HomeMy WebLinkAboutAPA4114dHydroacoustic Study of
Upstream Migrating Adult Salmon
in the Susitha River during 1985
~
BioSonics'"
BioSonics,Inc.4520 Union Bay Place NE,Seattle,Washington 98105 U.S.A.
-,
-,
-"
'"!
:l
j
..
l
Oil
"1
:3
~
~
~
""~
.j
j
.,
--.i
1
-.J
21
--"
--,
--0;
,.~:ii
Hydroacoustic Study of
Upstream Migrating Adult Salmon
in the Susitha River during 1985
DRAFT 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
November 19,1985
Tl(
/125
.S1
Afai
no 1'1111 J
"""l
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Susitna River is one of the primary producers of salmon
~in the Upper Cook Inlet drainage.In order to quantify the
~
-,
~
~j
-'
~
~
'1
~
=j
-"§
3
,,
~
i
d
..J
,.,.....,
-l
:::?l
--4'
3
-"
~
~
-----s
spatial 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,and to begin developing a hydroacoustic technique for
future enumeration of adult salmon in the Susitna River.
Hydroacoustic monitoring took place from July 15 to August 8.
Two dual-beam hydroacoustic systems were used to monitor salmon
within nine sampling cells along a predeterminecl 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 27•
upstream and downstream moving fish had similar horizontal
distributions across the river.For the total season,approxi-
mately 88%of the fish 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 ft
(18.3 m)of the west shore (cell 9),and 86%within 80 ft (24.4
m)•
Along the west shore (cell 9)fish tended to be oriented near
the bottom,the upstream moving fish more so than downstream fish.
Horizontal and vertical distributions suggested that fish were
oriented primarily toward low velocity water 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,
approximately 53 and 60 em.
.j
,
~
respecti vely,corresponding to mean total fish lengths of
-::3 During the study period,48%of the fish were moving
.1 upstream,and 52%downstream.This high incidence of downstream
1
~
1
-'
--l
~
--l
=!
~'"~
--:
movement was probably due in large part to turbulence caused by
water being forced around Petes Point,upstream of the study site.
It also appears that 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 determined
to have been moving upstream.
2
--""
'""
"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
~
~J
,
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 signal-to-noise ratio by
-'
1
~
....i
-'
'1
:3
5'
1
-I
.J
""!
~~
.J
~
:3
o.oJ
~
~
~
~
:
~
~
-~
approximately 50%-100%,allowing closer aiming of the
acoustic beam near the bottom.
The location of ensonified volumes relative to the surface
and bottom could be better defined by experiments in the
field using standard targets.
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 by about 20-30 ft (6-9 m).
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.
The factors that need to be addressed in order to develop a
technique to reliably enumerate salmon in the river have been
3
~
~
-'
"'1
~
~
.-'l
~,
~
3
~
1
-1
~
1
d
==:'l
.J
-.
d
1
~
-"'
~1
~
-ct
----;;:
~-=--;;
noted,and each has high potential.It is recommended that hydro-
acoustic monitoring of migrating adult salmon in the Susitna River
.be con tinued in 1986.Improvements to the technique applied in
1985 could be evaluated and implemented.Since a large pink
salmon run and other factors could affect fish horizontal distri-
butions,any fish enumeration strategy should incorporate plans to
periodically examine the horizontal distributions of fish across
the river.
4
~
-,
i
~~,
1.0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
~,
-,
1 .1
1.2
1.3
Background ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Study Objectives ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Site Description ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
1
1
2
2.0 GENERAL METHODS ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••3
2.1
2.2
Introduction ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Data Collection •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
3
4
2.2.1 Sample Design..............................4
2.2.2 Hydroacoustic Equipment,Operation,
and Cal i bra t ion .•..••••••••••••••.•••••••••5
'"'2.3 Data Reduction,Storage,and Analysis •••••••••••••7
j
~
3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••9
Detailed Methods •••••••••••••••••••••••••••9
Results and Discussion •••••••••••••••••••••10
,
~
3.1 Obj ecti ve 1:
migrating
3.1 .1
3.1 .2
Horizontal distribution of
adult salmon .••.••......•.•••....•..•••.9
"'l
3
3.2 Objective
migrating
2:vertical distribution of
adult salmon ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••16
1
J
3.2.1
3.2.2
Detailed Methods •••••••••••••••••••••••••••16
Results and Discussion •••••••••••••••••••••16
adult salmon ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••1
dl
3.3 Objective 3:Acoustic size of migrating
18
~
3.3.1
3.3.2
Detailed Methods •••••••••••••••••••••••••••18
Results and Discussion •••••••••••••••••••••18
j
::Jl
d
3.4 Objective 4:Development of the hydro-
acoustic technique for enumeration of
migrating adult salmon in the Susitna River •••••••19
I
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ••••••••••••••••••••••••23
~
~
4.0
3.4.1
3.4.2
Improved Sampling Near the Bottom ••••••••••19
Other Improvements to Sampling Technique •••22
~
::;jj
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ••••oo •••••o ••••••••••••••••••••••o ••••••••o 27
REFERENCES CITED ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••28
-,
-.
-,
.,
J
-.
,
~
~
::i
"""j
4
J
J
=>
Jj
~
-'
:;1
-"
J
TABLE OF CONTENTS -CONT.
Page
APPENDICES
Appendix A:Sample Times for Each Shift •••••••••••••••A1
Appendix B:Hydroacoustic System Equipment,
Operation,and Calibration ••••••••••••••••B1
Appendix C.Migrant Detection and Direction
of Movement Criteria ••••••••••••••••••••••C1
Appendix D.Dual-Beam Target strength Measure-
ments and Interpretation ••••••••••••••••••D1
Appendix &Simultaneous Tracking of Fish Direction of
Movement and Target Strength ••••••••••••••E1
Appendix F.Data Reduction and Analysis •••••••••••••••F1
'"
"'
_l
-,
Figure
2
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Susitna River study site ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••30
Study site,sample transect,and sample cell
locations at RM 28 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••31
3 Sample cells and depth profile along the
transect sampled hydroacoustically in 1985 ••••••••••32
4 Location and orientation of transducers on
sample boat •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••33
5 Transducer mounts •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••34
-,
6 Run timing:relative percentage by 12 h of
season total fish passage •••••••••••••••••••••••••••35
-'7 Horizontal distribution of adult salmon
across the river ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••o •••••36
8 Horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9 •••••••37
:'l
d
~
:i
1
,
;j
~
J
--,
,J
9
B2
C1
C2
01
02
Acoustic size distribution of fish during
Periods I-IV••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••38
BioSonics dual-beam system for echo surveys •••••••••B2
Fish movement through an oblique ensonified
sphere resulting in change-in-range for fish
traces on echograms •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••C2
Echogram from side-mounted horizontal transducer
looking into the river and aimed 45 0 downstream •••••C3
Beam patterns of narrow-and wide-transducer
elements showing a fish within both beams •••••••••••04
Polar plot of fish directivity in the yaw plane •••••09
."
~
03 Plot of mean smoothed fish directivity ••••••••••••••010
:3
d
F1
F2
Explanation of how weighting factor for a 6
0
transducer changes with range •••••••••••••••••••••••F2
Explanation of how a vertical distribution of
fish is obtained from a bottom-mounted 6 0 trans-
ducer aimed straight up •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••F4
'-'
G1 Run timing:cumulative percentage by 12 h of
season total fish passage •••••••••••••••••••••••••••G2
-,
d
~
c:;
~
....J
~
:1
1
-i
:J
-'
-'il
J
=3
d
Figure
Hl-5
H6-10
Il-6
I7'-12
Jl-6
LIST OF FIGURES -CONT.
Page
Horizontal distributions of adult salmon
across the river,weighted for fish abundance,
for Periods I through IV separately,
and for Periods I and II combined •••••••••••••••••••H2
Horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9,
weighted for fish abundance,for Periods I
through IV separately,and for Periods I
and II combined •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••H7
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,andPeriods I-IV combined ••••••••I2
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 •••••••••••••I8
Acoustic size distribution of fish during
Periods 1 through IV separately,for Periods
I and II combined,and for Periods I-IV combined ••••J2
-..,
--,
-,
Table
2
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Run timing of fish passage by 12h period ••••••••••••39
Summary of horizontal distributions of adult
salmon across the river,weighted for fish
abundance •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••40
,
.,
3 Summary of horizontal distributions of adult
salmon within the near-shore cells,weighted
for fish abundance ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••41
4 Vertical distribution of fish over two strata
in cell 9 .•.........................................·42
5 Mean acoustic size of adult salmon ••••••••••••••••••43
j
--,
,
-'
~
j
:::;
:;;i
1
~
~
~
:.:JI
---,
-
WI
d
4
=5
B1
D1
D2
H1
H2
H3
H4
11
Manufacturers and model numbers of electronic
equipment used by BioSonics,Inc.at Susitna
River,1985 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••83
Difference between dorsal and 45°side-aspect
target strength •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••D8
Difference between side-aspect target strength
at 15°,30°,and 45°aiming angles ••••••••••••••••••D11
Summary of horizontal distributions of upstream
migrating adult salmon,by shift ••••••••••••••••••••H12
Summary of horizontal distributions of downstream
migrating adult salmon,by shift ••••••••••••••••••••H13
Summary of mean horizontal distributions of
upstream adult salmon within the near-shore
cells by shift ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••H14
Summary of mean horizontal distributions of
downstream adult salmon within the near-shore
cells,by shift •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••H15
Summary of mean horizontal distributions of adult
salmon across the river,based on distributions
by shift ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••114
d
.....
d
12 Summary of mean horizontal distributions of adult
salmon across the river,based on distributions
by shift ••••ooo •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••115
-,
--l
--,
Table
J1
L1
LIST OF TABLES,cont.
Page
Target strength frequency distribution by period ••••J8
Relative percentage of downstream-moving fish
and relative staff gauge level vs.date and shift •••L4
-,
-1
cd
~
~
-'
"'
;:j
!
;j
9
d
--,
~,j
--,
d
"l~
.J
c.:.,j
,
'-'
L2 Regression of relative staff gauge level vs.
relative percentage of downstream-moving fish •••••••L5
L3 Relative percentage of upstream and downstream
movement of adult salmon by shift at cell 4 •••••••••L6
L4 Relative percentage of upstream and downstream
movement of adult salmon by shift at cell 9 •••••••••L7
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
-,
~
-,
j
.J
l
-'
~
j
1
.J
d
-~
j
~--.
~
=J
="
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 (ADFG)has in the past attempted to enumerate the susitna
Ri ver runs in-season.In the lower part of the river,mul tiple
channels,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 migri'lting i'lc'llllt Ri'llmon in thA lowAr Sl1sit.ni'l Rivp.r,ADFG
contracted BioSonics,Inc.to conduct a fixed-location hydroacous-
tic 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,and
2)vertical distribution of migrating adult salmon.
Secondary objectives were to:
3)estimate the acoustic size (target strength)of migrating
adult salmon,and
4)begin developing a hydroacoustic technique for future
~enumeration of adult salmon in the Susitna River.
-,
-,
,
-'
1
:::i
-:l
1.3 Site Description
The Susitna River lies northwest from 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 chan-
nels 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
"i
of the Yentna River.The study transect was located in this
J
J
:i
1
j
~
~
""l
;;j
=l
d
~
~
j
~
,
j
..
J
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 cm).At times debris was present in the river.Water
visibility was usually less than 2 inches (5 cm).Water tempera-
tures ranged from 48-56 of (9-13.5 °C).
The Susitna River is the primary producer of chum salmon
(Oncorhynchus ketal and one of the primary producers of sockeye
salmon (~nerka)in the Upper Cook Inlet.Other salmon species
occurring were pink (0.gorbuscha),silver (0.kisutch),and king
(0.tshawytscha)salmon.
2
~
-,
.~
--,
,
~
.....,
-,
=1
...,
~
...J
~
::.l
:J!
j
"l
d
~
:d
,
=-iI
~~
~
-.:1
=..ii
,
....
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 ale 1985).In a
typical fixed-location study,the transducer is attached to a
permanent structure or an anchored buoy or boat.
3
"'
-,
-'
-,
~
2.2 Data Collection
2.2.1 Sample Design
Fixed-location hydroacoustic sampling was conducted along an
established transect across the Susitna River.The sample tran-
-1
:::J
-,
-CJ
3
~
-:;:i
-:J
..i
~1
d
~
-'I
~
-.
~
d
'-~1
~
=;
~
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 maximum depth along the transect (20.4
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)during low water}(Figure
3).A shallow sand bar was located just upstream from cell 4.
Wa ter veloei ties were very low there and near both shores «0.5
fps (0.15 m/s)}.
Hydroaeoustic sampling of migrating salmon took place for 25
d 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 not usually sampled.
Shifts were numbered sequentially.A list of dates and times for
each shift appears in Appendix A.
4
-.,
Hydroacoustic sampling was conducted from a boat which was
anchored sequentially in each of the sample cells.During each
10-h shift,each cell was sampled once for 45 min,wi th the excep-
tion of the near-shore cells (cells 1 and 9).within each of
--1
"-'
1<l
--l
-"
-,
;.j
~
~l
:-..:JI
d
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 from as near shore as
practical and near the center of the off-shore half of the cell.
The sequence in which cells were sampled was rotated each day.
Infrequent exceptions to the sampling plan described above
were mandated by high water velocities,floating debris,high
winds,or equipment maintenance requirements.
During the low water period,water velocities were measured
on July 24 and August 6 with a Marsh-McBirney portable water
current meter.
Concurrent with hydroacoustic sampling,ADFG conducted fish
wheel sampling along the east bank at cell 1 (Figure 2).Gill net
drift sampling also took place near the sample transect.
2.2.2 Hydroacoustic Equipment,Operation,and Calibration
~Two dual-beam hydroacoustic systems were mounted in a boat 24
",-.~"
:d
"~,
.3
...J
-"
ft (7.3 m)long by 5 ft (1.5 m)wide.Dual-beam systems were used
so that the acoustic size (i.e.,target strength)and direction of
movement of individual fish could be estimated as described below•
A complete description of the hydroacoustic equipment,including
operation and calibration,is presented in Appendix B•
5
Primary data were obtained by surface-mounted and side-
--'mounted transducers attached to the boat (Figures 4 and 5).Where
-,
~
-.
depth permitted,the surface-mounted transducer was deployed and
oriented 30°downward and downstream.Side-mounted transducers in
the two sample cells nearest shore (i.e.,cells 1 and 9)and in
cell 4 were aimed horizontally into the river and 45°downstream.
In cells 1 and 9,transducers were positioned as near the shore as
practical.In cell 4 the transducer was located near the shal-
-,
lowest area and aimed toward the middle of the river.In all the
-,
~
1
'"
deepwater cells (cells 2,3,and 5-8),a side-mounted transducer
was aimed 45°downstream and near the surface.
At cell 9,a second horizontal 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-
:.J
-"....
~
;;;;;j
d
~
-..:j
:,
~1l
~
~
~
tion was provided by a bottom-moun ted transducer aimed 30 0 off
vertical and downstream.
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 c.
6
--,
~~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
Model 181 Dual-Beam Processor,converted to computer files,and
stored on floppy diskettes.Maximum amplitudes of the echo
--.,
--,
j
--,
~
=;
j
,
--,
d
=l
~
;.!
"l
5
cd
~
~
~
~
'"1
~
~.
,
:.;J
-.
...
.....
signals for both channels were then used to calculate fish acous-
tic size (i.e.,target strength),as detailed in Appendix D.
Because the dual-beam transducers were aimed at either 30°or
45°downstream (for surface-mounted and side-mounted transducers,
respecti vely),the resulting dual-beam data fi les could be
analyzed with custom software (TRACKER)to track a fish's general
change-in-range.~hat is,the ~RACKER program automatically
determined the fish's direction of movement (i.e.,either upstream
or downstream).This procedure is detailed in Appendix E.
Occasionally,data tapes included spurious bottom returns.
These tapes were processed separately.The individual fish traces
from these samples were counted from the chart recorder echograms
and then weighted as with all other data as described below.
Individual fish detections were sorted by direction of move-
ment,weighted to compensate for beam spreading with range from
the transducer,and used to calculate a mean fish flux (quantity
of fish/time/area).Daily water levels were recorded (Appendix M)
and used to estimate the cross-sectional area of individual strata
within cells.Fish flux was mUltiplied by this area to give a
passage rate (quantity of fish/time).Passage estimates were
7
~
-'
...
d
CJ
j
'1
d
=>
...
.3
1
:J
""
j
~
summed over strata to obtain the passage rate for a total cell.
The total fish passage rates by cell were then divided by the sum
of all cells'passage rates to obtain estimates of horizontal
distribution across the river.
The data analysis procedure is explained in more detail in
Appendix F.
8
-,
--;
--,
-j
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
calculated as the percentage by shift (expanded to 12 h)of the
index indicated an initial 7-d period of very low escapement,
.,
--'
total passage throughout the sample season (Section 3.1.2).This
~
'l
~
~
~
""~
1
d
-,
;;;i
::J
=.II
~
d
..J
J
-'
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,mean 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 total river passage.
It became apparent tha t 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.
9
-,
Horizontal distributions were calculated for each shift.
Horizontal distributions for each of the six periods were calcu-
la ted in two manners.To obtain measures of variabili ty 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
-,
-,
-J
~
=.J
i
~
""'l
="
=-,
d
:=:!
.....J
,...,
~
~
:'1
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 indi-
vidual cells during that period.These distributions are denoted
"horizontal distributions weigh ted for abundance."This latter
method was adopted when it became clear that distributions were
most variable when passage rates were lower.
All distributions were calculated separately for upstream and
downstream migrating fish.
3.1.2 Results and Discussion
Run Timing
The run timing index is presented in Figure 6 and Table 1.
Fish passage rates from shift to shift were highly variable.Fish
numbers were very low from July 15-21,followed by major 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 respectively lower
rates in periods I,III,and IV.
1 0
~
-,
"l
-,
-.,
,
]
-,
j
"
~
""
j
~
".
~
~
"']
~
The cumulative run timing index by shift for the whole season
indicated that 91%of the adult salmon passed between July 24 and
August 1.Fifty percent of the fish had passed by July 27 (Figure
G1).
ADFG fish wheel catches for period I were comprised primarily
of sockeye salmon,while the other periods yielded a mixture of
sockeye,silver,pink,and chum salmon.
Horizontal Distributions Weighted for Fish Abundance
The horizontal distributions weighted for fish abundance are
presented by period in Table 2.,The distributions for periods I-
IV combined appear in Figure 7.Other distributions weighted for
abundance are presented by day and period in Appendix H.
All horizontal distributions weighted for fish abundance 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).
All distributions indicate the vast majority of these fish
occurred in the westernmost cell (cell 9).For the entire study
period (periods I-IV),the weighted distributions show approxi-
mately 88%of all fish in cell 9,and approximately 7%and 5%in
cells 1 and 4,respectively (Table 2).Percentages by period for
~
:J
cell 9 varied from 61-92%.For cells
from 4-31%and 3-18%,respectively.
and 4,percentages varied
J
=i;
The weighted distributions over the season were nearly iden-
tical for upstream and downstream moving fish (Figure 7 and Table
2).The largest difference between upstream and downstream dis-
1 1
,
-;
l
-..l
-~
~
-,
,
-,
;-::01
-.,
-.J
~-;~
1
~
-.
•i
"...,
....i
d
:::!
l.~
~
~
~
F
Li
u
r~
w
tributions 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%of river total).
Mean Horizontal Distributions from Distributions by Shift
The mean horizontal distributions by period appear in Appen-
dix F.These distributions exhibited the same trends as those
weighted for abundance,but wi th slight shifts away from cell 9
and toward cells 1 and 4.For the total season,approximately 16%
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%,respectively.
Horizontal Distributions within Cells 1 and 9
Figures and tables of distributions within cells land 9
appear by period in Appendices H and I for abundance-weighted and
mean horizontal distributions,respectively.
Distributions within these two near-shore cells were heavily
weighted toward shore,with some drop off in fish percentages in
the 20-40 ft (6.1-12.2 m)sections nearest shore.The distribu-
tions by period show that most of the fish within cells 1 and 9
were found within 60 ft (18.3 m)of shore.Indeed,the total
study period distribution weighted for abundance indicates that
75%of the fish across the whole river passed wi thin 60 ft (18.3
m)of the west shore,and 86%within 80 ft (24.4 m)(Figure 8 and
Table 3).While the magnitudes of the percentages were smaller on
the east bank,the fish were similarly shore-oriented.
1 2
-,
-,
-,
-'
-,
-,
:.J
,,
_1
;:i
:J
;
;i
9
_J
='
,
;j
:]
In cell 9,there appeared to be a slightly stronger tendency
for offshore orientation of downstream moving fish than for up-
stream moving fish.
Discussion
An examination of individual horizontal distributions by
shift reveals much variability between percentages for cells 1,4,
and 9 (Table H1).High variability appears to correspond with
relatively low passage rates (Figure 6,Table 1).When passage
rates were relatively high,horizontal distributions were consis-
tently weighted toward cell 9.
The horizontal distributions weighted for fish abundance
were calculated from the total numbers of fish passing through
each cell during a given period.It is believed that these dis-
tributions are most representative of fish within a given period.
The extremely shore-oriented distributions of migrating
salmon can probably be attributed in large part to the low water
velocities observed at these locations.The fish were probably not
distributed so much toward the shore or shallow depths,but toward
slower water velocities.The force of water flow poses the most
--.:i resistance to their upstream progress.In an effort to conserve
energy,the salmon apparently tended to take the route of least~,
~
resistance.If one compares Figures 3 and 7,a correlation
-~
--'
~
--'
between high fish percentages and low water velocities appears.
Most fish tended to be located where water velocities were <0.5
fps (0.15 m/s).
1 3
-,
-...J
"9
--,
-1 Mean fish target velocities are shown in Appendix L.Esti-
---.
---'
---,
---'
-,
_8
d
.-J
..,
~
=l
1
oJ
-,
:::l
""l
d
::J
d
'9
~
d
~
""'-"""'t
d
~~
-"'
mated mean velocities throughout the season were 1.13 fps (0.35
m/s)and 1.07 fps (0.33 m/s)for upstream and downstream moving
fish,respectively (Appendix K).Since most fish were located
where veloci ties were approximately 0.5 fps (0.15 m/s)or less,
swimming speeds of upstream moving fish averaged approximately 1.6
fps (0.49 m/s)or less.In order for these fish to swim upstream
in the deep water cells 6-8,where water velocities averaged 3.3-
4.3 fps (1.0 -1.3 m/s)(Appendix N),they would have had to
expend much more energy.
The reasons for the much higher proportion of fish along the
west shore compared to the east shore are unknown.These results
suggest that these fish were predominantly destined for the Yentna
River system,and that Susitna River system runs upstream were
considerably smaller.However,the extent of crossover from the
west side to the east side of the river further upstream is
unknown.
As the wi thin-cell distributions show,there was a drop in
fish numbers nearest shore.This drop can in part be attributed
to shallower depths near-shore,and thus a smaller cross-sectional
area wi th which to accommodate fish passage.It is also likely
that some fish nearest the transducer passed undetected.Non-
detection could be due to the small sample volume nearest the
transducers,or to the fish being bottom-oriented (Section 3.2).
Throughout the course of data collection and analysis,several
improvements to the hydroacoustic applications of this study were
1 4
~
-~
~
-'
,
suggested to greatly improve the probability of detecting these
fish (Section 3.4).
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 will be in 1986 to
,
d
-,
~
""J
~
oJ
"j
~
~
.,
-J
~
d
:J
.=i
~~
J
d
d
-"
those of 1 985 remains to be seen.
1 5
~
_.1
-,
--'
-,
-.J
"{
.,
~
.J
""'l
~
d
~]
..J
1
-'
~
d
:J
=1
'9
~
~
-
d
.....
3.2 Objective 2:vertical distribution of migrating adult salmon
3.2.1 Detailed Methods
Vertical distribution analyses were planned for each deep
water cell for the same six periods for which the horizontal
distributions were developed.Since virtually no adul t salmon
were observed in these deep cells,the only vertical distributions
available were from the side-mounted,horizontally aimed trans-
ducers which monitored the shallow,near-shore areas •
Twice on July 28,during relatively high fish passage,a
side-mounted transducer was aimed alternately near the surface and
near the bottom.Fish detections were counted by direction of
movement,and relative percentages of fish numbers between the two
strata were calculated.
3.2.2 Results and Discussion
Results from counts of fish monitored in each stratum showed
that 17%of the fish were located in the upper portion of the
water column,and 83%in the bottom portion (Table 4).
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)•
1 6
-,.,
-,
,
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.
It is probable that the same factor that caused fish to
orient near the shores also tended to affect their vertical dis-
tribution.The highes t water velocities occurred near the
"
c1
--'
.J
1
j
~
-l
-,
J
.....JI
cq
~
--'
~
d
-'
surface,decreasing with depth until the minimum velocities were
observed at the bottom (Appendix N).
It is also conceivable that salmon actively swimming upstream
tended to be more bottom oriented than those moving downstream.
Unlike upstream moving fish,downstream fish would gain no great
benefit from an extreme bottom orientation.
1 7
,
-,
~
:
1
:i
3.3 Objective 3:Acoustic size of migrating adult salmon
3.3.1 Detailed Methods
Target strengths (acoustic sizes)were calculated for indi-
vidual fish as detailed in Appendix D.Mean target strengths were
calculated for each of the six periods,and converted to approxi-
mate total fish lengths,as explained in Appendix D.
3.3.2 Results and Discussion
Mean target strengths and corresponding fish lengths appear
-,in Table 5.Target strength frequency distributions for the
-'
,
]
d
~
~
-,
...l
,
j
:J
~
~
9~
:;)
dI
~
total study period appear in Figure 9,and distributions by indi-
vidual period appear in Appendix J.
The mean target strengths for the season were -35.4 dB and
-34.4 dB (approximately 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 fish).Mean target strengths for periods
I-IV ranged from -36.9 dB to -33.2 dB (44-69 cm)for upstream and
downstream migrating fish.
ADFG fishwheel catches indicated that primarily sockeye
salmon passed in the first period,and that other periods
contained a mixture of salmon species.
18
3.4 Objective 4:Development of the hydroacoustic technique for
enumeration of migrating adult salmon in the
Susitna River
During data collection in the field and data analysis in the
laboratory,refinements to the sampling technique were noted that
would enhance hydroacoustic monitoring of adult salmon in the
Susi tna River.
presented below.
Related findings and suggested improvements are
~
,
j
1
j
~
:J
~
j
~.
;j
,..,
;;
d
-,
j
::]
cJ
:J
j
.J
d
d
3.4.1 Improved Sampling Near the Bottom
An important improvement would be to sample more thoroughly
near the bottom.Most fish were located near the bottom (Section
3.2),upstream moving fish more so than downstream fish.The
following applications should greatly improve detection of these
fish.
Improved Si ting
Other sites on the river may be more conducive to hydro-
acoustic monitoring.The most desirable near-shore sites would
have a smooth bottom profile,a soft substrate,a minimum of
turbulence,and an initial rapid drop in depth from shore.The
west shore just below Petes Point (cell 9)exhibited a high pro-
portion of downstream moving fish (52%)(Table L4),probably due
to the high water veloci ties and turbulence caused by the river
being sharply diverted around the point.Similar trends were
observed at cells 1 and 4 (Tables L2 and L3).A significant
correlation between river water level and the relative percentage
19
__J
~
--,
__..l
2
~
---,
--'
9
•.J
...,,
J
J
j...
c
p
~
b
~.;W
u
~
tJ
lj
of downstream traveling fish was found (r=0.439,N=36,p<0.01)
(Figures L1 and L2).
From July 30 to August 8,supplemental monitoring was conduc-
ted 10 times at a site along the west shore approximately 600 ft
(183 m)upstream from Petes Point (Figure 2).Here,79%of the
detected fish were moving upstream.Moving the west shore sample
si te to this area could provide improved monitoring of upstream
moving sa lmon.
Use of Elliptical Transducers
Dual-beam transducers with elliptical beam patterns are
available with a 3°x 7°narrow beam and 10°x 21°wide beam.
(Circular-beam transducers of 6°and 15°were used in 1985.)The
elliptical transducers would sample better near the bottom and at
close ranges to the transducer.Fish at these locations would be
in the broader acoustic beam for a longer time,resulting in more
detections per fish.
Use of Two Transducers in Tandem
The near-shore areas would be more efficiently sampled by
multiplexing between two transducers,one sampling near the sur-
face and the other sampling near the bottom.Multiple transducers
could also be strategically aimed to compensate for irregular
bottom profiles.
20
-,
"1
-,
Shallower Downstream Aiming Angles
The data from the side-mounted,horizontally scanning trans-
--,ducers were collected at an aiming angle of 45 0 downstream.For
-'
--,
fish detected in the side aspect,signal strength is greatest at
90 0 to the longitudinal axis of the fish,(i.e.,broadside)
(Figure D2).By aiming transducers downstream 15-30 0 ,the
-;
d
--,
:J
-;
d
~
~~
d
strength of signal returns can be increased by approximately 3-6
dB (50-100%),compared to a 45 0 aiming angle (Appendix D).This
added signal-to-noise ratio would allow closer aiming of trans-
d~cers to the bottom,thereby improv~ng the probability of
detecting fish near the bottom.
Better Defined Sample Volume
The actual sample volume,and its proximity to the bottom and
surface,can best be defined under field conditions by actual
experimentation.The degree to which acoustic beams can be aimed
near the bottom and surface is largely a function of the bottom
1
type and surface condi tions.Before the salmon arrive,acoustic
.:.J
-,
oJ
=:]
-'
:~
~
9
~
measure men ts can be made using standard targets.In this way,
other improvements can be evaluated in their abi Ii ty to enhance
monitoring near the bottom.
More Stable Work Platform
OCcasional ambiguity was introduced into the 1985 data by the
inability to hold steady the side-mounted transducers,and hence
their corresponding ensonified volumes.Cri tical aiming close to
the bottom of the river was upset by movements of the boat.A
21
,
-,
"""1
-'
"'
j
-,
:j
"1
~
~
,
~
'"1
-'
.,
~-
cd
:J
-l
~
~
co,
d
~
more stable boat or semi-permanent transducer mount placed on the
bottom would benefit aiming near the river bottom.
3.4.2 Other Improvements to Sampling Technique
weir Salmon Away from Shore
There were no large differences in upstream and downstream
fish target velocities (Appendix K).This suggests that there
should be no disparity in hydroacoustic detectability between the
two groups.Also,all velocities were slow enough to allow ample
ensonifications at all but extremely close ranges.
Migrating adult salmon were visually observed very close to
the west shore,in water as little as 6-12 inches (15-30 em)deep.
In an effort to better sample these fish,a weir could be placed
near shore immediately downstream of the sample site to deflect
fish approximately 20-30 ft (6-9 m)into the river.This approach
could greatly improve the probability of detecting fish normally
passing through the first two sections of cells 1 and 9.
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 Susi tna Ri ver.On occasion,1985 water levels and debris
loads rose quickly,mandating changes in transducer placements and
placement techniques.The technique is flexible enough to permit
rapid altering of sampling strategies to compensate for these
changes.
22
.."
,
4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
-,
--,
1•
2.
Hydroacoustic moni toring of migra ting adul t salmon in the
Susitna River took place from July 15 to August 8,1985.
Between July 24 and August 1,91%of the adult salmon passed.
Fifty percent had passed by July 27.
-,
3.Upstream and downstream moving fish had similar horizontal
distributions across the river.
"l
-'
.:;.]I
--,
;l
""1
.i
-,
-'
-,
d
d
9
~
~
.J
~
4.
5.
6.
7.
During the study period,approximately 88%of the fish passed
through the cell nearest the west shore (cell 9),7%through
the cell nearest the east shore (cell 1),and 5%through a
shallow cell near the middle of the river (cell 4).
During the study period,approximately 75%of the salmon run
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 orienta-
tion was also observed along the east shore (cell 1).
Along the west shore (cell 9)fish tended to be oriented near
the bottom,upstream moving fish more so than downstream
fish.
Horizontal and vertical distributions suggested that fish
were oriented primarily toward low water velocities near
shore,in shallow areas,and near the bottom of the river •
23
,
-,
,
-,
-"
1
"'
8.
9.
During the 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 em.
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 turbulence caused by water being forced around Petes
Point upstream of the sample site.
-'
~
10.It also appears that some upstream moving fish passed unde-
tected.These fish were probably located near the bottom and
j
near shore.Several improvements in the application of the
";
"'
;J
,,
i
~
'"
:J
~
d
hydroacoustic technique were noted which would improve moni-
toring of the near-bottom and near-shore fishes.The
flexibility of this technique lends itself to timely evalua-
tion and implementation of these improvements.
11.At a more hydraulically stable test si te upstream of Petes
Point,79%of the monitored fish were determined to have been
moving upstream.
12.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
-"
1
.3
""
efficiently sample near the surface and across an irregular
bottom.
24
'I
j
.,
.,
j
"'
1
j
-,
J
1
"'
1
~
1
~~
~
~
~
13.Results from 1985 suggest that transducer aiming angles
shallower than 45 0 (e.g.,30 0 or 15 0 ),could be effectively
used.This would increase the signal-to-noise ratio by
approximately 50%-100%,allowing closer aiming of the
acoustic beam near the bottom.
14.The location of ensonified volumes rela ti ve to the surface
and bottom could be es tima ted by experiments in the field
using standard targets.
15.A stable work platform is essential for reliable aiming of
acoustic beams.A stable boat or semi-permanent bottom mount
for transducers would greatly benefit monitoring near the
bottom.
16.Moni toring of the fish neares t the wes t shore would be
enhanced by weiring fish out away from shore 20-30 ft (6-9
m).A weir on the east shore could also improve detecta-
bility.
17.Any sampling strategy in even numbered years will need to be
flexible enough to deal with very large densities of pink
-,
j
salmon.since a large pink run and other factors could
'"'I
~
~
c;l
J
j
...
affect fish horizontal distributions,any fish 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 wi thou t jeopardizing other tasks.
25
-,
~
18.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 Susitna River on a real-time basis.
-,
-3
19.Experience gained in 1985 has confirmed the ability of fixed-
location hydroacoustics to monitor salmon in the Susitna
River.The factors that need to be addressed in order to
develop a technique to reliably enumerate salmon in the river
have been noted,and each has high poten tial.It is recom-
mended that hydroacoustic monitoring of migrating adult
,salmon in the Susitna River be continued in 1986.Improve-
==:
~
,
d
~,
~
=i
'1
:7J!
J
""
~
J
d
-i
ments to the technique applied in 1985 could be evaluated and
implemented.The data collection crew should arrive at least
one week prior to commencement of actual sampling in order to
search for better sampling sites,test elliptical trans-
ducers,test semi-permanent transducer mounts,and perform
standard target measurements to better define sample volumes.
26
--,
1
J
-:!
'1
-:
j
~
;
~
i
~j
==
d
1
]
...]
~
..3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
BioSonics,Inc.would like to thank the following ADFG
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 ADFG 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.
27
-,
-'
REFERENCES CITED
Albers,V.M.1965.Underwater Acoustics Handbook--II.
State Univ.Press,University Park,Penn.356 p.
The Penn.
1
_ii
BioSonics,Inc.1984.Day night studies.Hydroacous tic
investigations of fish abundance and distribution around
piers affected by the Westway project.4 parts.Report to
New Jersey Marine Sciences Consortium,by BioSonics,Inc.,
Seattle,Wash.
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 quantity estimates.Application Memo #14,
BioSonics,Inc.Seatle,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 •
1983.Dual-beam echo survey of
Lake,B.C.,July 1983.Report to
Salmon Fisheries Commission.
Wash.,USA.
-..,
""
~
~
~
.i
Burczynski,J.J.,G.Marrone,and P.Michaletz.
survey on Lake Oahe for rainbow smelt abundance
July 1983.BioSonics,Inc.Seattle,Wash.
Burczynski,J.and R.Johnson.
sockeye salmon on Cultus
International Pacific
BioSonics,Inc.,Seattle,
1983.Echo
estimation in
"""l
J
Ehrenberg,J.E.1984a.The BioSonics dual-beam
measure men t system.Submi tted to FAO,
BioSonics,Inc.,Seattle,Wash.,USA.
targe t strength
February 1984.
"'"
---,
Ehrenberg,J.E.
measuring
BioSonics,
1984b.principles of dual-beam processing for
fish tar.get strengths.Technical Note #41.
Inc.,Seattle,Wash.,USA.
-"
--i
Haslett,R.W.G.1977.Automa tic 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.
cj Haslett,R.W.G.1969.
Vib.,9:181-191.
The target strength of fish.J.Sound
J
d
Kanciruk,D.1982.
Environ.Sci.
Tennessee.
Hydroacoustic biomass estimation techniques.
Div.,Oak Ridge National Labs.,Oakridge,
28
,
-,
Love,R.H.
fish.
REFERENCES,cont.
1971.Dorsal aspect target strength of individual
J.Acoustic Soc.Am.,49:815.
-,
..>
-;
~
~
-'
.,
:j
l
;
;i
~
='
-,
j
~
d
-,
-~
j
-'
.::i
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
evalua tion of fish migra tion in the vicini ty 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.Proc.Oceans
79.
Wirtz,A.R.and W.C.Acker.1981.A versatile sonar system for
ocean research and fisheries applications.IEEE Trans.Ocean
Eng.,Vol OIE-6(3):107-109.
Zar,J.H.1974.Biostatistical Analysis.Prentice-Hall,Inc.,
Englewood Cliffs,N.J.620 p.
29
-,
•N
R.
site
50 km
25 mi
, I I I
..
!7f;I
Ta 1achu 1 i tna R.
~
-,
d
~
=i
;jI
...,
--,
,
'"
C]
,
~"l
j
;il
;oj
"'""'
-,•
:3
..J
-,
-"'
Figure 1.Susitna River drainage,showing Susitna Station and the
1985 study site location.
-'30
west shonL
~
N
:.·ocabin
..00 tent
0".Dcabinso
.0:east shore
flow
I
6 -rJ f(rh wheel',,.I"5 4 3 2 1
~--------217 ft.e q •200 ft.
(66.2 m)(6 1•0 m)
-,
/8
test site
9
:-::-----..
200 ft.ea.
(61.0 m)
0:·:··..sand ba r
r-4-
cabin·.c,,·)...Petes Point
-'
-
..c,j
~
j
-,
""l
-,
--,
1..
q
d
l
:.J
-,
~
~
~
to sca 1e
......;
~
Figure 2.Study site,sample transect,and sample cell locations at
RM 28.Susitna River,1985.
31
L"""J l,ilL,,,,,"ilJ it j,J l""""j l;L,i,,,,i,,,;J 1.1.1""J".J U,~L ",LL.J ~,.."'IJ L""j ~,,'",j ,J l,
East Shore
5
3
!i "':'>;':':)1 'J 1
Y""I 'VL "'=-~;,Je"""-:=I,:·1 ~I.,r--river bottom
.......
'"0....
~
>-6...
-4g
;2
>
....
41...
~
max.depth·28.4 ft.(8.7 m)
a.Water velocity near shores estimated at <0.5 fps.
b.Due to varratlons In boat speed,horizontal dimensions vary sl ightly.
number:9 8 '7 6 5 4 3---2 1
200 ft..-L.200 ft...._J __200 ft.~217 ft.~217 ft.-+-217 ft..J_200 ft._,-200 ft.-h200 ft.
(61.0 m)~61.0 m)T"l"61.0 m)---r--(66.2 m)~66.2 m)(66.2 m)1l61.0 m'-I~"(6'1.0 m)(61.0 m)
I~185'1 ft.~I
(564.3 m)
eel I
W
tv
Figure 3.Sample cells and depth profile along the transect sampled hydroacoustically in 1985.Transect
was recorded July 18.Transducer was 21 inches (53 cm)below the water surface.Susitna Station staff
gauge was 0.9 feet (27 cm)above the lowest water level observed during the study (August 6).Susitna
River,1985.
45°
-,
side mount
-,an.chor
•flow
TOP VIEW
-,
-'
,
-:;
electronics
bottom mount
• •0 ..•.'~-:0:.'.'....".
SIDE VIEW
su rface-rnou nt
.---....---;-
anchor'
~
~
j
~
..d
,j
"
...
l
j
Figure 4.Location and orientation of transducers on sample boat.
Susitna River,1985 •
...,j,j
;;.3
33
,/
-,(a)Su rface mount (b)Side mount
~;
~
..Ii i!F;;:~~~~cer
~l ~'Y'1~'lI(gimbal
~'lI(·t ransducer
transducer -f.:"'...
weight
(c)Bottom mount
~0 ~'lI(gimbal
;:=n::::(\\
weight -.,
-,
~
:1
~
='
:J
;j
-J
~
J
:J
1
,
J
~
·Cl
:J
Figure 5.Transducer mounts.Susitna River,1985.
-'
oJ
34
iu," ,b",[,J 1l..;J;",JJ L 101 i.h"J Il",,,,I,,,';Wi"_!";."•.•J j.i,l"".lI C,,il ",j l,,,,..J l.,j J
16
14
12
IIIen
III
oil
oil
IIICI.
J:;
10
oil.-...
....
0
III 8en
III...
c:
III
U..
III
W
CI.
U"i III 6
>...
~
IIIa:
4
2
0
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 9
July Da te August
t--Pe r i od I I Pe r i od I I I Period III I Period IV ---1
Figure 6.Run timing:relative percentage by 12 h of season total fish passage.Susitna River,1985.
36
--,
UPSTREAM
,...-
f-
-
I----
r-
I-
.---
I I
Stratum Number
50 -l
0 :;0
rT (l)
llJ -
40 -~
:;0 _.
-0 <
30 ~(l)..,-u
(l)"..,-.n20III(l)
::J::J
rT
-ullJ
llJ<O10Vl(l)Vl
llJ-O
<0 .,...
0 (l)
west
shore
23
Cell 9
456
-,
50 Ce 11
Q)
"-0'1--,o I1l
l/l
Q)l/l 400l11l
11lel..
'-J
c.c 30Q)l/l
U 0-
LLL
Q)
el..L 20Q)
Q)>>.-.-ex:
4-J 1011l-
-I1lQ)4-J
ex:0
1--0 ..I
2 3 4 5 6
Stratum Number"l
east
-"shore
-,
~
,
DO \.IN STREAM
,.-----
I I
Stratum Number
Cell 9 50 -l
0 :;0
rt (l)
llJ -
40 -~
:;0 -.-.<<(l)
30 ~-u
(l)"..,-.n
20 ;~
rt
-ullJ
llJ<O10Vl(l)Vl
llJ 0
<0 -To
(l)
0
west
shore
23456
Cell
Q)50
"-0'1oI1l
l/l
Q)l/l 40_0'1 I1l
11lel..
4-J
c.c 30Q)l/l
U .-
LLL
Q)
el..L 20Q)
Q)>>.-
0-ex:
4-J 1011l~
-I1l
Q)4-J
ex:0
I-0 .I ,
2 3 4 5 6
Stratum Number
east
shore
c.:l
oJ
~
J
"1
J
3
...,
..
-"
~
~
Figure 8.Horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9,weighted
for fish abundance,for Periods I-IV (July 22 -August 8).Susitna
River,1985.
37
~
-20-25-.30-.35-40-45
o Ii"'i'",?l(Ik;'Il(Il(IY;'Ik;'Ik;'Ik;'WIk';'Ik;'Ik;'II(l'79 ,Q,,I
-50
8
4
6
2
26 I I
16
14
10
12
24
22
20
18~
01o
oJ
C
~
U...
~
0-
~>·Z
o
~
Q::
.cd
-...l
J
-'
,
c~
,
~
Target Strength (dB)
-20-25-.30-.35-40-45
2
O-'-r---r-.....-...--o---r-.....---r--.--~FLo~J.L,-lL,-LJy..t::,..u;...u;...L.t:,.l¥t:,..lJ:::,...u;J..tC,..~.Q.............--.~
-50
18
26 I i
4
8
6
16
14
22
20
12
24
10
Cl)
01o-c
~u...
~
0-
Cl)
>
OJo
~
Q::
-1
~
oJ
-'
'"
.---,
:..J
J
1
,
1
...
~
Target Strength (dB)
...J
Figure 9.Acoustic size distribution of fish during Periods I-IV
(July 22 -August 8).Susitna River,1985.
""
38
Table 1.Run timing of fish passage by 12h period (Susitna River 1985).
----------------------------------------------------------------
Shift Relative Cumulative
Date Number Percentage Percentage
----------------------------------------------------------------..,July 15 1 a a
2 a a
~.16 3 a a
4 a 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
::J
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
l 28 2.2 60.8
-'29 29 8.6 69.4~30 8.6 78.0
30 31 2.9 80.9.,
"i 32 1 •0 81.9
~31 33 1.8 83.7
34 2.0 85.7
August 1 35 3.5 89.2
;j 36 3.1 92.3
2 37 0.3 92.6
:J 38 1.4 94.0
3 39 0.5 94.5
..JJ 40 0.8 95.3
4 41 1.2 96.5
1 42 0.4 96.9
j 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
~
--
-'39
-,
J Table 2.Summary of horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river,
weighted for fish abundance (Susitna River 1985).
-,
--,
Period
Number Dates
Fish
Direction
Relative Percentage of Fish
East Shore Cell Number West Shore
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Total
--,
...l
:
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 0.8 0 0 7.7 0 0 0 0 81.6 100.0
Downstream 1.2 0 0 7.4 0 0 0 0 61.4 100.0
IV 8/4-8 Upstream 3.1 0 0 8.2 0 0 0 0 68.7 100.0
Downstream 3.1 0 0 2.4 0 0
0 0 74.5 100.0
~
;::I
l
~
~
-,
;d
::3
-'
~
~
-'
::3
I-II 7/22-30 Upstream
Downstream
I-IV 7/22-8/8 Upstream
Downstream
5.4
4.9
6.7
6.8
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
40
4.5
4.3
5.7
4.9
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
90.1
90.8
87.6
88.3
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
~"""L"j,1 J 16,[,,,,I,d IL "Ij 11.1"".",J LL j"J",.J ~""'"".J tj",",d ..,,~,:,",J ,""""J ,J
Table 3.Summary of horizontal distributions of adult salmon within the near-shore cells,weighted for fish
abundance (Susi tna River 1985).
Relative Percentage 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 a a 8.8 1 2.1 41.7 24.4 6.5 3.3 a 88.0
Downstream 0.4 3.1 0.8 1•1 a a 5.4 26.0 :34.6 19.3 7.4 1 .7 a 88.9
II 7/26-30 upstream 0.2 3.0 0.7 a a a 4.0 24.9 14.9 34.6 14.1 2.6 a 91.a
Downstream 0.7 3.3 0.6 0.1 a 0 4.7 12.7 31.6 35.3 10.2 2.0 0 91.8
III 7/31-8/3 Upstream 2.2 5.3 3.2 a 0 a 10.8 28.0 30.9 15.5 6.4 0.9 a 81.6
Downstream 2.0 2.9 6.2 a a a 31.2 9.2 17.5 13.1 19.0 2.7 a 61.4
."
I-'8/4-8IV upstream a 0.2 2.9 a 0 a 1 3.1 7.4 12.5 30.6 16.1 2.0 a 68.7
Downstream 2.2 6.5 4.4 0 a a 13.1 a 21.8 25.1 23.1 4.5 a 74.5
I-II 7/22-30 Upstream 0.6 2.9 1.0 0.9 a 0 5.4 21.2 22.7 31.6 11 .9 2.8 a 90.1
Downstream 0.6 3.2 0.7 0.5 a a 4.9 17.3 32.7 29.8 9.2 1.9 a 90.8
I-IV 7/22-8/8 upstream 0.9 3.7 1 .5 0.7 a a 6.7 21.8 23.7 28.6 11•1 2.4 a 87.6
Downstream 1.5 3.9 1.1 0.4 a a 6.8 15.8 30.7 29.3 10.5 2.0 a 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.
-,
.,
..;;
l
j
..;;
j
:i
1
-"
~
~
:Jl
d
~
d
-~
J
-'
Table 4.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.
42
-,
l
.."
-"
-'
1
Table 5.Mean acoustic size of adult salmon (Susitna River
1985).
Period Upstream Downstream
No.Dates TS*SD N Length**TS*SD 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
"
1
~
~
"
....J
'1
~
:]
....
~.
~
""
*
**
At side aspect,45°toward head-on from broadside.
Predicted total length in cm,calculated as described in Appendix c.
43
APPENDIX A:Sample Times for Each Shift
1
SHIFT DAY/START END
1 NUMBER NIGHT DATE HOUR DATE HOUR
~
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 20 800
12 D 7 20 800 7 20 1800
"]13 N 7 20 2200 7 21 800
14 D 7 21 800 7 21 1800
~
15 N 7 21 2200 7 22 800
"1 16 D 7 22 800 7 22 1800
~17 N 7 22 2200 7 23 800
18 D 7 23 800 7 23 1800
19 N 7 23 2200 7 24 800
~20 D 7 24 800 7 24 1800
{21 N 7 24 2200 7 25 800
22 D 7 25 800 7 25 1800~23 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 28 800
:oi 28 D 7 28 800 7 28 1800
29 N 7 28 2200 7 29 800
:]30 D 7 29 800 7 29 1800
J 31 7 29 2200 7 30 800N
'"""32 D 7 30 800 7 30 1800
~33 N 7 30 2200 7 31 800
:;i 34 D 7 31 800 7 31 1800
35 N 7 31 2200 8 1
800
-1
3
A1
-,
-.
-,
-=
-,
1
!...
1
'"
.~
~
::]
1
;j
~
d
,
:J
::]
...
~
;j
-.J
~
~
APPENDIX A,cont.
SHIFT DAY/START END
NUMBER NIGHT DATE HOUR DATE HOUR
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
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
A2
--,
-,
-,
-,
-'
APPENDIX B: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
-,
:::;J
l
;;>
~
i.I
1
...
--,
::i
::]
J
1
j
~
---,
~
transducer,a dual-beam echo sounder /transcei ver,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 B1.Table
B1 lists specific manufacturers and model numbers of the elec-
tronic equipment used.
B1
"'
1
1
-'
ECHO SOUNDER
40 log R +2aR
DIGITAL
CASETTE'
RECORDER
DATA TO BE PROCESSED
AFTER SURVEY IN SEATTLE
1-----'
DUAL-BEAM I
L !R()CrS()R_I
r - - - -I FISH FLUX AND
I MICROCOMPUTER I •TARGET STRENGTH
1 -.J (PREDICTED
FISH LENGTH)
1
j
40 log R +2aR~
CHART
RECORDER
OSCILLOSCOPE
1
j
~
~
~
:;
~
~
,j
~
J
]
.J
~
J
-
jJ
;:i
MONITOR FOR
I •PRESENCE OR ABSENCE OF FISH &
FISH TRACES CLASSIFICATION
15 0 I 16 0
DUAL-BEAM
TRANSDUCER
Figure B1.BioSonics dual-beam system for echo surveys .
B2
...,
Table B1.Manufacturers and model numbers of electronic equipment
used by BioSonics,Inc.at Susitna River,1985.
-,
Item Manufacturer Model Number
Echo Sounder/Transceivers BioSonics,Inc.101
-,
>J
-,
~
~
j
Dual-Beam Processor
Chart Recorders
Dual-Beam Transducers
(6°x 15°)
Oscilloscopes
Digital Audio Processors
Video Recorders
Tape Recorder Interfaces
Microcomputers
Computer Printers
Generators
BioSonics,Inc.
BioSonics,Inc.
BioSonics,Inc.
Hitachi Denshi,Ltd.
Sony
Sony
BioSonics,Inc.
Compaq
IBM
NorthStar
Epson
Honda
181
115
SP06
V-352
PCM-F1
B VCR
171
Portable
XT(hard disk)
Advantage
FX-80
LX-80
EM-3000
~
...
di
-,
..;.
,
'"
J
...
Note:Specifications for equipment can be obtained by contacting
BioSonics,Inc •
B3
-,
-,
,
'1
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 triggered by the Model 101 Echo Sounder,a high-frequency
transducer emi ts short sound pulses in a rela tively narrow beam
aimed toward an area of interest.As these sound pulses
l
j
1
~
,I
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 with distance from the transducer.Thus,equally-sized
l,targe ts produce the same signal ampli tudes 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
described in more detail by Albers (1965),Burczynski (1979),and
"1
cJ
~
its echo relative to the transmitted pulse.•This process is
j
..,
..J
~
o
j
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;;jj
~
..::dl
targets detected throughout the study•
B4
The threshold circui t on
--,
--,
--,
--,
j
--,
--,
j
.."
-,
~
~
1
i
~
;l
J
'9
...i
~
]
:;::;i
..J
~
--'
the chart recorder eliminates signals of strengths less than the
echo levels of interest.
Pulse rates were 10 pings/sec.This was sufficient to obtain
ample ensonifications of fish to determine change-in-range
(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 accura te (+0.5 0)es ti-
mate of the actual sensitivity beamwidth (or "effective"
beam wid th)for a given targe t strength could be de termined for
each transducer,based on sensitivity plots and target strengths.
Based on the calibration information,the adjustable ptint
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 ern total length.A detailed description of
the calibration of hydroaooustic systems can be found in Albers
(1965)and Urich (1975).
B5
-,
-,
-,
-,
APPENDIX C:Migrant Detection and Direction of Movement Criteria
Migrant Detection Criteria
within the analysis software,potential fish targets had to
satisfy two criteria to be classified as fish:1)the strength of
'""!\
.J
-,
,
.J
~
~
.,
~
]
~
-,
J
""
=i
~
J
.;;
.J
=-~
-'"
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).
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 em total
length).The conversion was based on the target strength/size
relationship discussed in Appendix D.
At least four successive ensonifications were required for a
target to be olassified 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 repeti tion
rates (10 pings/sec).This redundancy criterion enhanced fish
detectability in the presence of background interference,and for
fixed-location studies was necessary to obtain sufficient change-
in-range information to determine direction of fish travel•
C1
-,
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
transducer's positioning was known,this change-in-range
information expressed the fish's direction of movement.Figure C1
shows typical fish movement through an ensonified volume,and a
.J
,corresponding echogram trace caused by such a fish.A copy of an
echogram from the Susi tna Ri ver study shows ac tual fish trace s
--,with change-in-range (Figure C2).
transduce r
I
e'(2 )
"
( 1) ,I I '.
~cha r t movcmcn t
bo t tom
surface
~:..:..0.-:0:........"
(1)\...\r
..'"....:....:...-...:..
~
~
..J
J
~
,-~
"l
~
j
:J
1
..,
...Figure CQ.Fish movement through an obl~que ensonified sphere resulting in change-
in-range for fish traces on echogram .
..,j
~
C2
"1
on-shore
transducer
~
'~:::';:;~i';~;.'I~':~:;'::~"!':~;;~;~:,:
bottom
returns
I,ll,.
I •:;.~:'...
-:1
"
;1
I'
,.";,(\",\f~~f
;\.1
..;~•f
•
.I:~
I.f.",.
··;%~~·K):..
,;~;,..~~r .';)
;.:.~
..
~.:.,:;J=tI i;
~~'
~:
...~:
'---1.;·-.
....'\
~
-,
-,
-'
,
,
"1
]
,;
1
:)
"l
.:j
-.,
d
~Figu~e C2.Echogram from side-mounted horizontal transducer,looking
into the river and aimed 45°downstream.Susitna River,1985.
J
~
j
...
-,
j
~
--"C3
"1
-,
-,
1
APPENDIX D: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.~he
intensity of an echo reflected from a fish depends on a variety of
factors including acoustic frequency and the fish's size,
j
~
orientation,and swim bladder characteristics.(Much of the echo
~
l
j
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
~
1
j
j
measured from the dorsal aspect.
McCartney and Stubbs 1971).
(Haslett 1969,Love 1971,
..,
~
j
~
,
-'
'"
='
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
decibe ls.Typical values range from -60 dB to -20 dB.The
..
ari thmetic equi valen t of target strength (TS)is the back-
scattering cross section (~bs)in units of m-2 where:
""'
...
TS 10 log(Obs)
D1
(1)
.,.,
..,
-'
..,
For simplici ty,the following principles are explained in
arithmetic 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 2V=k ~bs b (e,~)
where
(2)
l
V =detected output of an echo sounder set at [40 log(R)+
2aR]time-varied-gain.The echo in tensi ty (I)is pro-
portional to V2 •
_3
j
1
"
k
()bs
a constant determined from system calibration and
equipment settings.
backscattering cross section of the fish.This is a
measure of the fish's acoustic reflecting power in the
direction of the transducer.Target strength is related
to TS by equa tion (1).
"
-~
~
~
,j
b(e,li')beam pattern factor of the transducer.
ratio of the acoustic beam's transmitted
at the angular coordinates (e,~n to
acoustic axis of the transducer;i.e.,
I(e,li')
b(e,li')
1(0,0)
This is the
intensi ty (I)
that at the
~
j
4
cJ
~
J
='"
.:]
-"
b(e,li')is also a measure of the transducer's receiving
sensitivity.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(g,~)can be measured and equation (2)solved for ~bs.
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 (e,~)in the beam.In
D2
~
.,
""'
j
9:
other words,a single-beam system cannot make direct in situ
target strength measurements because the fundamental equation (2)
contains two unknowns ("bs'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
6 bs •Specifically,a dual-beam system transmits pulses on a
narrow-beam transducer element and receives echoes on both narrow-
and wide-beam elements (Figure C1).The narrow-and wide-beam
squared voltage outputs are:
j
?£
v 2
n
v 2
w
k n <Jbs b n
2 (Q,~)
k w <Jbs bn(Q,~)bw(Q,~)
(3 )
(4 )
,
,
j
.JI
'"-j
J
j
:l
_J
i
.JI
~
j
-'
d
...
For simplicity of mathematics,assume that a dual-beam system
is designed so that bw(&'~)=1 over the main lobe of the narrow
beam;that is,the effective beam pattern factor of the wide beam
is engineered to uni ty 1.Wi th this consideration,the ratio of
1 It is not necessary that a dual-beam system be designed so that
b w =1 over the main lobe of the narrow beam as long as the
relationship between band b /b can be computed.The..n w nB~oSon~cs Dual-Beam System operates with b w ~1,but the
principles are the same.Differences are corrected using
parameters in the post-processing software (see Section 6.2,
Steps 8 and 9)•
D3
,
-,
.,
I I
Vn,I
I I .,I
V"
.;
~~
J
l
"l
"'
1
j
."
-j
:i
~
d
--,
,
...:iI
:)
d
~
-;;
oJ
..Jj
3
Figure Dl.Beam patterns of narrow-and wide-transducer elements
showing a fish within both beams.
D4
,
the squared voltages (3)and (4)from the received echo signal
becomes:
Vn
2 k n b n (e,9')
-,
=
V 2w
Rearranging gives:
b n (e,9')
k w
2Vn k w
2Vw k n
(5)
(6)
-,
-1
-:"J
Inserting this bn(e,lP)value into equation (3)and re-
arranging allows computation of a fish's backscattering cross
section according to:
::'l
:..3.
"!
6"bs
V 2 kw n
V 2 k 2nw
(7)
c.i
"1
:i
~
~
--,
J
'"
.J
~
;J
~
-1
..J
=:--~~
----.:i
Target 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 criteria entered by the user.Maximum amplitudes of
these echo signals (V n and Vw )are then used to calculate ~bs for
individual fish.The 6"bs values are then converted to target
strengths in dB,as described below•
D5
-,
--'
j
-,
~
-'
,
::l
""
~-~
J
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 (~bs)
can provide a good estima te 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 where
TS =10 log (~bs)
The principles of a dual-beam sounder are given in Burczynski
and Dawson (1984)and Ehrenberg (1984a,b).
In general,larger fish reflect more acoustic energy than
smaller fish.However,acous tic backsca ttering 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,
~l as well as the acoustic frequency used.While much of the
:.:l
~
j
""
:J
~
::i
-'
,
:3
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
D6
-,
least 16 other species as reported by other researchers.
-,
J
Expressed in terms of acoustic frequency,Love's formula is:
1)for individual fish ensonified from the dorsal aspect:
-,
where
TS
TS
19.1 log(L)-0.9 log(f)-62.0
target strength (dB)
,
]
1
f =frequency (kHz)
L =fish length (cm)
For salmon and some other species,BioSonics has found that
the Love form ula applies well to in si tu measure men ts of targe t
J strengths using the Dual-Beam System.In joint dual-beam acoustic
~
oJ
1-;
j
1
-~
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 data is often wider than the spread in the
1 measured fish length data (Burczynski and Johnson 1983,Burczynski
::>
et al.1983).
j
~
""
Off Angle Target Strength Compensation
The relationship described above is for dorsally oriented
in two orientations relative to the fish,(1)dorsally,30 0 off
~fish.For the 1985 Susitna River study,monitoring was conducted
J
vertical toward the anterior,and (2)horizontally,45 0 off
J
broadside toward the anterior.
~
.3
D7
-,
..,
..,
To compensate for the off vertical aspect,we followed Love
(1977)and Haslett (1977),and subtracted 4 dB from the dorsal
target strength.The adjusted target strength was then used for
target strength to length relationships and mark thresholding and
beam width calculations •
To adjust for the side aspect orientation,we relied on Dahl
(1982)and Haslett (1977).A sample plot of target strength
directivity for a 52 cm salmonid is presented in Figure D2.A
corresponding smoothed plot for three salmonids (40,52,and 61
-'I
cm)appears in Figure D3.These fish were near the size of
->
...,
Susi tna River salmon (Table 5).
The mean difference between the dorsal and side aspect target
strengths was 4 dB (Table D1).For the purposes of target
*
~
~
~
,
-]
J
1
--
--;
-'
J
1
..
'"!
~
--'
:J
dI
~
strength to length relationships and mark thresholding and beam-
wid th calculations,4 dB was subtracted from the dorsal targe t
strength.
Table D1.Difference between dorsal and 45 0 side-aspect target
strength (Susitna River 1985).
Length*Dorsal**45 0 Side-*Difference
(cm)TS (dB)Aspect TS (dB)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)
D8
~
~
~
~
1
--l
-'
"1
~
-l
1
]
§
:l
~
j
Side
Head 2adB
Side
scale:1dB/Div
~
d 0°head aspect 90°
Tai 1
side aspect 180°•ta i I aspect
J
J
1
c-'§.
.....
:3
d
Figure D2.Polar plot (420 kHz)of fish directivity in the yaw plane.
09
9.0 dB
3.8
dB
180160
___0-
1.~===1 ,15.9 dB___J4.'
140
5.9 dB
120
40 em fish
-eJ--52 em fish
61 em fish
100
'\,,,
\
\
\
\
\
\
\,
'\
'\
1\
80604020
._-----~
.--,_---0_-_I_ _.--L.
o ~,-----==-.~~-T-"-:
o
-53
-21
-45
-25
a:l-a
c:.-
J::.....
0'1c:
Q)
L-.....
til
.....
Q)
en
L-
eu -41~
~
:i
,ASPECT 0 0 =head 90 0 =side 180 0 =ta i1
j
"I
Figure D3.Plot of mean smoothed fish directivity (mean target
strength in 10°increments (Dahl 1982).
~
~
~
-'
.:i
D10
~
1
j
1
='
j
'::]
~
J
J
J
;:j
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
D3 and Table D2 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 ~trength gain is realized.By aiming transducers 30°
more broadside (i.e.,from 45 °to 15 0),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 D2.Difference between side-aspect target strength at 15°,
30°,and 45°aiming angles,from Dahl (1982)(Susitna
Ri ver 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
D11
j
~
1
j
~
;;i
=1
:i
,
j
~
j
~
-;;
j
..
-.,
...J
APPENDIX E:Simultaneous Tracking of Fish Direction of Movement
and Target Strength
As sta ted earlier,the dual-beam transducers were aimed at
30 0 (dorsal aspect)or 45 0 (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 fixed-aspect transducers operated at high pulse rates
(this study used 10 pulses per second),each target usually had
several echoes recorded during passage through the acoustic beam.
Using a window of time and range estimated by the maximum expected
velocity and the maximum expected change-in-range,echoes return-
ing from the same target were grouped together.This allowed
calcula tion of mean target strength wi thin 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 C).Using this
information,the angle of fish passage (A)through the acoustic
beam was calculated according to the formula:
E1
-,
~
-,
-,
--.J
where:
A =arctangent (RID)
A =angle of passage through the acoustic beam wi th
respect to the transducer axis
R =change-in-range of target as it passes through the
beam
o =distance traveled through the beam.
-,
j
-'
-,
cj
~
j
l
:1
j
'"
Ji
~
j
..
"
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.TRACKER also
simultaneously calculated fish passage rates for upstream and
downstream moving fish.
E2
-,
.,
APPENDIX F:Data Reduction and Analysis
Weighting Factor
The extrapolation of individual fish detections to a repre-
sentation of all fish in the area first took into account the
cone-like geometry of the acoustic beam produced by the trans-
-,ducer.Since the diameter of the ensonified sample volume
""1
increases in direct proportion to dis tance from the transducer,
each fish detection was multiplied by a geometric weighting factor
.J which decreases with range.Thus,a fish detected closer to the
~
""
~
j
-,
co
J
~
9,
d
-,
j
::;
d
~
'~
~
4
:3
col
transducer is weighted more (to represent more fish)than a fish
detected further away.All subsequent data analyses are based on
these weighted fish detections.An example of how weighted fish
detections are determined is shown in Figure F1.
F1
Range
(m)
Diameter
of Beam
We ight i ng
Factor a
Weighting
Factor b
j
1
J
l
'l
]
"
e =6°
.-..~'...,'...-
-40 4.19 1.00 3.58
-35 3.67 1.14 4.09
-30 3.14 1.33 4.78
-25 2.62 1.60 5.73
-20 2.10 2.00 7.14
-15 1.57 2.67 '9.55
-10 1.05 ~3.99 .14.29
-5 0.52 8.00 28.85
-2
-0 0.21 19.81 71.43
a)Relative to diameter at
maximum range.
b)Relative to 15 m intake
opening.
-,
~,
j
1
:J
FIGURE Fl.For quantitative studies based on echo counting,each
fish detection is multiplied by a weighting factor to account for
the cone shape of the acoustic sample volume.At range R,the
weighting factor W(R)is the ratio of a normalization width N to
the diameter of the beam OCR)at the range of detection:
""l
j
W(R)
N
OCR)
N
2 R tan(e/2)
4
:J
~
.::l
;;;;.;jj
--~
.J
--'
For relative studies,the choice of normalization width is
arbitrary,but it is frequently taken as the diameter of the beam
at maximum range.For absolute estimates of fish passage through
well-defined passage routes,the normalization width should be the
width of the sample cell,in Susitna River's case .
The above figure illustrates how the weighting factor for a 6°
transducer changes with range for two different normalization
widths.The first column of numbers lists the diameters of the
acoustic beam at various ranges.The second column lists the
corresponding weighting factors normalized to the maximum diameter
of the beam Ur this case,4.19 m).The third column lists the
weighting factors normalized to a 15-m width•
F2
...,
~
1
']
~
~
;J
~
,
j
d
~
~
~
::....:i
.....,j
Vertical Distribution
The vertical (depth)distribution of fish in the water column
is a straightforward calculation from data obtained from either a
bottom-mounted transducer,a surface-mounted transducer,or both.
An example is provided in Figure F2.When the transducer is aimed
at an angle to the surface,a vertical distribution can be
developed by first converting ranges from the transducer to depths
below the surface using the appropriate trigonometry•
F3
1.07 12 12.84 11 .31
1.24 23 28.52 25.13
1.47 18 26.46 23.31
1.80 10 18.00 15.86
2.34 5 11 .70 10.31
3.33 3 10.00 8.81
5.99 1 5.99 5.27
13.90 0 0.00 0.00
~
Oi
8 =6°
.°.°._::~:9:"t :.":':."
Range
(m)
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
2
o
TOTALS
Average
We i ght i ng
Factor
Number
Fish
Detections
72
Weighted
Fish
Detections
113.51
Vertical
Dis t r i bu t ion
Percentage
100.00
]
~
~
:-i
j
~
~
-=J
...i
FIGURE F2.This figure shows how a vertical distribution of fish
is obtained from a bottom-mounted 6°transducer aimed straight up
in 40 m of water.The first column of numbers shows the average
relative weighting factor for each of the 5-m depth strata.The
second column lists the numbers of single fish detections in each
of the 5-m depth strata over a 12-hour period.The third column
shows the results of multiplying these fish detections by the
average weighting factors in the first columns.The fourth column
shows the vertical distribution of fish expressed as percentages
of total weighted fish detections in the water column.
Separate vertical distributions can be developed and compared for
different time periods,environmental conditions,plant operating
procedures,etc.The width of the depth strata are selected
according to the study's objectives.
F4
-"
-,
J
Horizontal Distributions
By summing weighted fish detections for the different direc-
tions of movement,one can calculate the flux of fish (quantity of
fish/area/time)through a cross-sectional area.For a given
-i
-1
~
:l
1
j
aiming angle,the general direction of fish movement and the
resul ting flux values can be determined for two opposi te direc-
tions.
Once total flux ra tes were calculated for each ce 11 across
the river,the horizontal distribution across the river was cal-
culated as the relative percentage individual cells represented of
the ground total flux rate for the whole river.
Horizontal distributions were calculated separately for up-
stream and downstream moving fish.
Horizontal distributions within cells 1 and 9 were calculated
~
J as explained above for vertical distributions.Since side-aspect
d
j
::;
~
~
transducers were used for these data,all dimensions are simply
rotated 90°.
Fish Target Speed
Fish swimming speed is a physiological term referring to the
estimated speed of the fish if the fish were exerting an
d equivalent effort in zero current.Fish target speed is the
_A
,
.3
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
F5
I
--,
--'
~
j
~
"l
-'
~
~;
l
1..
.....
d
~
-
j
:2
.J
-,
~
:;J
~
of a fish moving downs tream would be its targe t speed minus the
water velocity.
Once the mean target strength was known,it was used with the
appropriate beam patterns factor to es tima te average beam wid tho
The mean chord length of fish traveling through the ensonified
volume was calculated as a function of this average beam width and
range.Average fish target speeds were determined acoustically by
dividing the average width of the beam at the range of detection
by the average time in the beam based on the average number of
detections by successive pings.
F6
L~>=
L
f"
~
r
--
f
Ie
F
k::
r
L
r
[
f~
l
l'r
l
r
l
,
'-
r
'-
r
l
4 ~L Xq JaoESSEd 4sTd
lE~oili UOSEas JO aOE~ua~~ad aAT~ElnwnJ :ouTwTili unB .~xlpuaddV
ij'Ji.I.d'.Lic"J 1.."1,,,J 1ib,1".JILJ 1l".,IJ \;",i".J lLLI."J."iJl W~,~"ILU,,-J lL.~,jLc",j,I .....i.J l..i"."jjj """...,,,""b,L,!"'•••....J ~..J .I .".1 L....1 •..".".J
100
90
80
41
Ol
III
'"70'"~
J:.
'".-60...
....
0
41
Ol 50III..c:
41
U
G)
~
41
N
0.40
41>..
III
~30
~u
20
10
o
15 16
July
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Date
29 30 31 1 2
August
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Figure Gl.Run timing:cumulative percentage by 12 h of season total fish passage.Susitna River,1985.
LH
~~UEPunqv 4s1~~oJ P~~461~M 1~~A1~
~4~SSo~~v UOWTES ~Tnpv JO su01~nq1~~s1a TE~uoz1~OH
r
t:
r
r
L
-"1
,
~
,100-
a>80 --,4-enorc
III
-'a>IIIenrcrca..
4-J
60-1 c..c
a>III
U .-
UPSTREAM l-u..
a>a..l-
a>-,a>>40->.-.-a::
+J
rc --rca>+.Ja::0 20-t-
~
'1
o I I I ~j I I I I
eas t 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 west
1 shore Cell Number shore
....100 -
"i
J a>
4-en 80-o rc
~III
a>VIenrc
j rca..
4-J
c..c 60-a>III
1 u .-
DOWNSTREAM l-u..1 a>:i a..l-
a>
a>>40->.-:=:'.1 .-a::
-~4-J
:l rc--rca>+Ja::0 20-,t-
j
:3 0 I I I II I I I
--'east 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 westdshoreCellNumbershore
~
j
Figure HI.Horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river,
weighted for fish abundance,for Period I (July 22-25).Susitna River,
jj 1985.
I
\
\
:;j
-
H2
"1
J
1
1
j
1
1
~
1
~
"1
J
j
,
0;
1
::l
.,
j
UPSTREAM
OOWNSTREAH
Q)
4-0)o cu
<n
Q)<n
O)CUcuo......
c.c
Q)<n
U .-
LlJ...
Q)
0..L
Q)
Q)>>.-.-ex::....
cu~
~cu
Q)....
ex::0
f--
(\)
4-Cllocu
tJl
(\)tJl
CllCUcuo......
C.c
(\)tJl
U .-
LlJ...
(\)
0..L
Q)(\)>>.-.-ex::....
CU -
~CU
Q)....
ex::0
f--
100-
80-
60-
40-
20-
o I I I II I I I
east I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 west
shore Cell Number shore
100 -
80-
60 -
40-
20-
~,
d
~
o
east
shore
l
I
2
1"
3
r
1"
l
I I
4 5 6
Cell Number
I
7
1"
8 9 west
shore
J
-
j
~~
J
='l
Figure H2.Horizontal distributions of adult salmon across·the river,
weighted for fish abundance,for Period II (July 26-30).Susitna River,
1985.
H3
east
shore
I I
I I I I I I
-,
-,
--,
-,
..J
~
~
UPSTREAM
eu
4-Olaro
IIIeuIIIOlroroo-...
c..c.eu IIIu·-
L-l.Leu
0-L-
eueu>>.-
0-0::::...
ro-
-roeu...
0::::a
I-
100
80
60
40
20
o
100
2 3 4 5 6
Cell Number
7 8 9 west
shore
east
shore
I I
I I I I I I
l
-,
~
]
:i
-~~~
:;j
--.
j
3l
d
~
QOWNSTREAM
Q)
4-Olacu
IIIeuIIIOlCUroO-
'-'c..c.eu IIIu.-
L-l.L
Q)
0-L-
eueu>>.-
.-0::::
'-'ro-
-CUeu'-'
0::::a
I-
80
60
40
20
o
2 3 456
Cell Number
7 8 9 west
shore
;J
~
,
;3
Figure H3.Horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river,
weighted for fish abundance,for Period III (July 31 -August 3).
Susitna River,1985.
H4
I I I I
-,
~
-,
-,
~
-,
~
"'
~
-i
j
~
UPSTREAM
100
4-~80oto
IIIeuIII
OltO
to a..
~.c 60euIII
u o -
L.u..eua..L.
eu
~o~40
0-a:::....
tO~
~toeu....
a::::::.20
a
east
shore
100
2 3 4 5 6
Cell Number
7 8 9 west
shore
;;
1
j
:]
~
1
;::i!
..."
J
:3
DOWNSTREAM
(l)
"'-Oloru
IIIeuIII
Olru
rua......
c.ceuIII
u --L.u..eua..L-
eueu>>0-
0-a:::....
to-
~toeu....a:::0
I-
80
60
40
20
o I I I I
~
~
east
shore
2 3 4 5 6
Cell Number
7 8 9 west
shore
;J
...
.3
Figure H4.Horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river,
weighted for fish abundance,for Period IV {August 4-8}.Susitna River,
1985 •
HS
east
shore
I I I
I I I I I I I
,
~
-,
j
l
j
~
"'
j
1
1
J
~
~
,
UPSTREAM
DOWNSTREAM
q)
.....01o~
III
q)III
01~
~a.......
C£
q)III
U .-
1-lJ...
q)
a..1-
q)
q)>>.-
.-IX:.....
~-~q).....
IX:0
I-
ClJ
.....eno~
III
l1J III
01~
~a.......
C£
l1J III
U .-
1-lJ...
l1Ja..1-
l1J
l1J >>.-
.-IX:.....
~-~l1J .....
IX:0
I-
100
80
60
40
20
o
100 -
80-
60-
40-
20-
2 3 4 5 6
Cell Number
7 8 9 west
shore
456
Cell Number
,
.J
~
oJ
o
east
shore
1..
2
..
3
r
T
1
I I ..
7
I
8 9 west
shore
~
..J
.3
~
Figure H5.Horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the river,
weighted for fish abundance,for Peri.ods I and II (July 22-30).Susitna
River,1985 •
H6
~50 -lo ;0
r1"(l)
OJ -
I-40 -~
;0 _0
-0 <<(l)I-30 (l)
,-0
(l)-n,
-0 ('l
I-20 VI (l)
:r:J
rt
-0 OJ
OJ toI-10 VI (l)
VI
OJ 0
to -...
0 (l)
2
r----
3
~
Cell 9
4
r
1
I
5
f
I
6
I
UPSTREAM
65432
,
--
,
(1)SO Cell 1
9
......enoIII
1Il
(1)1Il 40
--'en III
1llQ......
~
c..c 30(1)1Il
U 0-
LlJ...
(1)
Q..L
(1)20
(1)>>0-
0-a::....
Ill-10
-III(1)....
a::0
~0
l
Stratum Number Stratum Number
j
j
eas t
shore
west
shore
1
j
~
--'
1 DOWNSTREAM
Cell 9 -50 -lo ;0
r1"(l)
OJ -
40 -~
;0 -0
-0 <<(l)
30 ~-0
(l)-n-,
-o('l
20 ~~
r1"
-0 OJ
OJ to10VI(l)
VI
OJ 0
to -...
(l)
0,
6 5 4 3 2
Stratum Number
west
shore
Cell 1
(1)50
......enoIII
1Il
40(1)1Il
.en III
1llQ.......
c..c 30(1)1Il
u o -LlJ...
(1)
Q..L 20(1)
(1)>>0-
0-a::....10Ill-
-III(1)....a::0
~0 ,I .
2 3 4 5 6
Stratum Number
east
shore
""""1
~
~
~
--,
:]
d
....l
~
j..
-
.J
Figure H6.Horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9,weighted for
fish abundance,for Period I (July 22-25).Susitna River,1985.
-
~
H7
~
UPSTREAM
-
r--
I I
Stratum Number
50 -lo ;0
("T(l)
llJ -
40 -~
;0 -.-.<
30 ~(l)
,-0
(l)
"Tl,-·n20VI(l)
::T::l
("T
-ollJ
10 llJlO
VI (l)
VI
llJ a
1.0 ~
0 (l)
west
shore
23
Cell 9
456
Cell
Q)50
4-0'1o10
VI
Q)VI 400'110lOa..
+-'
C.J::.30Q)VI
u·-
l....lL.
Q)a..l....20Q)
Q)>>.-.-ex:
+-'10IU~
~10
Q)+-'ex:0
~0
2 3 4 5 6
Stratum Number
east
shore
~
1
~
-,
;
,
.:1
j
-:
j
~
j
"1.
j
=1i
oJ
"l
j
~
.J
~
:3
Cell 1
Q)50
4-0'1o10
VI
40Q)VI
0'110lOa..
+-'
C.J::.30Q)VI
u·-
l....lL.
Q)a..l....20Q)
Q)>>.-.-ex:
+-'10IU~
~10
Q)+-'ex:0
~0 .I ,
2 3 4 5 6
Stratum Number
east
shore
DOWNSTREAM
Cell 9 -50 -lo ;0
("T (l)
llJ -
40 -~
;0 -.-.<<(l)
30 ~-0
(l)
"Tl,-·n
20 ~~
("T
-ollJ
llJlO10VI(l)
\II
llJ 0
1.0 ~
0
(l)
I
6 5 4 3 2
Stratum Number
west
shore
-.....
Figure H7.Horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9,weighted for
fish abundance,for Period II (July 26-30).Susitna River,1985.
j
H8
UPSTREAM
Cell 1 Cell 9
v 50 50 -l
....Ol o ;;0o0C'O rt CD
llJ -VI
40 -~Q)VI 40tnC'O ;;0 _.C'Oo.._.<.....
30 ~CDCoL:30~Q)VI ,-0U.-CDLLL
Q).",-.()0..L 20 20 VI CDv
Q)>::T::J
rt>.--ollJ.-a:.....10 10 ~~C'O~
~C'O VI
Q).....llJ 0
a:0 ID -1)
1--0 0 CD
2 3 4 5 6 6 5 4 3 2
Stratum Number Stratum Number
eas t west
shore shore
1
j
,
j
1 DOWNSTREAM
~Cell 1 Cell 9 50 -f::;50-~Q)o ;;0....Ol rt CDoC'O llJ -]VI 40-40 -~Q)VI
.~tnC'O ;;0 -.~C'Oo..-.<.....<CDCoL:30-30 ~-0""
Q)VI
-~u·-CDLLL.",
~Q)-.()0..L 20 -20 ~~v
Q)>rt
-,>.--ollJ.-a:llJlD.....10 -10 VI CDjC'O~VI
~C'O llJ 0v.....I ID -1)a:0 CD
3 .....0 0I I I I
d I 2 3 4 5 6 6 5 4 3 2
Stratum Number Stratum Number
~east westj
~shore shore
,
-
J Figure HB.Horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9,weighted for
-,fish abundance,for Period III (July 31 -August 3).Susitna River,1985.
j
-----:1
H9
UPSTREAM
Stratum Number
.--
I I
Cell 9CeII
<1.l 50 -
4-enom
VI
<1.l VI 40-enroroo.......
c..s::30 -<1.l VI
U .-
Lou..
<1.l
0...Lo 20 -<1.l
<1.l >>.-.-oc....10-ro~
~ro
<1.l ....oc 0r-0
2 3 4 5 6
Stratum Number
ea st
shore
l
6 5 4 3 2
50 -Io /:)
rt (l)
llJ -
40 -~
/:)-.-.<
30 ~(l)
.,-0
(l)".,-·n20Vl(l)
"J"::J
rt
-ollJ
llJlO10Vl(l)
Vl
llJ 0
1O -...
0 (l)
west
shore
Stratum Number
r--
I I
Cell 9 .~.
50 -Io /:)
rt (l)
llJ -
40 -~
/:)-.-.<<CD
30 ~-0
(l)".,-.n
20 ~~
rt
-ollJ
llJlO
10 ~CD
llJ 0
1O -...
CD0
west
shore
23456
DOWNSTREAM
Cell
<1.l 50
4-enom
VI
40<1.l VI
enmroo.......
c.J::.30<1.l VI
U .-
Lou..
<1.l
0...Lo 20<1.l
<1.l >>.-.-oc....10ro~
~m
<1.l ....oc 0
t-O
I I I
2 3 4 5 6
Stratum Number
east
shore
~
J
,j
d
-,
~
-
3
1
j
1
,
-
j
-;
Figure H9.Horizontal distributions within Cells I and 9,weighted for
fish abundance,for Period IV (August 4-8).Susitna River,1985.
..;j
Hl0
50 -lo ;0
no ro
(lJ -
40 -~
;0 -.-.<
30 ~ro
•"Uro".-.n20tilro
:T::l
no
"U(lJ
10 e:~
til
(lJ a
lO ......
0 (l)
west
shore
23
Cell 9
4
Stratum Number
56
-
-
f--
f--
I
I I
UPSTREAM
Cell 1
Q)50
4-(j)o m
VI
Q)VI 40(j)mmo......
C£30Q)VI
U 0-
'-lL.
Q)
a..'-20Q)
Q)>>.-
0-a::::....10m--mQ)....
a::::0
f-0
2 3 4 5 6
Stratum Number
east
shore
~
-,
-,
j
"1
j
'J DOWNSTREAM
St ra tum Numbe r
I I
Cell :1'9 50 -lo ;0
no ro
OJ ~
40 ~~
;0 -.-.<<(l)
30 ~"U
ro".
-0 n
20 ~~
no
"U(lJ
(lJlO
10 til ro
til
OJ a
lO ......
(l)
0
west
shore
23456
Cell 1
Q)50
4-(j)o m
VI
40Q)VI(j)mmo......
C.J::.30Q)VIU0-
'-lL.
Q)a..'-20'Q)
Q)>>.-
0-a::::....10m--mQ)....a::::0
f-0
I I .
2 3 4 5 6
Stratum Number
east
shore
Cl~
~
d
j
"""1
~
--'
"""1
:]
;;l
:J
1
-l Figure HIO.Horizontal distributions within Cells I and 9,weighted for
fish abundance,for Periods I and II (July 22-30).Susitna River,1985.
3
Hll
"'
;;iJ
H12
""
H14
.J
~
j
j
-;1
~
"1-0;
j
-,
j
::'l
_J
~
~
:!
,
.J
:j
Appendix I.Mean Horizontal Distributions of Adult Salmon Across
the River,Based on Distributions by Shift
11
east
shore
I I I I
'1
--'
-,
-,
-'
-,
..,
1
_:l
oJ
j
"j
UPSTREAM
Ql
4-0'1oro
III
Ql IIIO'Iroroa..
+oJ
c£.
Ql IIIu·-'-u...
Qla..'-
Ql
Ql >>.-.-oc
+oJ
ro~
~ro
Ql +oJ
oc 0
~
100
80
60
40
20
o
100
2 3 4 5 6
Cell Number
7 8 9 west
shore
eas t
shore
-
I I I I
j
~
c3
1a
1
j
"1
oJ
J
,
.oJ
.,
~
;j
OOWNSTREAM
(l)
4-0'1oro
l/l
Ql l/lO'Iroroa..
+oJ
c£.
Ql l/l
U .-,-u...
Qla..'-
Ql
Ql >>.-.-oc
+oJ
ro~
~ro
Ql +oJoc0
~
80
60
40
20
o
2 3 456
Cell Number
7 8 9 west
shore
:oJ
=;l
Figure I1.Mean horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the
river,based on distributions by shift,for Period I (July 22-25).
Susitna River,1985.
I2
1
100
-'
Q.)801l.I-Olo10
-III
J Q.)III
OlIO
lOa..
~
1 c:.c:60Q.)III
U .-
UPSTREAM L-I.L.
Q.)
a..L-
Q.)
Q.)>40>.-
.-0:::
~
lll-
-10Q.)~
0:::0 20~
l
o I
I I I I I
east I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 west
shore Cell Number shore
J 100 -
'1
~<lJ
4-Ol 80 -o 10
l/l
<lJ l/l,Ollll
~lila..
~
c:.c:60 -Q.)l/l
")U .-
J.DOWNSTREAM L-1.L.
J Q.)
a..L-
Q.)
Q.)>40->.-~~>1 .-0:::~
~
""
lll-
-IIIQ.)~
0:::0 20-~~
;j
01 I ---1----1~I I I I
east 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 westJshoreCellNumbershore
,..,•
3
Figure I2.Mean horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the
-,river,based on distributions by shift,for Period II (July 26-10).
Susitna River,1985.
j
I3
I I I I
100
-,
~
Ql 80"l ~01oro
III
-"
Q)III
Olroroo......
~C£60QlIII
U .-
UPSTREAM \...lL.
Qla..\...
Ql
Ql >40>.-.-a::
-,....
ro~
~ro
Ql ....
a::0 20I-
0
east
shore
2 3 456
Ce II Number
7 8 9 west
shore
I I
I I I I I I
-.J
-;
~
~
J
~,
a
~,
~
"
j
~
j
d
~
.:J
100
Q)
80......enaCil
III
Ql IIIOlCilroo......
C£60Qllll
U .-
DOWNSTREAM \...lL.
Qla..\...
Ql
Ql >40>.-.-a::....Cil ~
~ro
Ql ....
a::0 20I-
a
east
shore
2 3 456
Cell Number
7 8 9 west
shore
-,
-~
J
l
d
Figure 13.Mean horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the
river,based on distributions by shift,for Period III (July 31 -
August 3).Susitna River,1985.
14
I I I I
-,
_J
---,
~
-,
--l
~
UPSTREAM
~
....01o10
In
~In
0110
lOa.......
c:..c:
~Inu·-
l...Ll..
~a..l...
~
~>>.-.-a::.....
IO~
~10
~.....a::0
I-
100
80
60
40
20
o
eas t
shore
100
2 3 4 5 6
Ce 11 Number
7 8 9 west
shore
east
shore
J I I I
~,
j
=i
d
=>~
~
~
j
::J
.J
~
j
DOWNSTREAM
~
.....01a10
In
~In
0110
100.......
c:.r:.
~In
U .-
l...Ll..
~
0..l...
~
~>>.-.-a::.....
IO~
~10
~.....a::a
I-
80
60
40
20
a
2 3 456
Cell Number
7 8 9 west
shore
..J
="
Figure 14.Mean horizontal distributions of adult salmon across the
river,based on distributions by shift,for Period IV (August 4-8)
Susitna River,1985.
IS
UPSTREAM
Ql
~CloIII
III
Ql III
ClIlIilia..
4-1
CJ::.
Ql III
U·-Lu...
Qla..L
Ql
Ql >>.-
.-0:::
4-1
1lI~
~III
Ql 4-1
0:::0
~
100
80
60
40
20
o I I I I
.~
eas t
shore
100
2 3 4 5 6
Cell Number
7 8 9 west
shore
east
shore
I I I I
J
~
J
~
j
-~
j
.,
j
:l
o=i
~
j
d
DOWNSTREAM
<IJ
~CloIII
III
Ql III
ClIlI
ilia..
4-1
CJ::.
Ql III
U·-Lu...
Qla..L
Ql
Ql >>.-
.-0:::
4-1
1lI~
~III
Ql ....
0:::0
~
80
60
40
20
o
2 3 456
Cel I Number
7 8 9 west
shore
-'
d
='
Figure IS.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.
16
,100
eas t
shore
I I I I
1
l
j
~
UPSTREAM
a)
......Q)o CO
III
a)III
Q)CO
COo.......
CL
a)Ill"
U·-
L-lL.
a)
0...L-
a)
a)>>.-
.-0::::....
CO~
~CO
a)......
0::::0
I-
80
60
40
20
a
2 3 4 5 6
Cell Number
7 8 9 west
shore
J
100
~
east
shore
"~
9 west
shore
87456
Cell Number
32
I I I I
20
o
40
80
60
Q)
-.-Q)o CU
III
Q)III
Q)CO
cuo.........
CL
Q)III
U .-
L-lL.
Q)
0...L-
a)
Q)>>0-
.-0::::......
CO~
~CO
Q)......
0::::0
I-
D.OWNSTREAM
"l
~
j
~
..j
.",
J
i
j
~
::
....
.J
;j
--i
Figure 16.Mean horizontal distribuions of adult salmon across the
river,based on distributions by shift,for Periods I-IV,(July 22 -
August 8).Susitna River,1985.
~
d 17
l
V
4-(1)o III
VI
V VI
(1)III
III a..
~
C:~V VIU0-
1-l.L
Va..l-
V
V >>0-
0-a:
~
Ill-
-IIIell~a:0...-
50
40
30
20
10
o
Cell 1
I I
UPSTREAM
Cell 9
r-
f-
f-
-
f-
I I
I I I
50 -1
.0 ;xl
~·OJ ~
4(r:-~
;xl -0
-.<
30 ~(l)
""'I '"U
(l)
"Tl ""'I-.n20III(l)
:T::J....
'"UtlJ
10 e:~
III
OJ 0l.O ...,o (l)
2 3 4 5 6 6 5 4 3 2
l
"
,
-'
east
shore
Stratum Number Stratum Number
west
shore
-
I I
:
~
1,
.i
1
='
.,
;oj
:J
DOWNSTREAM
:~~Cell 9 50 -1
0 ;xl
....(l)
OJ -
40 -~
;xl -._.<
<(l)
30 ~'"U
(l)
"Tl""'l-·n
20 ~~....
'"UtlJ
OJl.O10VI(l)
VI
OJ 0
l.O ...,
(l)
0
...J 6 5 4 3 2
-,
~
;j
Stratum Number
west
shore
...JJ
-,
..i
Figure I7.Mean horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9,based
on distributions by shift,for Period I (July 22-25).Susitna River,
1985 .
I8
UPSTREAM
50 -lo ;;;0
rt(1)
OJ -
40 -~
;;;0 -.-.<
30 ~(l)
..,-0
(l)"..,-·n20Vl(l)
:J::J
rt
-0 OJ
OJ tolOVl(l)
Vl
"OJ 0
to -t>
0 (l)
west
shore
23
Cell 9
4
Stratum Number
56
I I
Cell 1
Q)50
.......Oloco
Vl
Q)Vl 40OlCOcoo....
~
c.r::.30Q)Vl
U .-
'-lL.
Q)
0....'-20Q)
Q)>>.-.-a::
~10co~-co
Q)~
a::0
1--0
2 3 4 5 6
Stratum Number
eas t
shore
DOWNSTREAM
r-
l-
f-
~
I-
-----
I I
Stratum Number
50 -lo ;;;0
rt (l)
OJ -
40 -~
;;;0 -.-.<<(l)
30 ~-0
(l)"..,-.n
20 ~~
rt
-0 OJ
OJ to10VI(l)
VI
OJ 0
to -t>
(l)
0
west
shore
23
Cell 9
456
Cell 1 ~
Q)50
.......Oloco
Vl
40!Q)Vltnco1coo....
~
c.r::.30"Q)Vl
"1 U .-
'-lL.
d Q)
0....'-20Q)
Q)>,>.-.-a::
~10Jco~
~co
Q)~
a::0
:]I-0 .I .
~1 2 3 4 5 6
Stratum Number
east
shore
J
Figure I8.Mean horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9,based
on distributions by shift,for Period II (July 26-30).Susitna River,
1985.
19
UPSTREAM
Stratum Number
~
I I I
Cell 9Cell1
(1)50 -
....01o10
Vl
(1)Vl 40 -OlIO
IOQ......
C.J:;30 -Q)VlU...;.
-'I..lL..
Q)
Q..l..20 -(1)
Q)>>.-.-ex::....10 -11l~
-10Q)....
ex:0
~0
2 3 4 5 6
Stratum Number
east
shore
6 5 4 3 2
50 -io ;xl
rt (l)
OJ -
40 -~
;xl _.
-.<
30 ~(l)
.,IJ
(l)
..".,
-.n20Vl(l)
:::r::J
rt
IJOJ
10 ~~
Vl
OJ 0
<.0 ......
0 (l)
west
shore
DOWNSTREAM
-
-
-
-
-
I I I
Cell 1
r--
I I
Cell 9 50 -i
0 ;xl
rt (l)
OJ -40 -~
;xl -.-.<<(l)
30 ~IJ
(l)
..".,-.n
20 ~~
rt
IJOJ
OJ <.010Vl(l)
Vl
OJ 0
<.0 ......
(l)
0
2345665432
.~
50(1)
....01o10
Vl
40Q)Vl
'OlIOIOQ......
C.J:;30Q)Vl
u·-LolL..
Q)
Q..l..20(1)
Q)>>.-.-ex::....1010~
-10Q)....ex:0
~0
St ra tum Numbe r Stratum Number
east
shore
west
shore
Figure 19.Mean horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and 9,based
on distributions by shift,for Period III (July 31 -August 3).Susitna
River,1985.
110
UPSTREAM
r--
I I
Stratum Number
Cell 9Cell1
Q)50 -
....enoIII
VI
Q)VI 40 -en III
Illel......c..c 30 -Q)VI
U .-
LlJ...
Q)
el..L 20 -Q)
Q)>>.-.-a::....10 -Ill~
~III
Q)....
a::0
t-O I I I -----,----,I
2 3 4 5 6
Stratum Number
east
shore
6 5 4 3 2
50 -lo 7'
rT(l)
OJ -
40 -~
7'-._.<
30 ~(l)
.,-0
(l)".,-·n20III(l)
:J:J
rT
-0 OJ
10 e:~
III
OJ 0
t.Cl -t)
0 (l)
west
shore
DOWNSTREAM
I---
I
I I
Stratum Number
Cell 9 50 -l
0 7'
rT (l)
OJ -40 -~
7'-._.<
<(l)
30 ~-0
(l)".,-.n
20 ~~
rT
-0 OJ
OJt.Cl10III(l)
VI
OJ 0
t.Cl ....,
(l)
0
west
shore
23456
Cell 1
Q)50
....enoIII
VI
Q)VI 40UlIII
Illel......
c..c 30Q)VI
u·-LlJ...
Q)
el..L 20Q)
Q)>>.-.-a::....10Ill-
~III
Q)....a::0
t-O .I ,
2 3 4 5 6
Stratum Number
east
shore
"1
~
j
-.
3
1
1
~
"
j
-,
~
--'
~
Figure IIO.Mean horizontal distributions within Cells I and 9,based
on distributions by Shift,for Period IV (August 4-8).Susitna River,
1985 .
..i
III
UPSTREAM
(l)50 Cell 1
.....O'lo10
<II
(l)<II 400'l1O
lOa..
+J
c.r::.
(l)<II 30u.-
LlJ..
(l)
a..L
(l)20
(l)>>.-
.-0::::
+J
IO~10
~10
(l)+J
0::::0
1--0 r--
I I
Cell 9
50 -io :::0
rt (l)
01 -
40 -~
:::0 _.
-.<
30 ~(l)
.,-0
(l)".,-·n20VI(l)
:T:J
rt
-001
OlIO10VI(l)
VI
01 0
10 -t\
0 (l)
2 3 4 5 6 6 5 4 3 2
Stratum Number Stratum Number
east
shore
west
shore
1
~
~DOWNSTREAM
-
I I
Stratum Number
Cell 9 50 -io :::0
rt (l)
01 -
40 -~
:::0 -._.<
<(l)
30 ~-0
(l)".,-.n
20 ~~
rt
-001
OlIO10VI(l)
VI
01 0
10 -t\
(l)
0
west
shore
23456
Cell 1
(l)50
.....O'lo10
<II 40(l)<II
'Ol 10
lOa..
+J
c.r::.30(l)<II
u·-LlJ..
(l)
a..L 20(l)
(l)>>.-
.-0::::
+J 10IO~
~10
(l)+J
0::::0
I-0
I I .
2 3 4 5 6
Stratum Number
east
shore
J
~
-l
J
~
j
J
;j
::l
-1
-'i..
;"jj
~
Figure Ill.Mean horizontal distributions within Cells 1 and
on distributions by shift,for Periods I and II (July 22-30).
River,1985.'
9,based
Susitna
112
UPSTREAM
Cll SO -
....enoco
III
Cll III 40 -en COcoa..
+J
c..c 30 -Cll III
U .-
LLL
Clla..L 20 -Cll
Cll >>.-.-cr.
+J 10-co~
~co
Cll +Jcr.0
~-0
Cell I
I
I
1
I T 1
Cell 9
-
I I
50 -;
0 ;>::J
~(l)
III -
40 -~
;>::J _.
-.<
30 ~(l)
.,"U
(l)....,.,_.()
20 III (l)
:r~
rt
"U1ll
III to10III(l)
III
III 0to......
0 (l)
2 3 4 5 6 6 5 4 3 2
Stratum Number Stratum Number
east
shore
west
shore
DOWNSTREAM
'---
I I
Stratum Number
Cell 9 50 -io ;>::J
~(l)
III -
40 ~~
7'-.-.<.<(l)
30 ~"U
(l)....,.,
_.()
20 ~~
rt
"U1ll
III to10III(l)
III
III 0
to ......
(l)o
west
shore
23456
Cell 1
Cll SO
....enoco
III
40CllIII.en cocoa..
+Jc..c 30CllIIIu·-
LLL
Clla..L 20Cll
Cll >>.-.-cr.
+J 10co~
~co
Cll+Jcr.0
I-0 ,I ,
2 3 4 5 6
Stratum Number
east
shore
"1
-.
j
j
::3
d
~
j
-,
~
~
Figure 112.Mean horizontal distributions within CellG 1 and 9,based
on distributions by shift,for Periods I-IV (July 22 -August 8).
Susitna River,1985.
3
113
Ui ,,"",..l Lu ,j "",i,,,,,iU I.,1.,1 ~"''''"'U._ilt"J",,;,~
Table 11.Summary of mean horizontal distributions of adult
salmon across the river,based on distributions by
shift (Susitna 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 0 0 8.4/3.1 0 0 0 0 83.0/5.7 100.0
III 7/31-8/3 upstream 26.3/9.2 0 0 10.0/3.8 0 0 0 0 63.7/10.7 100.0
H Downstream 34.0/11.0 0 0 9.8/3.7 0 0 0 0 56.2/11.7 100.0...
*"IV 8/4-8 Upstream 14.3/5.2 0 0 13.3/4.7 0 0 0 0 72.4/6.9 100.0
Downstream 13.3/5.1 0 0 12.0/5.7 0 0 0 0 74.7/6.5 100.0
1+II 7/22-30 Upstream 14.6/6.2 0
Downstream 11.9/2.8 0
I-IV 7/22-8/8 upstream 17.2/3.9 0
Downstream 15.2/2.9 0
o 14.1/5.1 0
o 13.6/4.7 0
o 12.9/2.9 0
o 12.3/2.9 0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
71.3/7.7
74.5/5.7
69.9/4.8
72.5/4.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
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).
jJ 1.Il'''I'''".J ~L.l IJd.w IIJ,~,JI.'~IL.jI k.._J,.•.,.l.J 1l.i>J>'i •.,j ·L..i",.,j,,,,L•.wI
Table 12.Summary of mean horizon tal dis tributions of adult salmon across the rivet,based on
distributions by shift (Susi tna River 1985).
Period Fish*Relative Percentage Across the Cell,by Section**
Number Dates 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
H D 4.9/4.92 5.0/2.11 3.3/1.70 0 0 0 13.3/5.07...
VI
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 11.9/2.85
I-IV 7/22-8/8 U 1.8/0.80 9.2/2.04 3.0/0.95 3.2/2.33 0 0 17.2/3.94
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).
1 ~L,,",J Ii"",,:,,J lLkk~I"U".11 ""-.,,-,•..LJ lI.i.~,.",J l;.".iL",L",~
Table I2,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
H....
C1'I 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
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 69.9/4.81
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 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).
li'
f
~-
<.
-
-
-
-
-
-
V-VVV .,--V V V..-[7,-7/V V
V-//V V V
//
/V V
//T-/V ///
r7 V //V ,......-V //V V
!///V /-V ////V V
//r71
(/l ~v<[71V////V V
!//
26
24
22
20
Q)18
(J\
0
+J 16c
Q)
u 14l...
Q)a.
Q)12
>
'.;J
0 10
Q)
0::8
6
4
2
o
-50 -45 -40 -35 -.30 -25 -20
Target Strength (dB)
"'-1
l
.i
"
~
1
J
26
24
22
20
Q)18
(J\
0--16c
Q)
U
l...14
Q)
Q..
Q)12
~
0 10
Q)
0::8
6
4
2
0
-50 -45 -40 -35 -.30 -25 -20
~
.i
Target Strength (dB)
Figure J1.Acoustic size distr~bution of fish during Period I (July
22-25).Susitna River,1985 .
J2
26
24
22
20
Q)18
0'
0 16...c
Q)
u 14...
Q)
Q.
Q)12
>:;;100
Q)
0::8
6
4
2
0
-50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20
Target Strength (dB)
Target Strength (dB)
1
"
j
==
~
=l
j
26
24
22
20
Q)18
0'
0 16.....c
Q)
u 14...
Q)
Q.
Q)12
>0':;100
Q)
0::8
6
4
2
0
-50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20
-'
Figure J2.Acoustic size distribution of fish during Period II (July
26-30).Susitna River,1985 •.
J3
26
24
22
20
Q)18
Ol
0 16oJc:
Q)
u 14L.
Q)
Q..
Q)12
>'';:;100
Q)
0:::8
6
4
2
0
-50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20
Target Strength (dB)
Target Strength (dB)
-20-25-30-35-40-45
o
-50
26
24
22
20
Q)18
Ol
0
oJ 16c:
Q)
U
L.14
Q)
Q..
Q)12
.~
oJ
0 10
Q)
0:::8
6
4
2
-
j
~
~
~
.j
j
:::>
1
~
:i
Figure J3.Acoustic size distribution of fish during Period III
(July 31 -August 3).Susitna River,1985 .
.3
J4
~
~
~
26
24
22
20
v 18
(jl
0 16-'cvu 14L-v
0..
v 12
>:;:;100
v
0::8
6
4
2
0
-50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20
J Target Strength (dB)
~26 I I
..24
-,22
"
20
-20-25-30-35-40-45
2
O-'T--.---r--,--,-",-""--,--~",,,-""',...LL,...LL.r-lL.,-.l...I'"rl.L.rLL,-JiL,.-1""""'''r'-''-,-U:.,....LL,...lL,....u::..,...u.,...L...-.---,----,.----r1
-50
Target Strength (dB)
6
4
8
16
12
10
18
14
v
(jlo...,.
cv
U
L-
V
0..
v
~o
vn::
=l
~
'1
:j
J
d
~
.ii
J
:::;
.J Figure J4.Acoustic size distribution of fish during Period IV (August
4-8).Susitna River,1985.
-'
J5
26
24
22
20
Q)18
Ol
0 16.....c
Q)
u 14L
Q)
Q.
Q)12
.~.....10.2
Q)
lY 8
6
4
2
0
-50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20
Target Strength (dB)
26
24
22
20
Q)18
Ol
0 16-'c
Q)
u 14L
Q)
Q.
Q)12
>
-'100
Q)
lY 8
6
4
2
0
-50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20
Target Strength (dB)
~
~
~
~
~
:>
~
::l
3
ci
""
,
~
Figure J5.Acoustic size distribution of fish during Periods I and II
(July 22-30).Susitna River,1985.
-'
J6
26
24
22
20
III 18
(]I
0 16.....c
IIIu 14L
III
Q..
III 12
>:;:;100
IIIa::8
6
4
2
0
-50 -45 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20
Target Strength (dB)
26 ,Ir-----------------------------------,
24
22
20
-20-25-30-35-40-45
2
4
6
8
o I,• , , , I ' , ,i 7k;1k;1V;1V;I~WIV;IV;IV;I~IV;IV;IV;Ik(19Q=;=i •,I
-50
16
18
14
12
10
III
(]I
o...-
C
III
U
L
III
Q..
III>:;:;
o
va::
j
J
-,
'''''!
oil
~
:3
,
;j
Target Strength (dB)
-
oil Figure J6.Acoustic size distribution of fish during Periods I-IV
(July 22 -August 8).Susitna River,1985.
j
J7
Table J1.Target strength frequency distributions by period
(Susitna River 1985).
UPSTREAM
TS BLOCK1 BLOCK2 BLOCK3 BLOCK4 BLOCKS I-II BLOCKS 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 1 1 1 18 1 1 151 180
-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
1 -44 0 0 0 0 0 0
J -45 0 0 0 0 0 0
-46 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 -47 0 0 0 0 O.0
~-48 0 0 0 0 0 0
-49 0 0 0 0 0 0
~-50 0 0 0 0 0 0
J SUM 808 1279 136 87 2087 2310
:]
-'
~
~
;j
-
-
--'
~
J8
Table J1,cont.
~
"
-,
j
~
J
~
-;
~
j
3
Appendix K.Mean Fish Target Velocities
Upstream Downstream
Period Dates Velocity N Velocity N
in fps (m/s)in fps (m/s)
I July 22-25 1.06 (0.32)808 1.07 (0.33)969
II July 26-30 1 •11 (0.34)1279 1.03 (0.32)1479
III July 31-August 3 1.44 (0.44)136 1.13 (0.34)107
IV August 4-8 1 .47 (0.77)87 1.16 (0.35)97
I-II July 22-30 1 .11 (0.34)2087 1.06 (0.32)2448
I-IV July 22-August 8 1.13 (0.35)2310 1 .07 (0.33)2652
K1
j
'1
j
9
j
":l
,j
1
-~
:l
-'
]
~
Appendix L.Relative Percentage of upstream Vs.Downstream Moving
Adul t Sa lmon
Ll
L.,J Lil.L,LlJ l k""k,,,,,,,,,,J u.""""".J l.d~.J"""lJ II;.,,1.1 J LL<",J l_.,1 .,.J
~100 J \
----percentage downstream ,4.0
moving fish
A --_.staff guage level
enc->:;XJ
0 80
(1)
L 3.0 -
I OJ
E I
,.,.
III -
(1)I <
~I \(1)
.j.J I \Vl Vl
c I \,.,.
3 \
OJ
0 -fl
0 60 \-fl
4-\2.0 G'l
0 \OJ
\c
(1)1O
en \(1)
III \
L'.j.J \
r
c (1)
IV (1)\<
\J \(1)
~-
(1)40 ,1.0Q..,---.,-fl
(1),....,.,.
>,/...-......----.,--.j.J ,...-0---...;
III ".;---'.--"'(1)"r--"
ac """--20 0
7/22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 8/1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49
Date and Shift
Figure L1.
and shift.
Relative percentage of downstream-moving fish and relative staff gauge level vs.date
Susitna River,1985./
100
£.90
<II
u..
60 .. .
.~
50 r ;:
- 9 16X +48.12
.
y - •
r =0.439
40.
N =36
p <0.010
030t-o
80
......
It'
Q)ex:
enc
>o
L
Eco
~70
......
<II
C
3o
Cl
4-a
0)
enco......
c
0)
U
I...
0)
c-
O)
>
l
'1
1
1
~
i
:J
4.03.02~01.0
20 ' , . , , , , , , ,I ,,,,I ,,I ,,
oJ
...,
...
Relative Staff Gauge Level (ft)
=>
--'
..c-",
-'
Figure L2.Regression of relative staff gauge level vs.relative
percentage of downstream-moving fish.Susitna River,1985.
d
L3
-,
i
Table L1.Relative percentage of upstream and downstream movement
of adult salmon by shift,for the whole river (Susitna
River 1985).
Table L2.Relative percentage of upstream and downstream movement
of adult salmon by shift at cell 1 (Susi tna River
1985)•
Shift Relative Percentage
Date Number Upstream Downs tream 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
j
34 47.2 52.8 100.0
l August 1 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~
j 40 41.4 58.6 100.0~
4 41 52.1 47.9 100.0
9 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
cJ 7 47 0.0 0.0 0.0
48 0.0 0.0 0.0
8 49 50.0 50.0 100.0
til 50 0.0 0.0 0.0
'1
~Mean 46.9 53.1 100.0_-:3
J (by Shift)
Mean 47.6 52.4 100.0
(Weighted by Fish Abundance)
3
d
~L5
-'
L6
:::J
L7
Appendix M.Water Levels,Based on Daily Susitna Station Staff
Gauge Readings
"'
j
1
-
,
~
*--,
;j
-,
"
~
j
"
j
Relative to lowest water level on August 6.
=
"1
-,
,
~
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 8/8 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
M1
~
Appendix N.Mean water Velocity Profile and Depths During Low
Water Period.
Velocity in fps
~Depth Range*Percentage 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 period.
The end of the deployment cable (18 ft (5.5m»was reached
before flow meter reached the bottom.
--,
d
']
--j
.-J
l
-=-~~
=-.
~-1
::J
,
...J
d
F'J
'-'
f'u
t
f
CC!
-
L-':
N1