Fish Cannon

[Ghost Hunter]

This might save the dams.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/video/viral/fire-in-the-hole-salmon-cannon-helps-salmon-safely-migrate-to-other-side-of-dams/vi-AAJAg8U?ocid=spartandhp

[Stein]

That might work if the argument for taking out dams was really about saving fish.

[WSU]

The bigger problem is downstream migration as smolts (assuming it's a dam that already has upstream migration like some of the Snake and Columbia dams). 

[DOUBLELUNG]

The bigger problem is downstream migration as smolts (assuming it's a dam that already has upstream migration like some of the Snake and Columbia dams). 

Lots of high head dams have addressed this with surface collectors, then trucking the smolts to the downstream side.  The Whooshh system definitely has promise, but this is also met at those hydros currently by trapping adults and trucking them upstream.  Most of the FERC-regulated nonfederal dams have already been required to implement upstream and downstream passage measures and are pretty benign to salmon survival in both directions.  In the early 1990s, the mid-Columbia PUDs funded survival studies on the lower 550 miles of the Fraser River in BC, as the best available analog to an undammed Columbia River.  Smolt survival from the Methow River (523 river miles at the mouth) to below Bonneville, past 9 low head, run of river dams was virtually identical to the undammed Fraser, roughly 65% for each. 

[WSU]

The bigger problem is downstream migration as smolts (assuming it's a dam that already has upstream migration like some of the Snake and Columbia dams). 

Lots of high head dams have addressed this with surface collectors, then trucking the smolts to the downstream side.  The Whooshh system definitely has promise, but this is also met at those hydros currently by trapping adults and trucking them upstream.  Most of the FERC-regulated nonfederal dams have already been required to implement upstream and downstream passage measures and are pretty benign to salmon survival in both directions.  In the early 1990s, the mid-Columbia PUDs funded survival studies on the lower 550 miles of the Fraser River in BC, as the best available analog to an undammed Columbia River.  Smolt survival from the Methow River (523 river miles at the mouth) to below Bonneville, past 9 low head, run of river dams was virtually identical to the undammed Fraser, roughly 65% for each.

Can you post a link to the Fraser study?

[DOUBLELUNG]

The bigger problem is downstream migration as smolts (assuming it's a dam that already has upstream migration like some of the Snake and Columbia dams). 

Lots of high head dams have addressed this with surface collectors, then trucking the smolts to the downstream side.  The Whooshh system definitely has promise, but this is also met at those hydros currently by trapping adults and trucking them upstream.  Most of the FERC-regulated nonfederal dams have already been required to implement upstream and downstream passage measures and are pretty benign to salmon survival in both directions.  In the early 1990s, the mid-Columbia PUDs funded survival studies on the lower 550 miles of the Fraser River in BC, as the best available analog to an undammed Columbia River.  Smolt survival from the Methow River (523 river miles at the mouth) to below Bonneville, past 9 low head, run of river dams was virtually identical to the undammed Fraser, roughly 65% for each.

Can you post a link to the Fraser study?

I couldn't find an online link to the older studies.  This is a good one, probably better, as with the newer technology the comparison is extended to the salt.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2573937/