Control of Invasive Carp Using Non-Physical Barriers
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Control Of Invasive Carp Using Non-Physical Barriers Kaveh Someah, General Manager-Ovivo USA,LLC [email protected] 801-931 3010 Invasive Asian Carp Invasive Carp Issues Common carp European origin: invasive species in US Voracious bottom feeders- destroy aquatic habitat Affects wildfowling Grow large quickly Prolific spawners Spread rampantly throughout interconnected watercourses Probably the most damaging Common carp, Cyprinus carpio invasive fish [Sorensen & co-workers, University of Minnesota] Control Strategies • Various strategies can be considered: fish removal, rotenone, fish isolation • Isolation methods depend on identifying critical migration corridors, key times of migration, then blocking fish movements with physical or behavioural barriers • Need to consider fish population dynamics (what number of fish passing would be critical?) [Sorensen & co-workers, University of Minnesota] Basis for Multi-Stimulus Barriers • No behavioural barrier of any type is 100% effective for relevant species and lifestages • Animal behaviour is invariably a multiplex response to a complex of different signals in the environment, so why stick to one stimulus? • Different stimuli can interact to great effect to create a synergistic response • A complex of signals is less likely to be affected by an environmental perturbation (e.g. passing barge) Available Alternatives Are • Physical Barriers • Non-Physical Barriers Advantage of Non Physical Over Physical Barriers Non Physical Barriers have the following potential benefits: • No blockage risk/ flow impedance • In some cases can be species-selective • No barrier to navigation Non-Physical Fish Deterrent Technologies • Air Bubble Curtain Barriers • Electric Barriers • High Intensity Light Barriers • Acoustic Barriers (Sound Projector Arrays –SPAs, Bio- Acoustic Fish Fence –BAFF) • Combination of above Fish Deterrent Technologies (FDT) • Large Scale FDTs has well been established for fish exclusion from power plant and other water intakes. • Full Scale FDTs in CA is used to divert down migrating chinook salmon from entering irrigation diversions. • So far, only electric barriers used for invasive species control (Chicago Canal) • This presentation discusses use of multiple technologies to improve barrier effectiveness Electric Barriers • Efficiency related to potential difference across fish (high PD, higher efficiency) • Voltage gradients high enough to stop juvenile fish may be unacceptable for human Health & Safety • Electric fields are distorted e.g. by steel-hulled barges passing over electrodes • Generally not selective for species (native fish movements will also be blocked) Smith Root Graduated Field Barrier Why Use Sound? • Asian carp are extremely sensitive to sound • Failure modes are different from electric barriers, e.g. effective with small fish, so complementary in effect • Sound barrier-field will not be disrupted by barge traffic Sound Sensitivity Classes High Sensitivity: ‘hearing specialists’: clupeids, carp family, catfish etc. Moderate sensitivity: most roundfish e.g. cod Low sensitivity: bottom fish and those without swimbladder Fish Sensitivity to Sound: ABR Measurement Auditory Brainstem Response Tests can be carried out to determine optimum signal frequencies Data can be used to design species- selective barriers ABR tests carried out for Bighead and Silver Carp at Havana Lab Audiograms: Asian carp vs. other fish Audiograms are quickly Goldfish measured using Acoustic Asian carp Brainstem Response (ABR) technique Asian carp show exceptionally high sensitivity and extended Extended high-frequency response Common AFD Frequency Signal Range for to 2 kHz Frequencies Asian carp Possible to configure species selective barriers in some cases Effect of Sound on Smaller Fish Whereas electric barrier performance is better for large fish, acoustic deflection works on fish of all sizes Swimbladder acts as a detuned receiver, (i.e. it is not resonant), so that hearing sensitivity is not a function of fish size (Hawkins, 1981) Limiting factor for small fish is normally swimming performance (ability to resist passive movement with current) The Bio-Acoustic Fish Fence(BAFF): How it Works “Sound trapped within a wall of Air Bubbles” The “BAFF” A pneumatic system that introduces sound into a bubble curtain Sound concentrated in bubble plume Produces a ‘wall of sound’, suitable for guiding rather than deflecting fish Acoustic Barriers Sound projector or BAFF Efficiency retained over a broad sizeFGS Sound Projector range of fish No human Health & Safety issues Sound field integrity is maintained during passage of shipping Barriers can allow selective passage of native species (depending on difference in hearing ability) Bio-Acoustic Fish Fence (BAFF): Sound trapped within a wall of bubbles BAFF – Basic Arrangement • Sound projectors at base of bubble curtain aligned to ‘couple’ sound • Speed of sound in plume is Air intermediate between that curtain of air and water • Sound is refracted into bubble curtain and is Sound contained, creating a “wall projector of sound” Deterrent Sound Signals Various sound signals have been developed. These are typically in the frequency range <3 kHz and are continuously changing. For resident fish populations, the signal can be changed at intervals to avoid habituation. Signal Development: Effect of Different Signal Types Pure tones Not effective Pulses Not effective Chirps Are Effective The Acoustic Field The effectiveness of a sound field depends on - background noise - sound propagation - reflectiveness - source interactions This can be evaluated by available acoustic model. This also ensures no unwanted ‘sound pollution’ PrISM Acoustic Model BAFF Principle 1: Sound Resonates Between Bed and Surface Resonance path ensures uniform vertical spread of sound, rather than inverse square law decay Allows the BAFF to maintain full-height wall of sound in deep water BAFF Principle 2: Sound is Trapped within Bubble Sheet Sound level drops by up to 60dB at 1m distance, creating a well-defined guidance line Decay of Sound Pressure from BAFF Centre 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 100 Sound 1uPa) (dBLevel re Pressure 90 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 Distance from centreline (m) “Leaky” BAFF Concept – to Stop Fish Jumping Extra sound projectors are added but not coupled to bubble curtain Protective “wall-of-sound” is maintained but a more diffuse sound gradient is created upstream and downstream of the barrier This reduces the shock of the sound stimulus and will allow fish to turn back earlier Intended to reduce risk of fish jumping barrier Adding Other Stimuli Combinations of Bubbles, Sound, High Intensity Lights and Electric Fields Basis for Multi-Stimulus Barriers No behavioural barrier of any type has been found to be 100% efficient for all species and lifestages (e.g. electric barriers less efficient for small fish) Animal behaviour is a response to a complex of different signals in the environment, so why stick to one stimulus? Different stimuli can interact to create a synergistic response A complex of signals is likely to be less affected by an environmental perturbation (e.g. passing barge) High Intensity Light Barriers Efficiency retained over a FGS Linear Low- broad size range of fish Voltage Strobe Illumination is maintained during passage of shipping Usually set to between 200 and 400 fps Adding High Intensity Light to a BAFF High Intensity Light are repellent to many fish Narrow-beam lights fitted at base of bubble plume Water more transparent in bubble sheet, allowing light to reach surface even in turbid water (In reality the lighting forms a continuous line along the barrier) MkIII SPA Systems MkIII Sound Projector Integral High Intensity Light ring Contains sound generation and monitoring electronics Designed for easy maintenance MkIII SPA Systems For GS Power Supply & Performance Monitoring Unit Total System Control Unit (microprocessor) Touch sensitive screen for operators Power Supply Units (1 per 12 Sound Projectors) MkIII SPA System Schematic Fish Diversion Concepts Developing a clear fish behavior plan : Are we blocking, or diverting or trapping and removing the fish? What path will they take? How fast will they need to swim and for how long? What are the hydraulics What other factors might intervene (e.g. flooding, disturbance of stimulus field)? Fish Diversion Concepts Invasive Species Barrier: Blockage Barrier placed across the channel to deter fish movement Opportunities for selectively deterring Stream approach velocity acoustically sensitive species (acoustic only) Success depends on strength of stimulus vs. motivational state of fish Approach velocities must not exceed Escape horizon fish swimming ability (assume 90th%ile sustainable speed) StreamlinesFish Fish Diversion Concepts Angled FDT barrier for invasive species deflection Angled barrier line produces guidance effect Fish are diverted towards one end of the barrier, reducing likelihood of Navigation lock penetration Escape horizon Streamlines Fish Fish Diversion Concepts Angled barrier for invasive species trapping Similar to angled barrier above Fish are diverted into a trap Fish trap with inscale and are Navigation lock periodically collected and Escape horizon destroyed Streamlines Fish Bypass Hemsjo Nedre, Line of Bio-Acoustic Fish Fence Angled Barrier (BAFF) Bypass & Trap ‘Pavlovian’ Conditioning Raceway trials have demonstrated that Asian carp learn to stay away from sound This indicates that sound could be used in conjunction with existing electrical barriers to