Comparing Preloaded PIT Tag Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use PIT Injectors Scott McCutcheon Ryan Richmond Heiden Bliss Comparing Preloaded Single Use.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Accident Investigation vs. First Report of Injury.
Advertisements

Smolt Monitoring Program 1982-Present BPA project#
Environmental, Health & Safety Outsourcing Trends and Benefits Jeffrey M. Zipfel, CHMM Environmental & Safety Solutions.
Evaluation Procedures
Taking Advantage of OWS Cleaning / Waste Minimization Opportunities Presented by: Enviremedial Services, Inc.
Methods to Mitigate Tagging Effects (Actual & Perceived) Scott McCutcheon Ryan Richmond Methods to Mitigate Tagging Effects.
History and Development of Pre- loaded Single Use Injectors (SUI) Heiden Bliss Ryan Richmond Scott McCutcheon History and Development of Pre-loaded Single.
A Review of the 2014 Mark Procedures Manual Tiffani Marsh 1, Charles Morrill 2, Pat Keniry 3, Stephen Pastor 4, Jeff Fryer 5, Scott Putnam 6, Brandon Chockley.
Evaluation of prototype fish passage structures in the Lower Granite Dam juvenile fish bypass system – juvenile Pacific lamprey results Rod.
Minnesota Department of Transportation House Transportation Policy & Finance Committee February 23, 2015.
Assessing the use of PIT Tags as a Tool to Monitor Adult Chinook Salmon Returns to Idaho John Cassinelli Regional Fisheries Biologist Idaho Department.
Drug Courts: Some Answers to Our Burning Questions NADCP May 2008 How Drug Court Practices Impact Recidivism and Costs Shannon Carey, Ph.D. August 2014.
WASTE AUDITING 101. What Direction Are You Going?
1 MEASURING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE NATION’S FOODSERVICE AND RETAIL FOOD PROTECTION SYSTEM.
Rx/OTC Medications Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority Carol Holben, LCSW, CEAP, SAP Medical Standards & Compliance Administrator Human Resources.
Variation in Straying Patterns and Rates of Snake River Hatchery Steelhead Stocks in the Deschutes River Basin, Oregon Richard W. Carmichael and Tim Hoffnagle.
Preliminary Assessment Tribal Emergency Response Preparedness Dean S. Seneca, MPH, MCURP Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Centers for Disease.
March 2005 UMORS 1 UMORS Vander Kooi and Associates, Inc Ultimate Multiple Overhead Recovery System.
Hazardous Waste and Emergency Response
Presented by: Insert Name Safety Management Consultant
Incident Reporting Procedure
Review of Transportation Policies and Costs Fiscal Committee December 2, 2013.
Workers Compensation: Take control of your pool funding in an uncertain market.
Meredith Hicks Personnel Specialist/ Substitutes Ext
First Interim Report December 18, Tonight’s Presentation District’s First Interim Report Provides a summary to the Governing Board of the District’s.
LEARN COLLECT EXCEL Centralized Collections Bruce Robert, Chief of Collections San Bernardino County.
Yale Fleet Safety Programs Phil Cundiff Manager of Claims and Loss Control Risk Management July 2012 Phil Cundiff Manager of Claims and Loss Control Risk.
Mental Health and Substance Abuse Needs and Gaps FY 2013.
Airport Shuttle Agreements Presented by: John McCarthy GO Airport Express.
Desegregation and Black Dropout Rates By Jonathan Guryan.
 The unemployment rate = the percentage of the labor force that is jobless and actively looking for work Based on a country’s labor force, not the entire.
SURFWARE NEXT Courtesy of SURFWARE, Inc. SURFWARE 30% - 70% reduced cycle times 2x to 4x increase in cutter life Higher quality parts.
Hydrosystem Operations and Fish Recovery in the Columbia River Basin U
1. Objectives  Describe the responsibilities and procedures for reporting and investigating ◦ incidents / near-miss incidents ◦ spills, releases, ◦ injuries,
RETURNING INJURED WORKERS TO SUITABLE EMPLOYMENT Presented By: Justus Swensen Utah State University Facilities Safety
Food Services Program Evaluation March 28, 2011 Pocantico Hills Board of Education April 26, 2011.
2  Mission Statement.  Company’s overall purpose and direction, products, services and values.  Goals.  That accomplish the mission. E.g. 5 year plan.
Section 1512(c) Reporting: Calculating and Reporting of Job Creation and Retention.
Interdepartmental Placement of Employees Returning to Work Following Approved Leave County of Los Angeles Department of Human Resources July 6, 2011.
Task Force on Safe Teen Driving Joint Transportation Committee January 10, 2013.
Changing risk in the liberalised rail freight market Ian Lake – Railway Safety Commission.
Chinook Salmon Supplementation in the Imnaha River Basin- A Comparative Look at Changes in Abundance and Productivity Chinook Salmon Supplementation in.
CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES AND ALCOHOL USE TESTING REGULATIONS FOR DRIVERS.
A Bayesian Approach to Combine Multiple Sources of Escapement Data to Estimate Wind River Steelhead Abundance Dan Rawding and Charlie Cochran.
TDTIMS Overview What is TDTIMS? & Why Do We Do It?
CRITFC Video Smolt Project Developed in response to Fish Passage Center interest to see if video could be substituted for at least some of the handling.
Division of Risk Management State of Florida Loss Prevention Program.
2005 Subyearling Migration Fish Passage Center. Overview – summer migration Court ordered summer spill occurred from June 20 to August 31, 2005 Question.
1 FY2006 TDA Triennial Performance Audits Metropolitan Transportation Commission Programming & Allocations Committee October 4, 2006 GGBHTD (Golden Gate)
Historical Review Fish Migration Data. Two Management Approaches Spill for Fish Passage Planning dates Percent passage dates.
SCCFD Presentation for 48/96 Schedule 1. m/watch?v=6Qz05YO BJ9s&feature=youtube _gdata_player.
In FY the District Faced a $2.6 Million Dollar Reduction  SUMMARY OF REDUCTIONS  36.5 staff positions (5+%)  Elementary foreign language 
Strategies for Engagement By Tammy Guest, MA Oregon Supported Employment Center for Excellence.
B O N N E V I L L E P O W E R A D M I N I S T R A T I O N Slide 1 FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL SYMPOSIUM (West) – 6/3/09 Implementing Energy Efficiency in Remote.
WORKING BUDGET PRESENTATION September 24, Revenue Unaudited Carry Forward Balance - $6,323, Increased $423,361 from the tentative budget and.
Hourly Student Employees Getting Them Hired & Records Management Best Practices.
© 2010 Robert Half Management Resources. An Equal Opportunity Employer. Cost-Effective Staffing for Unprecedented Times.
Incident Reporting And Investigation Program
Preliminary Assessment Tribal Emergency Response Preparedness
Network Optimization Executive Seminar Track 1, Session A
Flexible Work Schedules
Mountain Regional Water Personnel Policies
Hatchery Subyearling Survival Lower Granite to McNary Dam 1998 to 2007 (preliminary results) Fish Passage Center.
Age at ocean entry of Snake River Basin fall Chinook and its significance to adult returns prior to summer spill at LGR, LGS, and LMN dams.
Incident Reporting And Investigation Program
HR Metrics 2: Staffing Metrics
ISyE 6203 The HDT Case Vande Vate Fall,
I want to thank you for serving on our School Council
Management of Occupational Road Risk
Organisational Structure
Presentation transcript:

Comparing Preloaded PIT Tag Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use PIT Injectors Scott McCutcheon Ryan Richmond Heiden Bliss Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors

Acknowledgements Contributed data: Doug Marsh, NMFS Dave Marvin & Jennifer Neighbors, PSMFC Nate Wiese, USFWS Hagerman NFH Funding agencies for tagging projects: US Army Corp of Engineers, Walla Walla District USFWS/LSRCP Douglas County PUD Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors

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 Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors

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%) 2011 o 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’s 2.There is an ascending growing trend in SUI usage 3.These numbers illustrate Biomark’s level of experience and expertise using SUI’s 50% of the total fish tagged and released in the Columbia Basin Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors

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 issues 2.Cost savings 3.Better product (healthy tagged fish at the time of release) Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors

Personnel Issues 5 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 locations A.Stanley Idaho B.Lower Granite Dam 1.Especially evident with sub-yearling fall Chinook due to their life history and small window of opportunity. Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors

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 locations A.of opportunity. Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors

Personnel Issues (2 of 6) 1.Crew Size 2.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 A.are facing hiring quotas and or restrictions Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors

Personnel Issues (3 of 6) 1.Crew Size 2.Personnel availability in remote locations 3.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 tags o 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 Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors

Personnel Issues (4 of 6) 1.Crew Size 2.Personnel availability in remote locations 3.Conflicting tagging schedules reduce personnel availability 4.Project management – A larger crew equates to: A.More HR issues B.More supervision required C.More training D.Dealing with hiring quotas and or restrictions 5.P 6.personal injury and the threat of human to human disease transmission Needle loaders get cut – a lot! Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors

Personnel Issues (5 of 6) 1.Crew 2.Personnel availability in remote locations 3.Conflicting tagging schedules reduce personnel availability 4.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. Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors

Personnel Issues (6 of 6) 1.Crew 2.Personnel availability in remote locations 3.Conflicting tagging schedules reduce personnel availability 4.Project management – A larger crew equates to: 5.Personal injury with the threat of human-to-human disease transmission 6.Fatigue The ergonomic design of the SUI implanter allows for long term usage without fatigue. Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors

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 charge Comparing 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 required 4.No MUI expenses Needle loading trailer rental, alcohol 5.Re-use/Recycling No hazardous waste fees Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors

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. Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors

Producing a Better Product (1) “A healthy, live, tagged fish – at the time of release.” Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors 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 Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors 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 Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors 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. – Improper techniques can lead to high mortality b)Use Sharp needles – Dull needles have a higher potential to injure or kill 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 (1c) Reduce Mortality Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors 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. – Improper techniques can lead to high mortality 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 (2a) Tag Shedding Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors 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 Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors 1.Tag shedding What can we do to reduce tag shedding? a)Use well trained personnel – Improper techniques can cause high shedding rates

Producing a Better Product (2a) Reducing Tag Shedding Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors 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.

Tag shedding & Mortality DATA Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors 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 b)Some comparisons of multi-year data using both MUI and SUI injectors. NMFS – Lower Granite Biomark – Various hatcheries

Tag shedding & Mortality A brief summary of study comparing SUI to MUI Nate Wiese, USFWS Hagerman NFH, Fall 2009 Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors 1.Two treatments – 6,600 SUI and 6,600 MUI 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..

Tag shedding & Mortality A brief summary of study comparing SUI to MUI Nate Wiese, USFWS Hagerman NFH, Fall 2009 Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors 1.Two treatments – 6,600 SUI and 6,600 MUI 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. At 14 days, both clean and ragged incisions had almost completely healed.

Tag shedding & Mortality A brief summary of study comparing SUI to MUI Nate Wiese, USFWS Hagerman NFH, Fall 2009 Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors 1.Two treatments – 6,600 SUI and 6,600 MUI 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. At 14 days, both clean and ragged incisions had almost completely healed.

Tag shedding & Mortality A brief summary of study comparing SUI to MUI Nate Wiese, USFWS Hagerman NFH, Fall 2009 Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors 1.Two treatments – 6,600 SUI and 6,600 MUI 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. At 14 days, both clean and ragged incisions had almost completely healed.

Tag shedding & Mortality A brief summary of study comparing SUI to MUI Nate Wiese, USFWS Hagerman NFH, Fall 2009 Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors Example of SUI Measurement Example of MUI Measurement

Tag shedding & Mortality A brief summary of study comparing SUI to MUI Nate Wiese, USFWS Hagerman NFH, Fall 2009 Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors 1.Two treatments – 6,600 SUI and 6,600 MUI 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 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.)

Tag shedding & Mortality A brief summary of study comparing SUI to MUI Nate Wiese, USFWS Hagerman NFH, Fall 2009 Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors 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) Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors 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. Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors

Summary Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors 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 Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors 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 Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors In 1991, 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 Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors In 1991, 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 in order 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 Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors In 1991, 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.

Questions Comparing Preloaded Single Use Injectors to Multiple Use Injectors Contact: Scott McCutcheon, Ryan Richmond, or Heiden Bliss At: Biomark, Inc. 703 S. Americana Blvd. Suite 150 Boise Idaho (208)