Fish Passage Through Urban and Rural-Residential Areas

  • Robert M. Hughes
  • Susie Dunham


Migration is a critical aspect of salmonid life histories and salmonids migrate at multiple spatial and temporal scales depending on species, age, and season. Resident salmonids often migrate a few kilometers between stream reaches and river segments and between lakes and streams, whereas anadromous salmonids may migrate hundreds of kilometers between oceans and headwaters (Quinn 2005). Large- and small-scale migrations are governed by differences in species life histories, body size, differing habitat requirements of each life stage, and habitat heterogeneity and connectivity (Fausch et al. 2002). The timing and time frames over which salmonids migrate have evolved to maximize survival and reproductive fitness in variable environments.


Excessive Noise Poor Water Quality Fish Passage Migration Barrier Refuge Habitat 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bates K, Barnard B, Heiner B, Klavas P, Powers P (2003) Fish passage design at road culverts: a design manual for fish passage at road crossings. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Habitat and Lands Program, Environmental Engineering Division, Olympia, WAGoogle Scholar
  2. City of Portland (2004) Willamette river conditions report. Bureau of Planning, City of Portland, Portland, ORGoogle Scholar
  3. Clarkin K, Connor A, Furniss MJ, Gubernick B, Love M, Moynan K, Wilson-Musser S (2005) National inventory and assessment procedure—for identifying barriers to aquatic organism passage at stream-road crossings. 7700-Transportation management. National Technology and Development Program, USDA Forest Service, San Dimas, CAGoogle Scholar
  4. Davis JC, Davis GA (2011) The influence of stream-crossing structures on the distribution of rearing juvenile Pacific salmon. J North Am Benthol Soc 30:1117–1128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fausch KD, Torgersen CE, Baxter CV, Li HW (2002) Landscapes to riverscapes: bridging the gap between research and conservation of stream fishes. BioScience 52:483–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fjeldstad HP, Barlaup BT, Stickler M, Gabrielsen SE, Alfredsen K (2012) Removal of weirs and the influence of physical habitat for salmonids in a Norwegian river. River Res Appl 28:753–763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Frissell CA (2002) Topology of extinction and endangerment of native fishes in the Pacific Northwest and California (U.S.A.). Conserv Biol 7:342–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fullerton AH, Burnett KM, Steel EA, Flitcroft RL, Pess GR, Feist BE, Torgersen CE, Miller DJ, Sanderson BL (2010) Hydrological connectivity for riverine fish: measurement challenges and research opportunities. Freshw Biol 55:2215–2237Google Scholar
  9. Fullerton AH, Lindley ST, Pess GR, Feist BE, Steel EA, McElhany P (2011) Human influence on the spatial structure of threatened Pacific salmon metapopulations. Conserv Biol 25:932–944PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hanski IA (1999) Metapopulation ecology. Oxford University Press, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  11. Hanski IA, Gilpin M (1991) Metapopulation dynamics: brief history and conceptual domain. Biol J Linn Soc 42(1–2):3–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harrison S (1991) Local extinction in a metapopulation context: an empirical evaluation. Biol J Linn Soc 42(1–2):73–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hughes RM, Herlihy AT (2012) Patterns in catch per unit effort of native prey fish and alien piscivorous fish in 7 Pacific Northwest USA rivers. Fisheries 37:201–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Isaak DJ, Thurow RF, Rieman BE, Dunham JB (2007) Relative roles of habitat quality, size, and connectivity in Chinook salmon use of spawning patches. Ecol Appl 17(2):352–364PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jackson CR, Pringle CM (2010) Ecological benefits of reduced hydrological connectivity in intensively developed landscapes. Bioscience 60:37–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. McIntyre JK, Baldwin DH, Beauchamp DA, Scholz NL (2012) Low-level copper exposures increase visibility and vulnerability of juvenile coho salmon to cutthroat trout predators. Ecol Appl 22:1460–1471PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Metro (1999) Streamside CPR: development of measures to conserve, protect and restore riparian corridors in the metro region. Metro Growth Management Services Department, Portland, ORGoogle Scholar
  18. Metro (2002) Metro’s technical report for goal 5. July 2002 revised draft. Metro, Portland, ORGoogle Scholar
  19. Meyer KA, Schill DJ, Campbell MR, Kozfkay CC (2008) Distribution, abundance, and genetic population structure of Wood River sculpin, Cottus leiopomus. West N Am Nat 68:508–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mirati AH Jr (1999) Assessment of road culverts for fish passage problems on state- and county-owned roads: statewide summary report. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, ORGoogle Scholar
  21. Myers J, Busack C, Rawding D, Marshall A, Teel D, Van Doornik DM, Maher MT (2006) Historical population structure of Pacific salmonids in the Willamette River and Lower Columbia River basins. Technical memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-73. US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Seattle, WAGoogle Scholar
  22. Perkin EK, Holker F, Richardson JS, Sadler JP, Wolter C, Tockner K (2011) The influence of artificial light on stream and riparian ecosystems: questions, challenges, and perspectives. Ecosphere 2:122. doi: 10.1890/ES11-00241.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Quinn TP (2005) The behavior and ecology of Pacific salmon and trout. University of Washington Press, Seattle, WAGoogle Scholar
  24. Rieman BE, Dunham JB (2000) Metapopulations and salmonids: a synthesis of life history patterns and empirical observations. Ecol Freshw Fish 9(1–2):51–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Schlosser IJ (1995) Critical landscape attributes that influence fish population dynamics in headwater streams. Hydrobiologia 303(1–3):71–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sheer MB, Steel EA (2006) Lost watersheds: barriers, aquatic habitat connectivity, and salmon persistence in the Willamette and lower Columbia River basins. Trans Am Fish Soc 135(6):1654–1669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Song J, Mann DA, Cott PA, Hanna BW, Popper AN (2008) The inner ears of northern Canadian freshwater fishes following exposure to seismic air gun sounds. J Acoust Soc Am 124(2):1360–1366PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Tabor RA, Brown GS, Luiting VT (2004) The effect of light intensity on sockeye salmon fry migratory behavior and predation by cottids in the Cedar River, Washington. N Am J Fish Manag 24(1):128–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Taylor B (1998) Salmon and steelhead runs and related events of the Sandy River Basin—a historical perspective. IPS2-17180, Bull Run Project, FERC no. 477. Portland General Electric, Hydro Licensing Department, Portland, ORGoogle Scholar
  30. Washington State Department of Transportation (2011) Progress performance report for WSDOT fish passage inventory. Accessed 16 Sep 2013
  31. Whittier TR, Halliwell DB, Paulsen SG (1997) Cyprinid distributions in Northeast USA lakes: evidence of regional-scale minnow biodiversity losses. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 54:1593–1607Google Scholar
  32. Wipfli MS, Richardson JS, Naiman RJ (2007) Ecological linkages between headwaters and downstream ecosystems: transport of organic matter, invertebrates, and wood down headwater channels. J Am Water Resour Assoc 43:72–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wofford JEB, Gresswell RE, Banks MA (2005) Influence of barriers to movement on within-watershed genetic variation of coastal cutthroat trout. Ecol Appl 15(2):628–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Amnis Opes Institute, Department of Fisheries and WildlifeOregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA
  2. 2.Department of Fisheries and WildlifeOregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA

Personalised recommendations