Gurshin, C.

Lenz, B.

English

ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst

University of Massachusetts AmherstScholarWorks@UMass AmherstInternational Conference on Engineering andEcohydrology for Fish PassageInternational Conference on Engineering andEcohydrology for Fish Passage 2014Jun 9th, 4:10 PM - 4:30 PMIncreased Downriver Passage of Juvenile BluebackHerring after Reconfiguring an Ultrasonic FieldC. GurshinUniversity of Wisconsin - MadisonB. LenzUniversity of Wisconsin - MadisonFollow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/fishpassage_conferenceThis Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Fish Passage Community at UMass Amherst at ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It hasbeen accepted for inclusion in International Conference on Engineering and Ecohydrology for Fish Passage by an authorized administrator ofScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact scholarworks@library.umass.edu.Gurshin, C. and Lenz, B., "Increased Downriver Passage of Juvenile Blueback Herring after Reconfiguring an Ultrasonic Field" (2014).International Conference on Engineering and Ecohydrology for Fish Passage. 70.https://scholarworks.umass.edu/fishpassage_conference/2014/June9/70Increased Downriver Passage of Juvenile Blueback Herring after Reconfiguring an Ultrasonic Field, Mohawk River, New YorkJune 2014Engineering and Ecohydrology for Fish PassageSound fieldsBackgroundDashed  = original configurationColored = current configurationOriginal Configuration (2008) Study Results Proportion of herring passing the main channel downriver site =0.31 3x greater than expected based on river flows ConclusionAcoustic deterrent effective but needed improvement BackgroundOriginal and Reconfigured Study Hypotheses1)  H0: Nd,downriver/Nd,upriver = Vd,downriver/Vd,upriver V = volume of water moving downstream at each site 2)  H0: Nd,downriver/Nd,upriver = 0.5 H1: Nd,downriver/Nd,upriver > 0.5 (majority) H2: Nd,downriver/Nd,upriver < 0.5 MethodologyDataAmbient• River Flow           1)  ADCP, fixed and mobile2)  Crescent plant discharge3)  USGS Cohoes gauge• Temperature                            HOBO loggers, 15 min.     Fish Pop’n• Hydroacoustic1) Mobile       420 kHz split-beam echo sounder2) Fixed          2 arrays, 3 horizontal, 1 vertical split-beams• Trawl 3 m cone, 95 mm stretch mesh net, 1.8 m x 1.2 m frameSupplemental• Invertebrate                              Plankton tow nets• Precipitation                             Albany airport MethodologyField Study MapsMethodologyFixed Hydroacoustic Sites Split-Beam Transducers CoverageMethodologySampling ScheduleRiver Flow        • ADCP1) Fixed = continuous2) Mobile = Daily• Crescent plant discharge/USGS Cohoes gauge   = continuousTemperature Continuous, 15 min. intervals    -------------------------Mobile     7    Day-Time Surveys1 Night-Time*Fixed ContinuousTrawl 11 Night-Time Surveys2   Day-Time**                MethodologyData AnalysesFlow• Difference in paired estimates of upstream/downstream fixed sites• Compared with mobile ADCPTemperature• 15-minute plotsMethodologyData AnalysesTrawl Surveys• Abundance Estimate (CPUE)• Verified with mobile hydroacoustic• 50 individual subsample per trawl, lengthMobile Hydroacoustic Surveys• Quantify the backscattering coefficient volume• Filter for juvenile herring target strength• Calculate herring target strength density• Survey maps w/kriging interpolation• (Dunning and Gurshin 2012)MethodologyData AnalysesFixed Hydroacoustic Surveys• Quantify the backscattering coefficient volume• Filter for juvenile herring target strength• Filter Chaoborus and bubbles• Calculate herring target strength density• Spatial and temporal trends• (Dunning and Gurshin 2012)MethodologyFlowResultsTemperatureResultsTrawl SurveysResultsMobile Hydroacoustic SurveyResultsMobile Hydroacoustic SurveyResultsResultsMobile SurveysResultsMobile SurveysResultsMobile SurveysResultsMobile SurveysResultsMobile SurveysResultsMobile SurveysResultsMobile SurveysMobile Hydroacoustic Survey ResultsFixed Hydroacoustic Survey ResultsFixed Hydroacoustic SurveyResultsFixed Hydroacoustic Survey1)   H0: Vd,downriver/Vd,upriver = 0.49V = volume of water moving downstream at each site 2)   H0: Nd,downriver/Nd,upriver = 0.76 H1: Nd,downriver/Nd,upriver > 0.5 (majority) H2: Nd,downriver/Nd,upriver < 0.5 ResultsConclusions1. Deterrence Rate =76%, 45% improvement after reconfiguration2. 180 C is limiting temperature at which JBBH complete    downstream migration out of Crescent Pool3. Strong diurnal activity patterns, dawn – early afternoon

Increased Downriver Passage of Juvenile Blueback Herring after Reconfiguring an Ultrasonic Field

https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1577&amp;context=fishpassage_conference

Increased Downriver Passage of Juvenile Blueback Herring after Reconfiguring an Ultrasonic Field

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst