1. The flow regime is a primary determinant of the structure and function of aquatic and riparian ecosystems for streams and rivers. Hydrologic alteration has impaired riverine ecosystems on a global scale, and the pace and intensity of human development greatly exceeds the ability of scientists to assess the effects on a river-by-river basis. Current scientific understanding of hydrologic controls on riverine ecosystems and experience gained from individual river studies support development of environmental flow standards at the regional scale. 2. This paper presents a consensus view from a group of international scientists on a new framework for assessing environmental flow needs for many streams and rivers simultaneously to foster development and implementation of environmental flow standards at the regional scale. This framework, the ecological limits of hydrologic alteration (ELOHA), is a synthesis of a number of existing hydrologic techniques and environmental flow methods that are currently being used to various degrees and that can support comprehensive regional flow management. The flexible approach allows

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

[1] Discharge is a master variable that controls many processes in stream ecosystems. However, there is uncertainty of which discharges are most important for driving particular ecological processes and thus how flow regime may influence entire stream ecosystems. Here the analytical method of effective discharge from fluvial geomorphology is used to analyze the interaction between frequency and magnitude of discharge events that drive organic matter transport, algal growth, nutrient retention, macroinvertebrate disturbance, and habitat availability. We quantify the ecological effective discharge using a synthesis of previously published studies and modeling from a range of study sites. An analytical expression is then developed for a particular case of ecological effective discharge and is used to explore how effective discharge varies within variable hydrologic regimes. Our results suggest that a range of discharges is important for different ecological processes in an individual stream. Discharges are not equally important; instead, effective discharge values exist that correspond to near modal flows and moderate floods for the variable sets examined. We suggest four types of ecological response to discharge variability: discharge as a transport mechanism, regulator of habitat, process modulator, and disturbance. Effective discharge analysis will perform well when there is a unique, essentially instantaneous relationship between discharge and an ecological process and poorly when effects of discharge are delayed or confounded by legacy effects. Despite some limitations the conceptual and analytical utility of the effective discharge analysis allows exploring general questions about how hydrologic variability influences various ecological processes in streams.

No abstract

Endangered pallid sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus) (right) and shovelnose sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus platorynchus) (left) from the Lower Missouri River, captured as part of the USGS Comprehensive Sturgeon Research Program. Early spring sampling for reproductive adult pallid sturgeon on Lower Missouri River. High-resolution multibeam bathymetric map to characterize habitat around tagged sturgeon locations. Microscopic image of sturgeon larval stage. Field researchers capture Scaphirhynchus sturgeon for telemetry studies using baited trotlines.

A group of river managers, stakeholders, and scientists met during summer 2005 to design a more naturalized flow regime for the Lower Missouri River (LMOR). The objective was to comply with requirements under the U.S. Endangered Species Act to support reproduction and survival of threatened and endangered species, with emphasis on the endangered pallid sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus), while minimizing negative effects to existing social and economic benefits of prevailing river management. Specific hydrograph requirements for pallid sturgeon reproduction are unknown, hence much of the design process was based on features of the natural flow regime. Environmental flow components (EFCs) extracted from the reference natural flow regime were used to design and assess performance of alternative flow regimes.The design process incorporated a primary stage in which conceptual hydrographs were developed and assessed for their general ecological and social-economic performance. The second stage accounted for hydroclimatic variation by coding the conceptual hydrographs into reservoir release rules, adding constraints for downstream flooding and low-storage precludes, and running the rules through 100 years of hydroclimatic simulation. The output flow regimes were then evaluated for presumed ecological benefits based on how closely they resembled EFCs in the reference natural flow regime. Flow regimes also were assessed for social-economic cost indicators, including days of flooding of low-lying agricultural land, days over flood stage, and storage levels in system reservoirs.Our experience with flow-regime design on the LMOR underscored the lack of confidence the stakeholders place in the value of the natural flow regime as a measure of ecosystem benefit in the absence of fundamental scientific documentation. Stakeholders desired proof of ecological benefits commensurate with the certainty of economic losses. We also gained insight into the processes of integrating science into a collaborative management exercise. Although the 2005 collaborative effort failed to reach a consensus among stakeholders on a naturalized flow regime, the process was successful in pilot-testing a design approach; it helped focus scienctific efforts on key knowledge gaps; and it demonstrated the potential for collaborations among scientists, stakeholders, and managers in river management decision making.