DOCSLIB.ORG

Approach, Passage, and Survival of Juvenile Salmonids at Little Goose Dam, Washington: Post-Construction Evaluation of a Temporary Spillway Weir, 2009

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Approach, Passage, and Survival of Juvenile Salmonids at Little Goose Dam, Washington: Post-Construction Evaluation of a Temporary Spillway Weir, 2009 Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Approach, Passage, and Survival of Juvenile Salmonids at Little Goose Dam, Washington: Post-Construction Evaluation of a Temporary Spillway Weir, 2009 Open-File Report 2010–1224 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover: Photograph of the Little Goose Dam spillway with the temporary spillway weir installed in spill bay 1, on the right. Photograph by Amy Braatz, U.S. Geological Survey, Western Fisheries Research Center, Columbia River Research Laboratory. Approach, Passage, and Survival of Juvenile Salmonids at Little Goose Dam, Washington: Post-Construction Evaluation of a Temporary Spillway Weir, 2009 By John W. Beeman, Amy C. Braatz, Hal C. Hansel, Scott D. Fielding, Philip V. Haner, Gabriel S. Hansen, Dana J. Shurtleff, Jamie M. Sprando, and Dennis W. Rondorf Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Open-File Report 2010-1224 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2010 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1-888-ASK-USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod. To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov. Suggested citation: Beeman, J.W., Braatz, A.C., Hansel, H.C., Fielding, S.D., Haner, P.V., Hansen, G.S., Shurtleff, D.J., Sprando, J.M., and Rondorf, D.W., 2010, Approach, passage, and survival of juvenile salmonids at Little Goose Dam, Washington: Post-construction evaluation of a temporary spillway weir, 2009: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2010-1224, 100 p. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report. Contents Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 7 Description of Study Area ................................................................................................................. 8 Methods .......................................................................................................................................... 10 Radio Telemetry Receiving Systems ........................................................................................... 10 Transmitters ................................................................................................................................ 14 Tagging ....................................................................................................................................... 15 Fish Releases .............................................................................................................................. 16 Analyses ...................................................................................................................................... 17 Proofing ................................................................................................................................... 17 Spill Periods and Environmental Conditions ............................................................................ 18 Fish Data ................................................................................................................................. 18 Approach Distributions and Travel Times ................................................................................ 18 Forebay Residence Time and Tailrace Egress Time ............................................................... 19 Behavior Near the Trash/Shear Boom ..................................................................................... 20 Estimating Passage and Survival Parameters ......................................................................... 21 Results ............................................................................................................................................ 29 Spring Migration Period ............................................................................................................... 29 Dam Operations and Environmental Conditions ...................................................................... 29 Tagging and Releasing Fish .................................................................................................... 31 Approach Distribution............................................................................................................... 34 Travel Time .............................................................................................................................. 37 Forebay Residence Time ......................................................................................................... 37 Behavior Near the Trash/Shear Boom ..................................................................................... 41 Rates of Dam Passage ............................................................................................................ 43 Assessment of Survival Model Assumptions ........................................................................... 44 Passage and Survival Probabilities .......................................................................................... 45 TSW Discovery and Entrance Efficiency .................................................................................. 49 Tailrace Egress ........................................................................................................................ 49 Summer Migration Period ............................................................................................................ 51 Dam Operations and Environmental Conditions ...................................................................... 51 Tagging and Releasing Fish .................................................................................................... 53 Approach Distribution............................................................................................................... 54 Travel Time .............................................................................................................................. 56 Forebay Residence Time ......................................................................................................... 56 Behavior Near the Trash/Shear Boom ..................................................................................... 59 Rates of Dam Passage ............................................................................................................ 61 Assessment of Survival Model Assumptions ........................................................................... 62 Passage and Survival Probabilities .......................................................................................... 63 TSW Discovery and Entrance Efficiency .................................................................................. 66 Tailrace Egress ........................................................................................................................ 66 Discussion ....................................................................................................................................... 68 Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................... 71 References Cited ............................................................................................................................ 71 Glossary .......................................................................................................................................... 75 iii Appendix A. Fish Release Summaries ............................................................................................ 76 Appendix B. Tag life ........................................................................................................................ 82 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 82 Methods ....................................................................................................................................... 82 Results ........................................................................................................................................ 84 Appendix C. Route-Specific Survival Estimates and Passage. ....................................................... 86 Appendix D. Dam Operations and River Conditions ....................................................................... 93 Appendix E. Forebay Residence Time ............................................................................................ 96 Appendix F. Synopsis. .................................................................................................................... 97 Figures Figure 1. Map showing overview of the Snake River
Load more

Recommended publications
  • To Save the Salmon Here’S a Bit of History and Highlights of the Corps' Work to Assure Salmon Survival and Restoration
    US Army Corps of Engineers R Portland District To Save North Pacific Region: Northwestern Division The Salmon Pacific Salmon Coordination Office P.O. Box 2870 Portland, OR 97208-2870 Phone: (503) 808-3721 http://www.nwd.usace.army.mil/ps/ Portland District: Public Information P.O. Box 2946 Portland, OR 97208-2946 Phone: (503)808-5150 http://www.nwp.usace.army.mil Walla Walla District: Public Affairs Office 201 N. 3rd Ave Walla Walla, WA 99362-1876 Phone: (509) 527-7020 http://www.nww.usace.army.mil 11/97 Corps Efforts to Save the Salmon Here’s a bit of history and highlights of the Corps' work to assure salmon survival and restoration. 1805-1900s: Lewis and Clark see “multitudes” 1951: The Corps embarks on a new research of migrating fish in the Columbia River. By program focusing on designs for more effective 1850, settlements bring agriculture, commercial adult fishways. fishing to the area. 1955: A fisheries field unit was established at 1888: A Corps report warns Congress of “an Bonneville Dam. There, biologists and enormous reduction in the numbers of spawning technicians work to better understand and fish...” in the Columbia River. improve fish passage conditions on the river 1900s-1930s: Overfishing, pollution, non- system. federal dams, unscreened irrigation ditches and 1960s: Experimental diversion screens at Ice ruined spawning grounds destroy fish runs. Harbor Dam guide some juveniles away from the Early hatchery operations impact habitat or turbine units, and lead to a major effort to develop close the Clackamas, Salmon and Grande Ronde juvenile bypass systems using screens for other rivers to salmon migration.
    [Show full text]
  • Passage Distribution and Federal Columbia River Power System Survival for Steelhead Kelts Tagged Above and at Lower Granite Dam, Year 2 Final Report
    PNNL-23051 Rev.1 Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla District, under an Interagency Agreement with the U.S. Department of Energy Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Passage Distribution and Federal Columbia River Power System Survival for Steelhead Kelts Tagged Above and at Lower Granite Dam, Year 2 Final Report AH Colotelo KD Ham RA Harnish ZD Deng BW Jones RS Brown AC Hanson MA Weiland DM Trott X Li MJ Greiner T Fu GA McMichael December 2014 PNNL-23051 Rev.1 Passage Distribution and Federal Columbia River Power System Survival for Steelhead Kelts Tagged Above and at Lower Granite Dam, Year 2 Final Report AH Colotelo KD Ham RA Harnish ZD Deng BW Jones RS Brown AC Hanson MA Weiland DM Trott X Li MJ Greiner T Fu GA McMichael December 2014 Prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla District, under an Interagency Agreement with the U.S. Department of Energy Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Richland, Washington 99352 Preface The study reported herein was funded as part of the Anadromous Fish Evaluation Program (AFEP), which is managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The AFEP study code is ADS-W-12-1: Steelhead kelt passage distributions and Federal Columbia River Power System survival and return rates for fish tagged above and at Lower Granite Dam. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) was the prime contractor for the USACE Walla Walla District. The USACE technical lead was Chris Pinney. The PNNL project manager was Alison Colotelo (509-371-7248).
    [Show full text]
  • Endangered Species Act 1972 1855 Treaties U.S. and Nez Perce
    Harvest Pacific Salmon Treaty (Pacific Salmon Hydro/Habitat Commission - PSC) Federal Columbia River Power System Magnuson Act (Pacific Fishery Biological Opinion Management Council – PFMC) • Dworshak Dam Endangered SpeciesSnake/Columbia Act 1972 summer spill U.S. vs. Oregon Management Agreement • Federal Energy Regulatory Commission • Idaho Power Complex Snake River Synergy is the interaction of elements that when combined produce a total effect that Fall Chinook is greater than the sum of the individual Salmon elements Hatchery Idaho Power Company/Hells Canyon Settlement Agreement Lower1855 Snake River Treaties Compensation U.S. Plan – Publicand Law Nez 94-587, Perce, 99-662, 103-316 NorthwestUmatilla,Yakama Power Act & Warm Springs U.S. vs. Oregon Management Agreement Columbia Basin Treaty Tribes Accords Snake River Falls SEA K 14% PFMC 34% CA NA DA 52% Pacific Salmon Treaty (Pacific Salmon Commission - PSC) Magnuson Act (Pacific Fishery Management Council – PFMC) U.S. vs. Oregon Management Agreement Columbia River Treaty Tribe Harvest Hydro/Habitat Federal Energy Regulatory Commission • Idaho Power Complex Federal Columbia River Power System Biological Opinion & Litigation • Snake/Columbia summer spill Snake River • Juvenile Transportation • Predation Fall Chinook • Estuary Salmon Bonneville Dam 1938 BrownleeIce Harbor Dam 1961 1958 LowerTheOxbow DallesMonumental Dam Dam 1961 1957 Dam 1969 John Day Dam 1971 HellsLittle Canyon Goose DamDam 19671970 Lower Granite Dam 1975 McNary Dam 1954 Warner W. Gardner, Assistant Secretary of the
    [Show full text]
  • Identification of the Spawning, Rearing, And
    July 1997 IDENTIFICATION OF THE SPAWNING, REARING, AND MIGRATORY REQUIREMENTS OF FALL CHINOOK SALMON IN THE COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN THIS IS INVISIBLE TEXT TO KEEP VERTICAL ALIGNMENT THIS IS INVISIBLE TEXT TO KEEP VERTICAL ALIGNMENT THIS IS INVISIBLE TEXT TO KEEP VERTICAL ALIGNMENT THIS IS INVISIBLE TEXT TO KEEP VERTICAL ALIGNMENT THIS IS INVISIBLE TEXT TO KEEP VERTICAL ALIGNMENT DOE/BP-21708-5 This report was funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), U.S. Department of Energy, as part of BPA's program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife affected by the development and operation of hydroelectric facilities on the Columbia River and its tributaries. The views of this report are the author's and do not necessarily represent the views of BPA. This document should be cited as follows: Rondotf,Dennis W., Kenneth F. Tiffan, U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, Columbia River Research Laboratory, U. S. Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Project Number 199l-029, Contract Number DE-A17cl-1991BP2170X, 121 electronic pages (BPA Report DOE/BP-21708-5) This report and other BPA Fish and Wildlife Publications are available on the Internet at: http://www.efw.bpa.gov/cgi-bin/efw/FW/publications.cgi For other information on electronic documents or other printed media, contact or write to: Bonneville Power Administration Environment, Fish and Wildlife Division P.O. Box 3621 905 N.E. 11th Avenue Portland, OR 97208-3621 Please include title, author, and DOE/BP number in the request. This report was funded by the Bonneville Power Admrnistration @PA), U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Power Benefits of the Lower Snake River Dams
    ffactactssheetheet January 2009 Power benefi ts of the lower Snake River dams n the 1960s and early 1970s, the federal government Ibuilt four large dams on the Snake River. This is the last set of major dams to have been built in the Federal Columbia River Power System. The FCRPS is the largest source of electricity in the Pacifi c Northwest and the largest source of renewable electricity in the nation. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers owns and operates the lower Snake River dams. All four of these dams are multiple-use facilities that provide navigation, hydro- Lower Granite Dam — capacity 810 MW, energized 1975 power, recreation, and fi sh and wildlife conservation benefi ts. These dams were not built to control fl oods. The four lower Snake River dams can operate above their rated capacity to produce up to 3,483 MW for An important part of the several hours. In an extended cold-snap or other power Northwest’s power supply emergency, such as another power plant shutting down unexpectedly, these four dams can produce in excess of The useful output of a power station is measured in two 2,650 MW over a sustained period of 10 hours per day ways – capacity and energy. The four lower Snake River for fi ve consecutive days. dams are major power plants by either measure. According to the Northwest Power and Conservation Capacity to meet peak loads Council, capacity is becoming increasingly important to Peak capacity typically refers to a power plant’s value the Pacifi c Northwest to meet peak loads in the summer in meeting peak power loads.
    [Show full text]
  • Columbia Basin White Sturgeon Planning Framework
    Review Draft Review Draft Columbia Basin White Sturgeon Planning Framework Prepared for The Northwest Power & Conservation Council February 2013 Review Draft PREFACE This document was prepared at the direction of the Northwest Power and Conservation Council to address comments by the Independent Scientific Review Panel (ISRP) in their 2010 review of Bonneville Power Administration research, monitoring, and evaluation projects regarding sturgeon in the lower Columbia River. The ISRP provided a favorable review of specific sturgeon projects but noted that an effective basin-wide management plan for white sturgeon is lacking and is the most important need for planning future research and restoration. The Council recommended that a comprehensive sturgeon management plan be developed through a collaborative effort involving currently funded projects. Hatchery planning projects by the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission (2007-155-00) and the Yakama Nation (2008-455-00) were specifically tasked with leading or assisting with the comprehensive management plan. The lower Columbia sturgeon monitoring and mitigation project (1986-050-00) sponsored by the Oregon and Washington Departments of Fish and Wildlife and the Inter-Tribal Fish Commission also agreed to collaborate on this effort and work with the Council on the plan. The Council directed that scope of the planning area include from the mouth of the Columbia upstream to Priest Rapids on the mainstem and up to Lower Granite Dam on the Snake River. The plan was also to include summary information for sturgeon areas above Priest Rapids and Lower Granite. A planning group was convened of representatives of the designated projects. Development also involved collaboration with representatives of other agencies and tribes involved in related sturgeon projects throughout the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Dams of the Columbia Basin & Their Effects on the Native Fishery
    Dams of the Columbia Basin & Their Effects on the Native Fishery Bonneville * The Dalles * John Day & McNary * Priest Rapids & Wanapum * Rock Island, Rocky Reach, Wells & Chief Joseph * Grand Coulee * Hells Canyon, Oxbow, Brownlee & Dworshak * Revelstoke, Keenleyside, Mica & Duncan BACK TO COLUMBIA BASIN MAP The Treaty Right to Harvest Traditional Equipment Dams & the Native Fishery Celilo Falls Ice Harbor Dam. Courtesy of Corps of Engineers Ice Harbor Dam: Snake River, near the confluence with the Columbia River at mile DOCUMENTS marker 9.7, completed in 1961, federally owned , concrete gravity hydroelectric, 1 lock, 2 fish ladders, 2822 feet long, 100 feet high, spillway 590 feet, 10 gates with an U.S. Treaties earth fill embankment. The dam creates Lake Sacajawea, which extends 32 miles upstream to the Lower Monumental Dam. Canadian Documents U.S. Legal Decisions Canadian Legal Decisions Other Documents Photo Archive Bibliography & Resources Table of Contents Lower Monumental Dam. Courtesy of Bonneville Power Administration Lower Monumental Dam: Snake River at mile marker 41.6, completed in 1969, federally owned, concrete gravity with a short earth fill abutment, spillway 572 feet, 8 gates, 3791 feet long ,height 100 feet, 2 fish ladders, 1 lock, creates Lake Herbert G. West, 28.1 miles to the Little Goose Dam, hydroelectric. Little Goose Dam. Courtesy of Army Corps of Engineers Little Goose Dam: Snake River at mile marker 70.3, completed in 1970, additional units completed in 1978, federally owned, concrete gravity type hydroelectric, spillway 512 feet, 8 gates, 2665 feet long, 98 feet high. Creates Lake Bryan which extends 37.2 miles upriver to the Lower Granite Dam.
    [Show full text]
  • Ieab2009 1.Pdf May 10, 2018
    Noelwah R. Netusil, Chair Susan S. Hanna Independent Economic Hans Radtke, Vice-Chair Roger Mann Analysis Board Daniel D. Huppert John Duffield IEAB Joel R. Hamilton Independent Economic Analysis Board Interactions between Fish and Wildlife Program and Sixth Power Plan (Phase I) IEAB Task Number 138 February 2009 IEAB Power Plan Interactions Page 1 Executive Summary This report describes some interactions between the Fish and Wildlife Program (FWP) and the Sixth Power Plan, suggests that some of these interactions be considered in the Power Plan, and discusses additional analyses that may be appropriate. Mainstem operations for fish in the Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS) under the recent Biological Opinions (BiOp) have been extensively documented in the form of hydrosystem, and power generation and value models. This paper does not focus on these models and their results. Rather, this paper identifies potential changes over the 20-year Power Plan time horizon relative to recent conditions and analyzes some other, less-studied interactions. The IEAB concludes that several important interactions between the power system and the FWP should be analyzed and discussed in the Sixth Power Plan: • Three changes in power supply and its cost will have demand and supply effects that will influence the amount, mix and costs of power. First, under the 2008 BiOp, increased FWP costs relative to the 2004 BiOp will increase BPA power prices. Increased prices can be expected to reduce quantity demanded. Second, in the next five years, new temporary spillway weirs (TSWs) may change the required amount and cost of fish spill relative to 2008 BiOp calculations at three FCRPS facilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Anadromous Salmonid Passage Facility Design
    ANADROMOUS SALMONID PASSAGE FACILITY DESIGN NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE NORTHWEST REGION www.nwr.noaa.gov July 2011 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Bryan Nordlund, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Hydraulic Engineer, is the primary author of this document. He was assisted by Larry Swenson, Hydraulic Engineer; Melissa Jundt, Hydraulic Engineer; Ed Meyer, Hydraulic Engineer; Scott Carlon, Fishery Biologist; and John Johnson, Hydraulic Engineer; all with NMFS. In addition, he was assisted by Steve Rainey, GEI Consultants, Inc. Reviews were provided by Denny Hudson, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation; Pat Powers and Tom Burns, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife; Ray Hartlerode, Tom Stahl, and Bernie Kepshire, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife; Lynn Stratton and Matt Hightree, Idaho Department of Fish and Game; and Ken Bates, Koszmo, Inc. Suggested changes, additions, or questions should be directed to Bryan Nordlund at [email protected] for consideration in updating this document. Assistance from NMFS fish passage specialists can be obtained by contacting the NMFS Northwest Region Hydropower Division at 503-230-5414. Suggested citation: NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service). 2011. Anadromous Salmonid Passage Facility Design. NMFS, Northwest Region, Portland, Oregon. NMFS Anadromous Salmonid Passage Facility Design July 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD.............................................................................................................................. viii 1. DEFINITION OF TERMS..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Snake River Hydropower Dams a Resilience Assessment Of
    Lower Snake River Hydropower Dams A Resilience Assessment of Regional Impacts with Proposed Dam Removal Brianna Pitcock, Thomas Lazarte, and Chase Christen 05-06-2020 Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 3 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 4 2.0 Previous Studies ........................................................................................................................ 4 2.1 Northwest Energy Coalition Strategies (2018) ..................................................................... 5 2.2 ECONorthwest (2019)........................................................................................................... 5 2.3 Columbia River System Operations Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (2020) ........... 6 3.0 Regional Energy Profile ............................................................................................................ 6 4.0 Analysis Methods...................................................................................................................... 7 4.1 Resilience Analysis Methods ................................................................................................ 7 4.2 Environmental Analysis ........................................................................................................ 8 4.2.1 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mainstem Recommendation 19 Appendix 1
    APPENDIX 1 THE FALLACY OF UPPER SNAKE FLOW AUGMENTATION THERE IS NO NEED TO DRAIN IDAHO FOR SALMON PREPARED BY IDAHO WATER USERS THE IDAHO WATER USERS ARE COMPOSED OF: THE COMMITTEE OF NINE AND THE IDAHO WATER USERS ASSOCIATION 410 S. ORCHARD, SUITE 144 BOISE, IDAHO 83705 JUNE 2001 CONTENTS Introduction......................................................................................................................... 2 Overview of Idaho and the Upper Snake Basin.................................................................. 3 Hydrology of the Upper Snake River.................................................................................. 7 Overview.......................................................................................................................... 7 Historical Stream Flow Records...................................................................................... 7 Water Conservation........................................................................................................ 13 Fish Survival and Upper Snake Flow Augmentation........................................................ 16 The Origin and Perpetuation of the Flow Augmentation/Fish Survival Myth.............. 16 Sub-Yearling Migrants (Fall Chinook).......................................................................... 19 Recent Studies Above Lower Granite Reservoir ........................................................... 19 Flow v. Survival............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • In W Alla W Alla County
    FORT WALLA WALLA MUSEUM & in Walla Walla County Walla in Walla Lewis For additional regional informa- Fort Walla Walla Museum is located at 755 Myra Road, tion on Lewis & Clark and visitor CLARK Pasco-Kahlotus Road LEWIS Walla Walla, WA 99362. Open April through October, Tuesday services contact: through Sunday. Hours and days are seasonal please contact Fort E R Clark Walla Walla Museum at 509-525-7703 Tourism Walla Walla Burr Canyon Road http://www.bmi.net/fortw2 877-WWVISIT (998-4748) Winddust Park www.wallawalla.org “3 Canoe Rapids” Lewis and Clark Trail State Park Dam Monumental Lower 509-337-6457 www.parks.wa.gov/lewclktr.htm 1805-1806 Discovery the Corps of re-discovering guide for A travel er Monumental Road Sacajawea State Park 509-545-2361 Magallon Road Rock Site Monumental www.parks.wa.gov/sacajawe.htm “Ship Rock” “Ship Casey Road Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail www.nps.gov/lecl Tri-Cities Visitor & Convention A yer Road This is a painting by local artist Norman Adams. Bureau Prints are available by contacting Ft. WW. Museum, Ayer Road 800-254-5824 Campsite of April 28,1806. www.visittri-cities.com WESTBOUND for 3 miles which was also intersepted with large rocks Sticking up and did not return untill late at night, about 20 came down & April 30, 1806 up in every direction and the chanel through which we must built a fire above and Stayed all night. The chief brought a October 13, 1805 pass crooked and narrow....we only made 20 miles today owing to basked of mashed berries." JOURNAL QUOTES (CLARK)*: "We took leave of those honest the detention in passing rapids, &c." See map location DD.
    [Show full text]