Since 1964,

Since thethe
1964, leader in effective,
leader safe
in effective, and
safe reliable
and products
reliable forfor
products fisheries conservation.
fisheries conservation.
Knowledgeable biologists depend upon Smith-Root equipment.
Knowledgeable biologists depend upon Smith-Root equipment.

SMITH-ROOT, INC.
FISH BARRIERS & GUIDANCE

® ®

SMITH-
SMITH-RR OOT
OOTWWW.SMITH-ROOT.COM
Productsfor
WWW.SMITH-ROOT.COM
Products forFisheries
FisheriesConservation
Conservation
09446.005
COMPANY PROFILE

For over 40 years Smith-Root We stop invasive

fish species from
migrating into
has been committed to the delicate natural
ecosystems.
conservation and sustainability
We analyze the effect
of fisheries resources. of waveforms on
fish to provide our
clients with cutting
edge technology.

"The electrical fish barrier was therefore We produce the

highly successful in preventing fish passage most effective
into the San Joaquin River."
behavioral barriers &
Dale Gates – California Department of Fish & Game guidance systems.
"Barrier systems and remote monitoring
capabilities have been refined and
upgraded over the dozen-plus years of
technological advancements."
Robert W. Clarkson - U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
We are the
world leader in
Fish Guidance
Technologies.

09446.05 Smith-Root Electrical Fish Barriers and Guidance, Revision 5 - Spring 2012

This document is the Intellectual Property of Smith-Root, Inc., and may not be used, sold, transferred, copied, or reproduced in whole or in part in any manner or
form or in or on any media to any person without the prior written consent of Smith-Root, Inc.
© 2012 Smith-Root, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Copyright in the whole and every part of this document belongs to Smith-Root, Inc. and may not be used, sold,
transferred, copied or reproduced in whole or in part in any manner or form or in or on any media to any person without the prior written consent of Smith-Root, Inc.

1 www.SMITH-ROOT.COM
 Fish Barriers & Guidance

CONTENTS

1 Company profile 1
2 summary 4
3 introduction 5
4 Graduated fields 7
5 Barrier parameters 8
6 description of systems 10
6.1.2.2 Plastic Culvert Barrier 11
6.1.3 Tailrace Barrier 11
6.1.4 Canal Barrier 12
6.1.5 intake Barrier 12
6.1.6 Louvered Intake Barrier 12
6.2 DOWNSTREAM Barrier 13
; 6.3 STATIC OR LOW-FLOW Barriers 13
6.4 TEMPORARY OR SEASONAL BarrierS 14
6.5 MARINE MAMMAL DETERRENCE 15
6.6 EXPERIMENTAL BarrierS 16
7 equipment and monitoring 17
8 safety 19
9 applications and research 20
10 AVAILABLE services 21
II Barrier Sites 23
1 1 literature and reports 27

www.SMITH-ROOT.COM CONTENTS
Fish Barriers & Guidance

2 Summary

S mith-Root has been designing and installing fish barrier systems for over
20 years. Advancements in electrical components have allowed Smith-Root
to develop product enhancements resulting in the most advanced fish
deterrence and guidance systems available.

O ur technology has
allowed greater
efficiency, more options,
and safer parameters
that exceed today’s
stringent environmental
demands and regulatory
requirements.
Our experienced
engineers, scientists and
project managers have
worked together to create
distinctive solutions for
various fish guidance needs.
This booklet provides the
reader with information on
Smith-Root’s fish guidance
systems. Because of their
technological complexity,
it is important to provide
a thorough explanation
of how the systems work
and how they can apply to
particular situations.
What types of systems are
available?
Where can a system be
best located?
What parameters need to
be known?
These questions are
answered first by
identifying the species
of concern. All species
respond differently to
4 2012
electrical current. Smith-
Root’s long experience with
electrofishing and electrical
barriers allows our staff
to determine the optimal
configuration and settings
for a successful project.
Next, why do the fish or
marine species need to
be deterred? To achieve
maximum deterrence
efficiency, Smith-Root must
fully understand the final
goal to be achieved.
The third factor to consider
is power. What is the
available power? Is there an
opportunity to use the local
grid or is on-site generation
such as fossil fuels or
renewable energy required?
After determining the
species to be targeted, the
reason for the guidance
system, and the power
availability, the physical
characteristics of the
waterway and associated
hydraulics need to be
considered. Understanding
the velocity, flow and
sediment transportation of
a waterway is fundamental
for a successful design
and implementation. This
information is required to
develop a concept for an
installation. It often can be
found from local monitoring
stations.
Water conductivity is a
measure of the resistance
of water to the flow of
electric current. This
characteristic influences
the amount of electricity
needed to power a barrier.
Usually also available
through local monitoring
stations, conductivity can
be measured using a basic
conductivity meter.
Once the discovery
process has been
completed Smith-Root
can design, construct, and
monitor a fish guidance
system to meet your
specific needs.
Complete information,
including details of existing
installations, is always
available online at:
www.smith-root.com/
barriers
For more information
regarding your specific
need, please contact us
directly at 360-573-0202 or
pm@smith-root.com

F ish are uniquely sensitive to
electrical currents because
their muscle control is based on
electrical impulses through their
nervous system, and they inhabit
a conductive environment.
Electrical barriers and guidance
structures make use of this
sensitivity.
Through many years of
experience and research with
electrofishing and barrier
projects, we have found
configurations and settings
that can produce the desired
responses without causing injury
or trauma to the target species.
WHAT ARE ELECTRICAL
FISH BARRIER AND
GUIDANCE SYSTEMS?
An electrical fish barrier can
be thought of as an impassable
barricade, and a fish guidance
system as a repelling zone. Both
use electrical current passing
through water. The electrical
circuit has two or more metal
electrodes submersed in water
with a voltage applied between
them. Electric current passing
between the electrodes, via the
water medium, produces an
electric field. When fish are within
the field, they become part of
the electrical circuit with some of
the current flowing through their
bodies. This can evoke reactions
ranging from a slight twitch to a
change in swimming behavior to
full paralysis, depending on the
current level and pulse duration
they receive.
A barrier or guidance system
exploits these reactions to
influence fish behavior.
WHAT ARE THE ELECTRICAL
CURRENT TYPES?
Since the water acts as a resistor
in the circuit, there is a voltage
drop over a given length parallel
to the electrical current, and a
fish of the same length feels the
same voltage drop. The amount
of current that passes through
the fish depends on relative
conductivities. The response
in a fish to the current passing
through it is readily apparent,
although the internal mechanisms
are not entirely understood by
fish physiologists. Direct current
(DC) has an effect; so does
alternating current (AC), and
pulsed DC. AC has been found to
be injurious to fish. It was used
in early barriers throughout the
world, but has been replaced
in the Smith-Root systems with
controlled pulsed DC in which
the voltage, frequency, pulse
shape and pulse width can be set
for optimal behavioral response.
Figure 3.1: Electric field in the water
WHAT IS THE ELECTRODE
CONFIGURATION AND
ELECTRICAL FIELD
PATTERN?
To construct a barrier in a
stream, electrodes are placed
across the stream so that the
electric current is parallel to
the stream flow and aligned
with the movement paths of
fish. Electrodes can be vertical,
suspended from a cable or a
structure or attached to piling,
or they can be horizontal,
suspended at mid-depth or
lying at the bottom. Electrodes
on a stream bottom lying flush
with the stream bed offer no
impediment to debris or boat
traffic, and therefore they are
most commonly deployed. The
shape of the electrical field is
determined by the electrode
configuration and the water
Figure 3.2: Electric field lines which run
head-to-tail along the fish transfer the
maximum power from water to fish.
www.SMITH-ROOT.COM
Fish Barriers & Guidance
INTRODUCTION 3
depth. The field is not affected
by water flow, turbidity, debris,
and modest sediment (although
thick layers of sediment that
are less conductive than the
water can reduce the field
in the water above bottom-
mounted electrodes). The shape
of the field is not affected by
conductivity, but the amount
of power needed to sustain a
given field increases with the
conductivity. Power requirements
in brackish water can become
large, and may necessitate a
change of strategy.
To produce the most efficient
electric field pattern for blocking
or guiding fish, it is desirable to
produce a field with electric lines
running head-to-tail through
the fish (see Figs. 3.1 & 3.2).
This orientation transfers the
maximum power from water into
the fish. In flowing water of 1.5 to
2 fish body lengths per second
or greater, fish instinctively swim
with their heads into the flow.
Therefore, the most effective field
pattern is one with the electric
field lines running parallel to
water flow.
Figure 3.3: Typical fish path within a
graduated field.
One of the most important
advantages of such parallel field
orientation is that when a fish is
crosswise to the electric field it
receives almost no electric pulse.
Fish learn very quickly that by
turning sideways to the flow they
can minimize the effects of the
electric field. In this orientation,
upstream migrating fish are
swept clear of the field by the
force of the water flow. Figure
3.3 shows the typical reaction
of migrating fish challenging an
oriented electric field. In slow or
static water a high percentage of
fish also learn to turn in relation
to the field and swim away.
5
Fish Barriers & Guidance
4 GRaduated fields
GRADUATED FIELDS
S mith-Root equipment enables
the barrier designer to shape
the electrical fields in the water
for specific objectives.
For barriers intended to prevent
upstream migration of invasive
species where there are no
protected species present, the
field can be developed with a
relatively sharp increase at the
beginning and a long, intense
field thereafter, ensuring that any
fish will eventually be overcome
and carried back downstream.
For barriers intended for
redirecting upstream migrating
protected species into bypass
channels, where it is important
to minimize distress to the fish,
the field is designed to be more
graduated so the fish has a good
sense of where to turn to reduce
the discomfort.
Fig. 4.0: Schematic Electric Fields
The graduated field is developed by increasing the voltages The graduated field is developed by varying the electrode
applied between evenly spaced electrodes.
6 2012
For all downstream barriers, it
often is most effective to use
relatively short fields that are
graduated. Here, fish are diverted
around the field or move back
upstream and do not penetrate
far into the field where they may
be overcome and drift through
with the water flow.
The field is shaped by the
spacing of the electrodes and
the voltages applied between
them. In general, electrical fields
become more intense (the
voltage changes more rapidly) in
water close to the electrodes, but
the lengths of the intense fields
are correspondingly shorter.
Usually a barrier is proportioned
to achieve a minimum field near
the surface of the water where
the effect of the individual
electrodes is smoothed out
by the influence of adjacent
spacing.
electrodes. Parasitic electrodes
can be added upstream and
downstream to alter the shape of
the field.
Fields can be modeled using
analysis software. Typically
Smith-Root provides field
information in the form of plots
along various fish paths to assist
in the understanding of the
barrier characteristics and to
aid in the calibration of site test
readings.
Smith-Root barriers can have
from two to as many as nine
electrodes. Some configurations
are more efficient in their use
of the equipment and some in
their power consumption. Figure
4 illustrates generically how
different graduated fields can be
generated with bottom-mounted
electrodes.
 Fish Barriers & Guidance

Graduated fields (cont) 4

The graduated field is developed by the way the electric current For evenly spaced electrodes and equal voltages applied to
disperses through the water, so that two groups of widely- each space, the graduated entry is shorter and the field is
spaced electrodes can be used. uniform over much of its length.

FLUSH-MOUNTED
ELECTRODES
F lush bottom-mounted
electrode arrays do not alter
normal water flow or catch
debris. The electrodes are
fixed into an insulating medium
placed on the stream bottom.
The insulating medium ensures
that the electric current will
flow through the water and not
through the stream bottom.
For most permanent Fig.4.1: Flush-mounted electrodes do not trap debris.
installations, the insulating
medium is a special concrete mix
called Insulcrete™. Site-specific For site evaluation we have
designs include cast-in-place portable canvas arrays that
decks, precast flat panels, and provide a temporary barrier
precast culverts (see Fig. 4.1) system. The portable arrays are
Plastic culverts are also available. constructed of reinforced vinyl
These provide the required sheets with stainless steel cable
insulation and allow flush- electrodes attached to the top
mounting of circular electrodes. surface (see Section 6.4).

Fig.4.2: Flush-mounted electrodes

www.SMITH-ROOT.COM 7
Fish Barriers & Guidance

5 BARRIER PARAMETERS

Essential Details
Barrier Parameters
T his section covers some of
the important parameters of
a potential barrier or guidance
system site that will influence the
design, operation, operational
constraints, maintenance, and
monitoring needs.
Electric Power Needs
Power can be provided using
one or all of the following
sources:
• Local electricity grid,
• Propane, methane or diesel
generator,
• Renewable energy such as
photo-voltaic (PV) or wind
power generation.
Intermittent sources like PV or
wind need battery storage which
limits the scale of the facility. All
systems with critical missions
(such as stopping invasive
species) need back-up power.
Smith-Root has provided
system installations with power
requirements ranging from 0.1
kW (small culvert) to 1850 kW
(large canal). Power requirements
change with water depth, water
conductivity and fish species.
Hydraulics
Fig. 5.1: Electric fish barriers can be powered by any number of power resources.
In all barrier installations, it
is important to understand guided is a critical parameter. particularly streams subject to
the existing flow and velocity annual variations in flow volume,
conditions and waterway The target velocity range for a
downstream barrier is 0 to 0.5 water depth over the electrode
physical characteristics. Many array may vary.
waterways have permanent m/s. However, by understanding
monitoring stations recording the waterway characteristics In such cases, electrodes may
information such as flow, velocity better, we can identify the need to be embedded in channel
and conductivity. velocity trouble spots and sidewalls to maintain electric field
position the barrier to suit. configuration at higher flows,
Velocity is important when larger diameter electrodes may
formulating a successful barrier When designing a barrier
for a river/stream or canal, it be needed to handle additional
installation. Equally important is power requirements, and the
understanding velocity direction. is important to keep in mind
that the physical structure amount of power necessary
Fish generally head directly into to maintain the desired field
flow during upstream movement. must conform to the original
geometrical characteristics, strength may increase as well.
Smith-Root has blocked the
movement of upstream adult minimizing any disturbance of It is important to understand the
Pacific salmon in water velocities the natural flow regime. historical water level information
ranging from 0.6 to 3 m/s. Water Depth Changes and develop a suitable system.
Blocking or guiding downstream Ideally, optimum barrier or Smith-Root hydrologists are
moving fish is more of a guidance system performance available to study and assist in
challenge with high water occurs with a uniform water this process.
velocities. The size of the fish depth across the electrode
attempting to be blocked or array. However, in many sites,

8 2012

Water Conductivity
Water conductivity is usually
expressed as micro-Siemens/
centimeter (µS/cm). The higher
the level of conductivity, the
more freely electric current flows
in water. However, along with
increased conductivity comes a
need for more electric current
to maintain an electric field
through the water. Smith-Root’s
barrier or guidance systems are
designed to handle water from
very low conductivity up to
about 5,000 µS/cm (equivalent
to approximately 3.9 parts per
thousand of salinity).This means
that the technology is suitable
for applications ranging from
pure freshwater up to lower
salinity estuarine sites.
Smith-Root is evaluating the
power needs, electric field
strength patterns, electrode
materials and configurations
necessary for full seawater
(35 ppt) applications. If there
is a potential application that
would need to be placed in
waters exceeding 5,000 µS/cm,
please contact a Smith-Root
representative to see if we can
meet your requirements.
Sediment Transportation
Naturally, all waterways transport
sediment from the highest point
of the watershed to the ocean. It
is important to understand the
sizes and shapes of sediment
present.
Sediment is transported via
water movement and is directly
related to velocity and the
associated flow event. Obviously,
more sediment is transported
during high flow events such as
floods.
In our experience sediment
depths of 0.6 m deposited on an
electrode array will not greatly
affect the performance of the
barrier guidance system.
Sediment transportation can be
critical in determining the best
place for a barrier. It is important
that Smith-Root engineers are
involved early.
Fish Barriers & Guidance
barrier parameters (cont.) 5
Waterway Width
We estimate, given our present within an existing structure,
equipment configurations, that new building or trailer to isolate
a maximum channel width of the equipment from inclement
approximately 250 m is an weather and air temperature
achievable limit. However, the extremes that could cause
theoretical channel width limit damage. It is important that
could be much greater if we this equipment is placed in a
installed much thicker electrodes secure housing as it alerts the
and exploited endless power system operator of any system
sources. However, Smith-Root is outages or malfunctions. More
mindful of power consumption information on some of the
and associated costs when options available for equipment
designing practicality into our security and protection is
barrier guidance systems. Power presented in Section 7.0.
delivery requirements will usually
limit the maximum waterway
width.
Upstream/Downstream Array
Lengths
Smith-Root’s present installed
barrier systems range from 1
m to over 48 m in upstream/
downstream length. The array
length depends on the water
depth and the number and
spacing of electrodes necessary
to generate the electric field
configuration and strength
necessary to accomplish the
biological objective(s). Guidance
systems may have a different
working length depending on
the species and size of fish to be
guided. Smith-Root systems also
can employ a reverse polarity
feature which greatly reduces
or eliminates deterioration of
electrodes due to electrolysis.
We also can create a sharply
defined edge for the electric
field by installing parasitic
electrodes at the upstream and/
or downstream end of the main
electric field.
Equipment Security and
Monitoring Telemetry
Requirements
Smith-Root barrier and
guidance systems are driven
by electric power and complex
electronic and communication
components. Computers control
the overall function, monitoring
and telemetry system. The
equipment components need
to be placed in a location
www.SMITH-ROOT.COM 9
Fish Barriers & Guidance

6 Description OF Systems

T his section introduces a cross

section of the types of barrier
and guidance applications
that are possible using Smith-
Root technology. Many of the
applications are shown using
conceptual drawings. It is
important to remember that
each system is specifically
designed to meet your biological
objective(s) and solve the
physical constraints at the site.
6.1 BARRIERS IN
FLOWING WATER
6.1.1 Streams
An electric field array across
a flowing stream can act as a
complete barrier and/or be used
to guide fish to a bypass channel, 6.1 Conceptual drawing of an upstream barrier designed to block upstream fish
entrance to a fish ladder, or into movement into the channel at the top of the drawing. A description of how this
a trap. Figure 6.1 shows a typical system works is described in Sections 3.0 and 4.0. Note that this array configuration
electrode installation. This same can also be used to guide fish moving upstream into the channel at the lower right
which could be a bypass channel or lead to a fish ladder or trap. This configuration
general configuration could could also block fish from entering a tailrace downstream of a hydropower facility or
be used to prevent fish from irrigation diversion.
entering a dam tailrace. Figure
6.2 shows a typical complete
barrier electrode array and
associated civil works.
6.1.2 Culverts Ele
Fis
Fis
h
h
ctr
Ba
EleBa

NGlta
NG
DAhh Vo
DA
Hig Aw
ep
Higep
Vo ay
Aw
ic
ic rr
ctrrrie
rrie
ER
ER
ge
ltage
ay

To control fish movement

Ke
Ke

through culverts, Smith-Root has

developed three approaches.

w
lo
6.1.2.1 Retrofitted culverts

rf
ve
O
rt
ve
ul
An existing culvert can be n
ai
M
C
retrofitted with an electrode
w
lo
rf
ve
O

array, bottom mounted or

encircling the entire culvert. 6.2 This photo shows a complete stream 6.3 A conceptual drawing showing a
barrier system. Note the flush mounted cast culvert installation. Electrodes are
Insulation can be attached electrode array on the bottom of the cast inside the concrete culvert. Note
UHMW panels, a sprayed concrete sill and the electrodes mounted the support building and power supply.
polyurethane coating, or the in the channel side walls to maintain the
concrete can be removed and electric field during high flow events.
replaced with InsulcreteTM,
depending on the expected
bedload characteristics.
6.1.2.1 Cast Culverts
This is a special InsulcreteTM
culvert section with cast-in-place
slots for an electrode array. It
is installed at the center of a
culvert assembly, flanked by
conventional culvert sections.
The electrode array is powered
by pulsators housed in a building 6.4 A conceptual drawing showing a typical cross section of a cast concrete culvert
nearby. Accidental human section. Note the security gate to prevent unauthorized human access.
exposure to the electric field
is prevented by fixed security the event of a power failure to a typical cast concrete culvert
gates at both ends of the culvert prevent fish movement. Figures configuration.
assembly. A fine-mesh drop gate 6.3 and 6.4 show a plan and cross
swings down automatically in sectional view, respectively, of

10 2012
 Fish Barriers & Guidance

description of systems (cont.) 6

6.1.2.2 Plastic Culverts

A plastic culvert barrier is a
custom fitted design intended
to replace an existing culvert
or for new installation. The
required length of Hi-Q pipe has
an electrode array installed at
its center. The electrode array
is powered by pulsators housed
in a building nearby. Accidental
human exposure to the electric
field is prevented by security
gates at both ends of the culvert
assembly. Figures 6.5 through
6.8 show various aspects of this
system.

Fig. 6.9: A conceptual drawing of an electrode array inside a turbine draft tube.
This configuration uses a circular geometric array.

a tunnel as shown in Figure 6.9.

Fig. 6.5: An overall view of a typical
plastic culvert barrier section.
Fig. 6.6: Electrode end view.
6.1.3 Tailraces and draft tubes
During turbine shutdowns or
dewatering, fish can swim into
a draft tube, thus increasing the
chance of injury or mortality on
start up, requiring operators to
manually salvage trapped fish.
To protect fish from turbine draft
tubes, many fisheries agencies
require a fish exclusion barrier.
Smith-Root has developed two
primary approaches for excluding
fish from tailrace or spillway
locations.
The first approach is applicable
to locations where water passing
through the turbine exits through
These systems employ a circular
geometric array with highly
insulated electrodes to provide
an ideal electric field pattern.
Flush mounted electrodes, which
do not obstruct water flow,
eliminate maintenance associated
with debris. Turbine discharge
provides high water velocity to
sweep stunned fish away from
the draft tube.
The second approach, which
is applicable to open channel Fig. 6.7: Front view of culvert array.
tailraces and downstream of
spillway bays is shown in Figure
6.1. This configuration is basically
an upstream barrier that can be
modified to guide fish to bypass
channels, a fish trap, or to the
entrance to fish ladder.
Fig. 6.8: A typical cross section view of
a plastic culvert section.

www.SMITH-ROOT.COM 11
Fish Barriers & Guidance

6 Description OF Systems (Cont.)

6.1.4 Canals
Barrier systems in canals are
used primarily to prevent fish
from moving up the canal into
an attached water body. Several
canals in Arizona utilize Smith-
Root barrier systems to keep
non-native fish from moving into
areas that have fish listed under
the Endangered Species Act.

Fig. 6.10: A conceptual drawing of a
large scale canal barrier.
Fig. 6.11: A photo of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal showing two barges and
a tug boat transiting the waterway. This canal currently has two barriers installed
with a third in the design stage to prevent invasive fish species from entering the
Great Lakes ecosystem. The barriers are designed to stop all fish from passing.
No fish have been observed passing since full implementation in 2009. This canal
is also subject to flow reversals, which means design considerations must include
flows moving in both directions.

Figure 6.10 shows a conceptual

drawing of a typical canal barrier
installation with the electrode
array embedded in the bottom
and walls of the canal.
The Chicago Sanitary and Ship WHEN
LIGHT

Canal is an example of a large-

IS ON
BARRIER
IS

scale canal facility. This canal

connects the Mississippi River Electric
Fish Barrier

drainage to Lake Michigan. Two

DANG
ER
High Voltage
Keep Away

barriers have been installed with

a third under contract to prevent
at least two species of Asian carp
from invading the Great Lakes
ecosystem. They are over 48 m
wide, with a water depth of up
to 9 m. Figure 6.11 shows a photo
of the canal with a barges and a
tug transiting the waterway. This
is Smith-Root’s largest system
to date, but our technology
will accommodate even larger
waterways.
6.1.5 Water Intake
A barrier system (Figure 6.12)
was designed to prevent fish
being drawn into the cooling
intake of a large industrial facility.
This configuration replaced
mechanical screens that had to
be cleaned regularly, requiring
costly plant shutdowns. Pile-
clusters were installed to protect
the barrier from damage by
passing ice-flows or ships.
Fig. 6.12 A conceptual drawing of a
barrier array designed to prevent fish
from entering an industrial scale water
intake. Barrier systems like this have
been installed an intake with an opening
as small as 1 m.
6.1.6 Louvered Intakes
The louvered barrier (Figure
6.13) is designed for water
intakes that have high flows and
large variations in water depth.
Increases in water depth do not
reduce the effectiveness of this
barrier because the electrodes
are mounted vertically on the
louvers. Diversion of high flow
volumes are made possible by
spreading the flow over a large
area. The electrodes are flush
mounted to facilitate water
flow between the louvers. Our
experience with this barrier
design clarified three important
Fig. 6.13 A conceptual drawing showing
a louvered intake barrier. Note that the
electrode array is attached to the vertical
louvers. This design accommodates
large variations in water depth and is
ideal for major irrigation diversions, with
an acceptable river geometry.
design considerations. First, the
approach velocity to the louvers
must be low enough to allow fish
repelled by the electric field to
swim away from the louver face.
Second, the velocity needs to
be controlled carefully, avoiding
local high-velocity regions. Third,
the length of the louvered face
should be at a low angle to the
dominant river flow to provide
a sweeping velocity to aid in
moving fish away from the intake
and reducing accumulation of
debris.

12 2012
 Fish Barriers & Guidance

Description OF Systems (Cont.) 6

6.2. Downstream Guidance

Downstream guidance
systems are designed to move
downstream-migrating fish from
one location in the channel to
another. Since the fish are moving
with the current, the key is to
get the fish to deviate across a
channel to the desired location
without immobilizing them.
The system uses very short DC
pulses, which create a sensation
much like pins and needles that
do not immobilize the fish or
reduce their swimming ability.
In addition, the electric field is
designed to divert fish around
or cause them to dart upstream
away from the electric field. Fig. 6.14: A conceptual drawing of a downstream guidance array showing fish being
Guidance is achieved by placing moved across the channel towards a bypass flow. Causing the fish to move to the
the electrode array on a diagonal bypass prevents them from being entrained in a turbine or pump intake.
line across the channel. The fish
explore along the electric field
until they enter the bypass area produce an abrupt field edge,
or trapping facility. The angle of which causes fish to be startled
the diagonal array depends on toward open water. Tests have
the species, the size of fish to shown repelling efficiencies
be repelled and the downstream of nearly 100% in static water
water velocity. This system should conditions when an alternate
be located in areas of moderate body of water is available as a
water velocity and positioned refuge (Figure 6.15). This type of
upstream from turbine intakes, barrier system has also been used
pumps, etc. This configuration to corral fish in an embayment
can also be used in waters with of Lake Seminole, Florida. Grass
no velocity to guide fish away carp were introduced into two
from a particular location. Figure embayments to control aquatic Fig. 6.15: A conceptual drawing of a
6.14 shows a conceptual drawing vegetation. In these systems, static water barrier. Note the parasitic
electrodes in the array which produces
of a downstream guidance array. physical fences were constructed a sharp electric field edge, thus
across each embayment, and the increasing the startle effect on the fish.
6.3 Barriers in Static or Low electrical barriers were located at
Velocity Water boat passageways (Figure 6.16).
Barrier or guidance systems
located at sites with no or
very little water velocity are
easier to design because the
water velocity parameter is not
a driving force in the overall
design. Water depth changes,
if any, and water conductivity
are major design considerations.
Systems in static water are
designed to startle and repel the
advancement of moving fish. The
electric field strength is adjusted Fig. 6.16: A photo of a lake embayment
system installed in Lake Seminole,
to remain constant across the Florida. The barrier allows boat
array. Electrical outputs are set to passage, while still containing grass
produce very narrow pulses with carp behind the barrier to control
a slow repeating pulse rate. The aquatic vegetation.
narrow pulses do not immobilize
or reduce a fish’s ability to swim.
The electrode array arrangement
is similar to upstream barriers
except that parasitic electrodes
are placed at each end to

www.SMITH-ROOT.COM 13
Fish Barriers & Guidance

6 Description OF Systems (Cont.)

6.4 Temporary or Seasonal

Applications
Occasionally, situations arise
where a barrier or guidance
system is needed for a short
time period or there is a need
to demonstrate if a permanent
electric barrier is right for a
particular site or species of
interest. To address these
situations, Smith-Root developed
a temporary portable array
that can be deployed at the
site on a short-term basis (e.g.,
blocking or diverting migrating
fish for a short period) or to
demonstrate the feasibility of
installing a permanent barrier.
Each array is custom designed
to fit a particular site and
biological objective. In general,
the array consists of a flexible
mat (e.g., canvas or vinyl sheet)
to which wire rope electrodes Fig. 6.17: A conceptual drawing showing a “typical” portable array deployment in
a stream. Note the vinyl substrate conforms to an irregular channel bottom and
are attached. The mat is laid electronic equipment being housed in a portable trailer. Tests have also been
across the bottom and secured. conducted where the electronics were housed in the back of a pickup with a
The array operates much like a camper shell attached.
permanent barrier, except that it
can be rolled up and transported
easily. A portable array will also
handle moderate undulations
in the stream bottom and can
be designed to fit an irregular
shaped channel.
Figures 6.17 - 6.21 show
conceptual drawings of various
characteristics of a portable
Fig. 6.18: A conceptual drawing showing Fig. 6.20: A conceptual drawing
array and a typical deployment a portable array configuration for showing a typical method used to
in a stream. Portable arrays have deployment in a stream. anchor the upstream edge of a portable
been used to block and guide fall array.
Chinook into an adjacent river
(San Joaquin/Merced rivers in
California), provide a proof of
concept for a larger scale system
(Palisades Creek barrier, Idaho),
and demonstrate that pulsed
DC can be used to deter marine
mammals from migrating up
a river (Puntledge River, B.C., Fig. 6.19: A conceptual drawing showing Fig. 6.21: A conceptual drawing
Canada; discussed in Section 6.5). how the vinyl substrate conforms to an showing a typical method used to
irregular stream bottom. anchor the upstream edge of a portable
array where a concrete sill and regular
stream bottom are present.

14 2012

6.5 Marine Mammal
Deterrence Barriers
and Testing
Populations of California sea
lions and other pinniped species
have increased exponentially
since passage of the Marine
Mammal Protection Act. These
increases have resulted in high
levels of riverine predation on
sensitive species of fish in the
Pacific Northwest, complicating
recovery efforts for the region’s
fishery managers. Growing
numbers of marine mammals
are also damaging docks in
boat mooring basins, posing
challenges for harbormasters.
Smith-Root developed a novel
concept to control marine
mammals using non-lethal,
electric gradients to deter
their foraging behaviors in
rivers and their presence in
harbors, where animal/human
use conflicts occur. A series of
studies and tests (summarized
below) have been conducted
from 2007 to present, to assess
the feasibility of developing
guidance technology for marine
mammal deterrence in the wild.
One of these efforts has resulted
in a workable technology that
is currently in use for marine
mammal deterrence in the Fraser
River, British Columbia, Canada.
The following is a summary of
Smith-Root’s capabilities and
experience in marine mammal
guidance and deterrence over the
past few years:
(1) Deterrence Tests on Captive
Harbor Seals, Vancouver B.C.
Aquarium (2007): This study
comprised the first-known tests
of the effects of a non-lethal,
electric deterrence field on
marine mammals. In partnership
with the Aquarium’s Marine
Mammal Veterinarian, scientists
from the Department of Fisheries
and Oceans Canada, Pacific
Salmon Commission biologists,
and Smith-Root scientists and
engineers, two captive harbor
seals were exposed to gradually
increased voltage gradients in
one of the Vancouver Aquarium’s
large swim tanks where animals
were pre-acclimated. The
Description OF Systems (Cont.) 6
underwater deterrence field was
limited to the far end of their
swim tank. The first harbor seal
was deterred from reaching the
end of the tank in four of four
trials. The second animal was
deterred in 18 of 18 trials. Video
results are available. Both harbor
seals demonstrated extreme
sensitivity to an underwater field
of pulsed DC electricity at levels
below what are now known to
affect most species of fish.
Fig. 6.22: Vancouver Aquarium testing
(2) In-River Deterrence Tests
on British Columbia Harbor
Seals (2007 and 2008): Based
on the successful outcomes in
the swim-tank studies above, a
deterrence barrier was placed
in-situ, into the Puntledge River
near Courtenay, B.C. Initial 2007
trials demonstrated immediate
deterrence of harbor seals as
they swam upstream to forage
on salmon juveniles during an
evening high tide. A weak field
caused five seals to vacate
one of their favorite salmon
predation areas on the first
evening’s tests in the Puntledge
River. The following evening, the
same non-lethal field prevented
about 12 animals from accessing
this known predation area
(which was situated under a
bridge, where deck lighting
illuminated their prey). Seal
deterrence reactions were
immediate.
More comprehensive
assessments were implemented
in 2008 trials in the Puntledge
River. Different electric arrays
were evaluated, and various
field strengths were examined.
With many more animals
present, some challenges were
encountered: embedded stream-
bottom metal may have shorted
www.SMITH-ROOT.COM
Fish Barriers & Guidance
the field and maximum spring
tides in the test area (located
only about 8 km upstream of the
estuary) served to weaken the
field in a few locations, permitting
upstream access by three or four
seals. However, the Smith-Root
electric deterrence barrier still
blocked upstream access for
79% of the seals observed during
those Puntledge River trials.
The pilot investigations
described above all highlight one
important conclusion: marine
mammals are extremely sensitive
to a very mild field of underwater
pulsed DC electricity which can
be used successfully as a marine
mammal barrier and a deterrence
technology for pinniped behavior
modification.
Fig. 6.23: Puntledge array
(3) Seal Deterrence from Pacific
Salmon Commission Test-Fishing
Gillnets in the Fraser River,
B.C. (2008): Seal predation on
returning adult salmon also had
become a serious problem in the
Fraser River B.C. over the past
several years. Foraging seals
were removing salmon from
test-fishing gillnets operated by
the Pacific Salmon Commission
each summer (to determine the
strength of the annual salmon
runs for in-season management
purposes). In addition, seals were
damaging the test gillnets. In
the Commission’s study, half of
a 100-fathom-long, test-fishing
gillnet was electrified with Smith-
Root’s deterrence technology
while the other half served as
the untreated control. Over 30
days of continuous testing, the
electrified end caught six times
as many salmon as the untreated
control end (where seals chose to
forage and reside). Results of this
highly successful demonstration
15
Fish Barriers & Guidance
6 Description OF Systems (Cont.)
project were published by
Canadian scientists in the North
American Journal of Fisheries
Management (see Forrest et al.
2009). The deployment was so
successful that it has become
a mainstay technology of the
Commission each summer to
keep predatory harbor seals
out of test-fishing gillnets in the
Fraser River.
(4) Deterrence Tests on Califor-
nia Sea Lions at Moss Landing
Fig. 6.24: Fraser River seal exclusion
testing, with buoys deployed.
Marine Labs (2008): Tests on
California sea lions (conducted
with Dr. Jenifer Zeligs, an inter-
nationally recognized expert on
marine mammal behavior) also
highlighted the extreme sensi-
tivities of pinnipeds to non-lethal
electric gradients. Following tests
to determine field levels that
animals could discern, deterrence
trials were conducted on four
California sea lions. Successful
deterrence was achieved in all
trials, even when a favorite prey
item (herring) was introduced on
the other side of the deterrence
array. Field trials were conducted
at weak, non-lethal voltage levels.
California sea lions were success-
fully deterred even when food
was present.
Video results of this research
may be found at this link: http://
www.smith-root. com/videos/
moss-landing-sea-lion-testing
(5) Tests of the Sea Lion
Deterrence Field on Fish
(2009): Various studies were
conducted on sturgeon (U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service), Pacific
lamprey, steelhead and Chinook
salmon (USGS Columbia River
Laboratory) to determine the
responses of these fish species
to the sea lion deterrence field.
Although spring Chinook salmon
hesitated when approaching the
16
Fig. 6.25: Moss Landing testing
deterrence field in an extreme,
worst-case trial (continuous,
non-stop operation), extensive
tests on the other three fish
species showed that steelhead,
Pacific lamprey and sturgeon
are not deterred at the sea lion
deterrence level. Results suggest
that selective deterrence of
marine mammals is possible
(especially during intermittent
operation of the array) — and
thus provides an opportunity
to help fishery co-managers
and harbormasters resolve
controversial resource conflicts
with marine mammals.
Fig. 6.26: Before (top) and after
(bottom) sea lion deterrence on docks,
Moss Landing CA
(6) Dock Surface Deterrence
of California Sea Lions at Moss
Landing Harbor District (2012):
This study was conducted early
in 2012. As can be seen in the
2012
photos in Fig. 6.5.5, the Moss
Landing Visitors’ dock is typically
covered by resting California sea
lions nearly every hour of every
day. A complex but highly effec-
tive deterrence field was installed
by Smith-Root and evaluated
by Dr. Jenifer Zeligs. Results
showed 100% success at voltage
gradients nearly imperceptible to
humans. Harbormasters on the
U.S. West Coast face enormous
challenges in keeping marine
mammals off docks to reduce
human/animal use conflicts and
to lessen the potential for struc-
tural damage. Technology is now
available to help them.
6.6 Experimental and Unique
Approaches and Species
Smith-Root scientists and engi-
neers are looking at possible new
deterrence research on unique
species of fish and wildlife. These
include: (1) Florida Manatee:
Under consideration is the pos-
sible use of mild, non-lethal
electric fields to help conserve
the Florida manatee (a species
that is frequently injured by boat
propellers and subject to thermal
shocks or physical damage at
power plant outfalls and river
dredge sites). A demonstration
project is needed.
(2) Saltwater Crocodiles in
Australia: Smith-Root has been
requested to examine the poten-
tial to use underwater electric
fields in coastal Queensland rivers
in Australia, where engineers
must conduct in-water inspec-
tions of bridge footings. Studies
to research the sensitivities of
saltwater crocodiles are under
consideration.
(3) Lungfish, Australian Eels and
Bull Sharks: Various requests
are being considered to develop
deterrence barriers to keep dan-
gerous bull sharks out of coastal
rivers (world-wide locations) and
to protect Australian lungfish and
eels during their downstream
migrations past hydropower and
water reservoir intake sites.
(4) American Alligators:
Research evaluations are planned
with partners in Louisiana to
assess the potential to sedate
large adults for inspections by
alligator farmers.

EQuipment and monitoring infrastructure 7
T he figure at right shows a
typical large-stream electric
fish barrier system. The system
includes six Programmable
Output Waveform (P.O.W.)
pulsators. The pulsators are
serially connected to a group
of submerged electrodes. The
system uses a BP-1.5-P.O.W., with
an input power of 1.5 kilowatts.
Energy is stored in a large
capacitor bank and is discharged
quickly through water, much like
a camera flash. Culvert barriers
typically require only one or two
pulsators. In the case of only
one pulsator, the output can
be split to energize up to three
electrodes.
Fig. 7.1: Top: Constant pulse frequency
and width mode; Bottom: Gated burst
mode.Pulses can be created in a wide
range of rates, widths, and periods.
7.1 Electrical Pulsators
Smith-Root Programmable
Output Waveform pulse
generators (BP 1.5 POW, see
Figure 7.3) output up to 1.5
kilowatts. Pulsed waveforms and
frequencies can be programmed
for optimum fish blocking
or repelling. Pulse width is
adjustable between 0.15 and 10.0
milliseconds. The repetition rate
is adjustable from 0.1 to 10 pulses
per second. They produce a
wide range of DC pulse outputs
to give more stopping power
with less stress to fish.
Each P.O.W. pulsator includes a
microprocessor to control width,
frequency, and period of the
output. A variety of waveforms
can be generated: standard
pulses, sweeping pulse widths,
sweeping frequencies, and gated
bursts. This allows generation
of optimum waveforms that
are effective with a wide range
of species. Smith-Root’s Fish
Barrier Telemetry and Control
System (FBTCS) typically is
required to set up, monitor, and
control the pulsators. Outputs
include:
Fish Barriers & Guidance
Fig. 7.2: Typical barrier installation. Six pulse generators mounted in an environmental
equipment enclosure. Wiring connects underground cables to the electrode array.
Auxiliary power is provided, fueled by propane for quick starting and reliability.
SPECIFICATIONS
Input Voltage, standard 240 volts single phase AC
Input Voltage, special order 120 volts single phase AC
Output Voltage (Pulsed DC) 40, 80, 120, 160, 200 and 240 volts
Maximum Input Power 1,500 watts
Maximum Output Energy 1,525 joules
Output Insulating Rating 5,000 volts
Maximum Output Current 1,200 amps
Pulse Width 0.15 to 10.0 milliseconds
Output Pulse Frequency 0.1 to 10.0 Hz
Dimensions 15.5" W x 10.5" H x 21" D
Weight 100 pounds
Operating Temperature 0 to 35° C (32 to 95° F)
Capacitor Bank 27,000 µfd
Specifications are subject to change without notice.
Standard Pulses: A regular
pattern of on/off times. The
width and period of the pulses
are selected to produce the most
effective pattern.
Gated Bursts: A group of pulses
followed by a longer off-time.
This is often just as effective
as standard pulses, but less
Fig. 7.3: BP-1.5-P.O.W.
stressful to the fish. E
F 01 2
Other Waveforms: Sequences
BCD
34 56
A
789
of pulses sweeping from wide-
ON
PULSE UNIT
MODE ADDRESS
to-narrow width, or sequences
OFF
CIRCUIT BREAKERS WARNING
RISK OF ELECTRICAL SHOCK. PULSÉ TENSION MACHINE
READ INSTALLATION AND OPERATING INTRUCTIONS BEFORE USING. TRIGGER DATA
FOR INDOOR USE ONLY - DO NOT EXPOSE TO RAIN OR MOISTURE.
AVERTISSEMENT
sweeping from high to low
RISQUE DE CHOC ÉLECTRIQUE.
LISEZ L'INSTALLATION ET LES CONSIGNES D'UTILISATION AVANT UTILISATION.
OUTPUT DC pulse 600A 350V 1.5kW POUR L'USAGE D'INTÉRIEUR SEULEMENT - N'EXPOSEZ PAS À LA PLUIE OU À L'HUMIDITÉ.
ATTENTION
BP-1.5 POW PROGRAMMABLE
OUTPUT
TO REDUCE THE RISK OF ELECTRICAL SHOCK, DO NOT REMOVE COVER. WAVEFORM
frequency can be implemented
REFER SERVICING TO QUALIFIED SERVICE PERSONNEL.
1+ 2+
PULSED ATTENTION
VOLTAGE POUR RÉDUIRE LE RISQUE DE CHOC ÉLECTRIQUE, N'ENLEVEZ PAS LA COUVERTURE.
MACHINE RÉFÉREZ-VOUS L'ENTRETIEN AU PERSONNEL DE SERVICE QUALIFIÉ. FISH BARRIER PULSATOR
on special order.
1- 2- U.S. Patent Nos. 5,327,854 and 4,750,451.
Canada Patent No. 1,304,442.
INPUT: 230/240 Volts 10 Amp AC 50/60 Hz. 1 Φ.
IP31
www.smith-root.com
INPUT: 230/240 Volts 10 Amp AC 50/60 Hz. 1 Φ.
AUX. ALARM
THIS PRODUCT IS PROVIDED WITH A MEANS FOR GROUNDING C NO NC
METAL PARTS THROUGH THE GROUNDING PIN OF THE POWER
SUPPLY CORD. DO NOT REMOVE THE GROUNDING PIN.
CE PRODUIT EST ÉQUIPÉ D'DES MOYENS POUR FONDRE DES PIÈCES EN MÉTAL PAR LE PIQUET DE MISE À LA
TERRE DE LA CORDE D'ALIMENTATION D'ÉNERGIE. N'ENLEVEZ PAS LE PIQUET DE MISE À LA TERRE. SERIAL NO.
Fig. 7.4: BP-1.5-P.O.W. rear panel
www.SMITH-ROOT.COM 17
Fish Barriers & Guidance

7 equipment and monitoring (Cont.)

7.2 Monitoring Systems
Each pulsator's waveform is
controlled and monitored by
the Fish Barrier Telemetry and
Control System (FBTCS) via a
fiber optic network. Pulsators
are connected through a star
concentrator. The advantage
is that should any pulsator in
the system fail, the barrier will
remain operational without
disrupting communications
with the remaining pulsators. A
separate trigger loop keeps the
pulsator's outputs synchronous
as required by the system.
The FBTCS system also has
relay contacts for controlling Fig. 7.0: Monitoring center, Chicago Barrier IIB (Photo: US Army Corp of Engineers)
external devices. The system can
be expanded to monitor and/
or control up to 256 devices by
adding a custom interface board.
The control system reports to
remote monitoring locations
via telephone modem or radio
telemetry. Up to four telephone
numbers can be programmed
for it to call in the event of a
problem.
The FBTCS can also receive
remote commands to reconfigure
the pulsator outputs via
telephone or radio modem link.
When connected by modem
to a computer, the FBTCS
system presents menus allowing
remote control and monitoring.
Passwords can be employed to
prevent unauthorized tampering.
The system software provides a
status display, and a keystroke
calls up the menus to give access
to all functions. An event-history
is maintained to record error
conditions. The system can be
interrogated at any time from
a standard touch-tone phone,
in which case the system will Figure 7.7: A typical barrier schematic. Optional extensions are shown in dashed lines.
respond in clear spoken voice.
In the illustration at right the
system monitors water velocity,
temperature and water-level
sensors which can automatically
adjust pulse characteristics to
respond to changes in water
conditions. The system sends an
alarm if preset water parameters
go beyond set limits.

Figure 7.9: Interior of barrier building,

showing BP 1.5 POW pulsers, smart
Figure 7.8: Typical Barrier Building concentrator.

18 2012

Fig. 8.0: Warning signage posted at Chicago Canal, Romeoville, Ill. (Photo USACE)
8.0 Safety
T
here are two areas of concern
for electrical safety. Out
of the water, the Smith-Root
electrical barrier systems are
designed with careful attention
to all national safety codes.
Nevertheless, we require barriers
to be fenced and warning signs
also be posted. In the water, the
water acts as a conductor in the
circuit. The voltage is dissipated
over the length of the field so
that the voltage gradient over
any small length of the field is
much less than the total voltage
applied.
Smith-Root barrier and
behavioral guidance systems are
designed to be non-lethal and to
use only low-frequency pulsed
DC to create electric fields.
Humans are three times more
likely to be harmed by alternating
current (AC) than by DC current,
and it has been shown repeatedly
in the scientific literature that
use of AC can injure fish. Pulse
frequency (especially) and
duration and current can all
contribute to potential damage,
thus Smith-Root typically sets
these values well below the
electrocution threshold of a
typical ground fault interrupter.
Pulse frequencies for barriers
are much lower than those used
in traditional electrofishing.
Our interest for most barriers is
in changing fish behavior, not
achieving galvanotaxis, tetany or
anesthesia.
Fish Barriers & Guidance
Safety 8
Fig. 8.1: Warning light indicates output.
10.0
5.0
1.0
PULSE DURATION
Electrocution threshold for typical adult
Seconds
0.1
0.05
Maximum permitted by UL for class A ground fault interrupter
0.01
Typical ground fault interrupter
Typical pulse duration for SRI pulsators
0.005
0.001
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260
CURRENT (Milliamps passed through chest area)
Fig. 8.2: Effects on humans of an electrical pulse passed through the chest area.
11. Effects on humans of an electrical pulse passed through the chest area.
Adapted fromThe Handbook of Electronic Safety Procedures, Edward A. Lacy. 1982 edition
Vessels can safely pass through
our electrical fields. Metal-hulled
vessels create local short-circuits
(requiring longer fields to ensure
that fish do not find a pathway
through); there are no potential
differences within a hull. Hulls
of insulating materials merely
distort the field by displacing the
conductive water. As occurs in
the Chicago Sanitary and Ship
Canal multiple times per hour,
metal-hulled barges traverse Fig. 8.3: Typical barrier warning sign.
our series of electric barriers for
Asian carp control with no effects
to vessels or occupants. Smith-
Root systems are safe to operate
when done so in accordance with
the design criteria specified for
each unique situation.
Fig.8.4: S m i t h - R o o t c a n p rov i d e
international signage where needed.
www.SMITH-ROOT.COM 19
Fish Barriers & Guidance

9 Applications and research

Potential New Applications and Areas of Research

Sea Lion deterrence test trials in Moss Landing, CA - 2008.

S mith-Root has an active program of research and development to continually improve and
expand upon the capabilities of our pulsed DC electric barrier and guidance systems. Some
examples of current efforts include:

• Development of new electric • Expanding our prototype

wave forms to optimize
electric field characteristics
to increase the effectiveness
of our graduated fields for
specific fish species and
sizes.
• Development of new electric
wave forms to reduce the
potential for injury or harm
to individual fish.
• Conducting modeling
and evaluations of the
optimum way to generate
barrier/guidance fields in
estuarine and full seawater
environments.
marine mammal deterrence
systems for harbor seals and
sea lions to other marine
mammals species.
• Preliminary evaluations of
ways of excluding fish from
hydropower turbine draft
tubes during de-watering
events.
• Deterring or excluding
predators from areas at the
ends of pipes used for fish
releases to reduce mortality.
• Preliminary evaluation of the
physical conditions necessary
to guide or provide a barrier
to downstream-moving
juvenile fish.
If you have a situation where
you think an electric barrier
may help meet your objectives
or you think your situation
may need some special
application of our technology,
please contact our Project
Management Department at
pm@smith-root.com. Smith-
Root is also interested in
partnering with individuals
or entities to develop new
applications for our proven
technology.

20 2012
 Fish Barriers & Guidance

available services 10

10.0 Barrier and Guidance Services Available from Smith-Root, Inc.

S mith-Root's team of scientists, electrical engineers, and civil/structural engineers

is available to help you through the entire decision making process. We can
help define your biological objectives, suggest what type of physical structure and
configuration will best accomplish your objective, and provide the appropriate
electronic equipment to generate the deterrence or guidance field you need.

Smith-Root barrier equipment is covered under a one (1) year Limited Product Warranty. During the one (1)
year warranty period, SRI electronically monitors the site, provided connectivity is available. SRI’s mission is
to resolve any noted issues, and field any questions or concerns of the client in a timely manner.
Smith-Root can provide any or all of the services below:
• Biological and engineering • Complete design services • Periodic maintenance of
evaluation of your objective for your site, including all the barrier and its electronic
and physical site suitability electrical and structural equipment; and
for a barrier or guidance design elements, plus the • Telephone support for any
system; equipment necessary to issue.
• Sale of the appropriately complete the installation;
sized pulse generator, • Turn-key installation
including ensuring that the from design to completed
installation of the equipment construction;
is appropriate for the location;

www.SMITH-ROOT.COM 21
Fish Barriers & Guidance
10 AVailable services
Forservice/maintenance
coverage beyond the one (1) year warranty period, SRI offers an electric fish barrier
contract.
Services may include:
• Power Supply Tests – test
transfer switch mechanism,
check for voltage and spikes
from local power, operation
check of emergency
generator system, check
propane levels, coolant and
oil levels, inspect batteries
and charging system, note
and report any required
repairs to client.
• Equipment Building – Inspect
air conditioning, roof and
gutters, doors and locks,
interior and exterior lighting,
warning lights and signs,
security system and keypad
operation, security gates,
erosion or insect problems,
report any findings to client.
• Reports – Smith-Root will
provide “Electrical Fish
Barrier Inspection Report”
for each inspection to client.
Included in this report is
a copy of the site’s alarm
history with analysis.
• Barrier Monitoring–Provide
technical assistance to client’s
staff to insure effective
electrical field.
22
• Array Tests – check for
corrosion, inspect/repair
junction boxes, load test
electrodes, chart field
strength, and record polarity
measurements.
• Pulsator Tests – check pulse
width and period controls,
check power, test overload
and over-temperature
circuits, check output
waveform, and test spare
pulsator and rotate into
operation.
• FBTCS – test alarm channels
for proper operation, check
reading and reporting of
pulsator output, print and
analyze event history file,
update software as necessary.
We look forward to helping
meet your deterrence and
behavioral guidance needs for
fish and other aquatic species
with our innovative designs and
our state-of-the-art technology.
2012
 Fish Barriers & Guidance

fish barrier sites II

Fish Barriers & Guidance

Fish Barrier sites

II. FISH BARRIER SITES

S mith-Root, Inc. has over two decades of experience designing and

Smith-Root, Inc.fish
installing has barrier
over a decade of experience
systems. Buildingdesigning and installing
on extensive fish barrier systems.
engineering
high-tech monitoring systems, SRI has constructed the most effective fish
and
Building on extensive engineering and high-tech monitoring systems, SRI has constructed
diversion and protection system available. On the following pages are
the most effective
presented fish diversion
a selection and protection
of various system available.
installations aroundOn thetheUnited
following pages are
States.
presented a selection of various installations around the United States.

www.SMITH-ROOT.COM 23
Fish Barriers & Guidance
II fish barrier sites
ATCO Power, Battle River Generating Station
Alberta, Canada
Vertical electrodes mounted on three rows of
HDPE piles across a 15 m constriction in a wide
cooling water canal.
Located approximately 200 kilometers
southeast of Edmonton, the Battle River
Generating Station is a 670 megawatt, coal-
fired power generating station. The fish barrier
is designed to stop upstream migration of fish
into the cooling water discharge of the facility.
Built: 2002
Barrier Type: Upstream
Configuration: 2 x BP-125kW
Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal 2A and 2B
Romeoville, Illinois
Permanent barriers using steel billets on
InsulcreteTM sleepers spanning the 49-m wide by
8-m deep shipping canal.
Designed to block upstream migration of two
species of invasive Asian carp. Scaled to permit
large barges to pass.
Built: 2A built 2006, commissioned 2009; 2B
built 2010, commissioned 2011.
Barrier Type: Upstream to still-water.
Configuration: 1 x BP-1500 kW, 1 x BP-350 kW
24
Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal 1
Romeoville, Illinois
A demonstration electric fish barrier constructed
of bottom mounted steel wire rope electrodes
resting on InsulcreteTM sleepers.
Designed to demonstrate effectiveness of
blocking upstream migration of invasive
Asian carp. Canal is 49 m wide by 8 m deep.
The barrier concept was validated by several
academic studies.
Built: 2002
Barrier Type: Upstream
Configuration: 2 x BP-25kW, 2 x BP-125kW
Heron Lake
Windom, Minnesota
Seven steel flat bar electrodes in slots in
an InsulcreteTM structure with sloping sides.
Used to prevent reinfestation by carp after
restoration of Heron Lake.
Built: 1991
Barrier Type: Upstream
Configuration: 6 x BP-1.5kW POW
2012
 Fish Barriers & Guidance

fish barrier sites II

Mountain Bayou Lake Eagle Creek National Fish Hatchery

St. Landry, Louisiana
Two barriers installed. Both are downstream
barriers intended to contain sterile grass carp
in a cooling-system lake. One has flat bar
electrodes set in an InsulcreteTM structure
(pictured above). The other has flat bar
electrodes over an insulating mat on an
existing weir.
Built: 2011
Barrier Type: Downstream
Configuration: 3 x BP-1.5kW POW
Estacada, Oregon
Railroad iron electrodes mounted on an
InsulcreteTM deck and side walls and a low-water
bypass channel.
The barrier is used to block upstream migration
of spawning salmon. The entrance to the fish
hatchery is below the fish barrier. The salmon
are used for fish hatchery egg production. There
are currently four Smith-Root fish barriers in the
Pacific Northwest used at Salmon hatcheries.
Built: 2003
Barrier Type: Upstream
Configuration: 6 x BP-1.5kW POW

Vessy Pine Creek Barrier

Geneva, Switzerland Irwin, Idaho
Steel flat bar electrodes installed on InsulcreteTM Concrete in an existing weir was replaced
slab and walls. by InsulcreteTM with slots for steel flat bar
Designed to prevent trout from entering power electrodes in the slab and walls. The barrier
station tailrace. diverts fish into a trap for sorting and
separating native cutthroat from invasive
Built: 2008 rainbow trout.
Barrier Type: Upstream Built: 2010
Configuration: 6 x BP-1.5kW POW Barrier Type: Upstream
Configuration: 3 x BP-1.5kW POW

SEE MORE ONLINE

View the entire Smith-Root portfolio of over 40 fish barrier sites - and complete data
on each - at: http://www.smith-root.com/barriers/sites/

www.SMITH-ROOT.COM 25
 Fish Barriers & Guidance

Literature and Reports

www.SMITH-ROOT.COM 27
Fish Barriers & Guidance
11 LIterature and reports
11.0 Published Literature and Monitoring and Evaluation Reports
11.1 PUBLISHED LITERATURE:
Barwick, D.H., and L.E. Miller. 1990. Effectiveness of
an electric barrier in blocking fish movement.
Production Environmental Services Research
Report PES/ 90-07, Duke Power Company,
Huntersville, NC.
Clarkson, R.W. 2004. Effectiveness of Electrical Fish
Barriers Associated with the Central Arizona
Project. North American Journal of Fisheries
Management 24: 94-105.
Dawson, H.A., U. G. Reinhardt, and J. F. Savino. 2006.
Use of Electric or Bubble Barrier to Limit
the Movement of Eurasian Ruffe. Journal of
Great Lakes Research 32: 40-49, International
Association for Great Lakes Research.
Dettmers, J.M., and S.M. Creque 2004. Field
assessment of an electric dispersal barrier
to protect sport fishes from invasive exotic
fishes. Annual Report to Division of Fisheries,
Illinois Department of Natural Resources,
Illinois Natural History Survey, Lake Michigan
Biological Station, Zion, IL 60099. Federal
Aid Project Report F-150-R. 20 pp.
Forrest, K.W., J.D. Cave, C.J. Michielsens, M. Haulena
and D.V. Smith. 2009. Evaluation of an
electric gradient to deter seal predation on
salmon caught in gill-net test fisheries. North
American Journal of Fisheries Management
29: 885-894.
Harlan, L., D. Smith, M. Holliman, C. Burger, G.
Taccogna, D. Miller, B. Munro, P. Olesiuk, S.
Baillie, I. Matthews, and G. Bonnell. 2009.
Evaluation of an electrical barrier as a seal
deterrent on the Puntledge River. Prepared
by Smith-Root, Inc. and Department of
Fisheries and Oceans Canada for the Pacific
Salmon Commission, Southern Boundary
Restoration & Enhancement Committee,
Vancouver, BC.
Holliman, F.M. 2011. Operational protocols for
electrical barriers on the Chicago Sanitary
and Ship Canal: Influence of electrical
characteristics, water conductivity, fish
behavior, and water velocity on risk for
breach by small silver and bighead carp.
Available from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Great Lakes and Ohio River District,
Cincinnati, OH (123 pp).
Maceina, M.J., J.W. Slipke, and J.M. Grizzle. 1999.
Effectiveness of three barrier types for
confining grass carp in embayments of Lake
Seminole, Georgia. North American Journal
of Fisheries Management 19: 968-976.
Moy, P., C. B. Shea, J. M. Dettmers, and I. Polls.
2005. Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal
aquatic nuisance species dispersal barriers.
Proceedings of the 2005 Governor’s
Conference on the management of the Illinois
River System (“The Illinois River: Progress
and Promise”). Tenth Biennial Conference,
October 4-6, 2005. Peoria, IL.
28
Moy, P., I. Polls, and J. M. Dettmers. 2011. The Chicago
Sanitary and Ship Canal aquatic nuisance
species dispersal barrier. Pages 121-137 in D.
C. Chapman and M. H. Hoff, editors. Invasive
Asian Carps in North America. American
Fisheries Society Symposium 74. Bethesda,
MD.
Palmisano, A. N. and C.V. Burger. 1988. Use of a
portable electric barrier to estimate Chinook
salmon escapement in a turbid Alaskan
river. North American Journal of Fisheries
Management 8: 475-480.
Reclamation District Number 108, 1997. State of
California RD 108 Executive Summary for
Wilkins Slough Fish Entrainment Study, P.O.
Box 50, Grimes, California.
Rozich, T. J. 1989. Evaluation of the Pere Marquette
River electrical lamprey barrier. Report to
Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
Seelye, J. G. 1989. Evaluation of the Ocqueoc River
electrical weir for blocking sea lampreys.
USGS Great Lakes Science Center Report,
Hammond Bay Biological Station, Millersburg,
MI.
Service de l’Électricité. 2009. Centrale
Hydroelectrique de Vessy. Suivi du système
de repulsion des poisons (suivi de mise en
service) (In French). Report to Service de
l’Électricité, Geneva, Switzerland by GREN
Biologie Appliquée Sari, Geneva, Switzerland.
Sparks, R.E., T.L. Barkley, S.M. Creque, J.M. Dettmers,
and K.M. Stainbrook. 2011. Evaluation of an
electric fish dispersal barrier in the Chicago
Sanitary and Ship Canal. Pages 139-161 in D.
C. Chapman and M. H. Hoff, editors. Invasive
Asian Carps in North America. American
Fisheries Society Symposium 74. Bethesda,
MD.
Swink, W.D. 1999. Effectiveness of an electrical barrier
in blocking a sea lamprey spawning migration
on the Jordan River, Michigan. North
American Journal of Fisheries Management
19: 397-405.
Savino, J.F., D.J. Jude, and M.J. Kostich. 2001. Use of
electric barriers to deter movement of round
goby. Pages 171-182 in C. Coutant, editor.
Behavioral Technologies for Fish Guidance.
American Fisheries Society Symposium 26.
Bethesda, MD.
Zeligs, J. and C. Burger. 2008. Behavioral deterrence
responses of captive California sea lions
to a mild, electric voltage gradient at Moss
Landing Marine Labs, CA. Unpublished
technical memorandum by Moss Landing
Marine Laboratory to Smith-Root, Inc.,
Vancouver, WA.
Verrill, D. D. and C.R. Berry. 1995. Effectiveness of
an electrical barrier and lake drawdown for
reducing common carp and bigmouth buffalo
abundances. North American Journal of
Fisheries Management 15: 141-141.
2012

11.2 REPORTS
EVALUATION OF A GRADUATED ELECTRIC
FIELD AS A FISH EXCLUSION DEVICE PREPARED
FOR PUGET SOUND POWER AND LIGHT
COMPANY (Quilcene Fish Hatchery) Final Report
May 1992
Prepared by: Phil J. Hilgert, Beak Consultants
Incorporated.
1990 TASK FORCE MONITORING RESULTS FOR
THE SALT RIVER PROJECT’S ELECTRICAL FISH
BARRIERS BELOW GRANITE REEF DAM – SOUTH
AND ARIZONA CANAL ELECTRICAL FISH
BARRIERS
PREPARED BY: United States Department of the
Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Arizona Project
Office
EVALUATION OF THE PERE MARQUETTE RIVER
ELECTRICAL LAMPREY BARRIER
PREPARED BY: Thomas J. Rozich, Fisheries Habitat
Biologist, Fisheries Division, Michigan Department of
Natural Resources, October 11, 1989
EVALUATION OF THE OCQUEOC RIVER
ELECTRICAL WEIR FOR BLOCKING SEA
LAMPREYS
PREPARED BY: James G. Seelye, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Hammond Bay Biological Station,
11188 Ray Road, Millersburg, MI 49759, December
27, 1989
GUIDANCE EFFICIENCY OF A FLOW
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM – ELECTRIC BARRIER
IN REDUCING JUVENILE CHINOOK SALMON
ENTRAINMENT AT THE RECLAMATION DISTRICT
108 WILKINS SLOUGH DIVERSION: 1995 FIELD
STUDIES AND EVALUATION
EFFECTIVENESS OF AN ELECTRICAL BARRIER
IN BLOCKING FISH MOVEMENTS
PREPARED BY: D. H. Barwick and L. E. Miller, 1990,
Duke Power Company, 13339 Hagers Ferry Road,
Huntersville, NC 28078
www.SMITH-ROOT.COM
Fish Barriers & Guidance
LIterature and reports (cont.) 11
EFFECTIVENESS OF AN ELECTRICAL BARRIER
IN BLOCKING A SEA LAMPREY SPAWNING
MIGRATION ON THE JORDAN RIVER, MICHIGAN
PREPARED BY: William D. Swink, U.S. Geological
Survey, Biological Resources Division, Great Lakes
Science Center, Hammond Bay Biological Station,
11188 Ray Road, Millersburg, MI 49759
USE OF ELECTRICAL BARRIERS AS A
DETERRENT TO DOWNSTREAM MOVEMENT OF
ROUND GOBIES
PREPARED BY: Jacqueline F. Savino, Great Lakes
Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, 1451 Green
Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48105
David J. Jude, Center for Great Lakes and
Aquatic Sciences, University of Michigan, 501 East
University, Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Melissa J. Kostich, Great Lakes Science Center, U.S.
Geological Survey
EFFECTIVENESS OF THREE BARRIER TYPES FOR
CONFINING GRASS CARP IN EMBAYMENTS OF
LAKE SEMINOLE, GEORGIA
PREPARED BY Michael J. Maceina, Jeffery W.
Slipke, and John M. Grizzle
Department of Fisheries and Allied Aquacultures,
Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station,
Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama 36849
The above reports are available upon request.
Please visit our website or contact Project
Management at pm@smith-root.com
29
 ® ®

SMITH-ROOT,
SMITH-ROOT, INC.
INC.
14014
14014 NE Salmon
NE Salmon Creek
Creek Ave.Ave.
Vancouver,
Vancouver, WAWA 98686
98686 USAUSA
360.573.0202
360.573.0202 Voice
Voice
360.573.2064
360.573.2064 FAXFAX
info@smith-root.com
info@smith-root.com
www.smith-root.com
www.smith-root.com