Station 1

Archived Posts from this Category

AN INSENSITIVITY OF PLACE

Posted by on 29 May 2016 | Tagged as: 5-year FERC licensing process, AMC, American Whitewater, Appalachian Mountain Club, By Pass Reach, Connecticut River, Connecticut River ecosystem, Connecticut River shortnose sturgeon, Connecticut River Watershed Council, CRWC, Dead Reach, ecosystem, endangerd shortnose sturgeon, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, federally-endangered shortnose sturgeon, FERC Comments, Gary Sanderson, Greenfield Recorder, New England FLOW, Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Station, Rock Dam, Rock Dam Pool, Station 1, The Recorder, Turners Falls, Turners Falls dam, whitewater boating

An Insensitivity of Place

Copyright © 2016 by Karl Meyer (CLICK on any photo to ENLARGE)

DSCF8475

There’s a big difference between theory and practice. So too is there often a huge divide between what is said and what is done—and a giant gap between how you portray your intentions in writing, and how you actually carry yourself in the real world. The difference between those things is what most often turns out to be true.

At the Rock Dam, the endlessly-beleaguered and sole natural spawning site for the state- and federally-endangered shortnose sturgeon in the entire Connecticut River system, that difference came into high resolution last week. While I looked on four people in helmets and safety gear lumbered in a huge blue raft over the tiny, watered notch leading into that self-same shortnose sturgeon spawning pool. Four other decked-out compadres looked on admiringly from atop the low ledge that helped form this little ancient pool thousands of years back.

The “drop” for this joyride might have been a total of 4 feet at best, perhaps a third of the length of the giant boat. For any shortnose sturgeon that might have been using this unique ecological site to accomplish the most basic act of survival—spawning, it would’ve been the equivalent of the Starship Enterprise plopping down atop your kiddy pool party. Basically, party over. But hey, those fish are only the sole federally-endangered migratory species in the entire river. Hope you enjoyed the ridiculously short, half-second rush… Yahoo!

And the real kicker is, they were doing this within the known documented time-window at Rock Dam for shortnose sturgeon to be present and attempting to spawn successfully. This was a Sunday, but the previous Wednesday I’d seen rafts being trailered away from the site in the “Patch” section of Turners Falls. I didn’t quite put it together until Gary Sanderson’s column came out in The Recorder the next day, noting the obtuseness of rafters and kayakers he’d seen repeatedly making the same disrespectful maneuvers at Rock Dam earlier in the week.

DSCF8472

But here’s the theory and practice divide. During the current 5-year Federal Energy Regulatory Commission relicensing hearings for the Turners Falls and Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage projects, these whitewater groups have been at the table advocating for increased flows and access for the public on this short section of river. Chief among these have been American Whitewater and New England FLOW, with the Appalachian Mountain Club partnered with the Connecticut River Watershed Council submitting formal testimony in favor of whitewater boating interests here.

AMC and the Watershed Council in submitted testimony are advocating opening up this most-biologically-damaged stretch of the river for the last half century to increased access at three sites over a tiny reach that is just 2.7 miles long: “Improvements would need to be made to a put-in at the upstream end of the run downstream of Turners Falls dam, the take-out at Poplar Street, and access at No. 1 station and at the Rock Dam.” I wonder how many boats, rafts and cars per mile of river that constitutes.

DSCF8476

All groups in their statements and submitted testimony made reference to their concerns for the protection of aquatic habitats here, as well as adherence to the Clean Water Act in this Dead Reach stretch of the Connecticut that includes the extremely critical spawning habitat of the shortnose sturgeon—which consists solely of the small, semi-circular pool that forms below Rock Dam–along with its tiny little 4 foot drop. Shortnose congregate at Rock Dam for spawning from early April through the end of May. Let’s run giant rafts over them and invite crowds of kayakers to overwhelm the river and rocks here to demonstrate respect and concern for a river struggling for life here these last 50 years.

This is self-interested behavior only a little removed from that of the power companies, and, like the power companies, there is cash waiting in the wings for using the river in this most self-considered way. So, well done, whitewater boating interests! We at least now have a tiny picture of what your practice, rather than theory, might constitute. And, hey, did it ever cross your minds that some people actually consider the Rock Dam a sacred place..?

INFORMATION BLACK HOLE on the Connecticut

Posted by on 05 May 2016 | Tagged as: American shad, Connecticut River, federal trust fish, FirstLight, GDF-Suez FirstLight, Greenfield Community College, Holyoke Community College, Holyoke Fish Lift, Jack Buckley, MA Division of Fish and Wildlife, New Hampshire, Northfield Mountain, shad, shad fishing, Station 1, teachers, Turners Falls, Turners Falls dam, Turners Falls power canal, US Fish & Wildlife Service, USFWS, Vermont, Walpole, Wendi Weber

P1000385

INFORMATION BLACK HOLE

Copyright © 2016 by Karl Meyer

On this May 5th, 2016, they have no idea in Sunderland–or in Deerfield for that matter. Nor do they know anything in Greenfield, Turners Falls, Gill, Northfield or Millers Falls. Upstream, Vermont folks in Vernon, Guilford, Brattleboro and Putney don’t have a clue. Across the river, New Hampshire people in Hinsdale, Chesterfield, Walpole and Charlestown remain in the dark.

What these towns all have in common is that nobody can tell them anything of the whereabouts of their share of the spring American shad run. The fish have been in the river and upstream of Holyoke for a full five weeks now, and there hasn’t been a single fish count provided from the Greenfield Community College students hired by GDF-Suez FirstLight to monitor fish passage at Turners Falls. An accounting of the public’s fish remains in the hands of a private company—and, as I’ve said before, many or most are likely struggling to survive a trip through their private power canal.

For a migrating shad, the 36 mile swim from Holyoke to Turners Falls is a walk in the park. It’s a day—maybe a day-and-a-half trip, ostensibly on the way to spawning habitats in Vermont and New Hampshire. But thousands of the public’s fish have gone missing on the Connecticut River this spring. And it seems no one can say exactly where they are. If you had to make an educated guess, you could surmise many are somewhere between Greenfield and Turners Falls, with many not in the actual river at all.

A significant number are fighting currents in the debased habitats of the Turners Falls power canal, where murky flows delay most by over a week before they even approach the site that could route them past the dam. Others are in the river, trying to find a path to the base of a fish ladder whose construction back in 1980 was based on Pacific salmon. And still others are sidetracked and stalled in the riverbed like sardines, expending precious migratory and spawning energy in front of the ramping outflows at a mini overflow power site known as Station 1. Wherever those fish may be, we do know that, on average over time, just 4% of those shad ever make it beyond Turners Falls Dam toward Vermont and New Hampshire. In the very few “good” years, one fish in ten wriggles upstream.

We also know that the first two American shad were lifted past Holyoke Dam five weeks ago. As of May 4, 2016, some 25,000 had been passed upstream at the Holyoke Fish Lift. What happened to them next is anyone’s guess. Once they pass Holyoke, accounting for them is left in the hands of a private power company—currently GDF-Suez FirstLight Hydro, now going under the corporate aegis Engie. These are the folks responsible for passing the public’s fish at Turners Falls Dam, and giving public accounts of fish passage for anglers, teachers, the general public, and the state and federal fish agencies.

It’s been documented that at least half of all the shad passing Holyoke will attempt to pass Turners Falls. It’s wholly possible the actual number is significantly higher. It matters little though, as all fish get diverted into the Turners Falls Power Canal once they attain this easy upstream reach, and only that average of 4% make it past the TF Dam. The rest simply go unaccounted for once they arrive and are tempted into that turbine-lined pit.

Five full weeks since fish have been heading upstream, and that includes sea lamprey as well. Yet we still do not have a single fish passage update at Turners Falls. What’s wrong here? Who is responsible?? Well, obviously FirstLight GDF-Suez is responsible. But, nobody is holding them to it. These fish, while moving through Massachusetts, are the responsibility of the US Fish & Wildlife Service. But, while here, they in large part fall under the responsibility of the MA Division of & Wildlife. Why aren’t they ensuring the public gets daily fish updates—like those that have been available at Holyoke Dam for years? Again, go fish…

At Holyoke Dam there are actually humans on-site that can witness real-time conditions, fish passage, and provide the needed public info in a timely manner. These come via students from Holyoke Community College. Not so at Turners Falls, where the Commonwealth has largely left responsibility for the chicken coop up to the fox. All monitoring is done remotely by video, with equipment provided by FirstLight. Prior years show repeated equipment failures. And then you have to wait—often many WEEKS, before those videos are handed off and analyzed by GCC interns. Its only then that we are treated to weeks-out-of-date info about where our fish are.

This privatization needs to change. Wendi Weber, Region 5 Director at the USFWS might be able to help. Or MA Division of Fish & Wildlife Director Jack Buckley. Or, perhaps, MADFW’s Caleb Slater, Anadramous Fish Passage Project Director. The guy at FirstLight responsible if Bob Stira.

As a side note: many other states have actuarial tables that put specific monetary values on migratory and resident fish. Then, if they are killed in project operations, or fish do not reach their spawning grounds, the public is reimbursed for the ecological damages.

Updated HOLYOKE fish counts can be accessed at:
www.fws.gov/r5crc under Recreation.

FERC Stakeholder comments: Turner Falls Canal ultrasound study

Posted by on 06 Feb 2016 | Tagged as: American shad, Cabot Station, Connecticut River shortnose sturgeon, Dr. Boyd Kynard, endangerd shortnose sturgeon, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, federally-endangered shortnose sturgeon, FERC, FirstLight, Fish and Aquatics Study Team, GDF-Suez FirstLight, Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Station, Relicensing, Revised Study Plan, Rock Dam, Rock Dam Pool, Secretary Kimberly Bose, shad, Station 1, Turners Falls, Turners Falls dam, Turners Falls power canal

Karl Meyer, M.S.
85 School Street # 3
Greenfield, MA, 01301
January 28, 2016

The Honorable Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
88 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20426

RE: P-1889 and P-2485, ILP for Turners Falls/Cabot Station and the Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Project

Dear Secretary Bose,

The following comments pertain to an RSP and failures on the part of FirstLight Hydro Generating Company in following FERC’s SDL on Study 3.3.19 and Study 3.3.2. They were shared with FirstLight’s team and FERC’s Brandon Cherry on January 20, 2016:

As one of the requesters for an ultrasound study at Cabot Station, here are my comments, suggestions and observations for ways to gain the best applicable results from Study 3.3.19-Evaluate the Use of an Ultrasound Array to Facilitate Upstream Movement to Turners Falls Dam by Avoiding Cabot Station Tailrace.

Unfortunately, FirstLight has not provided Stakeholders with any preliminary findings from the telemetry data gathered in Study 3.3.2, which would be a great help in addressing any changes or improvements needed for a successful 3.3.19 Ultrasound Study.

As stated in their Study Determination Letter under Discussion and Staff Recommendations, FERC was very clear that 3.3.2 information on: (1) “delay,” (2) “bypass flows,” and (3) “effects of Station 1 operations on upstream shad migrations,” be brought over and included in the design recommendations for 3.3.19:

“These evaluation data can be used to inform the methods and design of this study (e.g., ultrasound array design, layout, and placement; array testing at appropriate bypass flows) (section 5.9(b)(6)).”

FERC further stated in their SD Letter to FirstLight, “The amended study 3.3.19 should address stakeholder comments and recommendations. If FirstLight does not adopt a recommendation, FirstLight should provide its reasoning based on project-specific circumstances (e.g. Study 3.3.2 results).”

Revised Study Plan 3.3.19 ignores FERC’s guidance on the inclusion and application of “bypass flows” and “effects of Station 1 operations on upstream shad migrations” in its design. Neither key issue is addressed in their proposal. Bypass flows, which are key to any application of acoustic guidance to keep shad moving upstream in the Bypass, are not included at all. Stakeholders originally requested this Study be done for two years, with bypass flows tested throughout.

Further, the only mention of Station 1 is in a footnote, without any reference to testing its effects “on upstream shad migration operations.” FirstLight merely notes that hourly data on discharges at that site will be included—with no insight on how that data would be applicable if fish are not monitored for migratory delay, with and without flows, emanating from that site.

Since the thrust of the Study is aimed at getting fish up through the Bypass, I question why just three monitoring sites are suggested to be deployed upstream of Cabot Station itself.

• Sonic guidance at Cabot should be deployed in such a way that it encourages upstream movement as much as possible—and avoids biasing fish movements toward downstream retreat. It should also be deployed in a way that, when in ON mode, it also ensonnifies the entrance to Cabot Ladder, as the thrust of the study is to have fish avoid the power canal.

• Ensonification should NOT be engaged in two hour increments, as this would likely be a source of stress and disorientation for fish. Employ the tests in 24 hour cyles, one full day on, one full day off.

• Data should also be provided on the hourly operation and number of gates open at the Emergency Spill Gates off the Canal at Cabot.

• I’d suggest removing the monitor upstream of the mouth of the Deerfield and placing it at the Rock Dam pool, a site where shad–and anglers have a historic presence in the Bypass. The agencies, as well as the anglers, are concerned with finding out where fish gather and stall in this reach on their way northern MA, VT, and NH.

• Another monitor needs to be placed at Station 1, another known fishing site. I interviewed a fisherman there last year with Station 1 running. There were scores of fish visible, treading water in the outflow. He flatly said there are “always shad here” when Station 1 is generating.

• Station 1 should be monitored and switched On and Off in tandem with the Cabot ensonification to highlight impacts, false attraction, drop-backs to Rock Dam and elsewhere, and delays.

• Flow data, hours and number of units in operation, and any interruptions in flow at Station 1 should be included in the Study.

• Several more monitors need to be deployed at the Dam and the Spillway entrance to capture the early, freshet aggregation of fish there—as this is what’s at the core of this study.

• Given that this study will only have one sampling season, it is vitally important that it has enough reach to be applicable for informing a hydro-relicensing that may remain in place for two decades. One month testing and data collection is needed at minimum.

• Further, given the “drop out” rate for handled fish, the number of tagged fish included from FirstLight’s consultants should be doubled to 200, in order to have an acceptable sample entering the project reach.

• Test flows from May 15th through mid-June: two weeks at 5,000 CFS; third week at 4,000 CFS. The final week should be at a minimum of 2,500 CFS—which, as FL has indicated in their response to a new Stakeholder Study suggested at the Rock Dam for shortnose sturgeon spawning: 2,500 CFS is the absolute minimum, uninterrupted flow necessary through the Bypass from April 25 – May 22, in order to not interfere with the spawning of a federally endangered species and be subject to court action. In their response, FL cited “Kynard” et al. Minimum flows to keep SNS embryos and eggs motile, watered, and viable are required throughout the month of June.

Thank you,
Karl Meyer, Fish & Aquatics Study Team

New comments to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Posted by on 16 Nov 2015 | Tagged as: 5-year FERC licensing process, American shad, canal shad, Connecticut River, Connecticut River shortnose sturgeon, Dr. Boyd Kynard, Extinction, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, federal trust fish, federally-endangered shortnose sturgeon, FERC, FERC license, FERC licensing process, FirstLight, GDF-Suez FirstLight, migratory delay, power canal studies, Public Comment period, Relicensing, Revised Study Plan, Rock Dam, Rock Dam Pool, shad, shad fishing, shortnose sturgeon, Station 1, Turners Falls, Turners Falls dam, Turners Falls power canal, Vermont

The following comments were submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on November 13, 2015, respecting relicensing studies occurring at the Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Station and at the Turners Falls Dam and Canal. They are designated, respectively as: P-2485; and P-1889.

Karl Meyer, M.S. Environmental Science
85 School Street # 3
Greenfield, MA, 01301
413-773-0006 November 13, 2014

The Honorable Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
88 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20426

ILP COMMENTS on Updated Study Reports—including Disagreements/Modifications to Study/Propose New Study on Turners Falls Hydroelectric Project P- 1889, and Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Project P-2485.

Dear Secretary Bose,

The Turners Falls Hydroelectric Project, P-1889, and the Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Project, P-2485, are currently undergoing studies through the 5-year FERC relicensing process. The majority of the fish and aquatics studies remain incomplete at this time. However, having attended the recent study update meetings with FirstLight’s consultants, and as a member of the Fish & Aquatics Studies Team for P-2485 and P-1889, please accept these brief comments on the USR and proposals for modifications and new studies needed in the FERC ILP for these projects. As studies are brought to completion and data and results are shared with Stakeholders I will submit further comments.

3.3.2 Evaluate Upstream and Downstream Passage of American Shad

Needed information from this study: from personal observations I noted many days when Station 1 was in operation. I visited the site, took some photos, and interviewed a fisherman who was busy catching shad at the Station 1 Outflow on 5/24/2015. In good light, and without the advantage of polarizing sunglasses, I observed dozens of shad stacked up like cordwood, treading water there. The gentlemen noted that whenever Station 1 is running “there are always fish here.” The report should include information about tagged fish delayed in this false attraction water. It is also critical to delineate the number of days during testing that Station 1 was in operation.

3.3.6 Impact of Project Operations on Shad Spawning, Spawning Habitat and Egg Deposition in the Area of the Northfield Mountain and Turners Falls Projects.

In their update the applicant’s team stated that “because minimal shad spawning was observed in the Turners Falls Canal, no spawning areas in the canal were identified for further examination.”

Needed information from this study: at what hour, on what dates, and under what conditions were these “minimal” spawning observations made? Did they return to the site again under different, or more favorable conditions? What was the water temperature? Was it raining? Windy? Cloudy? Was Cabot Station running at the time-and how many units? Was Station 1 in operation on the nights they made their observations?

These are basic questions that require adequate answers as the TF Canal has been the bottleneck for the shad run up through Northern Massachusetts and into Vermont and New Hampshire these last 40 years. The canal appears to be culling off part of the run as a spawning trap. A thorough understanding of why fish are lingering there, and clear assessment of the numbers and delays of fish attempting to spawn in the canal is necessary for informed decision making.

3.3.18 Impacts of the Turners Falls Canal Drawdown on Fish Migration and Aquatic Organisms.

Needed information from this study: This study needs to be extended for another year. On October 5, 2015, I took a 20-minute walk through a small segment of the canal at 7:00 a.m. on the morning the canal had drained. On the flats far–from the thalweg where most of the 2014 assessment appears to have taken place, thousands of fish lay struggling, stranded, and dead in the drying pools. These included juvenile American shad, yellow perch, juvenile and “transformer” sea lamprey, one 8-inch chain pickerel, one crayfish, and thousands of tiny, unidentified YOY fish in drying pools and rills that led to nowhere.

These observations were made crossing just a few—out of the many acres, of silt and muck “shoulder habitat” that occurs away from the main channel on both the east and west sides of the TF Canal. A more thorough mortality assessment needs to be made across these habitats to have a full understanding of the impacts of the canal drawdown migrating and resident fish.

REQUEST for New Study: Tagging and Spawning Study of the Connecticut River Shortnose Sturgeon at the Rock Dam Pool in Turners Falls.

The USFWS’s fish passage and dam specialist John Warner reports that both downstream and upstream modifications for fish passage at Holyoke Dam will be completed this winter. New entrances and exits allowing CT River SNS to move upstream beyond that site will be working in spring 2016.

In light of the construction at Holyoke and the 2016 continuation of test flows evaluations on spring migrants in the By-Pass Reach at Turners Falls, testing of spawning success for SNS should be done at their documented natural spawning site–the Rock Dam in Turners Falls, in spring 2016. Regardless of any fine tuning needed at the Holyoke facility, some SNS will return to the Rock Dam pool by the last week of April, and the chance to study their spawning success in light of regulated test flows presents a unique opportunity for the only federally endangered migratory fish on the Connecticut River.

If this fish is ever to benefit from new genetic input, a full understanding of suitable flows at Rock Dam to accommodate spawning is necessary information going forward for a fish that has been decades on the cusp of extinction. It’s an opportunity to restore a part of the public trust.

For further information on longstanding research at this site without required test flows, see Kynard, B. and Kieffer, M.C., et al: Life History and Behaviour of Connecticut River shortnose and other sturgeons, published in 2102 by the World Sturgeon Conservation Society, ISBN 978-3-8448-2801-6.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the USR for these projects.

Sincerely,
Karl Meyer, M.S. Environmental Science
Greenfield, MA

The Great Eddy at Bellows Falls

Posted by on 27 May 2015 | Tagged as: American shad, Bellows Falls, Bellows Falls Fishway, Cabot Station, Connecticut River, Connecticut River ecosystem, Dead Reach, GDF-Suez FirstLight, migratory delay, New Hampshire, Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Project, Northfield Mountain Pumped Storage Station, power canal studies, Rock Dam, Rock Dam Pool, shad, shad fishing, Station 1, The Great Eddy, Turners Falls, Turners Falls dam, Turners Falls power canal, US Fish & Wildlife Service, USFWS, Vermont, Walpole

BFallsdam
May, 27, 2015. I happened to be at Bellows Falls High School yesterday, and I took a walk into town and over to the Connecticut River at the now-closed Vilas Bridge. Just downstream of here and pictured above is a place formerly known as the Great Eddy. Here, prior to the completion of the Turners Falls Dam in 1798–the first dam to span the entire Connecticut, historic accounts recall 1,200 shad being pulled from the river at a single haul of the net. This picture was taken a few years ago, my batteries proved exhausted as I stood looking downstream yesterday.

There were two young guys far below, fishing in the shadow of the bridge, just downstream of the Bellows Falls Dam. When I hollered down they said yes, the fishing was good, “A rainbow and some bass.” Thus, today, it is rare for a single shad to reach Bellows Falls, the upstream limit of their historic reach. It is harder still to imagine that this place was once a key part of an ecosystem connected to the OCEAN.

I got a note from John Howard, GDF-Suez FirstLight’s Director of Hydro Compliance on Monday. He assured me that those scores of American shad stalled by false attraction flows roaring down from Station 1 had been worked out and agreed to by the USFWS as part of a flexible test flow grid due to an absence of rain. He’d neglected to forward the new test flow schedule to the Fish and Aquatics Studies Team. I imagine those shad burning up their energies would’ve liked to have had a heads-up as well. Their destination–as is the professed destination of the Connecticut River anadromous fisheries restoration these last 48 years, has been to REACH Bellows Falls, VT, and Walpole, NH.

Head gate flow at the TF Dam today, Wednesday, was again lamb-gentle. Of all the years I’ve witnessed flows pouring out of those head gates in the midst of fish passage season, this is the quietest I’ve ever seen them. Canal head gate flow and power generation from the canal at Station 1 and Cabot Station will all need to be looked at carefully in these studies to tease out any biases. (Click to enlarge photo).P1000457

Meanwhile, there were still shad being taken at The Rock Dam Pool this afternoon. I was headed down the path about 3:30 pm and a guy was walking out with a pole and his two energetic labs. He cautioned the wet dogs to give me a wide birth and I asked how it had been. “Not bad,” he said, “Better this morning.” I took a second look at the gentlemen and said, “Hi Jake, how are you?” “Doing OK, how about you?” Jake was part of the maintenance and grounds crew up at Northfield Mountain under Northeast Utilities when I was working at the Visitor Center some dozen years back.

“You still writing letters?” he asked. “I’m doing what I can.” “Good,” Jake replied, “Give it to ’em. Good luck!” Funny, but I bump into many folks who used to work there and there seems to be little sympathy for the company–or lingering loyalty.

P1000460
When I get down to the Rock Dam Pool three people are angling. The guy here has a shad on the line. Another guy, just a bit upstream toward the dam hooks one two or three minutes later. I head out, continuing downstream by bike. (Click to enlarge)
P1000466
Looking upstream from the deck of the General Pierce Bridge in Montague City, much of the riverbed is exposed due to the low flows. At top, far right, is the outfall and attraction flow at Cabot Station, which is likely to be attracting and capturing a good slug of the migrating fish–steering them out of the river to the ladder that will dump them into the power canal. (Click to enlarge)

On “false attraction” at Turners Falls

Posted by on 24 May 2015 | Tagged as: American shad, canal shad, Connecticut River, Connecticut River ecosystem, False attraction, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FERC, FERC licensing process, FirstLight, Fish passage results, Holyoke Fish Lift, New Hampshire, Relicensing, Rock Dam, Rock Dam Pool, shad, shad fishing, Station 1, Test flows, Turners Falls, Turners Falls dam, Turners Falls power canal, Vermont

On “false attraction” at Turners Falls

No, this is not about sex—well OK, maybe a little. But it’s different than how you might see someone 200 yards up the trail and think, “Wow, looking good!”—only to discover on a closer pass that they are a different sex than the one that drives you, or they are decades older or younger than the person you were expecting to see. This is about spawning though—about squashing the spawning efforts of migratory fish.

False Attraction Flow is a phenomenon where migratory fish follow flows upstream that lead them to impassable barriers. These flows are created by flood and head gate releases at dam and canal sites, and they keep wild fish expending precious energy that would otherwise be used to swim to upstream river reaches to spawn.

5/24/2015 Today, FERC Relicensing Study test flow releases to the riverbed at Turners Falls Dam are set at 2,500 cubic feet per second. The weather is clear, warm.
P1000454

At 1p.m. I visit the ancient Rock Dam site on the Connecticut, where three people are fishing—a woman and two young men. The woman has just landed a shad. She has not been here long.

One young guy is just upstream. He says he’s been getting some hits, but nothing landed. He notes that he’s also a recent arrival.

I clamber up the cliff that looks down on the Rock Dam Pool. Shad are looping by in a constant stream, visible just to the outer edge of the bubbly rip. The light is so good I can see them almost straight down beneath me, as they are only five feet out from the cliff face at times. What is also apparent is that some turn back after making the approach to the whitewater that would take them through notches they must best to pass this natural falls. I see many turn in the current–cutting back against the school, then milling for a bit in the current.
(Below, is the flow downstream, away from Rock Dam–two people with fish poles are in kayaks)
P1000443

All the while, the stream of shad beneath me trying to find a way upstream is constant. Always a run of more fish—ten, twenty–hard to get a count as they spurt along. The spectacle is reminiscent of the old medieval representation of the ocean’s fish in constant circulation around the globe. Here, they simply keep appearing in an endless line. There is no telling if the 2,500 cfs is just too low for them to risk the rough, rocky edges of the Rock Dam’s clefts to move ahead. They get lost from view in the bubbly current. What it appears like, overall, is that these fish are stuck—streaming in, agitated to move upstream, but not finding a clear path forward at this flow.

I toss a question over to the furthest guy upstream near the headwaters over this basalt rock face. He says he’s seeing plenty of fish, but hasn’t brought in one yet.

On the way out I ask the woman if she’s going to cook up the good-sized shad she has laid out in the shallows. “Will you slow cook it?” I ask, “Or do you know how to dress them?” She is going to cook it up, but describes a method of cutting through center, just to get out some of those hundreds of delicate bones, and then toasting it up. “After it’s done, you can just get in there and get at the meat with a spoon.”

She asks me where my rod and reel are, and I tell her I’m really here to document flows—so that maybe someday we can all count on fish being here. I continue up the beach. “I’m hoping when I open this one there are some eggs in there,” she says, motioning over at her catch. She’d be delighted to fry up some roe. “Yea, that’s a pretty big fish,” I say, “I’m guessing it’s a female.” I bid her good luck for the day.

I get back on my bike and follow the Turners Falls Power Canal all the way upstream through The Patch section of Turners, and then down past Station 1–FirstLight’s small hydro generating site located on a dog-leg off the main canal. There’s a lone car down the paved drive that leads to the fishing access. When I scoot down to look over, the tailrace at Station 1 is charged with current. FirstLight is generating at this site, despite the test flow requirement that water only be released from the Turners Falls Dam at the 2,500 cfs level today. This will corrupt and skew fish passage study results.
P1000450

I walk down and meet the young guy fishing just off the edge of Station 1’s frothy spillway. James is from Greenfield, and “yup,” he fishes the site pretty regular. He’s just finished landing one. It’s unceremoniously laid out in the sandy silt. Smallish. “When there’s water here there are always fish,” he notes. I ask him if he wouldn’t mind my snapping a few photos and he’s fine with it, “You’re not in my way.” He points to the water, not a few feet out from where he is, “You see them all there?” I look, but don’t see much but shadowy, sun-dappled water. I stare a bit more, then start snapping pictures of the flows.
P1000448

When I come back down from near the tailrace I look again in the current. This time my angle to the sun is better. There are the shad. Dozens of them, stacked up in the current facing upstream into an endless, impassable sheet of water. “Now I see them,” I say, “Too bad they aren’t going anywhere.” “Yea,” James notes, “they are just stuck here.” I snap a photo of his dusty catch and wish him luck for the day.
P1000447
P1000449

As I come up to the road from Station 1 there are two young boys, maybe eleven or twelve years old, walking along with poles and fishing tackle. They appear to be headed further on, to try their luck in the canal dog-leg. “Hey, what are you guys going after, shad?” “Anything!” they both say in concert. “If you head just down there,” I say, pointing, “There’s a guy just caught one. There’s dozens of fish waiting in the current—you can look right down and see them.” A quick glimmer passes between them, and they say thanks, heading down the driveway. “There’s a bit of poison ivy on the path. Watch for it.” I call, riding away.

I continue up to the Turners Falls Dam, where the flow is still at 2,500 cfs, the lowest test flow setting. There were not supposed to be any other intervening flows confounding these tests all the way downstream to the end of the power canal. The only time Station 1 is supposed to be operating during test flows is when dam releases ramp up to 6,300 cfs. The Fisheries and Aquatics Studies Team had worked out the schedule with FERC, and FirstLight agreed to it. This appears to be a clear violation of study protocols, and it throws into question fish passage results here.
P1000456

I cross the road on the Turners Falls Bridge, and peer over the side just downstream of the dam. A few people are fishing in the flow next to the Spillway Fish Ladder. I yell down to the closest angler. He’s fairly close to where Bascule Gate 1 is pouring down those 2,500 cfs. He doesn’t hear me over the rush of water. I yell again; he looks all around—then, on the third time, he looks up. I’m maybe 80 feet above him and we can’t really converse. “How is it?” yell, mimicking with the thumbs up/thumbs down gesture. At first he doesn’t pick it up, but when I do it again, he gives the thumbs down.

I’m not surprised. With all the false attraction flow at the Rock Dam Pool from the added water released by FirstLight at Station 1, there is little flow here in the broad reach of the Connecticut that would temp fish away from treading water at those sites into these thin upstream currents. The fish are basically being tricked; they are expending precious energy that could be used to get upstream to Vermont and New Hampshire just running down their batteries downstream. Imagine treading water on an aquatic, industrial treadmill that’s trying to lure them into a power canal. If you are a Vermont or New Hampshire angler, just understand that these swam their little fins off trying to spawn up on your stretch of river. The lure of false attraction just got the better of them.
P1000451

When I take a look at the head gates at the head of the Turners Falls Canal they appear all but quiet, save for the bubbling attraction currents that help lead fish into the Gatehouse Fishway —the place where the public will see them passing. The main and only place where these fish are getting a substantial upstream current that leads to this site is…yup!—2-1/2 miles downstream at the tail end of the power canal at Cabot Station. That’s likely where these fish are really being attracted–and tallied, as some that are actually radio-tagged for these studies are being registered. Humn! That would certainly skew study results toward fish “preferring” the canal…

There’s a long tradition among American shad themselves–and the fisheries biologists that have studied fish passage at Turners Falls over the decades. Study results sometimes show a remarkable uptick in fish passage at the Turners Falls Fishway on holiday weekends when the public is most likely to visit. The fish just seem to just know exactly when it’s Memorial Day Weekend. Even in those years when passage is poor for most of the month of May, those shad seem to just love to appear in the fishway windows at the holiday weekend. It’s uncanny how the fish know. Ironic, really. Not like they are being manipulated…

What would also be uncanny would be if FirstLight had their “most successful canal passage year” ever–right at the time when the studies that impact relicensing flows are taking place. Last year, when 370,000 shad were lifted past Holyoke Dam, just 39,914 made it out of the canal and upstream past Turners Falls Dam. Not a great number. In 2013, when 381,436 shad were passed upstream at Holyoke, just 35,124 made it out of the canal and upstream past Turners Falls. A slightly worse number.

For the last 15 years the canal route for migratory fish has been studied and “improved” for fish passage. Today’s numbers are still pretty much junk.

As a final testament to the lack of progress let’s go back almost a quarter century: in 1991 the Holyoke Fish Lift passed 520,000 American shad upstream. Of those, 54,656 shad managed to emerge, alive, upstream of the Turners Falls Canal and dam, to swim toward Vermont and New Hampshire spawning site.

Thus, a quarter-century later, migrating American shad here are still “partying like its 1991.” False attraction–and false solutions, are very closely related here at Turners Falls. Study results are compromised.

Vermont, New Hampshire, sorry but as an ecosystem, we are still broken up. Just know this: “It’s not you, it’s US!”

New Stakeholder Comments submitted to FERC, re: Shad Spawning Habitat Studies and Fish Assemblage Assessment

Posted by on 19 Jun 2014 | Tagged as: American shad, By Pass Reach, Cabot Station, Connecticut River ecosystem, Connecticut River shortnose sturgeon, federally-endangered shortnose sturgeon, FERC license, FirstLight, GDF-Suez FirstLight, National Marine Fisheries Service, NMFS, shad, Station 1

The following Stakeholder Comments were submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on June 16, 2014, re: Study No. 3.3.6 Impact of Project Operations on Shad Spawning, Spawning Habitat and Egg Deposition in the Area of the Northfield Mountain and Turners Falls Projects; as well as Study No. 3.3.11 Fish Assemblage Assessment

Karl Meyer, M.S., Environmental Science
85 School Street, # 3
Greenfield, MA 01301 June 16, 2014

Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
88 First Street, N.E.
Washington, DC 20426

Stakeholder Comments RE: FERC P-2485-063, and P-1889-081:

These comments pertain to Study No. 3.3.6 Impact of Project Operations on Shad Spawning, Spawning Habitat and Egg Deposition in the Area of the Northfield Mountain and Turners Falls Projects; as well as Study No. 3.3.11 Fish Assemblage Assessment

My comments are specific to a Study Plan Determination meeting and consultation that took place at Northfield Mountain on June 3, 2014, to determine proper Study Plan parameters and procedures.

As a Stakeholder who has contributed to these fisheries discussions throughout the FERC process, I was dismayed that notification of this Stakeholder meeting was not sent out until the day before it was to take place. Along with Katie Kennedy, Andrea Donlon, and Don Pugh, I did not receive an email-invitation from FirstLight consultant Chris Tomichek to continue participating in the discussions until 9:15 a.m. on the morning of June 2, 2014—for a meeting that was to take place at 9:00 a.m., June 3, 2014. This is an abrogation of the FERC relicensing process for Stakeholder participation, and once again leaves these legal proceedings open to question. As I was on vacation when the less-than-24-hour-notice was sent, I was not aware that a meeting had taken place until the day after. With notice, I could have participated via teleconference.

I trust that the Notes and Transcript of this June 3rd meeting will be posted on both the FERC and Northfield Mountain relicensing web sites as part of the public record.

As I do not know the content of Stakeholder remarks or positions stated at the June 3, 2014 meeting, it’s possible that some of my comments may reiterate those of others. I will try to be brief, and address areas of my expertise.

My Comments re: Study No. 3.3.6 Impact of Project Operations on Shad Spawning, Spawning Habitat and Egg Deposition in the Area of the Northfield Mountain and Turners Falls Projects

In response to NMFS concerns about endangered shortnose sturgeon, FirstLight’s John Howard filed a response with FERC on January 28, 2014, stating, “Kieffer and Kynard (2012) have documented a spawning period of 5-17 days during the same 26 day period each year (April 27-May 22). Early life history stages (eggs and larvae) are present in the project area for 20 to 30 days after spawning (Kynard et al. 2012a). So the period when shortnose sturgeon eggs and larvae are present overlaps with the proposed sampling period for shad egg collection. Consequently, the collection of shad eggs may have the potential to impact shortnose sturgeon, and NMFS recommended in its December 2 letter that the study be revised.”

“To address this potential concern, FirstLight proposes to replace shad egg collection efforts, which studies have shown are duplicative of visual observations of shad spawning, with enhanced visual observations and splash counts.”

The best way to determine the presence of shad spawning, habitat and egg deposition in the By Pass Reach is to use both recommended efforts: egg collection and splash counts Using plankton nets to capture eggs and larvae should be employed to determine shad reproduction in the 2 miles of the By Pass Reach. NMFS did not at any time state that this method should not be employed. They merely noted the presence of SNS and their spawning period and egg/larvae deposition schedule.

Dr. Boyd Kynard states that there is no reason that plankton nets cannot be deployed in the channels opposite the islands on the west side of the river while SNS are present at their east-side ancestral Rock Dam spawning site, or the default site adjacent to Cabot Station if inadequate flows at Rock Dam have chased them downstream. Kynard states that this seining can take place all the way up to TF dam without impacting SNS spawning or egg deposition and larvae development. (Personal communication, 6/14/2014) Kynard is available if FL or Kleinschmidt would like to consult with him.

It is noteworthy that my own observations found FirstLight dumping water back into the river from its canal bypass flume above Cabot Station on three consecutive days at 12;25 pm: May 13, 14, and 15—all dates when SNS are potentially in spawning mode in the Connecticut River section known as the By Pass Reach. Station 1 was also operating off the canal at all these times, and the flows emanating from each were similar—though the whitewater flume-dumping off the canal appeared slightly less rigorous than the generation at the Station 1 outfall.

It is obvious from their notes that FL understands the requirements of SNS for successful reproduction. This canal-dumping practice has been noted by Kynard et al, as a flow regime that can abruptly end spawning efforts and bury or strand SNS eggs and larvae.

As suggested, splash counts should be also be done throughout the By Pass Reach. However, river regulation by FirstLight has a profound impact on whether and when shad are present in the By Pass Reach—River Segments 1 – 4 in the Study Plan—just as it impacts SNS.

FirstLight’s proposal to use splash counts to determine spawning should be carefully calibrated with river flows throughout the By Pass Reach. In order to have get a “clean” picture of when and where American shad may use this reach of river for spawning and egg deposition, continuous flows must be present in the river in order to sustain their use of the habitat. Ramping flow regimes and abrupt gate closures can easily displace federal trust fish from this river segment.

As such, I would suggest that steady-state flows of a minimum of 2,500 cfs up to 5,000 cfs be present in the By Pass from noon on the day the study is to commence until after midnight when spawning tapers off.

It is also necessary to know what the gate positions and flows are at TF dam throughout this time, as well as whether Station 1 is operating and at what flows, and whether water is being dumped from the canal back into the river above Cabot Station via the by-pass flume.

My Comments re: Study No. 3.3.11 Fish Assemblage Assessment

In his letter responding to NMFS concerns about endangered shortnose sturgeon, FirstLight’s John Howard formally responded to FERC on January 28, 2014, stating: “To avoid any potential impacts to sturgeon, FirstLight proposes to conduct all sampling in the bypass reach after June 30, and in the reach below the Deerfield River, FirstLight proposes to use both existing data and the data it obtains in the Turners Falls Impoundment.”

I will restrict my comments to fish assemblage sampling in the By Pass Reach:

Again, in order for electro-fishing sampling to be effective and get a “clean” picture of when and where resident and migratory fish may use this By Pass Reach of river, continuous flows must be present in the river in order to sustain their use of the habitat. Ramping flow regimes and abrupt gate closures can easily displace fish from this reach.

As such, I would suggest that steady-state flows of a minimum of 2,500 cfs up to 5,000 cfs be present in the By Pass for a full 24 hour cycle before this study is to commence.

And, again, it is also necessary to know what the gate positions and flows are at TF dam throughout this time, as well as whether Station 1 is operating and at what flow, and whether water is being dumped from the canal back into the river above Cabot Station via the by-pass flume.

End of Formal Comments

Thank you for this opportunity to participate in improving license requirements and protecting the Connecticut River ecosystem for future generations.

Sincerely,
Karl Meyer, M.S.