section Calculation A fish's target strength is a measure of its echo reflecting power.The larger the target strength,the more sound energy the fish will reflect when ensonified by a transmitted pulse. Acoustic backscattering from a fish is a complex phenomenon.The intensity of an echo reflected from a fish depends on a variety of factors including acoustic frequency and the fish's size, orientation,and swim bladder characteristics.(Much of the echo energy reflected from a fish is due to the gas-filled swim bladder.)Despite the many variables that can affect a fish's reflecting properties,empirical relationships have been derived between average fish length and average target strength when measured from the dorsal aspect.(Haslett 1969,Love 1971, McCar tne y and Stubbs 1971). In the last decade,techniques have been developed to measure target strengths of freely swimming·fish in their natural habitats (Burczynzki and Dawson 1984;Ehrenberg 1984a,1984b). Target strengths are expressed on a logarthmic scale in decibels.Typical values range from -60 dB to -20 dB.The arithmetic equivalent of target strength (TS)is the back- scattering cross section (~s)in units of m-2 where: TS ( 1 ) For simplicity,the following principles are explained in ari thmetic terms. The voltage output of a single-beam hydroacoustic system is related to a fish's backscattering cross section (and target strength)by the following equation: (2) where V detected output of an echo sounder set at [40 log(R)+ 2aRl time-varied-gain.The echo intensity (I)is pro- portional to v2 • k a constant determined from system calibration and equipment settings. ~bs backscattering cross section of the fish.This is a E1 measure of the fish's acoustic reflecting power in the direction of the transducer.Target strength is related to TS by equa tion (,). beam pattern factor of the transducer. ratio of the acoustic beam's transmitted at the angular coordinates (~,9')to acoustic axis of the transducer;i.e., b(8,13) 1(0,0) This is the intensity (I) that at the b(8,13)is also a measure of the transducer's receiving sensi tivi ty.Because a single -beam echo sounder uses the same transducer for both transmitting and receiving,this quantity is squared in equation (2). Under controlled laboratory conditions,the values of v 2 ,k, and b2(~,l;J)can be measured and equation (2)solved for crbs • However,under field conditions (either mobile or fixed-location surveys),the b 2 value cannot be measured because there is no way to determine a fish's exact coordinates (8,9')in the beam.In other words,a single-beam system cannot make direct in situ target strength measurements because the fundamental equation-T2). contains two unknowns (<Jbs 'b 2 ). A dual-beam system overcomes this problem by introducing a second transducer element,and hence a second equation.The b 2 value is factored out and equations (3)and (4)are solved for crbs.Specifically,a dual-beam system transmits pulses on a narrow-beam transducer element and receives echoes on both narrow- and wide-beam elements (Figure El).The narrow-and wide-beam squared voltage outputs are: v 2 n (3 ) (4 ) For simplicity of mathematics,assume that a dual-beam system is designed so that bw(~,II)=lover the main lobe of the narrow beam;that is,the effective beam pattern factor of the wide beam is engineered to unity'.With this consideration,the ratio of It is not necessary that a dual-beam system be designed so that b w =lover the main lobe of the narrow beam as long as the relationship be'tween band b /b can be computed.Thenwn BioSonics Dual-Beam System operates with b w i "but the principles are the same.Differences are corrected using parameters in the post-processing softwar~ E2 Figure El.Beam patterns of narrow-and wide-transducer elements showing a fish within both beams. E3 the squaced voltages (3)and (4)fcom the ceceived echo signal becomes: V 2n V 2w (5 ) Reaccanging gives: (6 ) Insecting this bn(~,l))value into equation (3)and ce- arranging allows computation of a fish's backscattering cross section according to: O"bs (7) Tacget strengths are then computed according to equation (1). The BioSonics Model 181 Dual-Beam Processor operates by first selecting only single target echoes based on the single-echo detection cciteria entered by the user.Maximum amplitudes of these echo signals (V n and V w )ace then used to calculate Obs for individual fish.The Obs values are then converted to target strengths in dB,as desccibed below. Procedure Followed to Relate Acoustic Size (i.e.,Target Strength) to Fish Length The echo reflecting power of fish,which is commonly expressed as target strength or backscattering cross section (Obs) can provide a good estimate of the size of acoustically sampled fish.The target strength in dB and backscattering cross section in m2 of sampled fish can be measured by the dual-beam echo sounder whece TS =10 log (Gbs) The principles of a dual-beam sounder are given in Bucczynski and Da wson (1984)and Ehrenbecg (1 984a,b). E4 In general,larger fish reflect more acoustic energy than smaller fish.However,acoustic backscattering from fish is a complex phenomenon and the intensity of the reflected echo depends on many factors,including the fish's orientation toward the transducer,it's size,anatomy,and swim bladder characteristics, as well as the acoustic frequency used.While much of the acoustic energy reflected from a fish is due to its gas-filled swim bladder,species without swim bladders can also be good acoustic reflectors. Despite the many variables that can affect fish reflecting properties,Love (1971)derived an empirical relationship between average fish length and average target strength when measured from the dorsal aspect.The relationship is based on Love's laboratory measurements on 8 species of fish (anesthetized)and data from at least 16 other species as reported by other researchers. Expressed in terms of acoustic frequency,Love's formula is: 1)for individual fish ensonified from the dorsal aspect: TS 19.1 10g(L)-0.9 log(f)-62.0 where TS target strength (dB) f frequency (kHz)" L fish length (cm) For salmon and some other species,BioSonics has found that the Love form ula applies we 11 to in si tu measuremen ts of targe t strengths using the Dual-Beam System.~jointdual-beamacoustic and trawl surveys,the average TS of fish populations,as measured by the Dual-Beam System,correlated well with the average measured length of the trawl-caught fish.However,due to the complex nature of acoustic backscattering from fish,the spread in the target strength da ta is often wider than the spread in the measured fish length data (Burczynski and Johnson 1983,Burczynski et al.1983). Off Angle Target Strength Compensation The relationship described above is for dorsally oriented fish.For the 1985 Susitna River study,monitoring was conducted in two orientations relative to the fish,(1)dorsally,30°off vertical toward the anterior,and (2)horizontally,45°off broadside toward the anterior. To compensate for the off vertical aspect,we followed Love (1977)and Haslett (1977),and subtracted 4 dB from the dorsal target strength.The adj usted target strength was then used for target strength to length relationships and mark threshold and beam width calculations. ES * To adj ust for the side aspect orientation,we relied on Dahl (1982)and Haslett (1977).A sample plot of target strength directivity for a 52 em salmonid is presented in Figure £2.A corresponding smoothed plot for three salmonids (40,52,and 61 em)appears in Figure £3.These fish were near the size of Susitna River salmon (Table 7). The mean difference between the dorsal and side aspect target strengths was 4 dB (Table £1).For the purposes of target strength to length relationships and mark thresholding and beam- width calculations,4 dB was subtracted from the dorsal target strength. Side-Aspect Target Strength at Shallower Aiming Angles TO investigate the advantages of side-aspect aiming angles shallower than 45°(i.e.,more broadside to the fish),we relied on Dahl (1982)and Haslett (1977).The differences between 30° and 45°,and 15°and 45°target strengths are presented in Figure £3 and Table £2 for three fish 40-61 em in length. By aiming transducers at 15°more broadside to the fish (i.e.,from 45°to 30°transducer aiming angle downstream),over 3 dB of signal strength gain is realized.By aiming transducers 30° more broadside (Le."from 45°to '15°),over 6 dB of gain is realized.These are equivalent to approximately 50%and 100% increases in signal strength,increases which extend the signal- to-noise ratio and permit aiming transducers closer to the bottom. Table £1.Difference between dorsal and 45°side-aspect target strength (Susitna River 1985). Length*Dorsal**45 °Side-*Difference (em)TS (dB)Aspect TS (d B)in TS (dB) 40 -33.8 -40.6 6.8 52 -31 .6 -34.7 3.1 61 -30.3 -32.4 2.1 mean 4.0 Dahl (1982) **Love (1971) £6 Side Head TS -28 dB Side Ta i 1 head aspect 90 0 side aspect 180 0 ~tail aspect Figure E2.Polar plot (420 kHz)of fish directivity in the yaw plane for a 52 cm salmonid (Dahl 1982). E7 Table E2.Difference between side-aspect target strength at 15°, 30°,and 45°aiming angles,from Dahl (1982)(Susitna River 1985). Target Strength Fish Length Aiming Angle*Difference (cm)15°30°45°45°to 30°45°to 15° 40 31.5 36.7 40.5 3.8 9.0 52 28.7 30.2 34.6 4.4 5.9 61 26.8 30.8 32.7 1 .9 5.9 mean 3.4 6.9 *0°broadside,90°head-on E8 -21 40 em fish -C}-52 em fish 61 em fish 3.8 dB ,,,,,, \,,, \ \ \ \ \, ~ 5.9 dB \ \, \, \, \,,,,, •__•__•..l.L._'L.J --------, I .__._-----~.--;-. I ,..--I--.-4L.J........""l...-l -----.,- -53 -37 -49 -33 -25 L.., 01 C <1J L.., Ul o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 ASPECT head 90 0 =side 180 0 =tail Figure £3.Plot of mean smoothed fish directivity (mean target strength in 100 increments (Dahl 1982). £9 APPENDIX F:Operation and Quality Control of the Automatic Fish Tracking Program,TRACKER The dual-beam transducers were aimed at 30°(dorsal aspect) or 45°(side aspect)downstream.The dual-beam processed computer files were analyzed with custom software (TRACKER)incorporating the capability to determine change-in-range trends and target strength simultaneously.That is,target strength and direction of movement were estimated for individual fish,enabling review of acoustic size results for only upstream or downstream moving fish. Since the fixed-aspect transducers operated at high pulse rates (10 pulses per second),each target usually had several echoes recorded during passage through the acoustic beam.using several operator input parameters,including a window of time and range estimated by the maximum expected velocity and the maximum expected change-in-range,echoes returning from the same target were grouped together.This allowed calculation of mean target strength within the group of echoes belonging to one target. Since the transducer was aimed at an angle not perpendicular to the primary direction of fish travel,then the range upon entering the acoustic beam was not the same as the range of exit from the acoustic beam (Appendix D).Using this information,the angle of fish passage (A)through the acous tic beam was calcula ted according to the formula: A =arctangent (RID) where:A angle of passage through the acoustic beam with respect to the transducer axis, R change-in-range of target as it passes through the beam,and o distance traveled through the beam. with a downstream orientation of the transducer,fish traveling upstream had a positive angle through the acoustic beam and fish traveling downstream had a negative angle.The target strength of each target was estimated,and a mean target strength for upstream traveling fish and a mean target strength for down- stream traveling fish were independently calculated.A more detailed description of TRACKER and its input parameters and operation can be found in Johnston (1985). Since TRACKER was able to distinguish a series of ensonifications for a single fish,it was in effect able to au toma tica lly de toect fish.Addi tion pos t-processing sof tware weighted raw fish detections and calculated fish passage rates for ups tream and downs tream moving fish,s im ul taneously.Th i s procedure is described in Appendix G. F1 APPENDIX G:Data Reduction and Analysis weighting Factor The extrapolation of individual fish detections to a repre- sentation of all fish in the cell first took into account the cone-like geometry of the acoustic beam produced by the trans- ducer,and the geometry of the cell. For side-aspect orientations,it was assumed that a sample representative of the entire water column was obtained.In cells 1,4 and 9,a relatively large proportion of the water column (and cross sectional area)was sampled (typically 20-80%). Each fish was sorted into a specific range stratum.For horizontal,side-aspect transducers each stratum corresponded to one of the sections.The raw fish counts were weighted by section by two factors.The first weighting factor was calculated as the mean water depth for the section divided by the mean beam width. This factor,in effect,expanded the raw fish detections for the proportion of the cross-sectional area of the section that was not acoustically sampled.The second ~eighting factor was equal to the full width of the section (20 or 100 ft)divided by the width sampled.The raw fish sampled within each section were multiplied by the appropriate weighting fact·ors for that section.The end result was the number of weighted fish that passed through that section during the sample.Fish passage rates (quantity of fish/min)were obtained by dividing the weighted number of fish by the elapsed sample time.To obtain a passage rate for an entire cell,the rates for each section were summed. Invariably,not all individual samples for a cell over a period would produce values for each section,due to interference, boat location,and boat movement.These missing data were extrapolated from the other samples wi thin the same period which contained data for these sections.All subsequent data analyses were performed on these estimates of fish passage rates. Horizontal Distributions Once total passage rates were calculated by direction for each cell across the river,the horizontal distribution across the river was calculated as the relative percentage individual cells represented of the grand total passage rate for the whole river. Horizontal distributions were calculated separately for upstream and downstream moving fish. G1 Horizontal distributions were calculated for each shift. Horizontal distributions for each of the six periods were calculated in two manners.To obtain measures of variability around horizontal distributions by period,mean distributions for a given period were calculated from individual distributions by shift.That is,each shift represented a replicate.These dis- tributions are denoted as "mean horizontal distributions."In the second method,the fish passage by shift (expanded to 12 h)was totaled by cell for a given period.Horizontal distributions for tha t period were then calculated from the total passage in individual cells during that period.These distributions are denoted "horizontal distributions weighted for abundance."This latter method was adopted when it became clear that distributions were most variable when passage rates were lower (Appendix I). Vertical Distribution Vertical distributions in cell 9 were calculated as the proportion by stratilm of the total raw fish detections for both stra tao vertical dis tribu tions were calcula ted separa te ly for upstream-and downstream-moving fish. Fish Target Speed Fish target speed is the actual speed of the fish relative to a stationary point as measured acoustically.Thus,fish target speeds equal swimming speeds only when there is no current.That is,the timing speed of a fish moving downstream would be its target speed minus the water velocity. Once the mean target strength was known,it was used with the appropriate beam patterns factor to estimate average beamwidth. The mean chord length of fish traveling through the ensonified volume was calculated as a function of this average beam width and range. Fish target velocities were calculated from the estimated mean time spent in the beam for a high number of fish (for our purposes we sorted ·for period and direction).This mean was then divided into the estimated mean chord length for the fish;this resulted in one mean velocity for the data set. G2 APPENDIX H:Summary by Period of Typical Data and weighting parameters The output from TRACKER formed the data base from which all data analyses were completed.This complete data base is contained on IBM-format computer diskettes (5-1/4 inch (13.3 cm) floppy diskettes)held at BioSonics,Inc.offices in Seattle,and ADF&G offices in Soldotna,Alaska. A sample of a TRACKER output summary file appears in Table H1.For files that were created manually,dummy values appear in all but item s 1 and 6.This occurred in approxima te ly 3%of the files. A sample of the data and weighting parameter summary appears in Table H2.In the tables,the sample start data and time is followed by the cell number,transducer orientation,and shift number.All resul ts are presen ted for upstream and downs tream moving fish separately.The data file name keys results to the TRACKER data base file.The results are presented by stratum (i.e.,by section for side-aspect transducers).The five columns within each stratum heading present-each step of the analysis from number of raw fish detections to final estimates of fish passage rates. The summaries are presented for only samples in which fish were detected. H1 I- i... ;Table Hi.Format of summary file output from TRACKER. I j Fish Ping Target Mean Nar.Num.Mean Target Time Fish j Number Number Strength Pulse W.Pings Range Angle in Beam Velocity --------------------------------------- --------------------- 1 7182.-37.401 :m02 4 t::'650 -~20 1 2(2)00 1 47:':j·J.'-'.··I 2 826~:C·.'-:r c.~047 fj·5lZr~~4 =700 17 ~:;(lWJ0 .~::i72..-...)_t ..·~_I ..-.~:..·..~I • H~}49 .-~:J+'716 4502 4 1 -,:'j 0 (i~-1 03 1 mm0 '"042'-·I •··'-'. 4 94:39.-:::;:'7>•698 4836 Lj.1 0 .r',r,t:::'--10.64 1 '':;>0L~0 1 830 !·-,1 ..~._.'··c::.9T'::::?•-38.002 4 :-2~5 :~~8 _.,650 --4.72 1 if 0 0 0 1 715...,..1 ·I .·· 6 10lLKVI.-::::4.i7~~~S 4269 =18.i .~'!\'-';'8.18 '")40lZWJ "460·,-,\_J /...J L...::.. 7 14(2)01 -:::::4.97(-1 4502 4 18.400 --::'93 1 ~}0 0 0 -:;847.·-..'.·'-'. 8 18614.-31 70::::4:335 4 12.475 12.14 1 5 ((10 0 ..662.··...::.... 9 1.Ei,t<::;2 .--::'-:~154 4669 6 10.475 ,.,-::-6lZl 2.~;lZl 0 lZl 1 Ct:.-C:' '-"-'..·..:..'-'.·J.Jd 10 1 E36~'':;6 •--~-:;-059 3855 4 8.550 -10.46 1 2lZl00 "267'.,1,_...··..:.:... 1 1 1 Bt-J6El.--::'~::.121 482;6 4 7.6'·''''-21 47 1 8000 1 424-.-''_.'..·Ld ·· ·I 1 ~?1 FIbS!--::::::~.7t.i~=j 4502 2'1 7 1'75 14.78 8.400lZl :::::0 0...·I .·1 ~;::18T3cl.--::.....'582 4669 <='7.c-"',r:=-~;1 51 ...600(2)1 06(l~'-'.':'..·d J",:~J ·...::..·14 1 ::38 ~5 ::,~.-~'::;B •598 LJ,(lIL12 4 EL 350 ~29 .56 ..0(l1(2)0 1 50::::~·.£..•· 15 190V18.-:38.164 4169 4 co 200 40.36 1 4000 1 r::::'rtl::"·.J.··.JL~J I I... , ..J H2 Table H2. Ditf)tiu,sapling IOCition,suplinq shiH.,~irKlion of fish lovUfnl,dltl filfnlu,ru fiSh,l!lghtlRq helor, Ifightfd fish Ifightfd fish/.inutrl ind ulrifohlfd IfightPil fish}linulf by sil ringf s rill.Sup Inq SfqufncK pulorud on thf Susitni Riv!f,July 22-25,1985. :-------Slutl 1----::------Strih 2------:------Slrih 3------~---------Slrill4------::-------Slrlh 5------::---------Slnh 6---------::-------Iolils------ &c=..-:..-:..-:at •..1:..~..;; :~~~i ~~i ~~i.g ~~~~-i ~-:~~:2 .::.!!~;~~=~..::..c::~: _0 ..c ~:..~~':6o :;:~~':..:;:~~":..~~~~..~~~":..~-:;-:~At .,......~. ....c:---- ---- ----..~i ~g ..~:r -:~~.~~.~~~~.~~~~~.;.~~~~-:~.~~:r ~-:~~.~E -:-:~.~~~~~.~~~U .It::.c Jt::::-~:=::;;:.lC ~~Jt::~.It::::-~Jt::~::;::-~~::::;.tt=.:-~::::;..c::.It:.~~-g.~....~...:~:-~:.::-Do :~~.:-:-:-~.:.:_;-:-:-~::::-:-:-~::::-:-:--=~.::-::~~....!!_.. r.:'"""._U"I 0 0 ex:»=-::a ""_cx:,.=-=-LY_cx:_=-•......_e:..=-,.LY_CX:...X =-......_a::=-=-_laoI_GC ..&.Y. 71i2 104 SIDE IS Lf'lSEI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 -0.000 0 0.00 0.0 .0.000 0.000 0 0.000.0 -0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.0 b.ooo O. 7/22 104 SIDE IS DN lSEI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 3 2.03 6.1 0.133 0.133 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 3 6.1 0.133 O. 7 121 mo 9 ON SIDE tS 011 15J2 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 I 1.80 1.8 0.060 0.060 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.002 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 I 1.8 0.060 O. 7 121 mo 9 ON SIDE t5 Lf'l5J2 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00.0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.0 0.000 O. 7 112 1432 I ON SIDE 16 Lf'lloAl 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 1 2.80 2.8 0.090 0.090 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 7 1.12 9.2 0.297 0.297 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 8 12.0 0.387 O. 7 /22 1m 1 ON SlOE 1&O.:6AI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 2 2.80 5.6 0.181 0.181 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 2 1.32 2.6 0.084 0.084 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 4 8.2 0.265 O. 7 122 lJ44 9 ON SIDE 16 Lf'16.12 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.0 0.000 O. 7/22 1346 9 ON SlOE 16011 16.12 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.121 2 2.80 5.6 0.215 0.215 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 2 5.6 0.215 O. 7 m 1121 ON SIDE 17 OIl l7Al 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 2 2.70 5.4 0.180 0.180 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.021 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 2 5.4 0.180 O. 7 m 1121 ON SIDE 17 Lf l7A1 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 1 2.10 2.7 0.090 0.090 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.056 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0•.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 I 2.7 0.090 o. 1/22 235:i 9 ON SIDE 17011 17JI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.160 4 2.20 8.8 0.284 0.284 6 1.00 6.0 0.194 0.194 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.012 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 10 14.8 0.477 O. 7 122 2m 9 ON SlOE 17 Lf'17JI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.OS3 2 2.20 4.4 0.142 0.142 3 1.00 1.0 0.097 0.097 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.019 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 5 7.4 0.239 o. 7 m 1312 I ON SIDE 18 011 ISAI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 5 2.50 12.5 0.417 0.417 I 1.70 1.7 0.057 0.057 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 6 14.2 0.413 O. 1 m 1312 I ON SlOE 18 Lf'ISAI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.0 0.000 O. 7 m 1408 4 SIDE IS 011 IBEI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.222 2 5.10 10.2 0.222 0.2223 1.82 5.5 0.120 0.120 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 5 15.7 0.341 o. 7 m 1408 4 SlOE IS Lf lBEI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 2 1.82 3.6 0.078 0.018 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 2 3.6 0.078 o. ."-7 m 1119 90N SIDE 18 011 18JI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 13 1.36 17.7 0.590 0.590 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.264 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.022 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 13 17.7 0.590 o. -<:::;7 m IlI9 UN SIDE lB Lf'18JI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 1 1.36 1.4 0.047 0.047 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0,00 0.0 0.000 0.006 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.004 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 I 1.4 0.047 o. 1124 43 l'ON SIDE 19 011 19A3 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.072 2 4.75 9.5 0.317 0.317 3 2.19 6.6 0.220 0.220 8 1.57 12.6 D.420 D.420 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 13 28.7 0.957 I. 7 121 43 1 ON SIDE 19 Lf'19A3 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.307 2 4.75 9.5 0.311 0.317 7 2.19 15.3 0.510 0.510 10 1.57 15.1 0.523 0.523 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 19 40.5 1.350 I. 7 121 220 4 SIDE 19011 19E1 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.096 I 4.40 4.4 0.096 0.096 9 1.57 14.1 0.307 0.301 3 1.03 3.1 0.067 0.067 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 13 21.6 0.470 0_ 7 121 220 4 SlOE 19 Lf'19E1 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 I 1.57 1.6 0.035 O.O~2 1.03 2.1 0.046 0.046 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 3 3.7 0.080 0 7 m 2317 9 OX SlOE 19 Lf'19JI 9 5.72 51.5 1.717 1.717 25 1.00 25.0 0.833 0.833 0 0,00 0.0 0.000 0.412 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.151 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.108 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 34 76.5 2.550 3. 7 m 2317 9 ON SlOE 19 ON 19J1 15 5.72 85.8 2.B60 2.860 41 1.00 41.0 1.367 1.367 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 o.m 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.896 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.074 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 56 126.8 4.227 5. 7 124 1103 1 ON SIDE 20 Lf'20A1 1 5.40 5.4 0.159 0.159 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.100 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 1 5.4 0.159 0_ 7121 1103 1 ON SIDE 20 011 20,11 1 5.40 5.4 0.159 0.159 I 2.20 2.2 0.065 0.065 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.027 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 2 7.6 0.224 o. 1121 1225 4 SIDE 20 011 20£1 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.098 I 4.40 4.4 0.098 0.098 I 1.60 1.6 0.036 0.034 4 1.03 4.1 0.091 0.091 2 1.00 2.0 0.044 0.044 3 99.50 2'18.5 6.633 0.000 11 31D.6 6.902 o. 7 114 1m 4 SIDE 20 Lf 20EI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 I 1.60 1.6 0.036 0.036 2 1.03 2.1 0.047 0.047 3 1.00 3.0 0.067 0.067 I 99.50 '19.5 2.2ll 0.000 .7 106.2 2.360 0_ 7/24 10109011 SIDE 20 011 20JI 9 33.n 300.0 10.000 10.000 388 1.13 438.4 140613 140613 157 1.00 157.0 5.233 5.233 20 1.00 20.0 0.667 0.667 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 514915.430.513 30 7 114 10109 ON SIDE 20 Lf'20JI 2 33.n 66.7 2.213 2.223348 1.13 393.213.107 13.107 161 1.00 161.0 5.367 5.367 6 1.00 6.0 0.200 0.200 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 517626.920.89720. 7 m m ION SIDE 21 011 21AI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 2 2.48 5.0 0.167 0.167 2 1.55 3.1 0.103 0.103 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 4 8.1 0.270 o. 7 12S SSI I ON SlOE 21 Lf'2UI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 3 2.48 1.4 0.247 0.247 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 3 7.4 0.247 0 7 m 630 4 SIDE 21 Lf'21EI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 I 1.00 1.0 0.020 0.020 1 1.00 1.0 0.020 0.020 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 2 2.0 0.040 0_ 7125 630 4 SlOE 21 ON 21EI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 4 1.48 5.9 0.118 0.118 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 4 5.9 0.118 o. 7 m m 9 ON SIDE 21 011 WI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.904 lB 2.69 48.4 1.613 1.613 128 1.00 128.0 4.267 4.267 52 1.00 52.0 1.133 I.m 25 1.00 25.0 0.833 0.833 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 22l 253.4 8.447 9 7125 m 9 ON SlOE 21 Lf'21JI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.504 15 2.69 40.3 1.341 1.341 95 1.00 9M 3.167 3.167 62 1.00 62.0 2.067 2.067 33 1.00 33.0 1.100 1.100 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 205230.3 7.677 B. 7125 180S 1 ON SIDE 22 Lf'22A1 1 6.60 6.6 0.143 o.m 4 2.25 U 0.196 0.196 I 3.00 3.0 0.065 0.065 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.163 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 6 18.6 0.404 0_ 1 m 1805 I ON SlOE ,22 011 22A1 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 1 2.25 15.8 0.341 0.144 I 3.00 3.0 0.06S 0.065 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.048 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 8 18.8 0.409 o. 7 m 1300 4 SIDE 22 011 22E1 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.276 3 4.13 12.4 0.276 0.276 15 1.47 22.0 0.489 0.411'13 1.00 13.0 0.289 0.289 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 31 47.4 1.053 1- 7125 1300 4 SlOE 22 Lf'22EI 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 1 4.13 12.4 0.276 0.276 8 1.47 11.8 0.262 0.216 2 1.00 2.0 0.044 0.262 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.044 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 Il 26.2 0.582 o. 7 m 1m 9 ON SIDE 22 ON 22J4 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.072 3 1.27 3.B 0.127 0.127 4 1.00 4.0 0.133 0.133 I 11.40 11.4 0.380 0.380 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 8 19.2 0.640 0_ 7 125 1933 9 ON SIDE 22 UP 22J4 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.00 0.0 0.000 0.000 0 0.0 0.000 o. Sues:18 521.4 17.261 20.146 902 71.650 37.85537.856 616 66D.5 21.089 22.151196 220.77.0347 8.9846 64 642.0644 2.1498 4 3'18 8.8444 018203023.94.14991 APPENDIX I:Statistical Analysis of Variability in Horizontal Distributions Between Shifts For upstream moving fish,the data were blocked into two groups and tested,by cell,to see if the lower passage group had a statistically higher variance than the higher passage group.In Test A,the groups contained horizontal distributions for shifts where less than 1%of the season total fish passage occurred,and distrbutions for shifts where more than 1%of the fish passage occurred.This level of passage was chosen because it split the 35 shifts into two blocks of nearly equal sample size.The rela- tive percentages by shift were transformed (arcsin)by cell,and means and variances calculated (Table 11).We found the variances of the low passage group to be significantly higher than the variances of high passage group at p<0.05 for cells 1 and 9. In Test a,we also examined groups of distributions with lower and higher passages «0.8%and >2.0%),and found the low passage variances to be significantly higher than the variances of the high passage group at p<0.005 for all three cells. These results indicate that there is more variability in distributions with low passage rates.Also,it is most unlikely tha t the pairs of variances represent the same parame tric vari- ance,i.e.,are from the same homogenous population (statistically speaking).As such it would be unwise to treat samples from both low and high passage blocks as replicates from the same statis- tical population,and perform parametric statistical manipulations on them. We should emphasize that even had the tests shown no signifi- cant difference between the variances of the two blocks,we would not have recommended treating the by-shift horizontal distribu- tions as replicates,for the reasons discussed in the text. 11 Table 11.Summary of test for variance differences between hori- zontal distributions of low and high passage rates (Susitna River 1985). passage Level Transformed Parameters by Cell* N Parameter Cell 1 Cell 4 Cell 9 Test A <1 .0% >1 .0% 17 Mean Variance 18 Mean Variance 27.63 648.87 13.07 60.30 18.39 328.84 13.78 163.15 47.90 645.16 68.50 133.15 F test p (to rej ect Ho ) 10.76 <0.001 Test B 2.02 <0.10 4.85 <0.005** <0.8% >2.0% 13 Mean Variance 13 Mean Variance 27.52 763.05 12.66 81 .04 13.87 287.35 9.16 52.54 51 .84 602.53 72.47 69.46 F test p (to reject Ho ) 9.42 <0.001 5.47 <0.005 8.67 <0.001** *Arcsin transformation. **Ho :varh varl Ha :varh >varl 12 Appendix J:Run Timing:Relative percentage of Season Total Fish Passage by 12-h Periods. Jl 98 ..... 76 Period IV ----I 5432 August Period III ...... ...... Date Period II ..... ...... 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 I---Per I od I 19 20 21 downstream index upstream index 70 90 80 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 15 16 17 18 July 100 ., C7\ IV III III IV Q.. .r:: III.-...... 0., 0\ IV ~ c:., u ~ '-., tv Q..., >.- ~ IV-:> E :>u Figure J1.Run timing:cumulative percentage of 12 h aeason total fish passage,by direction of movement. Susitna River,1985. ...--,'"... ''"\".......-"",\""...\/ '" .... ,\ \ \ \ \ """"", \ , '"",-..., I I I I,,,, I,,,,,,,,, I.- ....._--------,," Flathorn f i shwheel index by 24 h combined acoustic index --- °15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 3,1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 July Date Augus t t---Period I I Period II I Period III I Period IV ----j 6 8 4 16l "1! i12l 1°1 I '"'0"> '"'"'".., ll. .J::. '".-.... ~ 0 '"'0">.., ~ c: <lJ V c.., '- <lJ W ll. '"'> ~ ~ <lJex: Figure J2.Run timing:relative percentage of 12 h season total fish passage,upstream and downstream moving fish combined.Susitna River,1985. Table J1.Run timing of fish passage by 12-h period for down- stream-moving fish (Susi tna Ri ver 1985). shift Relative cumulative Date Number percentage percentage July 15 1 0 0 2 0 0 16 3 0 0 4 0 0 17 5 0 0 6 0 0 18 7 0 0 8 0 0 19 9 0 0 10 0 0 20 11 0 0 12 a a 21 13 0.1 0.1 14 0.1 0.2 22 15 0.1 0.3 16 0.3 0.6 23 17 0.5 1 .1 18 1 •1 2.2 24 19 4.1 6.3 20 17 .2 23.5 25 21 5.4 28.9 22 1 .4 30.3 26 23 6.9 37.2 24 1 .0 38.2 27 25 12.1 50.3 26 1 .8 58.1 28 27 7.4 65.5 28 2.4 67.9 29 29 7.7 75.6 30 7.0 82.6 30 31 3.2 85.8 32 1 •a 86.8 31 33 1 .6 88.4 34 1 •1 90.5 J4 Table Jl,cont. Shift Relative Cumulative Date Number percentage percentage August 35 1 .4 90.9 36 1 .8 92.7 2 37 0.3 93.0 38 1.0 94.0 3 39 0.6 94.6 40 0.7 95.3 4 41 0.8 96.1 42 0.2 96.3 5 43 0.4 96.7 44 0.5 97.2 6 45 0.6 97.8 46 0.1 97.9 7 47 0.1 98.0 48 0.5 98.5 8 49 0.9 99.4 50 0.6 100.0 J5 Table J2.Run timing of fish passage by 12-h period for upstream- and downstream-moving fish combined (Susi tna River 1985)• Shift Relative Cumulative Date Number Percentage Percentage July 15 1 a 0 2 a a 16 3 a a 4 0 a 17 5 a a 6 a a 18 7 a a 8 a a 19 9 a a 10 a a 20 11 a a 12 0.1 0.1 21 13 0.1 0.2 14 0.1 0.3 22 15 .0.1 0.4 16 0.3 0.7 23 17 0.4 1 .1 18 0.6 1 .7 24 19 3.6 5.3 20 15.0 20.3 25 21 5.3 25.6 22 1 •1 26.7 26 23 5.9 32.6 24 1 .3 33.9 27 25 10.9 44.8 26 7.2 52.0 28 27 6.6 58.6 28 2.2 60.8 29 29 8.6 69.4 30 8.6 78.0 30 31 2.9 80.9 32 1.0 81 .9 31 33 1 .8 83.7 34 2.0 85.7 J6 Table J2,cont. Shift Relative Cumulative Date Number Percentage Percentage August 35 3.5 89.2 36 3.1 92.3 2 37 0.3 92.6 38 1.4 94.0 3 39 0.5 94.5 40 0.8 95.3 4 41 1.2 96.5 42 0.4 96.9 5 43 0.4 97.3 44 0.5 97.8 6.45 0.5 98.3 46 0.1 98.4 7 47 0.1 98.5 48 0.3 98.8 8 49 0.9 99.7 50 0.4 100.1 J7 APPENDIX K:Flathorn station Fishwheel Catch Results Table Kl.Relative run timing from the Flathorn station fishwheel catch data (Kenneth Tarbox,ADFG,personal communica- tion)(Susi tna River 1985). Total Relative Cumulative Date Catch Percent Percent July 15 196 1 .3 1 .3 16 173 1.1 2.4 17 158 1 .0 3.4 18 85 0.5 3.9 19 75 0.5 4.4 20 60 0.4 4.8 21 68 0.4 5.2 22 193 1 .2 6.4 23 951 6.1 12.5 24 1202 7.7 20.2 25 1197 7.7 27.9 26 1302 8.4 36.3 27 1300 8.4 44.7 28 1478 9.5 54.2 29 1242 8.0 62.2 30 931 6.0 68.2 31 766 4.9 73.1 August 1 647 4.2 77.3 2 616 4.0 81 .3 3 461 3.0 84.3 4 588 3.8 88.1 5 372 2.4 90.5 6 551 3.5 94.0 7 486 3.1 97.1 8 444 2.9 100.0 Total 15542 100.0 Kl Table K2.Flathorn station fishwheel catches during the period of hydroacoustic sampling (Kenneth Tarbox,ADFG,personal communication)(Susitna River 1985). Numbers of Fish Sampled Fishwheel*Fishwheel Fishwheel Fishwheel** Period Species East Right East Left west Right west Left Total o 7/15- 21 I 7/22- 25 II 7/26- 30 III 7/31- 8/3 IV 8/4-8 sockeye pink chum. coho chinook total sockeye pink chum coho chinook total sockeye pink chum coho chinook total sockeye pink chum coho chinook total sockeye pink chum coho chinook total 33 56 1 12 8 110 118 33 12 9 o 172 228 195 109 75 o 607 178 396 195 197 3 969 217 429 166 57 4 873 67 164 1 23 12 267 633 304 84 157 4 1182 11 15 644 199 337 1 2296 156 192 56 130 2 536 185 345 46 45 o 621 21 39 o 6 3 69 460 159 37 124 o 780 340 143 23 104 2 612 76 70 15 44 1 206 50 56 3 10 o 119 108 143 1 17 8 277 974 195 28 144 4 1345 1741 555 62 304 1 2663 280 287 11 140 o 718 335 299 7 75 3 719 229 402 3 58 31 723 2185 691 161 434 8 3479 3424 1537 393 820 4 6178 690 945 277 511 6 2429 787 1129 222 187 7 2332 7/15-8/8 Total Percentage 2731 18.0 4902 32.4 1786 11 .8 5722 37.8 15141 100.0 *Located on the east shore. **Located on the west shore. K2 APPENDIX L:Ho~izontal Dist~ibutions by Shift L1 Table Ll.Summary of horizontal distributions of upstream migrating adult salmon,by shift (Susi tna River 1985)• Shift Relative Percentage across River by Cell Date Number 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Total July 22 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 16 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 23 17 31.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 68.1 100.0 18 0.0 0.0 0.0 58.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 42.0 100.0 24 19 33.5 0.0 0.0 1 .6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 64.9 100.0 20 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 98.1 100.0 25 21 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 96.7 100.0 22 39.8 0.0 0.0 60.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 26 23 2.4 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 94.0 100.0 24 7.7 0.0 0.0 43.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 49.0 100.0 27 25 0.6 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 97.5 100.0 26 13.1 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 85.7 100.0 28 27 5.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 94.3 100.0 28 4.3 0.0 0.0 12.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 83.0 100.0 29 29 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 96.9 100.0 30 3.0 0.0 0.0 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 91.7 100.0 30 31 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 83.9 100.0 32 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 66.3 100.0 31 33 5.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 94.5 100.0 34 12.8 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 84.5 100.0 35 5.2 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 94.4 100.0 36 4.1 0.0 0.0 15.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 80.1 100.0 2 37 58.4 0.0 0.0 13.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.9 100.0 38 10.3 0.0 0.0 19.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 70.3 100.0 3 39 62.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 37.3 100.0 40 51.4 0.0 0.0 27.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.7 100.0 4 41 3.2 0.0 0.0 42.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 54.3 100.0 42 27.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 73.0 100.0 5 43 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 44 22.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 77.1 100.0 6 45 20.3 0.0 0.0 15.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 63.8 100.0 46 49.1 0.0 0.0 26.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.7 100.0 7 47 0.0 0.0 0.0 26.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 74.0 100.0 48 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 8 49 20.9 0.0 0.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 73.1 100.0 50 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 83.6 100.0 L2 Table L2.Summary of horizontal distributions of downstream migrating adult salmon,by shift (Susi tna River 1985). Shift Relative percentage across River by Cell Date Number 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Total July 22 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 68.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 31.9 100.0 16 44.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 56.0 100.0 23 17 23.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 76.3 100.0 18 24.7 0.0 0.0 29.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 45.9 100.0 24 19 13.9 0.0 0.0 7.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 78.5 100.0 20 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 98.0 100.0 25 21 2.8 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 96.0 100.0 22 18.3 0.0 0.0 53.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.5 100.0 26 23 7.6 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 91.7 100.0 24 26.1 0.0 0.0 28.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 45.3 100.0 27 25 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 26 5.8 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 93.6 100.0 28 27 2.5 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 94.2 100.0 28 11.2 0.0 0.0 13.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 75.5 100.0 29 29 3.6 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 94.4 100.0 30 5.0 0.0 0.0 6.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 88.2 100.0 30 31 2.9 0.0 0.0 6.6'0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 90.5 100.0 32 21.0 0.0 0.0 21.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 57.4 100.0 31 33 5.2 0.0 0.0 6.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 88.7 100.0 34 34.4 0.0 0.0 8.7 .0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 56.9 100.0 35 11 .8 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 85.6 100.0 36 7.1 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 89.1 100.0 2 37 12.3 0.0 0.0 32.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 54.8 100.0 38 54.7 0.0 0.0 15.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 29.9 100.0 3 39 0.0 .0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 40 75.2 0.0 0.0 7.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.5 100.0 4 41 5.0 0.0 0.0 34.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 60.7 100.0 42 49.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.8 100.0 5 43 12.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 87.8 100.0 44 25.5 0.0 0.0 14.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 59.8 100.0 6 45 21.2 0.0 0.0 7.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 71.4 100.0 46 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 7 47 0.0 0.0 0.0 52.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 47.6 100.0 48 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 8 49 19.7 0.0 0.0 11 .2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 69.1 100.0 50 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 L3 Table L3.Summary of mean horizontal distributions of upstream adult salmon within the near-shore cells by shift, (Susi tna River 1985)• Relative Percentage of Fish Shift Cell 1 Cell 9 Date Number 2 3 4 5 6 Sum 2 3 4 5 6 Sum July 22 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16 0.0 23.3 0.0 76.7 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23 17 0.0 19.7 0.0 12.3 0.0 0.0 32.0 11.6 31 .1 21.2 0.0 4.2 0.0 68.1 18 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 34.6 0.0 4.4 3.0 0.0 42.0 24 19 6.2 6.4 10.3 10.5 0.0 0.0 33.4 34.6 16.8 8.3 3.0 2.2 0.0 64.9 20 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 1.2 10.4 61.5 25.2 0.9 0.0 0.0 98.0 25 21 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 5.9 15.9 37.4 24.4 13.0 0.0 96.6 22 10.0 13.7 4.6 1 1.4 0.0 0.0 39.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 26 23 0.0 1 .8 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 34.4 .19.9 32.6 7.1 0.0 0.0 94.0 24 0.0 7.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.7 16.0 0.0 24.5 7.2 1.2 0.0 48.9 27 25 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 34.4 36.3 16.2 7.6 2.9 0.0 97.4 26 0.0 11.4 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.1 24.5 6.9 30.5 21.4 2.3 0.0 85.6 28 27 0.0 1 .8 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.7 33.5 10.4 40.8 7.4 2.2 0.0 94.3 28 0.0 4.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.3 32.1 0.0 48.9 0.0 1.9 0.0 82.9 29 29 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.4 8.7 24.5 48.4 15.1 0.2 0.0 96.9 30 0.9 1.9 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 23.7 0.0 36.1 25.1 6.7 0.0 91.6 30 31 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.9 3.3 47.2 15.0 2.5 0.0 83.9 32 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.0 6.8 16.5 9.8 1.2 0.0 66.3 31 33 0.0 2.3 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.4 0.0 3.9 81.4 9.2 0.0 0.0 94.5 34 3.6 9.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.8 0.0 63.0 18.1 3.4 0.0 0.0 84.5 Aug. 1 35 0.0 0.7 4.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.2 86.5 0.0 2.4 5.5 0.0 0.0 94.4 36 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.1 0.0 63.4 7.2 8.2 1.3 0.0 80.1 2 37 0.0 39.5 18.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 58.4 0.0 0.0 9.3 18.6 0.0 0.0 27.9 38 5.5 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.3 2.8 50.5 7.6 5.8 3.5 0.0 70.2 3 39 3.4 30.8 8.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 62.6 18.6 0.0 4.7 4.7 9.3 0.0 37.3 40 12.0 15.8 23.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 51.3 5.8 0.0 9.2 5.5 0.0 0.0 20.5 4 41 0.0 3.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.2 6.3 0.0 30.8 17.2 0.0 0.0 54.3 42 0.0 27.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 27.0 11.7 11.5 47.5 0.0 2.3 0.0 73.0 5 43 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.6 0.0 42.1 46.3 0.0 0.0 100.0 44 0.0 11.7 11.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.9 8.9 0.0 58.4 9.7 0.0 0.0 77.0 6 45 0.0 10.4 9.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.3 5.3 0.0 13.5 27.0 18.0 0.0 63.8 46 0.0 49.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 49.1 2.6 0.0 0.0 22.0 0.0 0.0 24.6 7 47 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.5 0.0 21.8 43.7 0.0 0.0 74.0 48 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.9 0.0 52.9 32.8 3.3 0.0 99.9 8 49 0.0 15.8 5.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.0 4.8 44.9 14.9 8.5 0.0 0.0 73.1 50 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.7 48.4 25.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 83.6 L4 Table L4.Summary of mean horizontal distributions of downstream adult salmon wi thin the near-shore ce Ils,by shift (Susitna River 1985). Relative Percentage of Fish Shift Cell 1 Cell 9 Date Number 2 3 4 5 6 Sum 2 3 4 5 6 Sum July 22 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.8 1.0 0.0 31.8 16 0.0 30.0 0.0 14.0 0.0 0.0 44.0 20.1 35.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 55.9 23 17 0.0 21.2 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0 23.7 18.8 33.4 22.8 0.0 1.4 0.0 76.4 18 0.0 21.8 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.8 0.0 30.8 0.0 13.8 1 .1 0.0 45.7 24 19 1.0 4.3 3.0 5.6 0.0 0.0 13.9 38.5 18.4 8.6 12.1 1 .0 0.0 78.6 20 0.5 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.8 32.1 46.9 16.8 2.1 0.0 0.0 97.9 25 21 0.0 1.7 1• 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 9.3 16.6 43.8 17.8 8.6 0.0 96.1 22 0.0 13.7 2.6 1.9 0.0 0.0 18.2 2.9 5.1 5.3 15.2 0.0 0.0 28.5 26 23 0.0 5.8 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.6 15.2 34.7 33.8 6.4 1.6 0.0 91.7 24 0.0 26.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 26.1 7.2 12.3 19.9 5.0 1.0 0.0 45.4 27 25 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.7 54.9 20.2 6.3 1.8 0.0 99.9 26 0.0 4.9 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.8 15.1 44.2 23.8 8.4 2.0 0.0 93.5 28 27 0.0 2.0 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 2.6 14.5 31.6 33.8 12.2 2.0 0.0 94.1 28 0.0 10.0 1• 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 ".1 13.4 0.0 60.5 0.0 1.6 0.0 75.5 29 29 1 .3 2.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 3.6 3.3 31.3 48.5 11 .2 0.0 0.0 94.3 30 2.4 2.0 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 5.0 10.9 0.0 48.9 23.7 4.7 0.0 88.2 30 31 0.0 1.4 1.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 2.9 12.0 9.9 56.3 10.2 2.0 0.0 90.4 32 10.7 4.4 3.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 20.9 4.6 19.0 22.4 9.9 1.4 0.0 57.3 31 33 0.0 5.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.2 3.2 0.0 82.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 88.6 34 8.7 25.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 34.4 0.0 10.3 32.1 11.2 3.2 0.0 56.9 August 1 35 6.2 0.0 5.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 11 .8 46.4 0.0 3.0 29.9 6.2 0.0 85.5 36 0.0 7.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.2 0.0 47.8 15.6 22.8 2.8 0.0 89.0 2 37 0.0 0.0 12.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.4 0.0 0.0 12.2 42.6 0.0 0.0 54.8 38 54.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 54.7 0.0 12.8 12.8 3.3 0.9 0.0 29.8 3 39 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.6 44.2 16.4 29.5 3.3 0.0 100.0 40 12.4 38.5 24.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 75.2 2.2 0.0 3.8 11.5 0.0 0.0 17.5 4 41 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 27.2 31.2 2.2 0.0 60.6 42 49.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 O~O 0.0 49.2 0.0 13.8 17.5 0.0 19.5 0.0 50.8 5 43 0.0 12.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.2 0.0 0.0 41.8 40.8 5.1 0.0 87.7 44 0.0 8.9 16.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.5 0.0 26.6 22.2 11• 1 0.0 0.0 59.9 6 45 0.0 14.3 6.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.1 0.0 0.0 6.2 46.6 18.6 0.0 71.4 46 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 7 47 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.9 35.7 0.0 0.0 47.6 48 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 48.3 10.8 36.5 4.4 0.0 100.0 8 49 0.0 14.9 4.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.7 0.0 35.0 28.1 6.0 0.0 0.0 69.1 50 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 56.7 43.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 L5 Appendix M:Horizontal Distributions of Adult Salmon Across the River,weighted for Fish Abundance Ml 100- Q) 80 -"-01 0 10 VI Q)VI 0110 1OCl.... c.r.60- Q)VI U --UPSTREAM Lu... Q) Cl.L Q) Q)>40->----a::... 10 - -10Q)... a::0 20-f- I0 I I I I I I I I I east 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 west shore Cell Number shore 100 - Q) 80-"-01 0 10 VI Q)VI 0110 1OCl.... c.r.60 -Q)VI U --DOWNSTREAM Lu... Q) Cl.L Q) Q)>40>--.-a::... 10 - 10 Q)... a::0 20-f- 0 1 I I I I I I I I I east 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 west shore Cell Number shore Figure Ml.Horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river, weighted for fish abundance,for Period I (July 22-25).Susitna River, 1985. M2 100- Q) 80 -....O'l 0 m III Q)III O'lmme.. 4-1 60-CJ:: Q)III U .- UPSTREAM LLL. Q)e..L Q) Q)>40->.-.-a: 4-1 m~m Q)4-1a:0 20 -f- 0 I I I I I I I I I I east 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 west shore Cell Number shore 100 - Q) 80-....O'l 0 m III Q)'"O'lm .-<,:me..... CJ::60 - Q)'"u .- DOWNSTREAM LLL. Q)e..L Q) Q)>40->.-.-a:... m~m Q)... a:0 20-f- 0 I I I I I I I I I I eas t 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 west shore Cell Number shore Figure M2.Horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river, weighted for fish abundance,for Period II (July 26-30).Susitna River, 1985. M3 - - - - - I I I I I I I I UPSTREAM eu '+-0'1otil VIeuVI 0'1 til til a.. 4.J Col:eu VIu.- l-lL. IIIa..l- IIIeu>>.-.-ex: 4.J tIl~ ~til III 4.J ex:0 I- 100 80 60 40 20 o east shore 2 3 4 5 6 Cell Number 7 8 9 west shore 9 west shore 87456 Cell Number 32 - - :/J - - - I I I I I I I Io 100 eas t shore III 80'+-0'1 0 til VI III VI 0'1 til til a.. 4.J Col:60IIIVI U .- DOWNSTREAM l-lL. IIIa..l- eu III >40>.-.-ex: 4.J tIl~ til III 4.J ex:0 20I- Figure M3.Horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river, weighted for fish abundance,for Period III (July 31 -August 3). Susitna River,1985. M4 west shore 9874 5 6 Cell Number 32 - - - - - I I I I o east shore 100 .....~80atQ VI Cl)VI OltQ tQQ...... C.I::.60 Cl)VI U .- L-l.L Cl) Q..L- Cl) ~.~40 .-a:.... tQ~ ~tQ Cl).... a:~20 UPSTREAM 9 west shore 874 5 6 Cel I Number 32 - - ."-,: - - - I I I Io 100 eas t shore Cl) 80.....0'1atQ VI Cl)III OltQ tQQ...... C.I::.60Cl)III U .- DOWNSTREAM L-l.L Cl) Q..L- Cl) Cl)>40>.-.-a:.... tQ~ tQ Cl).... a:a 20f- Figure M4.Horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river, weighted for fish abundance,for Period IV (August 4-8).Susitna River, 1985. M5 west shore 987456 Cell Number 32 - - - - - I I I I I I I Io east shore 100 CLI 80.....0\ 0 ~ III CLI III O\~ ~a....... 60C.I::. CLI III U .- UPSTREAM \"u... CLIa...\.. CLI CLI >40>.-.-a::.... ~- ~ CLI .... a::0 20I- 100 - DOWNSTREAM (I) .....0\o ~ III CLI III O\~ ~'a....... C.I::. CLI III U .-\..u... CLIa...\.. ·CLI CLI >>.-.-a::.... ~-~CLI .... a::0 I- 80- 60 - 40- 20- 456 Ce)1 Number o east shore I 1 2 I 3 I I I I I I 7 I 8 9 west shore Figure MS.Horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the weighted for fish abundance,for Periods I and II (July 22-30). River,1985. river, Susitna M6 UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM Q) ....0'1oto <II Q)<II 0'1 to to a....., cor. Q)<II U 0- L..4. Q) a..L.. Q) Q)>>.- 0-a::..., to- -toQ)..., a::0 I- Q) ......0'1oto <II Q)<II 0'1 to to a....., cor. Q)<II U 0- L..4. Q)a..L.. Q) Q)>>.- 0-a::..., to- -toQ)..., a::0 I- 100- 80- 40- 20- 0 I I I I I I I I I I east 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 west shore Cell Number shore 100 - 80- 60- 40 - 20- 0 I I I,I I I I I I east 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 west shore Cell Number shore Figure M6.Horizontal distribu~ion of adult salmon across the river, weighted for fish abundance,for Periods I-IV (July 22 -August 8). Susitna River,1985. M7 UPSTREAM 50 Ce 11 Ce 11 9 ~50 -I '+-01 o ~ 0 ro ""(l) III QI -~III 40 40 -III O1ro rt roo..:>:J _....._.< C~30 30 <(l) ~III (l) u·-,-0 1-u...(tl ~"T'J, Q..1-20 20 -·n III VI (l) ~>::T:J >.-M .-a:-oQl....10 10 11110 ro-VI (l)-ttl VI ~....111 0a:0 10 ~ ~0 0 (tl 2 3 4 5 6 6 5 4 3 2. St ratum Number Stratum Number east west shore shore DOWNSTREAM Cell 1 50 -; 0 ~ rt (tl 111 -40 -111 rt :n -.-.< <(tl 30 (l),-0 (l) "T'J'-·n20VIn> ::T:l rt -oQl 1111010VIn> VI 111 0 \D ~roa 2.3 Cell 9 56 r- r- - - f- r-J I I I 65432 I1J 50 '+-01 0 ttl III 40I1JVI O1roroQ...... c..c.30IIIIII U .- 1-u... III Q..1-20III III >>.-.-a:..,10ro--roIII.., a:0t-O Stratum Number Stratum Number east shore west shore Figure M7.Horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9,weighted for fish abundance,for Period I (July 22-25).Susitna River,1985. M8 UPSTREAM ,--- r- r- roo - roo r-- J I Ce 11 1 Q)50 .......C7l 0 ro <Jl Q)<Jl 40C7lroroo...... c:..c 30I1lVIu.- l...u. Q) a..l...20I1l I1l >>.-.-a::....10ro--ro I1l ....a::0 ~0 Stratum Number 6 Cell 9 5 4 3 2 Stratum Number 50 -i 0 ;;0 M (l) OJ -40 -OJ ~;;0 _. -.< 30 <(l) (1).,"(l)....,., -.n20V'l (l) :T:J ~ "OJ 10 OJ 10 VI (1) VI OJ 0 10 ...... 0 (l) east shore west shore DOWNSTREAM Cell 9 50 -io ;;0 ....(l) OJ -40 -OJ,... ;;0 _._.< <(l) 30 (l).,"(1)....,.., -.n20VI(l) :T:J ~ "OJOJ1010VI(l) VI OJ a 10 ...... (1) 0 6 5 4 3 2 Stratum Number west shore Cell 1 I1l 50 .......C7l 0 ro VI I1l VI 40Olroroo...... c:..c 30I1lVI U "- l....u. I1la..l...20I1l I1l >>.-.-a::....10ro- -roI1l....a::0 ~0 2 3 4 5 6 St ra tum Number east shore Figure M8.Horizontal distributions w~thin Cells 1 and 9,weighted for fish abundance,for Period II (July 26-30).Susitna River,1985. M9 UPSTREAM 50 --; 0 ;>:> ,...(l) ClJ - 40 -ClJ,... ;>:>_. -.< 30 <(l) (l) •-0 (l) "T'I. 20 -.() III (l) :r:::J,... -oClJ 10 ClJIO III (l) III ClJ 0 10 -tl 0 (l) 23 Cell 9 456 - - -- - - I I I I 65432 50 Ce 11 Q) "-01 0 co III Q)III 4001cocoo...... c..c.30Q)III U .- Lu... Q) 0..L 20Q) Q)>>.-.-a::....10co~co Q).... a::0 ~0 Stratum Number Stratum Number east shore west shore DOWNSTREAM 50 --; 0 ;>:> rt (l) ClJ - 40 -ClJ rt ;>:>-.-.< <(l) 30 (l)•-0 (l) "T'I'-.() 20 III (l) :r:::J rt -OClJ ClJIO 10 III (l) III ClJ a 10 -tl (l) 0 west shore 23 Cell 9 4 Stratum Number 56 - - - - - - r- I I Cell <U 50 "-01aco III <U III 40 01 cocoo...... c..c.30<U III U .- Lu... Q) 0..L 20Q) <U >>.-.-a::....10co~ ~co Q)....a::0 ~0 2 3 4 5 6 Stratum Number east shore Figure M9.Horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9,weighted for fish abundance,for Period III (July 31 -August 3).Susitna River,1985. MiO Cell - - - - r----- r-- I I Cell 9 Q)50 -.....0> 0 10 \II Q)\II 40 -0>10lOa....... C.J::.30 -Q)\II U 0- LlJ... Q) a...L 20 -Q) Q)>>0- 0-a::....10-10- III Q)....a::0 ~-0 2 3 I I 4 I 5 I 6 I UPSTREAM 6 5 4 3 2 50 -i 0 :xJ rt (1) (l)- 40 -(l) rt :xJ -0 _0 < 30 <(1) (1),""'0 (1).., -·n20\II (1) :r::J rt ""'O(l) 10 (l)!D \II (1) Vl (l)a !D ..... 0 (1) eas t shore Stratum Number Stratum Number west shore DOWNSTREAM 50 Cell 1 Cell 9 50Q)-i.....0>a :xJ a III rt (1) (l)-\II 40 40 -(l)Q)VI rt0>III :xJ -.lOa..._.<....<(1)C.J::.30 30 (1)Q)VI ,""'0U0-(1)LlJ....., Q)-·na...L 20 20 VI (1) Q):r::JQ)>rt>.-""'O(l) 0-a::(l)!D....10 10 Vl (1) Ill~Vl ~III (l)aQ)....!D .....a::a (1)I-0 0 2 3 4 5 6 6 5 4 3 2 eas t shore Stratum Number Stratum Number west shore Figure MI0.Horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9,weighted for fish abundance,for Period IV (August 4-8).Susitna River,1985. Mll UPSTREAM r r-- - ~ ,...---- ~ I I Stratum Number Cell 9 50 -la ~ rt (b OJ - 40 -OJ rt ~-.-.< 30 <(b C1l.,-0ro...,., 20 -.n VI ro ~~ rt -0 OJ 10 OJ <.0 VI ro VI OJ 0 <.0 ~ 0 ro west shore 23456 Ce 11 III 50 4-0'\ 0 ru III III III 40O'\ruruo....., c..r:30IIIIII U .- LlJ.. III 0..L 20III III >>.-.-a:::...,10ru--ruIII..., a:::0 ~0 2 3 4 5 6 Stratum Number east shore DOWNSTREAM 50 -l 0 ~ roT ro OJ - 40 -OJ roT ~-._.< <ro 30 C1l.,-0ro...,., -.n 20 III ro ~~ roT -0 OJ OJ <.010VIro VI OJ 0 \D ~ro0 west shore 23 Cell 9 Stratum Number 56 r- ~ - ~ ~ f0- r-- I I Cell III 50....0'\ 0 ru III 40IIIIIIO'\ruruo....., c..r:30IIIVI U .- 1...lJ.. III 0..L 20III III >>.-.-a:::...,10ru--ru ClJ ...a:::0 ~0 2 3 4 5 6 Stratum Numbe r east shore Figure MIl.Horizontal distributions within Cells I and 9,weighted for fish abundance,for Periods I and II (July 22-30).Susitna River,1985. Ml2 UPSTREAM r- r- ~ - r- - r-- I I St ra tum Numbe r Cell 9 50 ~ 0 ;;0 n ro OJ - 40 -OJ,... ;;0 -0 -0 < 30 <roro,"ro "Tl, 20 -on III ro ::r:J,... "OJ 10 OJID .III ro III OJ·'0 ID .~ 0 ro west shore 23456 Ce 11 Q)50 '+-O'l 0 Cll III Q)III 40O'lCll Clla....... c.r.30Q)III U .- LlJ... Q) a...L 20Q) Q)>>0- 0-a::....10Cll~-Cll Q)....a::0 ~0 2 3 4 5 6 Stratum Number east shore DOWNSTREAM 50 ~ 0 ;;0 n ro OJ - 40 -OJ,... ;;0 -.-.<<ro 30 ~..,"ro "Tl,-.n 20 III ro ::r:J,..,. "OJOJID 10 III ro III OJ 0 ID ..." 0 ro west shore 23 Ce 11 9 .:.' 4 Stratum Number 56 r- r- r---~- - - I I 50 Cell 1 Q)....O'l 0 Cll III 40Q)III O'lCll Clla....... c.r.30Q)III U .- LlJ... Q) a...L 20Q) Q)>>0- 0-a::....10Cll~ ~Cll Q)....a::0 ~0 2 3 4 5 6 Stratum Number east shore Figure M12.Horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9,weighted for fish abundance,for Periods I-IV (July 22 -August 8).Susitna River I 1985. M13 Appendix N:Mean Horizontal Distributions of Adult Salmon Across the River,Based on Distributions by Shift Nl 40 east shore - - - - - I I I I 40 eas t shore - - .~ - - - I I I I UPSTREAM DOWNSTREAM (IJ ......enam U'l (IJ U'l enm ma...... c.r; (IJ U'l U .- I-u... (IJ a..I- (IJ (IJ >>.-.-a::.... m--m(IJ .... a::a ~ (IJ .....enam U'l (IJ U'l enm ma...... c.r; (IJ U'l U .- I-u... (IJ a..I- (IJ (IJ >>.-.-a::.... m --m(IJ .... a::a ~ 100 80 60 20 a 100 80 60 20 a 2 2 3 3 4 5 6 Cell Number 456 Cell Number 7 7 8 8 9 9 west shore west shore Figure Nl.Mean horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river,based on distributions by shift,for Period I (July 22-25). Susitna River,1985. N2 east shore - - - - - I I I I I I UPSTREAM Ql 4-en a "'III Ql IIIen", ",0- ~ C~ Ql III U .- Lou... Ql 0-Lo Ql Ql >>.-.-a:: ~ ",--"'Ql ~ a::a I- 100 80 60 40 20 a 100 - 2 3 456 Ce'l Number 7 8 9 west shore DOWNSTREAM Ql 4-en a "'III Ql IIIen10 ",0- ~ C~ Ql III U .- Lou... Ql 0-Lo Ql Ql >>.-.-a:: ~ ",--"'Ql ~ a::a I- 80- 60- 40- 20- 0 I I I I I I I I I I eas t 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 west shore Ce 11 Number shore Figure N2.Mean horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river,based on distributions by shift,for Period II (July 26-10). Susitna River,1985. N3 east shore - - - - - I I I I UPSTREAM <ll 4--0'1aIII 1Il <ll 1Il 0'1 III III a.. 4J c:..c: <ll 1Il U .- LlL. <lla..L <ll <ll >>.-.-a:: 4J Ill- -III<ll 4Ja::a..... 100 80 60 40 20 a 2 3 4 5 6 Cel I Number 7 8 9 west shore eas t shore west shore 987456 Cell Number 32 - - - - - I I I I I I I I o 20 40 80 60 100 <ll <+-0'1aIII 1Il <ll 1Il 0'1 III III a.. 4J c:..c: <ll 1Il U .- LlL. <lla..L <ll <ll >>.-.-a:: 4J Ill- -III<ll 4-Ja::a..... DOWNSTREAM Figure N3.Mean horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the ~iver,based on distributions by shift,for Period III (July 31 - August 3).Susitna River,1985. N4 40 east shore - - - - - I I I I UPSTREAM Q) ....01aIII III Q)III 01 IIIlila...... C..c <ll VI U .- L..I.L. <lla..L <ll <ll >>.-.-ex:.... /ll- -III<ll ....ex:a I- 100 80 60 20 o 2 3 456 Cell Number 7 8 9 west shore 40 eas t shore - - - - - I I J , DOWNSTREAM <ll ....01aIII \II <ll \II 01 IIIlila...... c..c <ll \II U·- L-l.L. Q)a..L.. <ll <ll >>.-.-ex:.... 1Il- -III<ll ....ex:a I- 100 80 60 20 o 2 3 456 Cell Number 7 8 9 west shore Figure N4.Mean horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river,based on distributions by shift,for Period IV (August 4-8) Susitna River,1985. N5 west shore 987456 Cell Number 32 - - - - - I I I ,o eas t shore 100 4-~80atil III 11l III Oltll tIlQ.. ~~60 11l III U .- '-lJ.... 11l Q..'- 11l ~.~40 .-ex::..... tIl- -til11l..... ex::(3.20 UPSTREAM - - -,- - - I I I I 100 11l 80"-Olatil III 11l III ;Ol til tIlQ....... c.r.6011lIII U .- DOWNSTREAM '-lJ.... 11lQ..'- 11l 11l >40>.-.-ex::..... tIl- til 11l ..... ex::a 20f- o eas t shore 2 3 456 Cell Number 7 8 9 west shore Figure N5.Mean horizotnal distributions of adult salmon across the river,based on distributions by shift,for Periods I and II (July 22-30).Susitna River,1985. N6 eas t shore - - - - - I I I I UPSTREAM QJ ....en a ltl III QJ III enltl ltlCl...... c..c QJ III U .- Lu.. QJ Cl..L QJ QJ >>.-.-a:.... ltl~ ~ltl QJ .... a:a I- 100 80 60 40 20 o 2 3 4 5 6 Cell Number 7 8 9 west shore - - - - - I I I I 100 QJ 80....enaltl III QJ III enltl ltlCl...... c..c 60QJIII U .- DOWNSTREAM Lu.. QJ Cl..L QJ QJ >40>.-.-a:.... ltl~ ltl QJ .... a:a 20I- o east shore 2 3 456 Cell Number 7 8 9 west shore Figure N6.Mean horizontal distribuions of adult salmon across the river,based on distributions by shift,for Periods I-IV,(July 22 - August 8).SusitnaRiver,1985. N7 UPSTREAM - - - - .----- - I I 50 -lo ;;0 ;'.C;;~ 40"-~ ;;0 -.-.< 30 ~ro '\..,-: ..".., -'n20VIlb ::::r::J rt "OJ 10 ~~ VI OJ 0 lO ~o lb 23 Cell 9 456 , l- t- t- r-- I IrII 6543 Ce 11 2 Q)50 4-Olattl VI Q)VI 40Olroroa..... cor.30Q)VI IJ .- LlL. Q) a..L 20Q) Q)>>.- .-0::...10ttl--ttl Q)... 0::at-O Stratum Number Stratum Number east shore west shore DOWNSTREAM 50 -l 0 ;;0 rt ro QJ - 40 -OJ rt :;0 -._.< <ro 30 lb..,"lb ..".., -.n 20 VI lb ::::r::J rt "OJOJlO 10 VI ro VI OJ 0 lO ~ lb 0 west shc:-t:: 23 Cell 9 4 Stralum Number 56 , t- t- ,..-- - t- ~r I Cell 1 Q)50- 4-Olattl VI 40 -Q)VI Olttlroa..... cor.30-Q)VI IJ .- LlL. Q)a..L 20 -Q) Q)>>.- .-0::...,10 -ttl--ro Q)... 0::a It-O I I I I 2 3 4 5 6 Stratum Number east shore Figure N7.Mean horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9,based on distributions by shift,for Period I (July 22-25).Susitna River, 1985. N8 UPSTREAM r-- t- """" t- r-~ I I Stratum Number Cell 9 50 --; 0 ;;0 ,...(1) 0>- 40 -0>,... ;;0 -.-.< 30 <CD (1)..,\) (1) "T!.., 20 -.n Vl CD ::T::J,... \)0> 10 0>\0 Vl (1) 1ft "0>a \0 ...., 0 CD west shore 23456 Ce 11 1 Q)50....0'1 0 ro ""Q)""40O'1roroQ...... cJ::.30Q)""u .-'-u.. Q) Q..'-20Q) Q)>>.- .-0::....10ro--ro Q).... ex::0 ~0 2 3 4 5 6 Stratum Number eas t shore DOWNSTREAM Cell 1 , ~ ..--- - - - I I 50 --;a ;;0 ,...CD 0>- 40 -0>,... ;;0 - •_.< <CD 30 CD..,"(1) "T!..,-·n 20 Vl (1) ::T::J,... \)0> 0>\0 10 1ft CD Vl 0>a \0 ...., CD0 23 Cell 9 45665432 Q)50....C7\a ro II'l 40Q)""C7lroroo...... cJ::.30Q)II'l U .-,-u.. Q) Q..L..20Q) Q)>>.- .-0::....10ro--ro Q).... 0::a ~0 Stratum Number Stratum Number east shore west shore Figure N8.Mean horizontal distributions within Cells I and 9,based on distributions by shift,for Period II (July 26-30).Susitna River, 1985. N9 UPSTREAM - - - - - I I I r- ~ l- I- l- f I Ce 11 9 C1l 50 ......0'1 0 ro III C1l III 40Olro roC-.... c..r::.30C1lIII U .- LlJ.. ClJ el-L 20ClJ C1l >>.-.-~....10ro-ro ClJ .... ~0 ~0 2 Ce 11 3 4 5 6 6 5 4 3 2 50 --1 0 ;;0,..(1) OJ 40 -OJ,.. ;;0 -.-.< 30 <C1l (1)..,"C1l "T1..,-.() 20 V>C1l:r -:J rt "OJ 10 OJlO V>C1l V> OJ 0 1O ...... 0 (1) Stratum Number Stratum Number east shore west shore DOWNSTREAM - - - - - I I 1 Cell 1 o 50 --1o ;;0 rt (1) OJ ~ 40 -~ ;;0 -._.< <(1) 30 ~" C1l "T1'_.() 20 ;~ rt "OJOJlO10V>(1) VI OJ 0 1O ...... (1) 23 Cell 9 456 ,- l- t- - ~ - f r 65432 ClJ 50.....0'1 0 III VI 40ClJVI Olroroel-.... c..r::.30Q)VI U .- Ll.L.. C1l el-L 20ClJ ClJ >>.-.-~....10ro--ro C1l .... ~0 ~0 Stratum Number Stratum Number eas t shore west shore Figure N9.Mean horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9,based on distributions by shift,for Period III (July 31 -August 3).Susitna River,1985. NIO UPSTREAM Ce 11 1 Ce 1\950-50 --lQ) 0 :;04-01 ...(1)0 ro III -VI 40 -IllQ)VI 40 -...OIro :;0 -.roCl.-.<.....<(tlc.s=30 -30 (1)Q)VI ,"OJ .-(1)Lli. "T1,Q)-.r>Cl.L 20 -20 VI (1)Q) :T::JQ)>...>.- "Ill.-a:III 10.....10-10 VI (1)ro-VI-ro III 0Q)..... 10 ......a:0 0 (1)~0 I I I I 2 3 4 5 6 6 5 4 3 2 Stratum Number Stratum Number east west shore shore DOWNSTREAM Cell 1 Cell 9 5050 --iQ)o :;0.....0\rt (1)0 ro III -VI.40 -IllQ)VI 40 ...O\ro :;0 -.roo..._.<.....<(1)c.s=30 30 (1) Q)\II "'""u .-(tlLli."T1'Q)-.r>Cl.L 20 20 VI (1) Q):T::JQ)>...>.-"Ill.-a:III 10.....10 10 VI (tl ro -VIroIII 0Q)....10 ......ex::0 (1)~0 0 2 3 4 5 6 6 5 4 3 2 Stratum Number Stratum Numbe r east west shore shore Figure NIO.Mean horizontal distributions within Cells I and 9,based on distributions by shift,for Period IV (August 4-8).Susitna River, IS85. Nll UPSTREAM Ce 11 1 Cell 9 Q)50 50 -i 0 ;;0\4.-0),....('l)0 '1)OJIII 40 -OJQ)III 40 ,....0)'1) ;;0 --'1)CL _.<....<('l)c..c 30 30 ('l)Q)III .,"u 0- ('l)'-lJ....".,Q)-.nCL'-20 20 VI ('l)Q)=r:JQ)>,....>-- "OJ.-0:::OJ 10....10 10 VI ('l)'1)- VI'1)OJ 0Q).... 10 .....0:::0 0 ('l)f-0 2 3 4 5 6 6 5 4 3 2 St ra tum Number Stratum Number east west shore shore DOWNSTREAM 50 -i 0 ;;0 rt ('l) OJ -40 -OJ,.... ;;0 -.-.<<('l) 30 ('l).,"('l)".,-.n 20 VI ('l) =r:J,.... "OJOJ1010III('l) III OJ 0 10 ..... ('l)0 west shore 23 Ceil 9 4 Stratum Number 56 ,..... f0- r- ~- t- r I Cell Q)50 4-0) 0 '1) III Q)III 40 0)'1) '1)Q...... c:..c 30Q)III U .- '-lJ.... Q) CL '-20Q) Q)>>.- .-0:::....10'1)--'1) Q).... 0:::0 f-0 2 3 4 5 6 Stratum Number east shore Figure NIl.Mean horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and on distributions by shift,for Periods I and II (July 22-30). River,1985. 9,based Susitna N12 UPSTREAM r- ,.. f0- r-- t-- f0- r-- j I Stratum Number 50 -i 0 ::>J ,..(l) Qj - 40 -Qj,.. ::>J _._.< 30 <(l) (l),-u (l)......, 20 -.n III (l) "J'":::J,.. -uQj 10 QjlO lJl ro -lJl Qj 0 lO ...,., 0 (l) west shore 23 Cell 9 456 Ce 11 Q)50 - \+-en 0 III III Q)III 40 -en IIIlila.. +J CL 30 -Q)III U .- LlL. Q)a..L 20 -Q) Q)>>.-.-a: +J 10-ro - III Q)~ 0:::0 I I~0 I I I 2 3 4 5 6 St ra tum Number eas t shore DOWNSTREAM 50 --i 0 ;;0 rt (l) Qj - 40 -Qj rt ;;0 -._.< <(l) 30 (l),-u (l)",-.n 20 VI (l) "J'":::J rt -uQj QjlO 10 VI (l) VI Qj 0 lO ...,., (l)a west shore 23 Cell 9 4 Stratum Number 5 r- ,.. I- ~l- I- r-- I 6 Cell Q)50 \+-en0III III 40Q)III en IIIroa.. +J CL 30Q)III U .- LlL. Q) a..L 20Q) Q)>>.- .-IX: +J 10ro~ ~ro Q)+J 0:::0 ~0 2 3 4 5 6 Stratum Number ea s t shore Figure N12.Mean horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9,based on distributions by shift,for Periods I-IV (July 22 -August 8). Susitna River,1985. Table Nl.Summary of mean horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river,based on distributions by shift (Susi tna River 1985). Period Number Dates Fish Direction Relative Percentage Across River by Cell* 123 456 7 8 9 Total I 7/22-25 Upstream 29.9/13.3 0 0 17.3/10.8 0 0 0 0 52.8/15.5 100.0 Downstream 16.0/5.3 0 0 20.1/9.6 0 0 0 0 63.9/9.7 100.0 II 7/26-30 Upstream 3.9/1.3 0 0 11.9/4.8 0 0 0 0 84.2/4.9 100.0 Downstream 8.6/2.7 a a 8.4/3.1 a a a a 83.0/5.7 100.0 III 7/31-8/3 Upstream 26.3/9.2 a 0 10.0/3.8 a a 0 a 63.7/10.7 100.0 Downstream 34.0/11.0 a a 9.8/3.7 a 0 0 a 56.2/11.7 100.0 IV 8/4-8 Upstream 14.3/5.2 a a 13.3/4.7 a 0 a a 72.4/6.9 100.0 Downstream 13.3/5.1 a a 12.0/5.7 a a a a 74.7/6.5 100.0 I-II 7/22-30 upstream 14.6/6.2 0 a '14.1/5.1 a a a 0 71.3/7.7 100.0 Downstream 11.9/2.8 a a 13.6/4.7 a a a 0 74.5/5.7 100.0 I-IV 7/22-8/8 Upstream 17.2/3.9 a a 12.9/2.9 a a 0 a 69.9/4.8 100.0 Downstream 15.2/2.9 a 0 12.3/2.9 a 0 0 0 72.5/4.0 100.0 *Relative percentage across the river/standard error. Note that means and standard errors were calculated by period from untransformed data.If further statistical manipulations are antici- pated they should be calculated on transformed data.Some form of an arcsin transformation would be most appropriate (Zar 1974). N14 Table N2.Summary of mean horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river,based on distributions by shift (Susitna River 1985). Period Fish*Relative Percentage Across the Cell,by Section** Numbe r Da te s Dir •1 2 3 4 5 6 SUM Cell 1 I 7/22-25 U 2.4/1.53 9.4/3.61 2.1/1.51 15.9/10.4 0 0 29.9/13.34 D 0.2/0.13 11.6/4.13 1.2/0.50 3.0/1.71 0 0 16.0/5.33 II 7/26-30 U 0.1/0.09 3.2/1.17 0.6/0.40 0 0 0 3.9/1.28 D 1.5/1.07 5.9/2.42 0.9/0.31 0.3/0.28 0 0 8.6/2.70 III 7/31-8/3 U 5.6/2.95 13.4/5.10 7.3/3.20 0 0 0 26.3/9.25 D 11.8/6.41 13.8/6.28 8.4/3.55 0 0 0 34.0/11.02 IV 8/4-8 U 0 11.7/5.02 2.6/1.42 0 0 0 14.3/5.23 D 4.9/4.92 5.0/2.11 3.3/1.70 0 0 0 13.3/5.07 I-II 7/22-30 U 1.1/0.67 5.8/1.75 1.3/0.66 6.6/4.51 0 0 14.6/6.18 D 0.9/0.60 8.4/2.31 1.0/0.27 1.5/0.82 0 0 11.9/2.85z f-' V1 1.8/0.80 9.2/2.04 3.0/0.95 3.2/2.33 17.2/3.94I-IV 7/22-8/8 U 0 0 D 4.1/2.00 7.7/1.70 2.6/0.90 0.8/0.40 0 0 15.2/2.95 *Direction of fish movement,upstream or downstream. **Relative percentage across the river/standard error. Note that means and standard errors were calculated by period from untransformed data.If further statistical manipulations are anticipated they should be calculated on transformed data. Some form of an arcsin transformation would be most appropriate (Zar 1974). Table N2,cont. Period Fish*Relative Percentage Across the Cell,by Section** Number Dates Dir.1 2 3 4 5 6 SUM Cell 9 I 7/22-25 U 9.0/4.67 22.8/8.21 13.2/5.65 4.7/3.35 3.2/1.75 0 52.8/15.46 D 15.2/5.20 23.4/5.70 12.2/5.41 11.5/3.74 1 .6/1 .01 0 63.9/9.67 II 7/26-30 U 25.5/2.94 10.8/3.89 34.2/3.92 11.6/2.39 2.1/0.59 0 84.2/4.89 D 11.3/1.50 23.8/5.9 36.8/4.92 9.3/1.95 1.8/0.38 0 83.0/5.72 III 7/31-8/3 U 14.2/10.56 22.6/10.7417.5/9.27 7.6/1.70 1.8/1.17 0 63.7/10.75 D 6.9/5.70 14.4/7.14 12.5/3.41 20.3/4.64 2.1/0.79 0 56.2/11.72 IV 8/4-8 U 8.0/0.99 10.5/6.14 30.8/6.03 20.9/5.28 2.4/1.78 0 72.4/6.95 D 0 18.0/7.00 25.9/4.76 25.8/6.17 5.0/2.52 0 74.7/6.55 I-II 7/22-30 U 18.7/3.23 15.8/4.19 25.5/4.09 8.7/2.08 2.6/0.78 0 71.3/7.73 D 13.0/2.42 23.6/4.01 25.9/4.62 10.3/1.94 1.8/0.48 0 74.5/5.66 z I-IV 7/22-8/8 U 14.6/2.88 15.8/3.59 25.2/3.36 11.9/2.04.2.3/0.67 0 69.9/4.81I--' ()\D 8.1/1.92 20.0/3.18 25.1/3.25 16.6/2.46 2.7/0.75 0 72.5/4.05 *Direction of fish movement,upstream or downstream. **Relative percentage across the river/standard error. Note that means and standard errors were calculated by period from un transformed data.If further statistical manipulations are anticipated they should be calculated on transformed data. Some form of an arcsin transformation would be most appropriate (Zar 1974). Appendix P:Relative percentage of upstream-Vs.Downstream- Moving Adul t Salmon Pl Table Pl.Relative percentage of upstream and downstream movement of adult salmon by shift,for the whole river (Susitna River 1985). Shift Relative Percentage Date Number upstream Downstream Total July 22 15 0.0 100.0 100.0 16 39.2 60.8 100.0 23 17 34.9 65.1 100.0 18 6.6 93.4 100.0 24 19 40.0 60.0 100.0 20 40.6 59.4 100.0 25 21 46.5 53.5 100.0 22 36.3 63.7 100.0 26 23 39.1 60.9 100.0 24 56.7 43.3 100.0 27 25 42.2 57.8 100.0 26 44.3 55.7 100.0 28 27 41.8 58.2 100.0 28 43.6 56.4 100.0 29 29 53.6 "46.4 100.0 30 57.9 42.1 100.0 30 31 42.9 57.1 100.0 32 45.9 54.1 100.0 31 33 52.8 47.2 100.0 34 70.5 29.5 100.0 August 35 79.0 21.0 100.0 36 69.8 30.2 100.0 2 37 39.6 60.4 100.0 38 62.6 37.4 100.0 3 39 41.2 58.8 100.0 40 50.8 49.2 100.0 4 41 62.7 37.3 100.0 42 70.6 29.4 100.0 5 43 49.8 50.2 100.0 44 43.1 56.9 100.0 6 45 40.8 59.2 100.0 46 43.0 57.0 100.0 7 47 35.3 64.7 100.0 48 9.2 90.8 100.0 8 49 48.5 51.5 100.0 50 28.2 71.8 100.0 Mean 44.7 55.3 100.0 (by Shift) Mean 47.9 52.1 100.0 (Weighted by Fish Abundance) P2 Table P2.Relative percentage of upstream and downstream movement of adult salmon by shift at cell 1 (Susitna River 1985). Shift Relative percentage Date Number upstream Downstream Total July 22 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 16 59.4 40.6 100.0 23 17 42.1 57.9 100.0 18 0.0 100.0 100.0 24 19 61.7 38.3 100.0 20 50.8 49.2 100.0 25 21 47.7 52.3 100.0 22 55.4 44.6 100.0 26 23 16.6 83.4 100.0 24 28.7 71.3 100.0 27 25 100.0 0.0 100.0 26 64.3 35.7 100.0 28 27 61.9 38.1 100.0 28 22.9 77.1 100.0 29 29 43.5 56.5 100.0 30 -45.6 54.4 100.0 30 31 0.0 100.0 100.0 32 0.0 100.0 100.0 31 33 54.0 46.0 100.0 34 47.2 52.8 100.0 August 35 62.4 37.6 100.0 36 57.1 42.9 100.0 2 37 75.6 24.4 100.0 38 23.9 76.1 100.0 3 39 100.0 0.0 100.0 40 41.4 58.6 100.0 4 41 52.1 47.9 100.0 42 56.9 43.1 100.0 5 43 0.0 100.0 100.0 44 40.5 59.5 100.0 6 45 39.8 60.2 100.0 46 100.0 0.0 100.0 7 47 0.0 0.0 0.0 48 0.0 0.0 0.0 8 49 50.0 50.0 100.0 50 0.0 0.0 0.0 Mean 46.9 53.1 100.0 (by Shift) Mean 47.6 52.4 100.0 (Weighted by Fish Abundance) P3 Tab.Ie P3.Relative percentage of upstream and downstream movement of adult salmon by shift at cell 4 (Susi tna River 1985). Shift Relative Percentage Date Number upstream Downstream Total July 22 15 0.0 100.0 100.0 16 0.0 0.0 0.0 23 17 0.0 0.0 0.0 18 12.2 87.8 100.0 24 19 12.5 87.5 100.0 20 28.9 71.1 100.0 25 21 25.3 74.7 100.0 22 39.2 60.8 100.0 26 23 77 .1 22.9 100.0 24 67.3 32.7 100.0 27 25 100.0 0.0 100.0 26 60.6 39.4 100.0 28 27 0.0 100.0 100.0 28 42.5 57.5 100.0 29 29 28.3 71.7 100.0 30 51.8 48.2 100.0 30 31 64°.7 35.3 100.0 32 56.9 43.1 100.0 31 33 0.0 100.0 100.0 34 42.4 57.6 100.0 August 35 33.3 66.7 100.0 36 90.5 9.5 100.0 2 37 21.5 78.5 100.0 38 67.8 32.2 100.0 3 39 0.0 0.0 0.0 40 79.9 20.1 100.0 4 41 67.6 32.4 100.0 42 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 43 0.0 0.0 0.0 44 0.0 100.0 100.0 6 45 59.6 40.4 100.0 46 100.0 0.0 100.0 7 47 21.3 78.7 100.0 48 0.0 0.0 0.0 8 49 33.6 66.4 100.0 50 100.0 0.0 100.0 Mean 46.2 53.8 100.0 (by Shift) Mean 51.7 48.3 100.0 (Weighted by Fish Abundance) P4 Table P4.Relative percentage of upstream and downstream movement of adult salmon by shift at cell 9 (Susi tna River 1985). Shift Relative Percentage Date Number Upstream Downstream Total July 22 15 0.0 100.0 100.0 16 0.0 100.0 100.0 23 17 32.4 67.6 100.0 18 6.1 93.9 100.0 24 19 35.6 64.4 100.0 20 40.6 59.4 100.0 25 21 46.7 53.3 100.0 22 0.0 100.0 100.0 26 23 39.7 60.3 100.0 24 .59.5 40.5 100.0 27 25 41.6 58.4 100.0 26 42.2 57.8 100.0 28 27 41.8 58.2 100.0 28 45.9 54.1 100.0 29 29 54.3 45.7 100.0 30 58.8 41.2 100.0 30 31 4,..1 58.9 100.0 32 49.5 50.5 100.0 31 33 54.4 45.6 100.0 34 78.0 22.0 100.0 August 35 80.6 19.4 100.0 36 67.5 32.5 100.0 2 37 25.0 75.0 100.0 38 79.8 20.2 100.0 3 39 20.8 79.2 100.0 40 54.9 45.1 100.0 4 41 60.1 39,.9 100.0 42 77.5 22.5 100.0 5 43 53.1 46.9 100.0 44 49.4 50.6 100.0 6 45 38.1 61.9 100.0 46 15.7 84.3 100.0 7 47 45.9 54.1 100.0 48 9.3 90.7 100.0 8 49 49.9 50.1 100.0 50 24.7 75.3 100.0 Mean 42.2 57.8 100.0 (by Shift) Mean 47.7 52.3 100.0 (Weighted by Fish Abundance) P5 Appendix Q:Mean Fish Target velocities Target velocity by Cell* period Direction**Cell 1 Cell 4 Cell 9 I U 3.2 (0.96)/19 3.1 (0.95)/27 1 .2 (0.37)/762 7/22-25 D 1 .9 (0.58)/26 1 .7 (0.53)/67 1 .1 (0.34)/876 II U 1 .7 (0.51 )/42 2.0 (0.60)/46 1 .1 (0.34)/1 1 72 7/26-30 D 1 .5 (0.45)/53 1 .4 (0.44)/52 1 .0 (0.31)/1365 III U 2.4 (0.72)/8 2.0 (0.60)/19 1 .5 (0.45)/91 7/31-8/3 D 1 .1 (0.35)/2 1 .5 (0.45)/22 1 .2 (0.37)/75 IV U 2.8 (0.87)/9 2.0 (0.62)/13 1.7 (0.51 )/65 8/4-8 D 3.4 (1 .05)/9 1.2 (0.37)/14 1 .3 (0.41 )/74 I-II U 2.1 (0.65)/61 2.4 (0.73)/73 1 .1 (0.35)1934 7/22-30 D 1 .6 (0.49)/79 1 .6 (0.49)/119 1 .1 (0.32)/2241 I-IV U 2.2 (0.69)/78 .2.3 (0.69)/105 1 .2 (0.35)/2090 7/22-8/3 D 1 .8 (0.55)/90 1 .5 (0.47)/155 1 •1 (0.33)/2390 * ** Velocity in fps (m/sec)/N. Direction of fish movement:u Q1 upstream;D downstream. APPENDIX R: stratum Individual .Samples for vertical Distribution of Fish over Two strata in Cell 9 on July 28 Relative Percentage of Fish upstream Downstream Total 0128 h (N=38) vertical Distribution by Direction of Fish Movement 1 Surface 2 Bottom Total 10.5 89.5 100.0 26.7 73.3 100.0 17.6 82.4 100.0 Fish Movement by Direction within surface stratum Surface 33.3 66.7 100.0 Fish Movement by Direction within Bottom Stratum 2 Bottom 60.7 39.3 100.0 11 11 h (N=58) Vertical Distribution by Direction of Fish Movement 1 Surface 15.4 15.6 15.5 2 Bottom 84.6 84.4 84.5 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 Fish Movement by Direction within Surface stratum Surface 44.4 55.6 100.0 Fish Movement by Direction within Bottom stratum 2 Bottom 44.9 55.1 100.0 Rl Appendix S:Acoustic Size of Fish S1 26 24 22 20 (1)18 (J\ 0 16.....c: (1) u 14L Q) (L (1)12 >.....100 (1)a:::8 6 4 2 0 -50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 upstream Torget Strength (dB) 26 24 22 20 v 18 (J\ 0 16--c: Q) u 14L Q) Q.. v 12 > 0 10 Q) a::8 6 4 2 0 -50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 downstream Target Strength (dB) Figure 51.Acoustic size distribution of fish during Period I (July 22-25).Susitna River,1985. 52 22 24 upstream 2 4 8 6 14 18 12 16 10 20 26 .....--------------------------------. v 0' 2cvu '-v Q.. CI.l>..., o vcr -50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 Target Strength (dB) 26-r--------------------------------, v CJ'o..., cvu...v Cl. v>..., o vcr 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 downstream -50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 Target Strength (dB) Figure 52.Acoustic size distribution of fish during Period II (July 26-30).5usitna River,1985. 53 26 ,....----------------------------_ upstream -20-25-.30-.35-40-45 O....J..,-~--,-~...,....-.-...--..--.--.._'TLL.,-1L.,.J-L<,-L.t~r.........,.~J.L,..J_r~'-r-'-....---.,...-r_',..........,.----r---,-_r -50 6 8 2 4 16 18 14 12 10 20 24 Cll 0'o-c Cll U L Cll Q.. Cll>-o Cllcr 22 Target Strength (dB) Cll 0'o-c Cll U L Cll Q. Cll >-o Cllcr 26 ,....---------------------------____, 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 downstream -50 -45 -40 -35 -.30 -25 -20 Target Strength (dB) Figure 53.Acoustic size distribution of fish during Period III (July 31 -August 3).5usitna River,1985. 54 26 24 22 20 Q)18 0' 0 16...-c Q) u 14"-Q) Cl. Q)12 >-100 Q) a::8 6 4 2 0 -50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 upstream Target Strength (dB) 26 24 22 20 Q)18 0' 0 16-c Q) u 14"- Q) Cl. Q)12 >-100 Q)a::8 6 4 2 0 -50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 Target Strength (dB) -20 downstream Figure 54.Acoustic size distribution of fish during Period IV (August 4-8).5usitna River,1985. S5 22 26 24 upstream 2 6 4 8 10 12 16 14 18 20 (\) CJ'o..-c (\) u.. (\) Q. (\) >..-o (\) a:: -20-25-30-35-40-45 O.....,.----.----.----.__.----r----.__.----.__.--<,-.J..L..,.J..L..,.J..L..,.J..L..,~.J..L..,.J..L..,.J..L..,.J..L..,..J.L,.J..L..,.J..L..,.J..L..,.J...o:;"'_"_r..L.....,-L:T:>,_._--.___,_J -50 Target Strength (dB) (\) CJ'o..-c (\) u.. (\) Q. (\) > o (\) a:: downstream -50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 Target Strength (dB) Figure 55.Acoustic size distribution of fish during Periods I and II (July 22-30).Susitna River,1985. 56 26 24 22 20 III 18 0' 0 16+Jc IIIu 14L. IIIn. III 12 > ';j 100 IlJa:::8 6 4 2 0 -50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 Target Strength (dB) upstream 26 24 22 20 IlJ 18 0' 0 16--c III u 14L. IIIn. III 12 > +J 100 IlJa:::8 6 4 2 0 -50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 Target Strength (dB) -20 downstream Figure 86.Acoustic size distribution of fish during Periods I-IV (July 22 -August 8).Susitna River,1985. 37 Table S 1.Targe t strength frequency distributions by period for upstream moving fish (Susitna River 1985). TS Period Period Period Period period I-II Period I-IV -20 0 0 0 0 0 0 -21 0 0 0 0 0 0 -22 0 0 0 0 0 0 -23 2 4 0 0 6 6 -24 1 0 0 0 1 1 -25 9 0 0 0 9 9 -26 4 0 0 0 4 4 -27 16 1 0 0 17 17 -28 36 1 1 0 37 38 -29 54 6 0 1 60 61 -30 70 16 0 0 86 86 -31 75 29 2 5 104 111 -32 86 78 4 3 164 171 -33 106 109 13 8 215 236 -34 92 222 6 14 314 334 -35 77 233 21 13 310 344 -36 73 250 34 14 323 371 -37 55 163 24 15 218 257 -38 40 11 1 18 11 151 180 -39 11 48 9 3 59 71 -40 1 7 4 0 8 12 -41 0 1 0 0 1 1 -42 0 0 0 0 0 0 -43 0 0 0 0 0 0 -44 0 0 0 0 0 0 -45 0 0 0 0 0 0 -46 0 0 0 0 0 0 -47 0 0 0 0 0 0 -48 0 0 0 0 0 0 -49 0 0 0 0 0 0 -50 0 0 0 0 0 0 SUM 808 1279 136 87 2087 2310 S8 Table S2.Target strength frequency distributions by period for downstream-moving fish (Susitna River 1985). TS period Period Period period period I-II period I-IV -20 0 0 0 0 0 0 -21 0 0 0 0 0 0 -22 2 0 0 0 2 2 -23 4 0 0 0 4 4 -24 11 1 0 1 12 13 -25 10 1 0 1 11 12 -26 28 3 0 1 31 32 -27 39 7 1 1 46 48 -28 54 21 0 1 75 76 -29 63 29 4 2 92 98 -30 85 61 1 6 146 153 -31 107 117 4 4 224 232 -32 113 161 8 8 274 290 -33 101 189 8 13 290 31 1 -34 97 229 11 12 326 349 -35 79 215 19 14 294 327 -36 74 193 19 17 267 303 -37 52 139 15 8 191 214 -38 34 77 8 5 111 124 -39 15 31 7 3 46 56 -40 1 4 2 0 5 7 -41 0 1 0 0 1 1 -42 0 0 0 0 0 0 -43 0 0 0 0 0 0 -44 0 0 0 0 0 0 -45 0 0 0 0 0 0 -46 0 0 0 0 0 0 -47 0 0 0 0 0 0 -48 0 0 0 0 0 0 -49 0 0 0 0 0 0 -50 0 0 0 0 0 0 SUM 969 1479 107 97 2448 2652 59