New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Sound Findings

Sonar offers a way to count salmon accurately

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The debate is as fierce and perennial as the surf pounding the Alaska coastline. On one side, commercial and sports fishermen complain that calculated fishing quotas do not match the number of fish actually in the water. On the other, conservation authorities worry that overfishing will deplete the sockeye and chinook salmon stocks plying the Pacific Northwest waters. New techniques using existing acoustic sonar equipment may help both sides by determining how many salmon are in the water as well as distinguishing one species from the other. And that could make counting and catching them a lot easier.

In sonar setups such as fish finders, pulses of sound bounce off the water's bottom--and off any creatures that happen to swim by. Typically devices record the strength of the return echo, thereby indicating the rough numbers of fish and their sizes.

Echo pulses have other characteristics, too, such as width, shape and kurtosis (the size of the pulse's top half relative to that of the bottom half). Scientists have largely ignored these features, because they believed that background noises obscure whatever information they may contain.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Some investigators decided to challenge that belief. This past summer researchers at Fisheries and Oceans Canada and the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service in Alaska mounted four acoustic transducers on a metal plate beside Alaska's Kenai River. The transducers then fired simultaneous sound waves, each at different frequencies, at approximately 40 chinook and sockeye salmon tethered to the river bottom with fishing line.

"We've learned," says physicist Tim Mulligan with Fisheries and Oceans Canada, "that, indeed, the fish's shape" and its positioning measurably alter the return echo, a finding "that wasn't really documented until now." For instance, the degree to which a salmon's head and tail point toward the transducer correlates strongly with the width of the echo pulse; other changes in the returning echo, including the kurtosis, also indicate the orientation of the fish. The next step will be to correlate echo components with other fish features, such as tail strength and swim speed, and to determine how those sonar characteristics vary according to species. Nailing down the differences between sockeye and chinook salmon could take years, however.

Mulligan insists the significance of the correlation between fish swimming behavior and long-ignored echo characteristics cannot be overstated. It "opens many more opportunities for fish-type discrimination based on behavior," he says. Alaska's Kenai River Sportfishing Association, which helped to finance the project, evidently agrees. Its hope: that conservation officials will have more accurate assessments of the yearly salmon runs up the Kenai and other rivers and be able to identify fish by species before netting or reeling them in. That could settle disputes between officials and fishers over just how much salmon can be harvested.�

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe