Search USGSSearch

USGS · ofr20171163

Effectiveness of common fish screen materials for protecting lamprey ammocoetes—Influence of sweeping velocities and decreasing flows

Abstract

In previous tests of the effectiveness of four common fish screen materials for excluding lamprey ammocoetes, we determined that woven wire (WW) allowed substantially more entrainment than perforated plate (PP), profile bar (PB), or Intralox (IL) material. These tests were simplistic because they used small vertically-oriented screens positioned perpendicular to the flow without a bypass or a sweeping velocity (SV). In the subsequent test discussed in this report, we exposed ammocoetes to much larger (2.5-m-wide) screen panels with flows up to 10 ft3 /s, a SV component, and a simulated bypass channel. The addition of a SV modestly improved protection of lamprey ammocoetes for all materials tested. A SV of 35 cm/s with an approach velocity (AV) of 12 cm/s, was able to provide protection for fish about 5–15 mm smaller than the protection provided by an AV of 12 cm/s without a SV component. The best-performing screen panels (PP, IL, and PB) provided nearly complete protection from entrainment for fish greater than 50-mm toal length, but the larger openings in the WW material only protected fish greater than 100-mm total length. Decreasing the AV and SV by 50 percent expanded the size range of protected lampreys by about 10–15 mm for those exposed to IL and WW screens, and it decreased the protective ability of PP screens by about 10 mm. Much of the improvement for IL and WW screens under the reduced flow conditions resulted from an increase in the number of lampreys swimming away from the screen. Fish of all sizes became impinged (that is, stuck on the screen surface for more than 1 s) on the screens, with the rate of impingement highest on PP (39– 72 percent) and lowest on WW (7–22 percent). Although impingements were common, injuries were rare, and 24-h post-test survival was greater than 99 percent. Our results refined the level of protection provided by these screen materials when both an AV and SV are present and confirmed our earlier recommendation that WW screens be replaced with more effective materials. Future work should focus on determining the risks associated with other screen types (for example, rotary drum screens, horizontal flat plate screens) and exploring the effectiveness of higher SV:AV ratios, because it may help expand the range of sizes protected by the best performing materials.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Matthew G. Mesa, Theresa L. Liedtke, Lisa K. Weiland, Helena E. Christiansen. 2017-12-14. Effectiveness of common fish screen materials for protecting lamprey ammocoetes—Influence of sweeping velocities and decreasing flows. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20171163

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona