Movement and Distribution of Sp/Sum Chinook ...

Movement and Distribution of Sp/Sum Chinook Salmon Pre-smolts in the Mainstem Salmon River, Pilot Study

April 2018

PILOT STUDY REPORT

Prepared By: Michael W. Ackerman1, Gordon A. Axel2, Richard A. Carmichael1, and Kevin See1

1

Quantitative Consultants, Inc., 705 South 8th Street, Boise, Idaho 83702

2

Fish Ecology Division, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2725 Montlake Boulevard East, Seattle, Washington, 98112

Prepared For: Idaho Office of Species Conservation, 304 North 8th Street, Suite 149, Boise, Idaho 83702 and Bureau of Reclamation, Pacific Northwest Region, Columbia/Snake Salmon Recovery Office, 1150 North Curtis Road, Boise, Idaho 83706

April 2018

Table of Contents Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 Methods .................................................................................................................................... 2 Fixed Site Telemetry Receivers .............................................................................................. 2 Radio Tagging ........................................................................................................................ 4 Tags.................................................................................................................................... 4 Radio Tagging Surgery Protocol ......................................................................................... 5 Tagging Schedule ............................................................................................................... 6 Fish Tracking .......................................................................................................................... 6 Travel Times........................................................................................................................... 7 Results ...................................................................................................................................... 7 Fixed-Site Telemetry Receivers .............................................................................................. 7 Radio Tagging .......................................................................................................................10 Tags...................................................................................................................................10 Fish Tracking .........................................................................................................................10 Travel Times..........................................................................................................................13 Discussion...............................................................................................................................15 Conclusions ...........................................................................................................................16 Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................16 References ..............................................................................................................................17 Appendix A. Supplemental Information ................................................................................18

List of Figures Figure 1. Map of study site. Location of the 14 fixed site telemetry stations are shown as black dots with site codes. Location of the lower Lemhi River rotary screw trap is shown by a text callout........................ 2 Figure 2. Examples of both a trailer-style (left; Salmon River Ranch) and a pod-style (right; Bobcat Gulch) telemetry station. ........................................................................................................................................... 3 Figure 3. Photograph of Model # ST100L radio tag (bottom) used to track Chinook salmon pre-smolt migration and distribution. Radio tag is shown next to Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tag models HPT10 (top), HPT9 (middle), and SST (bottom). Dime is presented for scale. ........................................... 5 Figure 4. Periods of operation (black) and down times (orange) for each of the radio telemetry receivers for the duration of the 2017/2018 winter. Sites are arranged from upstream (top) to downstream (bottom). The final tag detection occurred on January 16, 2018 (tag 5410 at BG1)............................................................ 9 Figure 5. The tag (battery) life for each of the eight test tags activated during the pilot study. Six tags had a ‘constant’ duty cycle and two tags had an ‘on-off’ duty cycle. Mean tag life for the two duty cycles were as follows: Constant = 48 days; On-Off = 86 days (red diamonds). ............................................................... 10 Figure 6. Length frequency histogram of Chinook salmon pre-smolts captured at the lower Lemhi River rotary screw trap between October 1 and the end of the trapping season (November 29), 2017. The red vertical line denotes the taggable size cutoff (105 mm FL). ....................................................................... 11 Figure 7. Estimates of the number of radio tagged Chinook salmon pre-smolts passing each fixed-site telemetry receiver for the duration of the study. This analysis only includes those 66 radio-tagged fish that received a radio tag with a ‘constant’ duty cycle. Estimates and confidence intervals are based on the number of ‘constant’ duty cycle tags observed at that site and the detection probability from the CJS model (and standard error). The red line represents the number of ‘constant’ duty cycle tags released at the lower Lemhi River RST. An estimate of the true number of tags passing VC in unavailable as we were unable to estimate the detection probability of VC. ................................................................................................... 12 Figure 8. Histograms of travel times between radio telemetry sites. Analysis includes all observations where a fish was detected at a given site and the subsequent downstream site. X-axis is in hours. Bins are 6-hour bins. ............................................................................................................................................................. 14

List of Tables Table 1. Summary of fixed-site telemetry stations used to track sp/sum Chinook salmon during winter 2017/2018 including site code, lat/long, site type, and site distances. Site Type denotes whether a site was a trailer (T) or pod (P) style. Distances between sites are calculated as the distance between a given site and the nearest upstream site for sites on the mainstem Salmon River. Cumulative distances are calculated as the distance from the confluence of the Lemhi and Salmon rivers. .............................................................. 3 Table 2. Estimates of detection probabilities at each site, with standard error, using both the ‘simple’ method and from the Cormack-Jolly-Seber (CJS) model. The coefficient of variation for CJS estimates are also shown. Downstream tags refer to the number of unique tags detected somewhere downstream of that site (𝑏); downstream tags detected refers to the number of those downstream tags that were detected at that site (𝑎). ................................................................................................................................................................ 7 Table 3. Summary of fixed-site telemetry receivers used to track sp/sum Chinook salmon pre-smolts during winter 2017/2018 including the receiver name, position, the percentage of time each receiver was in operation, and the upstream and downstream read ranges. ........................................................................... 8 Table 4. The number of tags observed passing each site along with the estimate of the number of unique tags that passed each site, with standard error, for the duration of the pilot study. .................................... 11 Table 5. Estimates of transition probabilities (survival and movement) for each of the study reaches from the Cormack-Jolly-Seber model.................................................................................................................. 12 Table 6. Summary of travel times between radio telemetry sites, in hours and days. Analysis includes all observations where a fish was detected at a given site and the subsequent downstream site. Times are when tag (fish) first arrived at the given sites....................................................................................................... 13 Table 7. Summary of travel speeds (km/day) between radio telemetry sites. Analysis includes all observations where a fish was detected at a given site and the subsequent downstream site. .................... 14 Table 8. Code set for Chinook salmon pre-smolt transmitters that operated continuously. Also shown are the frequency and channel for each of the associated codes. Code set is for 80 transmitters. .................... 18 Table 9. Code set for Chinook salmon pre-smolt transmitters that alternated 1 week on/1 week off. Also shown are the frequency and channel for each of the associated codes. Code set is for 30 transmitters. ... 18 Table 10. The number of 995 noise signals received by receiver and channel per hour of operation for the duration of the study. .................................................................................................................................. 19 Table 11. Complete ‘capture’ histories for each fish radio tagged and released during the pilot study. Duty cycle refers to whether a tag was emitting full-time upon release (constant) or cycling between emitting for one week followed by one week of deactivation (onOff). .......................................................................... 20

Radio Tracking Pilot Study

Introduction The effective management and restoration of salmon populations requires an understanding of their complete life history. Only after knowledge of the complete life history has been achieved can researchers identify factors limiting the productivity of populations of concern. Life history of juveniles during winter conditions is often the least understood component of monitored salmon populations. Overwintering movement, distribution, habitat use, and survival are often overlooked by fisheries managers owing to difficulties in monitoring during winter conditions, despite the considerable duration of occupancy of winter habitats and the susceptibility of fish to mortality during winter conditions. Characterization and understanding of winter movement, distribution, and survival of juvenile salmonids is critical to successful fisheries management (Cunjak 1996). Populations of spring/summer Chinook salmon (hereafter Chinook salmon) within the Snake River Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU) are listed as threatened under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (NMFS 1992). Within the Upper Salmon River major population group (MPG) of the Snake River ESU, extensive resources have been put towards the monitoring and restoration of depleted Chinook salmon populations, but a significant knowledge gap still exists regarding winter movement, distribution, and survival of juvenile Chinook salmon from those populations. However, it has been documented that for some tributaries a large number of juvenile Chinook salmon emigrate in the fall as pre-smolts to perhaps overwinter in mainstem Salmon River habitats. From 1997 – 2007, Copeland et al. (2014) estimated that between 80-96% of juvenile Chinook emigrants from the Lemhi River moved to downstream rearing habitats outside of the Lemhi River to overwinter. For the Pahsimeroi River, they estimated between 5891% of emigrants overwintered downstream of the Pahsimeroi for the same years. However, they acknowledged that the winter downstream movement and distribution of juveniles leaving their natal streams remains largely unknown. Moreover, they suggest that a broader focus to restoration plans is needed and that rearing reaches downstream from natal areas need to be addressed. Research is currently being done to better understand how characteristics of habitat influence juvenile rearing capacity (summer and winter) and redd capacity in watersheds containing depressed populations. Results from this research will ultimately be used to identify limited life-stages (and factors) to evaluate how various habitat restoration actions might differentially improve habitat capacity. Previous research has suggested that some Chinook salmon populations in Idaho may exceed winter rearing capacities resulting in the movement of a large portion of juveniles to downstream mainstem habitats to overwinter as presmolts. The goal of this study is to characterize the overwinter movement, distribution, and survival of Chinook salmon pre-smolts that leave tributary habitats to overwinter in the mainstem Salmon River. This report documents field efforts and findings from a pilot study to evaluate the feasibility of tracking juvenile Chinook salmon pre-smolt emigrants from tributaries in the Upper Salmon River MPG in mainstem habitats using radio telemetry. For the pilot study, pre-smolts were tagged at a rotary screw trap (RST) in the lower Lemhi River in October 2017 and then tracked downriver through the mainstem Salmon River throughout winter 2017/2018. Lessons learned and findings will be used to improve future study designs.

1


Methods Fixed Site Telemetry Receivers Fourteen fixed-site radio telemetry stations were installed during the 2017-2018 pilot season (Figure 1, Table 1). Of those, 11 were installed in the Salmon, Idaho region and 3 in the Riggins, Idaho region. Most sites (12) were installed between August 11 – 19, 2017 with the exception of the Deadwater and Corn Creek sites. The Deadwater site was installed on October 11, 2017 (delay in permitting) and the Corn Creek site on November 2, 2017 (construction at boat ramp). The upstream most site, Lemhi Hole, was installed on the Lemhi River approximately 100 m upstream from the confluence with the Salmon River. This site was the first encountered by radio tagged pre-smolts and was located approximately 6.6 km downstream from the Lemhi RST where Chinook pre-smolts were tagged and released. The downstream most site, Twin Bridges, was located approximately 310 km downstream from the confluence of the Lemhi and Salmon rivers. Average distance between sites was 25.9 km with a minimum of 4.6 km and maximum span of 124.8 km (between Corn Creek and Vinegar Creek). Sites in the Salmon region were taken down between February 14-17, 2018. Sites in the Riggins region were taken down in March 2018. In total, sites were operational over a span of 157 days.

Figure 1. Map of study site. Location of the 14 fixed site telemetry stations are shown as black dots with site codes. Location of the lower Lemhi River rotary screw trap is shown by a text callout.

2


Table 1. Summary of fixed-site telemetry stations used to track sp/sum Chinook salmon during winter 2017/2018 including site code, lat/long, site type, and site distances. Site Type denotes whether a site was a trailer (T) or pod (P) style. Distances between sites are calculated as the distance between a given site and the nearest upstream site for sites on the mainstem Salmon River. Cumulative distances are calculated as the distance from the confluence of the Lemhi and Salmon rivers. Site Lemhi RST Lemhi Hole Cement Plant Morgan Bar Tower Rock Red Rock Bobcat Gulch North Fork Deadwater Salmon River Ranch Colson Creek Corn Creek Vinegar Creek Shorts Bar Twin Bridges

Site Code LH DC MB TR RR BG NF DW LR SR CC VC SB TB

Latitude

Longitude

45.1595 45.1863 45.1710 45.2530 45.3109 45.3461 45.3609 45.3955 45.3797 45.4038 45.3006 45.3697 45.4595 45.4134 45.6604

-113.8331 -113.8913 -113.9103 -113.9060 -113.9064 -113.9224 -113.9633 -113.9788 -114.0708 -114.2158 -114.5344 -114.6871 -115.8927 -116.3027 -116.2922

Site Type P P P P P P T P T T T T P P

River km Between Cumulative NA - 6.7 NA - 0.1 NA - 2.5 8.9 8.9 7.2 16.1 5.5 21.6 6.7 28.3 4.6 32.9 9.2 42.1 14.6 56.7 34.2 90.9 18.2 109.1 124.8 233.9 39.4 273.3 36.6 309.9

Sites were either 1) a cargo trailer with receivers, batteries, solar panels, and antennas all contained within or on the trailer or 2) ‘pod-style’ with receivers and batteries within a pod, solar panels on the pod, and antennas standing nearby (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Examples of both a trailer-style (left; Salmon River Ranch) and a pod-style (right; Bobcat Gulch) telemetry station.

We calculated the season-wide probability of detection for each site given an (active) radio-tagged presmolt migrated past the site. Detection probability for each site was calculated as:

3


𝑝𝑖 =

𝑎𝑖 𝑏𝑖

where 𝑝 is the detection probability of site 𝑖, 𝑏 is the number of unique tags detected somewhere downstream of site 𝑖, and 𝑎 is the number of those tags detected at site 𝑖. We also calculated the standard error (SE) of detection probability for each site (Table 2). Moreover, we fit a simple Cormack-Jolly-Seber (CJS; Cormack 1964; Jolly 1965; Seber 1965; Skalski et al. 1998) model (see below) that provided additional estimates of detection probabilities with SEs and coefficients of variation (CV). Only tags with a ‘constant’ duty cycle (described below) were used to calculate detection probability. Additionally, we calculated the proportion of time that each receiver (two receivers per site) was operational (Table 3, Figure 4). Operational times were estimated using data from ‘timer tags’ that were hung nearby each telemetry station for the duration of the study. Timer tags emit 20 signals (1 per second) at each of the 9 channels (180 signals total), sequentially, every hour. We considered a site to be down for each hour that no timer tag data was recorded on a receiver. We also calculated the average noise signals per hour that each receiver recorded for the duration of the study (Table 10). Finally, we estimated the upstream and downstream read ranges for each receiver (Table 3). Read ranges were estimated by having one person walk an active tag upstream or downstream of the antenna until a location that the tag was no longer being read consistently by the receiver. Ideally, read ranges would be estimated with the tag floating through the thalweg of the river while underwater (e.g., on a fishing line); unfortunately, during the time of read range testing, in-river ice conditions precluded casting a tag into the river.

Radio Tagging Tags Model # ST100L radio tags (Figure 3) from Advanced Telemetry Systems, Inc. (ATS; https://atstrack.com) were used to track the movement and distribution of Chinook salmon pre-smolts. Radio tags measured 13mm in length and 5-mm in width with a 304-mm antenna. Total tag weight, including antenna, was approximately 0.50 g in air. Tags were coded with a 10-second pulse interval (6 ppm) for identification of individual fish. Tags were 30 MHz and emitted signals at a range of 30.17 – 30.25 with a 10-kHz spacing for 9 channels total. Additional tag specifications are available upon request from the first author.

4


Figure 3. Photograph of Model # ST100L radio tag (bottom) used to track Chinook salmon pre-smolt migration and distribution. Radio tag is shown next to Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tag models HPT10 (top), HPT9 (middle), and SST (bottom). Dime is presented for scale.

In total, 110 radio tags were purchased for the pilot study. Of those, 80 tags were set to operate continuously upon activation (constant duty-cycle); to increase battery life the remaining 30 tags were set to alternate between one week of operation followed by one week off (on-off duty cycle). Tag life of the radio transmitters was tested from a sample of eight tags tested in water. Of the eight test tags, six had a ‘constant’ duty cycle and two had an ‘on-off’ duty cycle. Code sets for tags are provided in Appendix A. Supplemental Information (Table 8, Table 9).

Radio Tagging Surgery Protocol Radio tagging surgery protocols followed closely those used by Axel et al. (2015) and were performed by Gordon Axel (NOAA Fisheries, NWFSC, Pasco Field Office). Tagging was performed inside a wall tent located at the lower Lemhi River RST. For each procedure, individual fish were anesthetized in a bath containing 70 mg/L tricaine methanesulfonate (MS222), weighed to the nearest 0.1 g, and length measured to the nearest 1 mm fork length (FL). After measurements were taken, a radio transmitter was implanted using techniques described by Adams et al. (1998). Radio-tagged individuals also had a passive integrated transponder (PIT) tag hand implanted so that any radio-tagged fish entering the juvenile bypass system of a downstream dam (e.g., Lower Granite Dam) could be identified and survival of radio-tagged juveniles could be estimated. A neoprene foam pad with a groove cut in the center was used to aid in fish stabilization during surgery. The foam pad was coated with a water conditioner to minimize impacts to the fish’s protective mucus layer (Harnish et al. 2010). Fish were placed ventral side up on the pad, and the gill was continuously irrigated with a maintenance dose of anesthetic (40 mg/L MS222) fed through a tube placed in the mouth. Approximately 30 seconds prior to conclusion of the surgical procedure, the flow of anesthetic solution was replaced with oxygenated freshwater to initiate the recovery process. To implant the transmitter, an approximately 5-8 mm incision was made anterior to the pelvic girdle on the linea alba. The incision was no deeper than needed to penetrate the peritoneum (Summerfelt and Smith 1990). To provide an outlet in the body wall for the antenna, we used a shielded needle technique similar

5


to that described by Ross and Kleiner (1982). An intravenous catheter and needle was used to guide the antenna through the body wall of the fish and the hard plastic base of the catheter was removed. Transmitters were implanted by threading the radio tag antenna through the incision end of the catheter. Both the antenna and catheter were then gently pulled toward the posterior while the transmitter was simultaneously placed into the body cavity. The incision was closed with two, simple, interrupted absorbable sutures evenly placed across the incision. Between each procedure, surgical instruments were disinfected by immersion in 70% ethanol for 8-10 minutes and rinsed in distilled water to minimize the spread of pathogens. Immediately following tagging, fish were placed in a bucket containing oxygenated freshwater until recovery from anesthesia. Holding fish in oxygenated water reduces stress associated with handling and anesthesia (Hoar and Randall 1971). Each bucket contained two fish to minimize the possibility of tangling radio tag antennas; fish were visually observed in the bucket until recovery from anesthesia. After fish had recovered, each pair of fish were then transferred to an in-river live well and held for approximately 24 hours for additional recovery and determination of post-tagging survival. Again, each live well only contained two fish to minimize the possibility of tangling antennas and to reduce stress. After holding for approximately 24 hours, fish were released below the lower Lemhi River RST in a location with reduced flow velocity and sufficient cover either at night or in the early morning.

Tagging Schedule In total, 88 Chinook salmon pre-smolts were radio-tagged and released at the lower Lemhi River RST (Table 11). Of those, 34 were tagged on October 11, 2017; 32 pre-smolts were tagged on October 17, 2017, and the final 22 were tagged on November 2, 2017. In all cases fish were held overnight and released the following day. Of the 88 radio-tagged pre-smolts, 66 received a ‘constant’ duty cycle radio tag and 22 received an ‘on-off’ duty cycle tag. During release, no mortalities were observed.

Fish Tracking Radio telemetry data were downloaded from each receiver in the Salmon, Idaho area approximately once each week; sites in the Riggins, Idaho area were visited and downloaded approximately every two weeks. Data were downloaded on a tablet using the Tracker v4.10.2 software written for NOAA by the White Salmon Group, Inc. www.whitesalmongroup.com. The number of tags moving past a given site during the season can be estimated as: 𝑌𝑖 =

𝑡𝑖 𝑝𝑖

where 𝑌 is the actual number of tags (fish) moving past site 𝑖, 𝑡 is the number of unique tags detected at site 𝑖 (different from 𝑎), and 𝑝 is the detection probability of site 𝑖. In our case, we use detection probabilities from the CJS model. Additionally, the number of tags moving past a site can be estimated as: 𝑌𝑖 = 𝑟 × 𝑠𝑖 where 𝑟 is the number of tags released and 𝑠𝑖 is the cumulative transition (survival and movement) probability to site 𝑖 from the CJS model. Here, we report the number of fish moving past each site using this method using cumulative transition probabilities. We fit the simple CJS model (Cormack 1964; Jolly

6


1965; Seber 1965; Skalski et al. 1998) using different detection probabilities at each site, and different survival/movement probabilities between each pair of sites. As with all CJS models, the survival/movement parameter and detection probability for the most downstream site with detection data are unidentifiable. Estimates of detection probabilities from the CJS model were compared to estimates of detection probability from the ‘simple’ method described above.

Travel Times We estimated the amount of time it took tagged pre-smolts to move between radio telemetry stations. For travel time analyses, we used any record where a tag (fish) was observed at a given site and subsequently observed at the next downstream site (i.e., we ignored records where fish moved past the next downstream site undetected). For each reach, we summarized the minimum, median, mean, and maximum travel times among fish detected at both sites. Finally, we used the distances between sites (Table 1) to estimate travel speeds (kilometers per day).

Results Fixed-Site Telemetry Receivers Estimates of detection probabilities using both the simple method and the CJS model were nearly equal (Table 2). Detection probabilities at fixed-site telemetry stations from the CJS model ranged from 47.9% (Colson Creek) to 75.7% (North Fork) and averaged 62.6%. Table 2. Estimates of detection probabilities at each site, with standard error, using both the ‘simple’ method and from the Cormack-Jolly-Seber (CJS) model. The coefficient of variation for CJS estimates are also shown. Downstream tags refer to the number of unique tags detected somewhere downstream of that site (𝑏); downstream tags detected refers to the number of those downstream tags that were detected at that site (𝑎). Site Lemhi Hole Morgan Bar Tower Rock Red Rock Bobcat Gulch North Fork Deadwater Salmon River Ranch Colson Creek Corn Creek Vinegar Creek Shorts Bar Twin Bridges

Site Code

Downstream Tags

LH MB TR RR BG NF DW LR SR CC VC SB TB

48 46 44 43 40 33 32 25 20 3 NA NA NA

Downstream Tags Detected 27 26 25 27 28 25 24 16 10 1 NA NA NA

Simple Det SE Prob 0.563 0.072 0.565 0.073 0.568 0.075 0.628 0.074 0.700 0.072 0.758 0.075 0.750 0.077 0.640 0.096 0.500 0.112 0.333 0.272 NA NA NA NA NA NA

CJS Model Det Prob 0.562 0.568 0.571 0.627 0.698 0.757 0.742 0.681 0.479 0.572 NA NA NA

SE

CV

0.067 0.069 0.070 0.0716 0.077 0.088 0.089 0.085 0.114 0.126 NA NA NA

0.120 0.121 0.123 0.114 0.110 0.116 0.120 0.125 0.238 0.220 NA NA NA

The percentage of times that radio receivers were operational ranged from a minimum of 71.0% (MB1, Morgan Bar) to a maximum of 99.1% (NF1, North Fork) and averaged 89.9% (Table 3, Figure 4). Figure

7


4 shows the time periods that each receiver lost power and the timer tag was not read; note periods where most or all sites were down simultaneously; these periods may correspond to series of days with high cloud cover resulting in decreased battery voltage. Read ranges for antennas/receivers ranged from a minimum of 20 m (NF1, North Fork, upstream) to a maximum of 232 m (DC2, Cement Plant, upstream) and averaged 89 m (Table 3). The amount of noise (i.e., 995 signals) varied greatly among radio receivers. The number of noise signals per hour ranged from a minimum of 0.0 (DW1, Deadwater) to a maximum of 125.8 (MB1, Morgan Bar) and averaged 13.1 per hour. A summary of receiver noise is provided in Appendix A. Supplemental Information (Table 10). Table 3. Summary of fixed-site telemetry receivers used to track sp/sum Chinook salmon pre-smolts during winter 2017/2018 including the receiver name, position, the percentage of time each receiver was in operation, and the upstream and downstream read ranges. Site Lemhi Cement Plant Morgan Bar Tower Rock Red Rock Bobcat Gulch North Fork Deadwater Salmon River Ranch Colson Creek Corn Creek Vinegar Creek Shorts Bar Twin Bridges

8

Receiver

Position

% Operational

LH2 LH1 DC2 DC1 MB2 MB1 TR2 TR1 RR2 RR1 BG1 BG2 NF1 NF2 DW1 DW2 LR2 LR1 SR1 SR2 CC1 CC2 VC2 VC1 SB1 SB2 TB1 TB2

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream NA NA Upstream Downstream

92.6 88.7 94.4 88.4 89.6 71.0 95.0 94.6 92.6 93.8 88.0 88.6 99.1 87.8 92.1 91.9 98.2 98.3 80.4 94.5 77.7 75.3 92.1 92.4 97.4 98.5 83.8 79.5

Read Range (m) Upstream Downstream 75 69 70 95 157 232 95 38 130 54 120 38 45 59 32 86 106 110 94 211 50 98 46 120 66 20 31 45 65 27 24 143 132 186 176 152 78 35 59 54 106 90 150 30 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA


Figure 4. Periods of operation (black) and down times (orange) for each of the radio telemetry receivers for the duration of the 2017/2018 winter. Sites are arranged from upstream (top) to downstream (bottom). The final tag detection occurred on January 16, 2018 (tag 5410 at BG1).

9


Radio Tagging Tags Of the eight test tags, six had a ‘constant’ duty cycle that operated continuously following activation. The other two test tags had an ‘on-off’ duty cycle whereas following activation they alternated between one week of operation followed by a week off for the duration of the tag’s life. For the six ‘constant’ tags, the mean battery life was 48 days. The two ‘on/off’ tags had an average tag life of 86 days (Figure 5).

Figure 5. The tag (battery) life for each of the eight test tags activated during the pilot study. Six tags had a ‘constant’ duty cycle and two tags had an ‘on-off’ duty cycle. Mean tag life for the two duty cycles were as follows: Constant = 48 days; On-Off = 86 days (red diamonds).

Fish Tracking During the period of tagging between 10/11 and 11/2, 40.3% of the Chinook salmon pre-smolts captured at the trap were of taggable (≥ 105 mm FL) size (Figure 6). Minimum FL of radio-tagged pre-smolts ranged from a minimum of 102 mm FL to a maximum of 126 mm FL and averaged 114 mm FL. Weight of radio tagged pre-smolts ranged from a minimum of 12.6 g to a maximum of 23.7 g and averaged 17.6 g (Table 11). Using a tag weight of 0.5 g, tag burden for fish ranged from 2.1% to 4.0% and averaged 2.9%.

10


Figure 6. Length frequency histogram of Chinook salmon pre-smolts captured at the lower Lemhi River rotary screw trap between October 1 and the end of the trapping season (November 29), 2017. The red vertical line denotes the taggable size cutoff (105 mm FL).

Biological information (length, weight) for each radio tagged Chinook salmon pre-smolt, as well as radio tag information (tag ID, duty cycle, activation and release time) and complete capture histories are provided in Appendix A. Supplemental Information (Table 11). Based on estimates of transition probabilities and the number of radio-tagged pre-smolts released, we were able to estimate the number of tagged pre-smolts, with standard error, estimated to have moved past each site (Table 4, Figure 7). Eighty-eight Chinook salmon pre-smolts were radio-tagged and released between October 12 and November 3, 2017. Of those, 47 were observed at the LH site at the confluence of the Lemhi and Salmon rivers. With a transition probability of 91.5% at that site, we estimate that 81 tags migrated past LH. The number of radio-tagged pre-smolts estimated to pass each site declined slowly until a sharp decrease was observed between NF and DW. We estimated that 56 fish passed the NF site, but only 45 arrived at the DW site. Numbers continued to decline to the Corn Creek (SR) site where we estimate 42 tags passed. Finally, four radio-tagged pre-smolts were observed arriving at Vinegar Creek (VC); however, we cannot estimate the number of tags to have passed VC as we cannot estimate the transition probability of that site. No tags were observed downstream of the VC site at Shorts Bar (SB) or Twin Bridges (TB). Table 4. The number of tags observed passing each site along with the estimate of the number of unique tags that passed each site, with standard error, for the duration of the pilot study. Site Lemhi Hole Morgan Bar Tower Rock Red Rock Bobcat Gulch North Fork Deadwater Salmon River Ranch Colson Creek

Site Code

Tags Observed

Trans. Probability

LH MB TR RR BG NF DW LR SR

47 35 37 35 40 39 30 28 21

0.915 0.820 0.960 0.938 0.995 0.950 0.801 0.999 0.940

Cum. Trans. Probability 0.915 0.750 0.720 0.676 0.672 0.638 0.511 0.510 0.489

Tags Passing 81 66 63 59 59 56 45 45 42

11


Site Corn Creek Vinegar Creek Shorts Bar Twin Bridges

Site Code

Tags Observed

Trans. Probability

CC VC SB TB

23 4 0 0

0.992 NA NA NA

Cum. Trans. Probability 0.476 NA NA NA

Tags Passing 42 4 NA NA

Figure 7. Estimates of the number of radio tagged Chinook salmon pre-smolts passing each fixed-site telemetry receiver for the duration of the study. This analysis only includes those 66 radio-tagged fish that received a radio tag with a ‘constant’ duty cycle. Estimates and confidence intervals are based on the number of ‘constant’ duty cycle tags observed at that site and the detection probability from the CJS model (and standard error). The red line represents the number of ‘constant’ duty cycle tags released at the lower Lemhi River RST. An estimate of the true number of tags passing VC in unavailable as we were unable to estimate the detection probability of VC.

The CJS model provided estimates of transition (survival and movement) probabilities between each of the sites down to Corn Creek (Table 5). Transition probabilities ranged from a minimum of 80.0% (NF to DW) to a maximum of 99.9% (DW to LR) and averaged 93.1%. Overall, slightly less than half (47.6%) of the fish appear to have survived and moved past Corn Creek (CC) during the study period. The remainder may not have necessarily experienced mortality, but instead the radio tag battery may have died prior to passing. Table 5. Estimates of transition probabilities (survival and movement) for each of the study reaches from the Cormack-Jolly-Seber model.

12

Location

Transition Probability

SE

CV

Release to LH LH to MB MB to TR TR to RR RR to BG

0.915 0.820 0.960 0.938 0.995

0.165 0.106 0.285 0.183 1.540

0.180 0.130 0.297 0.196 1.549

Cumulative Transition Probability 0.915 0.750 0.720 0.676 0.672

SE 0.165 0.167 0.288 0.326 1.564


Location

Transition Probability

SE

CV

BG to NF NF to DW DW to LR LR to SR SR to CC Overall

0.950 0.801 0.999 0.940 0.992 0.476

0.260 0.100 1.723 0.603 1.590 NA

0.273 0.125 1.725 0.641 1.601 NA

Cumulative Transition Probability 0.638 0.511 0.510 0.480 0.476 0.476

SE 1.561 1.264 2.870 3.261 6.290 NA

Travel Times Mean travel times between sites ranged from 0.2 days (Bobcat Gulch to North Fork) to 10.1 days (Corn Creek to Vinegar Creek) (Table 6, Figure 8). Mean travel speeds ranged from a minimum of 2.0 km/day (Lemhi Hole to Morgan Bar) to a maximum of 27.8 km/day (Bobcat Gulch to North Fork) (Table 7). Table 6. Summary of travel times between radio telemetry sites, in hours and days. Analysis includes all observations where a fish was detected at a given site and the subsequent downstream site. Times are when tag (fish) first arrived at the given sites. Location LH to MB MB to TR TR to RR RR to BG BG to NF NF to DW DW to LR LR to SR SR to CC CC to VC

n Tags 28 29 27 32 35 28 26 20 11 2

Min 1.4 1.1 0.9 1.1 0.7 2.8 2.4 6.4 2.7 47.8

Hours Median Mean 4.8 90.2 1.3 40.6 1.0 12.4 1.6 21.5 0.8 4.0 6.6 35.1 4.5 22.0 24.5 90.5 9.0 218.1 241.6 241.6

Max 1744.3 1028.9 142.5 278.7 39.6 441.2 123.1 692.1 1863.1 435.4

Min 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.1 2.0

Days Median Mean 0.2 3.8 0.1 1.7 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.9 0.0 0.2 0.3 1.5 0.2 0.9 1.0 3.8 0.4 9.1 10.1 10.1

Max 72.7 42.9 5.9 11.6 1.7 18.4 5.1 28.8 77.6 18.1

13


Figure 8. Histograms of travel times between radio telemetry sites. Analysis includes all observations where a fish was detected at a given site and the subsequent downstream site. X-axis is in hours. Bins are 6-hour bins. Table 7. Summary of travel speeds (km/day) between radio telemetry sites. Analysis includes all observations where a fish was detected at a given site and the subsequent downstream site.

14

Location

n Tags

km

LH to MB MB to TR TR to RR RR to BG BG to NF NF to DW DW to LR LR to SR SR to CC CC to VC

28 29 27 32 35 28 26 20 11 2

9.0 7.2 5.5 6.7 4.6 9.2 14.6 34.2 18.2 124.8

Min Speed 0.1 0.2 0.9 0.6 2.8 0.5 2.8 1.2 0.2 6.9

Median Speed 45.2 130.4 131.7 98.3 137.1 33.4 77.4 33.5 48.5 12.4

Mean Speed 2.4 4.3 10.7 7.5 27.8 6.3 15.9 9.1 2.0 12.4

Max Speed 157.1 154.3 144.8 141.5 158.0 80.1 148.1 127.3 161.0 62.6


Discussion Detection probabilities at fixed site radio telemetry stations were lower than anticipated. A similar study was conducted in spring 2014 to track the migration and survival of sockeye salmon smolts through the mainstem Salmon River to Lower Granite Dam (Axel et al. 2015). In that study, detection probabilities ranged from 66.7% to 100.0% and averaged 87.9% in a similar stretch of river as was monitored by this study. Detection probabilities in our study ranged from 47.9% to 75.7% and averaged 62.6%. Decreases in detection probabilities are likely not due to reduced performance in radio tags and/or radio antennas and receivers. Rather, we attribute decreases in detection probabilities to two things: 1) receivers not recording data due to a minor clock malfunction on days that data was downloaded, and 2) temporary shutdowns at sites due to insufficient charging from solar panels. On days that telemetry data was downloaded from sites, data was not being recorded to the primary B: drive on the receiver from the time of download until midnight that night. Each time data is downloaded the clock on the receiver is reset to match the time on the download tablet. The time should be reset following data download; however, field personnel were, at times, downloading data after resetting the receiver clocks and thus data was not being recorded to the B: drive. However, data was being written to the backup A: drive during that period. We are currently retrieving the ‘missing’ data from the A: drives from each receiver and will merge that data with the full dataset. We then intend to re-run analyses; any missed observations that are retrieved will increase detection probabilities. This issue will be resolved prior to the 2018/2019 winter field season and ‘missing’ data should not need to be retrieved from the A: drives following the field season. Fish tracking in our study occurred from mid-October through mid-January during winter conditions; on the other hand, fish tracking in the sockeye study occurred in the spring (May/June). We believe a combination of winter conditions (e.g., cloud cover, snow on panels, short days) and site locations (e.g., canyon reaches) resulted in insufficient solar panels and decreased battery voltages at certain times, resulting in short, temporary shutdowns to telemetry receivers. Radio-tagged pre-smolts may have migrated past telemetry stations during the short shutdown periods resulting in missed observations and reduced detection probabilities. This issue will be addressed prior to the 2018/2019 winter field season. A prototype solar system is currently being tested for telemetry pods and trailers. Each telemetry station will have additional solar panels and each solar panel will have its own charge controller going into a distribution block that will isolate each panel. This will prevent the solar panels with the least amount of sunlight from dragging down voltage and amps from panels receiving the most sunlight, thus panels are independently charging the system as a whole. Initial test results from the prototype system are positive. During the pilot study, we identified a minor issue with radio tags ‘re-activating’ prior to releasing fish. Tags were programmed to operate for 1 hour following initial activation, followed by 47 hours of deactivation during which fish would be tagged and held to save battery life, before re-activating prior to releasing the fish. However, while releasing fish, we noted a portion of tags had not re-activated after the 47-hour shutdown and it appears that re-activation of those tags was delayed. To address this, we intend to eliminate the 47-hour de-activation period for tags to avoid radio-tagged fish potentially migrating past telemetry sites while tags are not activated. Each radio-tagged pre-smolt also received a PIT tag. PIT tag observations will facilitate estimation of survival to Lower Granite Dam (and all downstream dams). We will download interrogation data from downstream hydropower facilities for the 88 radio-tagged pre-smolts following the spring emigration season to estimate survival to LGR. Moreover, survival estimates from radio-tagged individuals will be compared to non-tagged emigrants to explore potential radio-tag burden and/or differential survivals.

15


A larger sample size of Chinook salmon pre-smolts will be radio-tagged in future years at the Lemhi River RST. We implanted 88 radio tags in October 2017 of which 73 (83.0%) were observed downstream. Observations from the 73 pre-smolts allowed us to estimate the number of pre-smolts passing each site; however, uncertainty around those estimates were moderate to large (Figure 7). Additionally, no observations occurred at the two downstream-most sites, Shorts Bar and Twin Bridges. In October 2018, our goal is to radio tag 250 – 300 pre-smolts at the lower Lemhi River RST to increase downstream observations and decrease uncertainty in detection and transition probabilities. We further plan to radio tag approximately 50 pre-smolts at the Pahsimeroi River RST to examine feasibility of tagging and monitoring pre-smolts from that watershed. To monitor Pahsimeroi River pre-smolts, radio telemetry stations will be installed near the confluence of the Pahsimeroi and Salmon Rivers as well as along the mainstem Salmon River between the Pahsimeroi and Lemhi confluences. The 124.8 km stretch of river between the Corn Creek and Vinegar Creek sites largely borders the Frank Church River of No Return Wilderness, and thus, is difficult to monitor with radio telemetry. We estimated 28 radio-tagged ‘constant’ duty-cycle pre-smolts to have migrated past the Corn Creek site during the study period; however, only 3 of those pre-smolts were observed at the Vinegar Creek site. We are currently exploring potential options to install a telemetry site on private property along the mainstem Salmon River within that stretch to monitor pre-smolt movement and distribution within the wilderness.

Conclusions We demonstrated that winter monitoring of Chinook salmon pre-smolts from the Lemhi River donwstream through the mainstem Salmon River, during winter months, is feasible using radio telemetry. Radio tagging surgeries in pre-smolts ≥ 105 mm FL was successful; no mortalities occurred. And of the 88 radio-tagged pre-smolts released, 73 (83.0%) were observed at a downstream radio telemetry site. Finally, we were able to estimate detection and transition probabilities at all sites from Corn Creek upstream. In the future, we will radio tag additional pre-smolts at the Lemhi RST to reduce uncertainty in estimates and test the feasibility of radio tagging pre-smolts at the Pahsimeroi River RST. Additionally, we will explore alternative radio tag duty cycles in an attempt to monitor further into the winter/spring months (e.g., March) when fish presumably begin actively migrating, again.

Acknowledgements Funding for this pilot study was administered by the Idaho Governor’s Office of Species Conservation (contract SR1601) and was from the Idaho portion of the Snake River Basin Adjudication (SRBA) fund through a cooperative agreement between the State of Idaho and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Special thanks to personnel from the following agencies for permissions to install radio telemetry sites: Idaho Department of Fish and Game (sites RR, BG, TB), Bureau of Land Management (sites MB, TR, SB), and U.S. Forest Service (sites DW, CC, VC). In particular, special thanks to Greg Schoby and Joe Dupont (IDFG), Joni Cain and Curt Otto (BLM), and Jeremy Harris, Ken Gebhardt, Larry Vogel, and Gail Baer (USFS). Also thanks to the private landowners that allowed us to install the following sites: LH, DC, NF, LR, SR. Thanks to Tim Copeland (IDFG) for conversations that improved study design. Thanks to the following for your assistance in field operations: Chris Gaughn, Mike Hall, Tulley Mackay, Braden Lott, Jared Barker, Matt Lyon, and Travis Earl. Finally, a special thanks to the following staff from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Pasco Field Office for their help and expertise: Matt Nesbit, Jesse Lamb, Sam Rambo, and Louis Tullos.

16


References Adams, N.S., D.W. Rondorf, S.D. Evans, and J.E. Kelly. 1998. Effects of surgically and gastrically implanted radio transmitters on growth and feeding behavior of juvenile Chinook salmon. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 27:128-136. Axel, G.A., M. Peterson, C.C. Kozfkay, B.P. Sandford, M.G. Nesbit, B.J. Burke, K.E. Frick, and J.J. Lamb. 2015. Characterizing migration and survival between the Upper Salmon River Basin and Lower Granite Dam for juvenile Snake River sockeye salmon, 2014. Report of research prepared for Bonneville Power Administration, Division of Fish and Wildlife. Cormack, R.M., 1964. Estimates of survival from sightings of marked animals. Biometrika 51:429-438. Cunjak, R.A. 1996. Winter habitat of selected stream fishes and potential impacts from land-use activity. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 53(Supplement 1):267-282. Harnish, R.A., A.H. Colotelo, and R.S. Brown. 2010. A review of polymer-based water conditioners for reduction of handling-related injury. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 21(1):43-49. doi:10.1007/s11160-010-9187-1 Hoar, W.S., and D.J. Randall, editors. 1971. Fish physiology, volume 6. Academic Press, New York. Jolly, G.M. 1965. Explicit estimates from capture-recapture data with both death and immigrationstochastic model. Biometrika 52:225-247. NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 1992. Threatened status for Snake River spring/summer Chinook salmon, threatened status for Snake River fall Chinook salmon. Federal Register 57:78(22 April 1992)14653-14663. Ross, M.J., and C.F. Kleiner. 1982. Shielded-needle technique for surgically implanting radio-frequency transmitters in fish. Progressive Fish Culturist 44:41-43. Seber, G.A.F. 1965. A note on the multiple recapture census. Biometrika 52:249-259. Skalsi, J.R., S.G. Smith, R.N. Iwamoto, J.G. Williams, and A. Hoffman. 1998. Use of passive integrated transponder tags to estimate survival of migrant juvenile salmonids in the Snake and Columbia river. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55:1484-1493. Summerfelt, R.C., and L.S. Smith. 1990. Anesthesia, surgery, and related techniques. Pages 213-263 in C.B. Schreck and P.B. Moyle (editors). Methods for fish biology. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda.

17


Appendix A. Supplemental Information Table 8. Code set for Chinook salmon pre-smolt transmitters that operated continuously. Also shown are the frequency and channel for each of the associated codes. Code set is for 80 transmitters. Frequency 30.17 Channel 1 1265 1280 1295 1310 1325 1340 1355 1370 1385

Frequency 30.18 Channel 2 2260 2275 2290 2305 2320 2335 2350 2365 2380







Frequency 30.25 Channel 9 9255 9270 9285 9300 9315 9330 9345 9360

Table 9. Code set for Chinook salmon pre-smolt transmitters that alternated 1 week on/1 week off. Also shown are the frequency and channel for each of the associated codes. Code set is for 30 transmitters. Frequency 30.17 Channel 1 1400 1415 1430 1445

18

Frequency 30.18 Channel 2 2395 2410 2425 2440

Frequency 30.19 Channel 3 3390 3405 3420 3435

Frequency 30.20 Channel 4 4400 4415 4430







Table 10. The number of 995 noise signals received by receiver and channel per hour of operation for the duration of the study. Receiver LH1 LH2 DC1 DC2 MB1 MB2 TR1 TR2 RR1 RR2 BG1 BG2 NF1 NF2 DW1 DW2 LR1 LR2 SR1 SR2 CC1 CC2 VC1 VC2 SB1 SB2 TB1 TB2

1 23.2 16.9 0.3 0.3 152 32.1 5 1.2 16.9 12.3 0.4 0.2 7.9 57.8 0 0.1 0.1 1.6 1.5 0.4 6.4 8.4 0.5 0.5 1.9 1.4 7.8 4.9

2 27.1 4.4 0.3 0.4 129.8 31.8 3.3 0.6 16.8 11 0.3 0.3 3.2 65.9 0 0.1 0.1 1.5 4.4 2.9 6.1 101.7 0.5 0.2 1.6 1.5 12.1 5.7

3 25.7 11 0.2 0.3 147 27.5 2.8 0.7 17.5 12.1 0.4 0.2 5.2 68.4 0 0.1 0.1 0.8 1.7 0.8 8.2 8.3 0.6 0.2 1.4 1.5 12.9 4.5

4 25.4 16.7 0.2 0.3 148.4 40 3.2 1.5 17.7 13.5 0.4 0.3 6.7 79 0 0.1 0.1 1 4.3 3.4 5.1 88.3 0.6 0.2 2.5 1.8 12.2 4.1

Channel 5 26 22.5 0.2 0.3 136.6 40.5 3.7 2 17.5 13.6 0.4 0.4 5.8 82.9 0 0.1 0.1 1 2.2 0.5 7.6 10.9 0.6 0.6 1.7 1.8 14.9 4.5

6 24.3 15.8 0.2 0.2 130.8 26 2.7 2.1 16.9 13.4 0.4 0.3 6.9 90.7 0 0.1 0.1 0.5 4 2.6 15.6 96.7 0.6 0.2 1.9 1.9 12.7 4.8

7 25.8 11.1 0.2 0.2 102.2 22.5 3.2 0.9 12.9 14 0.2 0.3 3.4 51.2 0 0.1 0.1 0.8 2 0.7 11.2 18.7 0.5 0.2 1.7 1.6 10.5 4.9

8 25.9 12.9 0.1 0.2 91.4 15.7 2.4 0.3 12.9 11.4 0.2 0.3 6.5 31.5 0 0.1 0.1 0.7 5 2.3 7.6 14.3 0.5 0.1 1.9 1.6 10.2 5.3

9 23.3 8.9 0.2 0.3 93.9 9.1 4.2 0.6 10.8 15.9 0.2 0.2 15.7 28.7 0 0.1 0 0.6 1.9 0.9 6.4 8.2 0.6 0.1 1.2 1.4 7.8 3.7

19


Table 11. Complete ‘capture’ histories for each fish radio tagged and released during the pilot study. Duty cycle refers to whether a tag was emitting full-time upon release (constant) or cycling between emitting for one week followed by one week of deactivation (onOff). Tag ID 1265A 1280A 1340A 1355A 1370A 1385A 1400A 1415A 1430A 1445A 2260A 2290A 2305A 2335A 2350A 2365A 2380A 2395A 2410A 3255A 3270A 3285A 3315A 3330A 3345A 3360A 3375A 3405A 3420A 4265A 4280A 4295A 4310A 4325A 4355A 4370A 4385A

20

Length (mm) NA 121 NA 110 120 114 NA 113 120 119 115 NA 105 121 126 NA 113 NA 118 117 NA 115 111 NA NA 118 115 112 NA NA NA 121 112 116 116 107 NA

Weight (g) NA 22 NA 15.6 19.0 19.2 NA 15.1 20.1 19.4 19.1 NA 12.6 19.5 21.9 NA 17.9 NA 21.1 15.3 NA 16.6 16.3 NA NA 19.1 19.5 16.7 NA NA NA 21.5 15.9 19 18.2 14 NA

Duty Cycle constant constant constant constant constant constant onOff onOff onOff onOff constant constant constant constant constant constant constant onOff onOff constant constant constant constant constant constant constant constant onOff onOff constant constant constant constant constant constant constant constant

Time Activation 10/16/17 12:37 10/10/17 15:13 10/16/17 12:50 10/10/17 15:31 10/30/17 14:10 10/10/17 14:49 10/16/17 12:26 10/30/17 15:02 10/30/17 15:01 10/10/17 15:02 10/10/17 14:47 10/16/17 12:51 10/10/17 14:45 10/30/17 14:48 10/30/17 14:17 10/16/17 12:38 10/10/17 14:44 10/16/17 12:26 10/10/17 15:03 10/30/17 14:20 10/16/17 13:07 10/10/17 14:54 10/10/17 15:13 10/16/17 12:39 10/16/17 12:52 10/30/17 14:21 10/10/17 14:52 10/10/17 15:09 10/16/17 12:27 10/16/17 13:05 10/16/17 12:40 10/30/17 14:50 10/30/17 14:27 10/10/17 14:56 10/10/17 15:01 10/10/17 14:54 10/16/17 12:57

Release 10/19/17 6:39 10/12/17 19:00 10/19/17 6:21 10/12/17 19:00 11/3/17 6:30 10/12/17 19:00 10/19/17 7:01 11/3/17 6:30 11/3/17 6:30 10/12/17 19:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/19/17 7:00 10/12/17 19:00 11/3/17 6:30 11/3/17 6:30 10/19/17 7:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/19/17 6:59 10/12/17 19:00 11/3/17 6:30 10/19/17 7:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/19/17 6:32 10/19/17 7:00 11/3/17 6:30 10/12/17 19:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/19/17 7:00 10/19/17 7:00 10/19/17 7:00 11/3/17 6:30 11/3/17 6:30 10/12/17 19:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/19/17 7:00

LH 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0

MB 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0

TR 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0

RR 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0

BG 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0

Capture History NF DW LR 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

SR 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0

CC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0

VC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Tag ID 4400A 4415A 4430A 5260A 5275A 5290A 5320A 5335A 5350A 5365A 5395A 5410A 5425A 6255A 6270A 6285A 6300A 6315A 6330A 6345A 6360A 6390A 6420A 7265A 7280A 7295A 7310A 7325A 7340A 7355A 7370A 7385A 7400A 7415A 7430A 8290A 8305A 8320A 8335A 8350A

Length (mm) 115 113 108 NA 105 110 NA NA 115 110 113 114 NA 111 113 NA NA 125 108 NA 115 NA 105 NA 118 120 NA NA 121 115 110 120 NA 108 116 NA 111 111 110 124

Weight (g) 15.9 16.1 14.7 NA 14.1 16 NA NA 18.2 15.5 18 18.6 NA 16.5 18.5 NA NA 23.7 15.4 NA 17.4 NA 15.7 NA 19.4 21.1 NA NA 20.9 16.3 15.5 20.7 NA 14.4 18.8 NA 17.8 17 17.2 22.6

Duty Cycle onOff onOff onOff constant constant constant constant constant constant constant onOff onOff onOff constant constant constant constant constant constant constant constant onOff onOff constant constant constant constant constant constant constant constant constant onOff onOff onOff constant constant constant constant constant

Time Activation 10/30/17 14:25 10/30/17 14:23 10/10/17 15:41 10/16/17 12:42 10/10/17 14:55 10/10/17 14:55 10/16/17 12:58 10/16/17 13:04 10/30/17 14:54 10/10/17 14:56 10/10/17 15:34 10/30/17 14:28 10/16/17 12:28 10/10/17 15:28 10/30/17 14:29 10/16/17 12:43 10/16/17 12:59 10/10/17 14:58 10/10/17 14:57 10/16/17 13:03 10/30/17 14:57 10/16/17 12:28 10/10/17 15:05 10/16/17 12:45 10/10/17 15:41 10/10/17 15:03 10/16/17 12:45 10/16/17 13:01 10/30/17 14:34 10/30/17 14:30 10/30/17 14:32 10/10/17 15:07 10/16/17 12:30 10/10/17 15:06 10/30/17 14:32 10/16/17 13:02 10/10/17 15:29 10/10/17 15:04 10/10/17 15:11 10/30/17 14:38

Release 11/3/17 6:30 11/3/17 6:30 10/12/17 19:00 10/19/17 7:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/19/17 7:00 10/19/17 7:00 11/3/17 6:30 10/12/17 19:00 10/12/17 19:00 11/3/17 6:30 10/19/17 6:52 10/12/17 19:00 11/3/17 6:30 10/19/17 7:11 10/19/17 7:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/19/17 7:00 11/3/17 6:30 10/19/17 6:48 10/12/17 19:00 10/19/17 7:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/19/17 7:00 10/19/17 7:00 11/3/17 6:30 11/3/17 6:30 11/3/17 6:30 10/12/17 19:00 10/19/17 6:47 10/12/17 19:00 11/3/17 6:30 10/19/17 7:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/12/17 19:00 11/3/17 6:30

LH 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1

MB 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0

TR 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1

RR 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1

BG 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1

Capture History NF DW LR 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

21

SR 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0

CC 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0

VC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Tag ID 8365A 8380A 8410A 8425A 9255A 9285A 9300A 9315A 9330A 9360A 9390A

22

Length (mm) NA NA 102 NA 112 NA NA 109 109 115 NA

Weight (g) NA NA 12.7 NA 15.2 NA NA 14.4 15.6 17.6 NA

Duty Cycle constant constant onOff onOff constant constant constant constant constant constant onOff

Time Activation 10/16/17 13:02 10/16/17 12:46 10/30/17 14:35 10/16/17 12:33 10/30/17 14:41 10/16/17 13:02 10/16/17 12:49 10/10/17 15:01 10/10/17 15:11 10/10/17 15:07 10/16/17 12:33

Release 10/19/17 7:00 10/19/17 7:00 11/3/17 6:30 10/19/17 7:27 11/3/17 6:30 10/19/17 7:00 10/19/17 7:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/12/17 19:00 10/19/17 6:42

LH 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1

MB 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1

TR 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1

RR 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1

BG 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1

Capture History NF DW LR 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0

SR 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0

CC 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

VC 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

SB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0