TOMAHAWK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (FERC No. … · TOMAHAWK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT ... (FERC No. 1940)...

TOMAHAWK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (FERC No. 1940)

FISH ENTRAINMENT MORTALITY STUDY

Prepared for: WISCONSIN PUBLIC SERVICE CORPORATION

Green Bay, Wisconsin

Prepared by: HDR ENGINEERING, INC.

Portland, Maine

JULY 22, 2014

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report i

TOMAHAWK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (FERC No. 1940) FISH ENTRAINMENT MORTALITY STUDY

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section Title Page No.

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................. 1-1

2 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Background .......................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Turbine Entrainment and Mortality ..................................................................... 2-1 2.3 Tomahawk Project Description ............................................................................ 2-3 2.4 Fish Community................................................................................................... 2-5

3 STUDY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ............................................................................ 3-1

4 METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................... 4-1

4.1 Methodology Overview ....................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Description of Factors Affecting Entrainment, Impingement, and Survival ....... 4-1 4.3 Intake Velocities, Trashrack Exclusion, and Impingement ................................. 4-1 4.4 Entrainment and Turbine Survival Estimation .................................................... 4-2

4.4.1 Fish Species Composition ........................................................................ 4-2 4.4.2 Empirical Entrainment Rate Data ............................................................ 4-5 4.4.3 Project Hydrology and Generation .......................................................... 4-7 4.4.4 Turbine Specifications and Fish Survival ................................................ 4-9 4.4.5 Monthly Entrainment and Survival Estimation ..................................... 4-11

5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ...................................................................................... 5-1

5.1 Description of Factors Affecting Entrainment, Impingement, and Survival ....... 5-1 5.2 Intake Velocities, Trashrack Exclusion, and Impingement ................................. 5-3 5.3 Entrainment and Turbine Survival Estimation .................................................... 5-6

5.3.1 Empirical Entrainment Rate Data and Fish Composition ........................ 5-6 5.3.2 Tomahawk Generation and Entrainment Estimates ............................... 5-10

5.4 Tomahawk Survival Estimates .......................................................................... 5-21

6 CONCLUSION AND STUDY PLAN VARIANCES .................................................... 6-1

7 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 7-1

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Section Title Page No.

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report ii

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A - FISH SPECIES COLLECTED IN THE UPPER REACH OF THE WISCONSIN RIVER

APPENDIX B - SWIM SPEED DATA

APPENDIX C - SPAWNING AND EARLY LIFE STAGE PERIODICITIES

APPENDIX D - FORTY-THREE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS USED IN THE ENTRAINMENT ASSESSMENT (EPRI 1997A)

APPENDIX E - MONTHLY AVERAGE ENTRAINMENT RATES (EPRI 1997A)

APPENDIX F - FLOW ROUTING AND GENERATION AMOUNTS

APPENDIX G - ESTIMATED GENERATION FOR THE POR, DRY, AND WET WATER YEARS AND TOMAHAWK OPERATIONS RECORDS FROM 2001-2013

APPENDIX H - BLADE STRIKE RESULTS

APPENDIX I - EMPIRICAL SURVIVAL RESULTS AT 21 PROJECTS AND 85 FIELD TRIALS WITH KAPLAN-TYPE TURBINES

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report iii


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Title Page No. 2-1 FIVE REACHES OF THE WISCONSIN RIVER AS DEFINED BY LYONS (2005),

RELEVANT DAMS, AND THE TOMAHAWK PROJECT LOCATION .................... 2-4

4-1 PROJECT FLOW EXCEEDANCE FOR THE POR (1982-2013) AND OPERATING RANGE ............................................................................................................................ 4-8

5-1 MEAN PERCENT (STANDARD DEVIATION) COMPOSITION OF ENTRAINMENT SAMPLES BY FISH SIZE CLASS................................................... 5-8

5-2 AVERAGE AND MAXIMUM FISH FAMILY PERCENT COMPOSITION FROM THE EPRI (1997A) PROJECTS, AND FISH FAMILY COMPOSITIONS FROM SAMPLING CONDUCTED IN LAKE MOHAWKSIN, THE UPPER REACH OF THE WISCONSIN RIVER, AND THE SUB-REACH FROM GRANDMOTHER FLOWAGE TO THE HEADWATERS OF RAINBOW FLOWAGE............................ 5-9

5-3 COMBINED MONTHLY ENTRAINMENT ESTIMATES FOR ALL SPECIES AND ASSOCIATED GENERATION .......................................................................... 5-13

5-4 SEASONAL AND ANNUAL ENTRAINMENT ESTIMATES FOR THE 10 SIZE INTERVALS OF ALL SPECIES COMBINED ........................................................... 5-20

5-5 MEAN (RANGE) IMMEDIATE TURBINE SURVIVAL RATES DERIVED FROM BLADE STRIKE MODEL RUNS FOR THE 10 SIZE INTERVALS ......................... 5-23

5-6 IMMEDIATE KAPLAN TURBINE SURVIVAL RATES DERIVED FROM EMPIRICAL BALLOON TAG STUDIES FROM VARIOUS SOURCES1 AND MEAN BLADE STRIKE SURVIVAL AT THE PROJECT; FISH SIZES RANGE FROM 3 TO 29 IN LONG FOR BOTH ........................................................................ 5-24

5-7 IMMEDIATE KAPLAN TURBINE SURVIVAL RATES DERIVED FROM EMPIRICAL BALLOON TAG STUDIES FROM VARIOUS SOURCES1 AND BLADE STRIKE SURVIVAL RANGE AT THE PROJECT COMPARED WITH ASSOCIATED PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS; FISH SIZES RANGE FROM 3 TO 29 IN LONG FOR BOTH.............................................................................................. 5-25

5-8 COMBINED MONTHLY MORTALITY ESTIMATES FOR ALL SPECIES AND ASSOCIATED GENERATION .................................................................................... 5-26

5-9 SEASONAL AND ANNUAL MORTALITY ESTIMATES FOR THE 10 SIZE INTERVALS OF ALL SPECIES COMBINED ........................................................... 5-33

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report iv


LIST OF TABLES

Table Title Page No. 4-1 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED IN THE UPPER REACH OF THE MAINSTEM

WISCONSIN RIVER FROM 2000 TO PRESENT (WDNR FISH MAPPING APPLICATION 2014) ..................................................................................................... 4-3

4-2 PROJECT TURBINE SPECIFICATIONS ................................................................... 4-11

5-1 FACTORS INFLUENCING FISH ENTRAINMENT AND SURVIVAL ..................... 5-2

5-2 BURST SWIMMING SPEEDS OF FISH IN PROJECT AREA .................................... 5-4

5-3 ESTIMATED MINIMUM LENGTHS OF EACH SPECIES EXCLUDED OR IMPINGED ON PROJECT TRASHRACKS (2.70-IN CLEAR SPACING) ................. 5-5

5-4 ESTIMATED PROJECT GENERATION FLOW (1,000 CFS-HOURS) BASED ON THE POR (AVERAGE WATER YEAR), DRY, AND WET WATER YEARS ......... 5-12

5-5 SEASONAL AND ANNUAL ENTRAINMENT ESTIMATES BASED ON THE POR (1982-2013) ........................................................................................................... 5-14

5-6 SEASONAL AND ANNUAL ENTRAINMENT ESTIMATES BASED ON THE DRY WATER YEAR (2009) ........................................................................................ 5-16

5-7 SEASONAL AND ANNUAL ENTRAINMENT ESTIMATES BASED ON THE WET WATER YEAR (1986) ........................................................................................ 5-18

5-8 SEASONAL AND ANNUAL MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON THE POR (1982-2013).................................................................................................................... 5-27

5-9 SEASONAL AND ANNUAL MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON THE DRY WATER YEAR (2009) .................................................................................................. 5-29

5-10 SEASONAL AND ANNUAL MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON THE WET WATER YEAR (1986) .................................................................................................. 5-31

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report 1-1

Section 1

Executive Summary

Wisconsin Public Service Corporation (WPS) has initiated the process for renewing the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license of the Tomahawk Hydroelectric Project (FERC

Project No. 1940) (Project), which is scheduled to expire in 2018. As part of the relicensing

process, fish entrainment and turbine mortality have been identified as issues that need to be

studied in more detail to determine potential impacts of Project operations on local fish

populations. Consequently, WPS retained HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR) to conduct a desktop

analysis of entrainment and mortality using available data from field studies conducted at other

hydropower projects. Estimating annual entrainment losses will allow WPS and resource

agencies to determine potential impacts to resource management activities and goals, and

whether mitigation is warranted.

Operation of the Project requires passing water through the powerhouse, creating the potential

for fish to be impinged on trashracks and/or entrained and passed through the turbines.

Impingement refers to the potential for fish to become trapped against the intake trashracks due

to velocity conditions at the intake. Entrainment refers to the passage of fish into the powerhouse

intakes and through the turbine units. Fish subjected to impingement or entrainment can be at

risk for injury or mortality.

The Project may be expected to create some degree of entrainment that will vary with river flow,

fish species, season, and fish size/life stage. The majority of entrained fish species will likely be

sunfish and perch, and young life stages of all species, including eggs, fry, juveniles, and some

young adults incapable of intake avoidance or exclusion by the trash racks. Seasonal quantitative

entrainment estimates were derived for a list of species occurring in the Upper Reach of the

Wisconsin River, including Lake Mohawksin. This study incorporated hydrology, operations,

empirical entrainment rate data collected at various hydroelectric projects, and species’ average

relative composition (RC%) in the Upper Reach of the Wisconsin River from Grandmother

Flowage upstream to the headwaters of Rainbow Falls.

The annual average number of fish that may become entrained at the Project is estimated at

approximately 22,600. Based on water year, this number could range from 11,700 to 31,700 fish.

Section 1 Executive Summary


These estimates are based on species lists and relative composition data from the Upper Reach of

the mainstem Wisconsin River, empirically derived entrainment rates, 31-year USGS hydrology,

and the Project’s hydraulic capacity and operational specifications. The majority of the

entrainment estimates are small fish less than 6 inches in length. Bluegill and yellow perch

represent a large majority of entrainment, and overall entrainment numbers generally increase

from spring to fall, which is suggestive of increased activity and presence/dispersal of juveniles.

Entrainment netting studies at the Wisconsin River Division and Centralia projects on the

mainstem Wisconsin River (Middle Reach) documented high numbers of catfish and sunfish in

entrainment collections, but low numbers of perch species. Based on available fish community

data, catfish are rare or absent in the Upper Reach of the Wisconsin River, and yellow perch

make up a much larger percentage than in the Middle Reach.

The estimated annual average number of fish to experience immediate turbine-related mortality

at the Project is approximately 400 fish (98% survival rate), with a range of 200 to 600 fish

depending on water year. Turbine mortality estimates were derived using size specific blade

strike model survival rates, multiplied by the entrainment estimates for each size interval. The

survival rates obtained using the blade strike model compare well with empirically derived

survival study findings at several projects with similar specifications. Because latent mortality is

difficult to quantify, no measure could be incorporated into the mortality estimates at the Project.

Research in this area has primarily focused on endangered salmonids, where a 5% latent

mortality rate has generally been accepted. Including latent mortality, overall turbine survival for

those species and size classes estimated to become entrained could approximate 93%. These

estimates are fairly high due to the high immediate survival rates of fish less than 6 in, which

represent the majority of entrainment compositions.


Section 2

Introduction

2.1 Background

Wisconsin Public Service Corporation (WPS) has initiated the process for renewing the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license of the Tomahawk Hydroelectric Project (FERC

Project No. 1940) (Project), which is scheduled to expire in 2018. As part of the relicensing

process, fish entrainment and turbine mortality have been identified as issues that need to be

studied in more detail to determine potential impacts of Project operations on local fish

populations. Consequently, WPS retained HDR Engineering, Inc. (HDR) to conduct a desktop

analysis of entrainment and mortality using available data from field studies conducted at other

hydropower projects. Estimating annual entrainment losses will allow WPS and resource

agencies to determine potential impacts to resource management activities and goals, and

whether mitigation is warranted.

2.2 Turbine Entrainment and Mortality

Operation of the Project requires passing water through the powerhouse, creating the potential

for fish to be impinged on trashracks and/or entrained and passed through the turbines.

Impingement refers to the potential for fish to become trapped against the intake trashracks due

to velocity conditions at the intake. Entrainment refers to the passage of fish into the powerhouse

intakes and through the turbine units. Fish subjected to impingement or entrainment can be at

risk for injury or mortality.

The potential for fish to become entrained or impinged at a hydroelectric facility is dependent on

a variety of factors such as fish life history, size, swimming ability, reservoir stratification,

operating regimes, inflow, and intake/turbine configurations (Cada et al. 1997). A gradient of

potential exists both temporally and spatially, where smaller-sized fish may be in higher

abundances during certain portions of the year, thus increasing their potential for entrainment. In

addition, diurnal and seasonal movements of both small and large fish may bring them in close

proximity to intake structures. Physical and operational characteristics of a given project,

including trashrack bar spacing, intake velocities, intake depth, stratification, and intake

proximity to feeding and rearing habitats also affect the potential for a fish to become entrained.

Section 2 Introduction


These and several other factors are used to make general assessments of entrainment and

impingement potential at hydroelectric projects using a desktop study approach.

The size of trashrack bar spacing is often a concern when designing intake structures for

operating efficiency and successful exclusion of woody debris and other objects that could

damage turbines. Findings from FERC (1995a) and Winchell et al. (2000) suggest that the

majority of fish size classes entrained at hydroelectric projects is much smaller than the

minimum length of fish physically excluded by a certain clear spacing, and that length

frequencies of entrainment compositions are similar among sites with differing trashrack bar

spacing. It has been suggested that larger fish collected in entrainment samples may have been in

the draft tubes prior to tailrace net deployment and/or they may have entered through gaps in the

nets once they were deployed (EPRI 1992, 1997b). Such findings indicate that the lack of larger

fish in entrainment compositions may be related to their increased swimming performance and

ability to avoid intake velocities as they approach a dam. However, entrainment may occur

regardless of their swimming performance if the intake openings and resulting intake velocities

are the only available attractant flow for downstream migrating fish, particularly in riverine

environments (FERC 1995a; EPRI 1997b).

Fish may experience immediate or latent mortality during entrainment through a hydropower

plant. This could be caused by a number of factors related to mechanical injuries, shear stress,

pressure changes, cavitation, and/or turbulence (Odeh 1999; Cada et al. 1997). Immediate

mortalities typically occur from mechanical injuries, where blade strikes can completely sever

fish or cause blunt force trauma. Other physical injuries such as grinding, abrasions, and cuts

may make fish more susceptible to disease and predation, thus causing latent mortality. Fish with

open wounds and abrasions are more susceptible to bacterial and viral infections and diseases

due to loss of their skin’s mucous layer, while physical injuries may limit fish mobility and

predator avoidance.

Pressure changes, particularly in those fish with closed swim bladders (physoclistous), may often

cause latent mortality. Shear stress, or parallel surface pressure, can also lead to latent or

immediate mortalities. Injuries sustained from shear stress could include the removal of skin

mucous and loss of eyeballs and mouth parts (Cada et al. 1997). Turbulence occurs at different



scales while a hydroelectric turbine is operating, often leading to pressure and shear stress-

related injuries. However, turbulence may also disorient fish after passage, potentially creating

higher predation potential. Cavitation, or the formation of gas bubbles in areas of low pressure

(i.e., downstream of a turbine blade), is another form of injury that can cause both latent and

immediate mortality. These types of pressure-related injuries, however, most often occur at dams

with greater than 100 feet (ft) of head. It has been suggested that the majority of

injuries/mortalities occurring at hydropower projects with less than 100 ft of head are caused by

blade strike (Franke et al. 1997).

During the past 20 years, owners of hydroelectric facilities have conducted numerous field

studies to assess impingement, entrainment, and turbine survival at many small- to medium-sized

projects. Over 50 site-specific studies of resident fish entrainment and mortality at hydroelectric

sites in the United States have been performed and reported on to date (EPRI 1997a). Projects

studied vary by location, size, operation regimes, fish presence, impoundment characteristics,

and intake features such as trashrack bar spacing and intake velocities. Similarly, these studies

contain extensive turbine survival data for a range of turbine types and physical characteristics.

This comprehensive empirical database has been successfully used to conduct desktop

assessments of fish impingement, entrainment, and turbine survival at many projects throughout

the country.

2.3 Tomahawk Project Description

The Project is located in Lincoln County, Wisconsin, on the Wisconsin River (Figure 2-1). The

Project’s impoundment (Lake Mohawksin) spans 2,773 acres with 35 miles of shoreline.

Residence time (i.e., the amount of time water is retained in the reservoir) is approximately 6

days (Lyons 2005). The lake is classified as eutrophic, and is generally shallow with an average

and maximum depth of 9 ft and 25 ft, respectively, although 20 percent of the lake area is less

than 3 ft deep. Deeper water habitats are scarce, with less than 1 percent of the lake area

containing depths in excess of 20 ft. Substrate in the lake is dominated by sand and silt.



FIGURE 2-1 FIVE REACHES OF THE WISCONSIN RIVER AS DEFINED BY LYONS (2005),

RELEVANT DAMS, AND THE TOMAHAWK PROJECT LOCATION



The Project powerhouse has two 1.3 MW vertical Kaplan turbines with a combined hydraulic

capacity of 2,520 cfs and head of 14.5 ft. The average annual energy generation of the Project is

12,370 MWh. The powerhouse trashracks extend to the full depth of the intake and have 2.70-in

clear spacing. The Project dam is about 3,400 ft long and has a maximum height of about 27 ft.

The dam includes a 9 ft wide sluice gate section, a 267 ft long radial gate section, a 160 ft long

slab and buttress section, a 67 ft powerhouse section, a 60 ft long northwest abutment section,

and earthen dikes. Under normal operations, the impoundment elevation fluctuates between

1,434.7 ft and 1,435.5 ft, and the tailwater is typically at elevation 1,419.5 ft. The water elevation

in the tailrace is typically influenced by the impoundment of the next project downstream

(Grandmother).

2.4 Fish Community

The Wisconsin River is classified as a warm, lowland river and is the longest and largest in the

state of Wisconsin (Lyons 2005). Over 100 native fish species have been documented in the

river, which meanders approximately 400 miles from the outlet of Lac Vieux Desert on the

Wisconsin-Michigan border to the confluence with the Mississippi River. Lyons (2005)

described fish community characteristics within five Wisconsin River reaches based on

longitudinal change, and natural and manmade characteristics (Figure 2-1). The Project occurs in

the “Upper Reach” as defined from the Wausau Dam upstream to the Otter Rapids Dam. The

river widens and increases in gradient in the Upper Reach, with greater disturbances than the

“Headwater Reach,” including a higher frequency of impoundments and history of industrial

pollution. According to Lyons (2005), fish diversity decreases in the upstream direction in the

Wisconsin River, with 49 species known to occur in the Upper Reach. No federally threatened or

endangered fish species occur in the Wisconsin River, although 20 Wisconsin state-endangered,

threatened, or “special concern” fish occur throughout the basin. According to Lyons (2005), the

most common and abundant species in the Upper Reach are shorthead redhorse, bluegill,

smallmouth bass, yellow perch, and logperch.

Review of an extensive fish collection database (WDNR Fish Mapping Application 2014)

suggests occurrence of 64 fish species and three hybrids in the Upper Reach of the mainstem

Wisconsin River (Appendix A). Data collected from 2000 to present with multiple gear types



were compiled, resulting in 19 different sub-reaches or sample sites within the Upper Reach,

including Lake Mohawksin. Twenty different sample events from 2003 to 2010 in Lake

Mohawksin are included in the database, from which 22 species and one hybrid were collected

using boat electrofishing and fyke netting methods. The most abundant species collected was

yellow perch (28 percent composition of all collections combined), followed by bluegill (26

percent), walleye (14 percent), and black crappie (11 percent). According to the Project’s Pre-

Application Document (PAD), at least 20 species of fish are known to occur in Lake

Mohawksin, with the majority (75 percent) classified as warm water species in Wisconsin

(WPSP 2012). The remaining 25 percent are transitional species, which may be found in either

cold or warm water fish assemblages. No cold water species were present in available data sets,

which is not unexpected as the shallow lake provides little summertime thermal refuge for cold

water obligates (WPSP 2012). Due to the scarcity of deep, cool/cold water habitat and dissolved

oxygen levels below cold water standards, Lake Mohawksin is not suitable for cold water fish

species.


Section 3

Study Goals and Objectives

The goal of this entrainment mortality study is to develop reasonable estimates of the number of

fish that are killed annually as a result of passing through the turbines at the Project. To achieve

this goal, the following objectives have been developed for the study:

1. Characterize the potential magnitude, size composition, species composition, and

seasonal distribution of annual fish entrainment at the Project using existing

entrainment data collected during field studies at similar sites;

2. Develop estimates of turbine passage survival for species and size ranges entrained at

the Project using existing data from field studies conducted at sites with similar

turbine designs; and

3. Develop estimates of annual entrainment and mortality for the Project by applying

relevant entrainment and turbine survival data to fish species and size ranges that are

likely entrained.


Section 4

Methodology

4.1 Methodology Overview

The most current fish community data, historical hydrology, operational and structural

specifications, empirical entrainment rates, intake velocity calculations, and blade strike

probabilities were analyzed for a comprehensive review of fish entrainment and mortality at the

Project. The following independent assessments or study phases were made to address study

goals and objectives:

1. Description of factors affecting entrainment, impingement, and survival;

2. Intake velocities, trashrack exclusion, and impingement; and

3. Entrainment and turbine survival estimation.

4.2 Description of Factors Affecting Entrainment, Impingement, and

Survival

A general, qualitative assessment was made of factors influencing entrainment and mortality, and

their occurrence at the Project. Various structural, operational, and biological (biotic and abiotic)

factors generally known to influence entrainment and turbine mortality probability were

identified for the Project, and are presented below. These included intake proximity to littoral

zone habitats, littoral zone species abundance, and turbine type, to name a few.

4.3 Intake Velocities, Trashrack Exclusion, and Impingement

Fish impingement and intake avoidance were determined utilizing intake velocity calculations,

fish burst swim speeds, and trashrack spacing for a general qualitative assessment. Average

approach velocity was calculated using trashrack drawings (clear spacing) and the Project’s

maximum hydraulic capacity. Although not used in the entrainment estimation, available fish

swim speed data in scientific literature (Appendix B) were compared with calculated intake

velocities at the Project. Both approach and through-screen velocities were calculated by

dividing the Project’s hydraulic capacity by the total gross and clear areas of the intake,

respectively (EPRI 2000). Approach velocities are considered to be the average water velocity

Section 4 Methodology


measured a few inches in front of the intake screen, taken in the same direction as the general

flow (EPRI 2000). Through-screen velocity is measured between the structural elements of the

intake screen as water passes through. Approach velocities are typically considered more critical

when assessing potential for impingement/entrainment; however, through-screen velocities may

indicate the degree of difficulty for an impinged fish to escape from the screen (EPRI 2000).

The exclusion assessment also involved estimating minimum fish lengths for the target fish

species that would be excluded or impinged by the 2.70-in trashrack bar spacing at the Project. A

scaling factor relating fish body width to total length was used for the impingement assessment

phase to determine minimum sizes of the target fish species that would be physically excluded or

impinged on the trashracks (Smith 1985). Entrainment rates for these species-specific sizes that

cannot physically pass through the trashracks were not considered in the entrainment estimation,

but instead are considered to either become impinged or excluded (escape) by the trashracks.

4.4 Entrainment and Turbine Survival Estimation

The entrainment and turbine mortality estimation is a quantitative assessment that utilized a

combination of the best available data sources, including: (1) species lists and relative

composition data from the Upper Reach of the mainstem Wisconsin River (WDNR Fish

Mapping Application 2014); (2) EPRI (1997a) empirical entrainment rates; (3) United States

Geological Survey (USGS) 31-year (1982-2013) period of record (POR) hydrology; (4) Project

operational and mechanical specifications; and (5) blade strike probabilities (Franke et al. 1997).

The result is a monthly, seasonal, and annual estimate (number of fish) of potential entrainment

and mortality for species occurring in the Upper Reach of the Wisconsin River. Trashrack

exclusion findings are the only data from the other independent assessments utilized in the

entrainment estimation.

4.4.1 Fish Species Composition

Fish collection data from the WDNR Fish Mapping Application (2014) were used to compile a

list of those species occurring in the Upper Reach of the mainstem Wisconsin River, including

Lake Mohawksin (Appendix A). Table 4-1 provides the fish species and relative percent

composition (RC%) used to represent those communities vulnerable to entrainment at the



Project. Bluegill (27 percent), yellow perch (19 percent), walleye (18 percent), and black crappie

(9 percent) represent the majority of all species collected. Spawning and early life stage

periodicities for each of these species are provided in Appendix C.

The RC% values were derived from combined catches of all species at sample sites from

Grandmother Flowage upstream to the headwaters of Rainbow Falls Flowage. Based on

professional judgment and potential sampling bias in Lake Mohawksin, using the complete list of

species and their combined RC% in this reach provides for a comprehensive assessment of the

local fish community’s entrainment potential. As suggested by Hayes et al. (2007), all methods

of fish capture are selective, and some can only be applied to a fraction of the entire area of

interest. Although not verified, a review of the WDNR Fish Mapping Application (2014) data

suggests that some sample events targeted certain species (e.g., game species or those of

management concern), including those conducted in Lake Mohawksin. RC% is based on the

entire fish community; therefore, surveys targeting certain species tend to skew RC%. It was

determined that certain species might be underrepresented or overrepresented in a given sample.

Using combined RC% from multiple locations allows for a robust RC% for each species,

reflecting annual temporal and spatial changes in the local fish community. Following methods

previously accepted by FERC (HDR Engineering, Inc. 2014, 2013, 2012a, 2012b, 2012c), RC%

for each species was incorporated into their respective entrainment and survival estimations to

account for the local fishery composition.

TABLE 4-1 FISH SPECIES COLLECTED IN THE UPPER REACH OF THE MAINSTEM

WISCONSIN RIVER FROM 2000 TO PRESENT (WDNR FISH MAPPING APPLICATION 2014)

Common Name N1 RC% Bluegill 22,434 26.83% Yellow perch 16,310 19.51% Walleye 14,794 17.69% Black crappie 7,571 9.05% Pumpkinseed x Bluegill 4,470 0.59% Northern Pike x Muskellunge 4,179 0.00% Black bullhead 3,756 4.49% Yellow bullhead 2,497 2.99% Rosyface/Carmine Shiner 1,109 0.03% Silver redhorse 1,087 0.40%



Common Name N1 RC% Smallmouth bass 874 1.05% Bowfin 806 0.96% White sucker 744 0.89% Rainbow Darter 496 0.00% Northern Hog Sucker 415 0.46% Largescale Stoneroller 402 0.00% Northern Pike 388 5.00% Slender Madtom x Stonecat 337 0.00% Mimic Shiner 188 0.00% Golden redhorse 133 0.16% White crappie 130 0.16% Golden shiner 127 0.15% Hornyhead Chub 98 0.12% Common Shiner 86 0.10% Spotfin Shiner 48 0.06% Slenderhead Darter 40 0.05% Shorthead redhorse 21 1.30% Bluntnose Minnow 12 0.01% Largemouth bass 11 0.48% Chestnut Lamprey 10 0.01% Troutperch 10 0.01% Blackside Darter 6 0.01% Burbot 6 0.01% Mottled Sculpin 4 0.00% Central Mudminnow 3 0.00% Greater Redhorse 3 0.00% Brassy Minnow 2 0.00% Johnny darter 2 0.01% Muskellunge 2 0.50% Pumpkinseed 2 5.35% Channel Catfish 1 0.00% Creek Chub 1 0.00% American Brook Lamprey 0 0.00% Central Stoneroller 0 0.00% Common Carp 0 0.00% Emerald shiner 0 0.00% Fantail Darter 0 0.00% Finescale Dace 0 0.00% Green Sunfish 0 0.00% Iowa Darter 0 0.00% Logperch 0 0.22% River Redhorse 0 0.00% River Shiner 0 0.00% Rock Bass 0 1.33% Stonecat 0 0.00% Weed Shiner 0 0.00%



Common Name N1 RC% Total 83,615 100%

1 Numbers (N) represent those collected in the sub-reach from Grandmother Flowage upstream to the headwaters of Rainbow Flowage, of which the associated RC% was used to represent the community composition vulnerable to entrainment at the Project.

4.4.2 Empirical Entrainment Rate Data

An extensive literature review was conducted of entrainment studies previously completed for

various hydroelectric facilities throughout the United States. Recent FERC relicensing

entrainment studies (HDR Engineering, Inc. 2014, 2013, 2012a, 2012b, 2012c, 2011, 2010a,

2010b, 2010c; HDR|DTA 2010a, 2010b; GeoSyntec Consultants [GeoSyntec] 2005;

Normandeau Associates Inc. [Normandeau] 2008; Normandeau 2009) have utilized desktop

study approaches for such assessments, where data compiled by EPRI (1992, 1997a, 1997b) and

FERC (1995a, 1995b) has most commonly been used for comparative purposes. These reports

have detailed trends and correlations between fish community characteristics, entrainment rates,

mortality, and passage with hydroelectric plant design and operation. Findings from field trials

conducted at these projects and their transferability across the hydroelectric spectrum have

eliminated the need for costly and time-consuming survival/netting studies at FERC

hydroelectric projects (EPRI 1997a).

The EPRI (1997a) database provides the most robust empirical entrainment dataset from field

trials conducted at 43 hydroelectric facilities east of the Mississippi River (Appendix D). Eleven

of the 43 projects are in Wisconsin, two of which (Wisconsin River Division and Centralia) are

located on the mainstem Wisconsin River approximately 90 and 120 miles downstream from the

Project, respectively. All studies in the database utilized full-flow tailrace netting, which

according to EPRI (1997a) is the most preferred entrainment study methodology as opposed to

partial-flow tailrace netting, intake gallery netting, and/or hydroacoustics.

Full-flow tailrace netting involves placing a conical net in the immediate tailrace to collect the

entire discharge on a seasonal or monthly basis. Because full-flow tailrace netting did not always

document all fish passing through a turbine, most of the studies adjusted the number of fish

collected by the net’s collection efficiency. Studies conducted at the Buzzards Roost, Gaston

Shoals, Hollidays Bridge, Ninety-Nine Islands, and Saluda projects were the only ones that did



not, and were excluded from this desktop analysis. Other potential sources of error in the

database include net intrusion of fish in the tailrace. Larger fish often entered the draft tube

before the net was installed, thus producing entrainment rates that included fish that did not pass

through the turbines. The impingement assessment described above helps to correct for these

errors in eliminating those larger fish from the entrainment estimation at the Project.

The species, number (corrected for net efficiency), and size of entrained fish were documented,

of which data are available for approximately 140 species and 30 species groups. The resulting

5,332 rows of entrainment collection data were compiled into a sortable spreadsheet. Each row

represents fish numbers collected for one species/group at a given project in a given month, and

for the following 10 size intervals: 0-2 in, 2.1-4 in, 4.1-6 in, 6.1-8 in, 8.1-10 in, 10.1-15 in, 15.1-

20 in, 20.1-25 in, 25.1-30 in, and >30 in. Therefore, a total of 53,320 entrainment data points for

all projects, species/groups, and size intervals combined are available. This includes data points

where no fish were collected for a given size interval.

Entrainment rates (fish/hour/1,000 cfs of unit capacity) were determined for each of the 53,320

data points. Because only half of the studies in the EPRI database reported volume of water

sampled, EPRI (1997a) recommended using the number of fish entrained per hour per 1,000 cfs

of unit capacity. This allows for the standardization of all data and a larger sample size from

which to calculate average, monthly entrainment rates for a given species/group. All of the

studies in the database reported hours sampled, as well as the hydraulic capacity of the sampled

units. The number of fish reported for each of the 53,320 data points was divided by the hours

reported for the associated sample event, and then by the capacity of the sampled unit(s). If more

than one unit was sampled, the average hydraulic capacity was used (EPRI 1997a). This value

was then divided by 1,000 to obtain fish per hour per 1,000 cfs of unit capacity. In most cases,

this resulted in very small numbers, where significant units were rounded to the ten thousandth

decimal point.

All of the 53,320 entrainment rate data points were considered as the sample pool from which to

obtain monthly rates for all species. Using the entire database is considered conducive to

capturing the variability of aquatic ecosystems within and between river systems, while

providing a robust database for a wide range of species, sizes, and months. Based on professional



judgment, these data were filtered in the following manner in an attempt to acquire entrainment

rates for all 12 months for each species: (1) only use individual species data if all months are

represented (at least one data point in a given month); (2) if not all months are represented, use at

least one similar species within the same genus that occupies similar habitats; (3) if this does not

account for all months, use at least one similar species/group of species within the same family

that occupies similar habitats; and (4) if no data are available for a given species up to the family

level, select a similar species/group of species from another family that occupies similar habitats.

4.4.3 Project Hydrology and Generation

Wisconsin River flow exceedance values were obtained from USGS Stream Gage Nos.

05394500 (Prairie River at Merrill, WI) and 05395000 (Wisconsin River at Merrill, WI) for a 31-

year period of record (POR) f-rom 1982 to 2013. This period was selected based on the desire to

exclude historical hydrology influenced by the construction of dams, upstream development, and

changes in operations that may not reflect current characteristics. Flow proration (0.79) was used

to determine flow exceedance at the Project (Figure 4-1) based on the following calculation:

[(Wisconsin River at Merrill, WI USGS gage mean daily discharge – Prairie

River at Merrill, WI USGS gage mean daily discharge) × drainage area upstream

of Tomahawk Dam/(Wisconsin River at Merrill, WI USGS gage drainage area –

Prairie River at Merrill, WI USGS gage drainage area)]

These data were used to determine the hydrologic variability and volume of water available for

generation at the Project on a monthly basis. Generation amounts were determined by fitting

custom lines to flow duration curves, and calculating the area under that curve (exceedance

volume) that would have been available for generation. Combined with the Project’s hydraulic

capacities, this resulted in projected monthly generation amounts (1,000 cfs-hours) at the Project

for the POR and a representative wet (1986) and dry water year (2009).



FIGURE 4-1 PROJECT FLOW EXCEEDANCE FOR THE POR (1982-2013) AND OPERATING RANGE

Maximum Operating Flow

Minimum Operating Flow

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

5,500

6,000

6,500

7,000

7,500

8,000

8,500

9,000

9,500

10,000

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Flow

(cf

s)

Exceedance

Annual January Febuary March April May June July August September October November December



4.4.4 Turbine Specifications and Fish Survival

Turbine specifications for the Project (Table 4-2) were compiled and used to calculate blade

strike probabilities and fish survival. A predictive blade strike model was used to estimate

turbine survival for fish passing through the Project’s turbines. The Advanced Hydro Turbine

model (Franke et al. 1997) is a leading edge blade strike probability model developed by the U.S.

Department of Energy program to develop more “fish-friendly” turbines. Franke et al. (1997)

refined the original Von Raben Model (cited by Bell 1981) to account for the effect of tangential

projection of fish length and flow angle on operating head and discharge parameters. The

probability of blade strike in the model is based on several factors, including the number of

runner blades, fish length, runner blade speed, turbine type, runner diameter, turbine efficiency,

and total discharge.

Model predictions were made for 1-in fish length increments up to 36 in, which is the maximum

length of the target species (muskellunge) that could physically pass through the 2.70-in

trashrack bar spacing at the Project powerhouse based on the impingement/exclusion assessment.

A correlation factor (lambda) was added to each equation to account for the fact that a fish may

not always lie in a plane of revolution, as well as the fact that the strike severity may vary with

strike location on the fish. Von Raben (cited by Bell 1981) incorporated the correlation factor to

adjust the predictive turbine strike results to more closely match empirical results. Franke et al.

(1997) suggested correlation factors of 0.1 and 0.2 (i.e., 10% and 20% of strikes are lethal),

based on test results using Pacific salmonids. Survival is also dependent on the location of entry

into the runner for Kaplan turbines. Depending on turbine design, survival is typically lower

closer to the hub due to smaller spacings. To account for this, blade strike probabilities were

calculated for passage near the hub (0.4 or 40% of the hub diameter/runner diameter ratio), mid-

blade (0.7 or 70% of the hub diameter/runner diameter ratio), and blade tip (1 or 100% of the hub

diameter/runner diameter ratio).

Blade strike probabilities were calculated for each correlation factor with the associated model

input parameters, including entry location. Because the turbine units in the Project powerhouse

are identical, only one set of results is provided and the survival rates would apply to both.

Survival was calculated by subtracting the predicted strike estimate from 100. Average survival



rates could then be calculated from all correlation values for each of the 10 size intervals

available in the EPRI (1997a) database.

The following equations (Franke et al. 1997) were used for the vertical Kaplan turbine units at

the Project under maximum turbine flow efficiency:

∙∙cos8 ∙

sin

∙

tan∙ ∙

2 ∙ ∙

2

g∙∙

∙

∙260

S = 1 – P

Where:

P = Predicted strike S = Predicted survival N = Number of turbine blades L = Fish length D = Runner diameter λ = Strike mortality correlation factor (lambda) R = Radius of runner = (D/2) r = Location along radius that a given fish enters the turbine (passage route) η = Turbine efficiency at maximum flow rate (Q) Ewd = Head coefficient or energy coefficient (see above equation) Qwd = Discharge coefficient (see above equation) αa = Angle to axial of absolute flow upstream of runner (see above equation) g = Acceleration of gravity H = Turbine net head

ω = Rotational speed ∙

RPM = Revolutions per minute Q = Maximum turbine flow rate



TABLE 4-2 PROJECT TURBINE SPECIFICATIONS

Operating Mode Limited Peaking

Unit Type / Number Kaplan / 2

Unit Orientation Vertical

Maximum Flow (cfs) 1,260

Minimum Flow (cfs) 162

Combined Hydraulic Capacity (cfs) 2,520

Runner Diameter (same as diameter at inlet) (ft) 9.54

Hub Diameter (ft) 3.58

Runner Speed (rpm) 120

Number of Blades 4

Rated Net Head (ft) 14.5

Rack Spacing (in) 2.7

4.4.5 Monthly Entrainment and Survival Estimation

Monthly entrainment estimates at the Project incorporate the average monthly entrainment rate

(fish/hour/1,000 cfs unit capacity), projected monthly generation (1,000 cfs-hours), RC%, and

trashrack exclusion. Monthly generation amounts were multiplied by the monthly entrainment

rate for each of the 10 size intervals per species. This included separate estimates for each of the

10 size intervals (as provided in the EPRI database) for each species per month. An estimate was

derived for each species identified in Table 4-1. These values were then multiplied by the species

RC% for a project-specific entrainment estimate. Those species not collected in the sub-reach

from Grandmother Flowage to the headwaters of Rainbow Flowage have a zero estimate;

however, they are still included on the species list as they occur in the Upper Reach of the

Wisconsin River. Species-specific estimates of those size intervals that could physically pass

through the trashracks at the Project were summed for an overall species estimate in a given

month. Monthly estimates were summed to produce seasonal estimates (Winter = December,

January, February; Spring = March, April, May; Summer = June, July, August; Fall =

September, October, November), and seasonal estimates were summed for an annual estimate.

Entrainment estimates were derived in this fashion for the POR, wet and dry water years.



Blade strike survival results were used to estimate immediate mortality during passage through

the Project’s turbines. This included multiplying the average blade strike survival rate of a given

size interval by each species entrainment estimate for that size interval. Survival estimates of

those size intervals per species that could physically pass through the trashracks were summed

for an overall species estimate in a given month. Monthly estimates were summed to produce

seasonal estimates, and seasonal estimates were summed for an annual estimate. Survival

estimates were derived using this method for the POR, wet, and dry water years.


Section 5

Results and Discussion

5.1 Description of Factors Affecting Entrainment, Impingement, and

Survival

Table 5-1 provides a description of factors known to increase the risk of entrainment and turbine

survival, and their representation at the Project. The open water intake is adjacent the right

embankment, where relatively shallow depths (10-15 ft) occur in the immediate forebay. This

suggests that shallow water species, such as sunfish, may be more susceptible to entrainment.

Centrarchid species composition and abundance is high in Lake Mohawksin, and no clupeids are

present. There are no obligatory migrants or diadromous fish species in the Wisconsin River that

could be susceptible to entrainment. Several species may exhibit long-distance movements

during spawning seasons, but these are restricted to freshwaters (potadromy) and are generally in

the upstream direction away from the intakes (University of Wisconsin Sea Grant Institute 2014).

As presented in this section and documented during entrainment studies at other projects in the

Wisconsin River (EPRI 1997a), fish less than 8 in long typically constitute the majority of

entrainment. As discussed below, on average, these size groups have an immediate survival rate

of 97% through the Project’s Kaplan turbines.

Some studies suggest that a strongly stratified reservoir with an anoxic hypolimnion and deep

intake may decrease entrainment risk. Fish will not inhabit these anoxic conditions, and thus will

not be in proximity to the intakes. Likewise, fish concentrated in the epilimnion of a stratified

reservoir with an upper level intake may increase entrainment risk. Dissolved oxygen and

temperature data collected by the Citizen Lake Monitoring Network during 2008 indicate that the

lake stratifies during the summer and aquatic life would generally be supported in the higher

elevations of the waterbody.

Section 5 Results and Discussion


TABLE 5-1 FACTORS INFLUENCING FISH ENTRAINMENT AND SURVIVAL

Factor Influence on Entrainment/Turbine Mortality1 Representation at Tomahawk

Project

Ent

rain

men

t

Intake adjacent to shoreline

Near shore intakes may potentially entrain higher numbers of fish than offshore intakes due to tendency of fish to follow shorelines or orient to physical structures in shorelines.

Yes

Intake location in littoral zone

The littoral zone (generally from the shoreline to extent of aquatic vegetation or approximately 10 ft deep) is the most productive region of a reservoir and is where most species spawn and rear their young.

Yes

Abundant littoral zone fishes

Centrarchids and other reservoir species such as catfish that spend most of their lives in near shore habitats tend to be the most abundant species in an assemblage.

Yes

Abundant clupeids Entrainment rates may potentially be higher at projects where clupeids such as gizzard shad, threadfin shad, and alewife are relatively abundant.

No

Obligatory migrants

Obligatory migrants are those species that must migrate within and between freshwater systems to fulfill certain life cycles. Depending on time of year, turbine flow can represent the majority of river flow cues while migrating downstream.

No

Intake depth (ft at full pond)

Fish are usually more abundant in shallower portions of a reservoir year-round.

15

Winter drawdown Drawdowns may put fish in proximity to intakes. No Normal hydraulic capacity (cfs)

Values used with respect to entrainment rate. 2,520

Avg approach velocity (ft/s)

Approach velocities may correlate with intake rates, although siting may be more important. Velocities greater than fish burst swim speeds suggest potential inability to escape entrainment or impingement.

2.0

Water quality Poor water quality (e.g., stratification and low dissolved oxygen in the hypolimnion) may reduce fish susceptibility to entrainment

Yes

Additional downstream passage routes

Sluiceways, spillways, or other bypass structures may reduce turbine entrainment by providing an alternate route of downstream passage.

Yes

Surv

ival

Turbine type

The size of water passage spaces relative to fish size may increase the probability of contact with structural elements. Francis runners have more closely spaced bucket/blades than Kaplan/propeller-type units.

Vertical Kaplan

High speed (rpm) Higher turbine speeds potentially increase the likelihood of fish contact with structural elements.

No

Avg survival rates of small fish (<8 in)

More than 90% of fishes entrained at hydro projects are small. High survival rates reduce the overall impact to fish populations.

97%

Pressurized intake tunnel

High hydrostatic pressure in a penstock at high head sites may be suddenly released as fish acclimated to a higher pressure pass from pressurized areas of deep water to tailwaters at normal hydrostatic pressure. The sudden relief from high pressure increases the potential risk to fish of decompression trauma.

No

1From FERC (1995), EPRI (1997a), and Coutant and Whitney (2000)



5.2 Intake Velocities, Trashrack Exclusion, and Impingement

The mean intake approach velocity at the Project was calculated by dividing the total hydraulic

capacity of the units (2,520 cfs) by the total gross area of the trash rack (1,260.0 square-feet).

This resulted in a velocity of 2.0 feet per second (ft/s). The mean through-screen velocity at the

Project was calculated by dividing the total hydraulic capacity of the units (2,520 cfs) by the total

clear area of the trash rack (1,073.5 square-feet). This resulted in a velocity of 2.3 feet per second

(ft/s). Bluegill, one of the most abundant species in the Project area, have burst swim speeds

ranging from 1.8 ft/s to 4.3 ft/s depending on life stage (Table 5-2). This suggests that larger

bluegill would likely be able to avoid impingement and entrainment. Not all of the species

identified in Table 4-1 have swim speed data available in the scientific literature researched for

this study. Those available for important game, rough, and forage species are provided in

Appendix B and Table 5-2. Although the majority of available burst swim speeds suggest

avoidance capability, fish behavior in front of an intake structure can be variable and

unpredictable (Odeh 2000; Bell 1981). Individuals may volitionally follow the intake flow

through the trashracks, swim against the current and hold in the forebay, actively swim in front

of the intake without being entrained or impinged, dart away from the intake, and/or

inadvertently become entrained/impinged due to the inability to escape.

Proportional estimates of body width to total length (scaling factor) for all species in this study

are provided in Table 5-3. This proportional measurement was used to determine the minimum

length of each species excluded or impinged on the trashracks. Surrogates or groups/guilds of

fish were used to represent certain target species if data were not available in Smith (1985).

Maximum reported sizes for each species are also included in Table 5-3.

Based on this assessment, the largest sized target species that could physically pass through the

trashracks at the Project is a 36-in muskellunge. A fish this large would likely be capable of

avoiding entrainment unless volitional movement occurred through the intake. Only those fish

with sizes greater than the minimum reported size excluded are at risk of impingement (e.g.,

largemouth bass 20-in or greater could become impinged on the trashracks). The majority of

species would not be excluded (NE) or impinged on the trashracks because their maximum

reported sizes are smaller than the minimum estimated exclusion size (Table 5-3). Entrainment



data for those size groups larger than the maximum reported size or minimum length excluded

by the trashracks (whichever is less) were omitted from entrainment estimates.

TABLE 5-2 BURST SWIMMING SPEEDS OF FISH IN PROJECT AREA

Common Name Life Stage Length (in) Burst/Startle Swim Speed (ft/s)

Blacknose Dace1 Adult 2 2.01-3.02

Bluegill

Juvenile 2 1.84

Adult 4-6 2.44

6 4.30

Blue Sucker2 Adult 26 19.51

Brown Trout Juvenile/Adult 5-15 6.02

Central Stoneroller Juvenile/Adult 1-4 1.84-3.52

Common Carp Juvenile 6 2.76-4.59

Emerald Shiner3 Adult 2 4.00

Golden Shiner Adult 1-4 2.01-4.68

Greenside Darter Adult 2-3 1.02-2.64

Hybrid Catfish Juvenile 6-9 7.88

Largemouth Bass Juvenile 3-5 2.32-3.28

Longear Sunfish Juvenile/Adult 2-5 1.24-2.56

Longnose Sucker2 Juvenile/Adult 4-16 4.0-8.0

Northern Pike3 Juvenile/Adult 5-24 1.24-3.12

Pumpkinseed Adult 5 2.44

Robust Redhorse1 Larval/Fry <1 0.46-0.76

Smallmouth Bass

Fry <1 <1.78

Juvenile 4 2.6-3.6

Adult 10-15 3.2-7.8

Spotfin Shiner3 Adult 3 2.11-2.37

Walleye

Juvenile 3 2.48

Juvenile 6 6.02

Adult 14-22 5.48-8.57

White Crappie Juvenile 3 0.36-1.04

White Sucker Adult 7-15 4.96

1Does not occur in the Upper Reach of the Wisconsin River, but used to represent dace species; 2Does not occur in the Upper Reach of the Wisconsin River, but used to represent sucker species; 2Used to represent shiner and minnow species; 3Used to represent muskellunge; NOTE: Based on Bell (1991), burst/startle speed was calculated at 2x prolonged/critical speed as provided in Appendix B, unless burst speed was provided in the literature.



TABLE 5-3 ESTIMATED MINIMUM LENGTHS OF EACH SPECIES EXCLUDED OR IMPINGED

ON PROJECT TRASHRACKS (2.70-IN CLEAR SPACING)

Common Name Scaling Factor for

Body Width1 Maximum Reported

Size (in)2 Minimum Size Excluded (in)3

American Brook Lamprey N/A 8 NE

Black Bullhead 0.154 13 NE

Black Crappie 0.099 16 NE

Blackside Darter 0.11 5 NE

Bluegill 0.132 12 NE

Bluntnose Minnow 0.119 5 NE

Bowfin 0.136 24 20

Brassy Minnow N/A 4 NE

Burbot 0.113 32 24

Central Mudminnow 0.144 5 NE

Central Stoneroller 0.126 9 NE

Channel Catfish 0.156 34 17

Chestnut Lamprey N/A 11 NE

Common Carp 0.162 48 17

Common Shiner 0.107 8 NE

Creek Chub 0.128 12 NE

Emerald Shiner 0.108 5 NE

Fantail Darter 0.112 3 NE

Finescale Dace 0.107 6 NE

Golden Redhorse 0.127 24 21

Golden Shiner 0.105 12 NE

Greater Redhorse 0.146 27 18

Green Sunfish 0.154 10 NE

Hornyhead Chub 0.123 9 NE

Iowa Darter 0.108 3 NE

Johnny Darter 0.118 3 NE

Largemouth Bass 0.134 25 20

Largescale Stoneroller N/A 8 NE

Logperch 0.104 7 NE

Mimic Shiner 0.101 3 NE

Mottled Sculpin 0.147 6 NE

Muskellunge 0.073 60 37

Northern Hog Sucker 0.146 20 18

Northern Pike 0.078 50 35

Northern Pike x Muskellunge 0.0755 55 36

Pumpkinseed 0.124 10 NE

Pumpkinseed x Bluegill 0.128 11 NE

Rainbow Darter 0.114 3 NE



Common Name Scaling Factor for

Body Width1 Maximum Reported

Size (in)2 Minimum Size Excluded (in)3

River Redhorse 0.129 30 21

River Shiner N/A 5 NE

Rock Bass 0.155 12 NE

Rosyface/Carmine Shiner 0.088 4 NE

Shorthead Redhorse 0.130 22 21

Silver Redhorse 0.127 25 21

Slender Madtom x Stonecat 0.154 9 NE

Slenderhead Darter N/A 4 NE

Smallmouth Bass 0.128 23 21

Spotfin Shiner 0.110 5 NE

Stonecat 0.154 12 NE

Troutperch 0.136 6 NE

Walleye 0.125 32 22

Weed Shiner N/A 3 NE

White Crappie 0.085 16 NE

White Sucker 0.146 24 18

Yellow Bullhead 0.172 14 NE

Yellow Perch 0.114 17 NE

1Scaling factor expresses body width as a proportion of total length based on proportional measurements for the target/surrogate species in Smith (1985); 2maximum reported sizes from University of Wisconsin Sea Grant Institute (2014); 3NE = not excluded, all size classes could physically pass through trashracks based on maximum reported sizes.

5.3 Entrainment and Turbine Survival Estimation

5.3.1 Empirical Entrainment Rate Data and Fish Composition

Average monthly entrainment rates derived from the EPRI (1997a) database for each species are

provided in Appendix E. Shaded cells represent those size intervals that cannot physically pass

through the Project’s trashracks, and are therefore not included in the entrainment estimation.

Entrainment rates for all species increased in the summer and fall months, likely due to increased

activity related to foraging, spring reproduction, and subsequent dispersal (GeoSyntec 2005;

EPRI 1997a; Jenkins and Burkhead 1993). Winter months showed the lowest overall entrainment

rates.

Fish measuring less than 4 in long constituted the majority of fish entrainment compositions in

the EPRI (1997a) database (Figure 5-1). Sunfish were the majority of species entrained at 42 of



the 43 developments included in the database, representing on average 30% of the netted species

compositions (Figure 5-2). Sunfish are also common in Lake Mohawksin and the Upper Reach

of the Wisconsin River and, along with the perch family, comprise the majority of the fish

community (Figure 5-2). For those species occurring in the Project area, bluegill, yellow perch,

rock bass and white sucker entrainment rates are the highest in the database. Family

compositional data from the Wisconsin River Division, Centralia, and Brule projects are also

included in Figure 5-2. Studies at the mainstem Wisconsin River projects found high entrainment

rates of catfish; however, catfish are rare to absent in the Upper Reach of the Wisconsin River

(Lyons 2005).



FIGURE 5-1 MEAN PERCENT (STANDARD DEVIATION) COMPOSITION OF ENTRAINMENT SAMPLES BY FISH SIZE CLASS

Source: EPRI 1997A

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

0-2 2.1-4 4.1-6 6.1-8 8.1-10 10.1-15 15.1-20 20.1-25 25.1-30 >30

Per

cent

Com

posi

tion

Fish Size Interval (in)



FIGURE 5-2 AVERAGE AND MAXIMUM FISH FAMILY PERCENT COMPOSITION FROM THE EPRI (1997A) PROJECTS, AND FISH FAMILY COMPOSITIONS FROM SAMPLING CONDUCTED IN LAKE

MOHAWKSIN, THE UPPER REACH OF THE WISCONSIN RIVER, AND THE SUB-REACH FROM GRANDMOTHER FLOWAGE TO THE HEADWATERS OF RAINBOW FLOWAGE

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100S

unfi

sh

Per

ch

Cat

fish

Min

now

s

Suc

kers

Lam

prey

Bow

fins

Bur

bots

Pike

s

Scu

lpin

s

Sti

ckle

back

s

Tro

ut

Tro

ut-p

erch

Her

ring

Dru

m

Eel

Gar

Moo

neye

Sil

vers

ides

Sm

elts

Stu

rgeo

ns

Tem

pera

te B

ass

Top

min

now

s

Per

cen

t C

omp

osit

ion

Lake Mohawksin Upper Reach Wisconsin River

Grandmother Flowage Upstream to the Headwaters of Rainbow Flowage Sub-Reach Wisconsin River Division (EPRI 1997a)

Average Entrainment Composition (EPRI 1997a) Maximum Entrainment Composition (EPRI 1997a)

Centralia (EPRI 1997a) Brule (EPRI 1997a)



5.3.2 Tomahawk Generation and Entrainment Estimates

Analysis of the 31-year hydrology dataset and Project operations resulted in monthly generation

amounts (1,000 cfs-hrs) for the POR (1982-2013), including the driest (2009) and wettest (1986)

water years on record (Table 5-4). The annual average river flow for the dry (825 cfs) and wet

(2,078 cfs) water year is exceeded approximately 87% and 21% of the time, respectively. The

total, annual generation estimated at the Project for an average water year (POR) was 11,832

(1,000 cfs-hrs) with a range of 6,437 to 15,800 based on the dry and wet years, respectively

(Table 5-4). This equates to 42,596 million cubic feet (mcf) of water, with a range of 23,172 to

56,880 mcf (Appendix F). It should be noted that the Project is a limited peaking facility and this

assessment assumes 24-hour operation of the turbines as inflow allows. Comparisons with

operation records obtained from 2001 to 2013 suggest the range of generation estimated using

the POR, dry, and wet water years captures actual operating ranges, with slight variations from

year to year (Appendix G).

Monthly generation amounts were multiplied by monthly entrainment rates for each target

species and size interval, and the species’ associated RC% in Table 4-1, resulting in project-

specific monthly estimates of entrainment. For example, in October (for the POR) the

entrainment estimate for 2.1-in to 4-in yellow perch was calculated by the following equation:

13.63 (fish/hr/1,000 cfs) × 952 (1,000 cfs-hrs) × 0.1951 (RC%) = 2,500 fish

(rounded to the nearest hundred)

This was performed for all size intervals of each species, in each month, and for the three

hydrology datasets. Entrainment estimates up to the maximum size reported of a given species,

or for only those size intervals that cannot physically pass through the trashracks (whichever is

less) were summed for a species monthly entrainment estimate. For example, according to the

University of Wisconsin Sea Grant Institute (2014), yellow perch in the state of Wisconsin

obtain a length of approximately 17 in. Using this as the maximum reported size for yellow

perch, all sizes could physically pass through the Project trashracks; however, only those

estimates up to 17 in were summed in a given month. This was done for each species, and then

all species estimates were summed for an overall monthly entrainment estimate (Figure 5-3).



The annual average number of fish that may become entrained at the Project is estimated at

approximately 22,600 (Table 5-5). Based on water year, this number could range from 11,700 to

31,700 fish (Tables 5-6 and 5-7). The majority of the entrainment estimates are small fish less

than 6-in (Figure 5-4). Bluegill and yellow perch represent a majority of entrained species, and

overall entrainment numbers generally increase from spring to fall, which is suggestive of

increased activity and presence/dispersal of juveniles.

Entrainment netting studies at the Wisconsin River Division and Centralia projects on the

mainstem Wisconsin River (Middle Reach) documented high numbers of catfish and sunfish in

entrainment collections (Figure 5-2), but low numbers of perch species. Based on available fish

community data, catfish are rare or absent in the Upper Reach of the Wisconsin River, and

yellow perch make up a much larger percentage than in the Middle Reach (Lyons 2005; WDNR

Fish Mapping Application 2014).



TABLE 5-4 ESTIMATED PROJECT GENERATION FLOW (1,000 CFS-HOURS) BASED ON THE

POR (AVERAGE WATER YEAR), DRY, AND WET WATER YEARS

PE

RIO

D O

F R

EC

OR

D (

1982

-201

3)

Month Monthly Generation Seasonal Generation

December 1,051

2,947 January 1,016

February 880

March 1,097 3,531

April 1,254

May 1,181

June 977

2,593 July 832

August 783

September 814

2,761 October 952

November 995

Annual 11,832

DR

Y Y

EA

R (

2009

)

December 497

1,547 January 532

February 518

March 661

2,382 April 778

May 943

June 550

1,340 July 390

August 400

September 310

1,168 October 407

November 451

Annual 6,437

WE

T Y

EA

R (

1986

)

December 1,362

4,146 January 1,483

February 1,301

March 1,563

4,155 April 1,556

May 1,036

June 806

2,951 July 1,095

August 1,050

September 1,412

4,549 October 1,713

November 1,424

Annual 15,800



FIGURE 5-3 COMBINED MONTHLY ENTRAINMENT ESTIMATES FOR ALL SPECIES AND ASSOCIATED GENERATION

Note min and max represent dry and wet hydrology estimates.

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

11,000

12,000

13,000

14,000

15,000

16,000

17,000

18,000

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

January February March April May June July August September October November December

Nu

mb

er o

f F

ish

1,00

0 cf

s-h

rsMonthly Entrainment (POR) Annual Generation 1,000 cfs-hrs (POR) Annual Generation 1,000 cfs-hrs Min-Max (Dry-Wet Year)

49%

48%

1%

0%1% 0% 0% 0% 0%

0% 0%

Annual Entrainment Composition (POR)

Sunfish

Perch

Catfish

Pike

Suckers

Minnows

Bowfin

Burbot

Sculpin

Lamprey

Trout-perch



TABLE 5-5 SEASONAL AND ANNUAL ENTRAINMENT ESTIMATES BASED ON THE POR

(1982-2013)

Target Species Winter Spring Summer Fall Annual

Yellow Perch 493 3,471 2,458 3,678 10,100

Bluegill 61 3,138 1,754 3,914 8,867

Black Crappie 129 206 496 493 1,324

Walleye 59 94 508 102 763

Rock Bass 50 89 45 147 330

Pumpkinseed 26 41 119 96 281

White Sucker 33 25 40 174 272

Yellow Bullhead 13 9 129 16 167

Black Bullhead 8 68 39 22 138

Pumpkinseed x Bluegill 2 38 26 49 114

Northern Pike 4 33 31 11 80

Smallmouth Bass 1 2 18 11 32

Largemouth Bass 2 2 16 6 26

Shorthead Redhorse 1 4 8 5 17

Northern Hog Sucker 6 5 1 3 15

Common Shiner 3 3 3 3 12

Golden Shiner 2 1 3 5 11

Muskellunge 0 3 2 1 7

Logperch 0 2 4 1 7

Silver Redhorse 2 2 1 2 7

Hornyhead Chub 1 2 0 1 4

Bowfin 0 0 1 1 3

Slenderhead Darter 0 2 1 0 3

White Crappie 0 0 2 1 3

Golden Redhorse 1 1 0 1 3

Troutperch 0 1 0 0 2

Rosyface/Carmine Shiner 0 1 1 0 1

Blackside Darter 0 1 0 0 1

Channel Catfish 0 0 0 0 0

Burbot 0 0 0 0 0

Johnny Darter 0 0 0 0 0

Spotfin Shiner 0 0 0 0 0

Mimic Shiner 0 0 0 0 0

Bluntnose Minnow 0 0 0 0 0

Central Mudminnow 0 0 0 0 0

Chestnut Lamprey 0 0 0 0 0

Creek Chub 0 0 0 0 0

Greater Redhorse 0 0 0 0 0




Iowa Darter 0 0 0 0 0

Northern Pike x Muskellunge 0 0 0 0 0

Brassy Minnow 0 0 0 0 0

Mottled Sculpin 0 0 0 0 0

American Brook Lamprey 0 0 0 0 0

Central Stoneroller 0 0 0 0 0

Common Carp 0 0 0 0 0

Emerald Shiner 0 0 0 0 0

Fantail Darter 0 0 0 0 0

Finescale Dace 0 0 0 0 0

Green Sunfish 0 0 0 0 0

Largescale Stoneroller 0 0 0 0 0

Rainbow Darter 0 0 0 0 0

River Redhorse 0 0 0 0 0

River Shiner 0 0 0 0 0

Slender Madtom x Stonecat 0 0 0 0 0

Stonecat 0 0 0 0 0

Weed Shiner 0 0 0 0 0

Total 898 7,243 5,707 8,742 22,590



TABLE 5-6 SEASONAL AND ANNUAL ENTRAINMENT ESTIMATES BASED ON THE DRY

WATER YEAR (2009)


Yellow Perch 265 2,200 1,288 1,552 5,305

Bluegill 31 2,076 877 1,584 4,568

Black Crappie 64 131 247 207 649

Walleye 31 70 260 42 403

Rock Bass 26 57 23 63 170

Pumpkinseed 13 27 61 39 140

White Sucker 17 16 21 75 128












Logperch 0 1 2 0 4





Bowfin 0 0 1 1 1







Burbot 0 0 0 0 0



























Stonecat 0 0 0 0 0


Total 472 4,693 2,920 3,620 11,705



TABLE 5-7 SEASONAL AND ANNUAL ENTRAINMENT ESTIMATES BASED ON THE WET

WATER YEAR (1986)


Yellow Perch 707 4,235 2,551 6,560 14,052

Bluegill 83 3,638 2,169 6,764 12,654

Black Crappie 173 255 646 818 1,891

Walleye 84 92 566 177 919

Rock Bass 70 107 51 246 474

White Sucker 46 32 44 304 426

Pumpkinseed 34 48 140 166 388













Logperch 0 2 5 1 9


Bowfin 0 0 2 2 5








Burbot 0 0 0 0 0




























Stonecat 0 0 0 0 0


Total 1,264 8,619 6,514 15,269 31,666



FIGURE 5-4 SEASONAL AND ANNUAL ENTRAINMENT ESTIMATES FOR THE 10 SIZE INTERVALS OF ALL SPECIES

COMBINED


0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

11,000

12,000

13,000

14,000

15,000

0-2 2.1-4 4.1-6 6.1-8 8.1-10 10.1-15 15.1-20 20.1-25 25.1-30 >30

Num

ber

of

Fis

h


Winter Entrainment (POR) Spring Entrainment (POR)Summer Entrainment (POR) Fall Entrainment (POR)Annual Entrainment (POR) Annual Entrainment Min-Max (Dry-Wet Year)

28%

34%

33%

3%

1%

1%

0%0% 0% 0%

Annual Entrainment Composition (POR)

0-2

2.1-4

4.1-6

6.1-8

8.1-10

10.1-15

15.1-20

20.1-25

25.1-30

>30



5.4 Tomahawk Survival Estimates

Survival of target species through the Project’s turbines is expected to be high based on this

analysis and the size groups of fish expected to become entrained. The majority of entrained fish

are expected to be less than 6 in, and fish in this size class show relatively high immediate

survival rates through the units (Figure 5-5). A total of 216 blade strike probability/survival rates

were calculated for the Project (Appendix H). The maximum length used (36 in) represents the

largest sized fish of the target species (muskellunge) that could physically pass through the 2.70-

in trashrack bar spacing. The average survival rate of all length groups, correlation factors, and

entry points is 88% (65-99%). Because the turbines are identical, these values are representative

of survival rates through an individual turbine.

As discussed in Section 5.2, physical exclusion of certain size classes of target species will occur

due to the 2.70-in trashrack bar spacing. An average blade strike survival rate was determined for

each of the 10 size intervals analyzed in the entrainment assessment. For example, the estimated

average survival rate of the 2.1- to 4-in length group of yellow perch is 98%. This was calculated

by averaging the individual blade strike survival rates for the 3- and 4-in fish length groups,

correlation factors, and points of entry. Figure 5-5 shows the average blade strike survival rates

(including range) used in the survival estimates of each length group. It has been suggested that

fish turbine mortality is more related to fish size than the type of species (Franke et al. 1997;

Winchell et al. 2000); therefore, the survival rates determined for each length group was deemed

transferable across species (e.g., a 4-in yellow perch has the same survival rate as a 4-in bass).

Analysis of 21 projects and 85 field trials with Kaplan-type turbines from the EPRI (1997a)

turbine passage survival database and several other empirical sources cited in Normandeau

(2012) showed similar high survival (Appendix I). Fish sizes investigated ranged from 3 to 29 in.

Figure 5-6 displays the immediate survival rates for these 85 trials compared with fish length.

Mean blade strike survival rates for fish from 3 to 29 in at the Project are also included. Figure 5-

7 provides both datasets compared to associated project specifications. Blade strike survival

estimates are comparable with empirically derived survival estimates determined at those

projects with similar specifications as the Project.



Average blade strike survival rates for each size interval per species were multiplied by the

species’ associated monthly entrainment estimates to determine immediate turbine mortality

estimates. For example, in October (for the POR) the mortality estimate for 2.1-in to 4-in yellow

perch was calculated by the following equation:

2,531 fish × 0.016 (average blade strike mortality rate of 2-in to 4-in fish) = 40

fish (rounded to the nearest ten)

This was performed for all size intervals of each species, in each month, and for the three

hydrology datasets. Mortality estimates up to the maximum size reported of a given species, or

for only those size intervals that cannot physically pass through the trashracks (whichever is less)

were summed for a species monthly survival estimate. This was done for each species, and then

all species estimates were summed for an overall monthly survival estimate (Figure 5-8).

The annual average number of fish that may experience immediate turbine-related mortality at

the Project is estimated at approximately 400 (Table 5-8) which equates to an average annual

survival rate of 98%. Based on water year, this number could range from 200 to 600 fish (Tables

5-9 and 5-10). The majority of the mortalities are small fish less than 6 in. Entrainment

mortalities will likely be the highest from spring to fall months, when fish are most active.

Bluegill and yellow perch showed the highest mortality due to high entrainment rates from

spring to fall and relatively high RC% in the Project area (Figure 5-9).



FIGURE 5-5 MEAN (RANGE) IMMEDIATE TURBINE SURVIVAL RATES DERIVED FROM BLADE STRIKE MODEL RUNS FOR

THE 10 SIZE INTERVALS

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

0-2 2.1-4 4.1-6 6.1-8 8.1-10 10.1-15 15.1-20 20.1-25 25.1-30 >30

Est

imat

ed S

urv

ival

(%

)




FIGURE 5-6 IMMEDIATE KAPLAN TURBINE SURVIVAL RATES DERIVED FROM EMPIRICAL BALLOON TAG STUDIES FROM VARIOUS SOURCES1 AND MEAN BLADE STRIKE SURVIVAL AT THE PROJECT; FISH SIZES RANGE

FROM 3 TO 29 IN LONG FOR BOTH

1EPRI (1997a) and several sources cited in Normandeau (2012)

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

105

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32

Est

imat

ed S

urvi

val

(%)

Fish Size (in)

Empirical Data Tomahawk Blade Strike



FIGURE 5-7 IMMEDIATE KAPLAN TURBINE SURVIVAL RATES DERIVED FROM EMPIRICAL BALLOON TAG STUDIES FROM VARIOUS SOURCES1 AND BLADE STRIKE SURVIVAL RANGE AT THE PROJECT COMPARED WITH

ASSOCIATED PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS; FISH SIZES RANGE FROM 3 TO 29 IN LONG FOR BOTH

1EPRI (1997a) and several sources cited in Normandeau (2012)

Est

imat

edS

urv

ival

(%

)

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

105

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30

Runner Diameter (ft)


70

75

80

85

90

95

100

105

0 4,000 8,000 12,000 16,000 20,000

Rated Flow (cfs)


70

75

80

85

90

95

100

105

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110

Rated Head (ft)


70

75

80

85

90

95

100

105

50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250

Rated Speed (rpm)




FIGURE 5-8 COMBINED MONTHLY MORTALITY ESTIMATES FOR ALL SPECIES AND ASSOCIATED GENERATION


0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1,000

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

January February March April May June July August September October November December

Nu

mbe

r of

Fis

h

1,00

0 cf

s-h

rsMonthly Mortality (POR) Annual Generation 1,000 cfs-hrs (POR) Annual Generation 1,000 cfs-hrs Min-Max (Dry-Wet Year)

57%

38%

1%

1%

2%

0% 0% 0%0%

0%0%

Annual Mortality Composition (POR)

Sunfish

Perch

Catfish

Pike

Suckers

Minnows

Bowfin

Burbot

Sculpin

Lamprey

Trout-perch



TABLE 5-8 SEASONAL AND ANNUAL MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON THE POR

(1982-2013)


Bluegill 1 68 34 101 204

Yellow perch 11 38 22 70 141

Black crappie 2 7 7 8 24

Walleye 3 5 11 5 24

White sucker 1 1 0 6 8

Rock Bass 1 2 1 4 8



Black bullhead 0 2 1 1 4


Yellow bullhead 0 0 1 0 2

Shorthead redhorse 0 0 0 0 1

Smallmouth bass 0 0 0 0 1



Largemouth bass 0 0 0 0 0

Silver redhorse 0 0 0 0 0


Bowfin 0 0 0 0 0

Golden shiner 0 0 0 0 0

Golden redhorse 0 0 0 0 0

Logperch 0 0 0 0 0


White crappie 0 0 0 0 0





Burbot 0 0 0 0 0







Johnny darter 0 0 0 0 0













Emerald shiner 0 0 0 0 0









Stonecat 0 0 0 0 0


Total 22 130 83 200 435



TABLE 5-9 SEASONAL AND ANNUAL MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON THE DRY

WATER YEAR (2009)


Bluegill 1 45 17 40 103

Yellow perch 6 25 12 29 72

Walleye 2 4 5 2 13


Rock Bass 0 1 1 2 4















Bowfin 0 0 0 0 0


Logperch 0 0 0 0 0







Burbot 0 0 0 0 0





























Stonecat 0 0 0 0 0


Total 11 85 43 82 222



TABLE 5-10 SEASONAL AND ANNUAL MORTALITY ESTIMATES BASED ON THE WET

WATER YEAR (1986)


Bluegill 2 80 41 176 298

Yellow perch 16 46 23 124 209


Walleye 4 5 12 8 30


Rock Bass 1 2 1 7 12












Bowfin 0 0 0 0 0




Logperch 0 0 0 0 0







Burbot 0 0 0 0 0





























Stonecat 0 0 0 0 0


Total 31 153 96 350 630



FIGURE 5-9 SEASONAL AND ANNUAL MORTALITY ESTIMATES FOR THE 10 SIZE INTERVALS OF

ALL SPECIES COMBINED


0

100

200

300

400

500

0-2 2.1-4 4.1-6 6.1-8 8.1-10 10.1-15 15.1-20 20.1-25 25.1-30 >30

Nu

mb

er o

f F

ish


Winter Mortality (POR) Spring Mortality (POR)Summer Mortality (POR) Fall Mortality (POR)Annual Mortality (POR) Annual Entrainment Min-Max (Dry-Wet Year)

9%

29%

49%

6%

3%3%

1%0% 0%

0%

Annual Mortality Composition (POR)

0-2

2.1-4

4.1-6

6.1-8

8.1-10

10.1-15

15.1-20

20.1-25

25.1-30

>30


Section 6

Conclusion and Study Plan Variances

Using a desktop study approach, the annual average number (including range based on water

year) of fish expected to become entrained at the Project is approximately 22,600 (11,700–

31,700). These estimates are based on species lists and relative composition data from the Upper

Reach of the mainstem Wisconsin River, empirically derived entrainment rates, 31-year USGS

hydrology, and the Project’s hydraulic capacity and operational specifications. Turbine mortality

estimates were derived using size specific blade strike model survival rates, multiplied by the

entrainment estimates for each size interval. The survival rates obtained using the blade strike

model compare well with empirically derived survival study findings at several projects with

similar specifications. The annual average number of fish to experience immediate turbine-

related mortality at the Project is approximately 400 (98% survival rate), with a range of 200 to

600 fish depending on water year.

Because latent mortality is difficult to quantify, no measure could be incorporated into the

mortality estimates at the Project. Research in this area has primarily focused on endangered

salmonids, where a 5% latent mortality rate has generally been accepted (National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration 2012). Including latent mortality, overall turbine survival for those

species and size classes estimated to become entrained would approximate 93%. These estimates

are fairly high due to the high immediate survival rates of fish less than 6 in, which represent the

majority of entrainment compositions.

This fish entrainment study was conducted in accordance with the FERC-approved study plan

with no variances.


Section 7

References

Beamish, F. W. H. 1978. Swimming capacity. Fish Physiology, Vol. VII: 101-187.

Beecham, R. V., P. R. Pearson, S. B. Labarre, and C. D. Minchew. 2009. Swimming

Performance and Metabolism of Golden Shiners. North American Journal of

Aquaculture. 71:59-63.

Bell, M. C. 1981. Updated compendium on the success of passage of small fish through turbines.

Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, North Pacific Division, Portland, OR.

–––––. 1991. Fisheries Handbook of Engineering Requirements and Biological Criteria.

Prepared for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, North Pacific Division, Fish Passage

Development and Evaluation Program, Portland, OR. Third Edition.

Cada, G. F., C. C. Coutant, and R. R. Whitney. 1997. Development of biological criteria for the

design of advanced hydropower turbines. DOE/ID-10578. Prepared for the U.S.

Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office, Idaho Falls, Idaho.

Carlander, K. D. 1977. Handbook of Freshwater Fishery Biology. The Iowa State University

Press, Ames 2:431.

Deng, Z., M. C. Richmond, G. R. Guensch, and R. P. Mueller. 2004. Study of fish response

using particle image velocimetry and high-speed, high-resolution imaging. Prepared for

U.S. Department of Energy by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland,

Washington.

Drucker, E. G. and G. V. Lauder. 1999. Locomotor forces on a swimming fish: three-

dimensional vortex wake dynamics quantified using digital particle image velocimetry. J.

Exp. Biol. 202, 2393-2412.

Eakins, R. J. 2014. Ontario Freshwater Fishes Life History Database. Version 4.47. On-line

database. (http://www.ontariofishes.ca), accessed 27 June 2014.

Section 7 References


Electric Power Research Institute. 1992. Fish entrainment and turbine mortality review and

guidelines. Prepared by Stone & Webster Environmental Services, Boston,

Massachusetts. EPRI Report No. TR-101231, Project 2694-01. September 1992.

–––––. 1997a. Turbine entrainment and survival database – field tests. Prepared by Alden

Research Laboratory, Inc., Holden, Massachusetts. EPRI Report No. TR-108630.

October 1997.

–––––. 1997b. Guidelines for hydro turbine fish entrainment and survival studies. Prepared by

Alden Research Laboratory, Inc., Holden, Massachusetts. EPRI Report No. TR-107299.

July 1997.

–––––. 2000. Technical evaluation of the utility of intake approach velocity as an indicator of

potential adverse environmental impact under Clean Water Act Section 316(b). Prepared

by Alden Research Laboratory, Inc., Holden, Massachusetts. EPRI Report No. TR-

1000731. December 2000.

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). 1995a. Preliminary assessment of fish

entrainment at hydropower projects, a report on studies and protective measures, volumes

1 and 2 (appendices). FERC Office of Hydropower Licensing, Washington, D.C. Paper

No. DPR-10. June 1995 volume 1) and December 1994 (volume 2).

–––––. 1995b. Final environmental assessment for hydropower license, Stevens Creek

Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 2535-South Carolina, Georgia. FERC Office of

Hydropower Licensing, Washington, D.C. November 7, 1995.

Franke, G. F., D. R. Webb, R. K. Fisher, Jr., D. Mathur, P. N. Hopping, P. A. March, M. R.

Headrick, I. T. Laczo, Y. Ventikos, and F. Sotiropoulos. 1997. Development of

environmentally advanced hydropower turbine system design concepts. Prepared for U.S.

Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office, Contract DE-AC07-94ID13223.

Gardner, A. N., G. D. Jennings, W. F. Hunt, and J. F. Gilliam. 2006. Non-anadromous fish

passage through road culverts. Paper No. 067034, Annual Meeting, American Society of

Agricultural and Biological Engineers, St. Joseph, MI.



GeoSyntec Consultants. 2005. Fish entrainment evaluation. Catawba-Wateree Project (FERC

No. 2232). Prepared for Devine Tarbell and Associates.

Hayes, D. B., J. R. Bence, T. J. Kwak, and B. E. Thompson. 2007. Abundance, biomass, and

production. Pages 327-374 in C. S. Guy and M. L. Brown, editors. Analysis and

interpretation of freshwater fisheries data. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda,

Maryland.

HDR Engineering, Inc. 2010a. Fish entrainment and mortality study. BOST3 Hydroelectric

Project (FERC No. 12756). Prepared for Nelson Energy and BOST3 Hydroelectric LLC,

Golden Valley, Minnesota. June 2010.

–––––. 2010b. Fish entrainment and mortality study. BOST4 Hydroelectric Project (FERC No.

12757). Prepared for Nelson Energy and BOST4 Hydroelectric LLC, Golden Valley,

Minnesota. June 2010.

–––––. 2010c. Fish entrainment and mortality study. BOST5 Hydroelectric Project (FERC No.

12758). Prepared for Nelson Energy and BOST5 Hydroelectric LLC, Golden Valley,

Minnesota. June 2010.

–––––. 2011. Turbine entrainment and mortality report. York Haven Hydroelectric Project

(FERC No. 1888). Prepared for York Haven Power Company, LLC, York Haven

Pennsylvania. April 2011.

–––––. 2012a. Fish entrainment report. Muskingum River Hydroelectric Projects (FERC Nos. P-

13412, P-13408, P-13411, P-13406, P-13404, P-13407, and P-13405). Prepared for Free

Flow Power Corporation, Boston, Massachusetts. March 2012.

–––––. 2012b. Fish entrainment report. Williams Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. P-13346).

Prepared for Free Flow Power Corporation, Boston, Massachusetts. June 2012.

–––––. 2012c. Fish entrainment and survival assessment. Braddock Locks and Dam

Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 13739). Prepared for Hydro Green Energy, LLC,

Westmont, Illinois. August 2012.



–––––. 2013. Fish entrainment study report. Yazoo River Basin Hydroelectric Projects (FERC

Nos. P-13702, P-13703, P-13701, and P-13704). Prepared for Free Flow Power

Corporation, Boston, Massachusetts. June 2013.

–––––. 2014. Fish entrainment and mortality study. (BOST1) Coon Rapids Dam Hydroelectric

Project (FERC No. 13458). Prepared for Nelson Energy and BOST1 Hydroelectric LLC,

Golden Valley, Minnesota. January 2014.

HDR|DTA. 2010a. Fish entrainment and impingement. Sutton Hydroelectric Project (FERC No.

12693). Prepared for Brookfield Renewable Power, Marlborough, Massachusetts. June

2010.

–––––. 2010b. Fish entrainment and survival assessment. Price Dam Hydroelectric Project

(FERC No. 12187). Prepared for Brookfield Renewable Power Inc., Syracuse, New

York. August 2010.

Heisey, P. G., D. Mathur, and T. Rineer. 1992. A reliable tag-recapture technique for estimating

turbine passage survival: application to young-of-the-year American shad (Alosa

sapidissima). Can. Jour. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 49:1826-1834.

Hocutt, C. H. 1973. Swimming performance of three warmwater fishes exposed to a rapid

temperature change. Chesapeake Science 14(1):11–16.

Houde, E. D. 1963. Sustained swimming ability of larvae of walleye (Stizostedion vitreum

vitreum) and yellow perch (Perca flavescens). J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada 26:1647-1659.

Jenkins, R. E. and N. M. Burkhead. 1993. Freshwater fishes of Virginia. American Fisheries

Society, Bethesda, Maryland.

Jones, D. R., J. W. Kiceniuk, and O. S. Bamford. 1974. Evaluation of the swimming

performance of several fish species from the Mackenzie River. J. Fish. Res. Bd.

King, L. R. 1969. Swimming speed of the channel catfish, white crappie, and other warm water

fishes from Conowingo Reservoir, Susquehanna River, PA. Ichthyological Associates,

Bulletin No. 4.



Kolok. A. S. 1991. Photoperiod alters the critical swimming speed of juvenile largemouth bass

(Micropterus salmoides) acclimated to cold water. Copeia 1991, 1085–1090.

Larimore R. W. and M. J. Duever. 1968. Effects of temperature acclimation on the swimming

ability of small-mouth bass fry. Trans Am Fish Soc 97:175–184.

Layher, W. G. 1993. Determining swimming speeds for darters of the genera Etheostoma and

two cyprinid fishes. Final Report. Challenge cost-share grant between the Ouchita

National Forest U.S.D.A. Forest Service and the University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff.

Lyons, J. 2005. Fish assemblage structure, composition, and biotic integrity of the Wisconsin

River. Pages 345-359 in J. N. Rinne, R. M. Hughes, and B. Calamusso, editors. Historical

changes in large river fish assemblages of the Americas. American Fisheries Society,

Symposium 45, Bethesda, Maryland.

Normandeau Associates, Inc. 2008. Desktop fish entrainment and impingement assessment.

Prepared for Appalachian Power Company. Smith Mountain Project (FERC Project No.

2210). 49 pp.

–––––. 2009. Fish entrainment and impingement assessment. Claytor Hydroelectric Project

(FERC Project No. 739). Prepared for Appalachian Power Company. 52 pp.

–––––. 2012. Direct Survival/Condition of Juvenile and Adult Rainbow Trout Passed through

Spillbay 2, an Existing Turbine (Unit 2), and a Newly Installed Turbine (Unit 4) at Box

Canyon Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 2042), Pend Oreille River, Washington.

Prepared for Public Utility District No. 1 of Pend Oreille County, Washington.

Odeh, M. 1999. A summary of environmentally friendly turbine design concepts. U.S.

Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office, DOE/ID/13741. July 1999.

Page, L. M., and B. M. Burr. 1991. A field guide to freshwater fishes of North America north of

Mexico. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, Massachusetts. 432 pp.

Peake, S., R. S. McKinley, and D. A. Scruton. 2000. Swimming performance of walleye

(Stizostedion vitreum). Can. J. Zool. 78:1686-1690.



Smiley, P. and G. R. Parsons. 1997. Effects of photoperiod and temperature on the swimming

performance of white crappie. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 126:495-

499.

Smith, C. L. 1985. The inland fishes of New York State. The New York State Department of

Environmental Conservation, Albany, New York.

University of Iowa. 2010. Upstream passage, fish swimming speeds: determination of the need

for fish passage at the proposed project. IIHR Hydroscience and Engineering. Iowa City,

Iowa. February 2010: Page 7.

University of Wisconsin Sea Grant Institute (2014). Website accessed in May 2014:

http://www.seagrant.wisc.edu/home/Default.aspx?tabid=604.

Webb, P. W. 1998. Swimming. In The Physiology of Fishes (ed. D. H. Evans), pp.3 -24. Boca

Raton: CRC Press.

Winchell, F., S. Amaral, and D. Dixon. 2000. Hydroelectric turbine entrainment and survival

database: an alternative to field studies. HydroVision Conference, August 8-11, 2000,

Charlotte, North Carolina.

WDNR Fish Mapping Application. 2014. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources map of

distribution of WI fish species. https://cida.usgs.gov/wdnr_fishmap/map/. Accessed in

May 2014.

Wisconsin Public Service Corporation. 2012. Pre-Application Document. Tomahawk

Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 1940). September 2012.

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendices

APPENDICES

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendix A

APPENDIX A

FISH SPECIES COLLECTED IN THE UPPER REACH OF THE

WISCONSIN RIVER

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendix A-1

1"Upper Reach" of the Wisconsin River defined by Lyons (2005) and extends from Wausau Dam upstream to Otter Rapids Dam (114 river miles); 2Total number of fish, or 'N' represents combined catch from multiple years (2000 to present) of collections for most water bodies, as reported in WDNR Fish Mapping Application (2014)

N RC% N RC% N RC% N RC% N RC% N RC% N RC% N RC% N RC% N RC% N RC% N RC% N RC% N RC% N RC% N RC% N RC% N RC% N RC%

Bowfins AmiidaeBowfin Amia calva 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 66 0.62% 82 0.76% 6 0.15% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 485 1.37% 167 2.60% 174 1.94% 137 2.15% 5 0.50% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Burbots GadidaeBurbot Lota lota 0 0.00% 2 0.02% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.01% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 3 0.05% 4 0.04% 1 0.02% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Carps and Minnows CyprinidaeCentral Stoneroller Campstoma anomalum 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.22% 0 0.00%Largescale Stoneroller Campstoma oligolepis 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 0.43% 0 0.00%Northern Redbelly Dace Chrosomus eos 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Southern Redbelly Dace Chrosomus erythrogaster 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Finescale Dace Chrosomus neogaeus 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.02% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Redside Dace Clinostomus elongatus 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Spotfin Shiner Cyprinella spiloptera 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 26 5.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 22 9.24% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Common Carp Cyprinus carpio 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 13 2.81% 32 7.06%Brassy Minnow Hybognathus hankinsoni 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 0.14% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.02% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Common Shiner Luxilus cornutus 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4 0.99% 16 1.12% 19 4.33% 1 0.01% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 26 8.90% 20 8.40% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 0.03% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.22% 0 0.00%Pearl Dace Margariscus nachtriebi 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Hornyhead Chub Nocomis biguttatus 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 64 4.47% 13 2.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 18 6.16% 3 1.26% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.02% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 21 4.55% 1 0.22%Golden Shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas 2 1.10% 15 0.11% 0 0.00% 2 0.14% 4 0.91% 34 0.32% 24 0.22% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 34 0.10% 12 0.19% 9 0.10% 63 0.99% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 3 0.66%Emerald Shiner Notropis atherinoides 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.22%River Shiner Notropis blennius 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.22% 0 0.00%Rosyface/Carmine Shiner Notropis rubellus 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 0.46% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 16 5.48% 3 1.26% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Sand Shiner Notropis stramineus 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Weed Shiner Notropis texanus 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4 0.88%Mimic Shiner Notropis volucellus 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.23% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 0.84% 0 0.00% 1 0.02% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Bluntnose Minnow Pimephales notatus 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 8 0.07% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4 1.68% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Fathead Minnow Pimephales promelas 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Western Blacknose Dace Rhinichthys atratulus 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Longnose Dace Rhinichthys cataractae 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Creek Chub Semotilus atromaculatus 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.02% 0 0.00% 5 0.08% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Lamprey PetromyzontidaeAmerican Brook Lamprey Lethenteron appendix 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.22%Chestnut Lamprey Icthyomyzon castaneus 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 6 1.48% 2 0.14% 2 0.46% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Northern Brook Lamprey Icthyomyzon fossor 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%North American Catfishes IctaluridaeBlack Bullhead Ameiurus melas 30 16.48% 181 1.38% 0 0.00% 2 0.14% 0 0.00% 2 0.02% 1 0.01% 2,352 58.32% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 18 0.05% 1,170 18.22% 2,141 23.86% 116 1.82% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Slender Madtom x Stonecat Noturus exilis x N. flavus 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.01% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Stonecat Noturus flavus 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4 0.04% 0 0.00% 8 0.80% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Yellow Bullhead Ameiurus natalis 0 0.00% 891 6.77% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 188 1.76% 543 5.02% 272 6.74% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.42% 194 0.55% 408 6.36% 1,055 11.76% 284 4.46% 5 0.50% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Channel Catfish Ictalurus punctatus 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Perch PercidaeRainbow Darter Etheostoma caeruleum 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 0.03% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Iowa Darter Etheostoma exile 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 0.02% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.02% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Fantail Darter Etheostoma flabellare 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4 0.06% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Johnny Darter Etheostoma nigrum 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 0.46% 3 0.03% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 6 0.09% 8 0.09% 4 0.06% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Yellow Perch Perca flavescens 69 37.91% 1,310 9.96% 14 3.45% 70 4.88% 37 8.43% 1,846 17.23% 2,465 22.79% 55 1.36% 0 0.00% 2 0.68% 2 0.84% 10,011 28.28% 429 6.68% 106 1.18% 457 7.18% 2 0.20% 0 0.00% 7 1.52% 7 1.55%Logperch Percina caprodes 14 7.69% 0 0.00% 26 6.40% 66 4.61% 46 10.48% 2 0.02% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 8 8.89% 12 4.11% 7 2.94% 0 0.00% 7 0.11% 5 0.06% 12 0.19% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 36 7.79% 8 1.77%Blackside Darter Percina maculata 6 3.30% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 0.03% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 29 6.28% 1 0.22%Slenderhead Darter Percina phoxocephala 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 18 4.43% 14 0.98% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 6 2.05% 2 0.84% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Walleye Sander vitreus 3 1.65% 6,317 48.03% 10 2.46% 894 62.39% 8 1.82% 231 2.16% 83 0.77% 327 8.11% 0 0.00% 42 14.38% 8 3.36% 5,112 14.44% 1,759 27.40% 907 10.11% 1,269 19.94% 76 7.55% 50 27.17% 62 13.42% 28 6.18%Pikes EsocidaeNorthern Pike Esox lucius 3 1.65% 862 6.55% 2 0.49% 40 2.79% 2 0.46% 504 4.71% 124 1.15% 519 12.87% 4 4.44% 4 1.37% 9 3.78% 1,427 4.03% 679 10.58% 622 6.93% 573 9.01% 227 22.56% 12 6.52% 8 1.73% 12 2.65%Northern Pike x Muskellunge Esox lucius x E. masquinongy 0 0.00% 2 0.02% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Muskellunge Esox masquinongy 1 0.55% 7 0.05% 4 0.99% 8 0.56% 2 0.46% 24 0.22% 15 0.14% 25 0.62% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 313 0.88% 16 0.25% 4 0.04% 45 0.71% 10 0.99% 8 4.35% 6 1.30% 5 1.10%Central Mudminnow Umbra limi 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 3 0.03% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Sculpins CottidaeMottled Sculpin Cottus bairdii 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.23% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.42% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.01% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Sticklebacks GasterosteidaeBrook Stickleback Culaea inconstans 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Suckers CatostomidaeNorthern Hog Sucker Hypentilium nigricans 0 0.00% 5 0.04% 56 13.79% 92 6.42% 93 21.18% 4 0.04% 0 0.00% 2 0.05% 20 22.22% 76 26.03% 37 15.55% 3 0.01% 0 0.00% 1 0.01% 21 0.33% 7 0.70% 0 0.00% 101 21.86% 48 10.60%Silver Redhorse Moxostoma anisurum 3 1.65% 49 0.37% 8 1.97% 2 0.14% 11 2.51% 117 1.09% 17 0.16% 5 0.12% 24 26.67% 14 4.79% 39 16.39% 48 0.14% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 522 8.20% 365 36.28% 0 0.00% 7 1.52% 151 33.33%River Redhorse Moxostoma carinathum 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 0.02% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Golden Redhorse Moxostoma erythrurum 0 0.00% 20 0.15% 36 8.87% 4 0.28% 12 2.73% 0 0.00% 1 0.01% 6 0.15% 4 4.44% 6 2.05% 31 13.03% 10 0.03% 3 0.05% 25 0.28% 7 0.11% 16 1.59% 0 0.00% 19 4.11% 0 0.00%Shorthead Redhorse Moxostoma macrolepidotum 5 2.75% 83 0.63% 108 26.60% 36 2.51% 95 21.64% 51 0.48% 5 0.05% 233 5.78% 12 13.33% 68 23.29% 9 3.78% 292 0.82% 90 1.40% 55 0.61% 211 3.31% 131 13.02% 0 0.00% 76 16.45% 34 7.51%Greater Redhorse Moxostoma valenciennesi 0 0.00% 1 0.01% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 0.02% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 126 1.97% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%White Sucker Catostmous commersoni 0 0.00% 208 1.58% 66 16.26% 34 2.37% 12 2.73% 54 0.50% 19 0.18% 28 0.69% 8 8.89% 0 0.00% 9 3.78% 100 0.28% 206 3.21% 107 1.19% 95 1.49% 7 0.70% 0 0.00% 4 0.87% 3 0.66%Sunfish CentrarchidaeBlack Crappie Pomoxis nigromaculatus 0 0.00% 1,882 14.31% 4 0.99% 28 1.95% 7 1.59% 592 5.53% 710 6.56% 51 1.26% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4,056 11.46% 241 3.75% 149 1.66% 175 2.75% 15 1.49% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Green Sunfish Lepomis cyanellus 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 0.01% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Pumpkinseed x Bluegill Lepomis gibbosus x L. macrochirus 0 0.00% 15 0.11% 0 0.00% 2 0.14% 0 0.00% 170 1.59% 238 2.20% 1 0.02% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 3 1.26% 62 0.18% 5 0.08% 19 0.21% 0 0.00% 1 0.10% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus 34 18.68% 629 4.78% 0 0.00% 8 0.56% 0 0.00% 5,837 54.49% 5,797 53.59% 8 0.20% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 15 6.30% 9,227 26.06% 879 13.69% 2,908 32.40% 1,343 21.11% 3 0.30% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides 8 4.40% 78 0.59% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 151 1.41% 108 1.00% 3 0.07% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 0.84% 44 0.12% 8 0.12% 1 0.01% 14 0.22% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus 2 1.10% 148 1.13% 18 4.43% 12 0.84% 6 1.37% 584 5.45% 490 4.53% 63 1.56% 6 6.67% 0 0.00% 5 2.10% 2,991 8.45% 145 2.26% 331 3.69% 459 7.21% 17 1.69% 0 0.00% 2 0.43% 1 0.22%Rock Bass Ambloplites rupestris 0 0.00% 166 1.26% 8 1.97% 22 1.54% 14 3.19% 184 1.72% 61 0.56% 49 1.21% 2 2.22% 2 0.68% 3 1.26% 574 1.62% 24 0.37% 0 0.00% 50 0.79% 38 3.78% 0 0.00% 1 0.22% 5 1.10%Smallmouth Bass Micropterus dolomieu 2 1.10% 279 2.12% 18 4.43% 13 0.91% 24 5.47% 52 0.49% 33 0.31% 28 0.69% 2 2.22% 0 0.00% 1 0.42% 266 0.75% 156 2.43% 327 3.64% 361 5.67% 72 7.16% 114 61.96% 65 14.07% 108 23.84%White Crappie Pomoxis annularis 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 129 0.36% 1 0.02% 1 0.01% 0 0.00% 1 0.10% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Trout SalmonidaeBrook Trout Salvelinus fontilalis 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Trout-Perch PercopsidaeTroutperch Percopsis omiscomaycus 0 0.00% 2 0.02% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 4 0.01% 4 0.06% 6 0.07% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

182 100% 13,152 100% 406 100% 1,433 100% 439 100% 10,712 100% 10,817 100% 4,033 100% 90 100% 292 100% 238 100% 35,401 100% 6,420 100% 8,974 100% 6,363 100% 1,006 100% 184 100% 462 100% 453 100%

Scientific Name

Wisconsin River Upstream from Wausau Dam at Confluence with

Trappe River

Wisconsin River Upstream from Wausau Dam Near Brokaw, WI

Wisconsin Upstream from Wausau Dam at

Wausau, WIHat Rapids Flowage

Wisconsin River at Headwaters of Rainbow

Flowage

Wisconsin River at Rainbow Flowage

Tailwaters

Wisconsin River Upstream from Two

Sisters Creek

Wisconsin River Near McNaughton

Wisconsin River Just Upstream from Crescent

Creek

Historcial fish community numbers and their relative composition (RC%) in the "Upper Reach" of the mainstem Wisconsin River (WVDNR 2014)1,2

Total

Alexander LakeWisconsin River

Inbetween Alexander and Merril Dams

Grandfather FlowageWisconsin River

Upstream from Lake Alice at Negro Island

Lake Mohawksin Grandmother FlowageWisconsin River Just

Downstream from Crescent Creek

Common Name Boom LakeRhinelander FlowageRainbow Flowage

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report

Appendix B

APPENDIX B

SWIM SPEED DATA

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendix B-1

Maximum Sustained

Prolonged (P) or Critical (C)

Burst (B) or Startle (S)

Blacknose Dace Adult 1.60-1.74 (SL) NA 1.01-1.51 NA 24 Nelson et al. (2003)Juvenile 0.98-1.57 (TL) 0.3-0.75 NA NA >15.5 Schuler (1968)Juvenile 1.54-1.73 (TL) 0.48-0.52 NA NA 26.1-29.4 King (1969)Juvenile 2.01-2.13 (TL) NA 0.92 NA 21 Beamish (1978)Adult 3.94-5.91 (TL) NA 1.22 (C) NA NA Gardner et al. (2006)Adult 6.02 (TL) NA NA 4.3 NA Webb (1998)Adult 7.99 (TL) 1.0 NA NA NA Deng et al. (2004)Adult NA 0.98 NA NA NA Drucker and Lauder (1999)

Blue Sucker Adult 26.20 (TL) NA 4.36 19.51 NA The University of Iowa (2010)

Brown Trout Adult/Juvenile 5.04-14.69 (TL) NA 3.02 NA NA Beamish (1978)

Central Stoneroller Adult/Juvenile 1.42-4.33 (TL) NA 0.92-1.76 NA NA Layher (1993)

Common Carp Juvenile 6.02 (TL) NA NA 2.76-4.59 NA Tsukamoto et al. (1975)Emerald Shiner Adult 2.5 (TL) NA 2.00 4.00 NA Bell (1991)Golden Shiner Adult 1.54-4.33 (TL) NA 1.01-2.34 NA NA Layher (1993)Greenside Darter Adult 1.57-2.68 (TL) NA 0.51-1.32 NA NA Layher (1993)

Hybrid Catfish (Female Channel Catfish x Male Blue Catfish

Juvenile 6.30-9.06 (TL) 1.31 3.94 NA NA Beecham et al. (2009)

Juvenile 3.5-4.72 (FL) NA 1.64 NA 25

Juvenile 3.5-4.72 (FL) NA 1.56 NA 25

Juvenile 3.5-4.72 (FL) NA 1.31 NA 25

Juvenile 3.5-4.72 (FL) NA 1.16 NA 25

Adult/Juvenile 2.32-5.35 (TL) NA 0.62 NA 17.9-20.1




Longnose Sucker Juvenile/Adult 3.9-16.0 (TL) NA NA 4.0-8.0 NA Bell (1991)Northern Pike Adult 4.72-24.41 (FL) NA 0.62-1.56 NA NA Jones et al. (1974)Pumpkinseed Adult 5.00 (TL) NA 1.22 NA 20 Brett and Sutherland (1965)

Fry 0.55 (TL) NA 13-19 L/sec NA NA Larimore and Deuver (1968)Fry 0.55 (TL) NA 0.60-0.87 NA NA Larimore and Deuver (1968)

Fry 0.79-0.98 (TL) NA <0.89 NA NALarimore and Deuver (1968) cited in Carlander (1977) and Houde (1963)

Juvenile 3.58-3.66 (TL) NA 1.3-1.8 (C) NA 13-23 Webb (1998)Adult 10.3-14.9 (TL) NA 1.6-3.9 (C) NA 15-20 Bunt et al. (1999)

Spotfin Shiner Adult 2.95-3.31 (TL) NA 8.60 L/sec NA 30 Hocutt (1973) - relative swim speedFry 0.51 (TL) NA NA 0.36-0.60 NAFry 0.98 (TL) NA NA 0.52-1.00 NAJuvenile 2.01 (TL) NA NA 1.10-2.00 NAJuvenile 5.00 (TL) NA NA 2.10-5.00 NA

0.51 (TL) NA 0.23 NA 22.50.64 (TL) NA 0.35 NA 24.20.80 (TL) NA 0.38 NA 25.5

Fry 0.47 (TL) 0.16 NA NA 18.3 Houde (1963)Fry 0.78 (TL) 0.25 NA NA 13.0 Houde (1963)Juvenile 3.15 (FL) NA 1.24 (C) NA 18.0-20.0 Jones et al. (1974)Juvenile 6.3 (FL) NA NA 6.02 (S) NA Peake et al. (2000)Adult 13.78 (FL) NA NA 7.20 (S) NA Peake et al. (2000)Adult 14.96 (FL) NA 2.74 (C) NA NA Peake et al. (2000)Adult 22.44 (FL) NA NA 8.57 (S) NA Peake et al. (2000)Juvenile 2.17-3.94 (FL) 0.50-0.75 NA NA 21.1-28.3 Schuler (1968)Juvenile 2.95-3.19 (FL) 0.54-0.61 NA NA 24.4-26.1 King (1969)Juvenile 3.03 (TL) NA 0.52 (C) NA 25 Smiley and Parsons (1997)Juvenile 3.03 (TL) NA 0.18 (C) NA 5 Smiley and Parsons (1997)

White Sucker Adult 6.69-14.57 (FL) NA 2.48 NA 12-19 Hunter and Mayor (1986)

Reutz and Jennings 2000

Farlinger and Beamish (1977)

Layher (1993)

Bell (1991)

TL/FL/SL (in)Swim Speed (ft/s) Tested

Temperature (C)

ReferencesSpecies

Largemouth Bass

Smallmouth Bass

Walleye

Longear Sunfish

Striped Bass

Robust Redhorse Larval/Fry

Life Stage

White Crappie

Bluegill

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report

Appendix C

APPENDIX C

SPAWNING AND EARLY LIFE STAGE PERIODICITIES

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendix C-1

Souce: Eakins (2014)

Eggs and Larvae (estimated to begin two-thirds of the way through the spawning period and lasting 60 days post spawn)

River Shiner

Rock Bass

Rosyface/Carmine Shiner

Shorthead Redhorse

Silver Redhorse

Slender Madtom x Stonecat

Slenderhead Darter

White crappie

Stonecat

Troutperch

Walleye

Weed Shiner

Spawning Period

White sucker

Yellow bullhead

Yellow perch

Pumpkinseed

Pumpkinseed x Bluegill

Rainbow Darter

River Redhorse

Smallmouth Bass

Spotfin Shiner

Northern Pike x Muskellunge

Hornyhead Chub

Iowa Darter

Johnny Darter

Largemouth Bass

Largescale Stoneroller

Logperch

Mimic Shiner

Mottled Sculpin

Muskellunge

Northern Hog Sucker

Northern Pike

Brassy Minnow

Burbot

Central Mudminnow

Green Sunfish

Channel Catfish

Chestnut Lamprey

Common Carp

Common Shiner

Creek Chub

Emerald Shiner

Fantail Darter

Finescale Dace

Golden Redhorse

Golden Shiner

Greater Redhorse

Species Jan Feb

Bluntnose Minnow

Bowfin

Mar Apr May

Central Stoneroller

Dec

American Brook Lamprey

Black Bullhead

Black Crappie

Blackside Darter

Bluegill

Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendix D

APPENDIX D

FORTY-THREE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTS USED IN THE

ENTRAINMENT ASSESSMENT (EPRI 1997A)

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendix D-1

Site Name State River

Reservoir Total Plant

Capacity (cfs)

Hydraulic Capacity of

Sampled Units (cfs)

No. Units

Operating Mode

Avg. Velocity at Trash

Rack (ft/sec)

Trash Rack Clear

Spacing (in)

Area (ac)

Volume (ac-ft)

Belding MI Flat - - 416 416 2 - - 2.00

Bond Falls MI W.B. Ontonagon - - 900 450 2 PK - 3.00

Brule WI Brule 545 8,880 1,377 916 3 PK-partial 1.00 1.62

Buzzard's Roost SC Saluda 11,404 270,000 3,930 1,310 3 - - 3.63

Caldron Falls WI Peshtigo 1,180 - 1,300 650 2 PK - 2.00

Centralia WI Wisconsin 250 - 3,640 550 6 ROR 2.30 3.50

Colton NY Raquette 195 620 1,503 450 3 PK - 2.00

Crowley WI N.F. Flambeau 422 3,539 2,400 1,200 2 ROR 1.40 2.38

E. J. West NY Sacandaga 25,940 792,000 5,400 5,400 2 - - 4.50

Feeder Dam NY Hudson - - 5,000 2,000 5 PK - 2.75

Four Mile Dam MI Thunder Bay 1,112 2,500 1,500 500 3 ROR - 2.00

Gaston Shoals SC Broad 300 2,500 2,211 837 3 - - 1.50

Grand Rapids MI/WI Menominee 250 - 3,870 2,216 5 ROR - 1.75

Herrings NY Black 140 - 3,610 1,203 3 ROR - 4.13 High Falls - Beaver River

NY Beaver 145 1,058 900 300 3 - 0.70 1.81

Higley NY Raquette 742 4,446 2,045 2,045 3 PK - 3.63

Hillman Dam MI Thunder Bay 988 1,600 270 270 1 ROR - 3.25 Hollidays Bridge*

SC Saluda 466 6,000 4,396 370 4 - - -

Johnsonville NY Hoosic 450 6,430 1,288 1,288 2 PK - 2.00

Kleber MI Black 270 3,000 400 400 2 ROR 1.41 3.00

Lake Algonquin NY Sacandaga - - 750 750 1 - - 1.00

Luray VA S.F. Shenandoah - - 1,477 369 3 ROR - 2.75

Minetto NY Oswego 350 4,730 7,500 4,500 5 PULSE 2.40 2.50

Moshier NY Beaver 365 7,339 660 660 2 PK - 1.50 Ninety-Nine Islands

SC Broad 433 2,300 4,800 584 6 - - 1.50

Ninth Street Dam

MI Thunder Bay 9,884 2,600 1,650 550 3 ROR - 1.00

Norway Point Dam

MI Thunder Bay 10,502 3,800 1,775 575 2 ROR - 1.69

Potato Rapids WI Peshtigo 288 - 1,380 500 3 ROR - 1.75

Raymondville NY Raquette 50 264 1,640 1,640 1 PK - 2.25 Richard B. Russell

GA/SC Savannah 31,770 1,297,513 60,000 7,200 8 PK - 8.00

Saluda SC Saluda 556 7,228 812 227 4 - - Sandstone Rapids

WI Peshtigo 150 - 1,300 650 2 PK - 1.75

Schaghticoke NY Hoosic 164 1,150 1,640 1,640 4 ROR - 2.13

Shawano WI Wolf 155 1,090 850 850 1 ROR - 5.00

Sherman Island NY Hudson 305 6,960 6,600 4,950 4 PK - 3.13

Thornapple WI Flambeau 295 1,000 1,400 700 2 ROR-mod 1.22 1.69

Tower MI Black 102 620 404 404 2 ROR 0.82 1.00

Townsend Dam PA Beaver - - 4,400 4,400 2 ROR - 5.50

Twin Branch IA St. Joseph 1,065 - 3,200 1,200 - ROR - 3.00

Warrensburg NY Schroon - - 1,350 1,350 1 - - -

White Rapids MI/WI Menominee 435 5,155 3,994 3,994 3 PK-partial 1.90 2.50 Wisconsin River Division

WI Wisconsin 240 1,120 5150 5,150 10 ROR 1.40 2.19

Youghiogheny PA Youghiogheny 2,840 149,300 1,600 1,600 2 ROR 0.70 10.00

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendix E

APPENDIX E

MONTHLY AVERAGE ENTRAINMENT RATES (EPRI 1997A)

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendix E-1

JANUARY Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity

0-2 2.1-4 4.1-6 6.1-8 8.1-10 10.1-15 15.1-20 20.1-25 25.1-30 >30 American Brook Lamprey 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0286 0.0188 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Black Bullhead 0.0000 0.0855 0.0000 0.0000 0.0091 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Black Crappie 0.0437 0.0327 0.0380 0.0564 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Blackside Darter 0.0000 0.2595 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Bluegill 0.0119 0.0074 0.0190 0.0190 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Bluntnose Minnow 0.0000 0.2389 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Bowfin 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Brassy Minnow 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Burbot 0.0000 0.0000 0.0121 0.1978 0.2118 0.3033 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Central Mudminnow 0.0330 0.0405 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Central Stoneroller 0.0000 0.7295 0.5814 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Channel Catfish 0.0000 1.0784 0.0476 0.0000 0.0000 0.0761 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Chestnut Lamprey 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0286 0.0188 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Common Carp 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0186 0.0476 0.0000 0.0000 Common Shiner 0.0000 0.5467 0.2197 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Creek Chub 0.0000 0.9083 0.2595 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Emerald Shiner 0.0935 0.2159 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Fantail Darter 0.0000 0.0065 0.0074 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Finescale Dace 0.0000 0.1258 0.0649 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Golden Redhorse 0.0000 0.0106 0.0018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0023 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Golden Shiner 0.0044 0.2739 0.0849 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Greater Redhorse 0.0000 0.0106 0.0018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0023 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Green Sunfish 0.0704 0.0337 0.0122 0.0057 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Hornyhead Chub 0.0000 0.1258 0.0649 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Iowa Darter 0.0000 0.0065 0.0074 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Johnny Darter 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Largemouth Bass 0.0000 0.1135 0.0869 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0381 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Largescale Stoneroller 0.0000 0.7295 0.5814 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Logperch 0.0000 0.0199 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mimic Shiner 0.0000 0.0182 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Mottled Sculpin 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Muskellunge 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000


JANUARY Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity

0-2 2.1-4 4.1-6 6.1-8 8.1-10 10.1-15 15.1-20 20.1-25 25.1-30 >30 Northern Hog Sucker 0.0000 0.0241 0.0433 0.3893 0.1807 0.1946 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Northern Pike 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Northern Pike x Muskellunge 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Pumpkinseed 0.0080 0.0499 0.0130 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Pumpkinseed x Bluegill 0.0094 0.0340 0.0152 0.0071 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Rainbow Darter 0.0000 0.0065 0.0074 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 River Redhorse 0.0000 0.0106 0.0018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0023 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 River Shiner 0.0336 0.0918 0.0016 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Rock Bass 0.5664 0.1917 0.0634 0.0058 0.0072 0.0012 0.0004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Rosyface/Carmine Shiner 0.0000 0.1713 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Shorthead Redhorse 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0231 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Silver Redhorse 0.0000 0.0106 0.0018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0023 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Slender Madtom x Stonecat 0.0000 0.0401 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Slenderhead Darter 0.0000 0.1397 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Smallmouth Bass 0.0324 0.0046 0.0114 0.0130 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Spotfin Shiner 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Stonecat 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Troutperch 0.0000 0.9296 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Walleye 0.0129 0.0030 0.0089 0.0129 0.1285 0.0531 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Weed Shiner 0.0336 0.0918 0.0016 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 White Crappie 0.0218 0.0368 0.0000 0.0000 0.0025 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 White Sucker 0.0180 0.2525 0.3276 0.2207 0.1545 0.1334 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Yellow Bullhead 0.0040 0.0265 0.0296 0.0000 0.0187 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Yellow Perch 0.0000 0.5908 0.3794 0.0395 0.0010 0.0045 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000


FEBRUARY Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



FEBRUARY Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



MARCH Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



MARCH Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



APRIL Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



APRIL Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



MAY Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



MAY Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



JUNE Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



JUNE Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



JULY Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



JULY Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



AUGUST Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



AUGUST Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



SEPTEMBER Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



SEPTEMBER Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



OCTOBER Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



OCTOBER Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



NOVEMBER Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



NOVEMBER Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



DECEMBER Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity



DECEMBER Average No. Fish/Hr/1,000 cfs Unit Capacity


Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendix F

APPENDIX F

FLOW ROUTING AND GENERATION AMOUNTS

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendix F-1

January February March April May June July August September October November DecemberMedian Flow (cfs) 1,500 1,427 1,534 2,133 1,764 1,405 1,221 1,173 1,240 1,290 1,446 1,518Minimum Spill/Bypass flow (cfs) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Turbine Flow (cfs) 1,500 1,427 1,534 2,133 1,764 1,405 1,221 1,173 1,240 1,290 1,446 1,518Additional Spill (cfs) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Exceedance Volume at Maximum Operating flow 1,528 1,471 1,636 1,904 1,749 1,519 1,281 1,215 1,293 1,441 1,544 1,574Exceedance Volume at Minimum Operating flow 162 162 162 162 162 162 162 162 162 162 162 162Total Exceedance Volume 1,366 1,309 1,474 1,742 1,587 1,357 1,119 1,053 1,131 1,279 1,382 1,412Percent of Possible Volume 54.2% 52.0% 58.5% 69.1% 63.0% 53.9% 44.4% 41.8% 44.9% 50.8% 54.8% 56.0%Million Cubic Feet 3,658 3,168 3,948 4,515 4,250 3,518 2,996 2,820 2,932 3,427 3,582 3,7821,000 cfs hours 1,016 880 1,097 1,254 1,181 977 832 783 814 952 995 1,051

January February March April May June July August September October November DecemberMedian Flow (cfs) 862 946 1,017 1,085 1,349 904 671 669 585 698 802 825Minimum Spill/Bypass flow (cfs) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Turbine Flow (cfs) 862 946 1,017 1,085 1,349 904 671 669 585 698 802 825Additional Spill (cfs) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Exceedance Volume at Maximum Operating flow 877 932 1,051 1,242 1,429 926 687 699 593 709 789 830Exceedance Volume at Minimum Operating flow 162 162 162 162 162 162 162 162 162 162 162 162Total Exceedance Volume 715 770 889 1,080 1,267 764 525 537 431 547 627 668Percent of Possible Volume 28.4% 30.6% 35.3% 42.9% 50.3% 30.3% 20.8% 21.3% 17.1% 21.7% 24.9% 26.5%Million Cubic Feet 1,915 1,864 2,380 2,800 3,395 1,979 1,405 1,439 1,117 1,465 1,624 1,7881,000 cfs hours 532 518 661 778 943 550 390 400 310 407 451 497

January February March April May June July August September October November DecemberMedian Flow (cfs) 2,168 2,093 2,252 2,634 1,470 1,118 1,501 1,564 2,391 3,272 2,121 2,010Minimum Spill/Bypass flow (cfs) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Turbine Flow (cfs) 2,168 2,093 2,252 2,520 1,470 1,118 1,501 1,564 2,391 2,520 2,121 2,010Additional Spill (cfs) 0 0 0 114 0 0 0 0 0 752 0 0Exceedance Volume at Maximum Operating flow 2,155 2,098 2,262 2,324 1,554 1,282 1,633 1,573 2,124 2,464 2,139 1,993Exceedance Volume at Minimum Operating flow 162 162 162 162 162 162 162 162 162 162 162 162Total Exceedance Volume 1,993 1,936 2,100 2,162 1,392 1,120 1,471 1,411 1,962 2,302 1,977 1,831Percent of Possible Volume 79.1% 76.8% 83.3% 85.8% 55.2% 44.4% 58.4% 56.0% 77.8% 91.4% 78.5% 72.7%Million Cubic Feet 5,337 4,684 5,626 5,603 3,729 2,903 3,941 3,778 5,084 6,166 5,125 4,9051,000 cfs hours 1,483 1,301 1,563 1,556 1,036 806 1,095 1,050 1,412 1,713 1,424 1,362

Dry Year 2009

Wet Year 1986

Period of Record (1982-2013)

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendix G

APPENDIX G

ESTIMATED GENERATION FOR THE POR, DRY, AND WET WATER

YEARS AND TOMAHAWK OPERATIONS RECORDS FROM 2001-2013

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendix G-1

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,8001,

000

cfs-

hrs

2001

POR DRY WET 2001 Ops

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

1,00

0 cf

s-h

rs

2002



0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,8001,

000

cfs-

hrs

2003


0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

1,00

0 cf

s-h

rs

2004



0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,8001,

000

cfs-

hrs

2005


0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

1,00

0 cf

s-h

rs

2006



0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,8001,

000

cfs-

hrs

2007


0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

1,00

0 cf

s-h

rs

2008



0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,8001,

000

cfs-

hrs

2009


0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

1,00

0 cf

s-h

rs

2010



0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,8001,

000

cfs-

hrs

2011


0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

1,00

0 cf

s-h

rs

2012



0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,8001,

000

cfs-

hrs

2013

POR DRY WET 2013 Operations Records

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendix H

APPENDIX H

BLADE STRIKE RESULTS

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendix H-1

Fish Length

(in)

Edge of Hub = 0.375 Mid-Blade = 0.687 Blade Tip = 1.00 AVG

0.10 0.20 0.10 0.20 0.10 0.20

1 99.52% 99.04% 99.59% 99.18% 99.61% 99.21% 99.36%

2 99.04% 98.08% 99.18% 98.36% 99.21% 98.42% 98.72%

3 98.56% 97.12% 98.77% 97.53% 98.82% 97.64% 98.07%

4 98.08% 96.16% 98.36% 96.71% 98.42% 96.85% 97.43%

5 97.60% 95.20% 97.94% 95.89% 98.03% 96.06% 96.79%

6 97.12% 94.24% 97.53% 95.07% 97.64% 95.27% 96.15%

7 96.64% 93.28% 97.12% 94.25% 97.24% 94.48% 95.50%

8 96.16% 92.32% 96.71% 93.42% 96.85% 93.70% 94.86%

9 95.68% 91.36% 96.30% 92.60% 96.45% 92.91% 94.22%

10 95.20% 90.40% 95.89% 91.78% 96.06% 92.12% 93.58%

11 94.72% 89.44% 95.48% 90.96% 95.67% 91.33% 92.93%

12 94.24% 88.48% 95.07% 90.14% 95.27% 90.54% 92.29%

13 93.76% 87.52% 94.66% 89.31% 94.88% 89.75% 91.65%

14 93.28% 86.56% 94.25% 88.49% 94.48% 88.97% 91.01%

15 92.80% 85.60% 93.83% 87.67% 94.09% 88.18% 90.36%

16 92.32% 84.64% 93.42% 86.85% 93.70% 87.39% 89.72%

17 91.84% 83.69% 93.01% 86.03% 93.30% 86.60% 89.08%

18 91.36% 82.73% 92.60% 85.20% 92.91% 85.81% 88.44%

19 90.88% 81.77% 92.19% 84.38% 92.51% 85.03% 87.79%

20 90.40% 80.81% 91.78% 83.56% 92.12% 84.24% 87.15%

21 89.92% 79.85% 91.37% 82.74% 91.73% 83.45% 86.51%

22 89.44% 78.89% 90.96% 81.92% 91.33% 82.66% 85.87%

23 88.96% 77.93% 90.55% 81.09% 90.94% 81.87% 85.22%

24 88.48% 76.97% 90.14% 80.27% 90.54% 81.09% 84.58%

25 88.00% 76.01% 89.72% 79.45% 90.15% 80.30% 83.94%

26 87.52% 75.05% 89.31% 78.63% 89.75% 79.51% 83.30%

27 87.04% 74.09% 88.90% 77.81% 89.36% 78.72% 82.65%

28 86.56% 73.13% 88.49% 76.98% 88.97% 77.93% 82.01%

29 86.08% 72.17% 88.08% 76.16% 88.57% 77.15% 81.37%

30 85.60% 71.21% 87.67% 75.34% 88.18% 76.36% 80.73%

31 85.12% 70.25% 87.26% 74.52% 87.78% 75.57% 80.08%

32 84.64% 69.29% 86.85% 73.70% 87.39% 74.78% 79.44%

33 84.17% 68.33% 86.44% 72.87% 87.00% 73.99% 78.80%

34 83.69% 67.37% 86.03% 72.05% 86.60% 73.21% 78.16%

35 83.21% 66.41% 85.61% 71.23% 86.21% 72.42% 77.51%

36 82.73% 65.45% 85.20% 70.41% 85.81% 71.63% 76.87%

AVG 91.36% 82.73% 92.60% 85.20% 92.91% 85.81% 88.44%

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendix I

APPENDIX I

EMPIRICAL SURVIVAL RESULTS AT 21 PROJECTS AND 85 FIELD

TRIALS WITH KAPLAN-TYPE TURBINES

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendix I-1

Site Method Species Average size (in) Turbine Type No. of Blades

Runner Speed (rpm)

Runner Diamter

(in)

Runner Diamter

ft)

Peripheral Runner Velocity

(ft/s)

Test Discharge-

Rated Flow (cfs)

Project Head (ft)

1H Survival

48H Survival

Beaucaire Balloon Tag European eel 27.2 Bulb 4 94 245.7 20.5 100.7 11,150 45 0.955 0.946 Beaucaire Balloon Tag European eel 27.2 Bulb 4 94 245.7 20.5 100.7 10,900 45 0.957 0.920 Beaucaire Balloon Tag European eel 27.2 Bulb 4 94 245.7 20.5 100.7 11,050 45 0.956 0.930 Bonneville, P-1 Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 6.5 Kaplan 5 75 280 23.3 91.7 9,100 57 0.938 0.933 Bonneville, P-1 Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 6.5 Kaplan 5 75 280 23.3 91.7 9,100 57 0.969 0.961 Bonneville, P-1 Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 6.5 Kaplan 5 75 280 23.3 91.7 9,100 57 0.992 0.992 Bonneville, P-1 Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 6.5 Kaplan MGR 5 75 280 23.3 91.7 9,100 57 0.957 0.952 Bonneville, P-1 Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 6.5 Kaplan MGR 5 75 280 23.3 91.7 9,100 57 0.975 0.963 Bonneville, P-1 Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 6.5 Kaplan MGR 5 75 280 23.3 91.7 9,100 57 0.982 0.980 Buzzards Roost Balloon Tag bluegill 4.9 Vertical Kaplan 240 0.0 1,310 55 0.931 0.759 Buzzards Roost Balloon Tag bluegill 4.9 Vertical Kaplan 240 0.0 1,310 55 0.960 2.704 Buzzards Roost Balloon Tag bluegill 4.9 Vertical Kaplan 240 0.0 1,310 55 0.931 1.000 Buzzards Roost Balloon Tag bluegill 5.9 Vertical Kaplan 240 0.0 1,310 55 1.000 0.870 Buzzards Roost Balloon Tag bluegill 5.9 Vertical Kaplan 240 0.0 1,310 55 0.893 3.375 Buzzards Roost Balloon Tag white perch 5.9 Vertical Kaplan 240 0.0 1,310 55 0.923 Buzzards Roost Balloon Tag bluegill 5.9 Vertical Kaplan 240 0.0 1,310 55 0.931 1.000 Buzzards Roost Balloon Tag bullhead spp 7.4 Vertical Kaplan 240 0.0 1,310 55 1.000 1.000 Buzzards Roost Balloon Tag bullhead spp 7.4 Vertical Kaplan 240 0.0 1,310 55 0.963 0.963 Buzzards Roost Balloon Tag bullhead spp 10.3 Vertical Kaplan 240 0.0 1,310 55 0.774 0.774 Chalk Hill Balloon Tag bluegill 4.2 Vertical Kaplan 4 150 102 8.5 66.7 1,331 28 0.969 0.969 Chalk Hill Balloon Tag white sucker/rainbow trout 5.2 Vertical Kaplan 4 0.0 0.912 0.923 Chalk Hill Balloon Tag bluegill 5.3 Vertical Kaplan 4 0.0 0.974 1.000 Chalk Hill Balloon Tag white sucker/rainbow trout 8.9 Vertical Kaplan 4 0.0 0.974 0.896 Crescent Balloon Tag blueback herring 3.4 Kaplan 5 144 108 9.0 67.8 1,520 27 0.960 1.000 Fessenheim Balloon Tag European eel 27.7 Kaplan 4 88 262.5 21.9 101 12,700 50 0.939 0.953 Fessenheim Balloon Tag European eel 27.7 Kaplan 4 88 262.5 21.9 101 13,000 50 0.901 0.881 Fessenheim Balloon Tag European eel 27.7 Kaplan 4 88 262.5 21.9 101 12,400 50 0.956 0.936 Fessenheim Balloon Tag European eel 27.7 Kaplan 4 88 262.5 21.9 101 12,800 50 0.932 0.924 Hadley Falls Balloon Tag american shad 3.2 Kaplan 5 128 170 14.2 94.9 4,000 50 1.000 1.000 Hadley Falls Balloon Tag american shad 3.3 Kaplan 5 128 170 14.2 94.9 4,000 50 0.973 0.286 Ice Harbor Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 5.5 Kaplan 6 90 280 23.3 110 11,350 95.95 0.939 0.961 John Day Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 5.4 Kaplan 6 90 312 26.0 122.6 15,850 102.55 0.956 0.947 John Day Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 5.4 Kaplan 6 90 312 26.0 122.6 11,800 102.55 0.948 John Day Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 5.4 Kaplan 6 90 312 26.0 122.6 16,600 102.55 0.934 John Day Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 5.4 Kaplan 6 90 312 26.0 122.6 19,900 102.55 0.959 Lower Granite Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 5.9 Kaplan 6 90 312 26.0 122.6 18,000 98 0.953 0.936 (120 h) Lower Granite Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 5.9 Kaplan 6 90 312 26.0 122.6 13,500 98 0.972 0.972 (120 h) Lower Granite Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 5.9 Kaplan 6 90 312 26.0 122.6 19,000 98 0.946 0.941 (120 h) Lower Granite Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 5.9 Kaplan 6 90 312 26.0 122.6 18,000 98 0.975 0.940 (120 h) Lower Granite Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 5.9 Kaplan 6 90 312 26.0 122.6 18,000 98 0.975 0.954 (120 h) Lower Granite Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 5.9 Kaplan 6 90 312 26.0 122.6 18,000 98 0.949 0.949 (120 h) McNary Dam Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 5.9 Kaplan 6 85.7 280 23.3 104.7 12,150 73 0.954 0.951 McNary Dam Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 6.1 Kaplan 6 85.7 280 23.3 104.7 12,400 73 0.927 McNary Dam Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 6.1 Kaplan 6 85.7 280 23.3 104.7 12,400 73 0.916

Tomahawk Project (FERC No. 1940) Fish Entrainment Mortality Study Report Appendix I-2

Site Method Species Average size (in) Turbine Type No. of Blades

Runner Speed (rpm)

Runner Diamter

(in)

Runner Diamter

ft)

Peripheral Runner Velocity

(ft/s)

Test Discharge-

Rated Flow (cfs)

Project Head (ft)

1H Survival

48H Survival

McNary Dam Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 6.1 Kaplan 6 85.7 280 23.3 104.7 12,400 73 0.909 McNary Dam Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 6.1 Kaplan 6 85.7 280 23.3 104.7 12,400 73 0.924 Ottmarsheim Balloon Tag European eel 29.5 Kaplan 5 94 246 20.5 100.7 11,300 51 0.869 0.818 Ottmarsheim Balloon Tag European eel 29.5 Kaplan 5 94 246 20.5 100.7 11,050 51 0.780 0.760 Ottmarsheim Balloon Tag European eel 29.5 Kaplan 5 94 246 20.5 100.7 11,100 51 0.830 0.820 Ottmarsheim Balloon Tag European eel 29.5 Kaplan 5 94 246 20.5 100.7 11,150 51 0.826 0.799 Priest Rapids Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 6.1 Kaplan 6 85.7 284 23.7 106.2 13,000 78 0.966 0.961 Priest Rapids Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 6.1 Kaplan 6 85.7 284 23.7 106.2 13,000 78 0.965 0.965 Rock Island, P-1 Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 7.0 Kaplan 6 100 226 18.8 98.7 8,000 42 0.979 0.971 Rock Island, P-1 Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 7.0 Kaplan 6 100 226 18.8 98.7 8,000 40.5 0.957 0.950 Rock Island, P-2 Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 7.0 Bulb turbine 4 86 276 23.0 103.3 16,900 39 0.964 0.964 Rock Island, P-2 Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 7.0 Bulb turbine 4 86 276 23.0 103.3 16,900 39 0.957 0.950 Rocky Reach Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 6.3 Kaplan 6 90 280 23.3 110 92 0.947 0.930 Rocky Reach Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 6.3 Kaplan 6 90 280 23.3 110 92 0.939 0.947 Rocky Reach Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 7.2 Kaplan 6 90 280 23.3 110 12,000 92 0.979 0.973 Rocky Reach Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 7.2 Kaplan 6 90 280 23.3 110 12,000 92 0.952 0.944 Rocky Reach Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 7.2 Imp . Kaplan 6 90 280 23.3 110 12,000 92 0.954 0.942 Rocky Reach Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 7.2 Imp . Kaplan 6 90 280 23.3 110 12,000 92 0.963 0.958 Rocky Reach Balloon Tag Chinook Salmon 7.2 Imp . Kaplan 6 90 280 23.3 110 8,000 92 Safe Harbor Balloon Tag American shad 4.6 Kaplan 5 109.1 220 18.3 104.7 8,300 55 0.980 0.970 Safe Harbor Balloon Tag Adult American shad 16.7 Kaplan 5 109.1 220 18.3 104.7 8,300 55 0.897 0.882 Townsend Dam Balloon Tag largemouth bass 4.0 Horizontal Kaplan 3 152 113 9.4 75 2,200 16 1.000 1.000 Townsend Dam Balloon Tag rainbow trout 5.5 Horizontal Kaplan 3 152 113 9.4 75 2,200 16 0.944 Townsend Dam Balloon Tag largemouth bass 8.5 Horizontal Kaplan 3 152 113 9.4 75 2,200 16 0.860 0.860 Townsend Dam Balloon Tag rainbow trout 13.5 Horizontal Kaplan 3 152 113 9.4 75 2,200 16 1.000 1.000 Wanapum Balloon Tag Coho Salmon 6.0 Kaplan 5 85.7 285 23.8 106.5 17,000 80 1.000 1.000 Wanapum Balloon Tag Coho Salmon 6.0 Kaplan 5 85.7 285 23.8 106.5 17,000 80 0.948 0.948 Wanapum Balloon Tag Coho Salmon 6.1 Kaplan 5 85.7 285 23.8 106.5 17,000 80 0.968 0.975 Wanapum Balloon Tag Coho salmon 6.1 Kaplan 5 85.7 285 23.8 106.6 13,000 75 0.914 0.914 Wanapum Balloon Tag Coho salmon 6.1 Kaplan 5 85.7 285 23.8 106.6 13,000 75 0.971 0.971 Wanapum Balloon Tag Coho Salmon 6.1 Kaplan 5 85.7 285 23.8 106.5 17,000 80 0.924 0.930 Wanapum Balloon Tag Coho Salmon 6.1 Kaplan 5 85.7 285 23.8 106.5 17,000 80 0.968 0.968 Wanapum Balloon Tag Coho Salmon 6.1 Kaplan 5 85.7 285 23.8 106.5 17,000 80 0.885 0.890 Wanapum Balloon Tag Coho Salmon 6.1 Kaplan 5 85.7 285 23.8 106.5 17,000 80 0.949 0.955 Wanapum Balloon Tag Coho Salmon 6.2 Kaplan 5 85.7 285 23.8 106.5 17,000 80 0.897 0.897 Wanapum Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 6.7 Kaplan 5 85.7 283.5 23.6 106.1 13,750 77 0.979 Wanapum Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 6.7 Kaplan 5 85.7 283.5 23.6 106.1 13,750 77 0.971 Wanapum Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 6.7 Advanced Kaplan 6 85.7 304 25.3 113.7 13,750 77 0.985 Wanapum Balloon Tag Chinook salmon 6.7 Advanced Kaplan 6 85.7 304 25.3 113.7 13,750 77 0.954 Wilder Balloon Tag Atlantic Salmon 7.4 Kaplan 5 112.5 108 9.0 53 4,500 51 0.960 0.943

Date post:	20-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	phamcong
View:	214 times
Download:	1 times

TOMAHAWK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (FERC No. … · TOMAHAWK HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT ... (FERC No. 1940)...

Documents

Youngs Creek Hydroelectric Project FERC No. 10359€¦ · Owl Nest Boxes ... CAPA Critical Area Protection Area FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Project Youngs Creek Hydroelectric

Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 14241 ... · Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 14241) Recreation Resources Study Prepared for Alaska Energy Authority Prepared

ENLOE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (FERC PROJECT NO. 12569) · 2018-07-25 · Enloe Hydroelectric Project Operation Compliance Monitoring Plan ... During power plant outages , ... transmitted

Exhibit F Carmen-Smith Hydroelectric Project (FERC No ...

SKAGIT RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT LICENSE (FERC … Evaluation_2011-06-07... · biological evaluation . skagit river hydroelectric project . license (ferc no. 553) amendment: addition

ENLOE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT (FERC PROJECT NO. 12569) · Certification Application for the Enloe Hydroelectric Project (FERC Project No. 12569). As noted in Section 3.7 of the February

Prospect No. 3 Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. P ... · Prospect No. 3 Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No. P-2337 ... 1.2 Study Description ... Table 13 Summary of Fish

Kilarc-Cow Creek Hydroelectric Project Decommissioning FERC Project No. 606 Technical Meeting

Vegetation Management Plan North Umpqua Hydroelectric ... · Vegetation Management Plan North Umpqua Hydroelectric Project ... North Umpqua Hydroelectric Project FERC No. 1927 ...

Yadkin Hydroelectric Project FERC No. 2197 Relicensing · PDF fileYadkin Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 2197) i February 2007 Relicensing Settlement Agreement Table of Contents Table

Prospect No. 3 Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No - PacifiCorp

Appendix K Tomahawk Freshwater Mussel Study … 1.0 Introduction Wisconsin Public Service Corporation (WPS) as part of the relicensing process for the Tomahawk Hydroelectric Project

FERC Proposed Study Plan Meeting May 14, 2013 …...FERC Proposed Study Plan Meeting May 14, 2013 (afternoon) and May 15, 2013 Turners Falls Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 1889) Northfield

CONOWINGO HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC PROJECT NUMBER …mde.maryland.gov/.../FERC/Conowingo-IFIM-Study.pdf · CONOWINGO HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT . FERC PROJECT NUMBER 405 . Prepared for:

SKAGIT RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT - … Skagit FSA...SKAGIT RIVER HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT FERC NO. 553 REVISED FISHERIES SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT INCORPORATING ANADROMOUS FISH FLOW PLAN

Boundary Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 2144) Study No ... · REVISED FINAL REPORT STUDY NO. 22 – LAND AND ROADS STUDY Boundary Hydroelectric Project Seattle City Light FERC No.

Nuyakuk River Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 14873 ...

Youngs Creek Hydroelectric PProject FERC No. 10359 · 2017-04-07 · Youngs Creek Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 10359 Wildlife Habitat Mitigation Plan i Annual Report 2013 Final