Walla Walla River Basin Fish Screens Evaluations, 2006 Annual Report.

Chamness, Mickie ; Abernethy, Scott ; Tunnicliffe, Cherylyn

United States. Bonneville Power Administration.

关键词: Modifications;    Irrigation;    Sediments;    Juveniles;    Personnel;   

DOI  :  10.2172/961999
RP-ID  :  DOE/BP-00000652-36
RP-ID  :  652 REL 34
RP-ID  :  961999

美国|英语

来源: UNT Digital Library

【 摘 要 】

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory evaluated Gardena Farms, Little Walla Walla, and Garden City/Lowden II Phase II fish screen facilities and provided underwater videography beneath a leaking rubber dam in the Walla Walla River basin in 2006. Evaluations of the fish screen facilities took place in early May 2006, when juvenile salmonids are generally outmigrating. At the Gardena Farms site, extended high river levels caused accumulations of debris and sediment in the forebay. This debris covered parts of the bottom drum seals, which could lead to early deterioration of the seals and drum screen. Approach velocities were excessive at the upstream corners of most of the drums, leading to 14% of the total approach velocities exceeding 0.4 feet per second (ft/s). Consequently, the approach velocities did not meet National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) design criteria guidelines for juvenile fish screens. The Little Walla Walla site was found to be in good condition, with all approach, sweep, and bypass velocities within NMFS criteria. Sediment buildup was minor and did not affect the effectiveness of the screens. At Garden City/Lowden II, 94% of approach velocities met NMFS criteria of 0.4 ft/s at any time. Sweep velocities increased toward the fish ladder. The air-burst mechanism appears to keep large debris off the screens, although it does not prevent algae and periphyton from growing on the screen face, especially near the bottom of the screens. In August 2006, the Gardena Farm Irrigation District personnel requested that we look for a leak beneath the inflatable rubber dam at the Garden City/Lowden II site that was preventing water movement through the fish ladder. Using our underwater video equipment, we were able to find a gap in the sheet piling beneath the dam. Erosion of the riverbed was occurring around this gap, allowing water and cobbles to move beneath the dam. The construction engineers and irrigation district staff were able to use the video footage to resolve the problem within a couple weeks. We had hoped to also evaluate the effectiveness of modifications to louvers behind the Nursery Bridge screens when flows were higher than 350 cubic feet per second, (cfs) but were unable to do so. Based on the one measurement made in early 2006 after the modified louvers were set, it appears the modified louvers may help reduce approach velocities. The auxiliary supply water system gates also control water through the screens. Evaluating the effect of different combinations of gate and louver positions on approach velocities through the screens may help identify optimum settings for both at different river discharges.