More Like this

1. Dam removal: Listening in: RIVER RESPONSE TO DAM REMOVAL

   https://doi.org/10.1002/2017WR020457  

   Foley, M. M.; Bellmore, J. R.; O'Connor, J. E.; Duda, J. J.; East, A. E.; Grant, G. E.; Anderson, C. W.; Bountry, J. A.; Collins, M. J.; Connolly, P. J.; et al (July 2017, Water Resources Research)
2. Lessons from the Oroville dam

   https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aan0171  

   Vahedifard, Farshid; AghaKouchak, Amir; Ragno, Elisa; Shahrokhabadi, Shahriar; Mallakpour, Iman (March 2017, Science)
3. Environmental Impacts of Dam Reservoir Filling in the East Amazon

   https://doi.org/10.3389/frwa.2020.00011  

   da Silva, Geison Carlos; Medeiros de Abreu, Carlos Henrique; Ward, Nicholas D.; Belúcio, Liana Pereira; Brito, Daímio Chaves; Cunha, Helenilza Ferreira; da Cunha, Alan Cavalcanti (May 2020, Frontiers in Water)
4. Centring Fish Agency in Coastal Dam Removal and River Restoration

   Druschke, C.G.; Lundberg, E.; Drapier, L. and (October 2017, Water alternatives)

   This article considers the agentic capacity of fish in dam removal decisions. Pairing new materialist explorations of agency with news media, policy documents, and interviews related to a suite of dam decisions in a New England, USA watershed, we identify the ways that river herring seem constrained through technocratic discourse to particular human-defined roles in dam removal discussions. We suggest, meanwhile, that existing human relationships with salmonids like brook trout might serve as a bridge for public stakeholders and restoration managers to recognise the agentic creativity of fish in dam removal and river restoration decisions. 

   more » « less
5. A temporal perspective to dam management: influence of dam life and threshold fishery conditions on the energy-fish tradeoff

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-019-01726-7  

   Song, Cuihong; Mo, Weiwei (September 2019, Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment)

   While hydroelectric dams play a significant role in meeting the increasing energy demand worldwide, they pose a significant risk to riverine biodiversity and food security for millions of people that mainly depend upon floodplain fisheries. Dam structures could affect fish populations both directly and indirectly through loss of accessible spawning and rearing habitat, degradation of habitat quality (e.g., changes in temperature and discharge), and/or turbine injuries. However, our understandings of the impacts of dam life span and the initial fishery conditions on restoration time and hence the dynamic hydropower (energy)-fish (food) nexus remain limited. In this study, we explored the temporal energy-food tradeoffs associated with a hydroelectric dam located in the Penobscot River basin of the United States. We investigated the influence of dam life span, upstream passage rate, and downstream habitat area on the energy-food tradeoffs using a system dynamics model. Our results show that around 90% of fish biomass loss happen within 5 years of dam construction. Thereafter, fish decline slowly stabilizes and approaches the lowest value at around the 20th year after dam construction. Fish restoration period is highly sensitive even to a short period of blockage. The biomass of alewife spawners need 18 years to recover with only 1-year of blockage to the upstream critical habitats. Hydropower generation and loss of fish biomass present a two-segment linear relationship under changes in dam life span. When the dam life span is less than 5 years, generating 1 GWh energy cause around 0.04 million kg loss of fish biomass; otherwise, the loss of fish biomass is 0.02 million kg. The loss of fish biomass could be significantly decreased with minimal energy loss through increasing upstream passage rate and/or the size of downstream habitat area. 

   more » « less