CONTENTS 



Page 



Introduction 1 



Literature Survey 1 



Laboratory Methods and Equipment 2 



Laboratory Procedure 8 



Open -Water Methods and Equipment 8 



Open-Water Procedure 9 



Results of Laboratory Testing 14 



Results of Open -Water Testing 16 



Summary and Conclusions 19 



Literature Cited 19 



ILLUSTRATIONS 



Figure 1. Electro -magnetic Transducer 3 



Figure 2. Piezo-electric Transducer 4 



Figure 3 . Experimental Tank 5 



Figure 4. Tank Covers Showing Insulation 7 



Figure 5. Floating Laboratory 10 



Figure 6. Watertight Aluminum Box for Transducer H 



Figure 7. Block Diagram Showing Electronic Unit Arrangements 12 



Figures, Recording of Introduced and Background Sounds 13 



Figure 9. Sample of Laboratory Test Data 17 



Figure 10. Sample of Open -water Test Data 18 



ABSTRACT 



The objective was to determine whether used. Other than an initial "start" by 

 any quantity or quality of underwater sound the fish, no reaction was demonstrated, 

 would attract or repel young salmon. Fre- Apparently, fish are conditioned almost 

 quencies from 5 to 20, 000 cycles per second instantaneously to sounds. It was con- 

 were tested in an experimental tank and in eluded that sound waves were ineffective 

 open water. Two types of transducers were as an attracting or repelling force. 



ACKNOWLEDGMENT 



We are deeply grateful to the following This study was conducted by the 



engineers for their generous and patient help Fish and Wildlife Service under Contract 



in planning and aiding in the execution of this No. DA-35-026-eng-20685 with the Corps 



research project: Wayne M. Ross and Hyman of Engineers, as part of the Fisheries 



Pollack of Ross Laboratories, Seattle, Wash., Engineering Research Program. With the 



Jay W. Atherton of the United Control Corpora- publication of this report, the underwater 



tion, also of Seattle, Wash . sound studies conducted under the above 



contract are terminated. 



