As the demand for hydroelectricity progresses worldwide, small hydropower operators are increasingly examining the feasibility of using existing infrastructure (e.g. desander) in run-of-the-river schemes for intermittent power production. Such flexible production causes short-term discharge fluctuations (hydropeaking) in downstream reaches with potential adverse effects for the sensitive fauna and flora in alpine streams. In a field experiment on a previously unregulated section of the upper Rhone River (Switzerland), we measured density and composition of macroinvertebrate drift in two habitats (riffle, pool) following a 15-minute hydropeaking wave. The experimental hydropeaking was replicated five times over 14 days with decreasing recovery times between peaks (8 days, 3 days, 2 days, and 24 hours) and drift measurements were compared with kick samples for the benthic community. Results from the kick sampling showed that benthic macroinvertebrate abundance and composition did not significantly change between the experimental peaks. There were habitat specific reactions in macroinvertebrate drift to hydropeaking, with the pool experiencing more pronounced drift abundances than the riffle. We observed that drift abundance was not significantly correlated with recovery time but results indicate a reaction of some taxa to decreasing recovery times. This research may support water policy decision-makers to better understand the ecological impact of flexible power production in small hydropower plants, and advocates for the importance of completing more in-situ field experiments.
A presentation featuring the Monongahela Basin Mine Pool Project (MBMPP) created by Dr. Paul Ziemkiewicz, WVWRI Director, and Tamara Vandivort, WVWRI Project Manager.
Mapped Pools include a unique pool ID, geoLocation in decimal latitude and longitude, and a pool statusvalue indicating the pool’s presumed or verified status (Confirmed, Probable, Potential, Duplicate,Eliminated). In addition, Mapped Pools include dates of interaction with the data for each pool, the peopleresponsible for that interaction - observer and VPAtlas user, the town where the pool is located, estimatedlocation uncertainty, and the method used to map the pool (Known, Aerial Photo Interpretation, Field Visit).Information about the landowner may also be included, along with the observer’s comments about thepool’s status and location.
Pool Visit data includes a reference to its VPAtlas Mapped Pool data. Pool Visit data is information used toverify the status of a vernal pool. It includes geoLocation information, landscape, size and depth, water inletand outlet, disturbances, surrounding habitat, hydro-period, and the identification of indicator species.Vernal Pool Visit data may also include photos of the pool and its surroundings and photos of indicatorspecies, as well as links to iNaturalist species observations.VPAtlas Pool Visit data does not itself confirm the presence of a vernal pool. VPAtlas Visits are reviewed byAdministrative staff to determine and assign a status (Confirmed, Probable, Potential, Duplicate,Eliminated).VPAtlas Pool Visit data may also include VPAtlas Review data. VPAtlas Reviews are conducted by VPAtlasadministrators - biologists who determine the status of each Visited pool according to the informationincluded in each Visit. Reviews include the assignment of a pool’s status, provide a coded reason for thatstatus value, may include QA notes, may assign the Visit’s geoLocation to the Mapped Pool’s geoLocation,records the QA person and date, and assigns a unique ID to the Review.