Dam removal continues to garner attention as a potential river restoration tool. The increasing possibility of dam removal through the FERC relicensing process, as well as through federal and state agency actions, makes a critical examination of the ecological benefits and costs essential. This paper reviews the possible ecological impacts of dam removal using various case studies. Restoration of an unregulated flow regime has resulted in increased biotic diversity through the enhancement of preferred spawning grounds or other habitat. By returning riverine conditions and sediment transport to formerly impounded areas, riffle/pool sequences, gravel, and cobble have reappeared, along with increases in biotic diversity. Fish passage has been another benefit of dam removal. However, the disappearance of the reservoir may also affect certain publicly desirable fisheries. Short-term ecological impacts of dam removal include an increased sediment load that may cause suffocation and abrasion to various biota and habitats. However, several recorded dam removals have suggested that the increased sediment load caused by removal should be a short-term effect. Pre-removal studies for contaminated sediment may be effective at controlling toxic release problems. Although monitoring and dam removal studies are limited, a continued examination of the possible ecological impacts is important for quantifying the resistance and resilience of aquatic ecosystems. Dam removal, although controversial, is an important alternative for river restoration.

The potential effects of climate change on the hydrology and water resources of the Columbia River Basin (CRB) were evaluated using simulations from the U.S. Department of Energy and National Center for Atmospheric Research Parallel Climate Model (DOE/NCAR PCM).

This study focuses on three climate projections for the 21st century based on a ‘business as usual' (BAU) global emissions scenario, evaluated with respect to a control climate scenario based on static 1995 emissions. Time-varying monthly PCM temperature and precipitation changes werestatistically downscaled and temporally disaggregated to produce daily forcings that drove a macroscale hydrologic simulation model of the Columbia River basin at 1/4-degree spatial resolution.

This paper examines the effects of dam construction and operation in the Columbia River Basin on salmon populations. While the hydrograph of the Columbia River has been significantly impacted by dams, the seasonality of regulated flow on the Snake River has been less affected. The Snake River storage has been used for agricultural diversion while the Columbia has been for electrical generation. The reservoir system has effects on flow velocities, water chemistry (nitrogen supersaturation), habitat availability and reliability, and stream temperatures. Dams block about one third of the Columbia River watershed to access by anadromous fish.
Effects of Dams on Salmon;
Fish kills occur as a result of several characteristics of dams. Bruising, descailing, and stress caused by by-pass facilities; susceptibility to prey following delivery from by-pass to outfall; estuary damage; effects on the homing ability of fish; limited success in fish use of by-pass facilities. The effect of migration speed on smolt survival is uncertain but assumed to have an impact. More research is necessary.
Mitigation of Dam's Effects on Salmon:
Seven measures for mitigation of dams' effects on salmon are discussed
1. Fish passage facilities 2. Predator control 3. Transportation 4. Spill 5. Flow augmentation 6. Reservoir drawdown 7. Dam removal.

Utility companies release water to mitigate the effects of hydroelectric projects on fish habitats. Utility companies, government agencies, and research communities in Canada, the United States, Europe, New Zealand, and Australia were surveyed as part of a Canadian Electrical Association study to evaluate the effectiveness of water release as a mitigation. Respondents identified only 28 projects in which water was released specifically to protect fish habitats. Fewer than half of these projects (12) were judged as being effective. Six case histories with preimpact assessment and postimpact monitoring were reviewed. In four cases fish habitat or fish populations or both were maintained; in two cases they were not. The effectiveness of water release differed among rivers and fish species, and was greatest when designed to meet the habitat requirements of each life-history stage. A review of the literature did not support the theory that a particular fraction of the mean annual flow provides the best fish habitat. Although smaller changes in the flow regime had smaller effects, increasing minimum flows above those historically observed did not necessarily increase fish production.