DOCSLIB.ORG

Fish Passage Technologies: Protection at Hydropower Facilities

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fish Passage Technologies: Protection at Hydropower Facilities Fish Passage Technologies: Protection at Hydropower Facilities September 1995 OTA-ENV-641 GPO stock #052-003-01450-5 Recommended Citation: Fish Passage Technologies: Protection at Hydropower Facilities, OTA-ENV-641 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, September 1995). Foreword he House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries requested that the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) examine the role of fish passage and protection technologies in addressing the adverse effects of hydropower development on TNorth American fish populations. After the elimination of the requesting commit- tee, the report was continued on behalf of the House Resources Committee, Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Oceans. Hydropower development may adversely affect fish by blocking or impeding biologi- cally significant movements, and altering the quantity, quality, and accessibility of neces- sary habitat. Fish moving downstream that pass through hydropower turbines can be injured or killed, and the inability of fish to pass upstream of hydropower projects prohibits them from reaching spawning grounds. Hydropower licenses issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) may include requirements for owners/operators to imple- ment fish passage technologies or other measures to protect, enhance, or mitigate damages to fish and wildlife, as identified by the federal resource agencies. Although FERC is directed to balance developmental and nondevelopmental values in licensing decisions, many contend that balancing has been inadequate. Thus, fish passage and protection has become a major controversy between the hydropower industry and resource agencies. This report describes technologies for fish passage, and those for protection against tur- bine entrainment and mortality, with an emphasis on FERC-licensed hydropower projects. OTA identifies three areas for policy improvements. First, to establish and maintain sus- tainable fisheries, goals for protection and restoration of fish resources need to be clarified and strengthened through policy shifts and additional research. Secondly, increased coordi- nation is needed among fishway design engineers, fisheries biologists, and hydropower operators, especially during the design and construction phases of fish passage and protec- tion technologies, to improve efficiency. Finally, new initiatives with strong science and evaluation components are needed to advance fish passage technologies, especially for safe downstream passage. OTA sincerely appreciates the contributions of the advisory panel, workshop partici- pants, contractors, and reviewers. We are especially grateful for the time and effort donated by the federal and state resource agencies and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The information and assistance provided by all of these individuals was invaluable. ROGER C. HERDMAN Director iii Advisory Panel Don Kash, Chair George Eicher Dale Kelley John T. Hazel Sr. & Ruth D. President Executive Director Hazel Chair of Pubic Policy Eicher Associates, Inc. Alaska Trollers Association The Institute of Public Policy Portland, OR Juneau, AK George Mason University Fairfax, VA Christopher Estes Jack Mattice Statewide Instream Flow Senior Project Manager Paul Bisulca Coordinator Electric Power Research Assistant to the Governor Alaska Department of Fish and Institute Environmental Affairs Game Palo Alto, CA Penobscot Indian Nation Anchorage, AK Oxford, ME C. Paul Ruggles John Hall Fisheries and Environmental Tom Bowes National Marine Fisheries Consultant Director of Hydro Operations Western Shore, Nova Scotia, Consumers Power Service (retired) Canada Cadillac, MI Vienna, VA Jerry Sabattis Paul Brouha Mona Janopaul Program Coordinator Executive Director Conservation Counsel Hydro-Licensing American Fisheries Society Trout Unlimited Niagara Mohawk Power Falls Church, VA Arlington, VA Corporation Glenn Cada Chris Katopodis Syracuse, NY Aquatic Ecologist Habitat Management Engineer Ted Strong Oak Ridge National Freshwater Institute Director Laboratory Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada Oak Ridge, TN InterTribal Fish Commission Portland, OR Julie Keil Tom Carlson Director, Hydro Licensing Lead Scientist Portland General Electric Pacific Northwest Laboratory Company Richland, WA Portland, OR iv Ned Taft Gary Whelan Ron Wilson Program Manager FERC Project Coordinator Attorney Environmental Services Michigan Department of Columbia, MO Alden Research Laboratory, Inc. Natural Resources Holden, MA Lansing, MI v Workshop Participants Ken Bates Larry Leasner William Sarbello Department of Fish and Department of Natural Department of Environmental Wildlife Resources Conservation Olympia, WA Annapolis, MD Albany, NY Ron Brockman Charles Liston Price Smith U.S. Bureau of Reclamation U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Department of Game and Sacramento, CA Denver, CO Inland Fisheries Ashland, VA Christopher Estes Estyn Mead Department of Fish and Game U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Tom Squiers Anchorage, AK Arlington, VA Department of Marine Resources James Fossum Duane Neitzel Augusta, ME U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Batelle Northwest Green Bay, WI Richland, WA Tom Thuemler Department of Natural Roger Guinee John Nestler Resources U.S. Fish and Wildlife Survey U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Marinette, WI Sacramento, CA Vicksburg, MS Stephen Waste Alex Haro Dan Odenweller National Marine Fisheries National Biological Service Service Turner’s Falls, MA Department of Fish and Game Sacramento, CA Silver Spring, MD Darryl Hayes Gary Whelan Department of Water Rock Peters Department of Natural Resources U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Resources Sacramento, CA Portland, OR Lansing, MI Alex Hoar Ben Rizzo Marcin Whitman U.S. Fish and Wildlife Survey U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Marine Fisheries Hadley, MA Newton Corner, MA Service Santa Rosa, CA Robert Krska David Robinson U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Fort Snelling, MN Denver, CO vi Project Staff Clyde Behney Elise Holland Kimberly Holmlund Assistant Director Analyst Administrative Secretary Robert Niblock Rebecca I. Erickson1 Sharon Knarvik2 Program Director Research Analyst Administrative Secretary Environment Program Susan J. Wunder Babette Polzer3 Patricia Durana Contract Editor Contractor Project Director ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF Joan G. Harn Kathleen Beil 1 Until August 1995. Assistant Project Director Office Administrator 2 Until February 1995. 3 From June 1995. Matthew Draud Nellie M. Hammond Analyst Administrative Secretary vii Contents 1 Executive Summary and Policy Directions 1 Controversies 3 Policy Directions 7 Summary of Fish Passage Technologies 9 Conclusions 20 2 Fish Passage and Entrainment Protection 25 Part 1: Issues and Controversies 25 Part 2: Study Methods 45 3 Upstream Fish Passage Technologies: How Well Do They Work? 53 Upstream Fish Passage Design 53 Effective Fishway Design 63 Why Fishways Fail 65 Conclusions 67 4 Downstream Fish Passage Technologies: How Well Do They Work? 69 Design of Conventional Structural Measures 70 Other Methods for Providing Downstream Passage 76 Evolving Downstream Passage Technologies 82 Alternative Behavioral Guidance Devices 87 Perspectives on Technologies 93 Conclusions 94 5 The Federal Role in Fish Passage at Hydropower Facilities 97 Licensing of Nonfederal Hydropower Plants 98 Mitigation Costs and Benefits 108 Research and Development: Federal Involvement 112 Conclusions 117 ix Appendix A: Overview of Fish Passage and Protection Technologies in the Columbia River Basin 121 Abstract 121 Introduction 122 Overview of Columbia River Basin Fish Passage Research: Past to Present 125 References 130 Appendix B: Experimental Guidance Devices: NMFS Position Statements 135 Experimental Fish Guidance Devices: Position Statement of National Marine Fisheries Service Northwest Region January 1995 135 Experimental Fish Guidance Devices: Position Statement of National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Region January 1994 138 References for Northwest and Southwest Regions Position Statements 141 Appendix C: Suggested Reading 143 References 153 x Executive Summary and Policy Directions 1 he focus of this report is technologies a hydropower dam unless some fish passage for fish passage around hydropower facility is present. Downstream passage facilities generation facilities and protection may not always be necessary if the fish can T against entrainment and turbine mortal- safely pass through turbines, spillways, or sluice- ity. Emphasis is given to Federal Energy Regula- ways, though there is significant debate about the tory Commission (FERC)-licensed hydropower adequacy of these latter two passage methods. 1 projects where fish protection is a subject of con- Decisions about the need for fish protection troversy and congressional interest due to the measures at dams are often based on the per- Federal Power Act (FPA) and the Electric Con- ceived or measured impacts on one or more spe- sumers Protection Act (ECPA). Thus institu- cies at the site (242). Fish populations may be tional issues related to FERC-relicensing are also adversely affected by hydropower faci lities and discussed. (Major points of controversy are high- many other activities and facilities (e.g., mul tiple lighted in box 1-1.) Federal hydropower projects, use, flood control, and water supply dams; land especially in the Columbia River Basin, and irri- use practices like grazing and forestry; and facil- gation water diversions in the Pacific Northwest and California are included to the extent that they ities like coal-fired
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bald Eagle Wintering Activity Rocky Reach Reservoir
    Bald Eagle Wintering Activity Summary, 2011 - 2012 Bald Eagle Wintering Activity Rocky Reach Reservoir 2011 - 2012 Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County Fish & Wildlife Department Wenatchee, WA 98807-1231 Bald Eagle Wintering Activity Summary, 2011 - 2012 INTRODUCTION The Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County (Chelan PUD) owns and operates the Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project along the Columbia River in central Washington. This project operates under Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license #2145-060. Rocky Reach Dam was licensed in 1957 and began generating electricity in 1961. The operating license was renewed in 2009. As prescribed in the Rocky Reach Wildlife Habitat Management Plan required by Article 403 of the Rocky Reach license, Chelan PUD continues to monitor numbers of wintering eagles along Rocky Reach Reservoir (Chelan PUD 2010). This annual report summarizes data collected on wintering bald eagles for the winter of 2011 - 2012. HISTORY From 1975 – 1984, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) conducted monthly aerial surveys for wintering bald eagles along the mid-Columbia River, including Rocky Reach Reservoir (Fielder and Starkey 1980). In 1985, Chelan PUD began regularly monitoring eagles during the winter months along Rocky Reach Reservoir. The bald eagle was delisted on August 9, 2007. As a result, Chelan PUD reduced the monitoring effort from weekly to monthly during the winter months (November – March). This frequency of monitoring exceeds the level suggested in the bald eagle post-delisting monitoring plan (USFWS 2009) and should provide sufficient trend information into the future. Winter surveys allow Chelan PUD to determine distribution of wintering eagles along the Reservoir and to determine the age ratio of sub-adults: adults.
    [Show full text]
  • "Evaluation of Submerged Weir to Reduce Fish Impingement at Indian Point." May 25-Jul 29,1977
    wilveveaI, PDR ADOCK 05' p 0 -v EVALUATION OF A SUBMERGED WEIR TO REDUCE FISH IMPINGEMENT AT INDIAN POINT. FOR THE PERIOD 25 MAY - 29 JULY 1977 March 1978 Prepared for CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC. 4 Irving Place New York, New York 10003 .Prepared by TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INCORPORATED Science Services Division P.O. Box 5621 Dallas, Texas 75222 Copyright March 1978 by Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. science Services division TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page I INTRODUCTION I-i Ii METHODS AND MATERIALS 'I-i A. INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR PLANT 'I-i B. STUDY DESIGN 11-1 III RESULTS 111-1 IV DISCUSSION IV-l V LITERATURE CITED APPENDIX Appendix Title A IMPINGEMENT DATA COLLECTED AT INDIAN POINT UNIT 1 DURING THE COURSE OF WEIR STUDY, 25 MAY-29 JULY 1977 TABLES Table Title Page 111-1 Taxon List of Fish Collected during Submerged 111-2 Weir Study 111-2 Results of Two-tailed Mann-Whitney U-Tests Comparing 111-3 Number of Fish Collected Daily from Traveling Screens at Indian Point Unit 1 during Periods of Weir and Fixed Screen Operation ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Title Page 11-1 Indian Point Plant Layout 11-2 11-2 Cross Section of Unit 1 Forebay with Submerged Weir and 11-4 Back-up Fine N~esh Screen 11-3 Details of Submerged Weir Construction 11-4 science services division SECTION I INTRODUCTION Impingement of fish at power plant intakes is often an unavoidable consequence of withdrawals of large volumes of water from cooling water sources. Frequently, the magnitude of the impingement problem can be re duced by careful design of intake structures and judicious selection of intake location (USEPA, 1973).
    [Show full text]
  • 2009 Rocky Reach and Rocky Island Fish Passage Plan, Article 402, 03
    March 30, 2009 To: Bryan Nordlund National Marine Fisheries Service 510 Desmond Drive SE, Suite 103 Lacey, WA 98503 Dear Mr. Nordlund, Public Utility District No.1 of Chelan County (Chelan) respectfully submits this final 2009 Fish Passage Plan (FPP). The section pertaining to the Rocky Reach Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 2145, is submitted in accordance with License Article No. 408 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Order, issued April 12, 2002, amending the license for the Rocky Reach project authorizing the installation of a permanent juvenile fish bypass system. On February 19, 2009, FERC issued a new 43-year operating license for the Rocky Reach Project. Article 402 of the new license requires that …. “Within six months of the issuance date of license and by February 15 each year thereafter, the licensee shall file for Commission approval an operations plan.” The purpose of the new annual Rocky Reach operations plan, we believe, will be to supplant the former FPP, requiring all of the current reporting contents of that plan, but may also require additional information on fisheries and water-quality-related criteria and protocols. Please contact me with any questions or concerns that you might have. Respectfully yours, Barry G. Keesee Fisheries Studies Coordinator (509) 661-4763 Rocky Reach and Rock Island Fish Passage Plan 2009 Final Prepared by Thaddeus R. Mosey Steve L. Hemstrom Barry G. Keesee Fish and Wildlife Department Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County Wenatchee, WA 98801 March 31, 2009 Table of Contents Introduction………………………………………………………………………. 1 Overview…………………………………………………………………… 1 Emergency Deviations from the Fish Passage Plan (FPP)………………… 1 Spill………………………………………………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Freshwater Intake End-Of-Pipe Fish Screen Guideline
    Department of Fisheries and Oceans DRAFT Freshwater Intake End-of-Pipe Fish Screen Guideline Fisheries Pêches and Oceans et Océans DRAFT Department of Fisheries and Oceans Freshwater Intake End-of-Pipe Fish Screen Guideline Fisheries Pêches and Oceans et Océans Freshwater Intake End-of-Pipe FishDRAFT Screen Guideline Published by: Communications Directorate Department of Fisheries and Oceans Ottawa, Ontario K1A OE6 DFO / 5080 © Minister of Supply and Services Canada 1995 ISBN 0-662-23168-6 Catalogue No. Fs 23-270 / 1995E Printed on recycled paper Freshwater Intake End-of-Pipe FishDRAFT Screen Guideline Table of 1.0 Introduction 1 Contents 2.0 Guideline Objective 1 3.0 Information Requirements for Evaluation of Intake Screens 3 4.0 Design, Installation, and Maintenance of Freshwater intake End-of-Pipe Fish Screens 3 4.1 Fish Screen Criteria 4 4.2 Design of Fixed End-of-Pipe Fish Screens 6 4.3 Installation 8 4.4 Cleaning and Maintenance 15 References 17 Glossary 19 Appendix A: Information Requirements 21 Appendix B: Sample Calculation 23 Appendix C: Units of Conversion 25 Appendix D: DFO Regional Contacts 27 March 1995 Page i Freshwater Intake End-of-Pipe FishDRAFT Screen Guideline List of Figure 1 - Open Screen Areas for End-of-Pipe Water Figures Intake Flows 9 Figure 2 - Common Screen Shapes and Area Formulae 10 Figure 3 - Typical Applications and Features of End-of-Pipe Screens 11 Figure 4 - Examples of Typical Screen and Material Types 12 Figure 5 - Examples of Typical Installations of End-of-Pipe Screens 13 Table 1 - Summary of Common Fish Species and List of Swimming Modes 5 Tables Table 2 - Open Screen Area Required for End-of-Pipe Water Intakes 7 Table 3 - Examples of Screen Material 7 March 1995 Page iii Freshwater Intake End-of-Pipe FishDRAFT Screen Guideline The Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) has prepared the Freshwater Intake End-of-Pipe Fish Screen Guideline to 1.0 assist proponents in the design and installation of fish screens |for the protection of anadromous and resident fish where freshwater is extracted from fish-bearing waters.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria 2019
    FISH PASSAGE ENGINEERING DESIGN CRITERIA 2019 37.2’ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Northeast Region June 2019 Fish and Aquatic Conservation, Fish Passage Engineering Ecological Services, Conservation Planning Assistance United States Fish and Wildlife Service Region 5 FISH PASSAGE ENGINEERING DESIGN CRITERIA June 2019 This manual replaces all previous editions of the Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 5 Suggested citation: USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 2019. Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria. USFWS, Northeast Region R5, Hadley, Massachusetts. USFWS R5 Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria June 2019 USFWS R5 Fish Passage Engineering Design Criteria June 2019 Contents List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ ix List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x List of Equations ............................................................................................................................ xi List of Appendices ........................................................................................................................ xii 1 Scope of this Document ....................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Role of the USFWS Region 5 Fish Passage Engineering ............................................
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Pacific Lamprey Workshop Mtg Minutes 060816
    Final Regional Pacific Lamprey Workshop Minutes To: Aquatic SWG Parties Date: July 12, 2016 From: Kristi Geris (Anchor QEA, LLC) Re: Final Minutes of the Regional Pacific Lamprey Workshop The Regional Pacific Lamprey Workshop was held at Douglas PUD headquarters in East Wenatchee, Washington, on Wednesday, June 8, 2016, from 9:00 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. Attendees are listed in Attachment A of these workshop minutes. I. Summary of Discussions 1. Welcome, Introductions, and Workshop Goals (John Ferguson): John Ferguson (Aquatic Settlement Work Group [SWG] Chairman) welcomed the attendees (attendees are listed in Attachment A) and opened the meeting. Ferguson said the purpose for this Regional Pacific Lamprey Workshop is to address scientific uncertainties regarding the causes of poor adult Pacific lamprey passage over Wells Dam and to facilitate regional collaboration in addressing Pacific Lamprey in the Mid‐Columbia River Basin. Ferguson said the goals of today’s workshop include: 1) identifying critical uncertainties that need resolution; 2) discussing and possibly adjusting 2016 Pacific lamprey study designs for Wells and Rocky Reach reservoirs; 3) establishing the scientific foundation for longer term studies; 4) partitioning out adult Pacific lamprey presence and premature mortality; 5) determining more accurate passage enumeration and efficiencies; 6) aiding the prioritization of available study fish; and 7) beginning development of a more integrated approach to Pacific lamprey passage investigations at Mid‐Columbia River dams. Ferguson said today is the first of several discussions aimed at improving the Pacific lamprey resource within the respective jurisdictions of Grant, Chelan, and Douglas PUDs. He indicated the focus of today’s workshop is passage through the Rocky Reach Reservoir and Wells Dam; the Aquatic SWG will focus on fish exiting Wells Dam and migrating through the Wells Reservoir at future meetings.
    [Show full text]
  • Designing Fish Screens for Fish Protection at Water Diversions
    DESIGNING FISH SCREENS FOR FISH PROTECTION AT WATER DIVERSIONS Written By: Bryan Nordlund National Marine Fisheries Service 510 Desmond Drive S.E., Suite 103 Lacey, WA 98503 April 16, 2008 The following paper should be considered a working document, and its contents will be updated as errors are found and as technology progresses. The contents express the opinions of the author, and not necessarily the National Marine Fisheries Service. Consultation with local fisheries authorities is absolutely required to augment and confirm any information used from this paper. 1.0 -- INTRODUCTION Protecting the fisheries resources from hydroelectric, irrigation, municipal water supply and industrial water supply developments created the need for design criteria for the construction of juvenile fish screens to protect the fisheries resource from project impacts. This paper discusses a variety of topics involved in the juvenile fish screen design process, in a manner intended for the novice biologist, manager, planner or design engineer. Screen designs have been improved over the years mostly by the observation and evaluation of existing screens that were constructed based on a little bit of science, a generous dose of intuition and rudimentary understanding of fish behavior. Research in the field of fish passage was historically difficult to finance, and difficult to reach concise conclusions that could lead directly to the establishment of fish passage design criteria. More recently, biological and hydraulic testing of juvenile fish screens, and research specific to the design of juvenile fish screens has lead to further refinement of design criteria. Certain aspects of juvenile fish screen design criteria are now well understood for some species (such as maximum approach velocity and minimum mesh opening for juvenile salmonids), but data for many species is lacking.
    [Show full text]
  • Rocky Reach Pacific Lamprey Management Plan
    ROCKY REACH PACIFIC LAMPREY MANAGEMENT PLAN Final Draft ROCKY REACH HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC Project No. 2145 September 623, 2005 Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County Wenatchee, Washington Pacific Lamprey Management Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................1 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................3 SECTION 2: BACKGROUND..............................................................................................................................4 2.1 Life History ....................................................................................................................................................4 2.2 Species Status.................................................................................................................................................4 2.3 Adult Fishway Counts....................................................................................................................................4 2.4 Spawning and Rearing ...................................................................................................................................5 SECTION 3: STUDIES AND EVALUATION OF PROJECT EFFECTS........................................................6 3.1 Adult Lamprey Telemetry Study....................................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • Rocky Reach Dam: Operational and Structural Total Dissolved Gas Management
    Rocky Reach Dam: Operational and Structural Total Dissolved Gas Management by Michael L. Schneider and Steven C. Wilhelms U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center 3909 Halls Ferry Road Vicksburg, MS 39180 For Chelan County Public Utility District No. 1 327 N. Wenatchee Ave., PO Box 1231 Wenatchee, WA 98807 Table of Contents Table of Contents............................................................................................................2 List of Tables ..................................................................................................................3 Preface............................................................................................................................6 Background.....................................................................................................................7 Objective.........................................................................................................................7 Approach ........................................................................................................................7 Project Description..........................................................................................................9 General TDG Exchange Description.......................................................................... 10 Forebay ................................................................................................................. 11 Spillway...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Test Herrera Report Template
    1 2 3 4 WHITE PAPER 5 6 7 Fish Screens 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Prepared for 16 17 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 March 2008 Draft (Working Draft – Do Not Cite) 1 2 3 WHITE PAPER 4 5 6 Fish Screens 7 8 9 10 11 12 Prepared for 13 14 Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife 15 600 Capitol Way North 16 Olympia, Washington 98501-1091 17 18 19 20 21 Prepared by 22 23 Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 24 2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 1100 25 Seattle, Washington 98121 26 Telephone: 206/441-9080 27 28 29 In collaboration with 30 31 Kozmo Ken Bates 32 33 34 35 March 2008 Draft (Working Draft – Do Not Cite) Contents Executive Summary.........................................................................................................................1 1.0 Introduction...................................................................................................................... 1-1 2.0 Objectives ........................................................................................................................ 2-1 3.0 Methods............................................................................................................................ 3-1 4.0 Hydraulic Project Description.......................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Characteristics, Applications, and Descriptions of Fish Screen Subactivity Types...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Sauger Population Ecology in Three Missouri River Mainstem Reservoirs Brian D
    South Dakota State University Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange Electronic Theses and Dissertations 2006 Sauger Population Ecology in Three Missouri River Mainstem Reservoirs Brian D. S. Graeb South Dakota State University Follow this and additional works at: https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd Part of the Natural Resources and Conservation Commons Recommended Citation Graeb, Brian D. S., "Sauger Population Ecology in Three Missouri River Mainstem Reservoirs" (2006). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 438. https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/etd/438 This Dissertation - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Sauger Population Ecology in Three Missouri River Mainstem Reservoirs By Brian D. S. Graeb A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy Major in Biological Sciences South Dakota State University 2006 11 Sauger Population Ecology in Three Missouri River Mainstem Reservoirs This dissertation is approved as a credible and independent investigation by a candidate for the Doctor of Philosophy degree and is acceptable for meeting the dissertation requirements for this degree. Acceptance of this dissertation does not imply that the conclusions reached by the candidate are necessarily the conclusions of the major department. David W. Willis Date Dissertation Advisor Charles G. Scalet Date Head, Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences iii Acknowledgements I would like to especially thank my wife, Stephanie for her support and guidance in all aspects of my life during my long tenure as a graduate student, and my advisor, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Disconnect to Reconnect in Knox County Disconnect to Reconnect in Knox County
    Disconnect to Reconnect in Knox County Disconnect to Reconnect in Knox County HistoryHistory of Knox Co. RecreationHistory WinnetoonKnox County was was founded organized in about by the 1892 Territorial and wasLegislature incorporated in 1857 KnoxCenter County was provides platted many in 1901. beautiful It was parks named where for its you can play asand a villagenamed inL’Eau 1900. Qui It Court, was named meaning after in English, the Wisconsin “Running farm Water.” of volleyball,location have near a picnic, the geographical or walk through center an arboretum.of Knox Most area anThe acquaintance name was changedof a railroad to Knox official. by Aa poststatute office passed has Februarybeen in townsCounty. have community Center was swimming incorporated pools asas well,a village so stop and relax operation21, 1873, in which Winnetoon took effect since April 1891. 1, 1873. In 1996 Chief Standing poolside.in 1904 and is the county seat of Knox County, Bear Bridge was completed, bridging the shores of Knox County, Nebraska. near Niobrara, with South Dakota across the Missouri River. Knox Water Sports County containsParks about 1,050& Recreation miles, or 672,000 acres. If you enjoy boating, fishing, or swimming, you’ve found the ultimate WINNETOON MALL & POST OFFICE - Antiques, woodworking, play area.Parks Whether &you’re Recreation fishing in the Lewis and Clark Lake, furniture refinishing & repair. Natural Food Coop also. Visit Privy Missouri River, or the Niobrara River, you will find a wide variety of Path and the garden areas. Go back in time! fish includingCENTER walleye, PARK smallmouth- A quaint, bass, little largemouth park with bass,a northern Attractions playground, picnic shelter and restroom in the Explore an area filled with culture, history, recreation and adventure.
    [Show full text]