USE OF ELECTRICITY IN

THE CONTROL OF SEA LAMPREYS

Marine Biological Laboratory

LIBRAKY

APR 21 1153

WOODS HOLE, MASS.

SPECIAL SCIENTIFIC REPORT: FISHERIES No. 92

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

Explanatory Note

The series embodies results of investigations, usually of re-
stricted scope, intended to aid or direct management or utilization
practices and as guides for administrative or legislative action. It
is issued in limited quantities for the official use of Federal, State
or cooperating agencies and in processed form for economy and to
avoid delay in publication.

Washington, D. C.
December, 19!?2

United States Department of the Interior, Oscar L. Chapman, Secretary
Fish and Wildlife Service, Albert M. Day, Director

USE OF ELECTRICITY IN THE CONTROL OF SEA LAMPREYS:

ELECTROMECHANICAL WEIRS AND TRAPS

AND ELECTRICAL BARRIERS

by

Vernon C. Apple gate and Bernard R. Smith

Fishery Research Biologists
Great Lakes Fishery Investigations

and

Willis L. Nielsen

Electronic Engineer

Cook Research Laboratories

Division of Cook Electric Company

Special Scientific Report: Fisheries No. 92

ABSTRACT

An account is given of experiments conducted in 1951
and 1952 with electromechanical and electrical barriers for the
blocking and/or capture of sea lamprey runs in tributary streams
of northern Lake Huron and northern Lake Michigan. Details are
presented on structural characteristics, experimental manipula-
tions, and effects on sea lampreys and other fish. All installa-
tions were operated from 110-volt alternating current power. On
the basis of the experiments detailed, recommendations are offered
on devices suitable for the control of sea lampreys under various
stream conditions. The general structure and plan, and electrical
characteristics of the devices must be adjusted to such factors as
depth of water and extent of its fluctuation, rate of stream flow,
physical nature and conductivity of bottom materials, conductivity
of water, and need for the protection of fish that migrate simul-
taneously with the sea lamprey.

CONTENTS

Page

Installation of first experimental electromechanical

weir and trap in 195*1 2

Operation and testing procedures 7

Summary of results in 19!?1 <. 8

Installation .of electrical sea lamprey barriers in 1952 11

Kewaunee River electromechanical weir and trap.. 12

Squaw Creek electromechanical weir and trap 16

Hibbards ' Creek electrical barrier 17

Carp Creek electrical barriers 19

Operation and testing procedures

(1) Use of checking weirs 21

( 2 ) Physical measurements 21

(3) Electrical measurements 23

Power consumption 23

Voltage gradients 2h

Bottom resistance measurements 27

Electrode effectiveness. 27

Summary of results in 195>2

(1) General 30

(2) Minimum voltage gradient requirements. 31

(3) Electrode array pattern, circuitry, and

power requirements 32

(U) Electrode size, conformity, and efficiency 37

(5>) Electrode mounting 38

(6) Effects of water level, water resistivity,

and bottom resistivity on power drain UO

(7) Power sources. Ill

(8) Costs of installation and operation k3

Recommendations i;5

Acknowledgments J>1

Literature cited 5-1

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure Page

1. Experimental electromechanical weir and trap installed

in the Ocqueoc River in 195l 2

2. Plan and block diagram of experimental electromechanical

weir and trap installed in the Ocqueoc River in 195l 3

3. Electrical circuit diagram of experimental electromechan-

ical weir and trap installed in the Ocqueoc River in

1951 5

U. Drawing of ground-mounted electrode and stake assembly 6

5. Electromechanical weir and trap installed in the Kewaunee

River in 1952. 12

6. Drawing of electromechanical weir and trap installed in

the Kewaunee River in 1952 13

7. Electrical block diagram of electromechanical weir and

trap installed in the Kewaunee River 15

8. Electromechanical weir and trap installed in Squaw Creek

in 1952 17

9. Electrical barrier installed in Hibbards1 Creek in 1952 18

10. Electrical barrier installed in Carp Creek in 1952 with

upper and lower checking weirs 19

11. Drawing of electrical barrier installed in Carp Creek in

1952 20

12. Electrical block diagram of electrical barrier installed

in Carp Creek 22

13. Observer recording behavior of fish and lampreys below

and within the electrical fields in the water 23

lU- Checking voltage gradients within electrode array with

probe and vacuum tube voltmeter 25

15. Drawing of voltmeter probe 26

16. Drawing of water and stream-bed resistance probe 28

17. Relationship of total immersed electrode surface and

power consumption l|2

18. Drawing of recommended design of multiple-row, suspended

electrode, electromechanical weir and trap. 1|6

19. Drawing of recommended design of electrical barrier or

electromechanical weir and trap with single-row,

suspended electrodes and ground line U8

20. Diagrammatic plan of recommended design of electrical

barrier consisting solely of two lateral submerged

electrodes. U9

USE OF ELECTRICITY IN THE CONTROL OF SEA LAMPREYS:

ELECTROMECHANICAL WEIRS AND TRAPS

AND ELECTRICAL BARRIERS

Five types of mechanical control devices have been developed
for reducing the numbers of sea lampreys in the upper Great Lakes:
(1) large, permanent-type weirs and traps; (2) and (3) portable-type
weirs and traps for medium- and small-size streams; (U) barrier dams;
and, (5) dams and inclined-screen traps. Structures (l) through (h)
accomplish the destruction of spawning runs or block them from reaching
spawning grounds; the inclined-screen traps destroy young, recently
transformed sea lampreys on their way downstream to the "big" lakes
(Applegate, 1950, 1951; Applegate and Smith, 195la, 195lb; Applegate
and Brynildson, 1952; Applegate, Smith, McLain and Patterson, 1952).

Of these structures, the more or less conventional weirs
and traps are adapted to the widest usage in Great Lakes streams. Al-
though these devices have proven to be effective and positive instruments
for controlling the numbers of sea lampreys^ their operation is expensive
and fraught with frequent danger of breakdown under flood conditions with
resultant escapement of mature adults to the spawning grounds.

In an effort to circumvent these difficulties, preliminary
tests were performed in 195l to determine if the usual screens or grates
of the sea lamprey weir could be supplanted by a simple, alternating
current, electrical field which would control all lamprey and fish move-
ment in the stream while permitting unhindered downstream passage of
flood waters and debris. The results of these preliminary tests were
highly encouraging. They demonstrated that an effective and practical
electromechanical sea lamprey weir and trap could be built and operated
with greater efficiency and at appreciably less cost than the strictly
mechanical type control devices.

In order to develop and improve the structural characteristics
of the electromechanical device (electrode pattern, method of electrode
mounting, .....) four pilot models of diverse design were installed in
streams and tested during the spring of 1952. Descriptions of experi-
mental equipment, test procedures, and summaries of results in each year
with recommendations for application of several devices in Great Lakes
tributaries are presented.

Installation of first experimental
electromechanica!T~weir and trap in 1951

Daring the period May 2 - May 9, 1951, an experimental
electromechanical weir was assembled and put into operation in the
Ocqueoc River, Presque Isle County, Michigan, immediately downstream
from the mechanical weir and traps in that river (Figs. 1 and 2).
A 25 KVA generator was set up in a cabin on the west bank of the
Ocqueoc River adjacent to the mechanical weir. Power transmission
lines were strung from the generator to a wire lead distribution
platform positioned a few feet above the midpoint of the- weir.
Manipulation of individual leads to each electrode could be accom-
plished at this platform.

Figure 1. Experimental electromechanical weir and trap installed in
the Ocqueoc River in 1951.

25 KVA
GENERATOR

CONTROL
CIRCUITS

VARIAC

EAST BANK

100 V.D.C.
=l\ POWER
SUPPLY

2 1 STEP
DOWN
TRANS.

- PROPOSED DOWN
STREAM MECHANICAL
WEIR

ROW- A"
ROW-'B-
ROW-X*

SHIELD
SCREEN

OCQUEOC
MECHANICAL
WEIR -

LOW VOLTAGE
GRADIENT
AREA

WEST BANK

TOLCRANCU

FRACTIONS — £ .OIO-
OSCIMALS — + .OOO "

UHtxss OTHcmrisc specified

•ivwont

COOK RESEARCH LABORATORIES

A DIVISION OF COOK ILtXTKIC CO.
CHICAOO. 14. ILL.

MIOJSCT M

EXPERIMENTAL ELEC.WEIR
OCQUEOC RIVER SITE

OUAWH.^.-CL^.

.jalE*:

rsoo

SK-II58

Oo

Fig. ?— Plan and block diagram of experimental electromechanical weir and trap installed in the
Ocqueoc River in 1951.

3

Circuitry for the control of power to the electromechanical
weir and for protection of personnel against electrical shock was also
installed in the generator cabin (Fig. 3).

In detail, this electrical weir was simple. It consisted
of three rows of 23, 2-inch 0. D., non-buoyant aluminum electrodes with
a spacing of 3-1./2 feet between rows and h feet between electrodes in a
row. Each electrode was anchored to the bed of the stream by means of
a U-foot steel pin driven into the bottom (Fig. h) . The electrode was
attached to the steel anchor pin by a spring-loaded hinge, which per-
mitted movement of the electrode through an arc of 60 degrees only in a
downstream direction. A plastic plug isolated the electrode (electri-
cally) from the hinge, steel anchor pin, and the stream bed.

The center row of electrodes was made the common connection
for a voltage source of 110 volts AC for the upstream row of electrodes,
and 55 volts AC for the downstream row of electrodes (Fig. 2). It was
possible by means of a variable voltage transformer (variac), to raise
or lower these two voltages simultaneously, while maintaining the 2 s 1
voltage ratio between the upper and lower rows. The above indicated
voltage levels were arbitrarily selected as a starting point for the
tests simply because they seemed ample to block the upstream migrating
sea lampreys, and yet were not excessively wasteful of power. They fur-
ther represented voltages which could be introduced into the stream with
a minimum of equipment should ordinary line power be utilized.

The purpose of the low voltage field on the downstream side
of the array was to act as a non-lethal warning area for the game fish
while allowing the sea lampreys to penetrate to the high voltage field,
which was expected to have a lethal, paralyzing, or diverting effect on
them. 1/

The array of electrodes was installed diagonally across the
stream and a conventional weir-trap was installed between each end of
the array and the stream bank. These traps were bordered on their
streamward sides by wooden baffle walls covered with a metal screen
which acted as an electrical shunt in preventing the extension of the
fringe field into the trap area.

After initial tests of the electrical weir had indicated that
some game fish were being turned back downstream, a direct current
guiding field, powered by a 100 volt, continuous, DC power supply was
installed and tested. It consisted of an anode above the upstream trap

1/ Comments on the reactions of migrant sea lampreys to electrical
fields in the water are presented in a subsequent section.

±

00

o>

— uiii/-? — vjuiirf- \uar

P""^ |JL p,

nrrori

►* *■

zj-

of

©ST

o

0

o
o

c

§d

w .

* 2

0 .
0 0
0 (3

^o

JO

u

UJ

o o

I- c

22

uj UJ

z

^U

Z*
UJ O

or uj

2
<

2,
< I

UJ i

or

lO
i

oo

'to

aw

^^5

z

0 «1 t

1 I 2

15?

sis

'< O CD

"12-24 HEX. HEAD BOLT
AND NOT 2 3/8*LONG. (BRASS)

*599-6375
INSULATOR

599-6377SRRING

5/16-18 BRASS HEX. HEAD
BOLT AND NUT |"lONG
(2 USEDl

f^^i

•*599-6376 ELECTRODE
2*O.D. .035 WALL
ALUM. TUBING

BURNDY SCRULUG KPA8C
CONNECTOR FOR CABLE

9-6374 HINGE TOP

12-24 BRASS HEX. HEAD
\iBOLT AND NUT 3* LONG
~ (2 USED)

599-6373 HINGE BDTTOM

599-6372 STAKE

b=^

biti^j

5/16-18 BRASS HEX. HEAD BOLT
AND NUT 4 7/e"LONG

COOK RESEARCH LABORATORIES

GROUND MOUNT
ELECTRODE

DBAWN.^V^V;--

CHECKgotlitOZ-
APPROVEDl/lfff.

PROD

599637

Fig. I, Drawing of ground -mounted electrode and "take aaaembly,
6

and a cathode placed in various positions downstream from the electro-
mechanical weir. Three different cathode locations were tried in a
series of tests of this system.

Operation and testing procedures

The electromechanical weir and trap was operated almost con-
tinuously from May 9 until June 8 with interruptions only for changes
in circuitry and electrode configuration. It was originally intended
that the permanent Ocqueoc River sea lamprey weir and trap,, located
about 200 feet upstream from the electrical device, should serve as a
checking structure of the effectiveness of the electromechanical weir.
To a certain extent the permanent weir and trap served this checking
function and catches in both devices were compared regularly through-
out the test period. However, small escapements of migrants through
the electrical device occurred during periods in which the power was
shut down for the purposes of making certain checks and measurements.
The permanent weir and trap, therefore, could not serve as a true
measure of the efficiency of the electrical device. All conclusions
concerning this device are based primarily on direct, visual observa-
tion of the very large sea lamprey run entering the river during the
period of the tests. Fairly clear water, low river levels and good
observational facilities left no doubt in the investigators' minds as
to the effectiveness of the device under any of the applied conditions.

At least two men were present during every hour of operation,
observing the individual behavior of lampreys and fishes approaching
and/ or entering the electrical field. Observations at night were aided
by several spot-lights. 2/ Service crews emptied the traps of both the
electromechanical device and the checking weir regularly and turned over
catch records to the observers on duty as supplemental evidence concern-
ing the device's efficiency at any given time.

In the initial tests a 2 : 1 voltage ratio was maintained be-
tween the upstream and downstream rows of electrodes. Numerous voltage
levels ranging from 1^0/75 down to £0/2!? were employed. Power consump-
tion at these limits was approximately 9 KW and 1 KW, respectively, vary-
ing slightly with water level. Further tests were conducted maintaining
a voltage ratio of 1 : 1 between the upstream and downstream rows of
electrodes. Voltage levels were employed ranging from UO/llO down to
3>0/5>0. In these tests, power consumption ranged from 7.5 KW to l.k KW.

2/ It is a point of some biological interest that in none of our obser-
vations did we find that illumination of any intensity, within the range
which we employed, had any effect on the normal migratory behavior of the
sea lampreys.

Voltage gradients created in the water during each test
conducted were measured, recorded, and correlated with effects on
fish and lampreys. A specially designed probe and a vacuum tube
voltmeter were used to obtain these measurements. A more detailed
description of test instruments is included in a later section.

Summary of results in 195>1

(1) The experimental electromechanical weir and trap,
utilizing as little as 2 KW of power, effectively killed, trapped,
or diverted all sea lampreys entering the river. The results ob-
tained at this low power level are amazing in view of the fact that
it was necessary in this river to energize 1,U00 cubic feet of water
and that an appreciable percentage of the power input was dissipated
in the stream bed. By way of comparison, it might be pointed out
that this power consumption is roughly four times that required by a
domestic electric iron.

(2) Specifically, satisfactory results were achieved util-
izing the 2 : 1 voltage ratio between the upstream and downstream
rows of electrodes with voltage levels as low as 70/35 (2 KW power
consumption). Similar results were obtained with the 1 : 1 voltage
ratio between rows with voltage levels as low as 70/70 (2.7 KW power
consumption). At lower voltage levels in both applications (60/30 and
60/60 and lower combinations) some escapement of lampreys occurred.
Consideration of all factors indicated, however, that in general prac-
tice somewhat higher voltage levels than the minima found effective
should be used in order to provide some margin of safety. Input volt-
ages in the order of 110 provided an adequate margin of safety and at
the same time had the distinct advantage of being easily obtained from
conventional power sources (power line or generators).

(3) It was determined that a minimum voltage gradient of
0.75 volt per inch must exist in the water between electrodes at least
in the upstream half of the array (center row to upstream row of elec-
trodes) if the electrical field is to block the lampreys effectively.
Where weaker gradients exist between electrodes in the upstream half

of the array, some escapement of lampreys through the field occurs. If
an adequate margin of safety is desired, the minimal voltage gradient
between electrodes of the common and upstream rows must be at least 1.0
volt per inch.

(U) It was tentatively considered desirable to maintain the
effect of a so-called "incremental field" created by the application
of voltage levels in a 2 : 1 ratio between the upstream and downstream
rows of electrodes. The weaker electrical field on the downstream side
of the array seemed to repel migrant food and game fishes before they
could be harmed by abrupt contact with the higher voltages required in

8

the upstream half of the array. A further desirable effect of this
application is realized in that more sea lampreys are retained in a
paralyzed state in the electrical field until killed by suffocation.

{$) The ground-mounted, non- buoyant electrodes were not
satisfactory at least in the stage of development achieved during
tests in l°£l. Although the initial cost of a ground-mounted electrode
array was calculated to be less than that for a system of suspended
electrodes, this advantage was outweighed by numerous disadvantages
both electrical and mechanical. Siltation around the electrode mount-
ings caused appreciable losses of power into the stream bed. Further
losses of power resulted from the close proximity of the electrodes
to a good electrical ground in the form of the steel anchor pins, Suscep-
tibility to damage or displacement by heavy floating debris was great.
Wire leads to electrodes, lying on the bed of the stream, were easily
damaged and difficult to repair. From the mechanical standpoint, the
spring-loaded hinge was not a satisfactory electrode mounting. No prac-
tical method could be found to prevent debris from collecting inside the
hinge and jamming it open.

Ground-mounted, buoyant electrodes likewise were found to be
unsatisfactory. In addition to exhibiting most of the drawbacks indi-
cated above, the buoyant type produced distorted electrical fields and
drew unnecessary amounts of power during low-water stages when the elec-
trodes were lying almost flat on the water.

(6) It was observed that spawning runs of certain food and
game species, migrating simultaneously with the lampreys, were wholly
or partially blocked by the AC field. These species did not "lead"
well along the margin of the electrical field and enter the upstream
traps (from which they could then be transferred upstream). Some of
the species which were thus blocked, such as the suckers, can spawn in
the lake properj consequently their exclusion from stream spawning
grounds is not a serious consideration. However, in the interests of
protecting the runs of several species which are not so adaptable in
their habits, experiments were performed with a DC guiding field located
on the downstream side of the electrical weir. No positive evidence of
the effectiveness of this accessory device was obtained. Its failure
to guide fish into the upstream trap may have been due to one or both
of the following reasons: (a) The shield screen, which was necessary
to isolate the trap electrically from the strong AC fields at the up-
stream end of the weir, so completely dispersed the DC guiding field at
the attracting electrode (anode) (as evidenced by voltage gradient
measurements in this area) that the fish were not able to sense the
positive direction; (b) DC voltage gradients were insufficient as a
result of power limitations of the device (100 volts DC at one ampere).

Extensive tests subsequently undertaken in the laboratory
for the further development of this accessory guiding mechanism re-
sulted in some success in guiding or "leading" certain species of
fishes to a desired point in a body of water. Unfortunately, other
limitations of this "leading" device which tended to reduce its util-
ity presented themselves during the experiments. Details of these
experiments will be presented in a separate report. V Subsequent
experiments in 19!? 2 demonstrated other methods of holding mortality
of migrating fishes to a minimum (See "Summary of results in 1952").

3/ McLain, Alberton L. and Willis L. Nielsen. Directing the movements
of fish with electricity. (Scheduled for publication as a Special
Scientific Report, U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife
Service).

10

Installation of electrical sea lamprey
barriers in 1952

In general, a practical, economical electrical device for
blocking and/or capturing migrant sea lampreys was evolved from the
experimental electromechanical weir operated in the Ocqueoc River in
1951* Using 2-inch diameter tubes as electrodes arranged on U-foot
centers in a diamond pattern it was determined that migrant sea lam-
preys could be blocked and/or diverted (or destroyed within the array)
if a minimum voltage gradient of 0. 75 volt, AC per inch was esta-
blished on a line between the center and upstream rows of electrodes.
Such a minimum gradient between the above named rows of electrodes was
conveniently obtained at a 110 volt input to the array. The device
functioned effectively on very small amounts of power at common line
power voltages or simple reductions of these voltages.

In view of the low power requirements of the device , ela-
borate experimentation directed particularly at further reducing said
power requirements was not undertaken during the 1952 season. However,
experiments directed at reducing the amount of physical equipment re-
quired in a given device could and did result in reductions in power
demand. It was further deemed of no immediate practical advantage to
engage in experimentation that would lead to the use of some odd input
voltage level requiring special or additional transformers, etc. (e. g.,
indiscriminate and arbitrary changing of electrode spacing and array ~
pattern, particularly in the upper half of incremental fields, for pur-
poses other than to compensate for varying electrode diameter and effi-
ciency) . Reductions in numbers and rows of electrodes and changes in
electrode systems were accomplished where swift water velocities occurred
at test sites but experimentation was not carried beyond the point where
input voltages greater than 110 would be required to block or divert the
migrant lampreys.

The four pilot model alternating current devices installed in
1952 were designed primarily; To demonstrate the practicality and econ-
omy of this type of sea lamprey control device j to provide suitable facil-
ities for improving the mechanical design of the device sj and, to permit
investigations of various power supply problems. Because the experiments
of the preceding year had brought out rather clearly many of the major
electrical characteristics of an effective barrier, it was considered
necessary to provide only limited flexibility in the 1952 installations
for experimentation of an electrical nature. These structures were de-
signed primarily with a view toward mechanical flexibility adequate for
the solution of certain problems of construction and installation that had
been raised by the previous years experience. Further information on
mechanical problems was obtained by variation from device to device in
the structural components.

11

The devices were located in the following streams: (1)
Kewaunee River, Kewaunee County, Wisconsin; (2) Squaw Creek, Delta Coun-
ty, Michigan; (3) Hibbards1 Creek, Door County, Wisconsin; and, (U)
Carp Creek, Presque Isle County, Michigan. A summary of the equipment
and characteristics of these installations follows:

(1) Kewaunee River electromechanical weir and trap. — This
installation consisted of an array of three rows of electrodes suspended
by a system of overhead cables which in turn were supported by a pair of
steel poles at each bank (Figs. 5 and 6). Each row was comprised of 23
or 2)4 electrodes of 1-1/2 inch standard galvanized pipe, spaced on U8-inch
centers, which were hinged to, and suspended from, a 3-inch channel iron
rail. Spacings between electrodes could be increased in increments of 2
feet for experimental purposes. Electrode lengths varied from 2-1/2 to 5>
feet since they were cut to fit the contour of the stream bed. The center
row of electrodes was offset 2\\ inches to give a "diamond" or "X" pattern
to the electrodes in the total array.

Figure 5. Electromechanical weir and trap installed in the Kewaunee
River in 19^2.

12

i

£

z

i >

3^

•A' DETAIL

B" DETAIL

•C" DETAIL

^j

TT DETAIL

^

*E" DETAIL

END VIEW

^CEMENT

ABUTMENT

FRONT VIEW

BILL OF MAT [RIAL

DESCRIPTION

REQ

i

3/8" CABLE

600'

2

3" CHANNEL IRON

280

3

6" X 9' CHANNEL IRON

2

4

N/4' PIPE ELECTRODES

62

5

-B STRANDED BONDING WIRE

62

6

3- x re- PIPE

4

?

3" PIPE CAPS

4

8

12" HOOK-EYE TuRNBUCKLES

6

B

6* HOOK -EYE TURNBUCKLES

81

10

-504 STRAIN INSULATORS

80

1 r

6- DISTRIBUTION INSULATORS

■ ■::

12

•504 STRAIN INSULATOR CLEVISES

'4C

13

-504 STRAIN INSULATOR CLEVIS EYE-BOLT

70

14

INSULATED SPACER

10

IS

3/e" CABLE CLAMPS

330

16

1/2' X N/2" BOLT 6 WASHERS

70

1 7

1/4" X 2 1/2' BOLT 9 WASHERS

62

18

1/4 X 3/4' BOLT 6 WASHERS

62

19

3/8" X I' BOLT « WASHERS

3 2 0

20

1/4' X 1 1/2" BOLT 9 WASHERS

30

2 I

3/8'1 X 6" EYEBOLT • WASHERS

10

2 2

3/4" X 6* EYEBOLT • WASHERS

6

23

3/8* X 3" BOLT 0 COTTERPIN

62

UNITED STATES DEPT. OF THE INTERIOR

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
GREAT LAKES FISHERY INVESTIGATIONS

ELECTROMECHANICAL
WEIR AND TRAP

KEWAUNEE RIVER. KEWAUNEE CQ.WISCONSIN

DESIGN! BR- SMITH

DRAWN! AC BENNETT

„ „ 1 HAMMOND Bay

SHEET I OF I 2/15/52

'lg. 6—Drprlnir r>F Ploif.rofwe'iB-ilol «lr ond Irtp lnsUllsil In t

At the point of installation, the stream was 66 feet wide;
its average depth varied from 9-l/U to 21-l/U inches during the period
of experimentation with the device . The array of electrodes, which
was 96 feet in overall length was mounted diagonally across the stream;
a conventional weir-trap was installed between the upstream end of the
array and the stream bank (See Apple gate and Smith, 195l, for "portable
weir" trap design). The trap was shielded on its streamward side by an
electrically "grounded" metal screen.

The electrodes in each row were connected in parallel in
order that the three rows might be energized in various combinations
(Fig. 7)" The "B" (center) row of electrodes in all cases was made the
common connection for a voltage of 110 VAC to the "A" (upstream) row and
a voltage of 55 VAC or 110 VAC to the "C" (downstream) row. Thus, oper-
ation as a uniform field barrier or as an incremental field barrier was
possible. In addition, the voltage gradient within either field could
be controlled to some extent by changes in the spacing of electrodes in
the individual rows.

In certain of the experiments involving incremental fields, a
non-lethal "warning" field between the "B" and "C" rows of electrodes
was achieved by the application of 55 VAC, or one-half the AC line volt-
age, across these two rows of electrodes, A 60 cycle, 2 ; 1 stepdown
autotransformer was used for this purpose. In other similar experiments,
the effect of reduced voltage gradients in the downstream half of the
field was produced by increasing the spacing of "C" row electrodes to
8-foot centers and connecting this row to the same source of voltage as
the "A" or upstream row.

The Kewaunee River electromechanical weir was tested both as a
two-row and as a three-row system over a wide range of field intensities
by the use of various combinations of electrode spacings and voltages.
Following is a tabulation of the combinations tested:

Test

Electrode spacing
in row

Voltages

number

"A"

»B"

ne"

"A"

to

"B" "B" to "C"

1

U"

U»

l*«

110

55

2

6'

6»

6«

110

55

3

8"

8«

8-

110

55

h

k*

In-

8-

110

110

5

-

li-

U-

0

110

iU

o

N

i

15

The normal source of power for the Kewaunee River device was
a 60 cycle commercial power line* A distribution transformer supplied
110 VAC to fuse and switch boxes,, the autotransformer, and the gasoline
engine-driven, 5, 000 watt, AC generator, which served as the emergency
source of power. All of this equipment was housed in a small building.
The generator unit was equipped with automatic starting controls and
connected to both the normal source of line power, and the electro-
mechanical weir in a manner such that immediately upon failure of line
power the generator started automatically and provided an uninterrupted
flow of power to the weir. The generator unit was also equipped with a
battery charging circuit which automatically maintained the starting
batteries at full charge at all times.

The generator building also contained electrical outlets for
the continous operation of red warning lights mounted over the electro-
mechanical weir, and for the operation of floodlights as an aid to visual
observation of the sea lamprey runs during the hours of darkness.

(2) Squaw Creek electromechanical weir and trap. —The Squaw
Creek electromechanical weir was of essentially the same design as the
Kewaunee River installation (Fig. 8). It differed from the latter in only
the following respects: Each of the three rows of the array consisted of
11 or 12 electrodes, 5 feet long, which were made of 3/U-inch 0. D. , thin-
walled conduit) the electrodes were hung on 3~foot centers and the inter-
val between adjacent rows was 3 feet. The above indicated reductions in
spacing were effected in order to maintain voltage gradients in the array
at the same level as those resulting from the use of 1-1/2 inch diameter
electrodes spaced on U-foot centers.

Squaw Creek was Ul feet wide at the point of installation and
average water depth varied from 6 to 18 inches during the period of oper-
ation. Unlike the Kewaunee device, the Squaw Creek array was installed
directly across the stream at a 90=degree angle to the direction of water
flow. An electrically shielded trap was located at midstream, directly
under the supporting rails. Electrodes in the center of the array were
removed to accommodate the trap.

Electrical circuitry was identical with that of the Kewaunee
River device.? three connections were made to the array, one for each row
of electrodes. In all experiments conducted at the Squaw Creek site, the
electrode spacing was fixed at 3 feet. With 110 VAC applied to the "A"
(upstream) row, the array was tested with 55 VAC or 110 VAC applied to
the "C* (downstream) row ("B" row serving as common connection).

Two 3.500 watt gasoline engine driven generators housed in a
small building, together with fuse and switch boxes and a 2 % 1 stepdown
autotransformer, provided an uninterrupted supply of power to the weir.
One of the generator units operated as the normal source of power, while
the second unit served as an automatic emergency source of power ("standby"

16

Figure 8. Electromechanical weir and trap installed in Squaw
Creek in 1952.

generator). The generators also had adequate reserve power for the
operation of utility lights, warning lights, and such floodlights as
were used for night time observations.

(3) Hib bards ' Creek electrical barrier. — This device was
composed of two diverse elements! (a) A single row of electrodes sup-
ported by an overhead cable which in turn was suspended between single
steel towers at each bank, and, (b) a submerged lateral electrode placed
on the stream bottom downstream from the suspended electrodes and tra-
versing the entire stream width (Fig. 9). The roxtf of suspended elec-
trodes consisted of 118 elements of l/2-inch standard galvanized pipe,
spaced on U-inch centers, which were hung by short wire rope hangers
from a channel iron rail. The spacing between electrodes could be in-
creased by U-inch increments for test purposes. Electrode lengths var-
ied from 1-1/2 to 5> feet according to the contour of the stream bed.

17

/ "

1

Figure 9. Electrical barrier installed in Hibbards' Creek in 1952.

The submerged lateral electrode was formed of sections of
1-1/2 inch standard galvanized pipe strung on a length of l/U-inch
diameter wire rope. These sections were connected by means of flex-
ible wire "jumpers", the end section functioning as one terminal of
the weir. Tests were performed with this lateral electrode located
either h feet or 8 feet downstream from the suspended elements.

At the site of this structure, Hibbards1 Creek was hO feet
wide and varied from 23 to 28-1/2 inches in average depth during the
test period. The array was installed directly across the stream at
a 90-degree angle to the direction of flow. No trapping mechanism was
installed with this device. It was tested solely as a barrier to
lamprey and fish migrations, hj

h/ The mechanical structure of the Hibbards' Creek electrical barrier
and that of the Carp Creek electrical barrier which is described subse-
quently is very similar to that of certain electric fish screens manu-
factured by the Burkey Electric Fish Screen Company of Hollywood, Cal-
ifornia.

13

The Hibbards' Creek installation was operated as a uniform
field barrier. In all tests the ground or neutral side of a 110 VAC
line was connected to the submerged lateral electrode. The suspended
row of electrodes was then connected to the ungrounded side of the
110 VAC line.

Commercial line power for operation of the barrier, flood-
lights, and utility lights was carried from a distribution transformer
into a kilowatt-hour meter and through the fuse and switch boxes to
the electrode connections. No emergency or standby source of power
was provided.

(U) Carp Creek electrical barriers. — The principal electri-
cal barrier tested in Carp Creek was very nearly identical with that
installed in Hibbards" Creek (Figs. 10 and 11). It differed in that
the suspended electrodes were made of l/2-inch 0. D. thin-walled con-
duit and in the somewhat smaller size of the array. Carp Creek was 35
feet wide at the point of installation and varied from 9 to ll; inches in
average depth during the period of operation. The array likewise was
35 feet in overall length.

Figure 10. Electrical barrier installed in Carp Creek in 1952 with
upper and lower checking weirs.

19

J]

■& DETAIL

BILL OF MATERIAL

DESCRIPTION

REG

1

1/4- STEEL CABLE

175

2

2' ELECTRO0E HANGER RAIL-EFS05

35

3

6' HOOK-EYE TURNBUCKLES

IB

4

1/4* CABLE CLAMPS

63

5

3- PIPE 12' LONG

2

6

3" PIPE CAP

2

7

GROUND ANCHOR

4

D

2 PIECE COLLAR

2

B

3/8 X 6' EYEBOLT

4

10

3/8 x r EYEBOLT

2

i i

NO.8 FLEXIBLE WIRE

2-

'2

i 1/2- PIPE

36

'3

3/8' PIPE - 105 ELECTRODES

14

CEMENT ABUTMENT

lb

BELL INSULATORS

4

a

STRAIN INSULATORS

2

GROUND LINE 4 FEET DOWNSTREAM
FROM ELECTRODES, ANCHORED TO
STREAM BED

UNITED STATES DEPT OF THE INTERIOR

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
GREAT LAKES FISHERY INVESTIGATIONS

ELECTRICAL SEA

LAMPREY BARRIER

CARP CREEK, PRESQUE ISLE CO, MICHIGAN

DESIGN; adapted by b.r smith

DRAWN' A. C BENNETT

SHEET I OF I

, ll-Or-i™ of .l.otric.l h.rri»r IwlilW 1" Cut Cwk

Electrical circuitry was the same as at Hibbards' Creek
(Fig. 12). The power source at Carp Creek, However, was similar to
that employed at the Squaw Creek site. Two gasoline-engine driven
generators of 2,000 watt capacity provided normal supply and standby
power.

In addition to the installation described above, a modifi-
cation of this barrier was also tested in Carp Creek. This was an
extremely simple affair consisting of two lengths of 1-1/2 inch dia-
meter galvanized iron pipe placed on the stream bed, parallel to each
other, and set at an angle of approximately 90 degrees to the direction
of stream flow. The spacing between these two submerged lateral elec-
trodes was 10 feet. Power was provided by the generator source described
for the principal electrical barrier installed in the stream.

Operation and testing procedures
(1) Use of checking weirs

Portable -type, mechanical weirs and traps were installed as
checking structures at the four experimental sites both above and below
the electrical devices (Fig. 10). Details of the method of construc-
tion of these mechanical weirs and traps have been described by Apple gate
and Smith (195>1). During the conduct of the various experiments, the
contents of the downstream checking weir-trap were removed and counted
daily or twice daily. Lampreys and fish were then placed upstream above
the lower weir into the test area. Daily records were kept of the numbers
of lampreys and/or fish caught in the electrical weir-trap or killed in
the electrical field; these data were then analyzed in their relation to
the particular experiment in progress. Routine inspections of the check-
ing weir and trap above the electrical device substantiated visual obser-
vations as to nature and extent of escapement through the electrical
barrier (Fig. 13).

(2) Physical measurements

Daily records of water temperature, water level, and weather
conditions were maintained at each installation. Routine records were
made, at varying time intervals, of water velocity (at electrical weir
site), and dissolved solids content and pH of the water. Water levels
were read from staff gauges installed at each site. Water velocities
were determined by one of several conventional methods with a Price current
meter. Total dissolved solids present in the water was obtained with a

21

cr

UJ

cr

O _J

< <

O u

ai

=Sfc

»&8

Z -J

u

< UJ

U U

I- O

_j £
u <

u

Figure 13. . Observer recording behavior of fish and lampreys below
and within the electrical fields in the water.

Nalcometer, an instrument manufactured by the National Aluminate Cor-
poration, which gave readings directly in parts per million or grains
per gallon; pH readings were obtained with a Hellige comparator set.

(3) Electrical measurements

Power consumption. — Frequent measurements of power consump-
tion were made at each of the electromechanical weir sites in order to
correlate water level with power in watts drawn by the particular array
under test. These measurements were also valuable in the establishment
of operating cost figures for a given type array under given physical
conditions. Electrical current measurements were made by means of a
Pyramid Instrument Company, Model A6 "Amprobe" . This device, a clip
type AC ammeter, enables the operator to measure the current in the

23

electrical weir lead wires without cutting into or connecting directly
to these wires. This instrument also contains a voltmeter circuit
which may be used to measure voltages across the electrode rows of the
weir.

The power consumption of the uniform field barriers is the
product of the current in amperes (in the ungrounded line to the weir)
and the voltage across the weir. In the incremental field barriers,
two power measurements must be made; one of the power supplied to the
upstream half of the weir and one of the power supplied to the down-
stream half of the weir. The ••upstream" power is the product of the
amperes measured in the "A" row of electrodes and the voltage measured
between rows "A" and "B". "Downstream" power is determined in a similar
manner; it is the product of "C" row amperes and the voltage between
rows "B" and "C". The total power input to the weir is then the sum of
the "upstream" power and the "downstream" power in watts. Power con-
sumption will be found to vary directly with such factors as applied
voltage, water level, electrolytic content of the water, and the ratio
of water resistivity to stream bottom resistivity.

Voltage gradients. — Readings of water voltage gradients taken
within the energized field of an electrical weir provide the most reli-
able measure of its effectiveness, once the blocking or lethal voltage
gradient has been established. Voltage gradient measurements at the
various experimental sites were made with a high impedance vacuum tube
voltmeter, General Radio Model No. 727-A, used in conjunction with a
specially designed water voltage gradient probe (Figs. Ik and 1$) . This
instrument permits the operator to determine the direction of maximum
current flow through the water medium at any point, and in addition, the
R.M.S. value of the voltage gradient producing this current flow. The
measuring electrodes of the voltage gradient probe are spaced three inches
apart; therefore, readings observed on the vacuum tube voltmeter are
divided by three to obtain the voltage gradient in volts per inch. This
instrument was used extensively to measure voltage gradients produced in
each of the various tests that involved changes in voltages, electrode
diameter, or electrode spacing.

In general, between 9 and 20 readings were taken in the test
of an electrical weir depending on its type. At the Carp Creek and
Hibbards" Creek devices, the most significant locus of voltage gradient
measurement was considered to lie at the midpoint of a line perpendicular
to both the lateral, ground electrode and the line of suspended electrodes
and passing midway between two adjacent suspended electrodes. The aver-
age value of three such readings, expressed in volts per inch, constitutes
the "arbitrary minimum voltage gradient" subsequently referred to for this
type of array. In the multiple-row, suspended electrode systems such as
those operated in the Kewaunee River and Squaw Creek locations, the point

2U

Figure ll*. Checking voltage gradients within electrode array with
probe and vacuum tube voltmeter.

selected for representative measurement lay midway on a straight line
between an electrode in the upstream ("A") row and either of the two
electrodes nearest it. in the center ("B") row. The average value,
expressed in volts per inch, of four such readings taken in the area
between two adjacent "A" row and the nearest three "D" row electrodes
was used as a representative figure of the "minimum voltage gradient"
produced in the particular array being tested. All voltage gradient
measurements described here were taken at midwater depth (halfway be-
tween surface and bottom) with the probe terminals in a horizontal
plane and oriented for maximum voltage reading at the specified point
of measurement.

The voltage gradient probe is, in addition, an effective tool
for the detection of weak spots, i.e., areas of less than desired volt-
age gradient where escapement might result. When electrically shielded
traps are used in conjunction with an electrical weir, it is possible to

25

SLOT 7/16" DEEP X 1/2" WIDE
FOR LEVEL AS SHOWN

13/4" X I 3/4" X 13/4"
LUCITE BLOCK

1/32" THICK COLD
ROLLED STEEL INDICATOR
BRACKET

4" DIA X 1/4" THICK

LUCITE WHEEL CI/8"

WIDE X 3/16" DEEP GROOVE)

10-32 ALLEN HEAD
SCREW (2 REQD)

3 7/8"

1/4" THICK LUCITE
PLATES, 2 REQ'D
AS SHOWN

WOOD KNOB

LUCITE PIVOT
SHAFT

13/4'X 13/4-X 2 3/4"
LUCITE BLOCK

BAKELITE KNOB
SECTION AA
SCALE : FULL

ALUMINUM BASE
5/8" X 3 1/4" X 5" SLOT
1/16" WIDE AS SHOWN

SECTION BB
SCALE : FULL

BRASS LOCK
SCREW

1/4" DIA. X 1/4" LONG
STAINLESS STEEL TERMINALS

SECTION CC
SCALE . FULL

4" DIA X 1/4 • THICK
LUCITE WHEEL
CI/8" WIDE X 3/16"
DEEP GROOVE)

A

AL+

45 5/8"

49 1 1/16" ■

^iur--

STRING BELT

*

I" DIA. X 48 5/6" LONG
LUCITE ROD WITH ONE
INCH GRADUATIONS

scale: half

COOK RESEARCH LABORATORIES

A DfviSON OF COOK ELECTRIC CO.
CHICAGO ILL

US£0 On

MtOjECT ►»
396

VOLTAGE GRADIENT PROBE

cntCF£rfc].<'>l

3C»lf ISQTE.D

5996327

Pig. 15 — Drfl"ing of voltn»ter probe.
26

determine the effectiveness of the trap shielding by measurement of
the voltage gradients within,, and at the mouth of the trap,, The max-
imum voltage gradient allowable at these points for the effective
operation of such traps has been determined to be in the order of 0.2
volt per inch.

Bottom resistance measurements . —At the time when these
experiments were begun,, it was reasoned that the resistivity of the
stream bed, if somewhat lower than that of the stream water,, could
cause a considerable dissipation of energy with resultant weakening
and distortion of the electrical fields. In order to determine the
relative values of stream water and stream bed resistances at the ex-
perimental sites, a resistance probe was constructed. This device con-
sisted simply of two pointed steel rods, 12 inches long and 7/32-inch
in diameter,, which were mounted on a piece of waterproofed hardwood,
parallel to each other and spaced 12 inches apart. The upper halves of
the rods were insulated with rubber tubing and household cement so that
only the lower 6-inch section of each rod was left exposed (Fig. 16).
A suitable handle affixed to the top of this assembly permitted it to
be forced into the stream bottom to a depth of 6 inches or more. Two
insulated wires, one to each rod, were connected to the 2k volt wind-
ing of a 110 to 2k volts 20 watt, isolation transformer. With 2k volts
AC applied to the probe, a relative measure of the resistance of the
water or stream bed could be determined by dividing the voltage across
the probe by the current flowing through the probe (R = E/l) . The small
AC currents occurring in these measurements were best determined by read-
ing the voltages across a 10 ohm resistor connected in series with one
of the probe leads . This voltage, when divided by ten gave the current
in amperes in the probe0 Precise measurements of the voltage used in
determining relative resistance were made with a General Radio, Type 727-A
vacuum tube voltmeter.

In making resistance measurements at the experimental sites it
was found generally that readings taken at three or four points across
the stream did not differ widely. Resistance measurements were first
taken in the water with the rods submerged but held clear of the bottom.
Where the nature of the bottom materials permitted, the probe was then
forced into the bottom to the full length (12 inches) of the metal rods,
and another measurement of resistance was taken. Where this procedure
was not possible due to concentrations of large rocks, penetration of the
bottom to a depth of only 6 inches, the length of the exposed metal rod,
provided indicative readings.

Electrode effectiveness. °°A series of tests were conducted in the
laboratory for the purpose of determining the most desirable metal and
material for use as electrodes in electromechanical sea lamprey weirs where
relatively large numbers of such elements must be employed. The tests

2? ■

C\J
00

CO

CM

I

CO

>-
<

u

5

Q c/)

2

h-

O

QQ

<

u
cr

01

UJ
QQ

2

CL

O

z

i<

(£)

01
LJ

1-3

— FT

u

CM

00

C\j

CM

I

x:

CO

o °

050

ro i <
qj 0 u

o <

o

o

were restricted to metals and materials of generally low cost and ready
availability on the market.

The electrode tests were conducted in a concrete tank equipped
with an insulating liner. The particular two electrodes used in any one
test were suspended vertically into the center of a 37-inch-wide x 17-foot-
long tank which was filled to a depth of 23 inches with water pumped
from Lake Huron. The spacing between round electrode axes was held con-
stant at ij. feet. All round electrodes tested were suspended in a verti-
cal plane passing through the long axis of the tank and immersed to a
depth of 12 inches. Flat electrodes (6-l/U inches wide) were hung from
the same suspensions but in two parallel planes spaced U feet apart and
both perpendicular to the long axis of the tankj they likewise were im-
mersed to a depth of 12 inches.

The voltage gradient probe described earlier in this section
was suspended midway between the electrodes so that its terminals lay
6 inches beneath the water surface at the intersection of a vertical
plane passing through the long axis of the round electrodes, the vertical
center lines of flat electrodes, and a horizontal plane parallel to the
surface.

A variable transformer, powered by a 110 volt AC line, was used
to control the output voltage of a 1 : 1 ratio isolation transformer.
The secondary or output voltage of this transformer was fed into the two
electrodes under test and was held constant at 5>0. The voltage gradient
as measured across the terminals of the probe in a particular test was
used as the criterion of the effectiveness of the electrodes used.

29

Summary of results in 195>2

(1) General

The electromechanical weirs and traps as initially installed
in the Kewaunee River and Squaw Creek effectively killed, or diverted
and trapped, all sea lampreys moving upstream; they continued to func-
tion efficiently as reductions in electrode systems and changes in cir-
cuitry were made until deliberately altered so as to fall below the
threshold of 100-percent effectiveness. Mortality among simultaneous
fish runs meeting the electrical fields of these devices was negligible.
Unlike the similar device installed in the Ocqueoc River in 195>13 these
structures caused no significant blockade of migrant fishes. Such mi-
grants "led™ well along the fringe of the electrical field and readily
entered the electromechanical weir-traps.

The electrical barriers as installed in Hibbards" Creek and
Carp Creek effectively blocked the movement upstream of all sea lampreys
and other migrant fishes. They likewise continued to function efficiently
as reductions in numbers of suspended electrodes were made until they
were deliberately rendered ineffective.

Several simplified structures were developed from both the
electromechanical weirs and traps and the electrical barriers which, in
general, require less physical plant and power input than the pilot model
structures installed in 1952. These developments are embodied in three
recommended designs for electrical sea lamprey control devices which are
presented in the final section of this report.

Although considerable effort has been directed at determining
effective electrical field patterns and voltage gradients (for blocking
sea lampreys) and at improving the mechanical design and electrical cir-
cuitry of developed structures, comprehensive and detailed investigations
of numerous variables having only a nominal effect on the operating effec-
tiveness and efficiency of the devices have not been made. Exploratory
researches only in such matters as the effect of varying water and bottom
resistivity on power drain or the effect of extremes in water level on
power requirements were conducted with the intent of providing "yardsticks"
or guides in designing equipment to fit specific streams in the immediate
future. Because of the urgency of the problem, a sea lamprey control pro-
gram, when effected, must operate as it grows. In such circumstances,
ample opportunity will present itself to evaluate further the effect of
these variables on the functioning of electrical mechanisms used.

Specific findings obtained during the 195>2 season are incorpor-
ated in Sections 2 to 8 following.

30

(2) Minimum voltage gradient requirements

Experimentation in 19^2 substantiated the fact that a minimum
voltage gradient of 0.75 volt per inch must exist in the water on a
line between electrodes if the electrical field is to effect a complete
block of the lamprey run. This statement applies specifically to gra-
dients existing between electrodes of the center and upstream rows com-
prising the upper half of an incremental field barrier, and between
electrodes of any two adjacent rows of a uniform field barrier created
by either a 3-row or 2-row electrode system. It applies further to any
2-row electrode system regardless of whether both rows consist of sus-
pended electrodes or whether one row is suspended and the other is re-
placed by a single, lateral submerged electrode. It was also substan-
tiated that if an adequate margin of safety is desired, the minimum
voltage gradient between the aforementioned electrodes must be at least
1.0 volt per inch.

The above minimal gradients have been established on the basis
of an electrical field created in depth by a system of electrodes distri-
buting the electrical field over at least k feet of stream length (i.e.,
center and upstream rows of incremental field barrier., or any two rows
of uniform field barrier). A simple system of electrodes (i.e., one row
with every other electrode wired alternately to grounded and ungrounded
sides of a. 110 VAC circuit) would require much greater voltage gradients
particularly if located in sluggish waters. Furthermore, it is extremely
doubtful whether such a single row structure utilizing practical input-
voltages would provide a completely lamprey-tight barrier.

It seems pertinent to point out here that migrant sea lampreys
are not only highly resistant to electrical shock ^/but display little or
no avoidance reaction to an electrical field in the water. Whereas other
migrant fishes react sensitively to very weak gradients at the fringe of
an electrical field (and tend to avoid same), the lampreys show no such
reaction. Characteristically, the lamprey swims into a field of increas-
ing intensity, laboring against oncoming paralysis until complete para-
lysis prevents any muscular movement whatsoever. This resistance to elec-
trical stimulation, the determined nature of their migration, and their
ability to swim very rapidly at least over short distances, would as a
rule permit some escapement through a barrier creating only a relatively
thin electric field in the water.

Th

5/ Apple gate, Vernon C. and William L. Stahl. Use of electricity in

he control of sea lampreys : Experimental electrocution of downstream
migrants. MS.

31

(3) Ele ctrode array pattern, circuitry, and power requirements

Experimentation with the several devices indicated that a var-
iety of electrode array patterns were effective at low power demands
provided the voltage gradients produced in the water were not below the
minimum of 0.75 volt per inch discussed previously.

Multiple-row, suspended electrode systems used with the elec-
tromechanical weirs and traps were readily adaptable for creating
either incremental or uniform electrical fields. Two methods of pro-
ducing incremental fields were tested at the Kewaunee River device of
which the first proved to be more economical in power requirements than
the second.

In the first method, where incremental fields were produced
by maintaining equal spacing among all electrodes of all rows and apply-
ing one-half the AC line voltage (110) across the "B" and "C" rows, the
following results were obtained (interval between rows of electrodes in
the array held constant at I4 feet in all tests):

(a) With a spacing of U feet between electrodes in each row,
minimum voltage gradients between electrodes of the "A" and "B" rows in
excess of 0.75 volt per inch were present in the water and sea lampreys
were unable to penetrate the upstream half of the array. Furthermore,
many lampreys which penetrated the lower half of the array where voltage
gradients were reduced were completely immobilized and, where they settled
to the bottom within the array, were killed by suffocation. Average water
depth at the weir site during this test was 12.5 inches; 1,533 watts were
required to energize the device.

(A similar test conducted at the Squaw Creek installation with
smaller diameter electrodes set on 3-foot centers in rows spaced 3 feet
apart produced identical results. This array, considerably smaller than
that in the Kewaunee River, drew only 191 watts when the average water
depth at the weir site was 10.7 inches).

(b) With a spacing of 6 feet between the electrodes of each
row, minimum voltage gradients between elements of the "A" and "B" rows
averaged 0.70 volt per inch. Sea lampreys were still unable to traverse
the upstream half of the array. Occasional individuals, however, were
observed to penetrate this latter area quite deeply although none escaped
through the field. Had water velocities within the array been less than
the minimum 1.35 f.p.s. existing during all these tests, it is extremely
doubtful whether a complete blockade of the sea lamprey run would have
been accomplished with this electrode spacing. A subsequent test indi-
cated that even at these water velocities, any greater spacing of elec-
trodes within a row permitted lampreys to escape through the electrical

32

field. Although average water depth at the weir site during this test
had increased to 15„1 inches, only 1,192 watts were required to ener-
gize the array.

(c) With a spacing of 8 feet between the electrodes of each
row, minimum voltage gradients between elements of the "A" and "B" rows
averaged 0„6U volt per inch. Sea lampreys were now observed to penetrate
and pass through the entire electrical field and continue their journey
upstream. Average water depth at the device during this test was 15.1
inches 5 960 watts were required to energize the array.

In the second method, in which incremental fields were pro-
duced by removing every other electrode from the "C" row while at the
same time the full AC line voltage was applied across the "A" and "B"
and the nB" and "C" rows, the following results were obtained from the
single test performed (U-foot interval between rows of electrodes in the
array) :

(d) With electrodes of the "A" and "B" rows set on U-foot cen-
ters and those of the "Crt row set on 8-foot centers, minimum voltage
gradients between electrodes of the "A" and "B™ rows were in excess of
0.75 volt per inch, A complete blockade of the sea lamprey run was
effected comparable to that created in Test (a) above. Average water
depth at the weir during this test was 1$.9 inches ; 2,U25> watts were re-
quired to energize the array,

Comparison with Test (a) 'above indicates that under comparable
stream conditions, power requirements for developing an incremental field
by this method are approximately one-third greater than for that developed
by the first method discussed.

Uniform electrical fields were produced with both 3-row and
2-row suspended electrode systems by applying the full AC line voltage
(110) across the "A" and "B" and the "B" and "C" rows of the 3-row system
or simply across the two rows of a 2-row system. Where the 3-row elec-
trode system was tested at Squaw Creek, the following results were ob-
tained (interval between rows of electrodes in the array was 3 feet);

(e) With a spacing of 3 feet between electrodes in each row,
minimum voltage gradients between electrodes of the nB" row and those of
the "A" and "C" rows averaged 0.86 volt per inch. Sea lampreys were
unable to penetrate any portion of the array. Average water depth at the
weir site during this test was 8.9 inches J 197 watts were required to
energize the device.

Where the 2-row electrode system was tested in the Kewaunee
River, the following results were obtained (interval between the two rows
was k feetj in effect, only the "B" and "C" rows of the original 3-row
installation were used) i

33

(f) With a spacing of h feet between electrodes in each row,
minimum voltage gradients between electrodes of the two rows averaged
0.98 volt per inch. Sea lampreys were unable to penetrate the array.
Average water depth at the weir site during this test was 10.5 inches;
only 1,192 watts were required to energize the array.

This was the simplest and most economical multiple-row,
suspended electrode system developed during the present tests which
effectively blocked a sea lamprey run. Although extremely effective
in a relatively shallow location in the stream where water velocities
were swift, the general utility of this simple array has not been deter-
mined. It remains to be demonstrated whether it will function with
equal effectiveness in deeper and more sluggish water.

A nominal disadvantage in the utilization of uniform electri-
cal fields with these arrays is that few lampreys are killed by the
device. Meeting first an electrical field of paralyzing intensity rather
than the zone of reduced intensity characteristic of the incremental
electrical field, the lampreys cannot penetrate the area within the elec-
trode array. Stunned at or below the lower-most row of electrodes, they
are carried out of the electrical field by the water current and recover
rapidly.

In all tests of incremental and uniform electrical fields, runs
of other fishes, particularly suckers, "led" well along the "fringe"
field (below the lowermost row of electrodes) and entered the weir-trap
with little or no observed mortality or blocking effect. This represents
a marked improvement over the similar device installed in the Ocqueoc
River in 1951. The improved efficiency of the Kewaunee River and Squaw
Creek installations in capturing migrant fishes for transfer upstream is
attributed primarily to careful location of the electrical blocking field
and weir-trap in each stream. Weir-traps were placed directly in the path
followed by the majority of migrant fish swimming upstream. In the Kewau-
nee River at the site chosen for the installation this path happened to
lie very close to one bank; at the Squaw Creek site most fish movement
occurred in midstream. Electrode arrays were then installed so as to pro-
vide "leads" to these points for those fishes traveling elsewhere across
the width of the stream. The tendency of the earlier Ocqueoc River de-
vice to block rather than "lead" and capture migrant fishes was undoubt-
edly due to improper location of the weir-traps which were adjacent to
the stream banks rather than in midstream where the majority of fish
movement occurred at that particular site.

Another factor that contributed to the greater success of these
devices in "leading" and trapping fish was the rapid water velocities
occurring at the loci of installation (Kewaunee River* range - 1.35 to
1.5U f.p.s., average - l.Ul f.p.s.; Squaw Creek: spot reading - 1.13
f.p.s.). The swifter waters in the riffle areas over which the arrays were
installed discouraged or prevented fish from penetrating the "fringe" field
into areas of greater electrical current density where the alternating
current fields would tend to disorient them.

3U

It was evident further from these tests that where sufficiently
rapid water velocities exist as at the Kewaunee River and Squaw Creek
sites, the use of the more complex incremental electrical fields to
create a "warning" zone (to fishes) is not necessary in order to effect
satisfactory protection and salvage of fish runs. The use of "warning"
zones (through the application of incremental electrical fields) still
appears desirable, however, where the electromechanical devices are in-
stalled in deep and sluggish stream locations.

Arrays consisting of a single row of suspended electrodes and
a horizontal; submerged electrode formed effective barriers to all lam-
prey and fish movement with intervals as great as 6 feet between the
suspended electrodes when the horizontal, submerged electrode was placed
8 to 10 feet downstream from the suspended elements. Results obtained
with this type of array in Hibbards1 Creek were as follows (power applied
to array - 110 VAC);

CO

CD

•O t3

d

CD O

CO

o

SO U

CD

•H

U co **

"O

-v.

+»

CO

co a o

O —

| dJ

CO

■P

u

d

a -h id

co

d U m

.-1

d

CD

a>

& i-l rH

CD

CD 4-> CD

1 d 43

<-|

1

■H TJ

•

a CD

d

CD O xi

•H CD O

CO

t, d

te

w >o

o

S CO ci

d -h d

■H T3 -H

^ -P

CD

fH CO

-p

a is

d

^H (1

CD CO

h

CO

u

<u

- CO CD

iH

CD CO -rH

S co

■p d

•H

,Q CO

CD

£>

i— 1 t3

X5

h h

CO -H

d

t>>

.9

CO CD 0

•O

t3 >d

>> W) CD

p

o<

CD CD

S

<-\

■P t) J)

d

h e a

h ft

■p '

CD

> t->

3

CO

PI O ft

CO

CO ^3 CO

CO CD

CD CO

CO

U —

•H ft

d

>

O U CO

t» d

fn IjD CO

so

CD

CO

+■ a co

U

N -P 3

+>

U <D -P

•P ffl +>

co d

d

u -P

O CO CD

■p

<D

•H O CO

CD

CD ft CD

•r* +> r-i

^ +*

o

CD +»

BrlJ

to

+>

£-i Q)

CD

■P CO CD

& .-1 O

CD ft

d

B CO

V( co

<D

a

O <H l-i

<M

d d in

^g^

t» CD

■H

o SB

*H O .-1

EH

M

.d CO O

—

M CO — -

<3j T3

Pn —

|x| -p <Vh

1

H'-0"

2<-0"

l.Sh

26.6

1,790

Yes

2

8 " -0"

0'-U"

1.10

27.0

2,125

Yes

3

8 ' -0"

2 ' -0"

0.85

23.5

1,260

Yes

k

8 ' "0"

il«-0»

0.67

25.1

l,0ljl

Yes

5

8 ' -0"

6 ' -0"

0.63

2U.5

728

Yes

6

8'-0»

8'~0"

o.5U

25.5

685

No

7

8 • -0"

10' -0"

0.53

25.0

65U

No

(horizontal submerged electrode placed upstream from the sus-
pended electrodes)
8 U«_o» 2'-0" 1.36 27.5 1,696 Yes

1/ See discussion, page 2U„

35

Results obtained with a similar array in Carp Creek were as
follows (power applied to array - 110 VAC):6/

to

o

■a

-a

a>

o

W

«)

t->

CD

xi

fn ff

+^>

13

+>

CO

0) CI

o

a ^ co

Pi

+»

u

d a -h

0)

<D

I

CD

<B X> rH

H

CD +> CD

•O d

tH tJ

$ 3

ID

CD O A

o

§

Fh d

Sot)

Es <p o

»H -H

CD

*H <0

+» cl

T3

ph a

CD 4»

U

CO

u

CD - (0

CD

<D CD -r-t

4» CO

•H

.O CO

CD

43 iH

■a

XI

CO r-t

3

>>

£

CO CD

a

Tj tJ

ft rH

&

CD CD

B

rH -P T3

CO

HUB

CO —

CD

> u

3

co d o

Pk

CO ^ CO

CD +> CO

fH —

T* p.

CI

> o u

a

> CI
fn CD +»

tO CO CD

co

+> a

h N -P

0

-P

CO Cl A

U -R

o 3

+»

CD -H O

CO

CD

CD ft CD

CD -p

CD .H XI

CO

+» M CD

CD

+» CO CD

CD Cl

£ co

Vl CO

g

d O H

<n

<M

Cl 3 <(H

t» 4» -H

o es

U O <H

M XI CO

O

*■*"

HI CO —

«a< CO —

CM -~

W +" <ti

1

10' -0"

o«-UB

16.5

61*0

Yes

2

10' -0"

l'-0"

11.0

608

Yes

3

10«-0*»

2 ' -0tt

10.0

576

Yes

u

10«-0«

3'-0»

12.5

532

Yes

5

10«-0»

li«-0»

12.0

U56

Yes

6

10»-0"

8»-0»

12.0

26U

No

These devices in Hibbards' and Carp Creeks were tested solely
as simple barriers to the upstream movements of lampreys; as such, they
functioned effectively and inexpensively with a minimum of installed
equipment.

The use of this simpler electrode array to supplant the more com-
plex and expensive multiple-row, suspended electrode systems of the elec-
tromechanical weirs and traps appears feasible. Until further investiga-
tions have been made, however, such use in electromechanical devices should
be restricted to sites where the water is comparatively shallow and where
relatively rapid water velocities, at least in excess of 1.5 f.p.s., exist.
Observations at Hibbards' Creek where deeper and very sluggish water oc-
curred (static to 0,52 f.p.s.) at the electrical barrier site indicated

6/ Records of voltage gradients were faulty and hence are not given here.

36

that the device caused some mortality among migrant fishes when the
horizontal electrode was located downstream from the vertical elements.
The character of the electrical field established between the vertical
suspended electrodes and the horizontal submerged electrode is such
that where the installation is situated in deep, sluggish water, mi=
grant fish swimming near the surface can cross above the horizontal
electrode., Approaching closer to the vertical electrodes they become
stunned and are killed when they fall to the bottom inside the hori-
zontal electrode in the strongest area of the electrical field. This
mortality did not occur at Carp Creek where shallow water and swifter
stream velocities existed.

Evidence as to the amount of fish mortality resulting when
the horizontal, submerged electrode was placed upstream from the verti-
cal elements was not obtained during the single test conducted at
Hibbards" Creek. Fish migration in the stream had ceased when this
test was in progress „ However , the behavior of the lampreys during
this test suggested that fish mortality might be minimal with this elec-
trode arrangement,

A test conducted in Carp Creek with an array consisting of
only two horizontal, submerged electrodes placed parallel on the stream
bed indicated that under restricted conditions a barrier to lamprey and
fish movement could be effected with this simple equipment, With elec-
trodes placed 10 feet apart at a point where the water averaged 12
inches deep, 110 VAC was applied across the elements! sea lampreys were
unable to penetrate this electrical barrier, Only 1*80 watts were re-
quired to energize the device.

Further experimentation with this device is necessary in order
to establish its working limits. With this electrode arrangement, the
area of lowest electrical field strength and most likely point- of escape-
ment of lampreys through the barrier is at the surface of the water dir-
ectly above a point midway between the electrodes. At any fixed input
voltage,, the strength of the electrical field at this weakest point is
a function of the distance between electrodes and the water depth. Ulti-
mate use of the device will be restricted by the maximum stream depth at
which satisfactory voltage gradients can be established at this weakest
point when a given optimum spacing between electrodes for an input of
110 VAC is used.

(k) Electrode size, conformity «, and efficiency

It has been concluded that the most suitable electrode materials
for use in sea lamprey electrical weirs are the following in the order
presented? (a) l/?-inch diameter thin wall conduit, rough surface,
(b) 1/2-inch diameter thin wall conduit, smooth surface, (c) l/2-inch

37

diameter galvanized pipe. This conclusion is based on unit costs of
the materials tested and the results of electrical tests conducted as
described in a preceding section. The materials selected for the tests
were those of generally low cost and ready availability on the market.
Measurements of midpoint voltage gradients and values for relative
electrode effectiveness are presented in Table 1. The latter values
are based on a figure of 100 percent assigned to the midpoint voltage
gradient produced by the 2-inch diameter, galvanized pipe electrode (R-U).
This electrode was selected as the standard of comparison in these tests
simply because it produced the highest midpoint voltage gradient of
those round electrode types tested. Flat electrode materials were tested
for comparison with round electrode materials as a matter of academic
curiosity only, since mechanical considerations (would seem to) preclude
their use in sea lamprey weirs. Where known, unit cost of the round
electrode materials was used in the determination of a "cost-efficiency"
figure, the magnitude of which was the criterion applied to the final
selection of the three most suitable electrode types. Surface dissimilar-
ity which is apparently the only difference among the electrical conduit
electrodes (R-6 to R-9, Table 1) is probably attributable to minor varia-
tions in the manufacturing processes employed. That these differences in
type of surface account for different efficiencies was indicated in the
test results in that the rough surfaced conduit, having a greater surface
area than the smooth surfaced material of the same nominal diameter,
exhibited the higher relative effectiveness. It should be stated here
that the differences in effectiveness of the various round electrodes
tested are not so great but that any of them might be used in arrays with
necessary minor adjustments in row and electrode spacing to compensate
for variations in effectiveness. In consideration of the desirability
of locating electrical sea lamprey weirs in riffle areas where high water
velocities may exist and cause considerable electrode deflection, pipe
electrodes offer a distinct advantage over those made of electric conduit
or thin-wall aluminum tubing. Galvanized steel pipe, having a consider-
ably greater weight per unit of length than these other materials, will
undergo less deflection for a given water velocity, thereby limiting
fluctuations in the intensity of the electrical field. Another probable
advantage (though not yet proven in field tests) in the use of galvanized
pipe is that of longer protection against complete corrosive deterioration
by virtue of its greater wall thickness.

(5) Electrode mounting

All of the suspended electrode systems tested proved to be en-
tirely satisfactory. In spite of the increased size of the physical
structure required, they were a considerable improvement in nearly all
respects over the ground-mounted system installed in the Ocqueoc River
in 1951. With the suspended systems, localized and general losses of

38

CD
•H

o

•H
<H

Vl CO

CO rH

03

-P -H

to r<
O CD
O -P

eg

•p a
p
co o>

<a o

CO h

0) +>
P o

CO CD

t* rH

•H CD
■P

O P

.• 9

8 I

CD O
O
CD

•P u
o o

rl <U
■P
o co

CD CD

H 5
CD rH

CO

CD t»

r*

•H

■P
CO

rH

X»

6H

o
d

<D

o

<l-t CO

CD O

O

•H CD CD

<M 3 > -P

*H H rl rl

<D CO -P P

i > <0 p

+» r-t

CO CD

O ffi

O -—

Cl

H|

■P

O CD
O 13

Vl O CO — -

U rH CO

U 4* CO h

CD O sH CO

ft 0) h rH

rH CD rH

■P CD *i O

n co >«

O <M S —

o o

o

H CD

CD <*H

In

0

4» -P Xj

fl CD Q O

•h so ® a

O CO iH -H

Pl-r"0\

■oh mo

H O rl <l
S r» 0D>

CD

o

CO

&q

co

co

CM

■

CD

to

•*

o»

•

o>

■*

to

rH

•

IO

8

o

m

5

CD

CM

CM
lO

CM

CM

CD

CD

m

en

CO

o

lO

o

CO

o

CD

8

<o

in

CD

o
o

in
o>

o

oo

o

CD

tO

o

to

CM

o

o»

«o

o>

tO

r-\

m

to

o

to

o>

rH

H

CD

CS

cs

c-

tn

in

tD

cs

to

to

rH

in
d

to
o

m

to

CD

in

o»
m

o

CD

s

-P
XI

co
■p

B

CO
60

I

CM

XI
■P
O

rH
O

rp

■p

CD
CD
XX
CO

cd
■P
CD

a

•p

CD
CD
Xl
CO

CD

Pi

Pi

CO

oo

CD

Pi

P.

CO
t)0

CO

■p

CD

a

o
o

a

o

t> -H -rH

& I

CD
Pi

Pi

CO
00

CD

Pi

Pi

00

P

■H

2

t» rH

CO
00

CO
00

CO
00

I

CM

xi
■p

I

to

co
i

XI

■p

CO

3

a

o

a

2 s

■P a)

H -3

§ rH

§

o

p

a

o

a

■H P

I tH

CM I

CO CM

A

i

CO

CM

a

I

to
1

K

CO

a

I

p

i

CM

CO

xl
■p

a

6

CM

. a>
o o

CD CO
rH «H

rH CO
rH
00 XI

& 00

a §

•H tn

XI

■P -

+»

■H

~ P
. -O

Q a

• o

o o

i

CM

o

• CO

O «H

CD h

rH P

CD CO

rH XI

CO O
* O

- 1

p co

X) -

■P -P

<H

- P

o >rj
Q P

• O

O o

p

•H

I

CM

CD

• O

u cd

CD 4-1
rH U

CD p
CO
r-i
r-i XI

CO 00

B g

P rl

■H

XI -

■P +>

tH

:*

a p

• o

O o

I

• o

O CO

CD Vl

<-* rl

* g

H

rH XI

ffl -p

& o

O

P a

tH CO
XI

•p

P

o
o

I

CO

CD

i

CO

o»
I

05

CM

m

C3>

■P
P

CO
•P

X
CD

CD
O

■rl

u

Pi

CD

00
CO
U
CD

>l

39

power to the stream bed were minimized through the provision of adequate
clearance between distal ends of electrodes and stream bed to allow for
any sagging of the electrode suspension caused by expansion of cables or
settling of tower bases. Damage to, or permanent displacement of, elec-
trodes by floating debris and mechanical damage to wiring was practical-
ly non-existent.

Hinge mountings as used in the multiple-row electrode systems
and the short cable and pipe-cap hangers used in the single row and
ground line systems proved to be inexpensive and mechanically sound (see
"Detail" in Figs. 6 and 11). It was found to be absolutely essential
that only hinge mountings be used with any multiple-row, suspended elec-
trode system. This type of mounting restricts the movement of the elec-
trode to a single plane of deflection (downstream) and prevents contact
between electrodes of adjacent rows with resultant short-circuiting of
the device. The simpler cable and pipe-cap mounting is entirely satis-
factory for use with the single row, suspended electrode and ground line
system since random movement and contact among the single row of sus-
pended elements produces no damaging short-circuits.

(6) Effects of water level, water resistivity, and
"bottom resistivity on power drain

A direct, though non-linear, relationship exists between power
consumption of an electrical weir and the water level of the stream in
which it is installed, assuming water resistivity and applied voltage to
be constant. Conversely, at a given water level, power consumption of
such a device is directly proportional to the square of the applied volt-
age and inversely proportional to the water resistivity. Changes in the
power demand of an electrical weir or variation in load at other points
on a commercial power line will, in extreme cases, cause fluctuations of
± 6 volts on a nominal 117 volt AC line. Water resistivity, in turn, is
influenced by such factors as dissolved and suspended solids content, pH,
and water temperature. Frequent measurements of water level and power
consumption made at each of the weir sites did not reveal the exact nature
of the water level-versus-power relationship. This fact may be understood
when it is realized that neither the direct effects of voltage variation
nor the sometimes diverse effects of the variables governing water resist-
ivity, could be controlled (e.g., water temperature might rise coincident
with a rise in dissolved solids content, these factors having opposite in-
fluence on water resistivity). Measurements of water temperature, dis-
solved solids content, and pH were made at each experimental site at every
possible opportunity in an endeavor to correlate these variables with power
consumption. Determination of the true correlation was precluded in this
case by the interaction of these variables and lack of a sufficiently large
number of measurements. However, in a test conducted at the Carp Creek
weir site at a constant voltage level over a period of time sufficiently

Uo

short to preclude the slightest variation in water resistivity,, a simu-
lation of water level change provided experimental data representative
of the water level-versus-power relationship. These data are presented
graphically in Figure 17.

Relative values of stream bed and stream water resistance were
measured at the four electrical weir sites as described in an earlier
section. Results indicated clearly thats (a) in these locations the
ratio of stream bed to water resistance was l.lj : 1 or greater, and
(b) this ratio increased with the depth to which the resistance probe
was forced into the stream bed. These findings represent highly desir-
able conditions for the operation of an electrical weir. Where bottom
resistivity is high, excessive power loss will not occur in the stream
bed because its higher relative resistance will inhibit the flow of
current through it. Therefore, it is desirable to locate all electrical
weirs in an area where the ratio of stream bed to water resistance is
greater than 1, as measured by the method described earlier or by any com-
parable method.

(7) Power sources

The following three systems of electrical weir power supply,
all of which proved effective and satisfactory, were tested during the
course of the 1952 experiments s

System 1 (Commercial line power only); This method of opera-
tion, as tested at Hibbards' Creek, did not permit the escapement of lam-
preys. No known power failure occurred, and at no time did the line
voltage fall to a value sufficiently low to render the barrier ineffective.

System 2 (Commercial line as normal, generator as standby power
source); This system, as used at the Kewaunee River weir~was successful
in maintaining continuous power. Since no line power failures occurred,
the operation of the standby generator was checked frequently by manual
interruption of the line power. The time interval preceding restoration
of power to the weir by the standby generator was estimated to be consider-
ably less than 1 second. This was demonstrated by the fact that the dis-
continuity in power was only dis cernible with difficulty in the slight
deflection of a voltmeter connected across the weir terminals. The time
interval required to transfer the electrical weir load back to the normal
source of power upon its restoration was not sufficiently great to detect
visually in an incandescent light bulb connected across the weir terminals.
In neither case were lampreys capable of escaping through the weir in the
small interval of time during which the power was broken. The standby gen-
erator, which was operated a total time of approximately 170 hours, func-
tioned satisfactorily without breakdown or need for repairs of any kind.
This generator had ample capacity for the operation of floodlights and warn-
ing lights during periods of maximum power consumption of the electrical weir.

hX

911VM

til0313

System 3 (One generator as normal , one generator as standby-
source of power ) g The Carp Creek and Squaw Creek devices were operated
successfully with this method of power supply. The normal source gen-
erators supplied power at these sites throughout the conduct of the
experiments with the exception of those periods during which they were
stopped manually in order to test-run the standby generators. The
standby generator at each site was test-run approximately 200 hours?
both operated in a completely satisfactory manner without breakdown.
The time interval required for the standby generators to "take over"
upon interruption of the normal source generators was in both cases
equivalent to that described under System 2. The power capabilities of
the normal and standby generators used in System 3 were more than suffi-
cient to supply maximum weir loads encountered.

(8) Costs of installation and operation

Installation costs for the four structures tested in 1952 were
as follows t

Structure

Materials

and
equipment

Labor and Operation of

field vehicles and Total

supervision

construction
equipment

Kewaunee River
electromechanical
weir and trap

$1,8^2.91 $2,U58.65 $97.63

t.399.19

Squaw Creek

ele ctrome chanical

weir and trap

1,703.06 1.092.U8

5U.36 2,81*9.90

Hibbards' Creek
electrical barrier

1,599.92 1,038.28

21.60 2.669.80

Carp Creek
electrical barrier

1,599.92

327.73

3.U9 1,931.1U

Operating costs fall into two major categories - electrical power
and labor. Commercial line power supplied to the Kewaunee River electro-
mechanical weir and trap between April 23 and June 17 cost $62.70 for 1.680
KWH (kilowatt hours) used. Similar power supplied to the Hibbards" Creek
electrical barrier between April 16 and June 18, 1952 cost $52. 3U for
1,366 KWH used.

U3

Power supplied to the Squaw Creek electromechanical weir and
trap by 3.5 KW, gasoline-=engine driven generators cost $96,85 for
1,063.2 hours of operation. Similar power supplied to the Carp Creek
electrical barrier by 2 KW, gasoline-engine driven generators cost
$93. Ul for 8I4.O.7 hours of operation. Most useful in planning future
operations are cost-per-hour figures for individual generators of dif-
ferent capacities. Records kept for five gasoline-engine driven gen-
erators were as follows %

Generator
number

Capacity
(KW)

Total hours
of
operation

Total
cost of

operation

Cost per
hour of
operation

6

2

778.0

$85oU3

$ .11

7

2

62.7

7.98

.13

8

3.5

750.0

66.79

.09

9

3.5

313.2

30.06

.10

5

5

171.8

3U.2U

.20

The low cost-per-hour figures for the 3.5 KM generators indi-
cated above do not necessarily imply that they were the most economical
nsizen of generator used. The figures merely reflect the fact that the
power demand on these generators was well below the maximum capacity of
the units during most of the period of operation. The 2 KW generators
were taxed much more heavily in proportion to their capacity output. Both
2 KW and 3.5 KW power plants used were almost identical in gross size and
weight. The 5 KW plant on the other hand, was a considerably larger unit.
Although operated at only 19 to k9 percent of capacity output (less than
the capacity output of a 3.5 KW unit), the increased size of the plant was
reflected in a near doubling of the "cost per hour of operation".

Labor costs for operating traps in the electromechanical devices
are not available since these expenses could not be separated from labor
costs for operating checking weirs used during the tests. It was appar-
ent, however, that approximately 2 hours of labor per day per control
structure would provide satisfactory servicing. This figure includes tra-
vel time to and from the weir and is based on the assumption that the at-
tendant would be servicing a group of such devices within a limited geo-
graphic area. It is estimated that under such circumstances direct labor
costs for servicing ea,ch electromechanical weir and trap would amount to

uu

$262.50 per season. This applies in those lake basins where the sea
lamprey's spawning run season lasts an average of 3 l/2 months and is
based on an average hourly rate (in 1952) for laborers of $1.25.

Recommendations

At the present time, no single electrical mechanism for gen-
eral use in all sea lamprey spawning streams is recommended. In streams
where simultaneous fish runs must be protected, an electromechanical
weir and trap is required. Considerable care should be taken in advance
to determine the primary path of upstream movement of migrant fishes at
the site of installation. Weir-traps should be installed directly in
this path and the electrode array "tailored" to provide "leads" to the
trap.

A multiple-row, suspended electrode system is recommended where
any, or a combination of, the following conditions obtain at the locus
of installation:

(1) Maximum flood depths are greater than 5 feet

(2) Stream velocities are less than 1.0 f.p.s.

(3) Stream bed materials are soft or floculent

In general, a two-row electrode system creating a uniform electrical
field should suffice in such locations. A recommended design for an elec-
tromechanical weir and trap of this type is presented in Figure 18.

At sites where very sluggish water exists (0.5 f.p.s. or less),
observations during operation of the above device may indicate that some
fish mortality results due to the ability of some migrants to propel them-
selves into the strongest areas of the electrical field. Should this
occur, it would be desirable to alter the device to a three-row system
with an incremental electrical field. Modification of the structure de-
tailed in Figure 18 to accommodate a third row of electrodes may be accom-
plished as follows:

(1) Remove 5-foot, channel iron crosspiece at top of each pair
of suspension towers.

(2) Replace with similar crosspiece measuring 10 feet longj
crosspiece should be centered on centerline between dual suspension towers,

(3) Install suspension cables for three rows of electrodes on
U l/2-foot centers with middle row on centerline between towers.

U5

A DETAIL

(Sk.

■B- DETAIL

(23,
■C" DETAIL

r^

PLAN VIEW OF
TRAP AREA

TJ'1~JT3'~KH

FRONT VIEW

KD

D" DETAIL

Z7

DESCRIPTION

3/8" CABLE

I/4' CABLE

3" CHANNEL IRON

I/2" PIPE ELECTRODES

-8 BONDING WIRE

3' PIPE CAPS

-EYE TURNBUCKLES

HOOK - EYE TUHNBUCKLES

6" DISTRIBUTION INSULATORS

INSULATED SPACER

3/6" CABLE CLAMPS

CABLE CLAMPS

6* STRAP IRON

ANGLE IRON

TWO PIECE COLLAR

31/2- DEAD-END CLEVISES

3/B* X 3" BOLTS 8 COTTERPINS

\A- X 2 I/2- BOLTS

BOLTS % WASHERS

BOLTS 0 WASHERS

I/2- X I I/2" BOLTS i

3,J-

EYEBOLTS

UNITED STATES DEPT OF THE INTERIOR

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
GREAT LAKES FISHERY INVESTIGATIONS

ELECTROMECHANICAL
WEIR AND TRAP

TYPE A CONTROL STRUCTURE

DESIGN: BR SMITH

DRAWN. AC BENNETT

SHEET I OF I

Fig. lt~Vt*<lr« or nco-Miwfed d.»l«n of «Ulpl.-r«, ..up«»kd -Uetrod-, .ltrtroMObMlc.1 -lr «™> tr.

(U) Install light channel iron crosspiece, 10 feet long, at
appropriate height on each dual tower to establish anchor for horizon-
tal cables providing alignment and direct support of the electrode
array.

In stream locations where maximum flood depths do not exceed
5 feet, water velocities do exceed 1.0 f.p.s., and stream bed materials
are firm, an array consisting of a single row of suspended electrodes
and a horizontal, submerged electrode may be substituted for the
multiple-row installation. Details of a recommended design for this
type of array may be derived from the plans for an electrical barrier
presented in Figure 19. Should field observations indicate that this
array is causing an appreciable mortality among migrant fishes, it may
prove expedient to shift the horizontal, submerged electrode to a posi-
tion on the upstream side of the row of suspended electrodes.

In those sea lamprey spawning streams that have no fish runs
of importance, it is recommended that simple, electrical barriers be in-
stalled. Such streams will, as a rule, be small and the array consisting
of a single row of suspended elements and a horizontal, submerged elec-
trode will be adequate for most locations. A design for an electrical
barrier utilizing this type of array is presented in Figure 19. In very
small tributaries, an electrical barrier may be effected by installing
only two horizontal, submerged electrodes placed parallel to each other
on the stream bed. A suggested design for such an installation is pre-
sented in a sketch in Figure 20. However, until the working limits of
this very simple device are determined, it is not recommended that it be
installed in streams having maximum flood depths greater than 2 feet at
the point of installation.

All recommended designs and suggested modifications are based
on the utilization of sources of Jpower providing 110 VAC for application
to the arrays. In all cases, a minimum voltage gradient of 1.0 volt per
inch between specified electrode elements (as described in previous sec-
tions) should be established. Although appreciably higher than the min-
imum of 0.75 volt per inch required to block sea lampreys, this arbitrary
minimum provides a suitable margin of protection against seasonal changes
in water conductivity, losses of electrical field strength due to inad-
vertant grounding of distal ends of hanging electrodes, erratic field
patterns created by displacement of electrodes, and other minor variables
causing local or general weakening of the electrical fields.

Electromechanical weir-traps and the approaches to these traps
should be thoroughly explored with the voltmeter probe to determine if
these areas are adequately "coldw from an electrical standpoint. The
maximum voltage gradient permissable in these areas which will not repel
or stun fishes is in the order of 0.2 volt per inch. Excessive gradients
can usually be reduced by increasing the size of the shunt screens (i.e.,

U7

l^wl

3

XD

(is

■Cf DETAIL

BILL OF MATERIAL

DESCRIPTION

REG

1

1/4- CABLE

IS

2

3' CHANNEL IRON

as

3

1 1/2" PIPE ELECTROOES

1 2

4

1 1/2- GROUND PIPE

4'.

5

3" X 12' PIPE

2

6

3- PIPE CAP

2

7

0" DISTRIBUTION INSULATORS

12

e

"504 STRAIN INSULATORS

!

B

6* HOOK -EYE TURN0UCKLES

a

10

1/4" X 11/2" x 6" STRAP IRON

?A

1 1

■fl FLEXABLE BONDING WIRE

■-i

12

TWO - PIECE COLLAR

2

13

GROUND ANCHORS

i

14

1/4- X 1 \M- ANGLE IRON

2

i S

l/»- THIMBLES

24

: 8

1/4" CA0LE CLAMPS

8 a

i 7

3/8* X 5" EYEBOLTS

8

18

3/B* X 1- BOLTS fl WASHERS

*6

19

3/B' X 3- BOLTS 0 COTTERPINS

2

20

3i/2- DEAD-END CLEVISES

a

21

1/2" x 1 1/2" BOLTS • WASHERS

B

22

H4' x 2 1/2- BOLTS • WASHERS

2

23

M- X 3*" BOLTS • WASHERS

12

UNITED STATES OEPT. OF THE INTERIOR

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
GREAT LAKES FISHERY INVESTIGATIONS

ELECTRICAL SEA
LAMPREY BARRIER

TYPE B CONTROL STRUCTURE
DESIGN! adapted by BR SMITH

DRAWN! AC BENNETT ^^

mpuvhrl »lectrod*< ■

a

z

ui

5

o

o

-JOC

i

<UJ

ID

<->2

O

7

o

UJq

>-

a.

t-

h-

u.

Ou.

o

o

X

ct

^

o

UJZ

*s

<

U

of)

a.

MATI

CON

ODES.

H

O

UJ

I

hi

itto:

<Ui-

LU

1-

o

z

IAGR
ARRI
.LEC

extending further in an upstream or downstream direction) or by increas-
ing the electrical efficiency of the shunt (connecting shunt screen to
steel rods driven into the bed of the stream) .

The use of domestic power lines as the sole source of power
(System 1 as described in a previous section) in the operation of elec-
tromechanical weirs and traps and electrical barriers has proven to be
entirely satisfactory. However, since the requisite 100-percent effec-
tiveness of an electrical sea lamprey control device depends upon its
uninterrupted operation during the entire sea lamprey spawning run, the
use of an automatic starting generator as a standby source of power is
recommended. In remote areas, inaccessible to commercial power of any
sort, two complete power generating plants (System 3) must be used, each
equipped with its own starting batteries and fuel supply. One of these
generators must function as the "normal" source of power; while the other
is held in readiness as the "standby" source. The normal source generator
must deliver 115 volts, single phase, 60 cycle alternating current at
power levels determined by the stream width and depth and a number of
factors as discussed in Section (6) of the "Summary of Results in 1952".
This generator must have such features as manual ("push button") start-
ing, individual starting batteries with provision for automatic charging,
and a completely independent fuel supply. It is recommended that the
Kohler Company Series L21 generating plants or equivalent be used for
this application. The standby generator also must deliver 115 volt, single
phase, 60 cycle alternating current, and its power capability must be
equal to that of the normal source generator. This generating plant must
start automatically and transfer the load from the normal source to itself
immediately upon failure, for any reason, of the normal source of power.
Like the main generator, it must also be equipped with individual start-
ing batteries with provision for automatic charging and an independent
fuel supply. The Kohler Company Series E21 automatic standby plants or
equivalent are recommended for use as emergency sources of power in con-
junction with a domestic power line as the normal source in a System 2
supply, or with a generating plant as the normal source in a System 3 supply.

When the electrical weir site is to be located at a distance
from the nearest power line, the choice between a System 2 and System 3
power supply will be governed by a number of factors. First, the con-
struction and maintenance costs of a connecting power line in a System 2
installation must be weighed against the costs of a normal source gener-
ator which, in a System 3 supply would replace the power line. Where the
electrical weir may be expected to require very high levels of power, and
consequently a normal source generator of large capacity (over 10 KW),
then a System 2 supply would probably be the most economical where the
weir site is located up to 2 mile s from the nearest power line. However,
where the maximum anticipated power consumption of a weir is 2 KW or less,
the installation of a power line over a half-mile long would in general
not be economically advantageous and a System 3 supply accordingly would
be desirable. Another factor to be considered is accessibility to the

$0

weir site for the periodic delivery of the fuel required by a System 3
supply. Local electric power rates, although a consideration of less
significance, might also affect the choice of power supply system for
a particular weir.

It cannot be emphasized too strongly that all of the elec-
trical devices described in this report are extremely dangerous if not
approached and/or handled properly by experienced personnel. Ample
opportunity exists for inquisitive persons, not familiar with the
devices, to electrocute or at least seriously harm themselves. For
this reason, all installations must be adequately fenced in a manner
that will discourage curious individuals. So-called "cyclone" fencing
surmounted by triple strands of barbed wire is recommended. Generator
housings and access gates should be locked and prominent "warning-high
voltage" signs posted on all facings of the enclosing fence. In addi-
tion, the circuitry of the installation should provide for the operation
of several red "warning" lights which can be placed in prominent loca-
tions on the suspension towers.

Acknowledgments

We wish to acknowledge the assistance of Mr. William L. Stahl,
formerly Project Engineer, Cook Research Laboratories, Chicago, Illinois,
who contributed materially to the conception and planning of the first
electromechanical weir and trap installed in the Ocqueoc River in 195l.
During the 1952 season, the following members of the Fish and Wildlife
Service, Great Lakes Fishery Investigations, devoted considerable time
and effort to the project: Messrs. Leo Erkkila, Clifford Tetzloff, and
Joseph Beil at the Squaw Creek installation; Messrs. Leonard Joeris and
A. C. Bennett at the Hibbards' Creek and Kewaunee River installations;
Messrs. Howard Loeb and Clifford Brynildson at the Carp Creek installa-
tion! an<i, Mr. Alberton McLain who aided in devising the electrical bar-
rier consisting solely of two submerged electrodes. We are also indebted
to Dr. James W. Moffett, Chief, Great Lakes Fishery Investigations, for
guidance and aid in the work program.

Literature cited

Apple gate, Vernon C.

1950. Natural history of the sea lamprey, Petromyzon marinus , in
Michigan. U. S. Dept. of the Int., Fish and Wildl. Serv. ,
Spec. Sci. Rep.: Fish. No. 55, 237 pp.

51

Applegate, Vernon C. (continued)

1951. The sea lamprey in the Great Lakes. The Sci. Monthly,
72, 5 (May, 1951): 275-281.

Applegate, Vernon C. and Clifford L. Brynildson

1952. Downstream movement of recently transformed sea lampreys,
Petrcmyzon marinus, in the Carp Lake River, Michigan.
Trans. Am. Fish. Soc, 81 (1951): 275-290.

Applegate, Vernon C. and Bernard R. Smith

195la. Sea lamprey spawning runs in the Great Lakes in 1950.
U. S. Dept. of the Int., Fish and Wildl. Serv.,
Spec. Sci. Rep.: Fish. No. 61, U9 pp.

195lb. Movement and dispersion of a blocked spawning run of sea
lampreys in the Great Lakes. Trans. Sixteenth N. Am.
Wildl. Conf.: 2li3-2$l.

Applegate, Vernon C, Bernard R. Smith, Alberton L. McLain, and
Matt Patterson

1952. Sea lamprey spawning runs in the Great Lakes in 195l.
U. S. Dept. of the Int., Fish and Wildl. Serv., Spec.
Sci. Rep.: Fish. No. 68: 37 pp.

52 34228

MBL WHOI Library - Serials

5 WHSE 01074