Determining the effects of dams on subdaily variation in river flows at a whole-basin scale

River Research and Applications

Volumn 26, Issue 10, 2010, Pages 1246-1260

  Zimmerman, Julie K H ^a   Letcher, Benjamin H ^b   Nislow, Keith H ^c   Lutz, Kimberly A ^a   Magilligan, Francis J ^d  

^a THE NATURE CONSERVANCY   (United States)

^b U S GEOLOGICAL SURVEY   (United States)

^c USDA FOREST SERVICE   (United States)

^d Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory   (United States)

Author keywords

Connecticut River; Dams; Flood control; Flow restoration; Flow variability; Hydrologic alteration; Hydropower; Subdaily variation

Indexed keywords

DAM; DIURNAL VARIATION; FLOODING; FLOW PATTERN; FLOW REGULATION; RIVER BASIN; RIVER FLOW; SMALL SCALE HYDROPOWER; WATERSHED;

CONNECTICUT RIVER; UNITED STATES;

EID: 78649478717     PISSN: 15351459     EISSN: 15351467     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/rra.1324     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Armstrong DS, Parker GW, Richards TA. 2004. Evaluation of streamflow requirements for habitat protection by comparison to streamflow characteristics at index streamflow-gaging stations in southern New England, Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4332. U.S. Geological Survey: Reston, VA.
2. Bain MB, Finn JT, Booke HE. 1988. Streamflow regulation and fish community structure. Ecology 69: 382-392.
3. Baker DB, Richards RP, Loftus TT, Kramer JW. 2004. A new flashiness index: characteristics and applications to Midwestern rivers and streams. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 40: 503-522.
4. Biggs BJF, Nikora VI, Snelder TH. 2005. Linking scales of flow variability to lotic ecosystem structure and function. River Research and Applications 21: 283-298.
5. Blinn W, Shannon JP, Stevens LE, Carder JP. 1995. Consequences of fluctuating discharge for lotic communities. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 14: 233-248.
6. Bratrich C, Truffer B, Jorde K, Markard J, Meier W, Peter A, Schneider M, Wehrli B. 2004. Green hydropower: a new assessment procedure for river management. River Research and Applications 20: 865-882.
7. Brown LE, Milner AM, Hannah DM. 2006. Stability and persistence of alpine stream macroinvertebrate communities and the role of physicochemical habitat variables. Hydrobiologia 560: 159-173.
8. Carlisle DM, Falcone J, Wolcock DM, Meador MR, Norris RH. 2009. Predicting the natural flow regime: models for assessing hydrological alteration in streams. River Research and Applications. DOI: 10.1002/rra.1247
9. Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. 1994. Connecticut River Estuary and Tidal River Wetlands Complex: Nomination Report to the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance. State of Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Long Island Sound Programs, Hartford, CT.
10. Cushman RM. 1985. Review of ecological effects of rapidly varying flows downstream from hydroelectric facilities. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 5: 330-339.
11. Dunne T, Leopold LB. 1978. Water in Environmental Planning. W.H. Freeman and Co: San Francisco, CA.
12. Fette M, Weber C, Peter A, Wehrli B. 2007. Hydropower production and river rehabilitation: a case study on an alpine river. Environmental Modeling & Assessment 12: 257-267.
13. Freeman MC, Bowen ZH, Bovee KD, Irwin ER. 2001. Flow and habitat effects on juvenile fish abundance in natural and altered flow regimes. Ecological Applications 11: 179-190.
14. Garabedian SG, Coles FG, Grady SJ, Todd Trench EC, Zimmerman MJ. 1998. Water quality in the Connecticut, Housatonic, and Thames river basins, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York and Vermont, 1992-1995, U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1155. U.S. Geological Survey: Marlborough, Massachusetts.
15. Grand TC, Railsback SF, Hayse JW, Lagory KE. 2006. A physical habitat model for predicting the effects of flow fluctuations in nursery habitats of the endangered Colorado pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus lucius). River Research and Applications 22: 1125-1142.
16. Haag WR, Warren ML Jr. 1998. Role of ecological factors and reproductive strategies in structuring freshwater mussel communities. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55: 297-306.
17. Halleraker JH, Saltveit SJ, Harby A, Arnekleiv JV, Fjeldstad HP, Kohler B. 2003. Factors influencing stranding of wild juvenile brown trout (Salmo trutta) during rapid and frequent flow decreases in an artificial stream. River Research and Applications 19: 589-603.
18. Henriksen JA, Heasley J, Kennen JG, Niewsand S. 2006. Users' manual for the hydroecological integrity assessment process software (including the New Jersey Assessment Tools). Open File Report 2006-1093. U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Discipline.
19. Horwitz RJ. 1978. Temporal variability patterns and the distributional patterns of stream fishes. Ecological Monographs 48: 307-321.
20. Jacobson PM, Fredette CG, Barrett N. 2004. Introduction: Connecticut River watershed management-past, present, and future. American Fisheries Society Monograph 9: 263-272.
21. Leonard JG, Bell RT. 1999. Northeastern Tiger Beetles. CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL.
22. Lundquist JD, Cayan DR. 2002. Seasonal and spatial patterns in diurnal cycles in streamflow in the western United States. Journal of Hydrometeorology 3: 591-603.
23. Magilligan FJ, Graber BE. 1996. Hydroclimatological and geomorphic controls on the timing and spatial variability of floods in New England, USA. Journal of Hydrology 178: 159-180.
24. Magilligan FJ, Nislow KH. 2001. Long-term changes in regional hydrologic regime following impoundment in a humid-climate watershed. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 37: 1551-1569.
25. McKinney T, Speas DW, Rogers RS, Persons W. 2001. Rainbow trout in a regulated river below Glen Canyon Dam, Arizona, following increased minimum flows and reduced discharge variability. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 21: 216-222.
26. Milner AM, Petts GE. 1994. Glacial rivers: physical habitat and ecology. Freshwater Biology 32: 295-307.
27. New Hampshire Fish and Game Department. 2005. New Hampshire Wildlife Action Plan. New Hampshire Fish and Game Department: Concord, NH.
28. Nislow KH, Magilligan FJ, Fassnacht H, Bechtel D, Ruesink A. 2002. Effects of dam impoundment on the flood regime of natural floodplain communities in the upper Connecticut River. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 38: 1533-1548.
29. Omland KS. 2002. Larval habitat and reintroduction site selection for Cicindela puritana in Connecticut. Northeastern Naturalist 9: 433-450.
30. Poff NL, Allan JD. 1995. Functional organization of stream fish assemblages in relation to hydrological variability. Ecology 76: 606-627.
31. Poff NL, Allan JD, Bain MB, Karr JR, Prestegaard KL, Richter BD, Sparks RE, Stromberg JC. 1997. The natural flow regime. BioScience 47: 769-784.
32. Poff NL, Olden JD, Merritt DM, Pepin DM. 2007. Homogenization of regional river dynamics by dams and global biodiversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 104: 5732-5737.
33. Poff NL, Olden JD, Vieira NKM, Finn DS, Simmons MP, Kondratieff BC. 2006. Functional trait niches of North American lotic insects: traits-based ecological applications in light of phylogenetic relationships. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 25: 730-755.
34. Richter BD, Baumgartner JV, Powell J, Braun DP. 1996. A method for assessing hydrologic alteration within ecosystems. Conservation Biology 10: 1163-1174.
35. Richter BD, Baumgartner JV, Wigington R, Braun DP. 1997. How much water does a river need? Freshwater Biology 37: 231-249.
36. Sanford SE, Creed IF, Tague CL, Beall FD, Buttle JM. 2007. Scale-dependence of natural variability of flow regimes in a forested landscape. Water Resources Research 43: W08414.
37. SAS Institute Inc. 1999. SAS OnlineDoc®, version 8.0. SAS Institute Inc.: Cary, NC.
38. The Nature Conservancy. 2007. Indicators of Hydrologic Alteration Version 7 User's Manual. The Nature Conservancy: Arlington, VA.
39. Travnichek VH, Bain MB, Maceina MJ. 1995. Recovery of a warmwater fish assemblage after the initiation of a minimum-flow release downstream from a hydroelectric dam. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 124: 836-844.
40. US Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Puritan Tiger Beetle (Cicindela Puritana G. Horn) Recovery Plan. US Fish and Wildlife Service Northeast Region: Hadley, MA.
41. van Looy K, Jochems H, Vanacker S, Lommelen E. 2007. Hydropeaking impact on a riparian ground beetle community. River Research and Applications 23: 223-233.
42. Ward JV. 1994. Ecology of Alpine Streams. Freshwater Biology 32: 277-294.
43. Weisberg SB, Burton WH. 1993. Enhancement of fish feeding and growth after an increase in minimum flow below the Conowingo Dam. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 13: 103-109.
44. White MA, Schmidt JC, Topping DJ. 2005. Application of wavelet analysis for monitoring the hydrologic effects of dam operation: Glen Canyon Dam and the Colorado River at Lees Ferry, Arizona. River Research and Applications 21: 551-565.
45. Zimmerman JKH. 2006a. Hydrologic Effects of Flood Control Dams in the Ashuelot River, New Hampshire, and West River, Vermont. The Nature Conservancy, Connecticut River Program: Northampton, MA.
46. Zimmerman JKH. 2006b. Response of Physical Processes and Ecological Targets to Altered Hydrology in the Connecticut River Basin. The Nature Conservancy, Connecticut River Program: Northampton, MA.
47. Zimmerman JKH, Lester A. 2006. Spatial Distribution of Hydrologic Alteration and Fragmentation Among Tributaries of the Connecticut River. The Nature Conservancy, Connecticut River Program: Northampton, MA.
48. Zimmerman JKH, Lester A, Lutz K, Gannon C, Nedeau EJ. 2008. Restoring Ecosystem Flows in the Connecticut River Watershed. The Nature Conservancy, Connecticut River Program: Northampton, MA.