Ecologically-based criteria for hydropeaking mitigation: A review

Moreira, Miguel; Hayes, Daniel S.; Boavida, Isabel; Schletterer, Martin; Schmutz, Stefan; Pinheiro, António N.

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.12.107

Cited by 97 publications

(138 citation statements)

References 87 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

137

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Rapid flow reductions due to downramping can increase the stranding probability of fish through quickly receding water levels, causing sub-lethal impacts or direct fish mortality [16,18]. Studies have shown that stranding is species-and size-selective, whereby recently emerged fry are the most vulnerable life-history stage [15,52,56,57]. This finding is supported by the analysis of ten-year flow downramping monitoring data of Canadian rivers, showing that the highest stranding probabilities occur from May to August when juveniles inhabit nearshore areas which are likely to be dewatered [50].…”

Section: Thresholds For Impact Mitigationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Alfredsen et al [33] suggest introducing a cap flow and restricting rapid flow changes during swim-up. Since fry are especially vulnerable to sub-daily flow fluctuations and are present only at specific periods of the year [16,52], a feasible management approach is to define temporal 'emergence windows' where stringent thresholds, e.g., regarding downramping to prevent stranding, are enforced [8,15,52,61]. These emergence windows should start with the highly sensitive alevin phase [44][45][46] just before fry emerge from the gravel, whereas the length of the window depends on the growth, which is mainly related to temperature.…”

Section: Emergence Window Establishmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Parr are also vulnerable to stranding and drift, whereby the risk is reduced as they grow in size and increase their swimming performance, and additionally shift to deeper habitats away from the dewatered ramping zone [53]. Therefore, less restrictive ramping rates-in comparison to fry-can be sufficient [5,15,16,52,56,57]. However, since stranding probability is also determined by other factors aside from downramping velocity (e.g., wetted history, baseflow conditions, time of day), these must be considered in the establishment of mitigation rules as well [15].…”

Section: Parr To Adultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, well-targeted mitigation measures have to be developed to avoid energy losses and to guarantee ecological efficiency.Freeman et al [13] argue that adverse effects can be minimized by either restoring vital features of the natural flow regime or by implementing a flow management scheme which avoids hydropower-induced habitat bottlenecks. Regarding the latter, multiple studies point out the need to identify critical flows, which include seasonal and diel considerations when determining operational mitigation strategies in rivers affected by hydropeaking [5,[13][14][15][16]. To maintain self-sustaining fish populations in regulated water bodies, river management must take all life-history stages into account, especially during ecologically sensitive periods, when designing and implementing customized flow regimes [7].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As fish increase in size, they use different habitats. Once they reach sexual maturity, their life cycle starts over again [19,20].The literature indicates that each of these life cycle stages can show a distinct sensitivity to different aspects of the hydropeaking hydrograph, whereby reproduction and early life stages seem to be the most sensitive ones [15]. Thus, the key parameters for flow restoration will vary between the life cycle stages.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Life Stage-Specific Hydropeaking Flow Rules

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Peak-operating hydropower plants are usually the energy grid's backbone by providing flexible energy production. At the same time, hydropeaking operations are considered one of the most adverse impacts on rivers, whereby aquatic organisms and their life-history stages can be affected in many ways. Therefore, we propose specific seasonal regulations to protect ecologically sensitive life cycle stages. By reviewing hydropeaking literature, we establish a framework for hydrological mitigation based on life-history stages of salmonid fish and their relationship with key parameters of the hydrograph. During migration and spawning, flows should be kept relatively stable, and a flow cap should be implemented to prevent the dewatering of spawning grounds during intragravel life stages. While eggs may be comparably tolerant to dewatering, post-hatch stages are very vulnerable, which calls for minimizing or eliminating the duration of drawdown situations and providing adequate minimum flows. Especially emerging fry are extremely sensitive to flow fluctuations. As fish then grow in size, they become less vulnerable. Therefore, an 'emergence window', where stringent thresholds on ramping rates are enforced, is proposed. Furthermore, time of day, morphology, and temperature changes must be considered as they may interact with hydropeaking. We conclude that the presented mitigation framework can aid the environmental enhancement of hydropeaking rivers while maintaining flexible energy production.2 of 17 impacts on rivers downstream of dams" [3]. Fish communities, in particular, are severely threatened by hydropeaking [4]. Fish can be affected by changes in various components of the hydrograph, whereby the most common responses-stranding, drift, and dewatering of spawning grounds-are mostly related to up-and downramping rates [5,6], peak flow magnitude [5], and baseflow duration [7].Considering the large capacity of existing storage hydropower plants [8], as well as new ones that are currently being planned and installed [9], it is imperative to develop appropriate and transferable management measures to mitigate these ecological impacts. Many structural (e.g., constructing retention basins) and operational (e.g., reducing flow fluctuation rates) mitigation measures have been proposed [10,11], but implementation remains difficult, among other issues, because of significant reductions in the energy yield when setting ecological thresholds [2,12]. Therefore, well-targeted mitigation measures have to be developed to avoid energy losses and to guarantee ecological efficiency.Freeman et al. [13] argue that adverse effects can be minimized by either restoring vital features of the natural flow regime or by implementing a flow management scheme which avoids hydropower-induced habitat bottlenecks. Regarding the latter, multiple studies point out the need to identify critical flows, which include seasonal and diel considerations when determining operational mitigation strategies in rivers affected by hydropeaking [5,[13][14][15][16]. To...

show abstract

Section: Thresholds For Impact Mitigationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Emergence Window Establishmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Parr To Adultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Life Stage-Specific Hydropeaking Flow Rules

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Effects of hydropeaking on the attached eggs of a rheophilic cyprinid species

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human‐induced changes in the hydrological regimes of lotic waters such as hydropeaking have significant negative impacts on riverine life. However, the impacts of dynamic changes in water flow on adhesive fish eggs are not very well known. We focused on the effects of hydropeaking on the spawning ground of a rheophilic cyprinid fish, the asp (Leuciscus aspius). We tested whether a sudden increase in water velocity caused by hydropeaking may have negative effect on the adhesive eggs by the combination of field observations and laboratory experiments. The main objectives of the study were to (i) investigate abiotic characteristics of an asp spawning ground, (ii) monitor egg densities in relation to hydropeaking events and (iii) test detachment rates of the asp eggs in laboratory conditions in relation to water velocity. The asp spawning ground was associated with shallow water depths (0.2–0.4 m) and flowing water (0.1–0.4 m s−1) during base flow. The water velocity that occurred on the spawning ground during the hydropeaking event was measured to be from 0.7–1.2 m s−1. Asp eggs nearly disappeared from the spawning ground before their hatching time probably due to several hydropeaking events. The laboratory experiments showed the significant dependency of egg detachment rates on the water velocity and substrate type with a critical value of 0.7 m s−1. Our data suggested that eggs may be negatively impacted by flow alterations. Avoiding hydropeaking or keeping water velocity below critical values is recommended for the management of rheophilous fish spawning grounds.

show abstract

Applying a two‐dimensional hydrodynamic model to estimate fish stranding risk downstream from a hydropeaking hydroelectric station

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fish stranding is of global concern with increasing hydropower operations using hydropeaking to respond to fluctuating energy demand. Determining the effects hydropeaking has on fish communities is challenging because fish stranding is dependent on riverscape features, such as topography, bathymetry and substrate. By using a combination of physical habitat assessments, hydrodynamic modelling and empirical data on fish stranding, we estimated the number of fish stranding over a 5-month period for three model years in a large Prairie river. More specifically, we modelled how many fish potentially stranded during the years 2019, 2020 and 2021 across a 16 km study reached downstream from E.B. Campbell Hydroelectric Station on the Saskatchewan River, Canada. Fish stranding densities calculated from data collected through remote photography and transect monitoring in 2021 were applied to the daily area subject to drying determined by the River2D hydrodynamic model. The cumulative area subject to change was 90.05, 53.02 and 80.74 km 2 for years 2019, 2020 and 2021, respectively, from June to October. The highest number of stranded fish was estimated for the year 2021, where estimates ranged from 89,800 to 1,638,000 individuals based on remote photography and transect monitoring fish stranding densities, respectively, 157 to 2,856 fish stranded per hectare. Our approach of estimating fish stranding on a large scale allows for a greater understanding of the impact hydropeaking has on fish communities and can be applied to other riverscapes threatened by hydropeaking.

show abstract

Ecologically-based criteria for hydropeaking mitigation: A review

Cited by 97 publications

References 87 publications

Life Stage-Specific Hydropeaking Flow Rules

Life Stage-Specific Hydropeaking Flow Rules

Effects of hydropeaking on the attached eggs of a rheophilic cyprinid species

Applying a two‐dimensional hydrodynamic model to estimate fish stranding risk downstream from a hydropeaking hydroelectric station

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About