Cumulative Effects of Hydropower Schemes on Fish Migration and Populations
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Cumulative effects of hydropower schemes on fish migration and populations Report – SC120078 We are the Environment Agency. We protect and improve the environment and make it a better place for people and wildlife. We operate at the place where environmental change has its greatest impact on people’s lives. We reduce the risks to people and properties from flooding; make sure there is enough water for people and wildlife; protect and improve air, land and water quality and apply the environmental standards within which industry can operate. Acting to reduce climate change and helping people and wildlife adapt to its consequences are at the heart of all that we do. We cannot do this alone. We work closely with a wide range of partners including government, business, local authorities, other agencies, civil society groups and the communities we serve. This report is the result of research commissioned and funded by the Environment Agency. Published by: Author(s): Environment Agency, Horizon House, Deanery Road, Dr David Fraser, Simon Palmer & Dr Iain Stewart- Bristol, BS1 5AH Russon www.environment-agency.gov.uk Dissemination Status: Released to Regions ISBN: 978-1-84911-336-6 Publicly available © Environment Agency – January 2015 Keywords: Hydropower; Cumulative effects; Impacts; Barrier; Fish All rights reserved. This document may be reproduced Passage; Conservation limit; Migratory; Anadromous; with prior permission of the Environment Agency. Catadromous; Diadromous The views and statements expressed in this report are Research Contractor: those of the author alone. The views or statements APEM Ltd, Centre for Innovation & Enterprise expressed in this publication do not necessarily Oxford University represent the views of the Environment Agency and the Begbroke Science Park, Begbroke Hill Environment Agency cannot accept any responsibility for Woodstock Road such views or statements. Begbroke, OX5 1PF Tel: 01865 854 853 Further copies of this report are available from our publications catalogue: Environment Agency’s Project Manager: www.gov.uk/government/publications Stephanie Cole, Evidence Directorate or our National Customer Contact Centre: Project Number: T: 03708 506506 SC120078/R1 Email: [email protected] ii Cumulative effects of hydropower schemes on fish migration and populations Evidence at the Environment Agency Evidence underpins the work of the Environment Agency. It provides an up-to-date understanding of the world about us, helps us to develop tools and techniques to monitor and manage our environment as efficiently and effectively as possible. It also helps us to understand how the environment is changing and to identify what the future pressures may be. The work of the Environment Agency’s Evidence Directorate is a key ingredient in the partnership between research, guidance and operations that enables the Environment Agency to protect and restore our environment. This report was produced by the Scientific and Evidence Services team within Evidence. The team focuses on four main areas of activity: • Setting the agenda, by providing the evidence for decisions; • Maintaining scientific credibility, by ensuring that our programmes and projects are fit for purpose and executed according to international standards; • Carrying out research, either by contracting it out to research organisations and consultancies or by doing it ourselves; • Delivering information, advice, tools and techniques, by making appropriate products available. Miranda Kavanagh Director of Evidence Cumulative effects of hydropower schemes on fish migration and populations iii Executive summary Guidance for run-of-river hydropower schemes in England is designed to minimise environmental impacts. This report describes an investigation into whether small impacts from single sites, compounded across multiple schemes within a catchment, cumulatively produce significant adverse impacts. We use salmon as an example to illustrate whether cumulative effects on migratory fish populations can be assessed and whether they are likely to occur. The literature review indicated that multiple hydropower schemes have the potential to result in negative cumulative impacts but most of the available evidence is from much larger schemes in other countries not typical of schemes being developed in England. The literature does indicate the main aspects of hydropower schemes that may affect fish populations and these informed the development of a cumulative effects model. The model was applied to a test catchment, the River Coquet, to explore a range of hypothetical scenarios around the installation of hydropower schemes. Critically, hydropower schemes, which include mitigating measures such as an associated fish pass, can have a positive, neutral or negative effect, depending on scheme design and location. Consequently, whether multiple schemes have cumulative effects, and whether such effects are negative, neutral or positive, depends on the net effects from each individual scheme, considered collectively across all schemes. Such an approach is necessarily sensitive to the accuracy with which individual site effects can be quantified. To model cumulative effects, three model elements were used: (i) hydropower scheme impacts, (ii) spatial variations in the fish population and (iii) changes in the fish life-cycle. The hydropower scheme element identifies impacts of run-of-river hydropower schemes based on their importance in terms of migratory fish, and the likelihood of being able to quantify them. Impacts included were: • impediment to upstream and downstream migration from the scheme; • alleviation of upstream and downstream migratory impediment with fish passage solutions; • mortality through impingement or entrainment of fish on scheme intakes and through contact with turbines; • an option to include freshwater habitat loss as a result of the scheme (via any depleted on inaccessible reach). A range of sources were used to attribute values to model components. These included available guidance, literature and scientific judgement. The spatial population model element, developed using salmon as a demonstration species, uses the Environment Agency’s Detailed River Network, combined with generic, scientifically accepted juvenile salmon population values. The scheme effects element, reflecting hypothetical hydropower schemes, was then applied to the spatial population element. This enabled the salmon population upstream of the scheme, and (via the life-cycle model element) returning adults requiring passage past the scheme, to be quantified, and benefits and dis-benefits from the schemes to be applied to the population. Some factors that may be important but will be highly site specific (e.g. increased predation) or changes in flow apportionment between a turbine and a fish pass can be added if required but were not used in this study. The sequential evaluation of multiple schemes in this way allowed assessment of cumulative effects. Overall effects were quantified as the change in the numbers of returning adult salmon. iv Cumulative effects of hydropower schemes on fish migration and populations Within the River Coquet test catchment a theoretical maximum population of salmon was defined; this took no account of other pressures that might be operating within the catchment. The aim of the work was specifically to address impacts from hydropower. A range of scenarios considered the impacts of installing between one and six hydropower schemes; these are realistic but hypothetical situations designed to test the model. We show that the impact of each scheme and the cumulative effects of several schemes could be either positive or negative, with impacts on the number of returning adult fish ranging from +18% to -12% for the range of scenarios tested. The scenario testing assumed that values for upstream passage from new mitigation measures such as fish passes would meet Environment Agency guidance, which aims for greater than 90% efficiencies. Whether such efficiencies are achieved in practice may depend on site-specific conditions and design implementation. We included a scenario to illustrate the effect of a scheme operating below best practice passage efficiency levels. Impacts are highly dependent on the pre-scheme passability of existing barriers and any benefit achieved by mitigating measures such as improved fish passage. Other significant factors include the location of schemes and the amount of potential upstream habitat affected. In this analysis schemes located in the upper catchment have less potential for negative impacts, but in the case of the test scenarios a large improvement in fish passage at an existing barrier in the lower catchment created very significant improvements that more than compensated for some negative scheme impacts upstream. Such improvements could also be made without the installation of hydropower and the model facilitates evaluation of such options. The status of catchment populations would also influence the resulting impacts of schemes on salmon populations. The model was developed based on the biological values used for deriving salmon conservation limits and, thus, is scientifically robust, familiar to fisheries practitioners, and transferable (in principle) to other migratory species and rivers. However, a significant advantage is that, unlike conventional conservation limits, which are essentially static and do not allow spatial interrogation, the GIS format of the current spatial model enables the number