Assessing potential removal of low-head dams in urban settings: An example from the Ottawa River, NW Ohio

Environmental Management

Volumn 39, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 113-124

  Roberts, Sheila J ^a   Gottgens, Johan F ^b   Spongberg, Alison L ^b   Evans, James E ^a   Levine, Norman S ^c  

^a BOWLING GREEN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO   (United States)

^c School of Business   (United States)

Author keywords

Flood hazard regime; HEC RAS; Low head dam removal; Organic contaminants; Sediment contamination; Sediment transport; Stream restoration; Trace metals

Indexed keywords

FLOOD HAZARD REGIME; HEC-RAS; LOW HEAD DAM REMOVAL; ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS; SEDIMENT CONTAMINATION; STREAM RESTORATION; TRACE METALS;

CONTAMINATION; FLOODS; HYDROLOGY; RIVERS; SEDIMENT TRANSPORT; SEDIMENTS; URBAN PLANNING;

DAMS;

TRACE METAL;

DAM; GIS; HYDROLOGICAL MODELING; LIABILITY; LIDAR; LOCAL GOVERNMENT; ORGANIC POLLUTANT; RESTORATION ECOLOGY; RIVER WATER; SAMPLING; SEDIMENT ANALYSIS; SEDIMENT POLLUTION; TRACE METAL; URBAN SITE;

ARTICLE; CONTAMINATION; ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION; ENVIRONMENTAL EROSION; FORECASTING; GEOCHEMISTRY; GOVERNMENT; RESERVOIR; RIVER ECOSYSTEM; SEDIMENT; SEDIMENT TRANSPORT; UNITED STATES; URBAN AREA; URBAN POPULATION; WATER CONTAMINATION;

DISASTERS; GEOLOGIC SEDIMENTS; OHIO; RIVERS; TRACE ELEMENTS; URBAN RENEWAL; WATER MOVEMENTS; WATER POLLUTANTS, CHEMICAL; WATER SUPPLY;

CANADA; NORTH AMERICA; OHIO; OTTAWA RIVER; TOLEDO [OHIO]; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33845494501     PISSN: 0364152X     EISSN: 14321009     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00267-005-0091-8     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Anderson J. R., E. E. Hardy, J. T. Roach, R. E. Witmer. 1976. A land use and land cover classification system for use with remote sensor data, US Geological Survey Professional Paper 964
2. AR/FE/TU (American Rivers, Friends of the Earth, and Trout Unlimited). 1999. Dam removal success stories: Restoring rivers through selected removal of dams that don't make sense. American Rivers, Friends of the Earth, and Trout Unlimited, Washington DC. Available from www.americanrivers.org/ damremovaltoolkit/successstoriesreport.htm
3. ASTM. 1986. Standard practice for dry preparation of soil samples for particle-size analysis and determination of soil constants. Annual Book of ASTM Standards D421-85. American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia
4. Bednarek A. T. 2001. Undamming rivers: A review of the ecological impacts of dam removal. Environ Manage 27:803-814
5. Bushaw-Newton K. L., D. D. Hart, J. E. Pizzuto, J. R. Thomson, J. Egan, J. T. Ashley, T. E. Johnson, R. J. Horwitz, M. Keeley, J. Lawrence, D. Charles, C. Gatenby, D. A. Kreeger, T. Nightengale, R. L. Thomas, D. J. Velinsky. 2002. An integrative approach towards understanding ecological responses to dam removal: The Manatawny Creek Study. J Am Water Resources Assoc 38:1581-1599
6. Cowan W. L. 1956. Estimating hydraulic roughness coefficients. Agric Eng 37:473-475
7. Dean W. E. 1974. Determination of carbonate and organic matter in calcareous sediments and sedimentary rock by loss on ignition: A comparison with other methods. J Sed Petrol 44:249-253
8. Dietrich W. E. 1982. Settling velocity of natural particles. Water Resources Res 18:1615-1626
9. Doyle M. W., Harbor J. M., Stanley E. H. 2003. Toward policies and decision-making for dam removal. Environ Manage 31:453-465
10. Doyle M. W., E. H. Stanley, J. M. Harbor. 2002. Geomorphic analogies for assessing probable channel response to dam removal. J Am Water Resources Assoc 38:1567-1579
11. Evans J. E., N. S. Levine, S. J. Roberts, J. F. Gottgens, D. N. Newman. 2002. Proposed removal of Ballville dam, Sandusky River, Ohio: A GIS-based, interdisciplinary study. J Am Water Resources Assoc 38:1549-1565
12. Evans J. E., S. D. Mackey, J. F. Gottgens, W. M. Gill. 2000. Lessons from a dam failure. Ohio J Sci 100:121-131
13. FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2004. National dam safety program. Available from http://www.fema.gov/mit/ndspweb.htm
14. Folk R. L., W. C. Ward. 1957. Brazos bar: a study in the significance of grain-size parameters. J Sed Petrol 27:3-26
15. Gottgens J. F., J. E. Evans, N. S. Levine, S. J. Roberts, A. L. Spongberg. 2004. Dam removal in the Ottawa River, Ohio: A feasibility study. Final report to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources Office of Coastal Management
16. Hart D. D., T. E. Johnson, K. L. Bushaw-Newton, R. J. Horwitz, A. T. Bednarek, D. F. Charles, D. A. Kreeger, D. J. Velinsky. 2002. Dam removal: challenges and opportunities for ecological research and river restoration. Bioscience 52:669-681
17. Heinz Center. 2002. Dam removal: Science and decision making. The Heinz Center for Science, Economics, and the Environment, Washington, DC
18. Huff A., J. R. Angel. 1992. Rainfall frequency atlas of the midwest, Midwestern Climate Center and the Illinois State Water Survey, Champaign, IL
19. Huxley J. M., J. E. Evans, R. K. Vincent. 2006. Upstream channel changes following dam construction and removal, using a GIS/remote sensing approach. J Am Water Resources Assoc.
20. Ingersoll C. G., P. S. Haverland, E. L. Brunson, T. J. Canfield, F. L. Dwyer, C. E. Henke, N. E. Kemble, D. R. Mount, R. G. Fox. 1996. Calculation and evaluation of sediment effect concentrations for the amphipod Hyalella azteca and the midge Chironomus riparius. J Great Lakes Resources 22:602-623
21. Johnson S. E., B. E. Garber. 2002. Enlisting the social sciences in decisions about dam removal. Bioscience 52:731-738
22. Kannan K., B. Johnson-Restrepo, S. S. Yohn, J. P. Giesy, D. T. Long. 2005. Spatial and temporal distribution of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in sediments from Michigan Inland Lakes. Environ Sci Technol 39: 4700-4706
23. Korda A. P., A. T. Santas, Tenante, A. R. Santas. 1997. Petroleum hydrocarbon bioremediation: sampling and analytical techniques, in situ treatments and commercial microorganisms currently used. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 48:677-686.
24. MacDonald D. D., C. G. Ingersoll, T. A. Berger. 2000. Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 39:20-31
25. NID (National Inventory of Dams) (2004) Available from http://crunch.tec.army.mil/nid/webpages/nid.cfm
26. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. 2004. Environmental Protection Agency, Northwest Ohio District, unpublished data received from Dan Glomski February 6, 2004
27. Pejchar L., K. Warner. 2001. A river might run through it again: Criteria for consideration of dam removal and interim lessons from California. Environ Manage 28:561-575
28. Pizzuto J. E. 2002. Effects of dam removal on river form and process. Bioscience 52:683-692
29. Poff N. L., D. D. Hart. 2002. How dams vary and why it matters for the emerging science of dam removals. Bioscience 52:659-668
30. Pohl M. M. 2002. Bringing down our dams: Trends in American dam removal rationales. J Am Water Resources Assoc 38:1511-1519
31. Pohl M. 2004. Channel bed mobility downstream from the Elwha Dams, Washington. Professional Geographer 56:422-431
32. Rossmiller R. L. 1980. The rational formula revisited. In International Symposium on Urban Storm Runoff: University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY. pp 1-11
33. Sanders J. E. 1980. Wood debris and PCB pollution in upper-Hudson-River sediments; relationship to 1973 removal of Fort Edward Dam, Washington County, New York. Abstracts with Programs - Geological Society of America 12:514.
34. Simons R. K., D. B. Simons 1991. Sediment problems associated with dam removal - Muskegon River, Michigan. Hydraulic Engineering. In Proceedings of the 1991 National Conference of the American Society of Civil Engineers, New York. pp 680-685
35. Smith S. L., D. D. MacDonald, K. A. Kennleyside, C. G. Ingersoll, J. Field. 1996. A preliminary evaluation of sediment quality assessment values for freshwater ecosystems. J Great Lakes Res 22:624-638
36. Soil Survey Staff, National Resources Conservation Service. 2006. United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) Database. Available from www.ncgc.nrcs.usda.gov/products/datasets/ssurgo/index.html (accessed January 11, 2006)
37. Spongberg A. L. 2004. An initial investigation of PCB contamination in surface sediments in the coastal waters of Costa Rica. Rev Biol Trop 52:1-10
38. Stout S. A., V. S. Magar, R. M. Uhler, J. Ickes, J. Abbott, R. Brenner. 2001a. Characterization of naturally-occurring and anthropogenic PAHs in urban sediments: Wycoff/Eagle Harbor Superfund site. Environ Forensics 2:287-300
39. Stout S. A., A. D. Uhler, S. Emsbo-Mattingly. 2001b. Urban background: characterization of ambient anthopogenic PAH in urban sediments. In V.S. Magar and M.E. Kelley (eds) Proceedeedings of the 7th International Symposium on In Situ and On-Site Bioremediation. Orlando, Florida, June 2003. Battelle Press, Columbus, OH
40. Stout S. A., A. D. Uhler, S. D. Emsbo-Mattingly. 2003. Characterization of PAH sources in sediments of the Thea Foss/Wheeler Osgood waterways, Tacoma, Washington. Soil Sed Contam 12:815-835
41. US Army Corps of Engineers. 1999. National inventory of dams. Available from http://crunch.tec.army.mil/nid/webpages/nid.cfm
42. US Army Corps of Engineers. 2003. HEC-RAS user's manual. US Army Corps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center, Davis, CA
43. US Environmental Protection Agency. 1986. Test methods for evaluating solid waste. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, DC
44. US Environmental Protection Agency. 1994. Guidance for the determination of appropriate methods for the detection of Section 313 water priority chemicals. EPA Report No. 833B94001
45. Vanier C., M. Sylvestre, D. Planas. 1996. Persistence of PCBs in sediments of the Saint Lawrence River. Sci Total Environ 192:229-244
46. Wiberg P. L., J. D. Smith. 1987. Calculations of the critical shear stress for motion of uniform and heterogeneous sediments. Water Resources Res 23:1471-1480
47. Wiles J. J., N. S. Levine. 2002. A combined GIS and HEC model for the analysis of the effect of urbanization on flooding: the Swan Creek watershed, Ohio. Environ Eng Geosci 7:47-61