# C LAYTOR 

# H YDROELECTRIC 

# P ROJECT 

# F ISH 

# E NTRAINMENT AND 

# I MPINGEMENT 

# A SSESSMENT

January 2009

## C LAYTOR 

## H YDROELECTRIC 

## P ROJECT 

## F ISH 

## E NTRAINMENT AND 

## I MPINGEMENT 

## A SSESSMENT

Prepared for APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY Hydro Generation Department 40 Franklin Road Roanoke, VA 24011

Prepared by NORMANDEAU ASSOCIATES, INC. 1921 River Road Drumore, PA 17518

and

25 Nashua Road Bedford, NH 03110

R-20979.001



### January 2009C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 ii Normandeau Associates, Inc. 

# Table of Contents

Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND............................................................................ 1

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND GENERAL APPROACH .............................................. 2

2.1 C LAYTOR L AKE D ESCRIPTION AND C HARACTERISTICS

................................................... 2 2.2 P ROJECT F ACILITIES

......................................................................................................... 2 2.3 F ISH P OPULATIONS AND M ANAGEMENT S PECIES

............................................................ 3 2.4 S PECIES OF S PECIAL C ONCERN

........................................................................................ 7 2.5 C URRENT E VIDENCE OF E NTRAINMENT AND I MPINGEMENT P ROBLEMS

......................... 7

3.0 SWIM SPEED LITERATURE REVIEW AND FIELD VELOCITY DATA.................... 9

3.1 F ISH S WIM S PEEDS

........................................................................................................... 9 3.2 F IELD S TUDY OF I NTAKE V ELOCITY

.............................................................................. 16 3.3 F IELD V ELOCITIES VS F ISH S WIMMING C APABILITIES

................................................... 20

4.0 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SIMILAR PROJECTS............................................... 23

5.0 ENTRAINMENT ASSESSMENT........................................................................................ 26

5.1 C HARACTERISTICS AND B EHAVIOR OF S ELECTED F ISHES

............................................. 26 5.2 R EVIEW OF E NTRAINMENT R ATES D EVELOPED BY EPRI (1997) .................................. 31 5.3 B LADE S TRIKE AND C AVITATION P OTENTIAL OF E XISTING U NITS

............................... 36 5.4 T URBINE P ASSAGE S URVIVAL A SSESSMENT

.................................................................. 37

6.0 OVERALL ENTRAINM ENT ASSESSMENT ................................................................... 42

7.0 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................... 46

8.0 LITERATURE CITED.......................................................................................................... 47

8.1 S WIM S PEED L ITERATURE IN T ABLE 3-1 AND S ECTION 3.1 ........................................... 47 8.2 F ISHES AND E NTRAINMENT /I MPINGEMENT L ITERATURE

.............................................. 49C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 iii Normandeau Associates, Inc. 

# List of Figures

Page

Figure 2-1. Claytor Hydroelectric Projec t location in Virginia............................................................... 4

Figure 2-2. Representative drawing of Clayto r Hydro Project intake area............................................. 6

Figure 2-3. Reference photo of Claytor intakes and sp illway area during project construction............ 7

Figure 3-1. (T110) Color-contour section for tangential line (parallel transect) approximately 40 feet off the intake wa ll for 10,000 cfs condition. Box outline = intake centerline 44 feet deep.............................................................................................. 19

Figure 3-2. (N2A10). Color-contour section for normal line (perpendicular transect) in front of Unit #2 for the 10,000 cfs condition. Dist ance refers to distance from the face of the intake wall. Intake centerline is 44 feet deep. .......................................................... 19

Figure 3-3. (T10-43) Synoptic velocity vectors 43 fe et below the surface during the 10,000 cfs condition. Intake bays are labeled U1 , U2, etc. Scale arrow in lower left represents the length of a 1 ft/s vector. . ............................................................................. 20C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 iv Normandeau Associates, Inc. 

# List of Tables

Page

Table 2-1. Reservoir and intake characteristics of the Claytor Hydroe lectric Project.......................... 5

Table 2-2. Physical and hydraulic characteristics of turbines at Claytor Hydroelectric Project.................................................................................................................................... 6

Table 3-1. Reported swimming speed of fishes fo r the Claytor Hydroelectric Project ...................... 10

Table 3-2. Speed and direction values fo r each Fixed Station Profile................................................. 18

Table 3-3. Speed and direction values fo r each Fixed Station Profile................................................. 18

Table 3-4. Comparison of Claytor Lake intake veloc ity data and synthesis of fish swim speed information................................................................................................................ 22

Table 4-1. Location, hydraulic capacity and trash ra ck spacing of 43 sites included in the EPRI database...................................................................................................................... 24

Table 4-2. Size composition of entrainment catch by bar rack spacing (after Winchell et al. 2000).................................................................................................................................... 25

Table 5-1. Average entrainment densities for Claytor Hydro Project fish species of interest drawn from EPRI (1997) entr ainment database. Annual density standardized and shown as number of fish per million cubic feet of water. .................................................. 32

Table 5-2. Estimated entrainment losses for Claytor Lake fish species of interest. Annual density standardized and shown as number of fish per million cubic feet of water.......... 35

Table 5-3. Values of turbine parameters used in blade strike and survival estimates......................... 36

Table 5-4. Predicted turbine passage survival at Claytor Project turbines based on the blade strike probability formula developed by Franke et al. (1997)............................................ 38

Table 5-5. Mean fish survival rates for Francis turbin es and representative fish sizes in EPRI database (source: Winchell et al. 2000).............................................................................. 39

Table 5-6. Site characteristics of empirical studies at Francis installations not reviewed in EPRI database. All studies perfor med using balloon tag technology............................... 40

Table 5-7. Immediate (1-h) survival of representative fish species at Francis installations not reviewed in EPRI database. All studies performed using balloon tag technology........... 40

Table 5-8. Estimated annual mortality due to turbin e passage for Claytor Lake fish species of interest. The source of mortality rates was Winchell et al. (2000). ............................... 41

Table 6-1. Comparison of factors that may influence en trainment or survival rates at Claytor Hydro Project..................................................................................................................

..... 42C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 1 Normandeau Associates, Inc. 

## 1.0 I NTRODUCTION AND 

## B ACKGROUND
The purpose of this report is to evaluate the potential for fish entrainment and impingement at the Claytor Hydroelectric Project (No. 739). Appalachian Power Company (Appalachian) is in the process of relicensing the Project using the Integr ated Licensing Process (ILP) as defined by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Th e ILP process involves many participants or stakeholders, including government agencies, lo cal governments, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), the public, and other interested parties. Stakeholders were solicited for input on projectrelated issues that needed to be addressed during relicensing.
An initial step was preparation and submittal of a Pr e-Application Document that identified issues for study. Meetings with stakeholders and a work group guided study plan preparation during summer 2006. A revised study plan was developed in October 2006, and approved by FERC letter in November 2006.
This report addresses the likelihood of impingement, en trainment, and turbine mortality at the Claytor Project within a comprehensive review of relevant biological and physical factors at the project. The overall approach to this assessment is, for three task s, to review existing literature relative to the species of management interest in the Project reser voir, and evaluate the potential for entrainment, impingement, and turbine mortality of fishes relative to Project facilities and structures. The three literature-based tasks are:

1. Review swim speed and intake avoidance be havior literature for the identified fish species of principal management interest.
2. Review existing evidence of impingement a nd entrainment problems associated with the current operating regime.
3. Review other projects of similar design fo r impingement and entrainment problems and perform a comparative analysis to the Claytor Project.

A fourth task represents a field component that will measure intake velocity profiles at various reservoir locations during maximum and “most efficient” hydraulic capacities. The field measurements and analyses will be used to establis h threshold velocities relative to individual key species’ burst swimming ability identified in th e initial literature-based task listed above.
Via the study plan development process, eleven fish ta xa have been identified as the basis for analysis in this report: juveniles and adults of striped bass, striped bass hybr ids, gizzard shad, largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, spotted bass, white bass, walleye, bl ack crappie, bluegill, and alewife. The Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fish (VDGIF) manages the reservoir’s fisheries.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 2 Normandeau Associates, Inc. 

## 2.0 P ROJECT 

## D ESCRIPTION 

## A ND 

## G ENERAL 

## A PPROACH
The Claytor Project consists of a single conventi onal hydroelectric development located on the New River in southwestern Virginia (Figure 2-1). The Claytor Project dam is located at river mile (RM) 252. Claytor Lake, the project reservoir, is a sinuous, riverine impoundment 21.7 miles long with a surface area of 1,810 hectares (4,472 acres) at a normal full pool of 1,846 ft NGVD (AEP 2006). Claytor Lake features one long, narrow tributary arm (Peak Creek) and several smaller tributary creek embayments located mainly in the lower half of the lake. Claytor Lake is located near Radford, Virginia and was impounded in 1939. More detailed information is provided below.



### 2.1 C LAYTOR 

### L AKE 

### D ESCRIPTION AND 

### C HARACTERISTICS
Claytor Lake covers 4,472 acres with a maximum a nd mean depth of 115 ft and 49 ft, respectively (Table 2-1). Lake depth at the dam is reported at 124 ft. The main lake shoreline is rocky and steepsided. Shallow littoral areas are limited and genera lly confined to coves and lake areas upstream of Lighthouse Bridge (Figure 2-1) (Kohler et al. 1986; Rash 2003; Copeland 2004). Normal daily and weekly fluctuations in water surface elevation due to generation are less than 1 ft and 2 ft, respectively (Appalachian 2006). A fall drawdown of 5 ft is scheduled annually to permit shoreline landowners to access and re pair dock supports, etc.
Claytor Lake is considered moderately eutrophic (Copeland 1999), or nutrient enriched (Appalachian 2006). Temperature and dissolved oxygen stratificati on occurs in summer, and is particularly strong during summers with low inflow. Water quality mon itoring near Claytor Dam shows that dissolved oxygen depletion by late summer typically occurs between depths of 5 to 10 m (16-33 ft) to the bottom (Appalachian 2006).



### 2.2 P ROJECT 

### F ACILITIES
The Claytor Project powerhouse contains four Francis-type generating units each with a maximum and “most efficient” hydraulic capacity of 2,500 an d 2,000 cfs, respectively (Table 2-1). Normal operating head (rated net head) is 116 ft (Table 2-2). The submerged intakes for the four units extend from 14 ft to 61 ft below the surface at normal full po ol (Table 2-1; Figure 2-2). Each unit is screened by 0.5 in bar racks with 4.0 in clear spacing (Tab le 2-1). An historical reference photo is also provided for additional perspective showing the relationship among the intake area, spillway section, and lake bottom (Figure 2-3).
Francis turbine runners (example below) consist of a series of vertically arranged, curved, fixed metal blades. Claytor turbine runners have 15 blades, or “buckets”. Water under high to moderately high pressure flows down through the blades and makes th e turbine spin. Water flow from the intakes is delivered to the turbine through the penstock and is controlled by wicket gates (Claytor has 18 wicket gates) that surround the runner. Index testing de termines the best wicket gate setting (percent opening, or most efficient setting) to deliver th e optimum output. Water exits the turbine through a draft tube to the tailrace. Major parts of th e runner are labeled in the figure below.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 3 Normandeau Associates, Inc. The approach velocity at the submerged inta kes was estimated from calculations shown on the original project drawings. Estimated approach velocity in front of the trash racks, where fish initially encounter the project intakes, was calculated as 1.5 ft/s (Table 2-1). Velocity at the racks (located several feet inside the maximum intake opening) was calculated as approximately 2.4 ft/s. Water velocity accelerates during passage past the bar racks and through the penstocks as the penstock cross-sectional area further decreases. Additional in take velocity data obtained from planned field studies is discussed in Section 3.2.
The calculated intake velocity information shown in Table 2-1 reflects data that were unavailable during study plan preparation. At that time an engineering analysis of intake flows was planned to augment the field intake velocity studies. The discove ry of the project drawings that contained intake velocity estimates meant that the engineering anal ysis was no longer necessary. Thus, the engineering analysis portion of the study plan was dropped.



### 2.3 F ISH 

### P OPULATIONS AND 

### M ANAGEMENT 

### S PECIES
Fisheries data for Claytor Lake were summarize d for the Pre-Application Document by Copeland (2005). At least 24 native and introduced taxa characterize the known fish assemblage, although numerous additional species (e.g., minnows and darter s) likely occur but are undocumented since sampling locations and sampling gear generally targets game fish for management assessments (Copeland 2005). Game species include largemouth bass ( Micropterus salmoides ), smallmouth bass ( M. dolomieu ), spotted bass ( M

. punctulatus ), striped bass ( Morone saxatilis ), striped bass hybrids ( M., chrysops x M. saxatilis ), crappie ( Pomoxis spp. mostly black crappie, P. nigromaculatus ), and walleye ( Sander vitreus ). Striped bass, hybrid striped bass, and walleye historically have been maintained through stocking. Recent (since 2001) stocking densities for striped bass have been about 13 to 17 fingerlings per acre, whereas hybrid stripe d bass stocking density has been 7.5 fish per acre over the same period. Walleye stocking was discontinued in 1996, then resumed in 2004 (Appalachian 2006). Various sunfishes ( Lepomis spp.) and catfishes, including channel catfish ( Ictalurus punctatus ) and flathead catfish ( Pylodictis olivaris ) are also abundant.
The principal forage species in clude introduced gizzard shad ( Dorosoma cepedianum ) and alewife ( Alosa pseudoharengus ), in addition to young and smaller indi viduals of other species such as crappie and bluegill. Alewife was introduced concurrently with striped bass as pelagic forage in the late Crown

Blade (inlet edge)

Water exit to draft tube BandC LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 4 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Figure 2-1. Claytor Hydroelectri c Project location in Virginia.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/09/08 5 Normandeau Associates, Inc.Table 2-1. Reservoir and intake characteristics of the Claytor Hydroelectric Project.Intake Elevations1Trash Rack BarsDevelopmentSurfaceArea-fullpond (acres)Maximumand (mean)depth-ftNormalFull PondElevation1(ft) Top (ft) CL (ft)Bottom(ft)UnitIntakeWidth(ft)3IndividualUnit3ScreenedArea (sq ft)Width(in)ClearSpacing (in)Number ofUnitsOperatingDesignHydraulicCapacity(cfs)Normal2OperatingDischarge(cfs)ApproachVelocity(ft/s)4Claytor Project 4,472 115 (49) 1,846.00 1,832.00 1,808.50 1,785.00 34.0 1,598.0 0.5 4.01 2,500 2,000 1.5034.0 1,598.02 2,500 2,000 1.5034.0 1,598.03 2,500 2,000 1.5034.0 1,598.04 2,500 2,000 1.50Project Totals6,392.010,000 8,000Notes:1.All elevations are USGS datums.2.Normal hydraulic capacity (turbine discharge) at most efficient point (MEP).3.Each unit has two intake bays,each 17 ft wide x 47 ft high.4.Calculated velocity in front of racks at intake plane.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 6 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Table 2-2. Physical and hydraulic characteristics of turbines at Claytor Hydroelectric Project.

Unit Number Turbine Type Design Head (ft) Individual Unit Design Flow (cfs) No. of Blades/ Buckets Runner Diameter (ft) Runner Speed (rpm)
1, 2 Vertical Francis 116 2,000 15 10.9 138.5
3, 4 Vertical Francis 116 2,000 15 11.2 138.5

Notes: 1. Design flow (turbine discharge) at most efficient point (MEP). 2. Runner diameter (ft) at inlet.

Figure 2-2. Representative drawing of Claytor Hydro Proj ect intake area.

1960s (Kohler et al. 1986). Gizzard shad were in troduced by anglers in the late 1980s (Copeland 1999).
Recreational fishing for the three black bass species in Claytor Lake comprised 58% of the 330,000 angler hours expended in the most recent creel survey (Copeland 2000). Angling for Morone spp. formed nearly 10% of targeted effort, followed by effort for catfishes (7%) and panfish (5%). Angler catch was dominated by bluegill, followed by th e three black basses. Angler harvest was also principally bluegill, followed by channel catfish and black crappie. In terms of retention rate, however, anglers favored channel catfish (81%), walleye (73%), and flathead catfish (67%).C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 7 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Figure 2-3. Reference photo of Claytor intakes and spillway area during project construction.



### 2.4 S PECIES OF 

### S PECIAL 

### C ONCERN No rare, threatened, or endangered fish species are known from Claytor Lake (Appalachian 2006).



### 2.5 C URRENT 

### E VIDENCE OF 

### E NTRAINMENT AND 

### I MPINGEMENT 

### P ROBLEMS

2.5.1 Brief Description of Operations
The Claytor Project is operated primarily to provi de peaking power, particularly during the cooler months from mid-October through mid-April. Duri ng the warmer months from mid-April through mid-October, considered the prime recreation season, peaking is voluntarily limited (pool levels are maintained within 1 ft of full pool) to stabilize river levels for water-based recreation in the New River downstream of the dam. Additionally, water leve ls in the lake during 15 April to 15 June are maintained between 1,844 ft and 1,846 ft (full pond) to promote fish reproduction in shallow shoreline areas.

2.5.2 Evidence of Entrainment and I m pingement Problems
Direct evidence of fish emigration out of Claytor Lake is limited to 1) capture by anglers and biologists of adult striped bass and striped bass hybrids in dam tailwaters and New River reaches further downstream (Copeland 1999; Kilpatrick 2003), 2) establishment of alewife in Bluestone LakeC LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 8 Normandeau Associates, Inc. at least 100 km downstream of Claytor Lake (K ohler 1982), and 3) capture of moribund alewife during passage through turbine pens tocks (Boaze and Lackey 1974). Gizzard shad were also noted as emigrants out of Claytor Lake into the New River and downstream reservoirs by Bonds (2000). Among these lines of evidence, alewife clearly are subject to turbine entr ainment due to passage through penstocks noted by investigations during the 1970s (e.g., Boaze 1972). For the other species, evidence is indirect since timing and routes of travel (turbine route or spill) have not been established.
Survival of stocked striped bass during passage out of Claytor Lake has resulted in consistent sport fishing captures in the tailrace (primarily) as well as for a considerable distance downstream of the Project. However, radio telemetry and conventional tagging efforts by Kilpatrick (2003) were unable to determine whether striped bass caught in the tailr ace were entrained as juveniles or adults, or the emigration route utilized by either life stage. Kohl er et al. (1986) speculated that striped bass in Claytor Lake were susceptible to entrainment (= “emigration”) due to comparatively short water retention times. Alewife in Claytor Lake are prone to die-offs during cold winters (Kohler and Ney 1981) and become susceptible to turbine entrainm ent as they lose swimming ability in cold water (Boaze and Lackey 1974).
Impingement of fishes on project structures (trash ra cks) has not been noted. Given the wide bar rack spacing (4-inch) and submerged intake depth (14 ft at top), fish impingement would be unlikely. Fish lacking the swimming ability to avoid the intakes w ould be expected to pass through the bar racks and not be impinged upon them. See Section 3.0 (bel ow) for information on fish swimming capabilities.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 9 Normandeau Associates, Inc. 

## 3.0 S WIM 

## S PEED 

## L ITERATURE 

## R EVIEW AND 

## F IELD 

## V ELOCITY 

## D ATA



### 3.1 F ISH 

### S WIM 

### S PEEDS
Avoidance of fish entrainment and impingement probl ems at water intakes is related to fish size and swimming performance (Castro -Santos and Haro 2005). We conduct ed a literature review of swim speed information for eleven fish species that inhabit the Claytor Hydro Project reservoir. The purpose was to compare available swim performance data for these species to in-situ measurements of current velocity obtained proximal to the project’s intakes (see Sections 3.2 and 3.3).
Nine Claytor Lake fish species evaluated for sw im performance represent the principal targets of fisheries management efforts by VDGIF as well as the focus of angler interest , including juvenile and adult striped bass and hybrid striped bass, larg emouth bass, smallmouth bass, spotted bass, white bass, walleye, bluegill, and black crappie. Gi zzard shad, alewife, and young bluegill and other Lepomis (sunfish) represent the principal forage for these game species.
Three swim speed modes are generally recognized for fishes. Sustained swim speed is that maximum speed sustainable indefinitely, or for at least 200 min (Beamish 1978). Prolonged swim speed represents continuous, faster swimming that ultimat ely results in fatigue after at least 20 seconds. Laboratory testing of prolonged swim speeds for sp ecific time intervals, frequently related to an expected or required time required to pass through fishwa ys or culverts, results in estimates of critical swim speed (U), accompanied by a time stamp (e.g., Ucrit 2 = maximum prolonged speed for 2 min). Burst, or sprint swim speeds, results in fati gue after no more than 15-20 seconds or less (Beamish 1978; Bell 1991). Burst or sprint swim speeds (also star tle, fast-start, or dart) are the fastest attainable, and are also those generally associated with fish well-being or survival (Beamish 1978; Wardle 1980), as they are also related to a fish’s ability to capture prey, avoid predators, or in the present case, avoid water intake velocities or structural elements. Among the three swim speed modes, burst swim speed is harder to quantify in a laboratory , and, thus, fewer burst swim speed studies with adequate sample sizes are availabl e (Castro-Santos and Haro 2005).
Utilization of burst swim speed to avoid water in takes also implies the ability to use additional sensory mechanisms to properly detect and orient to the intake. Available stimuli near an intake, in addition to the physical structure, include turbulence, flow acceleration, pressure changes, sound, etc. (Castro-Santos and Haro 2005). The ability to utilize available cues to avoid intake structures or flow fields may be compromised by darkness or turbid ity, for example, or reduced swimming ability as water temperatures approach or exceed cold water tolerances.
The swim performance data in Table 3-1 clearly identify two trends for any given species. First, the swimming speed of larger juveniles or adult fish is faster than smaller juveniles. Second, water temperature also plays a role, and swim speed for several species appears maximized at approximately 20-30°C, typical late spring to fall ambient water body conditions. A reduction in swimming ability of 50% may occur at water temp eratures outside a preferred range (ASCE 1995). Typically, reduced swimming ability only becomes a c oncern at water intakes in temperate latitudes as winter approaches.
Swim speeds determined in the laboratory are typica lly measured by a distance rate, e.g., feet/sec, for a given fish length range or measure of length cen tral tendency (mean, median). However, inC LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/09/08 10 Normandeau Associates, Inc.Table 3-1. Reported swimming speed of fishes for the Claytor Hydroelectric ProjectSWIM SPEED-feet per second-ft/sSpeciesLifeStageFish SizeMax.SustainedProlonged orCriticalBurst orStartleLiterature Source-Comments-ClarificationStriped bass juv 1 in 0.83Kerr 1953, cited in Clay 1961unknown12-18L/sec Kerr 1953, cited in Hocutt 1973.juv 1-3 in ~1.9from Figure 88 in Clay 1961--100% swimming @ 10 minutes.juv 32-63 mm FL 0.6-1.2Tatham 1970-draft report; empirical data, 75 & 80F; 3 ppt salinityjuv 50mm SL1.91-1.982-min critical swim speed, U-crit: Young and Cech 1993.fry 0.5 in0.6 est. from Bell 1991; dart speed maintained for 7.5 sec;fry 1 in1.0 est. from Bell 1991; dart speed maintained for 7.5 sec;juv 2 in2.0 est. from Bell 1991; dart speed maintained for 7.5 sec;juv 5 in5.0 est. from Bell 1991; dart speed maintained for 7.5 sec;Striped bass adult 554 FL14.9* Haro et al.2004; @ 17.2C; upstream into fishway-max V testedHybrid striped bassNo swim speed studies located in literature.Gizzard shad juvjuv25-50 mmN/A0.752.8**Not availablemax water velocity with HSI = 0.1; Williamson and Nelson 1985.adult250-350mmTL8.0* measured water velocity atConoWest Lift-does not exclude adultsLargemouth bass juv 150mm 0.79 @ 10CBeamish 1970 in Carlander 1977150mm 1.57 @ 30Cjuv 250 mm 1.51 @ 10C250mm 2.07 @30Cjuv75-85mm1.21-1.34Dahlberg et al. 1968 in Carlander 1977juv 52-64mm TL 0.50 @ 30C 1.63Hocutt 1973; at 30C;--critical speed was max of tests from 15-35C.juv 52-64mm TL8.08L/secHocutt 1973; at 30C; same study--relative swim speed.juv 93-128mm 1.60 (see comments) U-crit 2 min = 3.5-3.8 BL/s; 15-19C; Kolok 1991"0.92 (see comments) U-crit 2 min = 2.2 BL/s; 5C; Kolok 1991juv52-64mm1.64Farlinger and Beamish 1977 (cited inBeamish 1978); critical @ 25Cjuv 102 mm1.50Farlinger and Beamish 1977 (cited in Beamish 1978); critical @ 25Cjuv 100 mm1.15Otto and Rice 1974(cited in Beamish 1978); critical @ 10Cfry 20-22mm0.78-1.02Larimore and Deuver 1968 (cited in Beamish 1978); prolonged @10-30C.juv 57mm1.01Larimore and Deuver 1968 (cited in Beamish 1978); prolonged @20Clg juv 150-270 mm1.80-2.17Beamish 1970(cited in Beamish 1978); prolonged at 10-30C.Smallmouth bass fry 20-25mm≤0.89Larimore and Deuver (1968)cited in Carlander 1977 & Houde 1969fry 14mm13-19L/sec relative prolonged speed; Larimore and Deuver (1968)fry 14mm0.60-0.87range of prolonged speed; Larimore and Deuver (1968)juv 91-93mm1.3-1.8Critical swim speed, 2-min U-crit @ 13-23C range; Webb 1998.adult 262-378mmTL1.6-3.9Critical swimspeed, U-crit-10 min @ 15-20C; Bunt et al. 1999.SpottedbassNo swim speed studies located in literature.(continued)C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/09/08 11 Normandeau Associates, Inc.Table 3-1. (Continued)SWIM SPEED-feet per second-ft/sSpeciesLifeStageFish SizeMax.SustainedProlonged orCriticalBurst orStartleLiterature Source-Comments-ClarificationWhite bass adult 313mm TL3.94critical swim speed; U-crit-10 min; Tunink 1975; Schmulbachet al. 1981; both cited in Wilcoxet al. 2004.Walleyefry 12mm TL 0.1618.3C; Houde 1969fry 20mm TL 0.2513C; Houde 1969juv 80mm FL1.24Jones et al. 1974;critical swim speed @18-20C for 10-minlg. juv 317mm FL11.0* Haro et al. 2004; @ 10.3C; able to enter fishwayat this V (max tested)adult 380mm FL2.74Jones et al. 1974;critical swim speed @ 18-20C for 10-minjuv 160mm FL6.02 Fast-start or startle speed; calc. from formula in Peake et al. 2000.adult 350mm FL7.20 Fast-start or startle speed; calc. from formula in Peake et al. 2000.adult 570mm FL8.57 Fast-start or startle speed; calc. from formula in Peake et al. 2000.Alewifejuv 2.5-3 in~3.0 est. from Bell 1991; dart speed maintained for 7.5 sec;adult 250mm TL11.5-16.4 range of burst swimspeed in fishway; Dow 1962 cited in Beamish 1978.adult 235mm FL11.2* Haro et al. 2004; @ 11.2C;able eto enter fishway at this V (max tested)Herring (spp. ?) fry 0.8 in1.0 est. from Bell 1991; dart speed maintained for 7.5 sec;adult 6-11 in ~5.0~6.7 est. from Bell 1991; dart speed maintained for 7.5 sec;Bluegilljuv 25-40 mm FL 0.3-0.75Schuler 1968; S/max = minimal swim speed in natural environment; most tests >60F.juv 39-44 mm FL 0.48-0.52King 1969; S/max = minimal swim speed in natural environment; 79-85F.juv 51-54 mm0.92tested at 21C; Beamish 1978adult 203 mm TL 1.0Deng et al. 2004adult unknown 0.98Drucker and Lauder 1999adult100-150mmTL1.22Critical swim speed for 10-min; Gardner et al. 2006adult 153 mm TL4.3 Webb 1978; final velocitymeasured after 9-sec burst over short distanceBlack crappieNo swim speed studies located in literature.Black crappie juv 78 mm TL 0.5L/sec***Assumed foraging swim speed, slower thansustained (Chick and Van Den Avyle 2000)White crappie juv 55-100 mmFL0.50-0.75S/max speed likely minimal sustained; 70-83F; Schuler 1968.juv 75-81 mm FL 0.54-0.61S/max speed likely minimal sustained; 76-79F; King 1969.juv 77 mm SL0.52U-crit 60 min @ 25C; Smiley and Parsons 1997.juv 77 mm SL0.18U-crit 60 min @ 5C; Smiley and Parsons 1997.* Values cited represent measured current velocities (V) that fish were able to negotiate at a fishway entrance.** Estimated from HSI curve in source literature.***Assumed swim speed, not from laboratory test.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 12 Normandeau Associates, Inc. recognition of the role of fish size in swim perfo rmance, much information on burst swim speed may also be expressed as fish body lengths/sec (L/sec), termed “relative burst speed”. Smaller sized fish typically have a higher relative swim speed (more body lengths per second) than larger fish, even though the absolute swim speed of larger fish is faster.
The data listed in Table 3-1 include studies specifi cally designed to measure one or more component of swim speed or performance, as well as other studies, typically more recent, that measure swim speed in relation to one or more variables, such as temperature changes, dissolved oxygen levels, etc. Where a temperature range or specific test temper ature is provided, these are indicated. For others with a range provided, the maximum swim speed attained was listed along with the appropriate temperature. Where other conditions were tested , such as physically-co nditioned fish versus nonconditioned fish, the data from non-conditioned fish were used as they best represent wild fish (Young and Cech 1993). Few studies were noted that tested fish with an objective of developing a water intake design, or tested vs intake design criteria (e.g., Tatham 1970; Hocutt 1973). In general, the comments or clarifications provided in Table 3- 1 identify any information deemed useful to assist interpretation of the test result.
For several species in Table 3-1, a listed burst swim speed was based upon successful upstream passage through a maximum water velocity at an actual or simulated fishway entrance, without an accompanying estimate of the actual swim speed attain ed (e.g, data for three species from Haro et al. 2004; adult gizzard shad data). We interpreted th ese data to represent a minimum estimate of burst swim speed for the species considered.

3.1.1 Striped bass

Burst swi m speed estimated for juvenile striped bass ranged from 2.0 to 5.0 ft/s, depending on fish length (Table 3-1). Fingerling stri ped bass stocked by VDGIF in Claytor Lake in June typically measure 25-50-mm TL (average about 41 mm), or 1 to 2-inches (Rash 2003; Copeland 2005). Thus, the burst swim speed shortly after stocking would ap proximate 2.0 ft/s, based upon data provided in Bell (1991). As the stocked juveniles grew to 5 in TL during their first year, estimated burst swim speed would increase to 5.0 ft/s.
No estimates were found of actual burst swim speed for adult striped bass. However, Haro et al. (2004) tested the ability of comparatively small adult striped bass (mean FL = 554 mm, appropriate for an adult male striped bass) to enter a simulate d fishway and pass upstream (the test flume is well described) over a range of current velocities. The ma ximum current velocity tested in the flume was 14.9 ft/s. We interpreted that this value represents a minimum burst swim speed for adult striped bass, since test fish were able to penetrate 5 to 6-m into the test flume.

3.1.2 White bass x striped bass hybrids
Hy brid stripe d bass are stocked later in the season and at a larger size than striped bass, typically in late summer or early fall at approximately 3 in TL or longer (Rash 2003; Copeland 2005). Thorough searching revealed no available swim performance data for hybrid striped bass in the published literature. Given their comparability in habits with juvenile striped bass (Rash 2003), plus acknowledged greater hardiness and fighting ability as a dults (Gleason 1982) relative to striped bass, their swimming ability should approach or be comp arable to that of striped bass. Therefore, as stocked 3-in fingerlings, burst swim speed is likely between 2.0 to 5.0 ft/s, based on data in BellC LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 13 Normandeau Associates, Inc. (1991). Similarly, an adult hybrid striped bass measuring 554 mm FL, as for striped bass cited in Haro et al. (2004) above, may be able to achieve a burst swim speed near 14.9 ft/s. This estimated swim speed for adult striped bass, however, is s ubstantially higher than the burst swim speed estimated for adult white bass (7.9 ft/s), typically th e male parent in the cross (see Section 3.7 below). As a result, a reasonable approximation of adult burst swim speed for hybrid striped bass would be the mid-point of the two estimates, or approximately 11.4 ft/s.
An estimated swim speed near 11 ft/s for larger striped bass hybrids also appears reasonable based on numerous captures of a wide size range of yearling and older hybrid striped bass in a Maryland fishway (see Section 3.3 below). Water velocities at the fishway entrance are typically maintained near 8 ft/s to attract adult alosids.

3.1.3 Gizzard shad

We located no estim ates of burst swim speed for either juvenile or adult gizzard shad. However, gizzard shad represent the most common species cau ght in a fishway located at Conowingo Dam on the Susquehanna River in Maryland. Fishway en trance current velocities have been measured historically to assist in capture of American shad, the primary target species. Measured current velocities of 8 ft/s represented no barrier to a dult gizzard shad (estimated TL = 250-350mm) passage into the fishway entrance. We interpreted that th is value represents a minimum burst swim speed for adult gizzard shad. A burst swim speed estimate for juvenile gizzard shad would likely be less than 8 ft/s, based upon information in Table 3-1 and trends for other species actually tested.
Two behavioral factors related to gizzard shad must also be acknowledged. First, gizzard shad are a schooling species. Schooling behavior confers enhanced survival (through presumably better swimming ability) as opposed to swimming as individuals (Boyd and Parsons 1998). Because of this schooling behavior, gizzard shad are prone to entrainment in large numbers. Second, gizzard shad are affected by low water temperatures (Williamson and Nelson 1985). During cold winters gizzard shad become increasingly moribund as water temperatures decline below 14°C (56°F), and die-offs of juveniles and adults occur at or below 3.3°C (38° F). Thus, the swimming ability of either life stage, and the ability to avoid entrainment, may be compromised during colder winters.

3.1.4 Largemouth bass
Although a common test animal in swim speed studies, we located no estimates of burst swim speed for either life stage of largemouth bass, perhaps b ecause largemouth bass are not typically thought of as riverine nor a common user of fishways, often a stimulus for burst or sprint swim speed testing. The study by Hocutt (1973) tested juvenile largemouth bass swim speed for a proposed water intake on a reservoir. A range of studies cited in Table 3-1 identified critical swim speed for small juvenile largemouth bass (52-102 mm) of appr oximately 1.01-1.64 ft/s, with in a temperature range of 15- 30°C. Prolonged swim speeds of large juveniles to perhaps small adults (150-270 mm) were faster, within the range of 1.80-2.17 f t/s. These speeds are faster than typical water intake design criteria used on reservoirs or rivers where intakes are usually oriented parallel to flow.
Burst swim speed for juveniles would be faster than either of these estimated for prolonged or critical swim speed (above). Bell (1991) estimated that prol onged (= sustained in his terminology) swim speed was 50 % to 70 % of dart (burst) speed. Applying Bell’s “50% criteria”, an estimate of burst swim speed for small (52-102 mm) and large juve nile (150-270 mm) largemouth bass would be fromC LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 14 Normandeau Associates, Inc. 3.2 to 4.3 ft/s. Burst swim speed for adult (e.g., ≥ 305 mm) largemouth bass would be expected to be faster than for the larger juveniles.

3.1.5 Smallmouth bass

No studies of burst swim speed for smallmouth b ass were located. Several studies that developed estimates of prolonged swim speed were identified and reported in Table 3-1. The maximum prolonged swim speed for juvenile smallmouth bass up to 93 mm long was 1.8 ft/s. A maximum critical swim speed (subset of prolonged swim speed) estimated for adult smallmouth bass up to 378- mm TL was 3.9 ft/s. Again using the “50% criteria” from Bell (1991), a maximum estimate of burst swim speed for juvenile smallmouth bass is 3.6 ft/s, and 7.8 ft/s for adult smallmouth bass.

3.1.6 Spotted bass

No esti m ates of swim speed for spotted bass were lo cated in the fisheries literature. Spotted bass prey preferences and diets are similar to smallmouth bass, but spotted bass habitat preferences are considered intermediate between their congeners ( Jenkins and Burkhead 1993). It is reasonable to assume that swim speeds may also be intermedia te between those estimated for largemouth and smallmouth bass.
A minimal estimate of burst swim speed for juven ile largemouth bass is 3.2 ft/s, and approximately 3.6 ft/s for juvenile smallmouth bass. Therefore, an intermediate estimate of burst swim speed for juvenile spotted bass would be approximately 3.5 ft/s.
A minimal estimate of burst swim speed for small adult largemouth bass is 4.3 ft/s. Burst swim speed for adult smallmouth bass was estimated to be 7.8 ft/s. A reasonable estimate of burst swim speed for adult spotted bass would be approximately 6 ft/s , the midpoint of swim speeds estimated for the
congeners.

3.1.7 White bass

No studies of burst swi m speed for white bass were located. One estimate of the critical swim speed for adult (313 mm TL) white bass was 3.94 ft/s (Table 3-1), in reference to upstream passage of white bass through Mississippi River Corps of Engineers dams (Wilcox et al. 2004). Using the “50% criteria” from Bell (1991), an estimate of burst swim speed for adult white bass would be approximately 7.9 ft/s. The burst swim speed for juve nile white bass would likely be less than 7.9 ft/s due to their smaller size.

3.1.8 Walleye
Walley e swim speed information was comparativ ely abundant for walleye sizes ranging from larval (12-20 mm TL) to large adults (570 mm FL). Howeve r, burst swim speed data or estimates were available only for juveniles and adults larger than 160-mm FL (Table 3-1).
Peake et al. (2004) tested the burst swim speed of walleye by startling (tail-touching) walleye in a holding tank and measuring their movement rate by video. The term “fast-start performance” was assumed synonymous with burst swim speed, and was found to increase linearly with fish size. The estimates of burst swim speed ranged from 6.02 ft/s for 160-mm FL walleye to 8.57 ft/s for 570-mm FL walleye, and were calculated from the regression e quation “Speed (m/s) = 1.53 + 1.90*(fish FL in m)”. Tabulated data were converted to English units in Table 3-1.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 15 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Haro et al. (2004) tested walleye swimming ability to enter a simulated fishway entrance, and walleye were able to enter the test flume at current veloc ities up to 11.2 ft/s, the highest velocity tested for walleye. As for the striped bass (Section 3.1 above) tested in the same apparatus, 11.2 ft/s may be assumed to represent a minimum burst swim speed for large juvenile walleye that averaged 317-mm FL.
Since loss of small juvenile walleye due to entrainmen t is often more of a concern than loss of adults, information from Bell (1991) may be applied to da ta for larval walleye (Houde 1969) to develop a rough estimate of burst swim capability for very small walleye approximating the fingerling size commonly stocked (typically 1-2 inches; Copeland 2005). Bell (1991) estimated that a fish’s cruising (= sustained) speed may be 15-20% of the dart (bur st) swim speed. Houde (1969) reported a sustained swim speed of 0.25 ft/s for 20-mm TL walleye (Tab le 3-1). Thus, a conservative estimate of newlystocked walleye fingerling burst swim speed would be approximately 1.25 ft/s. Similarly, a burst swim speed of approximately 2.5 f t/s may be estimated for somewhat larger juveniles of 80-mm FL, based on the 10-min critical swim speed estimate of 1.24 ft/s (Table 3-1) reported by Jones et al. (1974) and application of the Bell (1991) “50% criteria”.

3.1.9 Alewife

Burst swim speeds for juvenile and adult alewife ar e reported in Table 3-1. The burst swim speed for juvenile alewife (2.5-3 inch; 64-76-mm) was approxi mately 3 ft/s. Two comparable estimates of burst swim speed were available for adult alewife ( 235-mm FL; 250-mm TL), both generated in studies of alewife upstream passage in fishways. Dow (1962) estimated a range of burst swim speeds in a fishway of 11.5 to 16.4 ft/s. Haro et al. (2004) tested adult alewife passag e in a test flume that simulated a fishway entrance. The maximum wate r velocity tested at the flume entrance for successful ascent of adult alewife was 11.2 ft/s, which may represent a minimum estimate of burst swim speed.
The burst swim speed estimates derived from Dow (1962) and Haro et al. (2004) were based on typical lengths of adult anadromous alewife. Howeve r, adults in land-locked populations such as in Claytor Lake are usually smaller. Further, in Claytor Lake the bulk of alewives are Age-0 or Age-1 fish. Mean TL of alewife at the end of the firs t growing season may range from 130-160 mm TL, but late-spawning cohorts can be much smaller (Nigro and Ney 1982). Thus, for the bulk of alewives in Claytor Lake, the pertinent swim speed would probab ly be somewhat less than 11.2 ft/s. Additionally, landlocked alewife are especially susceptible to loss of swimming ability in co ld water, so seasonal effects (further loss of swim speed and lethargy in winter) must also be considered.

3.1.10 Bluegill

Swi m speed studies of both juvenile and adult blue gill were located. Bluegills are not considered strong swimmers, although tested juveniles oriented well to current (Schuler 1968). Bluegill body morphology is better suited for maneuverability th an for fast swim speed (Deng et al. 2004). Sustained swim speeds of 0.3 to 0.75 ft/s were reported for young of year bluegill at typical summer water temperatures by Schuler (1968) and King (1969) . Adult sustained swim speed was faster, about 1.0 ft/s (Drucker and Lauder 1999; Deng et al. 2004). Prolonged swim speed of young of year bluegill at 21°C was 0.92 ft/s (Beamish 1978). Critical swim speed of bluegill tested for 10 min, considered sufficient for culvert passage, was 1.22 ft/s, although fish size was not specified (Gardner et al. 2006). The burst swim speed of adult bluegill was estimated at 4.3 ft/s, attained over a 9-sec testC LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 16 Normandeau Associates, Inc. period using high speed photography (Webb 1978). However, this speed was reported as a final velocity calculated from an acceleration rate, a nd may represent a faster speed than might be estimated by more conventional test methods.

3.1.11 Black crappie

No swi m speed studies for black crappie were loca ted. However, the swim speed studies of closely related white crappie reviewed below suggested that black crappie may represent the poorest swimmers of the species considered herein.
Juvenile white crappie 55 to 100 mm FL were able to swim at between 0.50 to 0.75 ft/s in tests at typical summer water temperatures (Schuler 1968; King 1969). However, their behavior in the test apparatus suggested poor orientation to current, as ma ny fish tended to drift passively even at low water velocities. Investigators also noted that the swim performance of 80-mm long white crappie was similar to that of 40-mm long bluegill.
The critical swim speed of juvenile white crappie was estimated at 0.52 ft/s at 25°C, but was substantially lower (0.18 ft/s) when tested at 5°C, a typical winter water temperature in Virginia (Smiley and Parsons 1997). No studies of burst swim speed for white crappie were located. Based on the conservative application of the “50% criteria” fro m Bell (1991), an estimate of white crappie burst swim speed would be 1.0 to 1.5 ft/s. Based on white crappie as an appropriate surrogate, it is likely black crappie swim speeds would be similar.



### 3.2 F IELD 

### S TUDY OF 

### I NTAKE 

### V ELOCITY

Water current measurements were ta ken in front of the Claytor Project intakes on April 14, 2008. The intake current data were taken at two flow rates and compared to existing engineering calculations of intake velocity taken from origin al project drawings. These data were then compared to the swim speed information developed in Section 3.1.

3.2.1 Field Methods

A boat-m ounted 300 kHz Acoustic Doppler Current Pr ofiler (ADCP) connected to a laptop PC was used to acquire water current measurements in bo th horizontal and vertical dimension. The ADCP data system was operated in concert with a differen tial global positioning system (GPS) that fed data to the ADCP and a navigation software package on a separate PC. The navigation package provided accurate position updates each second. All data syst ems were clock-synchronized to enable accurate X-Y positioning during data processing.
Data were collected for five transect types at two flow conditions. A discharge of 10,000 cfs represented all four units at maximum output. Th e 2,000 cfs condition represented one unit at MEP flow. The five transect types included:

 Fixed station vertical profiles in front of each intake; position maintained for approximately 4 minutes.

 Tangential transects run parallel to the intake structure face. Four transects were run per flow, each further away from the intakes.

 Normal transects run perpendicular to each in take, starting near the intake. A pair of transects was run for each intake (each intake has two bays).C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 17 Normandeau Associates, Inc.  Transects run parallel to the log boom.

 Two far-field transects, approximately 0.5-mile and one mile uplake from the intakes.

A log boom running diagonally uplake from Unit 4 th at intercepts surface debris interfered with boat movements during tangential and normal transect r uns. Figures in the accompanying full report show the location of the log boom. Transects were comple ted by positioning the boat outside the log boom to continue data collection. The breaks in positio nal data are also shown on report figures.
Approach velocity data could not be obtained closer than approximately 40 feet from the intake wall. The ADCP transducers are angled 20° from ver tical and signals propagate downward as a coneshape. The 40-foot distance permitted data acquisiti on without interference by acoustic reflections off the dam face.
Additional details of the ADCP and GPS data syst ems are provided in the accompanying field study report prepared by Ocean Data Technologies, Inc.. The full report describes data processing steps, and presents all the data in tabular or graphical detail. The study report also includes all electronic data files on compact disk. Study results are summarized below in tabular fashion for the fixed station profiles, and by representative graphics for both types of near-dam transects. These transects represent the zones of influence for fish entrainment. Results for the log boom and uplake transects are provided in the separate field study report.

3.2.2 Results
All fixed-posi tion pr ofiles were taken at 38 to 75 feet in front of the intakes. The maximum velocities measured at the 10,000 cfs flow condition were 0.60 ft/s to 0.68 ft/s in the upper half of the intake in front of Unit 3 (Table 3-2). Directional data for th e fixed profiles in front of Units 1-3 also depict flows heading directly toward the intakes (i.e., at about 45° heading). Current velocities for the single unit MEP flow of 2,000 cfs provided by Unit 4 were substantially less, but also occurred at depths nearest the upper intake elevation (Table 3-3). Cu rrent directionality among all profiles at 2,000 cfs was decidedly weaker and inconsistent. Recall that the calculated velocity at the intake face was 1.5 ft/s (Section 2.2). Flow acceleration toward the prot ective bar racks and potential effects on fish thus occurs mainly within a comparatively short dist ance in front of the Claytor project intakes.
The results of the tangential and normal transects agreed well with the fixed profile data. Each figure depicts current velocity and flow direction by co lor code with an accompanying color legend adjacent to the right axis. Figure 3-1 shows the parallel transect closest to the intakes at the 10,000 cfs flow. The maximum velocity was less than 1.5 ft/s, most of the transect contained velocities less than 1.0 ft/s, and the highest velocity component occurred in front of Unit 3. The current velocities further upstream at 10,000 cfs, and along all tangential transects at 2,000 cfs were substantially less. Similarly, for the normal transects the current velo city was highest at the portion of each transect nearest the intake wall. Figure 3-2 shows the highest velocities at 10,000 cfs in front of Unit 2, with velocity decreasing progressively with distance up-lake , as you would expect. In the vertical aspect, both sets of transect profiles showed that current ve locities were highest in the upper portion of the intake profile, as also noted for fixed station data. Flow direction at 10,000 cfs was strongest in the North-East quadrant (toward the intakes). The normal transects also show flow directionality weakening with distance up-lake from the intake.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 18 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Table 3-2. Speed and direction values for each fi xed station profile. CL = approx. centerline.



### 10,000 cfs Flow Rate

Location ID Intake 1: F110 Intake 2: F210 Intake 3: F310 Intake 4: F410 Duration 4.21 min 3.92 min 4.45 min 4.98 min

Depth (feet) Speed ft/sec Direct (deg) Speed ft/sec Direct (deg) Speed ft/sec Direct (deg) Speed ft/sec Direct (deg)
10.1 0.33 28.6 0.44 54.0 0.53 70.7 0.42 100.0 16.6 0.35 34.9 0.47 50.0 0.60 56.6 0.46 88.7 23.2 0.37 38.3 0.46 54.3 0.68 56.4 0.41 85.9 29.7 0.40 38.9 0.46 47.2 0.65 43.4 0.38 78.9 36.3 0.39 36.2 0.52 51.4 0.60 45.0 0.42 84.3 42.9-CL 0.37 36.3 0.37 59.9 0.48 63.8 0.41 94.6

49.4 0.27 44.0 0.42 62.9 0.43 70.7 0.31 109.4 56.0 0.20 61.0 0.41 58.9 0.38 57.2 0.33 85.1 62.5 0.20 54.0 0.23 63.5 0.20 77.0 0.17 119.9 69.1 0.11 57.4 0.11 98.0 0.20 79.4 0.18 121.0 75.7 0.12 81.4 0.18 100.9 0.28 82.4 0.16 114.2 82.2 0.14 74.1 0.18 144.2 0.19 122.8 0.14 206.8 88.8 0.06 241.2 0.29 134.9 0.19 107.4 0.10 198.8 95.3 0.04 259.3 0.32 101.7 0.43 105.3 0.25 245.9

Table 3-3. Speed and direction values for each fi xed station profile. CL = approx. centerline.



### 2,000 cfs Flow Rate

Location ID Intake 1: F12 Intake 2: F22 Intake 3: F32 Intake 4: F42 Duration 3.68 min 3.68 min 3.68 min 4.27 min

Depth (feet) Speed ft/sec Direct (deg) Speed ft/sec Direct (deg) Speed ft/sec Direct (deg) Speed ft/sec Direct (deg)
10.1 0.08 55.3 0.11 45.2 0.06 45.8 0.20 98.4 16.6 0.06 331.0 0.12 13.1 0.04 36.5 0.17 50.0 23.2 0.16 322.9 0.09 336.1 0.05 57.6 0.08 18.3 29.7 0.08 292.9 0.09 215.6 0.10 58.2 0.07 290.6 36.3 0.04 228.8 0.03 31.6 0.07 20.4 0.05 101.3 42.9-CL 0.07 323.3 0.03 124.3 0.09 356.9 0.11 21.2

49.4 0.01 45.0 0.18 49.6 0.10 87.8 0.08 328.4 56.0 0.05 306.0 0.11 50.5 0.22 131.2 0.07 236.6 62.5 0.06 331.7 0.15 2.3 0.13 172.2 0.07 4.1 69.1 0.07 202.8 0.10 169.3 0.16 138.8 0.02 293.1 75.7 0.04 114.6 0.08 179.8 0.01 100.8 0.09 342.0 82.2 0.09 202.3 0.05 117.3 0.12 90.2 0.08 334.9 88.8 0.14 176.6 0.07 57.2 0.21 110.1 0.01 276.8 95.3 0.09 179.5 0.15 101.2 0.23 85.2 0.07 27.8C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 19 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Figure 3-1. (T110) Color-contour section for tangenti al line (parallel transect) approximately 40 feet off the intake wall for 10,000 cfs condition. B ox outline = intake centerline 44 feet deep.

Figure 3-2. (N2A10). Color-contour section for norm al line (perpendicular transect) in front of Unit #2 for the 10,000 cfs condition. Distance refers to distance from the face of the intake wall. Intake centerline is 44 feet deep.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 20 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Figure 3-3. (T10-43) Synoptic ve locity vectors 43 feet belo w the surface during the 10,000 cfs condition. Intake bays are labeled U1 , U2, etc. Scale arrow in lower left represents the length of a 1 ft/s vector. . ................................................................................
The tangential transect data were also used to genera te synoptic velocity vectors (arrows) that depict regional flow fields in front of and near the intakes. The vectors point in the direction of the flow and are scaled to current speed (ft/s). Figure 3-3 show s the flow vectors 43 feet deep near the intake centerline at 10,000 cfs. Current flow generally foll ows a consistent path toward the intakes for Units 1-3. However, flow toward Unit 4 runs parallel to the dam before bending sharply toward the intake. Similar vector direction and speed occurred at the 23-foot depth corresponding to the upper portion of the intakes, but were notably slower at 69 feet deep (see report).



### 3.3 F IELD 

### V ELOCITIES VS 

### F ISH 

### S WIMMING 

### C APABILITIES
Results of field velocity studies near Claytor Lake Dam described above combined with engineering calculations of at-rack intake velocity (Section 2. 2) generally depict acceleration of the near-dam water mass from about 75 ft up-lake directly toward the intakes. Inta ke velocities appeared highest in the upper water column, from about the intake center line (44 ft deep) to approximately 10 ft deep. In this reach, the water current increases from ≤ 0.5 ft/s to 1.5 ft/s. Velocity was notably less in deeper areas near the intakes. This summarization of intake velocities is shown with summarized fish swim speed information in Table 3-4.
The review of fish swimming ability clearly identified the juvenile period as the life stage most vulnerable to entrainment. However, by mid-to-lat e summer, larger juveniles of most species areC LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 21 Normandeau Associates, Inc. capable of escaping the at-rack velocity of 1.5 ft/s . The exceptions would likely be limited to crappie and late-spawned bluegill. These species are primar ily littoral zone residents, however, and therefore generally reside away from the intake area that is located more than 200 ft offshore. Larger juveniles and adults have the swimming ability to avoid intake flow velocities, even during full generation (10,000 cfs).
Newly stocked striped bass and walleye (if stocked) at < 2 inches long are also vulnerable to intake velocities. Although stocked in off-channel areas su ch as coves, an early summer spate might displace stocked juveniles from typical rearing areas and tr ansport numbers of young downstream toward the intake area, potentially leading to higher losses of stocked fish to the New River downstream of the dam.
Swim performance for several species listed in Tabl e 3-4 was poorer in colder water, as detailed in Table 3-1. For example, swim test results for white crappie at 5°C showed one-third the swimming ability compared to tests conducted at 25°C. Juven ile largemouth bass were also poorer swimmers in cold water. Other species such as alewife and gizzard shad become moribund or succumb at low water temperatures. In either in stance, reduction or loss of swimming ability and the behavioral response necessary to avoid intake flows can lead to increased episodes of fish entrainment.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 22 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Table 3-4. Comparison of Claytor Lake intake velocity data and synthesis of fish swim speed information.

Velocity Estimate Type Approach Velocity (ft/s) Engineering drawing-at rack 1.5 ADCP fixed profile @ 10,000 cfs 0.60-0.68 ADCP fixed profile @ 2,000 cfs ≤ 0.2 ADCP tangential and normal profiles < 1.5 cfs

Species Life Stage Size (in) Burst Swim Speed (ft/s) Striped bass Juv 2 - 5 2.0 - 5.0 Adult 21.8 14.9 Hybrid striped bass Swim speed intermediate between striped bass and white bass
Gizzard shad Juv N/A Adult 8.0 Largemouth bass Juv 2 - 4 3.2 Juv 5.9 - 10.6 4.3 Adult N/A
Smallmouth bass Juv 3.6 Adult 7.8 Spotted bass Swim speed intermediate between largemouth bass and smallmouth bass
White bass Juv N/A Adult 7.9 Walleye Juv ~1 1.25 Juv 3.1 2.5 Juv 6.3 6.02 Juv 12.5 11.0 Adult 22 8.57
Alewife Juv 2.5 - 3 ~3.0 Adult 9.3 11.2 Bluegill Juv 2 1.8 Adult 4 - 6 2.4 Adult 6 4.3 Crappie Juv ~3 ~1-2

Original swim speed data shown in Table 3-1. Absent a fish size or size range, no speci fic test was conducted; estimates were derived as described in text.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 23 Normandeau Associates, Inc. 

## 4.0 C OMPARATIVE 

## A NALYSIS OF 

## S IMILAR 

## P ROJECTS
Selected project data in Table 2-1 were compared to comparable project data available in the EPRI (1997) database to provide some perspective on th e subsequent analyses herein, particularly the potential for entrainment. The EPRI (1997) analysis examined fish entrainment for 43 sites including turbines of both Francis and Kaplan/propeller config urations. The sites represented in the EPRI database are listed in Table 4-1.
The Claytor Project is large compared to the 43 sites reviewed by EPRI. Based on plant capacity (8,000 cfs is the MEP combined flow for the four units at Claytor; see Table 2-1), only one site (Richard B. Russell) exceeded the plant capacity of the Claytor Hydro Project. Further, only one site approached the MEP plant flow capaci ty (Minetto). Similarly, the MEP flow for an individual turbine unit at Claytor Project (2,000 cfs) was exceeded by on ly three sampled units. Most (31) sampled units discharged less than 1,000 cfs.
Trash rack spacing for the 43 projects examined by EPRI (1997) is also listed in Table 4-1. Most projects (all but four) had rack spacing narrower than the 4-inch spacing at the Claytor Project. Some sampled sites featured rack spacing as narrow as 1-in ch. However, a subsequent examination of rack spacing and fish entrainment catch performed on EPRI (1997) data by Winchell et al. (2000) found that rack clear spacing had little effect on fish entrai nment, particularly on the size of fish entrained (Table 4-2).C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 24 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Table 4-1. Location, hydraulic capacity and tr ash rack spacing of 43 sites included in the EPRI database.

Site Name State River Total Plant Capacity

(cfs) Average Capacity of Sampled Units (cfs) Clear Trash Rack

Spacing

(in) Belding MI Flat 416 208 2 Bond Falls MI W.B. Ontonagon 900 450 3 Brule WI Brule 1,377 458 1.62 Buzzard's Roost SC Sal uda 3,930 1, 310 3.625 Caldron Falls WI Peshtigo 1,300 650 2 Centralia WI Wisconsin 3,640 550 3.5 Colton NY Raquette 1,503 450 2 Crowley WI N.F. Flambeau 2,400 1,200 2.375 E. J. West NY Sacanda ga 5,400 2,450 4.5 Feeder Dam NY Hudson 5,000 1,000 2.75 Four Mile Dam MI Thunder Bay 1,500 500 2 Gaston Shoals SC Broad 2,211 837 1.5 Grand Rapids MI/WI Menominee 3,870 739 1.75 Herrings NY Black 3,610 1,203 4.125 High Falls NY Beaver 900 300 1.81 Higley NY Raquette 2,045 682 3.63 Hillman Dam MI Thunder Bay 270 270 3.25 Hollidays Bridge SC Saluda 4,396 370 unknown Johnsonville NY Hoosic 1,288 644 2 Kleber MI Black 400 200 3 Lake Algonquin NY Sacandaga 750 750 1 Luray VA S.F. Shenandoah 1,477 369 2.75 Minetto NY Oswego 7,500 1,500 2.5 Moshier NY Beaver 660 330 1.5 Ninety-Nine Islands SC Broad 4,800 584 1.5 Ninth Street Dam MI Thunder Bay 1,650 550 1 Norway Point Dam MI Thunder Bay 1,775 575 1.69 Potato Rapids WI Peshtigo 1,380 500 1.75 Raymondville NY Raquette 1,640 1,640 2.25 Richard B. Russell GA/SC Savannah 60,000 7,200 8 Saluda SC Saluda 812 227 unknown Sandstone Rapids WI Peshtigo 1,300 650 1.75 Schaghticoke NY Hoosic 1,640 410 2.125 Shawano WI Wolf 850 850 5 Sherman Island NY Hudson 6,600 1,650 3.125 Thornapple WI Flambeau 1,400 700 1.69 Tower MI Black 404 202 1 Townsend Dam PA Beaver 4,400 2,200 5.5 Twin Branch IA St. Joseph 3,200 600 3 Warrensburg NY Schroon 1,350 1,350 unknown White Rapids MI/WI Menominee 3,994 1,225 2.5 Wisconsin River Division WI Wisconsin 5,150 431 2.19 Youghiogheny PA Youghiogheny 1,600 800 10C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 25 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Table 4-2. Size composition of entrainment catc h by bar rack spacing (after Winchell et al. 2000).

Average Composition (%) by Size Class (inches) Clear Spacing (inches) N 0 to 4 4 to 8 8 to 15 15 to 30 > 30 Representative Units

1 3 61.5 32.2 5.5 0.9 0.0

1.5-1.8 10 64.8 27.1 7.5 0.6 0.0

2.0-2.75 12 68.9 25.3 5.1 0.7 0.0

3.0-10.0 14 80.0 15.7 3.9 0. 3 0.0 All Claytor Units*

All 39 71.3 22.9 5.3 0.5 0.0

* Bar rack clear spacing = 4.0 inches.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 26 Normandeau Associates, Inc. 

## 5.0 E NTRAINMENT 

## A SSESSMENT



### 5.1 C HARACTERISTICS AND 

### B EHAVIOR OF 

### S ELECTED 

### F ISHES
In evaluating entrainment susceptibility and effects, th e eleven target species (juvenile and adults of striped bass, hybrid striped bass, gizzard shad, la rgemouth bass, smallmouth bass, spotted bass, white bass, walleye, alewife, bluegill, and black crappie) were considered separately. Following are brief life history accounts for each of the species consid ered in this study, with emphasis on their distribution within Claytor Lake.

5.1.1 Striped Bass
Striped bass is a significant recreational species in Claytor Lake, accounting for approximately 10% of angler effort during 1998-1999, the most recent creel survey period (Copeland 2004). The population is maintained by stocking 1 to 2-inch fi ngerlings during June of each year. Stocking densities since 2001 have been about 13 to 17 fingerl ings per acre. Fingerlings were stocked during 2001 and 2002 in two or three coves throughout Cl aytor Lake, including coves in lower-, mid-, and up-lake areas (Rash 2003).
Juvenile striped bass rapidly disperse from stocking sites, residing primarily in shallow littoral areas with open sand-bottom habitat (Van Den Avyl e and Higginbotham 1979; Rash 2003). Stocked juvenile striped bass quickly become piscivorous at about 120 mm in mid-summer, growing fast enough to successfully exploit young-of-year (YOY) alewives. Rash (2003) was most successful capturing YOY striped bass at lower lake littoral areas, which also corresponded to lower-lake habitats favored by spawning alewife, particularly along the north shore downstream of Claytor Lake State Park (Nigro and Ney 1982). Striped bass youn g likely follow alewife movements from littoral spawning areas to more pelagic, off-shore areas la ter in fall as water temperatures cool. Yearling striped bass move back onshore in spring, again expl oiting YOY alewives. It is likely juvenile striped bass remain in close proximity to favored alew ife food sources until the thermal requirements of mature striped bass intervene during the hottest periods.
The distribution of older striped bass in Claytor La ke is water temperature and/or food supply driven. Large striped bass actively seek the coolest water av ailable when water temperatures become warmer than preferred (Cheek et al. 1985). Coutant (1985) defines suitable summer habitat for adult striped bass as having water temperatures between 18 and 25°C, and DO concentrations at least 2-3 mg/L. As a result, striped bass in Claytor Lake are distribut ed much more broadly dur ing fall through spring, but tend to be restricted to the deeper reaches in the lower one-third of the lake in summer. The deeper reaches provide required cooler water temperatures that are unavailable in the shallower upper areas. Net uplake movements of adults occur in fa ll and spring, as large striped bass either leave thermal refugia as water temperatures cool or stag e for spawning migrations to lake headwaters, respectively.
Although adult striped bass occupy lower lake habita ts at depths similar to powerhouse intakes, little evidence of transport out of Claytor Lake exists for the larger specimens. More likely, downstream movement out of Claytor Lake occurs during the period shortly after stocking when juveniles (fingerlings) are rapidly dispersing from the stocking locations.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 27 Normandeau Associates, Inc. 5.1.2 Striped bass x white bass hybrids
Hybrid striped bass fingerlings stocked during late summer maintain the fishery in Claytor Lake. Hybrids are larger (3 to 5 inches) than striped bass at the time of stocking, but due to the time of year are unable to exploit YOY alewives and gizzard shad that have grown too large to ingest. YOY hybrids feed primarily on young Lepomis when they became piscivorous at approximately 120 mm (Rash 2003). Hybrid juveniles preferred open, sandy littoral habitats, similar to young striped bass, with similar thermal niches (Rash 2003). Seasona lly, YOY hybrids moved offshore in December, and back on-shore in March-April, similar to striped bass movements (and alewives).
Adult hybrids exhibit the same general within-lake seasonal movement patterns as striped bass, but in a given reach may occupy slightly different areas either horizontally or vertically (Kilpatrick 2003). Vertical separation occurs in summer due to the warmer water temperature tolerances of hybrids which allow them to exist higher in the water co lumn. Horizontal separation within a 700-m reach was noted as both groups staged prior to moving uplake for the spawning run.
Hybrids were stocked due to the belief they we re less prone than striped bass to emigrate downstream. Hybrids have become established in dam tailwaters, although little evidence exists to suggest when or at what size movement out of the lake occurs. One adult hybrid moved to dam tailwaters between February and April 2002, possibly exiting during a period of high inflow (Kilpatrick 2003). However, most hybrids probably exit as juveniles during their first year during post-stocking dispersal, based on prior experience with hybrids in a large hydroelectric reservoir (Normandeau Associates, in-file data).

5.1.3. Gizzard shad
The spatial distribution of gizzard shad in Claytor La ke generally overlaps that of alewives, the other clupeid forage species, due to generally sim ilar mesotrophic characteristics throughout the lake (Bonds 2000). Gizzard shad are primarily resident s of shallow, littoral habitats. Standing stock estimates in 1997, ten years after they became estab lished, revealed that gizzard shad comprised 35% of littoral fish biomass based in cove rotenone samples (Small 2002). However, overall abundance is regarded as low compared to more eutrophic reservoirs.
Gizzard shad in Claytor Lake spawn in the spring, beginning in mid-May around the same time as alewives (Small 2002). Peak larval densities were attained in late June, and larval captures ceased in early August. YOY gizzard shad appear in fish diet s at about 20 mm in mid to late summer; Age 1 shad are eaten only in spring before the new cohort is available. First-year growth in Claytor Lake is rapid, and YOY reach a mean length of 155 mm TL at Age 1, larger than Age 1 gizzard shad in other similar reservoirs (Bonds 2000). The rapid growth of young-of-year gizzard shad in Claytor Lake limits their usefulness as prey for piscivorous you ng of predators, and for the most part their contribution as forage to predator populations othe r than for the largest adults is as Age-0 fish, as commonly observed elsewhere (e.g., Ney et al. 1988). Young gizzard shad provide the main forage for striped bass and hybrid striped bass in late summer and fall, and represent a secondary forage species (after alewives) for walleye (Bonds 2000).
Gizzard shad apparently are routinely transported out of Claytor Lake to the New River and reservoirs downstream (Bonds 2000). Gizzard shad will succu mb or become moribund at prolonged water temperatures below about 3°C (37°F) (see revi ew in Williamson and Nelson 1985). Young gizzard shad typically pass out of temperate reservoirs duri ng fall and early winter as their lower temperatureC LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 28 Normandeau Associates, Inc. threshold is approached and swimming ability is re duced or lost. The loss of swimming ability creates their susceptibility to entrainment, and as a result fall/winter gizzard shad entrainment peaks are typical in reservoirs where they are abundant (FERC 1995).

5.1.4 Largemouth bass
Large m outh bass currently comprise about 30% of the three black bass species in Claytor Lake as determined by electrofishing (Copeland 2004). Howe ver, the angler catch of largemouth bass was equal to the combined catch of the other two bl ack bass species in the mo st recent creel survey (Copeland 2004). Largemouth bass electrofishing catch rates increased during 1992 to 1998 in Claytor Lake. Based on VDGIF electrofishing samples over the same period, largemouth bass spatial population densities are comparatively even among uppe r, mid, and lower lake reaches. Abundance is highest in off-channel coves, including Peak Creek , the major tributary arm. Largemouth bass growth is good and condition is excellent (Copeland 1999). Bluegill and crayfish dominated the diet of largemouth bass in all seasons, but alewives a nd gizzard shad can be important seasonal diet components (Bonds 2000). Reliance on bluegill identi fies largemouth bass as mainly littoral zone inhabitants.
Largemouth bass spawn in spring and build nests in sh allow, littoral zone habitats typically associated with cover objects. Adults guard the young afte r hatching, and young bass remain in shallow, protected habitats such as coves and flooded tri butary mouths following cessation of parental care. Adults typically establish home ranges during the summer into fall. Largemouth bass are generally considered inactive during winter (Cooke et al. 2003). Strong orientation to cover and preference for shallower, off-channel habitats generally limits largemouth bass exposure to entrainment through water intakes.

5.1.5 Smallmouth bass

S m allmouth bass are most abundant in lower and mi d-lake areas, which afford an abundance of steeper, rocky shoreline habitats (Copeland 1999; 2004). Throughout most of the 1990s overall smallmouth bass abundance (electrofishing CPUE) was about equal to that of largemouth bass. The representation of smallmouth bass in the 1998-1999 s port fishing survey was 38% of the total black bass catch (Copeland 1999). Crayfish and bluegill dominated the smallmouth bass diet (Bonds 2000).
Smallmouth bass spawn in spring and build nests assoc iated with littoral zone cover, and guard their young after hatching. Young bass remain in shallow, protected habitats following cessation of parental care. After spawning, adult smallmouth b ass may move about within a variable-sized home range in summer. Smallmouth bass may move from litto ral areas in late fall to winter aggregations associated with cover in deep water (Langhurst and Schoenike 1990). A lthough more abundant in downlake areas of Claytor Lake, the numerous pr otected coves combined with smallmouth bass preferences for shallow littoral habitats would te nd to isolate most young smallmouth bass, typically the life stage most vulnerable to entrainment, fro m the submerged, offshore-sited intake structures located in the lower lake.

5.1.6 Spotted bass
Spotted bass are the m ost abundant of the black bass species in Claytor Lake based on electrofishing CPUE (Copeland 1999). Spatially, spotted bass abundance is highest in the upper portion of the lake. Its habitat requirements, intermediate between those of largemouth and smallmouth bass (MillerC LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 29 Normandeau Associates, Inc. 1975; Jenkins and Burkhead 1993), and higher tolera nce for turbidity (Trautman 1981, in Jenkins and Burkhead 1993) conform to the more riverine character and higher turbidity of upper Claytor Lake. Seasonal movements to deeper lake areas (offshore) in winter may occur based on accounts in Miller (1975).
Spotted bass formed 12% of the black bass catch during the 1998-1999 creel survey (Copeland 1999). Adult dietary components strongly favored crayfish with some bluegill, similar to smallmouth bass (Bonds 2000).
Spotted bass construct nests on firm bottom at dept hs to 20 ft when water temperatures near 60°F (Jenkins and Burkhead 1993). A wide variety of firm bottom types are acceptable, but nearby cover is also important (Miller 1975; Voge le 1975). Young aggregate in schools while guarded by the male, then gradually disperse at about 30 mm (Vogele 1975). The occurrence of most spotted bass in uplake areas, tight schooling aided by parental car e, and strong association with cover may make the species less prone to entrainment at the most vulnerable juvenile stage.

5.1.7 White bass

White bass ar e highly fecund, mobile, pelagic predator s that move to reservoir headwaters or tributary rivers to spawn in spring. Claytor Lake white bass abundance is considered low (Copeland 2004), possibly due to competition from hybrid striped b ass or predation on larvae by alewives (Kohler 1980, cited in Bauer 2002). In Claytor Lake spaw ning success and dominant white bass year classes occur during Aprils with high run-off (DiCenzo and Duval 2002). Poor or missing year classes result from springs with low reservoir inflow. Spawning oc curs on the open-water surface and the eggs are demersal and adhere to the bottom. Young prefer shallow water over harder bottom, but remain in littoral zones only during early life stages (Horrall 1962, in Becker 1983). When in littoral habitat the young prefer sandy substrates, similar to striped bass and hybrid striped bass.
Larval white bass utilize a diurnal vertical migra tion to slow downstream transport from high-current spawning areas (Starnes et al. 1983). This mechanis m may effectively permit young white bass to grow to a larger size with higher swim performance capability before reaching Claytor Dam intakes, thereby reducing susceptibility to entrainment during the most vulnerable life stage.
Following spawning in the upper reaches of Clay tor Lake, most adults would likely move downstream to the main body of the reservoir. Th e summer-fall spatial distribution of larger white bass would likely mimic prey movements. White bass are schooling, aggressive pelagic predators that favor clupeid prey where they co-exist. White bass would likely follow schools of YOY alewives and gizzard shad, the dominant pelagic prey in Claytor Lake. White bass were heavy consumers of alewives prior to gizzard shad introduction (Bo aze and Lackey 1974). During summer, white bass were found primarily within the top 6 m (20 ft) of the water column (Tibbles 1956, in Becker 1983). During the rest of the year they were found in d eeper waters. White bass remain active during winter (Cooke et al. 2003).
Larger white bass respond to seasonal prey movements, and since they remain active during winter could be susceptible to fall/winter entrainment as discussed below for walle ye. White bass will follow clupeid schools (alewives in this case) throughout the upper 14 m (46 ft) of the water column (Boaze 1972).C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 30 Normandeau Associates, Inc. 5.1.8 Walleye
Claytor Lake walleye have received substantial management focus based on genetic characteristics in recent years. Prior to research recommendations to enhance the riverine walleye stock (Palmer 1999; Palmer et al. 2005), which may be native, walleye fry and fingerlings from la rgely lake sources were heavily stocked periodically since impoundment (Rosebery 1951; Copeland 1999), with the goal of establishing and maintaining a pelagic lake sport fi shery. However, the principle sport fishery for walleye occurs in the New River upstream of Clay tor Lake in spring during the spawning run. The lake sport fishery is negligible, representing less th an 1% of total effort (Copeland 1999), likely due to the preference of adult walleye for deep, o ff-shore waters most of the year (Palmer 1999).
Adult walleye that mostly reside in the lower two- thirds of Claytor Lake move upstream during late February into early May to spawn in lake head waters near Allisonia (Palmer 1999). Adults then return to pre-spawn home ranges in the lower lake th at typically extend over 13 linear kilometers in size. The adults are considered nomadic with in the home range, moving continually, likely in response to movements of alewife schools (Palmer et al. 2005). Alewife represents the preferred prey of walleye (Boaze and Lackey 1974; Bonds 2000).
Young walleye spawned in the New River likely drif t downstream to rear in Claytor Lake. Young in other lakes are pelagic until they grow to slightly l onger than 1 inch, then return to inshore rearing areas (Becker 1983). Dispersal of naturally produced young walleye ( ≤ 2 inches) to downstream tailwaters occurs at many reservoirs (FERC 1995). Th is is about the same size of stocked walleye. Movement of larger juvenile walle ye out of reservoirs is also comm on in late fall and winter, often accompanied by increased inflows and shorter flus hing times (FERC 1995; Jernejcic 1986). Larger walleye may also follow stressed prey such as cold -stressed clupeids to deeper reservoir areas thereby increasing susceptibility to entrainment into submerged water intakes (RMC 1992).

5.1.9 Alewife

Landlocked alewife were in troduced during the 1 960s, and along with introduced gizzard shad, comprise the main forage base for pelagic predator s in Claytor Lake. Alewife spawn principally in littoral, lower-lake areas adjacent to their preferred, pelagic habitats (Nigro and Ney 1982). Alewife exhibit a protracted spawning period that extends approximately 13 weeks, beginning in early May and lasting until early August. Larvae consume zooplankton but also prey on larvae of other fishes (Kohler et al. 1986). Nigro and Ney (1982) documen ted a daily growth increment of 0.68-mm in Claytor Lake. The long growing season resulted in young attaining 155 mm at Age 1, a length beyond the capability of all but the largest predators to ingest.
Alewife seasonal distribution has been largely de termined through gill netting and predator diet studies. Alewives in Claytor Lake are primarily pelagi c-zone inhabitants, with highest densities in the lower lake (Nigro and Ney 1982). Mature fish move inshore in spring for spawning, then move back off-shore. Although regarded as pelagic zone fishes, alewives invade the littoral zone at night (Kohler and Ney 1981). Older alewife thermal requirement s for cooler water temperatures (preferred 16- 20°C; Coutant 1977, cited in Ney et al. 1988) effectively limit their distribution to deeper offshore portions of Claytor Lake, where they are available for large pelagic predators such as walleye and striped bass with similar thermal requirements. Younger alewife exhibit a more plastic thermal regime (preferred temperature up to 25°C; Stewart and Binkowski 1986, cited in Ney et al. 1988), and so may be more common than adults in shallower areas that are warmer.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 31 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Alewife can succumb to cold water temperatures in some winters (Boaze and Lackey 1974; Kohler et al. 1986). During such winters, alewife may initially seek warmer water and move to the deeper portions of lakes (RMC 1992). In Claytor Lake and elsewhere, this can result in large alewife schools proximal to submerged water intakes. The result is entrainment of large numbers of alewife, as well as predators such as walleye that follow the schools (Boaze and Lackey 1974; RMC 1992). .

5.1.10 Bluegill
Bluegill represents the principal panfish species caught and harvested in Cla y tor Lake (Copeland 1999). Bluegill catch was in excess of 108,000 fish, a nd more than 15,800 were harvested. Targeted panfish angling comprised 5% of overall effort.
Bluegills are primarily littoral zone residents. Sp awning is protracted, occurring from May through at least August, and nests are constructed in shallows on sand or gravel. Upon leaving nests, bluegill larvae migrate to limnetic surface waters, returning to littoral areas at approximately 25 mm in length (Werner 1967). Young are planktivores (Jenkins a nd Burkhead 1993; Werner 1969), and themselves are the primary food of the black basses (Bonds 2000). In lower Claytor Lake, juvenile and adult bluegill abundance would likely be highest at the ba ck of coves where habitat < 5 m deep is most common, as shown in Nigro and Ney (1982).

5.1.11 Black Crappie
Although bot h crappie species exist in Claytor Lake , black crappie was likely targeted for this assessment since they are the dominant crappie sp ecies in the lower lake where turbidity is less (Kohler et al. 1986). Black crappie ranked third (2,411 total) among harvested fishes during the most recent creel survey (Copeland 1999). Given the harves t magnitude and high retention, black crappie exploitation is considered low, and recr uitment is consiste nt (Copeland 1999).
Black crappie are usually regarded as littoral zone residents, typically found in backwaters and other off-channel habitats, usually associated with in-water cover of some type. Historically, crappies were considered part of the pelagic predator assemblage in Claytor Lake (Kohler et al. 1986). Spawning occurs primarily in April in nests associated w ith cover (Jenkins and Burkhead 1993). Very young black crappie apparently undergo a migration fro m the spawning site to open limnetic habitat and then back to the littoral zone early in the first y ear, similar to bluegill (Werner 1967). Black crappie young represent a principal forage species for black basses which are also chiefly littoral zone inhabitants. In lower Claytor Lake, juvenile and adult black crappie abundance would likely be highest at the back of coves where cover and hab itat < 5 m deep are most available, as shown in Nigro and Ney (1982).



### 5.2 R EVIEW OF 

### E NTRAINMENT 

### R ATES 

### D EVELOPED BY 

### EPRI (1997)
EPRI (1997) compiled fish entrainment data from the 43 selected sites listed in Table 4-1. As discussed above in Section 4.0, most of the sites were smaller than the Claytor Project in terms of individual unit size or plant capacity. Several projects were located in the sout h (seven), but only one project was located in Virginia (Luray). The compilation filtered site entrainment data through a range of acceptability criteria, such as:C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 32 Normandeau Associates, Inc.  Requirement for utilization of full-flow netting

 Sufficient data for seasonal analyses

 Performance of net efficiency tests

 Sufficient operational data to calculate entrainment densities

 Lack of major study flaws such as net intrusion, extensive net damage, etc.

The thorough data screening enabled calcula tion of reliable seasonal and annual estimated entrainment rates for fishes of three size groups. Th e annual estimated entrainment rates for small (< 8 inches), medium (8-15 inches), and large (> 15 inch es) fish for most of the species considered for this assessment are summarized in Table 5-1. The range of densities among included sites for a species were used by EPRI (1997) to develop a 5- step qualitative scale of entrainment potential from Low to Moderate to High. The qualitative rating was determined within the distribution of entrainment densities by identifying "break points". A different set of "break-points" from among higher density values were used to describe entrainm ent potential for small fish compared to medium and large fish since small fish are more abundant in a reservoir than either medium or large fish.

Table 5-1. Average entrainment densities for Claytor Hydro Project fish species of interest drawn from EPRI (1997) entrainment data base. Annual density standardized and shown as number of fish per million cubic feet of water.

Small Fish (< 8 inches) Medium Fish (8-15 inches) Large Fish (>15 inches)

No. Sites Annual Entrainment No. Sites Annua l Entrainment No. Sites Annual Entrainment Species/Surrogates Present Density Potential Present Density Potential Present Density Potential Alewife 3 34.057 High 3 0.078 M oderate-High 3 0.0 None
Gizzard shad 10 15.668 High 10 0.220 High 10 0.0047 Moderate
Bluegill 36 0.925 Moderate-Hig h 36 0.005 Moderate 36 0.0000 Low
Black crappie 30 0.400 Moderate-Hig h 30 0.013 Moderate-High 30 0.0000 Low
Walleye 29 0.120 Moderate-High 29 0.026 Moderate-High 29 0.002 Low-Moderate
Largemouth bass 1 34 0.118 Moderate-High 34 0.002 Low-Moderate 34 0.0032 Moderate

Smallmouth bass 1 34 0.090 Moderate 34 0. 008 Moderate 34 0.0005 Low

White perch 2 4 0.224 Moderate-High 4 0.183 High 4 0.0000 Low

White bass 2 4 0.003 Low 4 0.042 Moderate-High 4 0.0 Low

Striped bass NA
Hybrid striped bass NA
Spotted bass NA

Footnotes (also see text): NA = no sites in EPRI database reported this species in entrainment catch
1 Potential surrogate species for spotted bass
2 Potential surrogate species for st riped bass and hybrid striped bass.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 33 Normandeau Associates, Inc. The entrainment densities and associated entrainmen t potential shown in Table 5-1 represent up to 36 sites per target species without regard to variations in local conditions ( e.g. , intake configuration, reservoir size, etc.) that may influence entrainment. Further, not all species of management interest within the Claytor Project were represented in the EPRI (1997) database. As a result, we assumed that information deemed relevant for several species c onsidered herein were represented by surrogate species included in the EPRI (1997) review. The surrogate species and the Claytor Project species they represent are listed as footnotes to Table 5-1.
As would be expected, small fish densities were s ubstantially higher than for medium and large fish (Table 5-1). In fact, most field studies included in data compilations have shown that entrainment is highest for fish less than 4 inches (FERC 1995; Winchell et al. 2000). Alewife and gizzard shad generally have the highest potential for entrainmen t in reservoirs where they are abundant. For both clupeid species, entrainment density peaks occurred in either the fall or winter, typically when they become lethargic due to cold water temperatures. The potential for entrainment of small bluegill and black crappie, walleye, and largemouth bass was Moderate-High. Entrainment density for these species tended to be higher in summer (EPRI (1997) or fall (FERC 1995), suggesting dispersal of young as the primary factor. Smallmouth bass entrainm ent risk also was highest in summer, although the overall risk was rated as Moderate. The youn g of each of these species, particularly the centrarchids, are considered primarily littoral zone inhabitants.
Spotted bass were not represented among any of the EPRI (1997) source studies. Although their habitat requirements are intermediate between smallmouth bass and largemouth bass, spotted bass tend to be more abundant in upper Claytor Lake (see Section 5.1.6). Given this, the entrainment potential of young spotted bass is most likely no more than Moderate.
The entrainment potential of white bass was j udged Low based on the limited EPRI (1997) data (Table 5-1). White bass young are typically produced in reservoir headwaters or tributary arms (DiCenzo and Duval 2002), which might account for their overall low entrainment rate.
Although in the same genus as striped bass, white ba ss alone as a surrogate for striped bass or hybrid striped bass may lead to an underestimate of en trainment potential for the young of these two stocked species. Stocked striped bass and, particularly, hybr id striped bass, are known to readily escape inland reservoirs and establish fisheries in downstream reaches, as has occurred in the New River and elsewhere (Van Den Avyle and Higginbotham 1979; Gleason 1982). As a result, white perch, another
Morone species, was included to possibly bracket entr ainment potential. Small white perch exhibited a Moderate-High entrainment potential rating based on the four studies that included white perch in EPRI (1997). Therefore, the entrainment potential of young striped bass and hybrid striped bass may be intermediate between white bass and white perc h, and appropriately described as Moderate, given their acknowledged rapid dispersal from stocking sites in the mid-reservoir area (Rash 2003).
Although annual entrainment densities were substantially lower for all fish > 8-15 inches except white bass, and only moderately lower for white perch, several species retained a qualitative potential rating of High or Moderate-High. These include gi zzard shad, alewife, black crappie, walleye, white perch and white bass. In particular, use of the white perch entrainment rate to develop a representative rate for medium-sized striped bass and hybrids striped bass might be problematic.However, though the qualitative potential for entrainment of medium or large fish relative to small fish may be comparable for some species, the numbers of many fishes > 8 inches that are available forC LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 34 Normandeau Associates, Inc. entrainment, including the Morone taxa, black crappie, and particul arly alewife and gizzard shad, are relatively low.
The entrainment potential among all large-sized fish es considered was no more than Moderate. For species like alewife and bluegill, fish >15 inches don’ t exist. The swimming ability of adults of most of the other species of interest (see Section 3.0) w ould be expected to preclude entrainment at the low prevailing approach velocities.

5.2.1 Projections of Entrainment Losses
The average annual entrainment densities shown in Tabl e 5-1 were used with annual turbine flow data to extrapolate to estimates of fish lost from each reservoir due to turbine entrainment. A dry year and a wet year were selected by AEP to illustrate poten tial bounds for fish loss estimates. Annual Claytor turbine flow data were provided by Appalachian Power operations staff for a recent dry year (2007) and representative wet year (2003). Claytor turbine flow was 66.824 billion cubic feet of water in 2007 and 152.19 billion cubic feet of water in 2003. Turbine flow during a wet year was more than twice that in a dry year. Other factors that can affect the amount of generation in a year such as planned or unplanned outages for equipment re pairs or upgrades are mentioned here but not considered further.
Estimated fish losses from Claytor Lake due to turbin e entrainment without regard to variability in fish passage survival (discussed later in Section 5.4) are shown in Table 5-2. As expected, the prolific prey species alewife and gizzard shad dominate estim ated entrainment losses. Projected game fish losses were substantially less. For all fishes, entr ainment losses would generally be expected to be higher in years with higher precipitation and increased runoff that enables more generation. It is also important to note that fish losses are primarily of small fish, and that survival of these small fish is typically quite high (see Section 5.4).

Two Morone species, white bass and white perch, served as surrogates to develop bracketed estimates of striped bass and hybrid striped bass entrainm ent losses. This was done due to the lack of quantitative striped bass or hybrid striped bass entrai nment data in available literature. The estimated losses in Table 5-2 were calculated by using white bass and white perch data each from four qualified projects reviewed by EPRI (1997). Juvenile white bass entrainment at these projects was low, whereas white perch entrainment was much high er. White bass young are produced in project headwaters, perhaps spatially isolated at their most vulnerable life stage by distance from turbine intakes. White perch are likely not as spatially is olated in reservoirs, and through natural reproduction can achieve high abundance leading to stunting in la nd-locked situations (e.g., Hergenrader and Bliss 1971, in Nebraska). The white perch in Nebraska also quickly propagated downstream. Additionally, studies at Richard B. Russell Project in South Caro lina/Georgia estimated white perch entrainment (pump-back) more than 50 times higher than estimated for striped bass or striped bass hybrids (Nestler et al. 1998). Although striped bass a nd hybrid striped bass also establish fisheries downstream as noted for white perch, both species ar e stocked in Claytor Lake at controlled densities. Thus, entrainment of small striped bass and hybrid striped bass may be higher than shown for white bass, but almost certainly less than if white perc h were used as the sole surrogate. Thus, to be conservative, the midpoint of the densities shown fo r white perch and white bass in Table 5-1 were used to estimate the losses in Table 5-2.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 35 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Higher losses of medium-sized white bass than smal ler individuals, and (by surrogate) higher than expected losses of medium-sized striped bass and hybrid striped bass represent other apparent anomalies in Table 5-2. Striped bass and hybrid st riped bass, largely due to the inclusion of white perch as a surrogate, also exhibited comparatively hi gh entrainment densities of medium-sized fish.

Table 5-2. Estimated entrainment losses for Cl aytor Lake fish species of interest. Annual density standardized and shown as number of fish per million cubic feet of water.

Small Fish (< 8 inches) Medium Fish (8-15 inches) Large Fish (> 15 inches)
DRY YEAR Species/surrogates Annual Density Entrainment Losses Annual Density Entrainment Losses Annual Density Entrainment Losses

Alewife 34.057 2,275,830 0.078 5,212 0.0 0
Gizzard shad 15.668 1,047,001 0.220 14,701 0.0047 314 Bluegill 0.925 61,812 0.005 334 0.0000 0 Black crappie 0.400 26,730 0.013 869 0.0000 0 Walleye 0.120 8,019 0.026 1,737 0.002 134 Largemouth bass 0.118 7,885 0.002 134 0.0032 214
Smallmouth bass 0.090 6,014 0.008 535 0.0005 33 Spotted bass 1 0.104 6,950 0.005 334 0.0018 120 Striped bass 2 0.1135 7,585 0.1125 7,518 0.0005 33 Hybrid striped bass 2 0.1135 7,585 0.1125 7,518 0.0005 33
White bass 0.003 200 0.042 2,807 0.0 0

Small Fish (< 8 inches) Medium Fish (8-15 inches) Large Fish (> 15 inches)
WET YEAR Species/surrogates Annual Density Entrainment Losses Annual Density Entrainment Losses Annual Density Entrainment Losses

Alewife 34.057 5,183,152 0.078 11,871 0.0 0
Gizzard shad 15.668 2,384,521 0.220 33,482 0.0047 715 Bluegill 0.925 140,776 0.005 761 0.0000 0 Black crappie 0.400 60,876 0.013 1,978 0.0000 0 Walleye 0.120 18,263 0.026 3,957 0.002 304 Largemouth bass 0.118 17,958 0.002 304 0.0032 487
Smallmouth bass 0.090 13,697 0.008 1,218 0.0005 76 Spotted bass 1 0.104 15,828 0.005 761 0.0018 274 Striped bass 2 0.1135 17,274 0.1125 17,121 0.0005 76 Hybrid striped bass 2 0.1135 17,274 0.1125 17,121 0.0005 76
White bass 0.003 457 0.042 6,392 0.0 0

1 Midpoint of largemouth bass and sma llmouth bass density used to calculate potential lo sses of spotted bass.
2 Midpoint of white perch and white bass de nsity used to calculate pot ential losses of striped ba ss and hybrid striped bass.

Winchell et al. (2000), in his summarization of the EPRI (1997) entrainment database, suggested that despite best efforts to prevent tailrace net intrus ion, some larger fish densities may have been affected by fish entering the net from downstream . The moderately high densities of medium-sized white bass and white perch likely reflect net intrus ion, since peak entrainm ent catches of both species occurred in spring during the spawning period ( EPRI 1997). Such higher entrainment densities of medium-sized fish are not only counterintuitive bu t opposite the data trends identified for other species in numerous field studies. In addition, th e swimming abilities of 8-15 inch striped bass andC LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 36 Normandeau Associates, Inc. hybrid striped bass are substantially better than the surrogate white perch, such that losses of striped bass and hybrid striped bass portrayed in Table 5-2 are probably overestimated.



### 5.3 B LADE 

### S TRIKE AND 

### C AVITATION 

### P OTENTIAL OF 

### E XISTING 

### U NITS

Blade strike or contact with turbine structural elemen ts is the most likely mode of injury or mortality for fishes passing through the turbines (e.g., Eicher Associates 1987). Other possible injury/mortality sources less likely to harm fish include shear forces and changes in pressure (e.g., Cada 1990). Changes in pressure within the tu rbine can result from cavitation. Cav itation potential is related to “plant sigma”, which is related to the elevation (siting) of the turbine relative to minimum tailrace elevation. The risk of injury/mortality due to cavita tion is addressed below. Additionally, for the more likely collisions with structural elements, the st rike probability assessment us ing the Franke et al (1997) formula described below relates fish size (p rimarily) to water passage spaces in the turbine, and most likely predicts blade or mechanical strike potential.

5.3.1 Strike Probability using Predictive Model

The form ula developed by Franke et al. (1997) grew out of efforts for the Department of Energy (DOE) to design more “fish-friendly” turbines. Th e formula calculates the probability (P) of blade strike by relating such turbine parameters as the number of buckets, runner diameter, and runner height to fish length and operating condition. Fish length and available passage space are the principal drivers of the output. The paramters of interest for the large Francis units at the Claytor Project are shown in Table 5-3. Other than manufacturer, the units differ only slightly in runner diameter (2.8%). For this exercise, eight representative fish le ngths, two operating conditi ons, and two correlation factors were selected. The operating conditions were unit design flow (2,500 cfs) and MEP flow (2,000 cfs). The correlation factors used were 0.10 and 0.15; these are used to account for variability in strike potential and also to relate the output to empirical data available to the Franke study. Although the formula calculates a probability, in the present context it is more conventionally used in the formula Survival (S) = 1 – P, with r esults expressed as a survival percentage.

Table 5-3. Values of turbine parameters used in blade strike and survival estimates.

Claytor Lake Turbines

Parameter Unit No. 1, 2 Unit No. 3, 4 Turbine type Francis Francis

No. blades/buckets 15 15 Max. turbine discharge (cfs) 2,500 2,500 Turbine discharge (cfs) at best efficiency 2,000 2,000

Runner diameter at inlet (ft) 8.8 9.0

Runner diameter at di scharge (ft) 10.9 11.2 Runner height at inlet (crown) (ft) 6.3 6.3 Best turbine efficiency (%) 92 92

RPM 138.5 138.5 Head (ft) 116 116C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 37 Normandeau Associates, Inc. The results applied to the Claytor units show that st rike potential is low and expected survival is quite high for the mostly small fish likely to be entraine d (Table 5-4). For example, at the MEP flow of 2,000 cfs and either unit type, predicted survival fo r small fish < 8 inches long (average of survival for 2, 4, and 6-inch fish) is 94% to 96%. The data also show that survival may be nearly as high for units operated at 2,500 cfs, and also that surv ival decreases as fish length increases. Both results conform to expectations. The water pathway is less turbulent at efficient flow, meaning smaller forces are acting on the fish, and larger fish are more likel y to contact a turbine element in a confined space.
These modeled predictions may be compared to survival results determined in the field for similar sized fish (see Section 5.4 below). For comparis on purposes, immediate survival results from field studies provide the most appropriate parallel, becau se these reflect fish condition immediately after turbine passage. The modeled data are generally quite similar to field study results and reflect the survival trends shown in Section 5.4 with particular reference to fish size.

5.3.2 Cavitation Potential

Cavitation occurs within the turbine envi ronm ent. Most hydro plants are designed to minimize the likelihood of cavitation due to the costs of efficiency loss and the cost of repa irs to turbine runners. Design issues or extreme operating conditions create sub-atmospheric pressures that typically damage metal turbine blades. Cavitation occurs in small ar eas of the runner, and damage to fish can result from intense shock waves emanating from collapsing bubbles or vapor pockets. Tests have shown, however, that the zone of cavitation is small, and fish passing through the turbine must be close to the shock wave to be damaged (E icher Associates 1987; Cada 1990).
Operations staff were queried about cavitation damage to Claytor turbine runners, as a gauge of the potential for cavitation to damage fish during passage. Cavitation repairs are a minor occurrence at the Claytor Project; repairs are needed on about a decadal frequency (J. Thrasher, Appalachian, personal communication). As a result, fish injury or mortality due to the effects of cavitation would likely be minimal.



### 5.4 T URBINE 

### P ASSAGE 

### S URVIVAL 

### A SSESSMENT

5.4.1 EPRI (1997) Data
Fish size more so than species has emerged as the ke y decision variable for a given turbine type and operational characteristics (see also Franke et al. 1997). Winchell et al. (2000) summarized empirical turbine passage survival data repor ted in the EPRI (1997) database by turbine type and characteristics and fish size. The survival rates reported reflect trends from field tests at up to 19 turbines per size class of test fish that met speci fic acceptability criteria for contro l fish mortality (could not exceed 10%). These survival data are reproduced herein for the studies representative of the four similar Francis turbines housed in the Claytor Project (Table 5-5). The four Claytor turbines are large (runner diameter about 11 ft, hydraulic capacity of 2,000 cf s at most efficient operation), and rotate slowly (138.5 rpm).
Immediate survival after passage was rated as High fo r two size groups of fish up to 7.8 inches (199 mm). Medium sized fish averaged 86.9% survival in 18 tests; risk was rated as Moderate. Survival was rated as Low (mean = 73.2%) for larger fish (> 11.8 inches). Survival declined a few percentageC LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 38 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Table 5-4. Predicted turbine passage survival at Claytor Project turbines based on the blade strike probability formula develo ped by Franke et al. (1997).

Units 1, 2 Units 3, 4
Unit Correlation Fish Survival Unit Correlation Fish Survival Flow-cfs Factor Length-in (%) Flow-cfs Factor Length-in (%)

2,000 0.1 2 98.1% 2,000 0.1 2 98.1%
4 96.3% 4 96.3%
6 94.4% 6 94.4%
8 92.6% 8 92.6%
10 90.7% 10 90.7%
12 88.8% 12 88.9%
18 83.3% 18 83.3%
24 77.7% 24 77.7% 2,000 0.15 2 97.2% 2,000 0.15 2 97.2%
4 94.4% 4 94.4%
6 91.6% 6 91.6%
8 88.8% 8 88.8%
10 86.1% 10 86.1%
12 83.3% 12 83.3%
18 74.9% 18 74.9%
24 66.5% 24 66.6% 2,500 0.1 2 98.0% 2,500 0.1 2 97.9%
4 95.9% 4 95.9%
6 93.9% 6 93.8%
8 91.8% 8 91.8%
10 89.8% 10 89.7%
12 87.8% 12 87.7%
18 81.7% 18 81.5%
24 75.6% 24 75.4% 2,500 0.15 2 96.9% 2,500 0.15 2 96.9%
4 93.9% 4 93.8%
6 90.8% 6 90.8%
8 87.8% 8 87.7%
10 84.7% 10 84.6%
12 81.7% 12 81.5%
18 72.5% 18 72.3%
24 63.3% 24 63.1%C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 39 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Table 5-5. Mean fish survival rates for Francis turbines and representative fish sizes in EPRI database (source: Winchell et al. 2000).

Average Immediate Survival-all species (%) Turbine

Type Runner Speed (rpm) Hydraulic Capacity (cfs) Fish Sizemm (in) N Minimum Maximum Mean Survival Potential**
Francis <250 440-1,600 <100 (3.9) 13 85.9 100 93.9 High (radial-flow) 370-1,600 100-199 (3.9-7.8 19 74.8 100 91.6 High 370-2,450 200-299 (7.9-11.8) 18 59.0 100 86.9 Moderate 440-1,600 300+ (11.8+) 14 36.1 100 73.2 Low
Average Survival (after 48 h)-all species (%) Turbine

Type Runner Speed (rpm) Hydraulic Capacity (cfs) Fish Sizemm (in) N Minimum Maximum Mean Survival Potential**
Francis <250 440-1,600 <100 (3.9) 11 80.9 100 90.4 High (radial-flow) 370-2,450 100-199 (3.9-7.8 17 73.7 100 87.8 Moderate 440-2,450 200-299 (7.9-11.8) 15 47.4 96.4 80.4 Moderate 440-1,600 300+ (11.8+) 13 33.8 94.1 66.8 Low

** Qualitative survival rating: High = 90- 100%; Moderate = 80-89.9%; Low = <80%.

points when fish were held for at least 48 h for de layed analysis, yet survival for all fish up to 3.9 inches remained High (Table 5-3).

5.4.2 Additional Empirical Survival Data

E m pirical fish passage survival studies for species representative of those considered at the Claytor Project were examined to augment the EPRI surviv al data. Results were compiled from six additional sites with Francis turbines. Most of the turbine characteristics at th e studied units bracketed those at Claytor Hydro Project, including number of runner buckets, runner speed (rpm) and runner diameter (Table 5-6). All were single-runner turbines except for those at Finch Pruyn (double and quad runner) and Holtwood Unit 3 (double). Th e operating head at each of the compiled studies was less when compared to the 116 ft of head at the Claytor Pr oject. The species studied were either target species identified for the Claytor assessment (e.g., smallmouth bass, bluegill), or reasonable surrogates (Table 5-7). American shad and blueback herring were c onsidered surrogates for alewife and gizzard shad due to similar shape and fragility. Fusiform fishes such as channel catfish, yellow perch, and suckers were considered surrogates for walleye and young st riped bass due to comparable body shape. Mean size of fish tested ranged from 90 mm TL (blueg ill) to 271 mm TL (smallmouth bass). Survival during turbine passage was determined using balloon tag technology (Heisey et al. 1992).
Survival of the large majority of species/sizes tested exceeded 90% (Table 5-7). These data agree with those summarized for Francis tu rbines in Section 5.4.1 above for the mostly small sizes of fish typically entrained. As discussed in Winchell et al. (2000) and elsewhere (e.g., Heisey et al.1996), there was little difference in survival rate among species tested. Survival was high for small and medium-sized fish of a variety of species.

5.4.3 Estimated Annual Fish Mortality

Co m piled 48-h fish survival data in Table 5-5 were applied to estimated entrainment losses from Table 5-2 to estimate annual fish mortality due to turbine passage. Survival rates (S) for both groups of small fish (< 8 inches) were averaged. Survival rates for medium and large fish were those shownC LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 40 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Table 5-6. Site characteristics of empirical studies at Francis installations not reviewed in EPRI database. All studies performed using balloon tag technology.

Station/location Turbine flow-cfs No. bucke ts Runner speed-rpm He ad-ft Runner diameter-ft
Columbia, SC 833 14 164 28 5.33 Finch Pruyn, NY (Unit 4) 708 15 225 46 3.00 Finch Pruyn, NY (Unit 5) 836 15 225 46 3.00 Holtwood, PA (Unit 10) 3,500 16 94.7 62 12.46 Holtwood, PA (Unit 3) 3,500 17 102.8 62 9.33 Stevens Creek, SC 1,000 14 75 28 11.25 Vernon, VT/NH 1,834 15 74 34 13.00 White Rapids, WI 900 14 100 29 11.17

Table 5-7. Immediate (1-h) survival of representative fish species at Francis installations not reviewed in EPRI database. All studies performed using balloon tag technology.

Species Station/location Mean fish length-mm Est. Percent Survival-1h

Smallmouth bass Finch Pruyn, NY (Unit 4) 191 95 Finch Pruyn, NY (Unit 4) 210 91 Finch Pruyn, NY (Unit 4) 271 93 Finch Pruyn, NY (Unit 5) 191 94 Finch Pruyn, NY (Unit 5) 210 91 Finch Pruyn, NY (Unit 5) 271 71 Bluegill Stevens Creek, SC 122 95.4
White Rapids, WI 90 95
White Rapids, WI 155 100 Sunfishes ( Lepomis ) Columbia, SC 106 95.9
Alosids
American shad Holtwood, PA (Unit 10) 125 89.4 Holtwood, PA (Unit 3) 125 83.5 Vernon, VT/NH 95 94.7 Blueback herring Stevens Creek, SC 203 95.3 Fusiform shape
Channel catfish Columbia, SC 143 93.6 Spotted sucker/yellow perch Stevens Creek, SC 165 98.3
White sucker White Rapids, WI 112 100 White Rapids, WI 204 93

for 7.9-11.8-inch fish and fish > 11.8 inches, respectively. Estimated entrainment losses were multiplied by the mortality rate (1-S) to estimate mortality.
Fish mortality in any given year would primarily be small alewife, gizzard shad, bluegill, and black crappie (Table 5-8). Comparatively little mortality for fish larger than 8 inches other than gizzard shad and alewife would be expected. As noted fo r the reasons discussed previously (use of white perch as one surrogate species for stocked striped b ass and hybrid striped bass), the annual mortalityC LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 41 Normandeau Associates, Inc. losses estimated for medium-sized and larger stri ped bass and hybrid striped bass likely represent overestimates.

Table 5-8. Estimated annual mortality due to tu rbine passage for Claytor Lake fish species of interest. The source of mortality rates was Winchell et al. (2000).

Small Fish (< 8 inches) Mortality Rate = 10.9% Medium Fish (8-15 inches) Mortality Rate = 19.6% Large Fish (> 15 inches) Mortality Rate = 33.2% Species/Surrogates Dry Year Wet Year Dry Year Wet Year Dry Year Wet Year
Alewife 248,065 564,964 1,022 2,327 0 0

Gizzard shad 114,123 259,913 2,881 6,562 104 237
Bluegill 6,738 15,345 65 149 0 0
Black crappie 2,914 6,636 170 388 0 0
Walleye 874 1,991 341 776 44 101
Largemouth bass 859 1,957 26 60 71 162

Smallmouth bass 656 1,493 105 239 11 25
Spotted bass 1 758 1,725 65 149 40 91

Striped bass 2 827 1,883 1,473 3,356 11 25

Hybrid striped bass 2 827 1,883 1,473 3,356 11 25

White bass 22 50 550 1,253 0 0

1 Annual mortality of spotted bass based on use of largem outh bass and smallmouth bass as surrogates; see Table 5-2.
2 Annual mortality of striped bass and hybr id striped bass based on use of white ba ss and white perch as surrogates; see Table 5-2.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 42 Normandeau Associates, Inc. 

## 6.0 O VERALL 

## E NTRAINMENT 

## A SSESSMENT
The Claytor Hydro Project was assessed with r espect to both entrainment and turbine passage mortality. The assessment examined individual ch aracteristics among dam, intake, and hydroplant structural elements, reservoir characteristics, and fish populations that can affect entrainment and mortality. Various comprehensive reviews of en trainment and mortality data (FERC 1995; EPRI 1997) as well as fish behavior relative to turbine passage (Coutant and Whitney 2000) suggest that one or more of the factors listed in Table 6-1 may influence the risk of turb ine passage entrainment or mortality. Among factors that can influence entr ainment rates, this ass essment examined the following:

Table 6-1. Comparison of factors that may influence entrainment or survival rates at Claytor Hydro Project.

Influence Factors Claytor Project

Entrainment Rates Intake adjacent to shoreline No

Intake location in littoral zone No Abundant littoral zone fishes (no. species) Yes Abundant littoral zone fishes (no. individuals) Yes Abundant clupeids Yes Obligatory migrants No Intake depth-ft (at top, full pond) 14

Winter drawdown No Normal hydraulic capacity (cfs) 8,000 Approach velocity (ft/s, normal operation) ≤ 1.5 Water quality factor Yes

Risk of Entrainment High/ Moderate-High*
Survival Rates Turbine type Francis High turbine speed No Survival rates of small fish (<8 in) Moderate-High

Pressurized intake tunnel Yes Risk of Mortality Low-Moderate

* Mainly clupeids, alewives and young centrarchids

 Intake adjacent to shoreline--Nearshore inta kes typically entrain fishes at higher rates than offshore intakes, as fish tend to follow shorelines or orient to physical structure associated with shorelines.

 Intake location in littoral zone--The littora l zone is the most productive region of a reservoir and most fish rear in the shallower littoral areas.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 43 Normandeau Associates, Inc.  Abundant littoral zone species--Fishes such as centrarchids that spawn, rear, and spend most of their lives in shallow nearshore waters tend to be among the most abundant species in a fish assemblage.

 Abundant clupeids--Entrainment rates trend highest at projects with clupeids such as gizzard shad and/or alewife.

 Intake depth--Fish are usually more abunda nt in shallower portions of a reservoir throughout most of the year.

 Winter drawdown--Drawdown of a reservoir to provide storage of winter and spring runoff reduces reservoir volume and may place fishes in closer proximity to water intakes.

 Hydraulic capacity--More water passed through intakes will entrain more fish for a given entrainment rate.

 Water quality factor--poor water quality ( e.g. low dissolved oxygen in the hypolimnion) in a reservoir may form a barrier and re duce fish susceptibility to entrainment.

 Approach velocity--approach velocities may pos itively correlate with entrainment rates, although FERC (1995) was unable to find a significant trend between entrainment rate and intake velocity. Other factors related to intake siting may be more important. Herein, approach velocity is considered at the plane of the water intake opening.

 Presence of obligatory migrants. “Resident” fish es are usually entraine d inadvertently but relative to their use of near-intake habitats . Migrants out of freshwater systems must locate an exit route and turbine intakes pr ovide the bulk flow cues used to guide outmigration.

Factors examined that can infl uence fish survival/mortality during turbine passage included:

 Turbine type--Among factors related to passag e survival, the size of water passage spaces available relative to fish size influences susceptibility to contact with structural elements. Francis runners have more closely spaced buc kets/blades than Kaplan/propeller runners and thus spaces available for passage are smaller, particularly relevant for larger-sized fish in Francis turbines.

 High turbine speed--Higher rpm's increase th e likelihood of contact with structural elements.

 Survival rate of small fish (<8 in)--More th an 90% of fishes entrained at hydro projects are small (EPRI 1997). High survival of small fish reduces the overall impact of entrainment to fish populations.

 Pressurized intake tunnel--High hydrostatic pressure in penstocks at high head sites (>100 ft) may be suddenly released as fish acclimated to higher pressure pass from pressurized areas or deep water to tailwaters at normal hydrostatic pressure. The sudden relief from high pressure increases the risk to fish of decompression trauma.

The Claytor project reservoir and turbines are exam ined below with respect to those unique features listed above that may affect fish entrainment or mortality.
The fish entrainment potential at the Claytor Hydr o Project is rated Modera te to Moderate-High, principally due to abundant clupeids as well as numerous and abundant centrarchid species such as bluegill and crappie (see Section 5.1). Young alew ife and gizzard shad (1.5 to 4 inches), as well as young bluegill and crappie (< 4 inches), typically fo rm the bulk of entrainment catches where they are abundant in hydropower reservoirs (FERC 1995). Y oung clupeids form dense, large, open-waterC LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 44 Normandeau Associates, Inc. schools and both clupeid species in Claytor Lake tend to be susceptible to torpor due to cold water temperatures. As a result, entrainment of shad tends to be episodic due to the clumped reservoir distribution (schooling behavior), and more preval ent during fall and winter. Natural movements of clupeids may also increase the risk of entrainmen t to those predatory species utilizing shad as prey. Young clupeids in fall and winter, including those stre ssed by cold water, may move to deeper waters of the reservoir seeking warmer water. Movements to the lower portions of the reservoir may increase exposure of alewife and gizzard shad and the pred atory fishes that follow schools of these forage species to water proximal to the intakes, thus increasing the risk of entrainment. Boaze (1972) previously documented alewife winter entrainment due to cold stress.
In some reservoirs, such winter losses may be exacerbated by reduced reservoir volume during winter drawdown. Routine winter drawdown to increase st orage does not occur at Claytor Lake, although brief fall drawdowns for shoreline structure maintenance or ad hoc drawdowns to accommodate expected high inflows do occur. Such occurrences, by their brie f nature, would not likely increase entrainment risk substantially.
Young centrarchids such as bluegill and crappie tend to be very abundant in shoreline areas and in shallow water, and are usually major contributors to entrainment. However, the mean entrainment densities of small bluegill and black crappie show n in Table 5-1 are nowhere near the densities typical for clupeids, thus the rating “Moderate-H igh”. Although centrarchid entrainment can be substantial, Claytor Lake is m oderately eutrophic and productive, and sustains large, diverse fish populations. Despite the “Moderate High” fish entrainment potential for several popular sport species (based on empirical studies elsewhere) Claytor Lake supports good recreational fishing for such species as bluegill and largemouth bass. The reservoir provides a “forage-rich” environment that supports these popular sport fisheries.
The Claytor Project intakes withdraw from moderate ly deep water. The intake ceiling is 14 ft below normal pool level, and extends to 61 ft deep; in take centerline is 37.5 ft below normal pool. Whereas deep ( e.g. , >60 ft) intakes may be isolated from areas of fish abundance, shallower intakes are in closer proximity to the reservoir areas where fish are most abundant. However, the Claytor Hydro intakes are removed from the limited littoral zone areas of the lake. The Claytor Hydro intakes are separated from the right (descending) shoreline by sev eral hundred feet of bulkhead, and from the left shoreline by the extensive spillway section. Thus, relatively shallow water withdrawals (compared to near-dam pool depth) may be mediated by the di stance from and limited area of littoral zones. The distance from and relatively low abundance of littoral areas is one of the prime factors that would be expected to limit entrainment and yield the overall risk profile of Moderate to Moderate-High.
Water quality is at most a seasonal deterrent to fi sh entrainment out of Claytor Lake. Years of low inflow result in dissolved oxygen depletion during warm months at depths below 5 to 10 m (16 to 33 ft), approximately equivalent to the upper portion of the intakes. Fish would avoid these areas of poor water quality and avoid potential entrainment through intakes at these depths. Avoidance of intake areas due to poor water quality would likely not occu r during years or seasons of higher inflow or cooler temepratures when dissolved oxygen is also higher.
Water velocity at the project intakes is consider ed moderate as calculated on historical project drawings and determined by field studies. Intake area field studies identified intake velocities less than about 1.5 ft/s as close as 40 ft up-lake durin g full generation. Water velocities then increase toward the plane of the dam face to where intake openings are located (1.50 ft/s) and to the trash barC LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 45 Normandeau Associates, Inc. racks (2.40 ft/s). The withdrawal volume (normal fu ll load discharges 8,000 cfs) is large. Although the larger water volumes would likely entrain more fish for a given entrainment rate, the comparatively low water velocities where fish might encounter withdrawal acceleration would mean that all but the poorest swimmers, such as yo ung fish, could escape unless swimming ability (or behavioral avoidance) was compromised by cold water temperatures.
Claytor Project head is 116 ft, somewhat higher than the maximum head (100 ft) typically ascribed to low head hydro projects. The moderately high h ead pressurizes the penstocks, so that maximum pressure during operation is developed just in front of the turbine runners (44.5 psi; J. Thrasher, Appalachian, personal communication). Studies have shown that shallow water intakes and passage of fish acclimated to near normal atmospheric pressu re enhances survival since entrained fish are not acclimated to deep water and high h ydrostatic pressure and, thus, are not forced to equilibrate to rapid reductions to normal pressure when passed into a hydro station tailrace (Cada 1990; Franke et al. 1997). Most of the Claytor Lake fish would be expected to be entrained from impoundment surface layers (to approximately 30 ft deep), and the rapi d transit time through the turbine (due to nearvertical fall of water) precludes the need for fish to make adjustments in swim bladder volume to accommodate pressure changes. Any injury or mortality due to the pressure changes experienced would be minimal (Cada 1990). A potential exception would be when fish acclimated to deep water, such as alewives seeking warmer water temperatures in late fall or winter or predator species following alewife schools, are inadvertently entrained. The sudden release to normal atmospheric pressure of the tailrace has caused decompression tr auma elsewhere (RMC 1994). However, the lack of any history of such occurrences in the Claytor tailrace since alewife were introduced suggests this is not a common occurrence.

Four vertical Francis turbines are housed at the Cl aytor Project. All units are similar in size (large) and rotate slowly (138.5 rpm). Fish survival is hi gher at hydro projects with low speed turbines (EPRI 1997; Winchell at al. 2000). The summaries of turbine survival data from Winchell et al. (2000) in Table 5-5 supplemented by several additional empiri cal survival studies (Table 5-7), clearly identify high ( ≥ 90%) survival of the mostly small fish that pass through project turbines. Thus, the risk to most fish passing through the turbines would be moderately Low.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 46 Normandeau Associates, Inc. 

## 7.0 C ONCLUSIONS
Popular multi-species fisheries characterize the Cl aytor Hydro Project reservoir. Black basses, walleye, catfishes, and panfish naturally reproduce; these species are augmented annually with striped bass and hybrid striped bass fingerlings to take advantage of abundant clupeid prey species. Some level of fish entrainment was assumed prior to this investigation, particularly for the stocked predators and clupeid prey species, but entrainment was not be lieved to be a problem due to the mostly robust lake sport fisheries. Fish kills due to turbine passage are lacking. Swim speed information coupled with engineering calculations and field intake velo city measurements suggest small juvenile fishes, those less than 8 inches long, are the most vulnerabl e to entrainment. Larger individuals, principally the stocked predators, generally possess the swimming ability to avoid velocities near the intakes.
Entrained fishes would comprise mostly prey species such as alewife and gizzard shad. Entrainment of young sunfish such as bluegill and crappie is al so likely, but moderated by intake separation from shorline littoral areas where they are typically mo st abundant. Stocked predators such as walleye, striped bass, and hybrid striped bass may be entrained as smaller juveniles, but older, larger fish are most likely to avoid entrainment through better sw imming ability. The survival of the mostly small fish passing out of the lake would be expected to be high based on model calculations and evidence accumulated elsewhere for similar turbines and similar-sized fishes. Due to the inter-annual differences in water volume passed through the Claytor Project turbines, more than a factor of two, fish lost to the New River downstream would likely be higher in years with higher project inflows and annual discharge.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 47 Normandeau Associates, Inc. 

## 8.0 L ITERATURE 

## C ITED



### 8.1 S WIM 

### S PEED 

### L ITERATURE IN 

### T ABLE 

### 3-1 AND 

### S ECTION 

### 3.1
ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers). 1995. Chapter 7, Fish Passage and Protection. in: Guidelines for design of intakes for hydroelectric power plants. American Society of Civil Engineers, New York.
Bainbridge, R. 1960. Speed and stamina in three fish. J. Exp. Biol. 39:129-153.
Beamish, F.W.H. 1970. Oxygen c onsumption of largemouth bass, Micropterus salmoides , in relation to swimming speed and temperature. Ca nadian J. Zoology 48:1221-1228.
Beamish, F.W.H. 1978. Swimming capacity. In: Hoar, W.S. and D.J. Randall, eds. Fish Physiology, Volume 7, Locomotion. Academic Press, NY. 576 pp.
Bell, M.C. 1991. Fisheries handbook of engineering requirements and biological criteria. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, North Pacific Division, Portland, Oregon.
Boyd, G. and G. Parsons. 1998. Swimming perfo rmance and behavior of golden shiner, Notemigonus crysoleucas , while schooling. Copeia 1998(2): 467-471.
Bunt, C.M., C. Katapodis, and R.S. McKinley. 199 9. Attraction and passage efficiency of white suckers and smallmouth bass by two Denil fishways. N Am. J. Fish. Mgt. 19:793-803.
Carlander, K.D. 1977. Handbook of freshwater fishery biology, Volume Two. Iowa Sate University Press, Ames Iowa.
Castro-Santos, T and A. Haro. 2005. Biomechanics and fisheries conservation. Chapter 12 in Fish Physiology: Fish Biomechanics, Volume 23. Elsevier, Inc.
Chick, J.H. and M.J. Van Den Avyle. 2000. Effects of feeding ration on swimming speed and responsiveness to predator attacks: implications for cohort survival. Can J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 57: 106-115.
Clay, C.H. 1961. Design of fishways and other fish facilities. Department of Fisheries of Canada, Ottawa. 301 pp.
Cooke, S.J., E.C. Grant, J.F. Schreer, D.P. Philipp, and A.L. Devries. 2003. Low temperature cardiac response to exhaustive exercise in fish with different levels of winter quiescence. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, Part A, 134:157-165.
Dahlberg, M.L., D.L. Shumway, and P. Douderoff. 1968. Influence of dissolved oxygen and carbon dioxide on swimming performance of largemouth bass and coho salmon. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada 25:49-70.
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.
Dow, R.L. 1962. Swimming speed of river herring, Pomolobus (Alosa) pseudoharengus (Wilson). J. Cons., Cons. Perm. Int. Explor. Mer. 27:77-80.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 48 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Drucker, E.G. and G.V. Lauder. 1999. Locomo tor forces on a swimming fish; three dimensional vortex wake dynamics quantified using digital particle imaging velocimetry. The Journal of Experimental Biology 202: 2393-2412.
Farlinger, S. and F.W.H. Beamish. 1977. Effects of time and velocity increments on the critical swimming speed of largemouth bass. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 106: 436-439.
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.
Gleason, E.V. 1982. A review of the life histories of striped bass ( Morone saxatilis ) and white bass ( M. chrysops ) hybrids and an evaluation of their suitability for stocking. California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Administrative Report No. 82-9.

Haro, A., T. Castro-Santos, J. Norieka, and M. Odeh. 2004. Swimming performance of upstream migrant fishes in open-channel flow: a new a pproach to predicting passage through velocity barriers. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 61:1590-1601.
Hocutt, Charles H. 1973. Swimming performance of three warmwater fishes exposed to a rapid temperature change. Chesapeake Science 14(1): 11-16.
Houde, E.D. 1969. Sustained swimming ability of larvae of walleye, Stizostedion vitreum vitrem , and yellow perch, Perca flavescens . J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada 26:1647-1659.
Jones, D.R., Kiceniuk, J.W., and O.S. Bamford. 1974. Evaluation of the swimming performance of several fish species from MacKenzie River. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada. 31:1641-1647.
Kerr, J.E. 1953. Studies of fish preservation at th e Contra Costa steam plant of the Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Calif. Dept. Fish and Game, Fish Bull. 92:1-66.
King, L.R. 1969. Swimming speed of the channel cat fish, 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 criti cal swimming speed of juvenile largemouth bass, Micropterus salmoides , acclimated to cold water. Copeia 1991(4):1085-1090.

Larimore, R.W. and M.J. Deuver. 1968. Effects of temperature acclimation on the swimming ability of smallmouth bass fry. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 97: 175-184.
Peake, S., R.S. McKinley, and D.A. Scrut on. 2000. Swimming performance of walleye, Stizostedion vitreum . Can. J. Zool. 78:1686-1690.
Schmulbach, J. C., Tunink, D. H., and Zittel, A. E. (1981). “Swimming performance of fishes endemic to the Missouri River in South Dakota.” U.S. Department of the Interior.
Schuler, V.J. 1968. Progress report of swim speed study conducted on fishes of Conowingo Reservoir. Ichthyological Associates, Progress Report 1B.
Smiley, Jr., P.C. and G.R. Parsons. 1997. Eff ects of photoperiod and temperature on swimming performance of white crappie. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 126: 495-499.
Tatham, T.R. 1970. Preliminary report of studies of swimming speed of white perch, striped bass, and other estuarine fishes. Ichthyological Associates, Middletown DE.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 49 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Tunink, D. H. (1975). “The swimming performance of fishes endemic to the middle Mississippi River,” M.S. thesis, University of South Dakota.
Wardle, C.S. 1980. Effects of temperature on the maximum swimming speed of fishes. in Ali, M.A., ed. The Environmental Physiology of Fishes. Plenum, New York. p. 519-531.
Webb, P.W. 1978. Hydrodynamics: non-scombroid fish. In: Hoar, W.S. and D.J. Randall, eds. Fish Physiology, Volume 7, Locomotion. Academic Press, NY. 576 pp.
Webb, P.W. 1998. Entrainment by river chub, Nocomis micropogon , and smallmouth bass, Micropterus dolomieu on cylinders. J. Exp. Biol. 201:2403-2412.
Wilcox, D.B., and 7 co-authors. 2004. Improving fi sh passage through navigation dams on the Upper Mississippi River system. Interim Report. ENV Report 54, U.S. Army corps of Engineers, St. Paul, MN
Williamson, K.L. and P.C. Nelson. 1985. Habitat suitability index models and instream flow suitability curves: gizzard shad. U.S. Fish a nd Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.
Young, P.S. and J.J. Cech, Jr. 1993. Improve d growth, swimming performance, and muscular development in exercise-conditioned young-of-the-year striped bass, Morone saxatilis . Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci 50:703-707.



### 8.2 F ISHES AND 

### E NTRAINMENT 

### /I MPINGEMENT 

### L ITERATURE AEP. 2006. Fish Entrainment and Impingement Revised Study Plan. Claytor Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 739. October 2006.
Bauer, D.L. 2002. White bass population differences in Nebraska reservoirs with gizzard shad or alewife prey bases. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 22:665-670.
Becker, G.C. 2003. Fishes of Wisconsin. The University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI.

Boaze, J. L. 1972. Effects of landlocked alewife introduction on white bass and walleye populations, Claytor Lake, Virginia. Master's thesis. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg.
Bonds, C.C. 2000. Assessment of the response of piscivorous sport fishes to the establishment of gizzard shad in Claytor Lake, Virginia. Master's thesis. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg.
Cada, G.F. 1990. A review of studies relating to the effects of propeller-type turbine passage on fish early life stages. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 10:418-426.
Cheek, T. E., M. J. Van Den Avyle, and C. Coutant. 1985. Influences of water quality on distribution of striped bass in a Tennessee River impoundment. Trans. Amer. Fish. Soc. 114:67-76.
Cooke, S.J., E.C. Grant, J.F. Schreer, D.P. Philipp, and A.L. Devries. 2003. Low temperature cardiac response to exhaustive exercise in fish with different levels of winter quiescence. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, Part A, 134:157-165.
Copeland, J. 1999a. Large Impoundment Management Report: Claytor Lake, for survey years 1996- 1998. Virginia Department of Ga me and Inland Fisheries. 16 pp.
Copeland, J. 1999b. 1998/1999 Claytor Lake Creel Su rvey bullet statements. Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. 6 pp.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 50 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Copeland, J. 2004. 2004 Claytor Lake Popular Report for Anglers. Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. 7 pp.
Coutant, C.C. 1977. Compilation of temperature pr eference data. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 34:739-745.
Coutant, C. C. 1985. Striped bass, temperature and dissolved oxygen: a speculative hypothesis for environmental risk. Trans. Amer. Fish Soc. 114:31-61.
DiCenzo, V.J. and M.C. Duval. 2002. Importance ofreservoir inflow in determining white bass yearclass strength in three Virginia reservoirs. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 22: 620-626.
FERC. 1995. Preliminary assessment of fish entrainmen t at hydropower projects. Vol. 1, A report on studies and protective measures. Report prepared by Stone & Webster Environmental Technology and Services for Office of Hydropower Licensing. Paper No. DPR-10, Washington, DC.
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). 1997. Tu rbine entrainment and survival database – field tests. Prepared by Alden Research Laboratory, Inc. EPRI Report No. TR-108630. 13 pp + two 3.5” diskettes.
Franke, G.F. and 9 co-authors. 1997. Development of environmentally advanced hydropower turbine system design concepts. Prepared for U.S. De partment of Energy, Idaho Operations Office, Contract DE-AC07-94ID13223.
Heisey, P.G., D. Mathur, and E.T. Euston. 1996. Passing fish safely: A closer look at turbine vs spillway survival. Hydro Review 15(4):2-6.
Heisey, P.G., D. Mathur, and T. Rineer. 1992. A reliable tag-recapture technique for estimating turbine passage survival: application to young-o f-the-year American shad (Alosa sapidissima. Canadian Journal of Fisheries a nd Aquatic Sciences 49:1826-1834.
Horrall, R.M. 1962. A comparative study of two spawning populations of the white bass, Roccus chrysops (Rafinesque), in Lake Mendota, Wisons in, with special reference to homing behavior. University of Wisconsin, Madison. PhD. Thesis. 181 pp.

Jenkins, R. E., and N. M. Burkhead. 1993. Freshwate r fishes of Virginia. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.
Jernejcic, F. 1986. Walleye migra tion through Tygart Dam and angler utilization of the resulting tailwater and lake fisheries. Pages 294-300. in G. E. Hall and M. J. Van Den Avyle (editors). Reservoir fisheries management: strategies fo r the 80's. Reservoir Committee, Southern Division, American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD.
Kilpatrick, J.M. 2003. Habitat use, movements, a nd exploitation of striped bass and hybrid striped bass in Claytor Lake, Virginia. Master's thesis. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg.
Kohler, C.C. 1980. Trophic ecology of an introduced, land-locked alewife ( Alosa pseudoharengus ) population and assessment of alewife impact on resident sportfish and crustacean zooplankton communities in Claytor Lake, Vi rginia. Doctoral dissertation. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 51 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Kohler, C.C. 1982. The impact of a transplanted forage fish, the alewife ( Alosa pseudoharengus ), on a reservoir in southeastern United States. Proceedings of the Symposium on Stock Enhancement in the Management of Fres hwater Fisheries. Budapest, Hungary.
Kohler, C.C. and J.J. Ney. 1981. Consequences of an alewife die-off to fish and zooplankton in a reservoir. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 110:360-369.
Kohler, C.C., J.J. Ney, and W.E. Kelso. 1986. Filling the void: development of a pelagic fishery and its consequences to littoral fishes in a Virginia mainstream reservoir. Pages 166-177 in G.E Hall and M.J. Van Den Avyle, editors. Reservoir Fisheries management: Strategies for the 80’s. Southern Division, American Fish eries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.
Langhurst, R. W., and D. L. Schoenike. 1990. Seasonal migration of smallmouth bass in the Embarrass and Wolf rivers, Wisconsin. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 10:224-227.
Miller, R.J. 1975. Comparative behavi or of centrarchid basses. Pages 85-94 in H. Clepper, editor. Black bass biology and management. Spor t Fishing Institute, Washington, DC.
Ney, J.J., C.M. Moore, R.J. Neves, M.S. Tisa, and J.J. Yurk. 1988. The Smith Mountain Lake Fishery: factors affecting major sport and fora ge fish populations. Prepared for Appalachian Power Company and Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
Nigro, A.A. and J.J. Ney. 1982. Reproduction and early life accommodations of landlocked alewives to a southern range extension. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 111:559-569.

Palmer, G.C. 1999. Genetic characterization of inte rmixed walleye stocks in Claytor Lake and the upper New River, Virginia. Master's thesis. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg.
Palmer, G.C., B.R. Murphy, and E.M. Hallerman. 200 5. Movements of walleyes in Claytor Lake and the upper New River, Virginia, indicate distinct lake and river populations. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 25:1448-1455.
Rash, J.M. 2003. Comparative ecology of juvenile striped bass and juvenile hybrid striped bass in Claytor Lake, Virginia. Master's thesis. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg.
RMC. 1992e. Final report on study plan to assess th e impact of power plant operations on fish resources, Youghiogheny Hydroelectric Project. Report prepared for D/R Hydro Co., Monroeville, PA.
Rosebery, D.A. 1951. Fishery management of Claytor Lake, an impoundment on the New River in Virginia. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 80:194-209.

Rothschild, B.J. 1966. Observations of the alewife Alosa pseudoharengus (Wilson) in Cayuga Lake. New York Fish and Game Journal 13:188-195.
Small, Jr., R.J. Trophic interactions between larv al gizzard shad and resident zooplanktivores in Claytor Lake, Virginia. Master's thesis. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg.
Starnes, L.B., P.A. Hackney, and T.A. McDonough. 1983. Larval fish transport: a case study of white bass. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 112:390-397.C LAYTOR H YDRO F ISH E NTRAINMENT & I MPINGEMENT A SSESSMENT

Claytor E&I Report.docm 12/9/08 52 Normandeau Associates, Inc. Stewart, D.J., and F.P. Binkowski. 1986. Dyna mics of consumption and food conversion by Lake Michigan alewives: an energetics modeling synth esis. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 115:643-661.
Tibbles, J.J.G. 1956. A study of the movements and depth distribution of the pelagic fishes of Lake Mendota. University of Wisconsin, Madison. PhD. Thesis. 193 pp.

Trautman, M.B. 1981. The fishes of Ohio with illustra ted keys, revised edition. Ohio State University Press, Columbus.
Van Den Avyle, M.J. and B.J. Higginbotham. 1979. Growth, survival, and distribution of striped bass stocked into Watts Bar Reservoir, Tennessee. Proceedings of the 33 rd Annual Conference, Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 33:361-370.
Vogele, L.E. 1975. The spotted bass. Pages 34-45 in H. Clepper, editor. Black bass biology and management. Sport Fishing Institute, Washington, DC.
Werner, R.G. 1967. Intralacustrine movements of bluegill fry in Crane Lake, Indiana. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 96:416-420.
Werner, R.G. 1969. Ecology of limnetic bluegill ( Lepomis macrochirus ) fry in Crane Lake, Indiana. The American Midland Naturalist 81:164-181.
Winchell, F., S. Amaral and D. Dixon. 2000. Hydroelectric turbine entrainment and survival database: an alternative to field studies. Hy dro Vision Conference, Charlotte, NC. August 2000.