Fish pass design - criteria for the design and approval of fish passes and other structures to facilitate the passage of migratory fish in rivers

Many of British rivers hold stocks of salmon (Salmo salar L.) and sea trout (Salmo trutta L.) and during most of the year some of the adult fish migrate upstream to the head waters where, with the advent of winter, they will eventually spawn. For a variety of reasons, including the generation of power for milling, improving navigation and measuring water flow, man has put obstacles in the way of migratory fish which have added to those already provided by nature in the shape of rapids and waterfalls. While both salmon and sea trout, particularly the former, are capable of spectacular leaps the movement of fish over man-made and natural obstacles can be helped, or even made possible, by the judicious use of fish passes. These are designed to give the fish an easier route over or round an obstacle by allowing it to overcome the water head difference in a series of stages ('pool and traverse' fish pass) or by reducing the water velocity in a sloping channel (Denil fish pass). Salmon and sea trout make their spawning runs at different flow conditions, salmon preferring much higher water flows than sea trout. Hence the design of fish passes requires an understanding of the swimming ability of fish (speed and endurance) and the effect of water temperature on this ability. Also the unique features of each site must be appreciated to enable the pass to be positioned so that its entrance is readily located. As well as salmon and sea trout, rivers often have stocks of coarse fish and eels. Coarse fish migrations are generally local in character and although some obstructions such as weirs may allow downstream passages only, they do not cause a significant problem. Eels, like salmon and sea trout, travel both up and down river during the course of their life histories. However, the climbing power of elvers is legendary and it is not normally necessary to offer them help, while adult silver eels migrate at times of high water flow when downstream movement is comparatively easy: for these reasons neither coarse fish nor eels are considered further. The provision of fish passes is, in many instances, mandatory under the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act 1975. This report is intended for those involved in the planning, siting, construction and operation of fish passes and is written to clarify the hydraulic problems for the biologist and the biological problems for the engineer. It is also intended to explain the criteria by which the design of an individual pass is assessed for Ministerial Approval.

Quantification of drag and lift imposed by pop-up satellite archival tags and estimation of the metabolic cost to cownose rays (Rhinoptera bonasus)

The recent development of the pop-up satellite archival tag (PSAT) has allowed the collection of information on a tagged animal, such as geolocation, pressure (depth), and ambient water temperature. The success of early studies, where PSATs were used on pelagic fishes, has spurred increasing interest in the use of these tags on a large variety of species and age groups. However, some species and age groups may not be suitable candidates for carrying a PSAT because of the relatively large size of the tag and the consequent energy cost to the study animal. We examined potential energetic costs to carrying a tag for the cownose ray (Rhinoptera bonasus). Two forces act on an animal tagged with a PSAT: lift from the PSATs buoyancy and drag as the tag is moved through the water column. In a freshwater flume, a spring scale measured the total force exerted by a PSAT at flume velocities from 0.00 to 0.60 m/s. By measuring the angle of deflection of the PSAT at each velocity, we separated total force into its constituent forces — lift and drag. The power required to carry a PSAT horizontally through the water was then calculated from the drag force and velocity. Using published metabolic rates, we calculated the power for a ray of a given size to swim at a specified velocity (i.e., its swimming power). For each velocity, the power required to carry a PSAT was compared to the swimming power expressed as a percentage, %TAX (Tag Altered eXertion). A %TAX greater than 5% was felt to be energetically significant. Our analysis indicated that a ray larger than 14.8 kg can carry a PSAT without exceeding this criterion. This method of estimating swimming power can be applied to other species and would allow a researcher to decide the suitability of a given study animal for tagging with a PSAT.

Capture fisheries in Uganda: why Bujagali hydro-power project and ecological monitoring?

Human use of water resow-ces in Uganda has grown and intensified along with population growth and increasing demand to meet the diverse human needs. In the case of Uganda's rivers, the main uses include fisheries, hydropower generation, abstraction for potable water supply, discharge of sewage and navigation. All these uses can disrupt the integrity of the aquatic ecosystem and may affect the survival of the diversity of organisms. In consideration of the need to increase electricity to meet demand, the Bujagali Hydro-power Project (BHPP) and the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) recognised the importance of safeguards to mitigate impacts of the project. The National Fisheries Resources Research Institute (NaFIRRI) was assigned the role of providing baseline information on the aquatic ecosystem of the Upper Victoria Nile and to follow up the findings with a monitoring framework during construction and post-commissioning phases.