comparing preloaded pit tag single use injectors to multiple use pit injectors scott mccutcheon ryan...

Comparing Preloaded PIT Tag Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use PIT

Injectors

Scott McCutcheonRyan Richmond

Heiden Bliss

Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors

Acknowledgements

Contributed data:Doug Marsh, NMFS

Dave Marvin & Jennifer Neighbors, PSMFCNate Wiese, USFWS Hagerman NFH

Funding agencies for tagging projects:US Army Corp of Engineers, Walla Walla District

USFWS/LSRCPDouglas County PUD


Introduction

• Earlier, Heiden Bliss gave you:– A description of the Pre-loaded Single Use Injector (SUI)– And, told you what led to development of SUI’s.

• During this presentation, I will:– Go into greater depth regarding some of my discussion points

from yesterday’s presentation (related to sharp needles) – Discuss the differences between SUI’s and Multiple Use

Injectors (MUI)– Present data that shows the benefit of using SUI’s– And finish up with a recommendation


SUI Usage in the Columbia Basin

• 2009 o 656,000 SUI were used equaling 30% of the total PIT tag usage

• Biomark’s proportion was 656,000 (100%)

• 2010 o 1,050,500 SUI were used equating to 43% of the total PIT tags usage

• Biomark’s proportion was 729,000 (69%)

• 2011o 1,300,000 SUI’s are projected to be used, equating to 50% of the total PIT tag usage

• Biomark’s proportion will be approximately 876,000 (67%)

This slide demonstrates three points:1. In two years, there have been a large number of fish tagged with SUI’s2. There is an ascending growing trend in SUI usage 3. These numbers illustrate Biomark’s level of experience and expertise using SUI’s50% of the total fish tagged and released in the Columbia Basin


Reasons for using SUI rather than MUI

The focus of this presentation will be to discuss three primary reasons which were the driving force behind developing SUI’s:1. Personnel issues2. Cost savings3. Better product

• (healthy tagged fish at the time of release)


Personnel Issues5 per6 personnel issues that make SUI usage more desirable

1. Crew Size - Rule of thumb – you need 1.2 needle loaders for each person tagging

A. Biomark– Crew size with MUI = 24 (4 data collectors, 8 taggers, 1 fish handler, 10 needle loaders and 1

supervisor) – Crew size with SUI = 13 (4 data collectors, 8 taggers and 1 fish handler) – 46% reduction in crew size

B. NMFS (Lower Granite)– Crew Size with MUI = 45 to 55– Crew size with SUI = 30 – 33 to 45% reduction in crew size

2. Personnel availability in remote locationsA. Stanley IdahoB. Lower Granite Dam

1. Especially evident with sub-yearling fall Chinook due to their life history and small window of opportunity.


Personnel Issues (1 of 6)1. Crew Size

• Rule of thumb for MUI’s – you need 1.2 needle loaders for each person tagging

A. Biomark– MUI crew size = 24

(8 taggers, 10 needle loaders, 4 data collectors, 1 fish handler and 1 supervisor)

– SUI crew size = 13 (8 taggers, 4 data collectors, and 1 fish handler)

– 46% reduction in crew size

B. NMFS (Lower Granite)– MUI crew size = 45 to 55– SUI crew size = 30 – 33 to 45% reduction in crew size

2. Personnel availability in remote locationsA. of opportunity.


Personnel Issues (2 of 6)

1. Crew Size2. Personnel availability is a problem in remote locations

A. Lower Granite Dam• No shows

• MUI crew required 55 people • Sometimes only 30 would show up to work

• Daily travel requirements• Dedicated, experienced Personnel

B. Stanley Idaho“In the winter, people in Stanley either have a job, or they don’t want a job.”

• Lack of available local personnel• Requires entire crew to be on travel status• With a full MUI crew, our travel budget would be cost prohibitive

C. are facing hiring quotas and or restrictions



1. Crew Size2. Personnel availability in remote locations3. Conflicting tagging schedules reduce personnel availability

A. State and/or federal agencies CW-Tagging fish at the same time & location

1. Especially evident with sub-yearling fall Chinook due to their life history o Limited to tagging fish with lengths >65mm using 12.5mm PIT tagso Fish SHOULD BE PIT tagged two week prior to their departure date

(pumped and transported)o That leaves us a 4 to 6 week window of opportunity when all

production sub-yearling fall Chinook must be tagged (CWT and PIT tags)

B. Example: Umatilla, Oregon. We were not able to find any local personnel in 2010.



1. Crew Size2. Personnel availability in remote locations3. Conflicting tagging schedules reduce personnel availability4. Project management – A larger crew equates to:

A. More HR issues B. More supervision requiredC. More trainingD. Dealing with hiring quotas and or restrictions

5. P6. personal injury and the threat of human to human disease

transmission• Needle loaders get cut – a lot!



1. Crew2. Personnel availability in remote locations3. Conflicting tagging schedules reduce personnel availability4. Project management – A larger crew equates to:5. Personal injury with the threat of human-to-human disease

transmission• Needle loaders get cut – a lot!

– (Fewer Band-Aids)

6. Fatigue• The ergonomic design of the SUI implanter allows for long term

usage without fatigue.

•



1. Crew2. Personnel availability in remote locations3. Conflicting tagging schedules reduce personnel availability4. Project management – A larger crew equates to:5. Personal injury with the threat of human-to-human

disease transmission6. Fatigue

• The ergonomic design of the SUI implanter allows for long term usage without fatigue.

•


Cost Benefit of SUI (1 of 2 )

Biomark was able to reduce our budget to the COE by 7% by using SUI injectors.

How? Doesn’t the needle cost more?

1. Yes. The cost per needle is Approximately $0.21 higher per use. • SUI -- $0.31

vs. • MUI -- $0.10 (When used correctly)

• Biomark used MUI needles approximately 10 • NMFS used their MUI needles 3 to 5 times

1. – no hazardous waste chargeComparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors

Cost Benefit of SUI (2 of 2)

Biomark was able to reduce our budget to the COE by 7% by using SUI injectors.How? Doesn’t the needle cost more?

Yes. (Approximately $0.21 per fish)BUT – This is offset by the following:1. Payroll – Biomark reduced our crew size by 46%

• (Reducing the crew size does not directly correlate to a payroll)

2. Per diem - fewer people on travel status 3. Travel expenses – fewer vehicles required4. No MUI expenses

• Needle loading trailer rental, alcohol

5. Re-use/Recycling• No hazardous waste fees


Producing a Better Product

As tagging project managers, our finished product should be:

A group of healthy, tagged fish that matches the data contained in the release file.


Producing a Better Product (1)“A healthy, live, tagged fish – at the time of release.”


We use two indicators to determine the immediate success of a tagging operation:

1. Fish mortality • From time of tagging until release.• Compared to normal mortality at the same facility.

2. Tag shedding • From time of tagging until release.

Producing a Better Product (1a)Reduce Mortality


1. Fish mortality• What can we do to reduce tagging related mortality? a) Use only properly trained personnel.

– Training personnel to use a SUI is much easier than training to use an MUI. (Ergonomics)

b) Use Sharp needles – Dull needles have a high potential to injure fish.

c) Use clean needles– SUI reduce the chance of horizontal (fish-to-fish) disease

transmission without disinfecting needles with alcohol

Producing a Better Product (1b)Reduce Mortality



– Training personnel to use a SUI is much easier than training to use an MUI.

– Improper techniques can lead to high mortality

b) Use Sharp needles – Dull needles have a higher potential to injure or kill fish.


transmission without disinfecting needles with alcohol

Producing a Better Product (1c)Reduce Mortality



– Training personnel to use a SUI is much easier than training to use an MUI.

– Improper techniques can lead to high mortality

b) Use Sharp needles – Dull needles have a high potential to injure fish.


transmission without disinfecting needles with alcohol.

Producing a Better Product (2a)Tag Shedding


1. Tag shedding• What can we do to reduce tag shedding?a) Use well trained personnel

– Improper techniques can cause high shedding rates

b) Use sharp needles– Dull needles will cause larger more ragged wounds that may

take longer to heal.

Producing a Better Product (2b)Tag Shedding




Producing a Better Product (2a)Reducing Tag Shedding




b) Use sharp needles– Dull needles will cause larger more ragged wounds that may

take longer to heal.

Tag shedding & MortalityDATA


The next few slides will show difference in data from fish tagged with SUI and MUI injectors:

a) A brief summary of study comparing SUI to MUI• USFWS – Hagerman Fall 2009.

b) Some comparisons of multi-year data using both MUI and SUI injectors.• NMFS – Lower Granite 2006-2010• Biomark – Various hatcheries 2008-2010

Tag shedding & MortalityA brief summary of study comparing SUI to MUINate Wiese, USFWS Hagerman NFH, Fall 2009


1. Two treatments – 6,600 SUI and 6,600 MUI 2. 300 fish (150 SUI & 150 MUI) were removed for 28

day wound observation (photographed on a weekly basis)Results• No significant difference in tag shedding (MUI slightly higher)

• No significant difference in mortality (MUI slightly higher)

• No significant difference in length of wound (MUI slightly longer)

Significant difference in width of wound (MUI Wider)

Significant difference in ragged wounds (MUI 44%, SUI 3%)

• At 7 days, 18% of ragged wounds had healed compared to 44% of clean incisions.

• .



1. Two treatments – 6,600 SUI and 6,600 MUI 2. 300 fish 150 SUI & 150 MUI) were removed for 28 day

wound observation (photographed on a weekly basis)Results• No significant difference in tag shedding (MUI slightly higher)




Significant difference in ragged wounds (MUI 44%, SUI 3%)

• At 7 days, 18% of ragged wounds had healed compared to 44% of clean incisions.

• At 14 days, both clean and ragged incisions had almost completely healed.



Example of SUI Measurement Example of MUI Measurement



1. Two treatments – 6,600 SUI and 6,600 MUI 2. 300 fish 150 SUI & 150 MUI) were removed for 28 day wound

observation (photographed on a weekly basis)Results• No significant difference in tag shedding (MUI slightly higher)




Significant difference in ragged wounds• 44% of the MUI group was considered ragged compared to 3% of the SUI

group.• At 7 days, 18% of ragged wounds had healed compared to 44% of clean

incisions.• At 14 days, both clean and ragged incisions had almost completely healed.

This is important when considering how fish are handled post tagging• (Whenever possible, do not transport for two weeks.)



Example of Ragged Incision 1 Day Post PIT tagging with MUI Needle Method.

Multi-year mortality and shed tag data recovered at Lower Granite dam by NMFS. Yearling hatchery Chinook were held 24 hours.

(Data provided by Doug Marsh, NMFS)


Injector Type Study year Tagged n % n % n %

SUI 2010 48,119 219 0.46 63 0.13 282 0.59%-

MUI 2009 46,647 247 0.53 129 0.28 376 0.81%MUI 2008 51,504 687 1.33 134 0.26 821 1.59%MUI 2007 31,658 127 0.40 60 0.19 187 0.59%MUI 2006 95,576 820 0.86 253 0.26 1,073 1.12%MUI Mean 225,385 1,881 0.83 576 0.26 2,457 1.09%

Morts Lost tags Combined

In 2007 the MUI injector method had fewer mortalities (higher shed rate). Note that fewer fish were tagged that year. Needles were used 3 times each and the smaller crew consisted of their most experienced personnel.

Multi-year mortality and shed tag data recovered at various hatcheries by hatchery staff and NMFS truck drivers.

Tagging was conducted by Biomark.


0.00%

0.20%

0.40%

0.60%

0.80%

1.00%

1.20%

Combined mortality and shedding for Snake River sub-yearling Fall Chinook

2008 2009 2010MUI SUI

DevelopmentSUI

n/a

Summary


• With two years of tagging using Pre-loaded Single Use Injectors, we have observed:– Reduced mortality – Lower shed rate – Decreased cost to tag fish.

• From a management perspective:– We are producing a better product at a lower cost.

Recommendation


In 1992, the Columbia Basin banned the use of auto-taggers. I believe a similar prohibition should be considered for the excessive use of MUI’s.

I recommend that researchers conducting PIT tagging should limit the use of MUI to no more than 10 fish per needle, or use SUI.

How do we mandate a change?

1. Funding agencies. – Demand a standard of excellence in the material used to produce valid

studies. • Follow this up with the funding to support.

2. PIT tag steering committee.– Recommend that needles not be used more than 10 times each.

Recommendation








Recommendation





1. Funding agencies. – Demand a standard of excellence in the material used in order to

produce valid studies. • Follow this up with the funding to support.


Recommendation








Questions


Contact:Scott McCutcheon, Ryan Richmond, or Heiden BlissAt:Biomark, Inc.703 S. Americana Blvd.Suite 150Boise Idaho 83702(208)275-0011

[email protected]@[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



comparing preloaded pit tag single use injectors to multiple use pit injectors scott mccutcheon ryan...

Documents