mass marking and electronic recovery of cwts in the pacific northwest ron olson
DESCRIPTION
Mass Marking and Electronic Recovery of CWTs In the Pacific Northwest Ron Olson Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission Olympia Washington. Background. Purpose Provide for Mark Selective Fisheries Hatchery Broodstock Management Brood selection for maintaining genetic fitness - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Mass Marking and
Electronic Recovery of CWTs
In the Pacific Northwest
Ron Olson
Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission
Olympia Washington
BackgroundBackgroundPurpose Purpose Provide for Mark Selective FisheriesProvide for Mark Selective Fisheries Hatchery Broodstock ManagementHatchery Broodstock Management
Brood selection for maintaining genetic fitnessBrood selection for maintaining genetic fitness Monitor hatchery/wild ecological Monitor hatchery/wild ecological
interactionsinteractions
RequirementsRequirements ESA listed hatchery broodstock managementESA listed hatchery broodstock management WA State legislative directives (1997 & 1998) WA State legislative directives (1997 & 1998) Federal mandate (2003 & 2004)Federal mandate (2003 & 2004)
Adipose Fin “Mass Adipose Fin “Mass Marking”Marking”
Annual Hatchery Annual Hatchery ProductionProduction
CohoCoho50 million 50 million S. British Columbia, Washington, S. British Columbia, Washington, OregonOregon
ChinookChinook150 million 150 million Washington, Oregon, IdahoWashington, Oregon, Idaho
Complications – The CWT Complications – The CWT SystemSystem
CWT Program Vital to Salmon CWT Program Vital to Salmon
ManagementManagement Fully integrated tagging, sampling and Fully integrated tagging, sampling and
recovery program – California to Alaskarecovery program – California to Alaska
Only method to estimate and monitor Only method to estimate and monitor coast wide fishery exploitation rates on coast wide fishery exploitation rates on individual stocks of coho and Chinook individual stocks of coho and Chinook salmon salmon
Without the CWT programs we would Without the CWT programs we would be virtually blind to fishery impacts and be virtually blind to fishery impacts and unable to separate fishery from marine unable to separate fishery from marine survival effects survival effects
- - Morishima 2007Morishima 2007
Pacific Salmon TreatyPacific Salmon Treaty
The parties of the PST agree to The parties of the PST agree to maintain the CWT program to maintain the CWT program to evaluate fishery regimes and evaluate fishery regimes and monitor stock rebuilding monitor stock rebuilding
Fishing regimes for Chinook and Fishing regimes for Chinook and coho are based on constraining coho are based on constraining Exploitation RatesExploitation Rates for naturally for naturally spawning populationsspawning populations
CWT groups representative of CWT groups representative of natural stocks are tagged and natural stocks are tagged and released for a region wide PSC released for a region wide PSC Indicator Stock ProgramIndicator Stock Program
The ChallengeThe Challenge
Implement a region wide Implement a region wide hatchery marking programhatchery marking program
and and
Maintain the capabilities of the Maintain the capabilities of the CWT system in the presence of CWT system in the presence of Mass Marking (MM) and Mark-Mass Marking (MM) and Mark-Selective Fisheries (MSF)Selective Fisheries (MSF)
The ApproachThe Approach
Change the regional designation Change the regional designation of the adipose markof the adipose mark
Gear up to mark 150 million fish Gear up to mark 150 million fish Convert to Electronic Tag Convert to Electronic Tag
Detection to recover CWTsDetection to recover CWTs Implement a “Double-Index Tag” Implement a “Double-Index Tag”
program to measure the impacts program to measure the impacts of MSFs on wild stocksof MSFs on wild stocks
Double Index TaggingDouble Index TaggingThe Indicator Stock contains two The Indicator Stock contains two
tag groups. tag groups.
The two groups are identical The two groups are identical except :except :
And the other is unmarked
One tag code is marked
This group now represents wild fish
Use difference between marked and Use difference between marked and unmarked returns to estimate total unmarked returns to estimate total MSF mortality of unmarked fishMSF mortality of unmarked fish
Challenges in Mass Challenges in Mass MarkingMarking
Region-wide Hatchery Region-wide Hatchery ProductionProduction Timing of MarkingTiming of Marking
Minimum fish size and limited Minimum fish size and limited windowwindow
5 month marking season5 month marking season
Labor and Equipment Labor and Equipment More efficient trailer designs and More efficient trailer designs and
new technologynew technology CostsCosts
New Fin Clipping TrailersNew Fin Clipping TrailersCrew of 12 – 14 Crew of 12 – 14
60-80,000 fish / day60-80,000 fish / day
Fin Clipping Stations with Fin Clipping Stations with Counting SystemCounting System
Clipping Crew Clipping Crew
““Automatic” TrailersAutomatic” TrailersCrew of 0 – 5Crew of 0 – 5
30-60,000 fish/day (w/o 30-60,000 fish/day (w/o crew)crew)
““AutoFish” System AutoFish” System TechnologyTechnology
Skilled OperatorsSkilled Operators
Current Investment in MM Current Investment in MM TrailersTrailers
Type Type # # UnitsUnits
Approx. Approx. Cost Cost
Total $Total $
Manual Manual ClippingClipping
2323 $70,000$70,000 $ 1,610,000$ 1,610,000
AutomatAutomaticic
2121 $1,000,000$1,000,000 $ $ 21,000,00021,000,000
Total Cost for Region =Total Cost for Region = $ $ 22,610,022,610,0
0000
A) Mass Marked Coho Salmon (Southern BC, WA, OR)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Brood Year
Mill
ions
Coastal Oregon
Columbia River
Coastal Washington
Puget SoundWest Coast Vancouver Is
Strait of Georgia
Total Relase
B) Mass Marked Chinook Salmon (WA and OR)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Brood Year
Mill
ions
Coastal Oregon
Columbia River
Coastal Washington
Puget Sound
Total Release
Proposed Chinook Marking Proposed Chinook Marking for 2009 for 2009 (Washington and (Washington and
Oregon)Oregon)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
MassMarked
CWT +Marked
CWTUnmarked
Unmarked
Mark Status
Mill
ion
s
Annual Mass Marking Costs Annual Mass Marking Costs
((direct costs w/Automatic trailersdirect costs w/Automatic trailers))
11 ODFW, 2002 ODFW, 2002
SpecieSpeciess
ActivityActivity # Fish # Fish (mill)(mill)
(# (# stocks)stocks)
ApplicatiApplicationon
Cost/Cost/1,0001,00011
CostCost
CohoCoho MarkinMarkingg
38.238.2 $ 26$ 26 $ $ 993,200993,200
DITDIT 0.95 (21)0.95 (21) $ 113$ 113 $107,35$107,3500
ChinoChinookok
MarkinMarkingg
101.7101.7 $ 26$ 26 $2,644,2$2,644,20000
DITDIT 3.4 (17)3.4 (17) $ 113$ 113 $384,20$384,2000
Total Cost = Total Cost = $4,128,9$4,128,95050
Electronic CWT Electronic CWT DetectionDetection
Electronic Tag Detection (ETD) Electronic Tag Detection (ETD) EquipmentEquipment How well does it work ?How well does it work ? CostsCosts
Impacts to Agency Sampling Impacts to Agency Sampling ProgramsPrograms
The “Wand” DetectorThe “Wand” Detector
Feasibility of the WandFeasibility of the Wand
Method of choice in situations Method of choice in situations with low fish numbers or with low fish numbers or undeveloped sitesundeveloped sites
No calibration requiredNo calibration required Very portableVery portable Cost = $5,000 (US)Cost = $5,000 (US)
The “Tube” or “Tunnel” Detector
Feasibility of the TubeFeasibility of the Tube
Practical use is limited to high volume Practical use is limited to high volume sites with level ground and clean fishsites with level ground and clean fish
Equipment calibration is criticalEquipment calibration is critical Automatic sorting and counting Automatic sorting and counting
capabilitycapability Staging adaptations (e.g. tote lifts and Staging adaptations (e.g. tote lifts and
custom tables may be necessary to custom tables may be necessary to reduce time and labor) reduce time and labor)
Cost = $29,700 (US)Cost = $29,700 (US)
Results of 1996 Wand Tests Results of 1996 Wand Tests on Cohoon Coho
Sampling TypeSampling Type
Fish Fish SampledSampled CWTs CWTs
Detection Detection
Rate (%)Rate (%)
% False% False
DetectionsDetections
NWIFC HatcheryNWIFC Hatchery 2,5942,594 670670 99.699.6 1.51.5
NWIFC Comm.NWIFC Comm. 1,9671,967 131131 100100 0.50.5
NWIFC StreamNWIFC Stream 154154 8585 97.697.6 0.00.0
WDFW HatcheryWDFW Hatchery 35,41735,417 1,6571,657 99.599.5 0.20.2
WDFW Comm.WDFW Comm. 1,6141,614 7878 100100 0.80.8
WDFW SportWDFW Sport 1,1571,157 6161 85.285.2 3.63.6
TotalsTotals 42,90342,903 2,6822,682 mean = 99.1mean = 99.1
or 97.0 or 97.0
Mean = 0.4Mean = 0.4
or 1.1or 1.1
Results of 1996 Tube Tests Results of 1996 Tube Tests on Cohoon Coho
Sampling TypeSampling Type
Fish Fish SampledSampled CWTs CWTs
Detection Detection
Rate (%)Rate (%)
% False% False
DetectionsDetections
CDFO HatcheryCDFO Hatchery 3,1833,183 7777 98.798.7 1.21.2
CDFO Comm.CDFO Comm. 12,15012,150 457457 100100 0.10.1
NWIFC HatcheryNWIFC Hatchery 1,1871,187 194194 100100 2.82.8
NWIFC Comm.NWIFC Comm. 2,8332,833 154154 92.292.2 2.12.1
WDFW HatcheryWDFW Hatchery 26,47626,476 770770 100100 1.11.1
WDFW Comm.WDFW Comm. 1,4061,406 8080 98.898.8 1.91.9
TotalsTotals 47,23547,235 1,7321,732 mean = 99.2mean = 99.2
or 98.2 or 98.2
Mean = 0.9Mean = 0.9
or 1.5or 1.5
Study
Detection Rate
ADFG (1995)
98 %
NWIFC/USFWS (1999)
99 %
CDFO (1999)
96 %
WDFW (1999)
91 %
Early Chinook Wanding Early Chinook Wanding StudiesStudies
Chinook Mouth Chinook Mouth WandingWanding
Results of Chinook Mouth Wanding Results of Chinook Mouth Wanding StudiesStudies
% Detections
Study#
CWTs
Standard
Wanding
Combined
Wanding
TubeDetector
WDFW, 2001 Hatchery 1,332 90.5 99.3 100
NWIFC, 2001Hatchery 368 99.7 99.7 100
ADFG, 2004-06Troll
2,534 98.2 99.9
CDFO, 2003-04Gill net
115 61.7
CDFO, 2006Troll 435 94.0
CDFO, 2004-05Spawning ground
591 91.0
Current Agency Investment Current Agency Investment in ETD Equipmentin ETD Equipment
TypeType # # UnitsUnits
Cost Cost 11 Total $Total $
Wands Wands 800800 $5,000$5,000 $ $ 4,000,0004,000,000
TubesTubes 114114 $29,70$29,7000
$ $ 3,385,8003,385,800
Total Investment =Total Investment = $ $ 7,385,8007,385,800
11 Current cost per unit Current cost per unit
CWT Sampling MethodsCWT Sampling MethodsRegion Fishery Method
Alaska All Visual
British Columbia Commercial Coho Electronic / Visual
Sport Coho Visual - Voluntary
Commercial Chinook
Electronic / Visual
Sport Chinook Visual - Voluntary
Washington All Electronic
Idaho All Electronic
Columbia River All Electronic
Oregon Coast Coho Electronic
Chinook Visual
California All Visual
Projected Number of BY 2008 MM Projected Number of BY 2008 MM ChinookChinook
to be Encountered by to be Encountered by Visual CWT Sampling ProgramsVisual CWT Sampling Programs
State/ProvinceState/Province # Fish # Fish EncounteredEncountered
AlaskaAlaska 10,00010,000
British ColumbiaBritish Columbia 25,40025,400
CaliforniaCalifornia 9,3009,300
SummarySummary
Logistical issues of MM hatchery Logistical issues of MM hatchery production have been met.production have been met.
Mass Marking is now an integral Mass Marking is now an integral component of NW hatchery production. component of NW hatchery production.
DIT component has not had the necessary DIT component has not had the necessary funding support outside of Washington funding support outside of Washington StateState
Summary Cont. Summary Cont.
ETD EquipmentETD Equipment High detection ratesHigh detection rates Expensive for agencies to gear upExpensive for agencies to gear up Challenges for processing plantsChallenges for processing plants
Sampling IssuesSampling Issues CWT sampling more labor intensive CWT sampling more labor intensive
for all agencies.for all agencies. Current geographical range of ETD Current geographical range of ETD
limited. limited. Sampling rates may be impacted for Sampling rates may be impacted for
agencies using visual sampling.agencies using visual sampling.
Summary of Costs for Current Summary of Costs for Current Marking and SamplingMarking and Sampling
One Time CostsOne Time Costs Marking Trailers Marking Trailers = $ 22,610,000= $ 22,610,000 ETD Equipment ETD Equipment = = $ 7,385,800$ 7,385,800
Total Total = $ 29,995,800= $ 29,995,800
Annual Direct CostsAnnual Direct Costs Mass Marking Mass Marking = $ 4,128,950= $ 4,128,950 DIT Groups DIT Groups = $ 491,550= $ 491,550 DIT Processing = $ 384,700 DIT Processing = $ 384,700 11
Add. Sampling Add. Sampling = = $ 524,300 $ 524,300 11
Total = $ Total = $ 5,529,5005,529,500
Agency Program Costs $44 - 48 / 1,000 Agency Program Costs $44 - 48 / 1,000 fish fish 22
11 From Bowhay, 2004 From Bowhay, 2004 22 USFWS and WDFW, 2007 USFWS and WDFW, 2007
Summary Cont.Summary Cont.
Mass Marking has provided Mass Marking has provided fishery managers and fishery managers and enhancement biologists with enhancement biologists with powerful new tools: powerful new tools:
MSFs MSFs
Differentiation of Hatchery Differentiation of Hatchery and Wild fishand Wild fish
Summary Cont.Summary Cont.
“Mass marking of hatchery fish by removing adipose fins should not be permitted until assurances are received from substantially affected jurisdictions that CWTs will be electronically sampled.” Recommendation of PSC Selective Fishery Evaluation, 1995
Unfortunately, CWT programs, DIT programs, and CWT sampling programs are no longer adequately synchronized between NW agencies.
The End