Power supplied to the Squaw Creek electromechanical weir and 

 trap by 3.5 KW, gasoline-=engine driven generators cost $96,85 for 

 1,063.2 hours of operation. Similar power supplied to the Carp Creek 

 electrical barrier by 2 KW, gasoline-engine driven generators cost 

 $93. Ul for 8I4.O.7 hours of operation. Most useful in planning future 

 operations are cost-per-hour figures for individual generators of dif- 

 ferent capacities. Records kept for five gasoline-engine driven gen- 

 erators were as follows % 



The low cost-per-hour figures for the 3.5 KM generators indi- 

 cated above do not necessarily imply that they were the most economical 

 n size n of generator used. The figures merely reflect the fact that the 

 power demand on these generators was well below the maximum capacity of 

 the units during most of the period of operation. The 2 KW generators 

 were taxed much more heavily in proportion to their capacity output. Both 

 2 KW and 3.5 KW power plants used were almost identical in gross size and 

 weight. The 5 KW plant on the other hand, was a considerably larger unit. 

 Although operated at only 19 to k9 percent of capacity output (less than 

 the capacity output of a 3.5 KW unit), the increased size of the plant was 

 reflected in a near doubling of the "cost per hour of operation". 



Labor costs for operating traps in the electromechanical devices 

 are not available since these expenses could not be separated from labor 

 costs for operating checking weirs used during the tests. It was appar- 

 ent, however, that approximately 2 hours of labor per day per control 

 structure would provide satisfactory servicing. This figure includes tra- 

 vel time to and from the weir and is based on the assumption that the at- 

 tendant would be servicing a group of such devices within a limited geo- 

 graphic area. It is estimated that under such circumstances direct labor 

 costs for servicing ea,ch electromechanical weir and trap would amount to 



uu 



