pacific region fish health program and dworshak fisheries … annual... · 2018. 5. 21. ·...
TRANSCRIPT
Pacific Region Fish Health Program And Dworshak Fisheries Complex
COE Challenges at Dworshak Dam• Regional water management – connected system• Weather prediction• Flood control• Power generation• Cooling water• Dworshak Reservoir recreation• Dworshak NFH B steelhead• Natural fish impacts• Other COE priorities• Partner desires
Our Challenges at Dworshak NFHOld infrastructureComplicatedCritical hatchery for the Clearwater BasinHeavily Co-managed Limited Reservoir Water and System I onlyRiver WaterCan be routed to all ponds Loaded with fish pathogens
What is Gas Bubble?• Caused by ‘spill’ of water• Entrains gases in liquid; including blood• Harmful in fish – just like ‘the bends’ in humans• Can be removed through degassing
• Vacuum• Substrate• Oxygen injection
• Measured as Total Dissolved Gas (TDG)• 100% saturation or slightly lower best for fish• Oxygen level higher than 100% not a problem• Nitrogen is bad
• Gas Bubble Trauma makes fish vulnerable
What Can the Fish Do?
In the hatchery, depth compensation is limited
In the river, fish compensate with depth or leave area
Weberian Apparatus
Technology at WorkRiver Water Degassing Raceway LHO Treatment
2017…The Perfect Storm• Dworshak Dam
• Three turbines for power generation• Turbine 1 and 2 combined 5 kcfs when in use• Turbine 3 also 5 kcfs when in use
• No or limited gas entrainment through turbines• Extreme winter in ‘17
• Heavy snowpack – spill required• Wet spring with lots of rain – spill required
• Repair of Turbine 3 in 2016-2018• Unit 3 offline during repair – spill required• Delays by contractor-repair ongoing
Turbine 3 at Dworshak Dam down for maintenance
Higher than normal levels of snow/precipitation
2017 Conditions
Increased spill from Dworshak Dam
Gas supersaturation in the North Fork Clearwater River and Dworshak NFH
Gas bubbles in hatchery fish
COE Collaboration• COE installed vacuum degassers at Dworshak
NFH prior to turbine repair• COE installed TDG monitoring equipment at
the Hatchery• TMT agreed to reduced flow in NF during
Chinook releases• COE engineers visited DNFH to try and help• COE revised their fish transport contract and
provided drivers early to help move fish• A visit from LTC Delarosa to thank staff
Job Well Done! Adam suggested lowering
aeration chamber 1’ to create larger vacuum space
Idea worked: vacuum degassing performance improved a full 1%
LTC Delarosa thanked Adam with a COE Coin
Adam Izbicki: American Hero
Fish Health Monitoring• Based on Fish Passage Center Protocols and
Rankings• Examined Eyes, Gills, Lateral lines, Unpaired fins• Also noted levels of food in stomachs• Histology confirmation (GBT-caused cellular
damage)• Each species on station examined per written
plan (daily or every other day) until release
Raw Data
DateDischarge
(cfs)River
TDG %
Collection Channel %
TDG Time
(military)Barometric
Pressure n Gills Lat Line Fins Eyes
Low/No Food in
Stomach Total n Gills Lat Line Fins Eyes
Low/No Food in
Stomach03/02/17 12,500 119 102 700 no data no data no data no data no data no data no data no data no data no data no data no data no data no data03/03/17 12,500 119 102 700 no data no data no data no data no data no data no data no data no data no data no data no data no data no data03/04/17 13,900 120.6 103 1500 no data 10 4 0 0 0 0 4 10 3 0 0 0 003/05/17 14,600 122.3 104 1500 no data 10 2 0 0 0 0 2 10 0 0 0 0 003/06/17 15,600 122.4 104 1500 no data 10 4 0 0 0 0 4 10 3 0 0 0 003/07/17 16,500 122.2 104 700 no data 10 4 0 0 0 0 4 10 2 0 0 0 003/08/17 17,500 122.5 104 700 no data 10 5 6 0 0 0 11 10 1 0 0 0 003/09/17 18,500 123.2 105 700 no data 10 3 6 0 0 0 9 10 3 0 0 0 003/10/17 19,500 124.3 104.4 700 no data 20b 9 4 0 0 4 17 10 4 1 3 0 003/11/17 20,500 124.4 104.4 700 740.2 10 6 3 0 0 2 11 10 4 0 2 0 003/12/17 21,500 124.6 104.5 700 741.0 10 7 6 0 0 0 13 10 2 0 0 0 103/13/17 22,500 125.1 104.5 700 740.2 10 7 9 0 0 1 17 10 3 0 1 0 203/14/17 22,500 125.2 104.6 700 736.8 10 9 6 1 0 6 22 10 4 0 2 0 303/15/17 22,500 125.3 104.8 700 734.7 10 9 4 0 0 8 21 10 3 0 1 2 303/16/17 22,500 125.3 105.2 700 737.8 10 9 5 0 0 3 17 10 5 4 2 0 203/17/17 12,500 119.8 102.3 700 741.2 10 5 5 1 0 1 12 10 4 1 5 0 003/18/17 12,500 119.7 101.7 700 732.5 10 8 10 0 0 18 10 1 2 3 0 003/19/17 7,500 106.5 97.2 700 740.5 10 5 8 0 0 13 10 3 0 4 0 003/20/17 13,700 108.4 99 700 739.3 NA 10 1 0 2 0 1003/21/17 25,000 126.3 105.2 630 732 10 5 0 3 0 1003/22/17 25,000 105 10 3 3 6 0 1003/23/17
b Spring Chinook sampled (10 each) from Burrow's pond 82 and raceway A7.c Spring Chinook off feed beginning 3/18/17 in preparation of outplanting on 3/20/17.d Steelhead taken off feed in advance of outplanting/release.e From this date forward, all data as collected/reported by PRFHC - Idaho.
On 3/10/2017 Main aeration level lowered 12 inches to increase vacuum can space to increase degassing.
Total dissolved gas (%) in the North Fork Clearwater River and Dworshak National Fish Hatchery collection channel by date, discharge, time, and barometric pressure with concomitant number of fish, by species, exhibiting gas bubbles by anatomical structure.
Number of fish sampled and exhibiting gas bubbles by anatomical locationSpring Chinook Steelhead
Date and Environmental Conditions
ALL SPRING CHINOOK RELEASED
All steelhead in Systems 2 and 3 released. ALL STEELHEAD RELEASED OR MOVED TO SYSTEM 1
Gills
Lateral lines
Fins
Eyes
What Did We Do?• Intensive fish health monitoring• Negotiation with COE on spill weekly• Negotiation with partners on fish releases• Early on site release of all spring Chinook on March
20 into mainstem Clearwater• Early on site and off site release of some steelhead• Moved remaining steelhead into System 1 at same
time and added more reservoir water from CFH• On site release of remaining steelhead as planned
Teamwork• Dedicated DFC staff• Nez Perce Tribe help
• Truck and driver• Technicians• Program changes
• Idaho Fish and Game help• Additional reservoir water• Program changes
• Focused fish health monitoring• All fish released safely
TDG Dissipation In-River Gas levels dropped through mixing with Mainstem CR Also dropped with movement downstream Increased at each dam spilling during high flow spring Unknown impacts on adult returns
What Did We Learn?What is gas bubble trauma? More importantly, why does Margaret always catch me when I don’t pay for the social?Hmm…
Discharge from Dworshak DamSpring Chinook release
Percent TDG in North Fork Clearwater River Relative to Discharge
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000
Rive
r %TD
G
Discharge(cfs)
Percent TDG in Collection Channel Relative to % TDG in River
%TDG in River vs. in Hatchery
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
03/0
2/17
03/0
3/17
03/0
4/17
03/0
5/17
03/0
6/17
03/0
7/17
03/0
8/17
03/0
9/17
03/1
0/17
03/1
1/17
03/1
2/17
03/1
3/17
03/1
4/17
03/1
5/17
03/1
6/17
03/1
7/17
03/1
8/17
03/1
9/17
03/2
0/17
03/2
1/17
Disc
harg
e CF
S
%TD
G
Date
North Fork %TDG
Collection Channel %TDG
Discharge CFS
Comparison of %TDG in North Fork Clearwater R. and the collection channel after degassing of spill from Dworshak Dam from 3/2/2017 to 3/21/2017
%TDG in River vs. Collection Channel vs. System 1
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
Disc
harg
e CF
S
%TD
G
Date
North Fork %TDG
Collection Channel %TDG
System 1 Burrows Pond %TDG
Discharge CFS
%TDG in North Fork Clearwater R., the collection channel at Dworshak NFH, and a burrows pond in system 1 at Dworshak NFH compared to the discharge from Dworshak Dam from 3/2/2017 to 4/17/2017 on sampled days.
Vacuum Degassing Effectiveness
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
%TD
G R
educ
tion
Date
TDG reduction percentage after degassing at Dworshak NFH from 3/2/2017 to 3/21/2017
Spring Chinook - Raceways
GB signs relative to %TDG in collection channel, anatomical structure, and time of exposure
Steelhead - Systems 2 & 3
GB signs relative to % TDG in collection channel, anatomical structure, and time of exposure
Steelhead - System 1
GB signs relative to % TDG in system 1, anatomical feature, and time of exposure and at different reservoir/river water blends
20% 40% 53%%Res. Water
Summary• Vacuum degassers reduced river water gas saturation 9-
17%; but not enough to avoid gas bubbles over time• Vacuum degassers more effective at higher TDG levels• Strong correlation between exposure time and observed
effects in fish• At in-hatchery TDGs of 105% and above, feeding
behavior dropped sharply• No observed increase in mortality or secondary disease
outbreaks during this extended high saturation exposure• Once TDG levels lowered, gas bubbles did not necessarily
dissipate as quickly as reported in literature• Data not sufficient to establish a “safe” level of TDG
exposure for fish produced at DNFH• Vacuum degassers and LHO’s $$ well spent
Now What?• What about 2018 fish releases?• Adult returns?• Climate change?• Other Unknowns?• Questions?