{"Bibliographic":{"Title":"Studies to evaluate the effectiveness of extended-length screens at Little Goose Dam, 1993","Authors":"","Publication date":"1994","Publisher":""},"Administrative":{"Date created":"08-16-2023","Language":"English","Rights":"CC 0","Size":"0000044818"},"Pages":["1993\nStudies to Evaluate\nthe Effectiveness\nof Extended-Length Screens\nat Little Goose Dam,\nCZES\n1993\nby\nCoastal Zone and\nMichael H. Gessel, Benjamin P. Sandford,\nEstuarine Studies\nand Douglas B. Dey\nDivision\nNorthwest Fisheries\nSeptember 1994\nScience Center\nNational Marine\nFisheries Service\nLibrary\nNorthwest\nNOAA\nSeattle, Washington\n2725\nSeatila, WA","NWFSC098\nSTUDIES TO EVALUATE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF\nEXTENDED-LENGTH SCREENS AT LITTLE GOOSE DAM, 1993\nSH\n153\nL7\nG3\nby\n1993\nMichael H. Gessel\nBenjamin P. Sandford\nand\nLibrary\nDouglas B. Dey\nNorthwest & Alaska Fisheries Center\nNOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service\n2725 Montlake Boulevard, E.\nSeattle, WA 98112\nAnnual Report of Research\nFunded by\nU.S. Army Corps of Engineers\nWalla Walla District\nDelivery Order E86920164\nand\nCoastal Zone and Estuarine Studies Division\nNorthwest Fisheries Science Center\nNational Marine Fisheries Service\nNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration\n2725 Montlake Boulevard East\nSeattle, Washington 98112-2097\nSeptember 1994","CONTENTS\nPage\nINTRODUCTION\n1\nOBJECTIVE 1: FISH GUIDANCE EFFICIENCY OF THE EXTENDED-\nLENGTH TRAVELING SCREEN AND EXTENDED-LENGTH\nBAR SCREEN\n4\nApproach\n4\nResults and Discussion\n9\nDipbasket Efficiency\n9\nFish Guidance Efficiency\n9\nOBJECTIVE 2: JUVENILE SALMONID DESCALING\n10\nApproach\n10\nResults and Discussion\n12\nCONCLUSIONS\n14\nACKNOWLEDGMENTS\n16\nREFERENCES\n17\nAPPENDIX\n19","INTRODUCTION\nAt Little Goose and Lower Granite Dams on the Snake River,\njuvenile salmonids (Oncorhynchus spp.) are guided into the\ncollection/bypass facilities by standard-length submersible\ntraveling screens (STSs) installed in the 1970s. From 1982 to\n1985, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) researchers\nextensively evaluated the STSs at Lower Granite Dam and found\nthat fish guidance efficiency (FGE) was approximately 50% for\nyearling chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha). .\nIn 1987, in an effort to improve guidance levels, NMFS\nconducted research at Lower Granite Dam to test a simulated\nextended-length screen. This was done by placing a fixed bar\nscreen (FBS) in the fish screen slot in conjunction with an STS\nin the bulkhead slot. The STS is about 6.1 m (20 ft) long, and\nthe addition of the FBS approximately doubled the length of the\nguiding surface.\nResults of these tests indicated that the\nSTS/FBS combination could improve guidance.\nResearch at Lower Granite Dam in 1989 was done with an\nentire turbine intake screened with the STS/FBS combination and\n18.8-m (62-ft) raised operating gates. Significant increases in\nFGE for both yearling chinook salmon and steelhead (O. mykiss)\nwere realized (weighted FGES of 66 and 83%, respectively,\ncompared to 57 and 77% with the STS and raised operating gate) .\nThe descaling rate for fish recovered from gatewells without an\nSTS was 3% or less. Descaling rates for guided yearling chinook\nsalmon during FGE tests were 2.5 and 4.7% for control and\ntreatment conditions, respectively.","2\nStudies at Little Goose Dam were conducted in 1986 and 1987.\nThey provided baseline FGE data on yearling chinook salmon and\nsteelhead with STSs at either standard elevation or in a lowered\nposition, and operating gates in either the standard or raised\nposition. Vertical distribution measurements were taken of fish\nentering the turbine intake to determine theoretical fish\nguidance efficiency (TFGE, defined as an estimate of the\npercentage of fish theoretically guidable based upon a measured\nvertical distribution of fish passing into the turbine intakes\nand flow distributions within the intake with an STS in place as\ndetermined from hydraulic model studies) . Also, the effect of\ntraveling screens on fish condition was assessed by comparing\ndescaling levels of fish collected in the gatewell during FGE\ntests with those collected during vertical distribution\nmeasurements. Based upon the vertical distribution measurements,\nestimates of TFGE at Little Goose Dam were greater than 80% for\nboth yearling chinook salmon and steelhead.\nGuidance at Little Goose Dam for yearling chinook salmon and\nsteelhead was in the 60-70% range and improved with the raised\noperating gate. Also, there was a general increase in FGE as the\noutmigration progressed. This trend may have been related to the\nincreased smoltification level of fish passing the project during\nthe later stages of the outmigration (Muir et al. 1988) .\nThe respective seasonal descaling averages for yearling\nchinook salmon and steelhead were 2.1 and 0.7% in 1986 and 3. 7\nand 0.9% in 1987.","3\nDuring spring and summer of 1991, NMFS tested an extended-\nlength submersible traveling screen and an extended-length\nsubmersible bar screen at McNary Dam on the lower Columbia River.\nEach of these extended-length screens, which are approximately\ntwice as long as an STS, increased FGE to about 80% for yearling\nchinook salmon and to well over 50% for subyearling chinook\nsalmon, with no significant difference in FGE between devices\n(Brege et al. 1992) . However, lower descaling of guided fish was\nobserved with the extended-length bar screen.\nAdditional testing was done with the extended-length bar\nscreen at McNary Dam during the 1992 outmigration, with similar\nFGE results (McComas et al. 1993) . These studies led to the\ndevelopment and prototype testing of extended-length bar screens\nand extended-length traveling screens with various perforated\nplate porosities at Little Goose Dam in 1993. This report covers\nthe first year of the evaluation of these devices.\nSpecific research objectives for 1993 were:\n1)\nEvaluate the ability of extended-length traveling screens\nand extended-length bar screens to guide fish during the\njuvenile salmonid outmigration.\n2)\nDetermine the effect of extended-length screens on descaling\nof juvenile salmonids.","4\nOBJECTIVE 1: FISH GUIDANCE EFFICIENCY OF THE EXTENDED-LENGTH\nTRAVELING SCREEN AND EXTENDED-LENGTH BAR SCREEN\nApproach\nFish guidance efficiency tests at McNary Dam in 1992\nindicated that an extended-length bar screen with a 35%\nperforated plate porosity was the optimum configuration for fish\ncondition (descaling) and guidance. Average water flow within\nMcNary Dam turbine intakes is substantially less than at Little\nGoose Dam (about 15,000 vs. 18,000 cfs) . The higher volume flow\nis produced by higher water velocity within the turbine intakes.\nTo compensate for the higher velocity at Little Goose Dam, it was\nnecessary to reduce the overall porosity of the screens by\naltering the perforated plate porosity.\nTo determine which porosity was most effective, three\ndifferent perforated plate porosities were tested with both the\nextended-length traveling screen and extended-length bar screen:\n22, 25, and 28%. Prior to FGE testing, we monitored descaling\nfor each of the extended-length screens at the different\nporosities; this was done in Slots 4A, 4B, 4C, 5A, 5B, and 5C.\nOnce we had determined that none of the porosities caused\nunacceptably high descaling, we selected the initial test\nporosity for each screen and began the FGE tests.\nMethods for determining FGE at Little Goose Dam were similar\nto those used in previous STS studies at McNary Dam (Brege et al.\n1992; McComas et al. 1993) Extended-length screens (Fig. 1)\nwere tested in Slots 4B and 5B, and an STS was used in Slot 3B as\na control. Extended-length screens were also placed in Slots 4A,","5\nLittle Goose Dam cross section\n1993 Fyke-net layout\nNorth Middle South\nRow\nGatewell\n1\n(bulkhead slot)\nJuvenile fish\n2\nbypass flume\n3\nOperating gate\n(raised position)\n4\nGate slot\n5\nVertical barrier\nscreen\n6\n7\n8\nFLOW\nt\nExtended-length\nFyke\nscreen\nnets\nFigure 1. . - - Cross section of turbine intake with extended-length\nscreen and fyke nets at Little Goose Dam.","6\n4C, 5A, and 5C to maintain uniform flows within each test unit.\nPlacement of test screens during FGE testing was as follows:\nPerforated\nTurbine\nScreen\nplate\nunit and slot\nporosity (%)\ntype\nStandard-length STS\n3B\n48\nExtended-length bar screen\n4A\n22\nExtended-length bar screen\n4B\n25\nExtended-length bar screen\n4C\n28\nExtended-length STS\n5A\n22\nExtended-length STS\n5B\n25\nExtended-length STS\n5C\n28\nThe support structure for the extended-length screens\nextends to the floor of the turbine intake; therefore, it was\nnecessary to place the fyke-net frame for collecting unguided\nfish in the downstream or operating gate slot (Fig. 1) . A full\ncomplement of nets (three columns of eight rows) with cod ends\nwas used in the two extended-length screen test slots. An\nanalysis of fyke-net catch by net column with extended-length\nscreens at McNary Dam is included in McComas et al. 1994.\nThe fyke-net frame used with the STS also had a full\ncomplement of nets, but to limit the number of mortalities, only\nthe center column of nets had cod ends. Previous statistical\nanalyses of a similar standard-length screen configuration\nindicated that multiplying the center-column catch by 3 would\nprovide a reasonable approximation of the total fyke-net catch\n(Gessel et al. 1986) .\nAll the extended-length screen slots in Turbine Units 4 and\n5, as well as Slot 3B (control), , contained modified balanced flow\nvertical barrier screens that separated the gatewell (bulkhead","7\nslot) from the operating gate slot and confined guided fish to\nthe gatewell (Fig. 1). A solid plate (1.3-m wide) was added to\nthe bottom panel of the vertical barrier screens to distribute\nflow entering the gatewell.\nAll screens were operated at the standard elevation; screen\nangle was 55° throughout the tests. Operating gates were either\nfully raised or removed (Fig. 1) Water flows into test turbine\nunits were maintained at approximately 19,500 cfs¹ for FGE\ntests. This corresponded to a screen-approach velocity of around\n2.5 fps with turbine power loads of about 135 MW.\nGatewell dipbasket catches provided the number of guided\nfish while the fyke-net catch gave the number of unguided fish.\nFish guidance efficiency for each species was calculated as the\ngatewell catch divided by the total number of fish (by species)\nentering the turbine intake.\nGW\nFGE =\nX 100%\n(GW + FN)\nGW = gatewell catch\nFN = fyke-net catch\nTests began at about 2000 h and generally lasted from 1 to\n3 hours. At the end of each test, the turbine unit was shut\ndown, the fyke-net frame was raised, and the catch was removed\nfrom each net and placed in a separate container. Both guided\n1 To approximate the flow conditions near the guiding device under\nnormal operating conditions (no net frame in place), it was necessary\nto increase the flow into the turbine unit during FGE testing. This\ncompensated for the flow reduction caused by the fyke-net frame and\nthe full complement of fyke nets.","8\nand unguided fish were counted by species and the gatewell catch\nwas examined for descaling.\nMean FGE differences between the extended-length bar screen\nin Slot 4B and the extended-length traveling screen in Slot 5B\nwere examined using analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Fisher's\nProtected Least Significant Difference (FPLSD) used for multiple\ncomparisons of significant F-tests (Petersen 1985) . Blocking by\nday for statistical analysis was not possible because on some\ndays the tests were only conducted in one unit or fish numbers\nwere too low in one or both test units. Analyses were done for\nyearling chinook salmon (16 and 13 replicate test days for the\nextended-length bar screen and extended-length traveling screen,\nrespectively) and steelhead (18 and 15 test days) . Guidance\nestimates were not used where total sample size was less than\n30 fish.\nAll fish were monitored for PIT-tags. Additionally, all\nyearling chinook salmon and steelhead were examined for brands,\nfin clips, or distinguishing marks that would indicate whether\nthey were wild or of hatchery origin.\nDipbasket efficiency was estimated by recovering marked\nyearling chinook salmon from a gatewell during the FGE tests.\nStandard procedure was to release a known number of marked fish\ninto the test gatewell after the unit had reached normal test\nloading (135 MW) . The test gatewell was dipped 30-60 minutes\nlater and dipbasket efficiency was estimated by the percentage of\nmarked, released fish that were recovered.","9\nResults and Discussion\nDipbasket Efficiency\nFive gatewell releases of yearling chinook salmon were made\nto estimate dipbasket efficiency. A total of 124 out of 139\nsmolts were recaptured (89.2%). Fourteen of the missing fish\nwere lost during two of the tests. The remaining tests showed a\n99% collection efficiency.\nFish Guidance Efficiency\nConstraints resulting from the listing of Snake River\nsockeye salmon (0. nerka) and Snake River wild spring/summer\nchinook salmon under the Endangered Species Act influenced the\nFGE evaluation since we were limited by the number of these fish\nwe could handle. Because of the unusually high ratios of wild to\nhatchery yearling chinook salmon (Appendix Table 1), high river\nflows, and a delay in the outmigration of approximately 2 weeks,\nwe were able to conduct only a portion of the desired number of\nFGE tests. It was also necessary to adjust downward the minimum\nnumber of fish acceptable for statistical analysis from\napproximately 200 per replicate to 30 per replicate. Estimates\nof FGE can be assumed to be binomially distributed. A sample\nsize of 30 ensures that the data are approximately normally\ndistributed, which satisfies one assumption in the use of\nanalysis of variance procedures.\nDaily fish collections for FGE tests are listed in Appendix\nTable 2. Overall mean FGE for the extended-length bar screen (84\nand 92% for yearling chinook salmon and steelhead, respectively)\nwas not significantly different from mean FGE for the extended-","10\nlength traveling screen (86 and 87%) . Daily guidance estimates\nshowed no apparent trend over time for either extended-length\nscreen or species. Figure 2 shows FGE results for both yearling\nchinook salmon and steelhead for the three screen types on days\nwhen sufficient numbers of fish were captured in each test slot\nfor statistical analysis. Guidance tests in the control slot\n(3B) with the STS were only conducted on three days (22-24 May) ;\nFGE averaged 74 and 95% for yearling chinook salmon and\nsteelhead, respectively.\nA total of 183 PIT-tagged yearling chinook salmon were\nidentified during FGE tests. Of these, 16 were killed in the\nfyke nets and 167 were collected from gatewells and returned to\nthe juvenile salmonid bypass system.\nOBJECTIVE 2: JUVENILE SALMONID DESCALING\nApproach\nThe external condition of all juvenile salmonids collected\nin the gatewells was evaluated using standard Fish Transportation\nOversight Team descaling criteria (Ceballos et al. 1992) .\nMean descaling differences among the 25% porosity extended-\nlength bar screen in Slot 4B, the 25% extended-length traveling\nscreen in Slot 5B, the STS in Slot 3B, and the 22% extended-\nlength bar screen in Slot 4A were examined using ANOVA.\nDescaling estimates were not included in analyses if the sample\nsize was less than 25 fish. Analyses were done for yearling\nchinook salmon with 21, 20, 16, and 8 test days, respectively,\nfor the four screen conditions. Steelhead descaling estimates","11\nYearling Chinook Salmon\nESBS\nESTS\nSTS\nFGE (%)\n100\n80\n60\n40\n20\n0\n26\n29\n30\n31\n5\n6\n7\n12\n17\n22 23 24\nMay\nSteelhead\nESBS\nESTS\nSTS\nFGE (%)\n100\n80\n60\n40\n20\n0\n26\n28\n29\n30\n5\n6\n7\n12\n17\n22 23 24\n25\nMay\nFigure 2. -- Fish guidance efficiency (FGE) for yearling chinook\nsalmon and steelhead at Little Goose Dam, 1993\n(ESBS = extended-length - bar screen, ESTS = extended-\nlength traveling screen, STS = standard-length\ntraveling screen) .","12\nfor all screens increased noticeably after 12 May and again after\n22 May, so data in these time periods were analyzed separately.\nAnalyses for early season data (19 April-12 May) were done with\n8, 8, 6, and 2 test days for the extended-length bar screen,\nextended-length traveling screen, STS, and the Slot 4A extended-\nlength bar screen, respectively. Analyses for the middle season\ndata (15 May-22 May) were done with 5, 3, and 6 test days (no\nSlot 4A extended-length bar screen) Analyses for late season\ndata (23 May-3 June) were done with 9, 6, 11, and 7 test days.\nResults and Discussion\nTable 1 summarizes the results of the initial descaling\ntests conducted for three days prior to FGE testing. This\nmonitoring was done to make sure test conditions and prototype\nequipment would not cause an inordinate amount of descaling or\ninjury to juvenile salmonids. Constraints of available test days\nand low numbers of fish limited us to only a cursory examination\nof descaling. However, the information collected reaffirmed our\nselection of the 25% porosity extended-length screens for Slots\n4B and 5B in the initial FGE test series. Because of concern\nabout descaling problems occurring as the outmigration proceeded,\nthe highest porosity screens (28%) were placed in Slots 4C and 5C\n(i.e., slots with lowest discharge) .\nDaily descaling data collected during FGE tests are provided\nin Appendix Table 3. Mean descaling for the extended-length\ntraveling screen in Slot 5B (12%) was significantly higher than\nfor the extended-length bar screen in Slot 4B and STS in Slot 3B\n(9 and 7%, respectively) for yearling chinook salmon. It was not","1. - - Descaling of yearling chinook salmon and steelhead during the initial testing of\ndifferent porosity (%) extended-length screens at Little Goose Dam, 19-21 April\nFish Desc%\n10.5\n23 13.0\n11.9\nFish Desc%\n0.0\n4.8\n2.8\n28% ESTS\n28% ESTS\nSlot 5C\nSlot 5C\n19\n42\n15\n21\n36\nFish Desc%\nFish Desc%\n13.8\n9.1\n40 15.0\n11.8\n5.3\n11.4\n5.1\n7.5\n28% ESBS\n28% ESBS\nSlot 5B\nSlot 5B\n58\n88\n186\n57\n70\n59\n186\nFish Desc%\nFish Desc%\n21.8\n82 14.6\n17.5\n5.9\n14.3\n10.3\n25% ESBS\n25% ESBS\nSlot 5A\nSlot 5A\n55\n137\n68\n77\n145\nYearling chinook salmon\nFish Desc%\nFish Desc%\nSteelhead\n9.4\n8.9\n9.2\n2.5\n7.3\n4.9\n22% ESTS\n22% ESTS\nSlot 4C\nSlot 4C\n53\n45\n98\n40\n41\n81\nFish Desc%\nFish Desc%\n15.0\n2.8\n9.4\n8.4\n3.8\n1.5\n5.4\n3.2\n22% ESBS\n22% ESBS\nSlot 4B\nSlot 4B\n80\n106\n53\n239\n79\n137\n92\n308\nFish Desc%\nFish Desc%\n11.5\n10.6\n11.0\n6.0\n6.4\n6.2\n25% ESTS\n25% ESTS\nSlot 4A\nSlot 4A\n61\n85\n146\n83\n94\n177\n1993.\nFish Desc%\nFish Desc%\n11.1\n4.6\n0.0\n5.1\n2.3\n4.4\n0.0\n2.9\nSlot 3B\n48% STS\nSlot 3B\n48% STS\n9\n24\n6\nOverall 39\n42\n68\n26\nOverall 136\nTable","14\nsignificantly higher than the 10% descaling for the extended-\nlength bar screen in Slot 4A (22% porosity) There were no\nsignificant differences in mean descaling between extended-length\nbar screens in Slots 4A and 4B and the STS. Daily descaling\nestimates showed no apparent trends over time for any screen.\nThere were no significant differences among screens in mean\ndescaling for steelhead. Overall season descaling averaged 16,\n15, 17, and 20% for the extended-length bar screen, extended-\nlength traveling screen, STS, and the extended-length bar screen\nin Slot 4A (mostly tested after 24 May) , respectively. These\ndescaling rates were higher than expected and we do not have a\ndefinitive explanation. It is noteworthy, however, that\ndescaling for steelhead (under the various guidance conditions\ntested) averaged between 4 and 6% before 13 May, between 11 and\n17% from 15 May to 22 May, and between 23 and 29% after 23 May.\nHigh river flows and spill at Snake River dams, as well as the\ninflux of hatchery steelhead all occurred around 12 May, shortly\nbefore the increase in steelhead descaling.\nCONCLUSIONS\n1)\nFish guidance efficiency of the extended-length\ntraveling screen and the extended-length bar screen was\nhigh for both yearling chinook salmon and steelhead\n(nearly 85 and 90%, respectively) and was not\nsignificantly different between the two types of\nextended-length screens.","15\nMean descaling for yearling chinook salmon and was\n2)\nsignificantly higher with the extended-length traveling\nscreen (12%) than with the extended-length bar screen\n(9%) or STS (7%). . There was no significant difference\nin mean descaling between the extended-length bar\nscreen and the STS.\n3)\nDescaling for steelhead was about 5% prior to mid-May,\n15% in late May, and 25% by early June, but was not\nsignificantly different for any screen type.","16\nACKNOWLEDGMENTS\nWe would like to express our appreciation to the Corps of\nEngineers personnel at Little Goose Dam for their assistance and\ncooperation in this study. The fish screen maintenance crew,\nsupervised by Ken Weeks, and the Control Room Operators were\nparticularly supportive.","17\nREFERENCES\nBrege, D. A. , S. J. Grabowski, W. D. Muir, S. R. Hirtzel,\nS. J. Mazur, and B. P. Sandford. 1992. Studies to\ndetermine the effectiveness of extended traveling screens\nand extended bar screens at McNary Dam, 1991. Report to\nU. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Delivery Order E86910060,\n50 p. plus Appendixes. (Available from Northwest Fisheries\nScience Center, 2725 Montlake Blvd. E., Seattle, WA\n98112-2097.) )\nCeballos, J. R. S. W. Pettit, and J. L. McKern. 1992. Fish\nTransportation Oversight Team. Annual Report - FY 1991.\nTransportation operations on the Snake and Columbia Rivers.\nNOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS F/NWR-29, 77 p. plus\nAppendix. (Available from Environmental and Technical\nServices Division, 911 N.E. 11th Avenue, Suite 620,\nPortland, OR 97232.)\nGessel, M. H. L. G. Gilbreath, W. D. Muir, and R. F. Krcma.\n1986. Evaluation of the juvenile collection and bypass\nsystems at Bonneville Dam - 1985. Report to U.S. Army Corps\nof Engineers, Contract DACW57-85H-0001, 63 p. plus\nAppendixes. (Available from Northwest Fisheries Science\nCenter, 2725 Montlake Blvd. E. Seattle, WA 98112-2097.)\nMcComas, R. L., D. A. Brege, W. D. Muir, B. P. Sandford, and\nD. B. Dey. 1993. Studies to determine the effectiveness of\nextended-length submersible bar screens at McNary Dam, 1992.\nReport to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Delivery Order\nE86910060, 34 p. plus Appendixes. (Available from Northwest\nFisheries Science Center, 2725 Montlake Blvd. E. Seattle,\nWA 98112-2097.\nMcComas, R. L., B. P. Sandford, and D. B. Dey. 1994. Studies to\nevaluate the effectiveness of extended-length screens at\nMcNary Dam, 1993. Report to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,\nDelivery Order E86910060, 103 p. (Available from Northwest\nFisheries Science Center, 2725 Montlake Blvd. E. Seattle,\nWA 98112-2097.) )\nMuir, W. D. A. E. Giorgi, W. A. Zaugg, W. W. Dickhoff, and\nB. R. Beckman. 1988. Behavior and physiology studies in\nrelation to yearling chinook salmon guidance at Lower\nGranite and Little Goose Dams, 1987. Report to U.S. Army\nCorps of Engineers, Contract DACW68-84-H-0034 47 p. plus\nAppendixes. (Available from Northwest Fisheries Science\nCenter, 2725 Montlake Blvd. E. , Seattle, WA 98112-2097.)\nPetersen, R. G. 1985. Design and Analysis of Experiments.\nMarcel Dekker, New York. 429 p.","","19\nAppendix Table 1. - - Hatchery and wild yearling chinook salmon and\nsteelhead collected during descaling and fish\nguidance efficiency tests at Little Goose Dam,\n1993.\nYearling chinook\nSteelhead\nPercent\nPercent\nHatchery Wild Total wild\nDate\nHatchery\nWilda\nTotal\nwild\n19 April\n290\n47\n337\n13.9\n88\n322\n410\n78.5\n20 April\n381\n75\n456\n16.4\n177\n331\n508\n65.2\n21 April\n37.3\n90\n9\n99\n9.1\n111\n66\n177\n28 April\n104\n76\n180\n42.2\n175\n25\n200\n12.5\n4 May\n399\n64\n463\n13.8\n151\n25\n176\n14.2\n5 May\n751\n102\n853\n12.0\n457\n146\n603\n24.2\n6 May\n195\n27\n222\n12.2\n162\n72\n234\n30.8\n7 May\n171\n30\n201\n14.9\n408\n157\n565\n27.8\n12 May\n663\n81\n744\n10.9\n555\n111\n666\n16.7\n15 May\n57\n17\n74\n23.0\n332\n69\n401\n17.2\n16 May\n66\n22\n88\n25.0\n466\n66\n532\n12.4\n17 May\n129\n82\n211\n38.9\n651\n68\n719\n9.5\n18 May\n246\n94\n340\n27.6\n272\n37\n309\n12.0\n19 May\n131\n53\n184\n28.8\n167\n38\n205\n18.5\n21 May\n34\n18\n52\n34.6\n101\n11\n112\n9.8\n22 May\n117\n33\n150\n22.0\n293\n30\n323\n9.3\n23 May\n266\n108\n374\n28.9\n183\n29\n212\n13.7\n24 May\n394\n226\n620\n36.5\n562\n56\n618\n9.1\n25 May\n69\n19\n88\n21.6\n215\n32\n247\n13.0\n26 May\n342\n103\n445\n23.1\n308\n45\n353\n12.7\n27 May\n86\n20\n106\n18.9\n145\n18\n163\n11.0\n28 May\n103\n14\n117\n12.0\n273\n34\n307\n11.1\n29 May\n276\n93\n369\n25.2\n314\n38\n352\n10.8\n30 May\n171\n69\n240\n28.8\n276\n31\n307\n10.1\n10.4\n31 May\n292\n69\n361\n19.1\n155\n18\n173\n2 June\n72\n16.7\n113\n58\n171\n33.9\n60\n12\n3 June\n173\n41\n214\n19.2\n114\n20\n134\n14.9\nPrior to May 4, the estimated number of wild yearling chinook\nsalmon was based on the assumption that all hatchery fish had\ntheir adipose fin clipped; after this date, the estimated number\nof wild yearling chinook salmon was based on the assumption that\nall hatchery fish had either the adipose fin clipped or a ventral\nfin clipped.","","21\nAppendix Table 2. - Numbers of fish caught in individual replicates of\nfish guidance efficiency tests at Little Goose Dam,\n1993.\n28 April (5B, ESTS) a\nSubyearling\nYearling\nchinookb\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nLocation\nchinook\nL M R Totc\nLMRTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n3\n3\n1\n1\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n1\n3\n1\n5\nLevel 4\n1\n2\n4\n7\n3\n3\n8\n14\nLevel 5\n4\n4\n3\n11\n2\n1\n3\nLevel 6\n2\n1\n3\n6\n2\n2\n4\nLevel 7\n1\n1\nNet total\n7\n10\n11\n28\n6\n10\n12\n28\nGatewell\n152\n172\nTotal\n180\n200\nFGE (%)\n84\n86\n04 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL M R Tot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nLMRS Tot\nLevel 1\n4\n4\n2\n2\nLevel 2\n2\n6\n8\n1\n1\nLevel 3\n1\n2\n4\n7\n2\n2\nLevel 4\n3\n7\n6\n16\n1\n1\n4\n6\nLevel 5\n4\n5\n6\n15\n1\n2\n3\nLevel 6\n5\n5\n5\n15\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 7\n1\n1\nNet total\n15\n24\n27\n66\n1\n6\n9\n16\nGatewell\n302\n132\nTotal\n368\n148\nFGE (%)\n82\n89\naTest date (Test slot, guidance device type: ESTS = extended-length\ntraveling screen, ESBS = extended-length bar screen, STS = standard-length\nsubmersible traveling screen) .\nb Age 0+ fish, <30 mm in length.\nCRefers to fyke-net column: L = left, M = middle, R = right, Tot = total\ncatch for net level.","22\nAppendix Table 2.\n- - Continued.\n05 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\n2\n2\n3\n1\n4\nLevel 2\n3\n4\n5\n12\n2\n2\nLevel 3\n2\n8\n10\n1\n1\nLevel 4\n4\n1\n3\n8\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 5\n1\n2\n6\n9\n4\n2\n6\nLevel 6\n5\n5\n2\n12\n1\n1\n2\n4\nLevel 7\n4\n1\n2\n7\n2\n2\nNet total\n19\n13\n28\n60\n8\n8\n5\n21\nGatewell\n221\n311\nTotal\n281\n332\nFGE (%)\n79\n94\n05 May (5B, ESTS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\n1\n1\nLevel 2\n1\n1\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 4\n1\n1\n4\n6\n1\n1\n1\n3\nLevel 5\n3\n2\n5\n10\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 6\n4\n4\n1\n2\n3\nLevel 7\nNet total\n9\n3\n10\n22\n2\n2\n6\n10\nGatewell\n362\n248\nTotal\n384\n258\nFGE (%)\n94\n96","23\nAppendix Table 2. Continued.\n06 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\n1\n1\n2\n2\nLevel 2\n2\n1\n2\n5\n5\n4\n1\n10\nLevel 3\n4\n1\n5\n1\n2\n3\nLevel 4\n2\n2\n1\n1\nLevel 5\n2\n3\n1\n6\n1\n1\nLevel 6\n2\n1\n3\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 7\n1\n1\nNet total\n13\n4\n5\n22\n9\n5\n6\n20\nGatewell\n54\n115\nTotal\n76\n135\nFGE (%)\n71\n85\n06 May (5B, ESTS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\nLevel 3\nLevel 4\n1\n1\n1\n1\nLevel 5\n1\n1\n1\n3\nLevel 6\n2\n2\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 7\nNet total\n3\n1\n2\n6\n1\n2\n3\nGatewell\n28\n50\nTotal\n34\n53\nFGE (%)\n82\n94","24\nAppendix Table 2\nContinued.\n-\n-\n07 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\n1\n1\nLevel 2\n1\n2\n1\n4\n3\n6\n6\n15\nLevel 3\n3\n3\n6\n5\n4\n9\n18\nLevel 4\n1\n2\n3\n6\n6\n2\n8\nLevel 5\n1\n4\n1\n6\n5\n7\n4\n16\nLevel 6\n2\n3\n4\n9\n4\n9\n2\n15\nLevel 7\n2\n2\n3\n3\nNet total\n8\n16\n9\n33\n18\n35\n23\n76\nGatewell\n69\n252\nTotal\n102\n328\nFGE (%)\n68\n77\n07 May (5B, ESTS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL M R Tot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n2\n1\n1\n4\nLevel 3\n1\n2\n7\n10\nLevel 4\n4\n5\n3\n12\nLevel 5\n1\n2\n3\n4\n5\n9\nLevel 6\n2\n3\n5\nLevel 7\nNet total\n1\n2\n3\n9\n12\n19\n40\nGatewell\n11\n127\nTotal\n14\n167\nFGE (%)\n79\n76","25\nAppendix Table 2.\nContinued.\n-\n12 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\n3\n1\n4\n2\n2\nLevel 2\n1\n1\n1\n2\n9\n12\n1\n2\n1\n4\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n3\n1\n3\n7\n3\n1\n5\n9\nLevel 4\n2\n3\n5\n10\n4\n4\n4\n12\nLevel 5\n1\n1\n2\n2\n7\n11\n1\n4\n3\n8\nLevel 6\n6\n6\n12\n3\n3\nLevel 7\n2\n2\nNet total 2\n1\n3\n11\n15\n32\n58\n11\n14\n13\n38\nGatewell\n0\n378\n363\nTotal\n3\n436\n401\nFGE (%)\n0\n87\n91\n12 May (5B, ESTS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nLMRTot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n2\n2\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n2\n2\n2\n3\n7\nLevel 4\n1\n2\n3\n1\n1\n1\n3\nLevel 5\n1\n1\n2\n2\nLevel 6\n2\n2\n2\n2\n2\n6\nLevel 7\nNet total\n2\n3\n3\n8\n7\n5\n8\n20\nGatewell\n166\n228\nTotal\n174\n248\nFGE (%)\n95\n92","26\nAppendix Table 2\n- Continued.\n15 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 2\n1\n1\n3\n5\nLevel 3\n1\n1\nLevel 4\n1\n2\n3\nLevel 5\n2\n2\nLevel 6\n1\n1\n2\n4\nLevel 7\n1\n1\nNet total\n0\n2\n1\n3\n2\n5\n8\n15\nGatewell\n5\n23\n207\nTotal\n5\n26\n222\nFGE (%)\n100\n89\n93\n16 May (5B, ESTS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\n2\n2\nLevel 2\n1\n1\n1\n1\n3\n5\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n3\n3\n6\nLevel 4\n1\n1\n4\n6\nLevel 5\n1\n2\n3\n3\n1\n2\n6\nLevel 6\n2\n1\n3\n1\n1\n2\n4\nLevel 7\n1\n1\nNet total 1\n1\n2\n3\n3\n8\n11\n7\n11\n29\nGatewell\n5\n44\n385\nTotal\n6\n52\n414\nFGE (%)\n83\n85\n93","27\nAppendix Table 2\nContinued.\n17 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\n1\n1\nLevel 2\n2\n2\n3\n2\n5\nLevel 3\n2\n2\n2\n2\n2\n3\n1\n6\nLevel 4\n1\n2\n1\n4\nLevel 5\n1\n1\n2\n1\n1\nLevel 6\n2\n1\n1\n4\n2\n2\nLevel 7\n1\n1\nNet total 2\n2\n3\n1\n6\n10\n7\n8\n5\n20\nGatewell\n6\n121\n451\nTotal\n8\n131\n471\nFGE (%)\n75\n92\n96\n17 May (5B, ESTS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\n2\n1\n3\nLevel 2\n1\n1\n2\n1\n3\n6\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n1\n1\n1\n2\n3\nLevel 4\n1\n1\n2\n2\n2\n5\n9\nLevel 5\n1\n2\n5\n8\n1\n3\n5\n9\nLevel 6\n1\n2\n1\n4\n1\n5\n6\nLevel 7\n2\n1\n1\n4\nNet total 2\n2\n3\n5\n7\n15\n10\n10\n20\n40\nGatewell\n0\n65\n209\nTotal\n2\n80\n249\nFGE (%)\n0\n81\n84","28\nAppendix Table 2. Continued.\n18 May (5B, ESTS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\n1\n1\nLevel 2\n1\n1\n1\n5\n6\n1\n2\n4\n7\nLevel 3\n1\n4\n5\n2\n4\n6\nLevel 4\n2\n1\n2\n5\n4\n4\nLevel 5\n1\n1\n1\n1\n1\n3\n1\n4\n5\nLevel 6\n4\n3\n7\n2\n1\n1\n4\nLevel 7\n1\n1\n2\n1\n1\n2\nNet total 2\n2\n4\n9\n15\n28\n4\n6\n19\n29\nGatewell\n2\n166\n236\nTotal\n4\n194\n265\nFGE (%)\n50\n86\n89\n19 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 2\n2\n2\n1\n1\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n2\n2\n2\nLevel 4\n1\n1\n2\n1\n2\n3\nLevel 5\n1\n1\n1\n1\nLevel 6\n1\n1\n2\n2\n2\nLevel 7\n1\n1\n1\n1\nNet total\n5\n2\n3\n10\n3\n5\n4\n12\nGatewell\n1\n99\n155\nTotal\n1\n109\n167\nFGE (%)\n100\n91\n93\n21 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n1\n1\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n1\n1\nLevel 4\n1\n1\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 5\n1\n1\n1\n1\nLevel 6\nLevel 7\nNet total\n1\n2\n3\n3\n2\n5\nGatewell\n1\n18\n52\nTotal\n1\n21\n57\nFGE (%)\n100\n86\n91","29\nAppendix Table 2\nContinued.\n-\n-\n22 May (3B, STS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n1\n3\nLevel 3\nLevel 4\n2\n6\n1\n3\nLevel 5\n1\n3\nLevel 6\nLevel 7\nNet total\n4\n12\n1\n3\n0\nGatewell\n47\n63\n1\nTotal\n59\n66\n1\nFGE (%)\n80\n95\n100\n22 May (4B ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n1\n1\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 4\n1\n2\n3\nLevel 5\n1\n1\nLevel 6\n1\n1\nLevel 7\nNet total\n2\n2\n2\n6\n1\n1\n2\nGatewell\n34\n58\nTotal\n40\n60\nFGE (%)\n85\n97\n22 May (5B, ESTS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nSockeye\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nL M R Tot\nL M R Tot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\n1\n1\nLevel 2\n1\n1\n1\n5\n4\n10\nLevel 3\n3\n1\n4\nLevel 4\n1\n1\n1\n1\n1\n1\nLevel 5\n2\nLevel 6\n1\n1\n2\n1\n1\nLevel 7\n1\n1\nNet total\n3\n2\n5\n2\n11\n6\n19\nGatewell\n24\n15\nTotal\n29\n34\nFGE (%)\n83\n44","30\nAppendix Table 2.\n- - Continued.\n23 May (3B, STS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n4\n12\nLevel 3\n6\n18\nLevel 4\n2\n6\n1\n3\nLevel 5\n1\n3\nLevel 6\nLevel 7\nNet total\n13\n39\n1\n3\n0\nGatewell\n123\n96\n1\nTotal\n162\n99\n1\nFGE (%)\n76\n97\n100\n23 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n2\n2\nLevel 3\n1\n2\n3\nLevel 4\n1\n1\n1\n2\n3\nLevel 5\n2\n2\n4\nLevel 6\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 7\nNet total 1\n1\n2\n2\n8\n12\n1\n1\n2\nGatewell\n0\n127\n61\nTotal\n1\n139\n63\nFGE (%)\n0\n91\n97\n23 May (5B, ESTS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n2\n2\n1\n1\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 4\n1\n1\nLevel 5\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 6\n1\n1\nLevel 7\n1\n1\n1\n1\nNet total\n2\n2.\n3\n7\n1\n3\n4\nGatewell\n74\n27\nTotal\n81\n31\nFGE (%)\n91\n87","31\nAppendix Table 2.\nContinued.\n24 May (3B, STS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\n1\n3\nLevel 2\n1\n3\nLevel 3\n15\n45\nLevel 4\n17\n51\n4\n12\nLevel 5\n4\n12\n3\n9\nLevel 6\nLevel 7\n1\n3\nNet total\n38\n114\n8\n24\n0\nGatewell\n235\n274\n1\nTotal\n349\n298\n1\nFGE (%)\n67\n92\n100\n24 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\n1\n1\n1\n1\nLevel 2\n1\n1\n2\n1\n1\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n1\n1\nLevel 4\n1\n2\n3\nLevel 5\n2\n1\n2\n5\nLevel 6\n1\n1\nLevel 7\nNet total\n6\n1\n6\n13\n1\n2\n3\n0\nGatewell\n168\n138\n1\nTotal\n181\n141\n1\nFGE (%)\n93\n98\n100","32\nAppendix Table 2.\nContinued.\n25 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL M R Tot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n1\n1\n1\n1\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 4\n1\n1\nLevel 5\n1\n1\n1\n1\nLevel 6\n1\n1\nLevel 7\nNet total\n2\n3\n5\n1\n2\n3\nGatewell\n7\n33\nTotal\n12\n36\nFGE (%)\n58\n92\n25 May (5B, ESTS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\nLevel 3\n1\n1\nLevel 4\n1\n2\n3\n1\n1\nLevel 5\n1\n1\n2\n4\n3\n3\nLevel 6\n1\n1\n1\n1\nLevel 7\n1\n1\n1\n1\nNet total\n3\n1\n6\n10\n3\n2\n1\n6\nGatewell\n11\n35\nTotal\n21\n41\nFGE (%)\n52\n85","33\nAppendix Table 2\n--Continued.\n26 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 3\n1\n1\nLevel 4\n1\n1\n1\n3\nLevel 5\nLevel 6\nLevel 7\nNet total\n1\n2\n2\n5\n1\n1\nGatewell\n66\n59\nTotal\n71\n60\nFGE (%)\n93\n98\n26 May (5B, ESTS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nLMRTot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n2\n2\nLevel 3\n1\n1\nLevel 4\n3\n2\n2\n7\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 5\n1\n5\n2\n8\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 6\n1\n1\n2\n1\n1\nLevel 7\nNet total\n4\n10\n6\n20\n2\n1\n2\n5\nGatewell\n143\n108\nTotal\n163\n113\nFGE (%)\n88\n96","34\nAppendix Table 2 - - Continued.\n27 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL M R Tot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM R Tot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\nLevel 3\nLevel 4\nLevel 5\n1\n1\nLevel 6\n1\n1\nLevel 7\nNet total\n1\n1\n2\n0\nGatewell\n11\n19\n1\nTotal\n13\n19\n1\nFGE (%)\n85\n100\n100\n27 May (5B, ESTS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 4\n1\n1\n2\n2\nLevel 5\n1\n1\n2\n1\n1\nLevel 6\nLevel 7\n1\n1\nNet total\n1\n1\n3\n2\n2\n7\n2\n1\n3\nGatewell\n2\n19\n18\nTotal\n3\n26\n21\nFGE (%)\n67\n73\n86","35\nAppendix Table 2\nContinued.\n28 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 4\n2\n2\n1\n1\nLevel 5\n2\n2\n1\n1\nLevel 6\n1\n1\nLevel 7\nNet total\n2\n3\n5\n2\n3\n5\nGatewell\n30\n77\nTotal\n35\n82\nFGE (%)\n86\n94\n28 May (5B, ESTS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 3\n2\n2\nLevel 4\n2\n2\n1\n2\n3\nLevel 5\n1\n1\n2\n1\n3\nLevel 6\n1\n1\n1\n1\n2\n1\n1\nLevel 7\nNet total 1\n1\n2\n3\n5\n2\n6\n3\n11\nGatewell\n2\n17\n55\nTotal\n3\n22\n66\nFGE (%)\n67\n77\n83","36\nAppendix Table 2\nContinued.\n-\n29 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\n1\n1\nLevel 2\n1\n1\n2\n2\n1\n1\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 4\n2\n1\n1\n4\n1\n1\nLevel 5\n1\n2\n3\n1\n1\nLevel 6\n1\n1\nLevel 7\nNet total 1\n1\n3\n5\n1\n9\n1\n1\n4\n6\n1\n1\nGatewell\n0\n107\n114\n0\nTotal\n1\n116\n120\n1\nFGE (%)\n0\n92\n95\n0\n29 May (5B, ESTS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL M R Tot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n1\n1\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n2\n2\n2\nLevel 4\n1\n1\n2\n1\n2\n3\nLevel 5\n1\n2\n3\n1\n1\nLevel 6\n1\n1\n2\n2\nLevel 7\nNet total\n1\n1\n4\n5\n1\n10\n3\n1\n2\n6\nGatewell\n0\n77\n122\nTotal\n1\n87\n128\nFGE (%)\n0\n89\n95","37\nAppendix Table 2\nContinued.\n-\n30 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 2\n1\n2\n1\n4\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n1\n1\nLevel 4\n1\n1\n2\n1\n1\nLevel 5\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 6\n1\n1\nLevel 7\n1\n1\n1\n1\nNet total\n1\n1\n4\n4\n5\n13\n1\n1\n2\nGatewell\n0\n58\n90\nTotal\n1\n71\n92\nFGE (%)\n0\n82\n98\n30 May (5B, ESTS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM R Tot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n1\n1\nLevel 3\n1\n1\n1\n1\nLevel 4\n2\n1\n2\n5\nLevel 5\n2\n2\n4\nLevel 6\nLevel 7\nNet total\n5\n3\n3\n11\n1\n1\nGatewell\n57\n51\nTotal\n68\n52\nFGE (%)\n84\n98","38\nAppendix Table 2\nContinued.\n-\n-\n31 May (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\n1\n1\nLevel 2\n2\n2\n4\n1\n1\nLevel 3\n1\n1\nLevel 4\n3\n1\n2\n6\nLevel 5\n6\n6\n1\n1\nLevel 6\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 7\n1\n1\nNet total\n0\n7\n1\n11\n19\n1\n2\n1\n4\n0\nGatewell\n33\n2\n1\n63\nTotal\n37\n2\n1\n82\nFGE (%)\n100\n77\n89\n100\n31 May (5B, ESTS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n1\n1\nLevel 3\n1\n2\n2\n5\n1\n1\nLevel 4\n2\n5\n7\nLevel 5\n1\n1\nLevel 6\n1\n1\n2\n4\nLevel 7\nNet total\n1\n4\n3\n11\n18\n1\nGatewell\n65\n14\nTotal\n83\n15\nFGE (%)\n78\n93","39\nAppendix Table 2. - --Continued.\n02 June (4B, ESBS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL M R Tot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\n1\n1\nLevel 3\n1\n1\nLevel 4\n1\n1\n2\nLevel 5\n1\n1\nLevel 6\n1\n1\nLevel 7\nNet total\n2\n1\n3\n6\n0\nGatewell\n27\n18\nTotal\n33\n18\nFGE (%)\n82\n100\n02 June (5B, ESTS)\nSubyearling\nYearling\nLocation\nchinook\nchinook\nSteelhead\nSockeye\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL\nM\nR\nTot\nL M R Tot\nLevel 1\nLevel 2\nLevel 3\n3\n3\nLevel 4\n1\n1\nLevel 5\nLevel 6\n1\n2\n1\n4\nLevel 7\n1\n1\nNet total\n2\n5\n2\n9\n0\nGatewell\n42\n11\nTotal\n51\n11\nFGE (%)\n82\n100","","41\nAppendix Table 3 - - -Descaling data from fish guidance efficiency tests\nconducted at Little Goose Dam, 1993.\nYearling chinook\nSteelhead\nTest\nTotal\nNumber\nPercent\nTotal\nNumber\nPercent\ndate\ncatch\ndescaled\ndescaled\ncatch\ndescaled\ndescaled\nUnit 3, Slot B (48% STS)\n4 May\n95\n7\n7.4\n28\n4\n14.3\n5 May\n188\n14\n7.4\n12\n1\n8.3\n6 May\n114\n10\n8.8\n46\n4\n8.7\n7 May\n85\n6\n7.1\n70\n3\n4.3\n12 May\n134\n11\n8.2\n7\n1\n14.3\n15 May\n48\n2\n4.2\n179\n23\n12.8\n16\nMay\n36\n3\n8.3\n98\n12\n12.2\n18\nMay\n146\n9\n6.2\n44\n2\n4.5\n19\nMay\n75\n1\n1.3\n38\n2\n5.3\n21\nMay\n31\n5\n16.1\n55\n9\n16.4\n22\nMay\n47\n0\n0.0\n63\n11\n17.5\n23\nMay\n123\n7\n5.7\n96\n29\n30.2\n24\nMay\n35\n139\n16\n11.5\n146\n24.0\n25\nMay\n10\n1\n10.0\n83\n32\n38.6\n26\nMay\n22.2\n87\n4\n4.6\n36\n8\n27\nMay\n45\n3\n6.7\n97\n24\n24.7\n28\nMay\n36\n3\n8.3\n110\n25\n22.7\n29\nMay\n81\n10\n12.3\n71\n17\n23.9\n30\nMay\n37\n3\n8.1\n102\n28\n27.5\n31\nMay\n96\n9\n9.4\n79\n18\n22.8\n2 June\n48\n4\n8.3\n26\n7\n26.9\n3 June\n58\n3\n5.2\n62\n14\n22.6\nUnit 4, Slot A (22% extended-length bar screen)\n24 May\n108\n6\n5.6\n76\n15\n19.7\n25\nMay\n10\n2\n20.0\n30\n9\n30.0\n26\nMay\n78\n4\n5.1\n38\n9\n23.7\n27\nMay\n19\n3\n15.8\n23\n1\n4.3\n5.6\n28\nMay\n27\n4\n14.8\n54\n3\n29\nMay\n89\n9\n10.1\n34\n7\n20.6\n30\nMay\n68\n3\n4.4\n59\n18\n30.5\n31 May\n88\n13\n14.8\n40\n11\n27.5\nUnit 4, Slot A (28% extended-length bar screen)\n2 June\n39\n4\n10.3\n17\n3\n17.6\n3 June\n82\n12\n14.6\n39\n10\n25.6","42\nAppendix Table 3 - -\nContinued.\nYearling chinook\nSteelhead\nTest\nTotal\nNumber\nPercent\nTotal\nNumber\nPercent\ndate\ncatch\ndescaled\ndescaled\ncatch\ndescaled\ndescaled\nUnit 4, Slot B (25% extended-length bar screen)\n4 May\n302\n30\n9.9\n132\n7\n5.3\n5 May\n221\n21\n9.5\n311\n17\n5.5\n6 May\n54\n4\n7.4\n115\n3\n2.6\n7 May\n69\n11\n15.9\n252\n8\n3.2\n12 May\n378\n45\n11.9\n363\n22\n6.1\n15 May\n23\n0\n0.0\n207\n37\n17.9\n17 May\n121\n7\n5.8\n187\n22\n11.8\n19 May\n99\n6\n6.1\n155\n29\n18.7\n21 May\n18\n5\n27.8\n52\n9\n17.3\n22\nMay\n34\n0\n0.0\n58\n10\n17.2\n23 May\n127\n8\n6.3\n61\n20\n32.8\n24 May\n168\n7\n4.2\n138\n27\n19.6\n25 May\n7\n1\n14.3\n33\n8\n24.2\n26 May\n66\n3\n4.5\n59\n17\n28.8\n27 May\n11\n0\n0.0\n19\n5\n26.3\n28 May\n30\n3\n10.0\n77\n13\n16.9\n29 May\n107\n11\n10.3\n114\n30\n26.3\n30 May\n58\n0\n0.0\n90\n22\n24.4\n31 May\n63\n9\n14.3\n33\n10\n30.3\n2 June\n27\n2\n7.4\n18\n6\n33.3\n3 June\n74\n15\n20.3\n33\n9\n27.3\nUnit 5, Slot B (25% extended-length traveling screen)\n28 April\n152\n14\n9.2\n172\n15\n8.7\n5 May\n362\n33\n9.1\n248\n10\n4.0\n6 May\n26\n4\n15.4\n50\n3\n6.0\n7 May\n11\n2\n18.2\n127\n2\n1.6\n12 May\n166\n21\n12.7\n228\n7\n3.1\n16 May\n44\n5\n11.4\n385\n49\n12.7\n17 May\n65\n4\n6.2\n96\n13\n13.5\n18\nMay\n147\n14\n9.5\n179\n24\n13.4\n22\nMay\n24\n4\n16.7\n15\n2\n13.3\n23 May\n12.2\n74\n9\n27\n8\n29.6\n25 May\n11\n1\n9.1\n35\n12\n34.3\n26\nMay\n143\n26\n18.2\n108\n31\n28.7\n27\nMay\n19\n2\n10.5\n18\n9\n50.0\n28 May\n17\n0\n0.0\n55\n11\n20.0\n29\nMay\n77\n4\n5.2\n122\n36\n29.5\n30\nMay\n57\n6\n10.5\n51\n17\n33.3\n31\nMay\n65\n11\n16.9\n14\n6\n42.9\n2 June\n42\n4\n9.5\n11\n5\n45.5"]}