Cargando…

How Big of an Effect Do Small Dams Have? Using Geomorphological Footprints to Quantify Spatial Impact of Low-Head Dams and Identify Patterns of Across-Dam Variation

Longitudinal connectivity is a fundamental characteristic of rivers that can be disrupted by natural and anthropogenic processes. Dams are significant disruptions to streams. Over 2,000,000 low-head dams (<7.6 m high) fragment United States rivers. Despite potential adverse impacts of these ubiqu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fencl, Jane S., Mather, Martha E., Costigan, Katie H., Daniels, Melinda D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4634923/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26540105
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0141210
_version_ 1782399440279044096
author Fencl, Jane S.
Mather, Martha E.
Costigan, Katie H.
Daniels, Melinda D.
author_facet Fencl, Jane S.
Mather, Martha E.
Costigan, Katie H.
Daniels, Melinda D.
author_sort Fencl, Jane S.
collection PubMed
description Longitudinal connectivity is a fundamental characteristic of rivers that can be disrupted by natural and anthropogenic processes. Dams are significant disruptions to streams. Over 2,000,000 low-head dams (<7.6 m high) fragment United States rivers. Despite potential adverse impacts of these ubiquitous disturbances, the spatial impacts of low-head dams on geomorphology and ecology are largely untested. Progress for research and conservation is impaired by not knowing the magnitude of low-head dam impacts. Based on the geomorphic literature, we refined a methodology that allowed us to quantify the spatial extent of low-head dam impacts (herein dam footprint), assessed variation in dam footprints across low-head dams within a river network, and identified select aspects of the context of this variation. Wetted width, depth, and substrate size distributions upstream and downstream of six low-head dams within the Upper Neosho River, Kansas, United States of America were measured. Total dam footprints averaged 7.9 km (3.0–15.3 km) or 287 wetted widths (136–437 wetted widths). Estimates included both upstream (mean: 6.7 km or 243 wetted widths) and downstream footprints (mean: 1.2 km or 44 wetted widths). Altogether the six low-head dams impacted 47.3 km (about 17%) of the mainstem in the river network. Despite differences in age, size, location, and primary function, the sizes of geomorphic footprints of individual low-head dams in the Upper Neosho river network were relatively similar. The number of upstream dams and distance to upstream dams, but not dam height, affected the spatial extent of dam footprints. In summary, ubiquitous low-head dams individually and cumulatively altered lotic ecosystems. Both characteristics of individual dams and the context of neighboring dams affected low-head dam impacts within the river network. For these reasons, low-head dams require a different, more integrative, approach for research and management than the individualistic approach that has been applied to larger dams.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4634923
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46349232015-11-13 How Big of an Effect Do Small Dams Have? Using Geomorphological Footprints to Quantify Spatial Impact of Low-Head Dams and Identify Patterns of Across-Dam Variation Fencl, Jane S. Mather, Martha E. Costigan, Katie H. Daniels, Melinda D. PLoS One Research Article Longitudinal connectivity is a fundamental characteristic of rivers that can be disrupted by natural and anthropogenic processes. Dams are significant disruptions to streams. Over 2,000,000 low-head dams (<7.6 m high) fragment United States rivers. Despite potential adverse impacts of these ubiquitous disturbances, the spatial impacts of low-head dams on geomorphology and ecology are largely untested. Progress for research and conservation is impaired by not knowing the magnitude of low-head dam impacts. Based on the geomorphic literature, we refined a methodology that allowed us to quantify the spatial extent of low-head dam impacts (herein dam footprint), assessed variation in dam footprints across low-head dams within a river network, and identified select aspects of the context of this variation. Wetted width, depth, and substrate size distributions upstream and downstream of six low-head dams within the Upper Neosho River, Kansas, United States of America were measured. Total dam footprints averaged 7.9 km (3.0–15.3 km) or 287 wetted widths (136–437 wetted widths). Estimates included both upstream (mean: 6.7 km or 243 wetted widths) and downstream footprints (mean: 1.2 km or 44 wetted widths). Altogether the six low-head dams impacted 47.3 km (about 17%) of the mainstem in the river network. Despite differences in age, size, location, and primary function, the sizes of geomorphic footprints of individual low-head dams in the Upper Neosho river network were relatively similar. The number of upstream dams and distance to upstream dams, but not dam height, affected the spatial extent of dam footprints. In summary, ubiquitous low-head dams individually and cumulatively altered lotic ecosystems. Both characteristics of individual dams and the context of neighboring dams affected low-head dam impacts within the river network. For these reasons, low-head dams require a different, more integrative, approach for research and management than the individualistic approach that has been applied to larger dams. Public Library of Science 2015-11-05 /pmc/articles/PMC4634923/ /pubmed/26540105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0141210 Text en © 2015 Fencl et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Fencl, Jane S.
Mather, Martha E.
Costigan, Katie H.
Daniels, Melinda D.
How Big of an Effect Do Small Dams Have? Using Geomorphological Footprints to Quantify Spatial Impact of Low-Head Dams and Identify Patterns of Across-Dam Variation
title How Big of an Effect Do Small Dams Have? Using Geomorphological Footprints to Quantify Spatial Impact of Low-Head Dams and Identify Patterns of Across-Dam Variation
title_full How Big of an Effect Do Small Dams Have? Using Geomorphological Footprints to Quantify Spatial Impact of Low-Head Dams and Identify Patterns of Across-Dam Variation
title_fullStr How Big of an Effect Do Small Dams Have? Using Geomorphological Footprints to Quantify Spatial Impact of Low-Head Dams and Identify Patterns of Across-Dam Variation
title_full_unstemmed How Big of an Effect Do Small Dams Have? Using Geomorphological Footprints to Quantify Spatial Impact of Low-Head Dams and Identify Patterns of Across-Dam Variation
title_short How Big of an Effect Do Small Dams Have? Using Geomorphological Footprints to Quantify Spatial Impact of Low-Head Dams and Identify Patterns of Across-Dam Variation
title_sort how big of an effect do small dams have? using geomorphological footprints to quantify spatial impact of low-head dams and identify patterns of across-dam variation
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4634923/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26540105
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0141210
work_keys_str_mv AT fencljanes howbigofaneffectdosmalldamshaveusinggeomorphologicalfootprintstoquantifyspatialimpactoflowheaddamsandidentifypatternsofacrossdamvariation
AT mathermarthae howbigofaneffectdosmalldamshaveusinggeomorphologicalfootprintstoquantifyspatialimpactoflowheaddamsandidentifypatternsofacrossdamvariation
AT costigankatieh howbigofaneffectdosmalldamshaveusinggeomorphologicalfootprintstoquantifyspatialimpactoflowheaddamsandidentifypatternsofacrossdamvariation
AT danielsmelindad howbigofaneffectdosmalldamshaveusinggeomorphologicalfootprintstoquantifyspatialimpactoflowheaddamsandidentifypatternsofacrossdamvariation