Review of Approaches and Methods to Assess Environmental Flows Across Canada and Internationally

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Review of Approaches and Methods to Assess Environmental Flows Across Canada and Internationally C S A S S C C S Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat Secrétariat canadien de consultation scientifique Research Document 2012/039 Document de recherche 2012/039 National Capital Region Région de la capitale nationale Review of approaches and methods to Examen des approches et des méthodes assess Environmental Flows across d’évaluation des débits Canada and internationally environnementaux au Canada et à l’échelle internationale Linnansaari, T.1, Monk, W.A.2, Baird, D.J.2 and Curry, R.A.1 1 Canadian Rivers Institute, University of New Brunswick, Department of Biology, P.O. Box 4400, Fredericton, New Brunswick, E3B 5A3 2 Environment Canada, Canadian Rivers Institute, University of New Brunswick, Department of Biology, P.O. Box 4400, Fredericton, New Brunswick, E3B 5A3 This series documents the scientific basis for the La présente série documente les fondements evaluation of aquatic resources and ecosystems in scientifiques des évaluations des ressources et Canada. As such, it addresses the issues of the des écosystèmes aquatiques du Canada. Elle day in the time frames required and the traite des problèmes courants selon les documents it contains are not intended as échéanciers dictés. Les documents qu‘elle definitive statements on the subjects addressed contient ne doivent pas être considérés comme but rather as progress reports on ongoing des énoncés définitifs sur les sujets traités, mais investigations. plutôt comme des rapports d‘étape sur les études en cours. Research documents are produced in the official Les documents de recherche sont publiés dans language in which they are provided to the la langue officielle utilisée dans le manuscrit Secretariat. envoyé au Secrétariat. This document is available on the Internet at: Ce document est disponible sur l‘Internet à: www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/csas-sccs/ ISSN 1499-3848 (Printed / Imprimé) ISSN 1919-5044 (Online / En ligne) © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2013 © Sa Majesté la Reine du Chef du Canada, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................................. iv RÉSUMÉ ...................................................................................................................................................... vi 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 NEEDS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL FLOW FRAMEWORK IN CANADA ........................................ 1 1.2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF REVIEW ......................................................................................... 2 2. CONFLICTING TERMINOLOGY OF "ENVIRONMENTAL FLOWS" ....................................................... 3 Instream Flow Need / Requirement ............................................................................................ 3 Environmental Flow ..................................................................................................................... 3 Ecological Flow: .......................................................................................................................... 4 Base Flow: ................................................................................................................................... 4 3. REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FLOW ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ........................................... 4 3.1 HYDROLOGICAL METHODS ...................................................................................................... 5 3.1.1 The Tennant method and its derivatives ............................................................................ 5 3.1.2 Flow Duration (Exceedence) curves, and statistical low-flow frequency methods ............. 6 3.1.3 Indicators of Hydrologic Alteration (IHA) and the Range of Variability Approach (RVA) .... 7 3.1.4. Percentage of Flow (POF) methods, Sustainability Boundary Approach (SBA) and Presumptive Standards ..................................................................................................... 8 3.1.5 Strengths, weaknesses and data requirements of hydrological methods ........................ 10 3.2 HYDRAULIC RATING METHODS .............................................................................................. 11 3.2.1 General description and common methods ..................................................................... 11 3.2.2. Strengths, weaknesses and data requirements of hydraulic methods ............................ 12 3.3 HABITAT SIMULATION METHODS ........................................................................................... 13 3.3.1 Habitat simulation methods at the microhabitat scale ...................................................... 13 3.3.2 Strengths, weaknesses and data requirements of habitat simulation methods ............... 18 3.3.3 Generalized (statistical) habitat models ........................................................................... 19 3.3.4. Mesohabitat models ........................................................................................................ 20 3.3.5 Bioenergetic models ......................................................................................................... 23 3. 4 HOLISTIC METHODS AND OTHER ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORKS FOR DEVELOPING ENVIRONMENTAL FLOW STANDARDS ................................................................................ 23 3.4.1 Building Block Methodology (BBM) .................................................................................. 24 3.4.2 Downstream Response to Imposed Flow Transformation (DRIFT) ................................. 25 3.4.3 Benchmarking and the derived frameworks ..................................................................... 27 3.4.4 The Ecological Limits of Hydrologic Alteration (ELOHA) Approach ................................. 28 3.4.5 Strengths, weaknesses and data requirements of holistic methods ................................ 33 4. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FLOW GUIDELINES CURRENTLY USED IN CANADA AND INTERNATIONALLY .............................................................................................................................. 34 4.1 CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL FLOW GUIDELINES IN CANADA ........................................... 34 4.1.1 British Columbia ............................................................................................................... 35 4.1.2 Alberta .............................................................................................................................. 35 4.1.3 Saskatchewan and Manitoba ........................................................................................... 36 4.1.4 Ontario .............................................................................................................................. 36 4.1.5 Quebec ............................................................................................................................. 36 4.1.6 Atlantic Provinces (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador).......................................................................................... 37 4.1.7. Eastern and Western Arctic ............................................................................................ 37 4.2 ENVIRONMENTAL FLOW GUIDELINES IN OTHER SELECT COUNTRIES ........................... 37 4.2.1 USA .................................................................................................................................. 37 4.2.2 European Union ............................................................................................................... 38 4.2.3 Australia, South-Africa and New-Zealand ........................................................................ 38 ii 5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................................................... 39 6. REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................ 39 TABLES ....................................................................................................................................................... 50 FIGURES .................................................................................................................................................... 58 APPENDIX A: List of Abbreviations ............................................................................................................ 72 APPENDIX B. The current method of establishing minimum or environmental flows in some European countries................................................................................................................................................. 73 iii Correct citation for this publication: Linnansaari, T., Monk, W.A., Baird, D.J. and Curry, R.A. 2013. Review of approaches and methods to assess Environmental Flows across Canada and internationally. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res. Doc. 2012/039. vii + 75 p. ABSTRACT Freshwater resources are under increasing threat from anthropogenic activities, both in terms of consumptive and non-consumptive use. The increasing societal demands for water have led to substantial flow alterations in rivers in Canada. Flow alteration can be directly linked to impacts on the physical and chemical attributes and processes of rivers and subsequent ecological changes. In addition to increasing
Recommended publications
  • Guidelines for the Assessment of Environmental Flows in the Western Indian Ocean Region Guidelines for the Assessment of Eflows in WIO Region
    Western Indian Ocean Ecosystem Guidelines and Toolkits Guidelines for the Assessment of Environmental Flows in the Western Indian Ocean Region Guidelines for the Assessment of EFlows in WIO region Western Indian Ocean Ecosystem Guidelines and Toolkits Guidelines for the Assessment of Environmental Flows in the Western Indian Ocean Region Published by the United Nations Environment Programme/Nairobi Convention Secretariat. Copyright © Nairobi Convention 2020. All rights reserved: The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Contracting Parties to the Nairobi Convention. Rights and Permissions: The information in this report is copyrighted, therefore, copying and/or transmitting portions of this report without permission of the Nairobi Convention may be a violation of applicable law. How- ever, the Nairobi Convention encourages dissemination and use of the materials in this report. Disclaimer: This publication has been produced by the United Nations Environ- ment Programme-Nairobi Convention and WIOMSA with the kind assistance of various regional governments, Non-Governmental Organizations, Civil Society Organizations, as well as of individuals through the Global Environment Facility (GEF) funded WIOSAP pro- ject and SIDA funded MASMA project executed by the Convention and WIOMSA respectively. The report is copyrighted entirely to the Nairobi Convention and WIOMSA. Compiled and prepared by: Cate Brown and Jackie King, with contributions from Lara Van Niekerk and Susan Taljaard. Series Editor: Matthew D. Richmond Designed by: Marco Nunes Correia Coordinated by: Jared Bosire, Julius Francis and Timothy Andrew Citation: UNEP-Nairobi Convention/WIOMSA (2020). Guidelines for the Assessment of Environmental Flows in the Western Indian Ocean Region.
    [Show full text]
  • Stream Restoration, a Natural Channel Design
    Stream Restoration Prep8AICI by the North Carolina Stream Restonltlon Institute and North Carolina Sea Grant INC STATE UNIVERSITY I North Carolina State University and North Carolina A&T State University commit themselves to positive action to secure equal opportunity regardless of race, color, creed, national origin, religion, sex, age or disability. In addition, the two Universities welcome all persons without regard to sexual orientation. Contents Introduction to Fluvial Processes 1 Stream Assessment and Survey Procedures 2 Rosgen Stream-Classification Systems/ Channel Assessment and Validation Procedures 3 Bankfull Verification and Gage Station Analyses 4 Priority Options for Restoring Incised Streams 5 Reference Reach Survey 6 Design Procedures 7 Structures 8 Vegetation Stabilization and Riparian-Buffer Re-establishment 9 Erosion and Sediment-Control Plan 10 Flood Studies 11 Restoration Evaluation and Monitoring 12 References and Resources 13 Appendices Preface Streams and rivers serve many purposes, including water supply, The authors would like to thank the following people for reviewing wildlife habitat, energy generation, transportation and recreation. the document: A stream is a dynamic, complex system that includes not only Micky Clemmons the active channel but also the floodplain and the vegetation Rockie English, Ph.D. along its edges. A natural stream system remains stable while Chris Estes transporting a wide range of flows and sediment produced in its Angela Jessup, P.E. watershed, maintaining a state of "dynamic equilibrium." When Joseph Mickey changes to the channel, floodplain, vegetation, flow or sediment David Penrose supply significantly affect this equilibrium, the stream may Todd St. John become unstable and start adjusting toward a new equilibrium state.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX a Site Characteristics for Selected USGS Gage Stations In
    APPENDIX A Site Characteristics for Selected USGS Gage Stations in the Allegheny Plateau and Valley and Ridge Physiographic Provinces This Appendix provides summaries of field data collected by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) at fourteen U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) gage station monitored stream sites in the Allegheny Plateau and Valley and Ridge hydro-physiographic region of Maryland. For each site, information and survey data is summarized on four pages. The first page for each site contains general information on the drainage basin, gage station, and the study reach. The Maryland State Highway Administration provided land use/land cover information using the software program GIS Hydro (Ragan 1991) and 1994 Landsat and Spot coverage information. The land use/land cover information may be incomplete for drainage basins that extend beyond the state of Maryland boundaries, this is noted in the General Study Reach Description for the pertinent sites. Stream order and magnitude are based on Strahler (1964) and Shreve (1967), respectively. The reported discharge recurrence intervals are from the log-Pearson type III flood frequency distribution for the annual maximum series calculated by USGS according to the Bulletin 17B procedures. The second page provides information on the study reach including cross-section plots and particle size distributions in the riffle and reach. The third page presents photographic views of the surveyed cross-section in the study reach and the fourth page provides a scale plan form diagram of the study reach mapped using a total station survey instrument and generated with the graphic and survey reduction software Terra Model.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidance on Environmental Flows
    Guidance on Environmental Flows Integrating E-flow Science with Fluvial Geomorphology to Maintain Ecosystem Services 2019 edition WEATHER CLIMATE WATER CLIMATE WEATHER WMO-No. 1235 Guidance on Environmental Flows Integrating E-flow Science with Fluvial Geomorphology to Maintain Ecosystem Services 2019 edition WMO-No. 1235 EDITORIAL NOTE METEOTERM, the WMO terminology database, may be consulted at http://public.wmo.int/en/ resources/meteoterm. Readers who copy hyperlinks by selecting them in the text should be aware that additional spaces may appear immediately following http://, https://, ftp://, mailto:, and after slashes (/), dashes (-), periods (.) and unbroken sequences of characters (letters and numbers). These spaces should be removed from the pasted URL. The correct URL is displayed when hovering over the link or when clicking on the link and then copying it from the browser. WMO-No. 1235 © World Meteorological Organization, 2019 The right of publication in print, electronic and any other form and in any language is reserved by WMO. Short extracts from WMO publications may be reproduced without authorization, provided that the complete source is clearly indicated. Editorial correspondence and requests to publish, reproduce or translate this publication in part or in whole should be addressed to: Chair, Publications Board World Meteorological Organization (WMO) 7 bis, avenue de la Paix Tel.: +41 (0) 22 730 84 03 P.O. Box 2300 Fax: +41 (0) 22 730 81 17 CH-1211 Geneva 2, Switzerland Email: [email protected] ISBN 978-92-63-11235-4 NOTE The designations employed in WMO publications and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of WMO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Wetted Perimeter Assessment Shoal Harbour River Shoal Harbour, Clarenville Newfoundland
    Wetted Perimeter Assessment Shoal Harbour River Shoal Harbour, Clarenville Newfoundland Submitted by: James H. McCarthy AMEC Earth & Environmental Limited 95 Bonaventure Ave. St. John’s, NL A1C 5R6 Submitted to: Mr. Kirk Peddle SGE-Acres 45 Marine Drive Clarenville, NL A0E 1J0 January 8, 2003 TF05205 Wetted Perimeter Assessment Shoal Harbour River Shoal Harbour, Clarenville, NF, TF05205 January 8, 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 STUDY AREA .................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 WETTED PERIMETER METHOD ................................................................................... 1 2.0 STUDY TEAM ...................................................................................................................... 3 3.0 METHODS ........................................................................................................................... 3 3.1 CRITICAL AREAS (TRANSECTS).................................................................................. 3 3.2 SURVEY DATA................................................................................................................ 4 4.0 RESULTS............................................................................................................................. 6 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Survey data from each transect Page i Wetted Perimeter Assessment Shoal
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Flows Overview
    Environmental Flows Overview Sam Sandoval and Sarah Yarnell Center for Watershed Sciences, UC Davis Presentation Outline • What are Environmental Flows? • History of E-flows in CA • E-flows methods • Policy and Implementation in CA • Seminar Schedule Environmental Flows • What do we mean by: “Environmental Flows”? Environmental Flows Ecosystem: community of living organisms and nonliving components that interact as a system • Aquatic • Riparian • Terrestrial Environmental Flows • Aquatic Ecosystem Environmental Flows • Aquatic Ecosystem: Food Chain Environmental Flows • Aquatic Ecosystem: Ecosystem Services Environmental Flows • Riparian Ecosystem Environmental Flows • Riparian Ecosystem Environmental Flows • Riparian Ecosystem Environmental Flows • Riparian Ecosystem Environmental Flows • Riparian Ecosystem: Services Environmental Flows • Riparian Ecosystem: Services Environmental Flows • Aquatic and Riparian Ecosystems Environmental Flows • Terrestrial Ecosystem Environmental Flows • Quantity • Quality • Geomorphology Environmental Flows Flow Regime the variability in its discharge throughout the year due to P, T, ET, and basin characteristics Environmental Flows Quantity ~ Flow regime: • Magnitude • Frequency • Timing • Duration • Rate of Change Hydrologic Classification for California State of California Natural Flow Class (SM) Snowmelt (HSR) High-volume snowmelt and rain (LSR) Low-volume snowmelt and rain (RSG) Rain and seasonal groundwater (WS) Winter Storms (GW) Groundwater (PGR) Perennial groundwater and rain (FER) Flashy, ephemeral
    [Show full text]
  • State Standard for Hydrologic Modeling Guidelines
    ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES FLOOD MITIGATION SECTION State Standard For Hydrologic Modeling Guidelines Under the authority outlined in ARS 48-3605(A) the Director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources establishes the following standard for Hydrologic Modeling Guidelines in Arizona. State Standard for Hydrologic Modeling, or “guidelines for the experienced modeler”, has been developed to address hydrologic conditions for a variety of statewide watersheds. Included are problems and situations identified by the State Standard Work Group (SSWG) and floodplain managers. The intended audience is statewide; engineers, professionals and Floodplain Administrators. The following topics are included: • Hydrologic Model comparison and recommendation • Guidelines and parameters • Model application for specific situations, and associated hydrologic parameters • Precipitation values (NOAA 14) • Storm duration • Unique conditions, such as wildfire burn, overgrazing, logging, drought, rapid snowmelt, urbanization. The State Standard includes examples addressing the above key issues. This requirement is effective August, 2007. Copies of this State Standard and the State Standard Technical Supplement can be obtained by contacting the Department’s Water Engineering Section at (602) 771-8652. SS10-07 1 August 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................................5 1.1 Purpose and Background .......................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • Rainfall-Runoff Relationship (Contd.) Rainfall-Runoff
    Module 3 Lecture 2: Watershed and rainfall-runoff relationship (contd.) Rainfall-Runoff How does runoff occur? When rainfall exceeds the infiltration rate at the surface, excess water begins to accumulate as surface storage in small depressions. As depression storage begins to fill, overland flow or sheet flow may begin to occur and this flow is called as “Surface runoff” Runoff mainly depends on: Amount of rainfall, soil type, evaporation capacity and land use Amount of rainfall: The runoff is in direct proportion with the rainfall. i.e. as the rainfall increases, the chance of increase in runoff will also increases Module 3 Rainfall-Runoff Contd…. Soil type: Infiltration rate depends mainly on the soil type. If the soil is having more void space (porosity), than the infiltration rate will be more causing less surface runoff (eg. Laterite soil) Evaporation capacity: If the evaporation capacity is more, surface runoff will be reduced Components of Runoff Overland Flow or Surface Runoff: The water that travels over the ground surface to a channel. The amount of surface runoff flow may be small since it may only occur over a permeable soil surface when the rainfall rate exceeds the local infiltration capacity. Module 3 Rainfall-Runoff Contd…. Interflow or Subsurface Storm Flow: The precipitation that infiltrates the soil surface and move laterally through the upper soil layers until it enters a stream channel. Groundwater Flow or Base Flow: The portion of precipitation that percolates downward until it reaches the water table. This water accretion may eventually discharge into the streams if the water table intersects the stream channels of the basin.
    [Show full text]
  • 18 an Interdisciplinary and Hierarchical Approach to the Study and Management of River Ecosystems M
    18 An Interdisciplinary and Hierarchical Approach to the Study and Management of River Ecosystems M. C. THOMS INTRODUCTION Rivers are complex ecosystems (Thoms & Sheldon, 2000a) influenced by prior states, multi-causal effects, and the states and dynamics of external systems (Walters & Korman, 1999). Rivers comprise at least three interacting subsystems (geomorphological, hydro- logical and ecological), whose structure and function have traditionally been studied by separate disciplines, each with their own paradigms and perspectives. With increasing pressures on the environment, there is a strong trend to manage rivers as ecosystems, and this requires a holistic, interdisciplinary approach. Many disciplines are often brought together to solve environmental problems in river systems, including hydrology, geomor- phology and ecology. Integration of different disciplines is fraught with challenges that can potentially reduce the effectiveness of interdisciplinary approaches to environmental problems. Pickett et al. (1994) identified three issues regarding interdisciplinary research: – gaps in understanding appear at the interface between disciplines; – disciplines focus on specific scales or levels or organization; and, – as sub-disciplines become rich in detail they develop their own view points, assumptions, definitions, lexicons and methods. Dominant paradigms of individual disciplines impede their integration and the development of a unified understanding of river ecosystems. Successful inter- disciplinary science and problem solving requires the joining of two or more areas of understanding into a single conceptual-empirical structure (Pickett et al., 1994). Frameworks are useful tools for achieving this. Established in areas of engineering, conceptual frameworks help define the bounds for the selection and solution of problems; indicate the role of empirical assumptions; carry the structural assumptions; show how facts, hypotheses, models and expectations are linked; and, indicate the scope to which a generalization or model applies (Pickett et al., 1994).
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Values, Flow Related Issues and Objectives for the Upper
    Environmental values, flow related issues and objectives for the Canning River, Western Australia From the Canning Dam to Kent St Weir Department of Water Environmental Water Report Series Report No. EWR5 May 2007 Environmental Water Report No. 5 Canning values and issues report Department of Water 168 St Georges Terrace Perth Western Australia 6000 <www.water.wa.gov.au> Telephone +61 8 6364 7600 Facsimile +61 8 6364 7601 For more information contact: Laurence Radin Water Resource Division, Department of Water PO Box K822 Perth Western Australia 6842 Acknowledgements This report was prepared by: Laurence Radin, Kylie La Spina, Mike Braimbridge and Ben Malseed, Environmental Water Planning. Comments on the early draft by Dr Andrew Storey are greatly appreciated as are contributions made throughout the project by Dr Storey. The assistance and advice provided by Mark Pearcey and others from the Department of Water, Surface Water Hydrology group is also acknowledged and appreciated. ISSN 1833-6582 (pbk.). Printed on recycled paper. May, 2007 Subject of cover photograph Freshwater cobbler (Tandanus bostocki) Department of Water ii Environmental Water Report No. 5 Canning values and issues report Contents Contents......................................................................................................................iii Summary..................................................................................................................... v 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Listen to the River
    2 - LESSONS FROM A GLOBAL REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FLOW SUCCESS STORIES 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Citation: Harwood, A., Johnson, S., Richter, B., Locke, A., Yu, X. and Tickner, D. 2017. We would like to thank the following participants who generously donated their time to participate in Listen to the river: Lessons from a global review of environmental flow success stories, the oral case study interviews and provide written comments on the interview notes and case study WWF-UK, Woking, UK synopses. Their viewpoints and input are fundamental to this report and we are grateful for their time and expertise: Eric Krueger (The Nature Conservancy), Harry Shelley (Savannah River Basin Advisory Council), ABOUT WWF Stan Simpson (United States Army Corps of Engineers), Andy Warner (CDM Smith, formerly The At WWF, we believe that a living planet – from the global climate to local environments – is vital Nature Conservancy), Ian Atkinson (International River Foundation, formerly Nature Foundation not only for wildlife, but also as the source of our food, clean water, health and livelihoods. And as South Australia), Andrew Beal (Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, South a source of inspiration, now and for future generations. So we’re tackling critical environmental Australia), John Foster (Commonwealth Environmental Water Office, Australia), Tom Rooney challenges and striving to build a world with a future where people and nature thrive. (Waterfind Australia and Healthy Rivers Australia), Hilton Taylor (Commonwealth Environmental Water Office, Australia), Jin Chen (Changjiang Water Resources Commission), Hai Wang (China To do this, we’re educating, inspiring, influencing and engaging the public, policy-makers, business Three Gorges Corporation), the Office of Fisheries Law Enforcement for the Yangtze River Basin leaders and influencers.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating Tradeoffs Between Environmental Flow Protections and Agricultural Water Security
    RIVER RESEARCH AND APPLICATIONS River Res. Applic. (2013) Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/rra.2637 EVALUATING TRADEOFFS BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL FLOW PROTECTIONS AND AGRICULTURAL WATER SECURITY T. E. GRANTHAMa*, M. MEZZATESTAb, D. A. NEWBURNc and A. M. MERENLENDERd a Center for Watershed Sciences, University of California, Davis, California, USA b Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Washington DC, USA c Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA d Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA ABSTRACT River basin managers responsible for water allocation decisions are increasingly required to evaluate tradeoffs between environmental flow protections and human water security. However, the basin-scale effects of environmental flow regulations on water users are not well understood, in part because analyses are complicated by the spatial and temporal variation in water availability, human demands, and ecosystem needs. Here, we examine alternative regional environmental flow policies and their effects on a distributed network of water users in a small (182 km2) river basin in coastal California. We use a hydrologic model to simulate water diversion operations under three policy scenarios and quantify potential impacts to bypass flows for adult migrating salmon and agricultural water storage. The results indicate that there are inherent tradeoffs between environmental flows and agricultural water security, with the most restrictive environmental policy associated with the greatest impacts to water users. Surprisingly, the moderate environmental flow policy had larger impacts to bypass flows than the unregulated management scenario, suggesting that ecological benefits of the moderate policy are small relative to the adverse effects on agricultural water users.
    [Show full text]