Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 99 views

    Savidge - Lowell Mill and Carbonton Dam Removals

    Uploaded by

    Restoration Systems, LLC
    This document summarizes the results of monitoring aquatic fauna following the removal of two dams in North Carolina. For the Lowell Mill Dam removal, monitoring found the restoration of nearly 500,000 feet of habitat for migratory fish passage and establishment of lotic aquatic communities within the former reservoir. Rare mussel and fish species were also found to recolonize the area. For the Carbonton Dam removal, monitoring showed increases in rare fish species abundance and diversity of lotic invertebrates and fish within the former reservoir. While dam removal can successfully restore aquatic habitats and species, it may also negatively impact mussels through stranding, sediment release, and handling during monitoring. Careful planning is needed to mitigate potential adverse

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Savidge - Lowell Mill and Carbonton Dam Removals

    Uploaded by

    Restoration Systems, LLC
    99 views37 pages
    This document summarizes the results of monitoring aquatic fauna following the removal of two dams in North Carolina. For the Lowell Mill Dam removal, monitoring found the restoration of nearly 500,000 feet of habitat for migratory fish passage and establishment of lotic aquatic communities within the former reservoir. Rare mussel and fish species were also found to recolonize the area. For the Carbonton Dam removal, monitoring showed increases in rare fish species abundance and diversity of lotic invertebrates and fish within the former reservoir. While dam removal can successfully restore aquatic habitats and species, it may also negatively impact mussels through stranding, sediment release, and handling during monitoring. Careful planning is needed to mitigate potential adverse

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes the results of monitoring aquatic fauna following the removal of two dams in North Carolina. For the Lowell Mill Dam removal, monitoring found the restoration of nearly 500,000 feet of habitat for migratory fish passage and establishment of lotic aquatic communities within the former reservoir. Rare mussel and fish species were also found to recolonize the area. For the Carbonton Dam removal, monitoring showed increases in rare fish species abundance and diversity of lotic invertebrates and fish within the former reservoir. While dam removal can successfully restore aquatic habitats and species, it may also negatively impact mussels through stranding, sediment release, and handling during monitoring. Careful planning is needed to mitigate potential adverse

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    99 views37 pages

    Savidge - Lowell Mill and Carbonton Dam Removals

    Uploaded by

    Restoration Systems, LLC
    This document summarizes the results of monitoring aquatic fauna following the removal of two dams in North Carolina. For the Lowell Mill Dam removal, monitoring found the restoration of nearly 500,000 feet of habitat for migratory fish passage and establishment of lotic aquatic communities within the former reservoir. Rare mussel and fish species were also found to recolonize the area. For the Carbonton Dam removal, monitoring showed increases in rare fish species abundance and diversity of lotic invertebrates and fish within the former reservoir. While dam removal can successfully restore aquatic habitats and species, it may also negatively impact mussels through stranding, sediment release, and handling during monitoring. Careful planning is needed to mitigate potential adverse

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 37

    ASSESSING AQUATIC FAUNAL RESPONSE TO DAM REMOVAL: TWO CASE STUDIES IN NC

    Timothy W. Savidge, The Catena Group Inc.

    DAM REMOVAL AS STREAM MITIGATION IN NC


    NC Dam Removal Task Force (NCDRTF) recommends large scale dam removal as an appropriate and desirable form of compensatory stream mitigation. In 2002 NCDRTF prioritized 11 dams in NC that would provide the highest ecological benefit by being removed Removal of # 1 Lowell Mill Dam and # 4 Carbonton Dam by Restoration Systems, LLC

    Criteria for Credit Determination (from DRTF 2004 guidance)


    General criteria that will be considered when determining mitigation credit Water quality issues Establishment of appropriate aquatic community Rare, endangered and threatened aquatic species Additional credit Anadromous fish passage Wooded buffers Human values Demonstrated downstream benefits

    Monitoring Protocol
    Generate baseline data (Habitat conditions, faunal composition and distribution etc.) within and outside area of dam influence Identify success metrics Design five-year monitoring that will allow for documentation of success criteria

    LOWELL MILL DAM REMOVAL LITTLE RIVER: GOALS


    Restoration of appropriate aquatic community in 34,990 linear feet of river and stream channel from lentic to lotic conditions Known Barrier for American Shad: potential restoration of 497,800 linear feet for anadromous fish passage Restoration of Rare, Endangered and Threatened Aquatic Species: 11 rare mussel, 6 rare fish, and 1 rare salamander species known from basin, including two federally endangered species

    Pre-removal aquatic surveys


    14 sites within Little River (3 upstream, 7 in reservoir pool, 4 downstream Reservoir pool dominated by lentic-adapted species Higher mussel diversity and relative abundance (CPUE) in un-impounded sites compared to impounded sites Decreasing diversity and abundance within impoundment towards dam

    Post Removal Monitoring


    Re-sample the monitoring sites, at various times during monitoring period, depending on metric (i.e. mussel recruitment surveys not until Year-4) Sample upstream of former impoundment at next barrier to anadromous fish passage

    Anadromous Fish Sampling

    Restored Anadromous Fish Passage


    Spawning American shad captured upstream of former dam, at Atkinson Mill Dam on Little River during Year-1 and Year-2 Monitoring and in lower portions of Buffalo Creek Young of Year found within former impoundment during Year-5 Monitoring

    Young Of Year American Shad in Former Impoundment

    Measures of Success: Appropriate Aquatic Community


    Establishment of a suite of lotic-adapted fish species within former impoundment. Increases of relative abundance and species diversity of lotic freshwater mussel fauna within former impoundment Increases of relative abundance and species diversity of lotic aquatic snail fauna within former impoundment

    Restoration of Lotic Habitat

    Establishment of Appropriate Aquatic Community: Fish Community

    Fish surveys using NC Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) surveys conducted at 6 stations (> 600 foot wadeable section) during Year-1, Year-3 and Year-5. Method produces a numeric score based on 12 metrics (species richness and composition, trophic guild composition, abundance, health etc.) Scores ranged from 38-54 (Fair-Excellent) Year-1 (Ave. 46); 42-56 (Good/Fair-Excellent) Year-3 (Ave. 49), 50-56 (Good-Excellent) Year-5 (Ave. 53)

    Establishment of Appropriate Aquatic Community: Mussels and Snails

    Transition from suite of lentic and habitat generalist mussel species, to habitat generalist and lotic adapted ones, post removal recruitment Gravel Elimia found at 1 site in very low numbers pre-removal; and at 5 sites in high numers post removal

    Restoration of Rare, Endangered and Threatened Aquatic Species


    11 rare mussel species: 6 rare fish species, 1 rare salamander species outside of impoundment area

    Rare, Endangered and Threatened Aquatic Species


    1 rare species within impoundment pre-removal (Atlantic Pigtoe: 1 individual) 4 rare species within impoundment post-removal (Pinewoods Shiner: 11 individuals, 4 locations; Neuse River Waterdog: 2 individuals, 1 location; Creeper: 1 individual, 1 location; Tar River Spinymussel: 1 individual 1 location Potential habitat for other rare mussel species established, number of locations

    Rare, Endangered & Threatened Species Habitat

    Habitat

    Former Dam Site

    Lowell Mill Dam

    CARBONTON DAM, DEEP RIVER

    CARBONTON DAM REMOVAL MITIGATION CREDIT CRITERIA


    Restoration of rare, E, T species: 8 rare mussel, 4 rare fish species Known from Deep River, including Cape Fear Shiner, Dam recognized as population barrier Establishment of Appropriate Aquatic Community: Lentic to Lotic Faunal Assemblage After Removal

    Pre-Removal Sampling
    14 sites within reservoir pool 6 un-impounded reference sites Developed Target Aquatic Communities (TAC) for various locations within impoundment, based on reference sites

    Formerly Impounded Area Survey Location Map

    Restoration of Appropriate Aquatic Community

    10 of 13 sites in Deep River similar composition to the established TAC in Year 1, further developed in following years; Steady increase in tributaries of lotic adapted species, especially abundance and diversity of darter and shiner species Gravel elimia found at all sites in former Deep River impoundment post removal (Common to Very Abundant); not found during pre-removal

    Rare, Endangered and Threatened Aquatic Species


    Cape Fear Shiner found at 8 sites (#=41) during Year 2, collected again during Years 3-5 Post Removal Recruitment of 5 Rare Mussel Species in upper 2/3 of impoundment by Year-3; lower 1/3 by Year-5 Yellow Lampmussel, Savannah Liliput, Notched Rainbow*

    Rare, Endangered and Threatened Aquatic Species

    Conclusions: Carbonton Dam

    CFS located at 11/13 sites within former impoundment Substantial Riffle Habitat Formation with appropriate aquatic community Post Removal Mussel Recruitment, and increasing diversity of lotic species *Former Impoundment Site Sampled by SCUBA during Pre-removal (14 feet deep) depicted above

    Negative Impacts to mussels from dam removal?


    Mussels Stranded in Former Impoundment (Lentic species) Mussels Downstream: Release of low DO; Release of sediment/toxins Seithi et al. 2004Wisconsin Impact from explosives

    Mussel Response to Dam Removal Objectives


    Determine Mortality to mussels attributed to dam removal Determine Growth of Mussels below dam compared to control Determine changes in mussel density over time after dam removal

    Mussel Response to Dam Removal: Experimental Design


    Transects across river (10m, 200m,400m, upstream control) Mussels sampled in sq.m plots across transects (tagged, measured and returned) 1 of every 6 plots across transect not sampled (control for winter handling) Monitored for mortality etc. 3 months, 1 year.5-year

    3 Month Results
    Transect Control 10 m 200 m 400 m Tagged Mussels 38 31 96 439 Recovered/ Movement %mortality 32 (84%)/ 0% 14(45%)/ 0%, 4 fd 57 (59 %)/ 1%, 28fd 3 (9.4%) 7 (50%) 28 (49%)

    353 (80%)/ 6 (1.7%) 0.22%, 25fd

    Conclusions 3-months
    Some mussels crushed at former dam footprint No mortality attributed to dam removal in plots Sediment wedge slowly moving downriver Behavioral response of mussels to wedge noted Large amount of mortality, in subsequent monitoring years as wedge continued to move downstream

    30m Transect Mussel Groups

    200m Transect

    400m Transect # of mussels

    Control Transect

    Original tagged (Group1) 3-month tagged (Group 2) 32-month tagged (Group 3)

    31 24 15

    96 170 57

    438 417 112

    38 35 36

    Monitoring Interval 3-month interval Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 15-month interval Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 32-month interval Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 44-month interval Group 1 Group 2

    % recovered 45.2 ~ ~ 3.2 16.7 ~ 3.2 4.2 ~ 0 0 59.4 ~ ~ 52.6 38.2 ~ 2.1 11.2 ~ 7.3 7.1 80.4 ~ ~ 25.6 21.8 ~ 3.6 7.7 ~ 3.9 1.7 84.2 ~ ~ 76.3 61.8 ~ 28.9 26.5 ~ 23.7 29.4

    Implications for success of dam removal


    Useful conservation tool to restore aquatic habitat, rare species habitat, migrating fish habitat Development of monitoring protocol with quantifiable success criteria is key Not without adverse impacts Careful cost/benefit to resource analysis needed for each situation Incorporate measures to lessen magnitude of impacts

    Acknowledgements
    Restoration Systems: George Howard, Randy Turner, John Pryor, Adam Riggsbee Fritz Rohde-NMFS TCG Staff

    Questions?

    You might also like