Culvert Design for Fish Passage:

Concepts and Fundamentals
Rollin H. Hotchkiss
Ph.D., P.E., D.WRE, F.ASCE
rhh@byu.edu; 801‐422‐6234

Introductions
• Who are you?
• Why are you here?

2
 Map of Webinar Attendees

Your Tour Guide
• Civil and Environmental 
Engineering Professor, BYU
• Completed and current 
research in fish passage at 
culverts
• Principal publications on topic 
in references
• President of ASCE’s EWRI

4
 Outline
1. Importance
2. Fish biology
3.   Barriers
4. Assessment and Prioritization
5. Discharges of Interest
6. Design Methods
7. Summary

Caveat
• Focus is on fish
• Many methods 
now address 
more general 
topic of Aquatic 
Organism Passage 
(AOP)
• Fish: a good place 
to start http://fishpassage.wsu.edu/pdfs/MarkHudy.pdf

6
 1.1 Importance
• Fragmentation 
by loss of access
• Can occur at
– Time of 
construction
– Later

1.2 Impacts
• Isolated populations
• Increased risk of loss due 
to natural or anthrogenic 
events
• Genetic homogeneity 
weakens stock
• Extirpation/loss more 
likely

8
 2.1 Fish Biology
• Swimming ability
– Prolonged
– Sustained
– Burst

United States Forest Service
9

2.2 Swimming Modes
Movement
Description Muscle System Period
Type
Sustained Used for long periods of travel at Red (purely aerobic) Hours
low speeds.
Prolonged Short periods of travel at high Red and White Minutes
speeds
Burst Maximum swimming speed or White (purely anaerobic) Seconds
jumping, inducing fatigue.

10
 2.3 Typical Values in Ft/s
Fish Sustained Prolonged Burst
Adult steelhead 5 15 27
Adult Shad 3 7 15
Adult Sucker 2 5 10
Adult 8 ft‐long eel 8 ‐ ‐

From Hotchkiss and Frei, 2007

11

3.1 Barriers
• Traditional culvert design
– Objective:  minimize span
– Increases
• Barrel velocity
• Downstream scour
– Causes most barrier types

12
 3.2 Barrier Types
Barrier Type Description
Drop Drop at outlet exceeds fish
jumping ability, or jump pool is
insufficient to generate
sufficient thrust.
Velocity High velocity exceeds fish
swimming ability.
Turbulence Turbulence within culvert
prevents fish from entering, or
confuses sense of direction
Length
Depth Low flow depth causes fish not
to be fully submerged.
Debris Caught within a culvert, debris
can block flow, or portions of
flow.
Cumulative Series of culverts, each of
which stresses fish during
13 passage.
3.3 Drop and Velocity
http://www.stream.fs.fed.us/fishxing/b29.html
http://www.stream.fs.fed.us/fishxing/theugly.html
14
Impact
Fish cannot enter structure,
can be injured, or will expend
too much energy entering the
structure to traverse other
obstacles.
Fish tire before passing the
crossing.
Fish do not enter culvert, or
are unable to successfully
navigate the waterway.
Fish may not enter structure
due to darkness. Fish may
fatigue before traversing the
structure.
Fish will be unable to swim
efficiently or unable pass the
structure.
Fish may not be able to pass
by debris, or constricted flow
may create a velocity or
turbulence barrier within the
culvert.
Group of culverts, each
marginally passable, may be a
combined barrier.
 3.4 Insufficient Depth
Fish Species Minimum Depth (ft)
Pink Salmon 0.59
Chum Salmon 0.59
Coho Salmon 0.59
Sockeye Salmon 0.59
Spring Chinook 0.79
Summer Chinook 0.79
Fall Chinook 0.79
Steelhead Trout 0.79
From Hotchkiss and Frei, 2007
15

3.5 Excessive Turbulence
• Fish will avoid excessive levels
• Found at
– Entrance
– Exit
– Near debris
– Near baffles
• If poorly designed

16
 3.6  Debris Accumulation
• Byproduct 
of small 
barrels

http://www.stream.fs.fed.us/fishxing/photos.html
17

3.7 Light (?)
• This is what a 
fish’s world looks 
like ½ the time
• No clear guidance 
on this issue

18
 4.1 Assessment and Prioritization
• What State DOTs and USFS faces:
– 100s or 1000s of culverts in every jurisdiction
– New fish passage requirements for existing 
culverts
• What to do?
– Inventory
– Assess
– Prioritize

19

4.2 Methods
• US Forest Service
• http://www.stream.fs.fed.us/fishxing/publicat
ions/PDFs/NIAP.pdf

20
 4.3 Methods (continued)
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/engineering/hydraulics/pubs/07033/07033.pdf

21

4.4 Methods (continued)
• Utah Department of Transportation Fish 
Passage at UDOT Culverts:  Prioritization and 
Assessment
• http://www.udot.utah.gov/main/uconowner.
gf?n=4542407443027547
• Illustrates 2 assessment levels:
– Initial: 5 minutes in field per culvert
– Detailed: 90 minutes in field per culvert

22
 5.1 Discharges of Interest
Discharge Purpose
Design Meet headwater requirements
Usually 25‐, 50‐, or 100‐year flood
Fish Passage Allow for fish passage upstream
Accepted:  less than the 2‐year flood

23

5.2 Obtaining Discharge of Interest
• Design discharge
– Rational method
– TR‐55
– Regression equations
• Fish Passage Flows
– Life stage and species specific requires fish swim 
tests
– Generalizations from literature

24
 5.3 High Fish Passage Flow Examples
• Alaska:  the discharge 24 hours before the 2‐
year flood
• Washington and Oregon:  10% exceedance 
flow during migration period
• National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest 
Region for adult salmonids:  ½ of 2‐year flood
• Idaho:  discharge such that delay during high 
water is less than 2 days

25

5.4 Low Fish Passage Flow Examples
• Washington:  2‐year, 7‐day low flow
• Oregon:  same or 95% exceedance flow during 
migration
• National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest 
Region for adult salmonids:  greater of 3 cfs or 
50% exceedance flow during migration
• National Marine Fisheries Service Northwest 
Region for adult salmonids:  50% exceedance 
flow during migration
26
 5.5 So What Do I Do to Get 
Discharge?
• Depends upon your design procedure
• Preview of next section
Method Q
Life stage and species swim tests
‘guaranteed’ passage don’t need
‘inferred’ passage State or regional 
guidelines

27

6.1 Design Continuum
No Impedance

Geomorphic Simulation 
with Floodplain Continuity

Hydraulic Simulation

Hydraulic Design

From Hotchkiss and Frei, 2007
Flood Flow Capacity
28
 6.2 Geomorphic Simulation
Characteristics
Relative
Name
Width Biological Geomorphic Hydraulic
Natural Substrate; Mobile Unaltered for Q slightly
Geomorphic Pass all fish and
1 Simulation ≥bankfull aquatic organisms
bed; Stability of substrate above bankfull; Check
usually not checked Q100

29

6.3 Hydraulic Simulation
Characteristics
Relative
Name Width
Biological Geomorphic Hydraulic

Reported to pass
Oversized substrate;
Hydraulic all fish and Similar for Q slightly less
2 Simulation
≤bankfull Stationary bed; Stability of
aquatic than bankfull; Check Q100
bed usually checked
organisms

30
Kim Hastings, USFS
 6.4 Hydraulic Design
Characteristics
Relative
Name Width
Biological Geomorphic Hydraulic

Must meet target species

variable; Pass target
Hydraulic and life stage
3 Design
usually species at target Artificial channel
requirements; Check for
<bankfull life stage
Q100

31

6.5 Example – Methow Wildlife Area

32
 6.6 Existing:  2.8 m by 2.0 m CMP 
Arch

Inlet
Outlet – High Velocity, Perched

33

6.7 Methods Used
• Geomorphic Simulation
– Stream Simulation
– No Slope Design
• Hydraulic Simulation
– Maryland
– Alaska
– Browning
• Hydraulic Design
– Roughened Channel
34
 6.5

6 Implications for Culvert Span
6.8 Implications for Culvert Span
5.5

5
CMP Arch Span, m

4.5

3.5

2.5

2
Existing Stream No Slope Browning Alaska Maryland Roughened
Simulation Channel
35 Design Method

7.1 Federal Highway Administration

36
 7.2 HEC‐26 Description
• Fits into the hydraulic simulation category
• Big difference:  culvert span is NOT an 
independent variable decided beforehand
• Span is such that embedded material is stable 
during design discharge
• New; not much feedback so far
• More in second part of Webinar

37

7.3 Early Comparisons

• Three examples in HEC‐26
• Compared to geomorphic simulation,
– Two cases would have narrower spans
– One would have a wider span
– All will pass fish

38
 8.1 Summary
Questions to ask:
1.Is fish passage a concern for this project?
2.Who can be added to multidisciplinary team?
3.What design procedures must I use?
– U.S. Army Corps of Engineers?
– State DOT guidelines?
– State resource agency guidelines?

39

8.2 Summary (continued)
Available tools
1. 11 procedures described in Synthesis report 
and categorized
–Geomorphic simulation
–Hydraulic simulation
–Hydraulic design
2. USFS Stream simulation
3. FHWA HEC‐26
40
 8.3 Preview of Webinar Part II
• Culvert Design for Fish Passage:  Design Steps 
and Examples
• Quick review of categories
• Design examples using cited references
– Synthesis report
– HEC‐26

41

References
• Beavers, Aaron E., Rollin H. Hotchkiss, Mark C. Belk.  
2008.  Fish passage at UDOT culverts:  prioritization 
and assessment.  Final Report No. UT‐08.8, August. 
http://www.udot.utah.gov/main/uconowner.gf?n=454
2407443027547
• Clarkin, Kim, Anne Connor, Michael J. Furniss, Bob 
Gubernick, Michael Love, Kathleen Moynan, and 
Sandra WilsonMusser.  2005.  National inventory and 
assessment procedure – for identifying barriers to 
aquatic organism passage at road‐stream crossings.  
U.S. Forest Service 7700 – Transportation Mgmt.  
http://www.stream.fs.fed.us/fishxing/publications/PD
Fs/NIAP.pdf
42
 References (continued)
• Forest Service Stream‐Simulation Working Group.  2008.  
STREAM SIMULATION:  an ecological approach to 
providing passage for aquatic organisms at road‐stream 
crossings.  National Technology and Development 
Program. 
http://www.stream.fs.fed.us/fishxing/aop_pdfs.html
• Hotchkiss, Rollin H. and Christopher M. Frei.  2007.  
Design for fish passage at roadway stream crossings:  
synthesis report.   Report No. FHWA‐HIF‐07‐033, June. 
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/engineering/hydraulics/pubs/
07033/07033.pdf

43

References (continued)
• Kilgore, Roger T., Bart S. Bergendahl, and Rollin H. 
Hotchkiss.  2010.  Culvert design for aquatic 
organism passage.  Hydraulic Engineering Circular 26, 
Report No. FHWA‐HIF‐11‐008 HEC‐26, October. 
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/engineering/hydraulics/p
ubs/11008/hif11008.pdf

44