Evaluation of prototype fish passage structures in the Lower Granite Dam juvenile fish bypass system – juvenile Pacific lamprey results Rod O’Connor 1, Scott McCutcheon 2, Ryan Richmond 2, and Frank Loge 3 1 Blue Leaf Environmental Ellensburg, WA 3 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering University of California, Davis Davis, CA 2 Biomark Boise, ID

 In 2013 USACE installed two prototype passage structures in Gatewell 5A at Lower Granite Dam  In 2014 structures were modified  Sharp-crested overflow weir, and  Light ring around 14-inch orifice  Test potential passage improvement measures from gatewell into bypass channel Introduction

Passage structures

 Determine effective collection methods at Lower Granite, Little Goose, and Lower Monumental dams  Evaluate PIT tag retention using two different tagging techniques: surgical methods described by Mesa et al. (2011) and injecting PIT tags with a 16-gauge needle.  Measure travel times through JBS  Including temporary PIT antennas in bypass collection channel in 2014 Objectives

 Fish collected from raceways at JFF  Additional lamprey from LGO and LMN  Release PIT-tagged fishes into Gatewell 5A and bypass collection channel  Passage structures operated one- at-a-time on 24 h cycle  Gatewell residence time  PIT antennas in bypass channel  Travel time from release to first detection at JFF Gatewell 5A Lower Granite JFF

Lower Granite Dam  SMP staff collected fish during daily sample  BLE staff captured individuals passing the separator at night  Most successful collection in the head boxes of raceways with dip net

 8.5 mm L x 1.4 mm Dia PIT  16-gauge needle  n=150 Tag retention with two tag sizes and methods – combined results  “Mesa method”  9 mm L x 2.1 mm Dia PIT  Scalpel incision 2-3 mm  Manually insert PIT  n=150  Control group n=100  All held 96 h  Group tagged with 16-gauge needles had one shed tag  5.3% unhealed tagging wounds  Group tagged with scalpels had two shed tags  36.0% unhealed tag wounds

Yearling Chinook vs. juvenile lamprey travel time  Baseline comparison for juvenile lamprey

2014 Bypass collection channel antenna installation

2014 Bypass Channel PIT array criteria  System design must not require structural modifications to existing collection channel.  Antennas and associated mounting structures must not significantly alter passage conditions of fish.  Antennas must be ‘bolt on’ for safe and easy installation and removal from collection channel.  Antenna dimensions and housing materials must span the area of the collection channel and fit through the entryway to the collection channel.  Corps requirements for hydraulically acceptable antenna design must be met.

“Stick” testing Sticks Detected Sticks Not Detected Proportion detected Chi-Square Statistic TagLocationTotalp-value 12 mmJBS Channel < mmJBS Channel mmJFF Separator mmJFF Separator Live fish detection Species/age classLocation Proportion detected Yearling Chinook JBS Channel0.37 JFF Separator0.99 Juvenile steelhead JBS Channel0.45 JFF Separator0.99 Sub-yearling Chinook JBS Channel0.47 JFF Separator0.99 Lamprey JBS Channel0.12 JFF Separator0.92

Summary Qty tagged and released1, Primary Tag9mm8.4mm Tagging MethodsScalpelInject 16 gauge needle Holding/ReleasePerf buckets/draft tube Collection methodsSMP sort, racewaysSMP sort, raceways, LGR separator screen River flow/run timing“Normal”Bimodal – March and May

Conclusions  Juvenile Lamprey Collection  A combination of SMP daily sample and raceway collection was effective  Lesson learned - start at first indication of lamprey presence – we caught tail end of availability in 2013  Flow regime likely drives availability  Tag retention/tagging methods  Both methods effective  Faster tagging process and fewer unhealed wounds with 16-gauge needle and 8.5 mm PIT  Travel time through the JBS  Median travel times for all treatments were less than salmonid travel times  Detection efficiency with 8.5 mm PIT was lower than 12 mm PIT, especially at temp antennas

Suggestions for future bypass channel studies Install multiple antennas downstream of test gatewells to improve overall detection efficiency of PIT-tag detection system. Multiple antennas will help to mitigate for groups of fish passing through the PIT-tag detection system. Collect system diagnostics without tagged fish in the collection channel to serve as a baseline for system performance. Identify fish release protocol into collection channel to minimize potential for tag collision between groups of released fish and run-at-large PIT-tagged fish.

Acknowledgements Thanks to the following people for providing assistance: USACE: Chris Pinney, David Trachtenbarg, Derek Fryer, Mike Halter, Elizabeth Holdren, Ches Brooks, Bill Spurgeon, Rick Weis, Rich Hilt, all the staff in LGR Project Operations PSMFC: Fred Mensik, Shawn Rapp, Allan Martin, Scott Livingston, Monty Price NOAA: Tiffani Marsh