REGULATED RIVERS: RESEARCH & MANAGEMENT, VOL.

12, 483-492 (1996)

BYPASS CHANNELS AT WEIRS AS APPROPRIATE AIDS FOR

FISH MIGRATION IN RHITHRAL RIVERS
MATHIAS JUNGWIRTH
Department of Hydrobiology, State University of Agriculture, Max-EmanuelstraJe 17, A- 1180 Vienna, Austria

ABSTRACT
In most cases, the design of currently deployed migration aids is based on technical concepts, e.g. fish ladders, fish lifts,
etc. These systems meet the swimming and migratory requirements of commercially interesting species such as salmonids,
but not of smaller fish species and/or juvenile stages. In this context, bypass channels designed to resemble natural stream
channels-with a comparatively flat gradient and a high morphological, current and substrate diversity-are a viable
alternative. The utility of such systems, in compensating for the interrupted river course and in supporting migrations
of various rhithral fish species, has been demonstrated in an investigation of a bypass channel on the Mur River in Styria,
Austria. This 200 m long system with a total of 30 pools and riffle-like connections was successfully navigated by all seven
existing fish species and was additionally used by juvenile fish as habitat. During the main spawning periods April-June
and September-December, a total of 3658 fish ascended the bypass, 94% of which did so in the spring. In the 5.5 km
stretch of river below the weir, the grayling (Thymallusthymallus) was the dominant species. From an estimated population of 13 300 adults, 17% migrated through the pass.
KEY WORDS: fish migration; migration barriers; bypass channels

INTRODUCTION
Austria contains a broad spectrum of river types which, due to topographical and hydrographical conditions, are dominated by rhithral systems characterized by the brown trout (Salmo trutta) and European
grayling (Thymallus thymallus) regions. The relatively few potamal rivers of the barbel (Barbus barbus)
and bream (Abramis brama) regions, harbour approximately 60 fish species whose leaping and swimming
abilities are for the most part comparatively poor. These fish are hindered by artificial obstacles created during the course of flood protection and hydroelectric development, which prevent spawning migrations and
thus limit reproductive potential. Optimal solutions to these migratory obstacles for potamal fish species are
bypass channels that resemble natural lowland rivers and lack any vertical drops, o r at least none that are
more than lOcm high (see Jungwirth and Schmutz, 1988; Jungwirth and Pelikan, 1989). Such systems are
currently being developed, tested and monitored in several potamal rivers in Austria (Schmuts et al., 1995).
The present paper deals with bypass channels in rhithral rivers of Austria. In addition to various falls created by flood-control constructions, hydroelectric dams are primarily responsible for interrupting the river
course and creating insurmountable obstacles for the migrations of many rhithral fish species. Despite the
fact that the majority of Austrian rivers display alpine characteristics and are dominated by comparatively
strong-swimming rheophilic fish species (i.e. brown trout, grayling, Danube salmon (Hucho hucho) etc.),
such migration barriers seriously hinder any efforts to develop and preserve these fish populations.
Inhibited migrations within the main river, and between the main river and its tributaries, reduce natural
reproduction as well as ontogenetic and seasonal movements of specific species in search of their required
habitats. In particular, for endangered species (e.g. blageon (Leuciscus Sofia agassizi), Ukrainian brook
lamprey (Eudontomyzon mariae) and others) there exists a very real threat that isolated populations of
site-specific ecotypes will be lost, thus reducing the variability in the overall gene pool (Bless 1985, 1990).
To counteract these barriers, different types of fish passes have been constructed at many weirs and artificial waterfalls in Austria over the last few decades. Investigations of these, primarily technical, constructions (fish ladders, Denil pass, fish elevator, etc.) show that they are most suited to adult brown trout.
CCC 0886-9375/96/050483- 10
0 1996 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received 22 August 1995

Accepted 30 November 1995

484

M. JUNGWIRTH

Juvenile brown trout, as well as the biomass-dominant grayling, and small rhithral species, such as blageon,
the sculpin (Coitus gobio), the stone loach (Noemacheilus barbatulus) and lamprey, with lesser swimming
abilities can not surmount such passes. Even small technical constructions with vertical drops of only
25cm inhibit the movement of young trout and other small fish species (Jungwirth and Parasievicz,
1994). In other investigated rivers comparable to the Mur (e.g. the Inn) where technical fish passes have
been monitored, such systems have either failed completely or have been insufficient in providing passage
for all species (Bruschek, 1953; Pelz, 1985).
For these reasons, alternative bypass channels, which resemble the morphology and hydraulics of natural
tributaries for each river type, have been constructed in recent years. In attempting to recreate the natural
conditions in terms of gradient, flow velocity and substrate, these channels are not only suitable as migration
corridors but also provide habitat for juveniles of various species.
The following results summarize an investigation of the effectivenessof a bypass channel around a weir on
the river Mur in Unzmarkt, Styria, Austria. This construction is of special interest since the Mur is one of the
last, relatively intact, large river systems in Austria, in which not only the dominant grayling exist, but also,
naturally reproducing populations of brown trout and the endangered Danube salmon.
SHORT DESCRIPTION O F THE BYPASS CHANNEL
The hydroelectric dam (Figure 1) constructed in 1988 has a vertical drop of 8.4m. This obstruction has been
circumvented by a 200 m long bypass channel on the right bank with a total of 30 pools with riffle-like connections (overall gradient 4.2%) and a maximum difference in water level between pools of 35 cm (Figures 2
and 3). The discharge through this system is 165l/s. The entrance to the channel lies in the tailwaters below
the dam and is faced by an artificially stabilized island.

Figure 1. The mouth of the bypass channel on the right bank in the tailwater of the dam (turbine outlet on left bank)

FISH MIGRATION IN RHITHRAL RIVERS

48 5

486

M. JUNGWIRTH

El
thalweg

x-sect,m 1760 1820 1830 1870

POs,t,M
129591 13196m1333 m 13528m

:
1970

g T $

2020

2050

2000

14004n H22Om 14438m

X604m

m
N

93

2100
2130
1 4 9 2 2 ~ lS15kn

Figure 3. Longitudinal section showing mean (Vm) and maximum ( Vmax) flow velocity, channel bed height and water level height
(WSE)

METHODS
The morphology and hydraulic conditions of the channel system have been recorded at the given discharge
of 165 l/s. During upstream migrations of spring-spawning grayling, rainbow trout (Oncorynchus mykiss)
and Danube salmon, as well as during the autumn-spawning run of brown trout, water temperatures
were recorded continuously. For more detailed methods concerning the measurements of channel morphology, hydraulics, water temperature and suspended solids, as well as general ecological conditions, see Jungwirth and Parasiewicz (1994).
Downstream of the weir, the density of the fish stock was estimated quantitatively on 5-6 March 1992
along a 5.5 km river stretch using an electrofishing boat. The fish density was computed as catch per unit
effort (performed in strips) and was also estimated using the mark-recapture method. All fish captured
were individually marked with visible implant (VI) tags to determine the distances moved as well as the percentage of fish using the bypass channel. The fish ascending the bypass were captured and registered with the
aid of a trap at the upper end of the channel. Fish entering the trap that were not previously marked were
also tagged to keep track of all fish passing the weir. The suitability of the bypass system as a habitat for
juveniles of target species, as well as sculpins, lampreys, etc., was documented regularly with electrofishing.
For this purpose, juvenile brown trout, grayling and rainbow trout were tagged with VI tags. The investigation of the passage of individual fish through the complete bypass system was made using marked fish and
radiotelemetry.

487

FISH MIGRATION IN RHITHRAL RIVERS

RESULTS
Morphometric and hydraulic conditions
Highly variable flow velocities are created through alternated broadening and tapering of the channel,
as well as through a varying gradient (Figures 2 and 3). Thus, the total bypass system resembles a welldeveloped stretch of river.
The pools within the channel have variable widths and depths, creating a heterogenic current pattern. The
pools have a minimum depth of 0.4m, water surface areas of 2-45m2 and a volume of up to 15 m3. Pool
lengths range from 2 to 13 m, with a minimum width of 2.5 m. The channel narrows down to 0.70 m only
in riffle areas. The maximum water depth is normally at the head of the pool and can reach 1.15m. In the
riffle areas the water depth is reduced to a minimum of 20 cm.
The distribution of flow velocities at a discharge of 165l/s, as shown with the aid of isotachs (areal flowvelocity profiles), ranges from 1 to 2.75m/s in the flumes between the pools (Figure 3). Downstream of
these areas, current velocity can drop to 0.25 m/s depending on the pool design. The mean maximum flow
velocity in the flume areas is approximately 1.3m/s. Because of the rough and irregular configuration of
the overflow areas, small fish species and juvenile salmonids may ascend in at least some parts of each flume
profile (Figure 4).
Fish stock in the River Mur
The fish community in the Mur, downstream of the power plant, consists of seven species. The grayling is
dominant, making up approximately 90% of the assemblage by numbers, followed by rainbow trout,
Danube salmon and brook trout, Sulvelinus fontinulis. Sculpin, as well as one lamprey species, were also present but could not be quantified. The estimated total population of adult grayling in the 5.5 km stretch below

color

EASY-1

s
19
I

rn

WW
a
5

Wff

EASY-1

EASY-?
UQIEMIE-1

WoOuIE-2
CIIIIICAL-1

cmIIuL-?

E2.m

EASY-1
EASY-?
YmEnAlE-1
m T E - 2
QII1Iw-1

CIIIliCU-2

"a
W - 1

Cdff

Eur-2
m T E - I
M A T E 4

QIITWL-1
c(IIlkX-2

EASY-1

w*-i

a3

rn

M - 2
M A E - 1
WDERAlE-2
CRITIC&-I

mnca-z

9EcIK)(6

Rmp-

-aw
aw

am
1.00

1.w
200
250

R-hd

am
am
1.00
1.Y)
200
250

3.00

km

am
a03

am
am
0.03
am
aw

P r a t
0.0
14.1
124

11.s
123
34.4

tas

SIIc110(7

3
am

a50
1.00
1.80
200

zm
sfclwly

-a2
am
am
1.00
1.50
ZM
250

Vwfid

aw
1.00

1.m
200
250

aw

h a
0.78

om
0.22

plcnt
40.6
30.7
127

a08

5.6
4.6

0.01
0.00

a4
0.0

0.10

h a

om

0.97
0.0.0s
0.00
0.00

am

Parceli

ias
04.0

2ZS
2.0

ao
0.0
0.0

Figure 4. Examples of four flow-velocity profiles, shown with the aid of isotachs, of a pool and its corresponding riffle; used to examine
critical (dark colour) velocities for fish passage (compare Figure 3 and text)

488

M. JUNGWIRTH

1 Hjuveniles //

rainbow
trout

grayling

1
0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

individuals

Figure 5. Total catch of the three dominant fish species in the bypass trap between 1 April and 9 June 1992 (compare with Figure 7)

the dam varied between 13 300 individuals (f3000 ind. 95% C.1.) and 15 500 individuals (A~6000ind. 95%
C.1.) calculated from catch per unit area and mark-recapture methods, respectively.
Fish ascending the bypass
Although the entrance to the bypass is situated on the opposite bank from the turbine outlet, fish successfully found and ascended the bypass channel. Combining the spring (1 April-9 June) and autumn (22 September-3 December) sampling periods, a total of 3658 fish successfully ascended the bypass channel. The
majority, 94% (3439 individuals), were recorded during the spring (Figure 5).
Adult grayling dominated the catch in the bypass trap, and about 17% of the total population below the

30
25

P 20

c 15
0

g)

10

3
$

go
0

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500

migration-distance in rn

Figure 6 . Percentage of mature grayling migrating through the bypass channel from individual sampling stretches throughout the 5.5 km
below the power plant (results from trap catches, see text)

FISH MIGRATION IN RHITHRAL RIVERS

489

30
28
26
24
22
20
18

1:

12

.S 108
6

Figure 7. Length frequency distribution of grayling sampled within the bypass channel by electrofishing during spring 1992 (adult fish
> 290 mm length, compare with Figure 5 and text)

dam moved through the bypass during the spawning season. Adult individuals marked as far as 5.5 km
downstream from the power plant, were recorded in the bypass, but the percentage of fish ascending the
pass declined with increasing distance from the dam (Figure 6). Juvenile grayling also ascended the pass,
making up 20% of the total catch (Figures 5 and 7). The time required by adult grayling (VI tagged or investigated by telemetry) to pass through the entire bypass was approximately four hours.
Only two juvenile Danube salmon were caught (40 and 50 cm, total length) during the study. Between 1989
and 1991, three-year-old Danube salmon were tagged and stocked in the Mur 10 km downstream from the
power plant. Based on recaptures, these fish moved up to 20 km and some specimens had also successfully
navigated the bypass system.
The rainbow trout made up 10% of the spring catch in the bypass channel in 1992. The brown trouts share
(approx. 200 individuals) was < 10%. During the autumn spawning period only 113 brown trout ascended the
bypass, indicating that the movement of that species through the bypass was actually higher in spring.
No clear correlation between the timing of the fish migration and the water temperature was found.
Although the first temperature increases in late March may have been decisive for triggering spring migration activity, the main migration clearly occurred after the end of the snow melt between 20 May and 1 June
(Figure 8). A close examination of the detailed temperature changes during a spring day revealed that the
frequency of fish ascending the pass increased in the afternoon, when the water temperature was often
more than 5C higher than in the early morning.
Re-colonization of displaced fish
During the spring study period, a flushing of the impoundment (4 May) and increased discharges during
some flooding events displaced fish downstream that had already ascended through the bypass channel. Of
the 1767 fish that had ascended the channel once, and were tagged and stocked in the impoundment, 60 individuals (3.4%)passed a second time through the bypass from the tailwaters of the dam.
Hab i ia t use
Using approximately weekly electrofishing and individual VI tagging, the residence time of different age
groups of grayling, brown and rainbow trout throughout the course of the year was recorded. Juvenile
brown and rainbow trout, as well as sculpin and lamprey, preferred longer and deeper pools. VI-tagged yearling brown trout, and to some degree rainbow trout, sometimes remained in these habitats for several

490

M. JUNGWIRTH

12.00

10.00

8.00

6.00

8!
3

P
4.00

I-

2.00
0.00

Figure 8. Spring 1992 trap catches with daily water temperatures (taken at 5 pm)

months and moved between pools on a regular basis, including those pools that had the largest differences in
height (maximum 35 cm). Immature grayling, older than one year, frequented the bypass channel regularly.
With the help of individually marked fish, it was shown that these immature fish, as well as adults, were not
stationary in particular habitats but maintained a high rate of exchange between the bypass channel and the
river (for details, see Jungwirth and Parasievicz, 1994).
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Many large European rivers and their tributaries show a high degree of development. Various regulation
measures, technically constructed inclines in the river bed, and hydroelectric dams create a series of interruptions in river courses. Under the premise that rheophilic fish species of the rhithral region have adequate
leaping and swimming abilities (see Bainbridge, 1958, 1960, 1962; Beamish, 1978; Stuart, 1962) and therefore
could surmount higher drops without problems, various technical fish pass systems have been constructed.
Although such installations are often adequate, especially for adult brown trout, they still constitute insurmountable migration obstacles for grayling (see also Gustafson, 1949; Peterson, 1968; Zacharcenko, 1973;
Fleming and Reynolds, 1991; Witkowski and Kowalewski, 1988) and other small fish species (Barandun,
1990; Bless, 1990). For example, an investigation in the Loichbach, Lower Austria, examined a technical
fish pass with vertical drops in a variety of forms (Jungwirth and Parasievicz, 1994).For juvenile brown trout
less than lOcm in length, smooth flumes with an overall drop of 25cm were already limiting. The sculpin,
another typical representative of the rhithral region, was also unable to surmount such smooth-surfaced
flumes with drops of 25cm. In flumes constructed with gravel substrate and a surface overflow, all attempts
of the sculpin to ascend the flumes within a five-day investigation period failed, as the flow velocity was
1.77m/s. This finding is in agreement with Bless (1990), who found that adult sculpins can only negotiate
flumes with flow velocities < l.Om/s. In additional tests at the same fish pass flumes were constructed
with single boulders > 70 cm in diameter, leaving only an interstitial water flow. In this case, 32 out of 72
test sculpins (44%) were able to ascend through the interstitial gravel within 14 days.
Such examples demonstrate that comparably small differences in height within technical fish passes can
cause problems for juvenile trout, grayling and a range of small species found in these areas. Because the
rhithral rivers of Austria are dominated by grayling with co-occurring endangered species (e.g. blageons,
sculpins, stone loach and lamprey), only bypass channels that resemble site-specific, natural river channels
can be recommended. The channels not only provide migration corridors for all potentially present fish

49 1

FISH MIGRATION IN RHITHRAL RIVERS

species, including their juvenile stages, but also are an aesthetic improvement on the landscape (Figure 9).
Such systems also help to reduce the current deficit of near-natural river stretches displaying a high degree
of structure, thus providing more available aquatic habitat. The newly created riverine habitats of such fish
passes can correspond in form to the original tributaries and side channels of these larger river systems
(Bless, 1985; Heggenes, 1988). These more naturally formed bypass channels can also better accommodate
higher discharges, which can be strategically released during the main spawning periods (grayling April/
May; brown trout November/December). Increased discharges through the bypass channel may be better
at attracting potential migrants from the tailwaters below the dam. During the winter months, under certain
circumstances, an argument can be made for greatly reducing discharge into the channel.
The results of this investigation show that properly designed bypass channels provide a migration corridor
for all the typical fish species of this region. The fact that 17% of the ripe grayling in the 5.5 km stretch below
the dam successfully navigated the bypass system within one spawning season (in addition to 20% of the
total catch being juveniles) clearly demonstrates the efficiency of this system. Tagging returns also demonstrated that the bypass system provides a mechanism for fish displaced downstream by impoundment flushing or floods to re-establish themselves in upstream stretches.
The densities of two- and three-year-old juvenile grayling, both within and across seasons, as well as
juvenile brown trout, rainbow trout, Danube salmon, sculpin and lamprey, demonstrate that these richly

(4

(b)

Figure 9. (a) and (b): two views of a bypass channel constructed in 1994 on the Pols river, a tributary of the River Mur

492

M.JUNGWIRTH

structured bypass channels serve not only as migration corridors, but also as habitats in themselves. Methodological constraints (mesh width of traps) prevented us from determining whether sculpin and lamprey
successfully passed through the entire system.
With regard to the design of this bypass system, it would have been advantageous to have the entrance
near the outlet of the turbines, as fish would be attracted to the main current and more easily find the bypass
(Jens, 1982; Jungwirth and Pelikan, 1989; Gebler, 1991). However, the total number of captured fish demonstrates that the fish were able to find the entrance in spite of the location.
A discharge of 165l/s in the bypass channel and a mean discharge in the River Mur of 14.9 m3 yields a 1:90
ratio. This ratio is even worse during higher dam discharges. This calls for investigating to what extent such
systems could be improved with higher bypass discharge/dam discharge ratios. In principle, higher discharges in the bypass channel should attract more fish to its entrance. In this respect, if there is a diversion
power plant, it may be hypothesized that the effectivenessof the bypass could be improved by releasing all of
the remaining water through the bypass channel.
Many well designed and thoroughly tested technical fish pass systems exist today for both anadromous
species and resident adult salmonids (e.g. Clay, 1961; Jens, 1982; Pelz, 1985; Gebler, 1991; Larinier er al.,
1993).However, it is clear that many installations do not meet the needs of juvenile trout, grayling and small
rhithral fish species adequately. In many cases, bypass channels that resemble natural side channels or tributaries can be a cost-effective and functional alternative in re-establishing the continuity of the river corridor.
REFERENCES

Bainbridge, R. 1958. The speed of swimming fish as related to size and to the frequency and amplitude of the tail beat, J . Exp. Eiol.,
35(1), 129-153.
Bainbridge, R. 1960. Speed and stamina in three fish, J . Exp. Eiol., 37(1), 129-153.
Bainbridge, R. 1962. Training, speed and stamina in trout, J. Exp. Biol., 39(4), 537-556.
Barandun, J. 1990. Auswirkungen von Ausbreitungsbarrieren auf das Vorkommen der Groppen (Corrus gobio)-Anregungen fur den
Artenschutz, Schrifrenreihe Natur. Landrehaft., 65.
Beamish, F. W. H. 1978. Swimming capacity, Fish Physiology, Vol. VII. Academic Press Inc., New York.
Bless, R. 1985. Zur Regeneration von BBchen der Agrarlandschaft. Eine ichthyologische Fallstudie, Schrifienreihe Natur. Lundrchafr.,
26.
Bless, R. 1990. Die Bedeutung von gewasserbaulichen Hindernissen im Raum-&it-System der Groppe (Coitus gobio, L.),Natur.
Landschafz., 65, 12.
Bruschek, E. 1953. Funktionspriifung an den Fischpassen der Kraftwerke Obernberg und Ering, dsterr. Fischerei, 9/10, 129- 136.
Clay, D. H. 1961. Design of fishways and other fish
es, Deportment of Fisheries of Canada. Queens Printer, Ottawa. 301 pp.
Fleming, D. F. and Reynolds, J. B. 1991.Effectsof spawning-run delay on spawning migration of Artic grayling, Am. Fish. SOC.Symp.,
10,299-305.
Gebler, R.-J. 1991. Sohlrampen und Fischaufitiege. Eigenverlag Wasserbau und Umwelt, Walzbachthal.
Gustafson, K.-J. 1949. Movements and growth of grayling, Fishery Board Sweden, Ann. Rep. (1948), 29, 35-44.
Hegenes, J. 1988. Substrate preferences of brown trout fry (Salmo rrurru) in artificial stream channels, Can. J. Fish. Aguut. Sci., 45,
1801- 1806.
Jens, G. 1982. Der Buu von Fischwegen. Verlag Paul Parey, Hamburg und Berlin.
Jungwirth, M. and Parasievicz, P. 1994. Fischaufstiegshilfen an Gebirgsfliissen. Vergleichende Untersuchung des Fischaufstieges an
drei Fischaufstiegshilfen im Rhithralbereich, EM L & F- Wasserwirtschuftskur~rer.248 pp.
Jungwirth, M. and Pelikan, B. 1989. ZurProblematik von Fischaufstiegshilfen, Schrifrenreihe dsterreichische Wusserwirrschafr,
41(3/4), 80-89.
Jungwirth, M. and Schmutz, St. 1988. Untersuchung der Fischaufstiegshilfebei der Stauhaltung 1 im GieOgang Greifenstein, Wr. Mitteilungen, Band 80.
Larinier, M., Porcher, J. P., Travade, F., and Gosset, C. 1993. Passes a poissons-expertise, conception des ouvrages de franchissement, Collection mise au point, 336 pp.
Pelz, G. R. 1985. Fischbewegungen iiber verschiedenartige Fischpasse am Beispiel der Mosel.Cow. Forsch. Inst. Senkenb., 76, 114-165.
Peterson, H. H. 1968. The grayling, Thymallus rhymallus (L.),of the Sundsvall Bay area, Fishery Board Sweden, Ann. Rep., 48.36-56.
Schmutz, St., Mader, H., and Unfer, G. 1995. Funktionalitat von Potamalfischaufstiegshilfenim Marchfeldkanalsystem, dsrerreichische Wasser- und Abfallwirrschaft, 47(3/4), 43-58.
Stuart, T. A. 1962. The leaping behaviour of salmon and trout at falls and obstructions, Freshw. Salmon Fish. Res., 28, 1-44.
Witkowski, A. and Kowalewski, M. 1988. Migration and structure of spawning population of European grayling Thymullus rhymallus
(L.) in the Dunajec basin, Arch. Hydrobiol., 112, 279-297.
Zacharcenko, G . M. 1973. 0migracijach chariusa Thymallus thymallus (L.) v vierchovjach Pecory. Vopr. Ichtiol., 13,744-745 [quote
from Witkowski er al. (1984)l.