Editorial: Implementing Environmental Flows: Lessons for Policy and Practice

Tickner, David; Kaushal, Nitin; Speed, Robert; Tharme, Rebecca E.

doi:10.3389/fenvs.2020.00106

Cited by 12 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Development of river systems for human use is ubiquitous across the globe (Lehner et al, 2011;Grill et al, 2019;Cooley et al, 2021) and has resulted in drastic reductions in freshwater biodiversity and ecosystem services (Vorosmarty et al, 2010;Reid et al, 2019). Recent global biodiversity initiatives explicitly call for actions that restore freshwater ecosystem processes, improve water quality, accelerate environmental flow implementation, and protect critical habitats (Tickner et al, 2020a; van Rees et al, 2021). Environmental flows, or the practice of allocating water in river systems for ecological purposes, is a leading strategy for conserving aquatic species and improving river health (Horne et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional Flows in Groundwater-Influenced Streams: Application of the California Environmental Flows Framework to Determine Ecological Flow Needs

Yarnell

Willis

Obester

et al. 2022

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental flows, or the practice of allocating water in river systems for ecological purposes, is a leading strategy for conserving aquatic species and improving river health. However, consideration of surface-groundwater connectivity is seldom addressed in environmental flow development due to a lack of methodologies that account for groundwater contributions to instream flow. Groundwater-influenced streams have been identified as key refugia for native biota under a rapidly changing climate. These ecosystems are anticipated to be more resistant to climate change because groundwater input buffers the adverse effects of low flows and high temperatures, particularly in the dry season. Less understood, however, is the relative contribution of groundwater inputs to streamflow and how these surface-groundwater water interactions should be accounted for in environmental flow assessments and management actions. In order to assess ecological flow needs in groundwater-influenced streams, we applied the California Environmental Flows Framework (CEFF) in two river systems in California, United States. The Little Shasta River and the lower Cosumnes River are representative of many groundwater-influenced streams throughout the semi-arid western United States. Historically, perennial streamflow once sustained diverse native aquatic species in these ecosystems, but water withdrawals for irrigated agriculture has resulted in periodic stream dewatering. We found CEFF was useful in quantifying ecological flow needs for seasonal components of the flow regime that support ecosystem functionality. In particular, CEFF offered flexibility to incorporate information on the seasonal and spatial dimensions of groundwater influences in the development of ecological flow targets. The focus on ecosystem functions in CEFF, and ability to account for groundwater influences on those functions, creates opportunities for integrated surface-groundwater management strategies that support the recovery and protection of streamflows in groundwater-influenced streams.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional Flows in Groundwater-Influenced Streams: Application of the California Environmental Flows Framework to Determine Ecological Flow Needs

Yarnell

Willis

Obester

et al. 2022

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ameliorating this challenge may seem less daunting once the ecological (and human) benefits of prioritized environmental flows are accounted for (Richter and Thomas 2007). Although such changes might incur short-term one-time costs to implement (e.g., relocating communities built in floodplains to allow for improved floodplain services), the long-term benefit to ecological and human communities may make such efforts worthwhile (Tickner et al, 2020;Serra-Llobet et al, 2022).…”

Section: Operationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The natural flow regime (Poff et al, 1997) characterizes the dynamic and nuanced characteristics of stream flow that integrate to sustain ecosystems, acknowledgement of which has led to the development of environmental flow approaches that recognize the importance of natural flow variability and related ecological responses Richter et al, 2012). More recent research has increasingly recognized the role of physical and biogeochemical factors in mediating the relationship between flow and ecology (Beechie et al, 2010;Wohl et al, 2015;Yarnell et al, 2015), and resource managers have advocated for holistic environmental flow assessment methods designed to support the physical, chemical, and biological functions of streams that sustain ecosystem health (Poff and Matthews, 2013;Palmer and Ruhi, 2019;Tickner et al, 2020). Yet, how to translate these holistic methods into an environmental flow strategy that includes water extraction for human uses via dam regulation remains elusive.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This framing perpetuates the false dichotomy of human communities vs. ecological function (Corral-Verdugo et al, 2008). Few studies frame ecological function as integral to human sustainability, despite recent calls to do so (Reid et al, 2019;Tickner et al, 2020). However, quantifying the ecological benefits of alternative environmental flow strategies and their effects on hydropower production has been challenging (Widén et al, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Shifting Trade-offs: Finding the Sustainable Nexus of Hydropower and Environmental Flows in the San Joaquin River Watershed, California

Willis

Rheinheimer

Yarnell

et al. 2022

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental flow management in watersheds with multi-objective reservoirs is often presented as an additional constraint to an already strained and over-allocated stream system. Nevertheless, environmental flow legislation and regulatory policies are increasingly being developed and implemented globally. In California, USA, recent legislative and regulatory policies place environmental flows at the forefront of the state’s water management objectives; however, the increased reliance on hydropower to support climate change mitigation goals may complicate efforts on both issues. This study modelled alternative environmental flow strategies in the major tributaries to the San Joaquin River in California. Strategies included detailed water management rules for hydropower production, flood control, and water deliveries, and three methodological approaches to environmental flow releases: minimum instream flows (“baseline”) year-round, 40% of full natural flow (FNF) during the spring runoff season and minimum releases the remainder of the year, and functional flows year-round. Results show that environmental flow strategies affect downstream flow releases in each of the San Joaquin’s four sub-basins differently depending on infrastructure capacity, water management objectives, and hydrologic year types. While hydropower production was comparable or declined in the Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and Merced basins, functional flow and 40% FNF strategies increased hydropower production in the Upper San Joaquin basin by 11%. Uncontrolled spill of high flow events decreased when high flow releases were based on hydrologic cues rather than exclusively on flood storage capacity. Water deliveries were reduced in all years regardless of environmental flow strategy. The 40% FNF and functional flow strategies both increased water released to the river relative to baseline, but in different ways. The functional flow strategy allocated water in a holistic approach that enhanced ecological functions in all years, but particularly in moderate and wet years. In contrast, the 40% FNF strategy provided increased flows relative to baseline and some ecological benefit in dry years, but less ecological benefit in other years. This study shows that alternative environmental flow strategies will have different and important trade-offs for integrated water management, and may mutually benefit seemingly conflicting objectives.

show abstract

“…Much experience has been gained over the past decades in the mitigation of downstream flow alterations from dams. Options to minimize the effects of flow alteration include environmental flow releases (with several elements that can apply to any type of dam including minimum flows, ramp up/down rules, and the release of periodic high flows) and re-regulating reservoirs (Brown et al, 2019; King & Brown, 2018; Tickner et al, 2020a). Such reservoirs are sometimes built downstream of peaking power plants to reduce rapid flow fluctuations.…”

Section: Solution Pathways To Navigate Trade-offs Of Dams and River Conservationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Navigating trade-offs between dams and river conservation

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non-technical summary There has been a long history of conflicts, studies, and debate over how to both protect rivers and develop them sustainably. With a pause in new developments caused by the global pandemic, anticipated further implementation of the Paris Agreement and high-level global climate and biodiversity meetings in 2021, now is an opportune moment to consider the current trajectory of development and policy options for reconciling dams with freshwater system health. Technical summary We calculate potential loss of free-flowing rivers (FFRs) if proposed hydropower projects are built globally. Over 260,000 km of rivers, including Amazon, Congo, Irrawaddy, and Salween mainstem rivers, would lose free-flowing status if all dams were built. We propose a set of tested and proven solutions to navigate trade-offs associated with river conservation and dam development. These solution pathways are framed within the mitigation hierarchy and include (1) avoidance through either formal river protection or through exploration of alternative development options; (2) minimization of impacts through strategic or system-scale planning or re-regulation of downstream flows; (3) restoration of rivers through dam removal; and (4) mitigation of dam impacts through biodiversity offsets that include restoration and protection of FFRs. A series of examples illustrate how avoiding or reducing impacts on rivers is possible – particularly when implemented at a system scale – and can be achieved while maintaining or expanding benefits for climate resilience, water, food, and energy security. Social media summary Policy solutions and development pathways exist to navigate trade-offs to meet climate resilience, water, food, and energy security goals while safeguarding FFRs.

show abstract

Editorial: Implementing Environmental Flows: Lessons for Policy and Practice

Cited by 12 publications

References 4 publications

Functional Flows in Groundwater-Influenced Streams: Application of the California Environmental Flows Framework to Determine Ecological Flow Needs

Functional Flows in Groundwater-Influenced Streams: Application of the California Environmental Flows Framework to Determine Ecological Flow Needs

Shifting Trade-offs: Finding the Sustainable Nexus of Hydropower and Environmental Flows in the San Joaquin River Watershed, California

Navigating trade-offs between dams and river conservation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About