<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><i>Any relevance to Klamath & Trinity PIT tagging efforts? Any evaluation studies on coho tagging?<o:p></o:p></i></p><table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 width="100%" style='width:100.0%'><tr><td style='background:white;padding:8.25pt 8.25pt 8.25pt 8.25pt'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";font-variant:small-caps;color:black'>Study Suggests Sedating Chinook When Radio-Tagging Improves Returns To Spawning Tributaries</span></b><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'> <br>Posted on Friday, July 25, 2014 (PST) <o:p></o:p></span></p></td></tr><tr><td style='background:white;padding:8.25pt 8.25pt 8.25pt 8.25pt'><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>Sedating fish to implant radio tags, instead of collecting and restraining them without sedation, significantly reduces the impacts of the procedure on fish used throughout fishery research.</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black;background:yellow;mso-highlight:yellow'>Radio-tagging fish for research, whether juvenile salmon and steelhead or adults, results in unaccounted-for losses when conducting fish studies</span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>.</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>Yet, research is generally conducted assuming that there are no, or minimal, impacts on the tagged fish and so seldom take losses into account.</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>A study of the radio-tagging procedure on both adult chinook salmon and adult steelhead using both the collecting and restraining technique, and sedating with Eugenol-based anesthesia on the Willamette River found that sedated chinook reached their spawning tributaries 82 percent of the time, while those that were restrained without sedation when inserting the radio tag arrived at their spawning tributary 47 percent of the time.</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>In addition to the longer term impact (escaping to the spawning tributary), the study found improvements in short term impacts: anesthetized fish were less likely to head back downstream after the radio-tagging procedure, according to lead author Chris Caudill, assistant professor in the Department of Fish and Wildlife Sciences, College of Natural Resources at the University of Idaho.</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>“Clearly, the results recommend that fish should be anesthetized whenever possible, both for the sake of the fish and to minimize the potential for tagging effects to bias study results,” Caudill said.</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>The article, "A Field Test of Eugenol-Based Anesthesia versus Fish Restraint in Migrating Adult Chinook Salmon and Steelhead," appeared in the July Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><a href="http://afs.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00028487.2014.892533?queryID=%24%7BresultBean.queryID%7D#.U9E_HvldVqV"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:blue'>http://afs.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00028487.2014.892533?queryID=%24%7BresultBean.queryID%7D#.U9E_HvldVqV</span></a></span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>.</span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>Its authors are Caudill; Michael A. Jepson and George P. Naughton, research support scientists; Steven R. Lee and Travis L. Dick, scientific aides; and Matthew L. Keefer, research scientist. All are in the Department of Fish and Wildlife Sciences, College of Natural Resources at the University of Idaho.</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>The study also included Willamette River winter steelhead. The researchers found little difference in either fallback or escapement for steelhead between restraint and sedation, apparently because some species are more susceptible to handling effects than others.</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>“We don’t have a good explanation for this result, but presumably it stems from differences in physiology between the two species,” Caudill said. “Regardless, it does caution against extending results from one species to another without confirming the effects are similar across species.”</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>The study was conducted at the Willamette Falls Dam, a combined hydroelectric project and natural falls near Oregon City, Ore. on the Willamette River, one of the Columbia River’s largest tributaries. Spring chinook were collected at the dam every other week from April 16 to July 2, 2012, and winter steelhead were collected March 2 to June 16, 2012. All were tagged: approximately half were restrained in a cradle during the insertion of the tag and half were immersed in a bath of river water and the Eugenol-based anesthesia.</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>Of the fixed-site radio receivers, ten were in the fishway or downstream, while 34 were located in Willamette River tributaries (Clackamas, Tualatin, Molalla, Yamhill, Santiam, Calapooia, McKenzie, Coast Fork of the Willamette, and the Middle Fork of the Willamette rivers).</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>The short term component of the research tested whether fish lingered in the dam’s fishway or fell downstream after tagging. The long term component tested escapement, whether the fish arrived at their spawning tributaries.</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>After release, 47 percent of the restrained chinook salmon and 20 percent of the anesthetized salmon moved down the fishway and into the dam’s tailrace. There was no difference for steelhead between the restrained and anesthetized fish: 17 percent of each fell back. </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>Many of these fish eventually moved up to the spawning tributaries. Of the restrained salmon, 60 percent re-ascended the fishway, while 89 percent of the anesthetized salmon re-ascended the fishway.</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>Of the 17 percent of steelhead that fell below the dam, 88 percent to 90 percent re-ascended the fishway, and 79 percent to 83 percent of all steelhead made it to the tributaries.</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>“The consistency across chinook Salmon studies suggest that manual restraint may be particularly stressful for chinook Salmon,” the study concludes, going on to say that there is a “higher potential to compromise some types of studies (e.g. survival estimation) than others (e.g. migration timing and behavior.”</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black'>“These results might be applied to past tagging studies of unanesthetized chinook salmon in the Willamette River, but I would only cautiously apply them elsewhere,” Caudill said of adjusting past research to these results. “In either case, the results can be useful for speculating on the magnitude of tagging effects in past studies, but it would be foolhardy to apply a precise correction factor from our study.”</span><span style='font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></td></tr></table><p class=MsoNormal>THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Weekly Fish and Wildlife News<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><a href="http://www.cbbulletin.com">www.cbbulletin.com</a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>July 25, 2014<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Issue No. 715<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>