Socioeconomic and Institutional Dimensions of Dam Removals: The Wisconsin Experience

Born, Stephen M.; Genskow, Kenneth; Filbert, Timothy L.; Hernández-Mora, Nuria; Keefer, Matthew L.; White, Kimberly A.

doi:10.1007/s002679900111

Cited by 122 publications

(117 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

109

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As concerns about the ecological impacts of small dams on stream ecosystems have increased in recent years (Doeg and Koehn 1994;Poff and Hart 2002;Tiemann et al 2004), their removal is increasingly being considered as an effective way to carryout ecological restoration (Born et al 1998;Bednarek 2001;Heinz Center 2002;Stanley and Doyle 2003;Thomson et al 2005). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of low-head dam removal on benthic macroinvertebrate communities in a Korean stream

Kil

Bae

2012

Animal Cells and Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was conducted to examine how a low-head dam removal (partial removal) could affect benthic macroinvertebrate communities in a stream. Benthic macroinvertebrates and substrates were seasonally sampled before and after dam removal (March 2006ÁApril 2007. Benthic macroinvertebrates and substrates were quantitatively sampled from immediately upstream (upper: pool) and downstream (lower: riffle) sites, the location of the dam itself (middle), and immediately above the impoundment (control: riffle). After the removal, species richness and density of benthic macroinvertebrates as well as the EPT group (Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera) increased to higher levels than those before the removal, while functional feeding groups and habitat orientation groups changed more heterogeneously at the upper site. At the lower site, species richness and density decreased somewhat immediately after dam removal, which was associated with an increase of silt and sand, but recovered after monsoon floods which helped to enhance substrate diversity at the upper site. Decreased dominance index and increased diversity index in both the upper and lower sites are evidence of positive effects from the dam removal. In conclusion, we suggest that even a partial removal of a dam, resulting in increased substrate diversity in the upper site, could sufficiently help rehabilitate lost ecological integrity of streams without major habitat changes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of low-head dam removal on benthic macroinvertebrate communities in a Korean stream

Kil

Bae

2012

Animal Cells and Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, a study of 14 dam removals in Wisconsin, USA, showed that the estimated cost of repair was on average three times higher than that of removal (Born et al 1998). One common consequence of damming rivers is an impoverished fish fauna.…”

Section: Economic Incentivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In cases in which riparian landowners represented a majority of stakeholders, i.e., dams were located in the middle of communities rather than more rural settings, the dams ended up being repaired instead of removed, despite a higher cost for the dam owner. Born et al (1998) also categorized the perceived gains and losses following removal and found that stakeholders in 12 of the 14 cases felt that improved safety was a gain. Stakeholders also listed improved fish and wildlife habitats as a reward.…”

Section: Always Wonder What Is It About the Sound Of A Sledgehammermentioning

confidence: 99%

Conflicts Associated with Dam Removal in Sweden

Lejon¹,

Renöfält²,

Nilsson³

2009

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Although these end-of-life decisions on dams are taking place at a time when stakeholder participation is a priority for environmental decision makers (Reed 2008, Freeman et al 2010, Susskind 2013, Kochskämper et al 2016, stakeholders' perceptions of the decisions and their impacts have been little studied (Born et al 1998, Johnson and Graber 2002, Lejon et al 2009, Jørgensen and Renöfält 2012, Fox et al 2016, Reilly and Adamowski 2017. There is a need to better understand why stakeholders often have diverging views on whether a dam should be removed or rebuilt/refurbished to anticipate and mediate any resulting conflict and to incorporate their perspectives into decisions (Johnson and Graber 2002, Lejon et al 2009, Jørgensen and Renöfält 2012, Fox et al 2016.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial and temporal scale framing of a decision on the future of the Mactaquac Dam in New Brunswick, Canada

Reilly¹,

Adamowski²

2017

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Many large dams are coming to the end of their lifespans and decisions must be made about whether to rebuild/refurbish or remove them, which will have different implications across temporal and spatial scales. Such decisions are often controversial, but little is known about what drives differences in stakeholders' perspectives of them. Cognitive scale frames describe how people use scales in interpreting such an issue, including which of its elements they prioritize and which they minimize. Using interviews with 30 stakeholders and analysis of documents, we explored how stakeholders used spatial and temporal scales in their frames of a decision about whether to rebuild/refurbish or remove the Mactaquac Dam in New Brunswick, Canada. We found that stakeholders used multiple levels on spatial, hydrological, administrative, and temporal scales in their frames. Both those who wanted to retain the dam and those who wanted to remove it upscaled problems from local level to higher spatial levels, making problems seem widely shared and therefore legitimate. However, there were mismatches in the scales used: the retainers upscaled to the province on the administrative scale while the removers upscaled to the entire river on the hydrological scale. The results revealed the particular importance of temporal scale frames, particularly of the past, which have been little studied. Both groups framed problems as continuing into the future, but diverged strongly in how they framed various periods of the past as being relevant to understanding problems and their solutions in the present. Decision makers should be aware of differing scale frames when designing decision-making processes and conflict resolution efforts.

show abstract

Socioeconomic and Institutional Dimensions of Dam Removals: The Wisconsin Experience

Cited by 122 publications

References 9 publications

Effects of low-head dam removal on benthic macroinvertebrate communities in a Korean stream

Effects of low-head dam removal on benthic macroinvertebrate communities in a Korean stream

Conflicts Associated with Dam Removal in Sweden

Spatial and temporal scale framing of a decision on the future of the Mactaquac Dam in New Brunswick, Canada

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About