2005
DOI: 10.1002/rra.871
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Tests of two types of bypass for downstream migration of eels at a small hydroelectric power plant

Abstract: Efficiencies of two types of bypass, a surface and a bottom sluice, were tested for the natural downstream migration of silver eels Anguilla anguilla at a small hydroelectric power plant at Halsou, on the River Nive in France. Naturally migrating eels were caught after their passage through either bypass. A total of 637 eels were trapped during the three-year study. Total efficiency for both bypasses, evaluated on the basis of downstream movement of radiotagged eels, ranged from 56% to 64%. Given a bias due to… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
70
1
2

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 78 publications
(78 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
(6 reference statements)
5
70
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Eels did not pass through the orifice, which was situated half way up the gate, supporting the results of other studies which report eels to be principally benthic oriented during freshwater migration (Jonsson 1991;Tesch 2003) exhibiting a preference for undershot pathways (Gosset et al 2005;Russon and Kemp 2011a;Russon and Kemp 2011b). Reduced delay when the orifice was operational may have been due to the gates being open on more occasions when eels initially approached them, or the lower upstream salinity that may have resulted from the lower tides that occurred during these periods, as diadromous fish may need to adapt to abrupt salinity gradients (e.g.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Eels did not pass through the orifice, which was situated half way up the gate, supporting the results of other studies which report eels to be principally benthic oriented during freshwater migration (Jonsson 1991;Tesch 2003) exhibiting a preference for undershot pathways (Gosset et al 2005;Russon and Kemp 2011a;Russon and Kemp 2011b). Reduced delay when the orifice was operational may have been due to the gates being open on more occasions when eels initially approached them, or the lower upstream salinity that may have resulted from the lower tides that occurred during these periods, as diadromous fish may need to adapt to abrupt salinity gradients (e.g.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Currently, the European Union Directive 1100/2007 of 18 September 2007 recommends that mitigation measures be introduced by hydropower facilities. One option is to prevent the migrants from passing by turbines, by orienting them to a safe route using controlled spillage (Watene & Boubee 2005), eel-suitable downstream bypasses (Gosset et al 2005) and mechanical and behavioural deflection technologies (Russon et al 2010). A second option is to develop fish-friendly turbines to limit mortality (Hecker & Cook 2005).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In year 2 a 1 large piece of woody debris became lodged upstream of the undershot sluices and 2 although the gates remained partially open for much of the time, eels were delayed 3 for long periods and few ultimately passed. Silver eels have been observed to exhibit 4 predominantly benthic-oriented movement at barriers during their migration 5 downstream, and prefer undershot routes at structures (Behrmann-Godel and 6 Eckmann, 2003;Gosset et al, 2005;Russon and Kemp, 2011a;Russon and Kemp, 7 2011b). Although benthic oriented passage was possible for eels at Flatford despite 8 the debris, the abrupt velocity gradients near the constricted openings may have 9 induced the avoidance behaviour observed (Coutant and Whitney, 2000).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%