Stakeholder Participation in Freshwater Monitoring and Evaluation Programs: Applying Thresholds of Potential Concern within Environmental Flows

Abstract

The complex nature of freshwater systems provides challenges for incorporating evidence-based techniques into management. This paper investigates the potential of participatory evidence-based techniques to involve local stakeholders and make decisions based on different "knowledge" sources within adaptive management programs. It focuses on the application of thresholds of potential concern (TPC) within strategic adaptive management (SAM) for facilitating inclusive decision-making. The study is based on the case of the Edward-Wakool (E-W) "Fish and Flows" SAM project in the Murray-Darling River Basin, Australia. We demonstrate the application of TPCs for improving collaborative decision-making within the E-W, associated with environmental watering requirements, and other natural resource management programs such as fish stocking. The development of TPCs in the E-W fish and flows SAM project helped improve stakeholder involvement and understanding of the system, and also the effectiveness of the implemented management interventions. TPCs ultimately helped inform environmental flow management activities. The TPC process complemented monitoring that was already occurring in the system and provided a mechanism for linking formal and informal knowledge to form explicit and measurable endpoints from objectives. The TPC process faced challenges due to the perceived reduction in scientific rigor within initial TPC development and use. However, TPCs must remain tangible to managers and other stakeholders, in order to aid in the implementation of adaptive management. Once accepted by stakeholders, over time TPCs should be reviewed and refined in order to increase their scientific rigor, as new information is generated.

Reflexive learning in adaptive management: A case study of environmental water management in the Murray Darling Basin, Australia

“…By comparison, the upper loop is concerned with adaptive assessment feedbacks. Here, the WRPA audits monitoring activities to evaluate strategic outcomes in the form of TPCs (Conallin et al, ). The auditing and evaluation of TPCs—have they been exceeded—is a means of input into further decision‐making regarding future adjustments to flow regimes and/or TPCs (Conallin et al, ).…”

“…Here, the WRPA audits monitoring activities to evaluate strategic outcomes in the form of TPCs (Conallin et al, ). The auditing and evaluation of TPCs—have they been exceeded—is a means of input into further decision‐making regarding future adjustments to flow regimes and/or TPCs (Conallin et al, ). Communications within a WRPA are undertaken over shorter time scales of days and weeks to determine if operations and ecological responses are occurring adequately.…”

“…The Murray and Lower Darling WRPA, in NSW, has been involved in application of the SRLF and development of TPCs for environmental watering (cf. Conallin et al, ; McLoughlin & Thoms, ). The WRPA is responsible for establishing, monitoring, and evaluating TPCs associated with environmental water allocated from Hume Dam on the River Murray.…”

“…Adjustments of water releases from Hume Dam occurred when the monitoring protocol was evaluated. When listed TPCs were exceeded, their prioritization for future river flow events provided input into the 10‐year hydrological plan (Conallin et al, ). This review process of TPCs represents the important adjustment feedback in the SAM cycle at SRLF Level‐3.…”

“…TPCs are refined or new ones developed with additional information. In the Murray and Lower Darling WRPA, the nonachievement of fish recruitment targets, for example, led to reconsideration of flow regimes, as well as the development of a fish habitat strategy to enhance fish responses to flow events (see Conallin et al, ). These adaptive reflection feedbacks occurred over two to three years, through a series of stakeholder workshops.…”