اثرات اکولوژیکی حذف سدها

نویسندگان
عطااله کاویان 1
لیلا غلامی 2
مهین کله هوئی 3
1 عضو هیئت علمی دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی ساری
2 گروه مهندسی آبخیزداری، دانشکده منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی ساری، ساری، ایران
3 دانش آموخته دکتری علوم و مهندسی آبخیزداری، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس
چکیده
افزایش ناگهانی رشد جمعیت و به دنبال آن محدودیت و کمبود در عرضه منابع آب شیرین در سطح جهان باعث فراهم شدن شرایط جدیدی برای کشورهای واقع در کمربند خشک و نیمه‌خشک شده است. پروژه‌های متعددی ازجمله آبیاری و زهکشی، کنترل سیلاب و ساخت سد به‌منظور حفظ، بهبود و بهره‌برداری بهینه از این منابع باارزش اجراشده است. دراین‌بین سدها ابزاری بسیار مهمی برای مدیریت آب رودخانه برای توسعه اجتماعی-اقتصادی و هم‌چنین بهبود وضعیت اکولوژیکی تخریب‌شده سیستم رودخانه و خدمات آن‌ها به شمار می‌رود. سدها بسته به مکان و زمان درزمینه جریان زیست‌محیطی دارای نقش منفی و مثبتی است که در این میان هزینه‌های زیست‌محیطی آن‌ها قابل‌توجه می‌باشد. مطابق نتایج مستندات و گزارش‌های انجام‌شده احداث سد دربرگیرنده تغییرات زیست‌محیطی از جنبه‌های مختلف هجوم و افزایش گونه‌های مهاجم تا افزایش دسترسی به زیستگاه‌های تخم‌ریزی برای ماهیان مهاجر بوده است. امروزه چالش پیش روی مدیران و دانشمندان درک و مدیریت بهتر عواقب ناشی از حذف سدها می‌باشد. به همین تقدیر هدف از نوشتار حاضر ارائه رویکردهای حذف سد بر تغییرات اکولوژیکی می‌باشد. نتایج این پژوهش می‌تواند اطلاعات باارزشی از تغییر رفتار سدها روی ویژگی‌های محیط‌زیست را به کُنش‌گران بخش‌های مربوطه ارائه ‌دهد.
کلیدواژه‌ها
بوم‌سازگان
تنوع زیستی
زیستگاه‌
زیست‌محیطی
مدیریت منابع آب

عنوان مقاله English

Ecological impact of removing dams

نویسندگان English

Ataollah kavian 1
Leila Gholami 2
Mahin Kalehhouei 3
1 f
2 Department of Watershed Management Engineering, Faculty of Natural Resources, Sari Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University, Sari, Iran
3 Former Ph.D. of Watershed Management Sciences and Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University.
چکیده English

The sudden increase in population growth, followed by the restriction and scarcity of the world's supply of freshwater resources, has created new conditions for countries in the arid and semi-arid belts. To conserve, enhance and make the best use of these valuable resources, several projects have been implemented, including irrigation and drainage, flood control and dam construction. Meanwhile, dams are a very important tool to manage the river water for socio-economic development and also to improve the deteriorated ecological status of the river system and its services. Depending on place and time, dams play both negative and positive roles in environmental flows, with significant environmental costs. According to the results of the documents and reports, the construction of the dam has brought about environmental changes from various aspects of invasion and increase in invasive species to improving access to spawning habitats for migratory fish. The challenge for managers and scientists today is to better understand and manage the consequences of dam decommissioning. For this reason, the purpose of this study is to present the approaches of removing the dam on ecological changes. The results of this research can provide stakeholders in the responsible departments with valuable information about the changes in the behavior of dams on the environmental properties.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Biodiversity
Ecosystems
Environment
Habitat
Water resource management
  1. Arango, S., Greco, R., Guzzo, N., Raffrenato, E., Montanari, M., Bailoni, L. 2023. Physical Characterization of Ten Hemp Varieties to Use as Animal Bedding Material. Animals, 13(2), 284.
  2. Arce-Gomez, A., Donovan, J. D., Bedggood, R. E. 2015. Social impact assessments: Developing a consolidated conceptual framework. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 50, 85-94.
  3. Arcifa, M. S., Coelho, P. N., da Silva, L. H. S., Righi‐Cavallaro, K. O. 2023. Impacts of small dams on the phytoplankton and invertebrates in an Amazonian river. River Research and Applications, 39(4), 661-674.
  4. Babin, A. B., S. Peake, T. Linnansaari, R. A. Curry, M. Ndong, K. Haralampides, and R. Jones. 2021. Atlantic Salmon upstream migration delay in a large hydropower reservoir. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 41: 158–175.
  5. Bednarek, A. T. 2001. Undamming rivers: a review of the ecological impacts of dam removal. Environmental management, 27, 803-814.
  6. Brown, P. H., Tullos, D., Tilt, B., Magee, D., Wolf, A. T. 2009. Modeling the costs and benefits of dam construction from a multidisciplinary perspective. Journal of environmental management, 90, S303-S311.
  7. Brown, R. L., Thomas, C. C., Cubley, E. S., Clausen, A. J., Shafroth, P. B. 2022. Does large dam removal restore downstream riparian vegetation diversity? Testing predictions on the Elwha River, Washington, USA. Ecological Applications, 32(6), e2591.
  8. Burroughs, B. A., Hayes, D. B., Klomp, K. D., Hansen, J. F., Mistak, J. 2010. The effects of the Stronach Dam removal on fish in the Pine River, Manistee County, Michigan. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 139(5), 1595-1613.
  9. Camargo, J. A., Voelz, N. J. Biotic and abiotic changes along the recovery gradient of two impounded rivers with different impoundment use. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 50,143– 158.
  10. Chilakala, R., Thannaree, C., Shin, E. J., Thenepalli, T., Ahn, J. W. 2019. Sustainable solutions for oyster shell waste recycling in Thailand and the Philippines. Recycling, 4(3), 35.
  11. Cordoleani, F., Holmes, E., Bell-Tilcock, M., Johnson, R. C., Jeffres, C. 2022. Variability in foodscapes and fish growth across a habitat mosaic: Implications for management and ecosystem restoration. Ecological Indicators, 136, 108681.
  12. Craig, J.F. 2001. Large Dams and Freshwater Fish Biodiversity. World Commission on Dams, 59 pp.
  13. Dynesius, M., Nilsson, C. Fragmentation and flow regulation of river systems in the northern third of the world. Science 266:753–762.
  14. Crunkilton, R.L., Czarnezki, J.M. 1980. Severe gas bubble disease in a warmwater fishery in the midwestern United States. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 109, 725–733.
  15. Cummins, K.W., Klug, M.J. 1979. Feeding ecology of stream invertebrates. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 10, 147– 172.
  16. Friedman, J.M., Auble, GT. 1999.Mortality of riparian box elder from sediment mobilization and extended inundation.Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 15, 463–476.
  17. Giddings, J. 2011. Village of the Dammed: The Biophysical and Socioeconomic Impacts of Small Dams and their Removal-A Case Study of Eden Mills, Ontario (Doctoral dissertation, University of Guelph).
  18. Gierszewski, P. J., Habel, M., Szmańda, J., Luc, M. 2020. Evaluating effects of dam operation on flow regimes and riverbed adaptation to those changes. Science of the Total Environment, 710, 136202.
  19. Gregory, S., Li, H., Li, J. 2002. The conceptual basis for ecological responses to dam removal: resource managers face enormous challenges in assessing the consequences of removing large dams from rivers and evaluating management options. BioScience, 52(8), 713-723.
  20. Habel, M., Mechkin, K., Podgorska, K., Saunes, M., Babiński, Z., Chalov, S., Absalon, D., Podgórski, Z., Obolewski, K. 2020. Dam and reservoir removal projects: a mix of social-ecological trends and cost-cutting attitudes. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 19210.
  21. Hart, D.D, Poff, N.L. 2002. A special section on dam removal and river restoration. BioScience 52, 653–655.
  22. Heggenes, J., Stickler, M., Alfredsen, K., Brittain, J. E., Adeva‐Bustos, A., Huusko, A. 2021. Hydropower‐driven thermal changes, biological responses and mitigating measures in northern river systems. River Research and Applications, 37(5), 743-765.
  23. Heinz Center for Science. 2002. Social aspects of dam removal. In Dam Removal: Science and Decision Making. H. J. Heinz Center for Science, Economics and the Environment: Washington, DC; 175–189.
  24. Herbert, R. J., Humphreys, J., Davies, C. J., Roberts, C., Fletcher, S., Crowe, T. P. 2016. Ecological impacts of non-native Pacific oysters (Crassostrea gigas) and management measures for protected areas in Europe. Biodiversity and Conservation, 25, 2835-2865.
  25. Hoque, M. M., Islam, A., Ghosh, S. 2022. Environmental flow in the context of dams and development with special reference to the Damodar Valley Project, India: a review. Sustainable Water Resources Management, 8(3), 62.
  26. Itsukushima, R., Ohtsuki, K., Sato, T., Kano, Y., Takata, H., Yoshikawa, H. 2019. Effects of sediment released from a check dam on sediment deposits and fish and macroinvertebrate communities in a small stream. Water, 11(4), 716.
  27. Jones, P. E., Champneys, T., Vevers, J., Börger, L., Svendsen, J. C., Consuegra, S., Jones, J., Garcia de Leaniz, C. 2021. Selective effects of small barriers on river‐resident fish. Journal of Applied Ecology, 58(7), 1487-1498.
  28. Lenhart, C.F. 2000. The vegetation and hydrology of impoundments after dam removal in southern Wisconsin. MS thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
  29. Li, H.W., Schreck, C.B., Bond, C.E., Rexstad, E. 1987. Factors influencing changes in fish assemblages of Pacific Northwest streams. Pages 193–202 in Matthews WJ,Heins DC, eds.Community and Evolutionary Ecology of North American Stream Fishes.Norman:University of Oklahoma Press.
  30. Mason, R. J., Johnson, M. F., Bailey, L., Rice, S. P., Wood, P. J. 2022. Vertical reworking of sediment by the cased caddisfly Glossosomatidae (Agapetus fuscipes) increases sand exposure and availability in armoured gravel-bed rivers. Geomorphology, 418, 108475.
  31. Maule, A.G., Schreck, C.B., Bradford, C.S., Barton, B.A. 1988. Physiological effects of collecting and transporting emigrating juvenile Chinook salmon past dams on the Columbia River. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 117, 245–261.
  32. McAllister, D.E., Craig, J.F., Davidson, N., Delany S. Seddon, M. 2001. Biodiversity Impacts of Large Dams. Background Paper Nr. 1, Prepared for IUCN / UNEP / WCD, 47 pp.
  33. Mensinger, M. A., E. J. Blomberg, and J. D. Zydlewski. 2021. The consequences of dam passage for downstream-migrating American Eel in the Penobscot River, Maine. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 78: 1181–1192.
  34. Minshall, G.W., Robinson, C.T., Lawrence, D.E. 1997. Postfire responses of lotic ecosystems in Yellowstone National Park, U.S.A. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 54, 2509–2525.
  35. Mitra, S., Singh, A. 2018. Assessment of environmental flow requirements of damodar river basins by using flow duration indices method–a case study. International Journal of Hydrology, 2(3), 281-283.
  36. Montgomery, J.C., Becker, C.D. 1980. Gas bubble disease in smallmouth bass and northern squawfish from the Snake and Columbia Rivers.Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 109, 734–736.
  37. Moser, M. L., Jackson, A. D., Lucas, M. C., Mueller, R. P. 2015. Behavior and potential threats to survival of migrating lamprey ammocoetes and macrophthalmia. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries, 25, 103-116.
  38. Neves, R.J. 1999. Be dammed: The life and times of freshwater mussel populations in the United States. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Fisheries Society; 1 September 1999; Charlotte, NC.
  39. Newcombe, C. P., MacDonald, D. D. Effects of suspended sediments on aquatic ecosystems. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 11, 72–82.
  40. Orr, C.H., Rogers, K.L, Stanleym E.H. 2006. Changes in channel geomorphology and phosphorus uptake following small dam removal. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 25, 556–568.
  41. Poff, N.L., Allan, J.D., Bain, M.B., Karr, J.R., Prestegaard, K.L., Richter, B.D., Sparksm R.E, Stromberg, J.C. 1997. The natural flow regime. BioScience 47: 769–784.
  42. Postel, S. 1997. Last oasis: facing water scarcity. New York: WW Norton.
  43. Robinson, C.T., Uehlinger, U., Monaghan, M.T. 2004. Stream ecosystem response to multiple experimental floods from a reservoir. River Research and Applications 20, 359–377.
  44. Sabater, S., Bregoli, F., Acuña, V., Barceló, D., Elosegi, A., Ginebreda, A., Marcé, R., Muñoz, I., Sabater-Liesa, L., Ferreira, V. 2018. Effects of human-driven water stress on river ecosystems: a meta-analysis. Scientific reports, 8(1), 11462.
  45. Shafroth, P.B., Friedman, J.M., Auble, G.T., Scott, M. L., Braatne, J. H. 2002. Potential responses of riparian vegetation to dam removal. BioScience, 52, 703–12.
  46. Srinivas, R., Singh, A. P., & Shankar, D. (2020). Understanding the threats and challenges concerning Ganges River basin for effective policy recommendations towards sustainable development. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 22, 3655-3690.
  47. Stringer, A. P., Gaywood, M. J. 2016. The impacts of beavers Castor spp. on biodiversity and the ecological basis for their reintroduction to Scotland, UK. Mammal review, 46(4), 270-283.
  48. Tang, L., Mo, K., Zhang, J., Wang, J., Chen, Q., He, S., Zhu, Ch., Lin, Y. 2021. Removing tributary low-head dams can compensate for fish habitat losses in dammed rivers. Journal of Hydrology, 598, 126204.
  49. Thomas, Y., Cassou, C., Gernez, P., Pouvreau, S. 2018. Oysters as sentinels of climate variability and climate change in coastal ecosystems. Environmental Research Letters, 13(10), 104009.
  50. Tian, Q., Xu, K. H., Wang, Y. P., Liang, C. J. 2022. Dam impacts on seasonality of water and sediment transport in intensively managed river basins: a case study of the Yangtze River. Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface, 127(11), e2021JF006573.
  51. Wallace, L. 2014. Condit dam removal: a decision-making comparison with removal of Elwha River dams (Doctoral dissertation, Kansas State University).
  52. Weber, N., Bouwes, N., Pollock, M. M., Volk, C., Wheaton, J. M., Wathen, G., Wirtz, J., Jordan, C. E. 2017. Alteration of stream temperature by natural and artificial beaver dams. PloS one, 12(5), e0176313.
  53. Whittum, K. A., Zydlewski, J. D., Coghlan Jr, S. M., Hayes, D. B., Watson, J., Kiraly, I. 2023. Fish Assemblages in the Penobscot River: A Decade after Dam Removal. Marine and Coastal Fisheries, 15(1), e10227.
  54. Wilson, H. 2021. Reefs of rubbish: the ecological implications of anthropogenic litter in streams (Doctoral dissertation, University of Nottingham).
  55. World Commission on Dams (WCD). 2000. Dams and development: a new framework for decisions-making. London: Earthscan Publications.
  56. Wu, H., Chen, J., Xu, J., Zeng, G., Sang, L., Liu, Q., Yin, Zh., Dai, D., Yin, D., Liang, J., Ye, S. 2019. Effects of dam construction on biodiversity: A review. Journal of cleaner production, 221, 480-489.
  57. Xu, L., Li, Q., Yu, H., Kong, L. 2017. Estimates of heritability for growth and shell color traits and their genetic correlations in the black shell strain of pacific oyster Crassostrea gigas. Marine Biotechnology, 19, 421-429.
  58. Yaghoubi Farani, A., Izadi, N., Ataie, P. 2016. Assessment of Ecological and Social impact of Fadami Dam Construction on Agricultural Development of the Area. Geography and Development, 14(43), 91-112. (In Persian)