The ecological limits of hydrologic alteration (ELOHA): a new framework for developing regional environmental flow standards

Freshwater Biology - Tập 55 Số 1 - Trang 147-170 - 2010
N. LeRoy Poff1, Brian D. Richter2, Angela H. Arthington3, Stuart E. Bunn3, Robert J. Naiman4, Eloise Kendy5, Mike Acreman6, Colin Apse7, Brian P. Bledsoe8, Mary C. Freeman9, James A. Henriksen10, Robert B. Jacobson11, Jonathan G. Kennen12, David M. Merritt13, J. H. O’Keeffe14, Julian D. Olden4, Kevin H. Rogers15, Rebecca E. Tharme16, Andrew T. Warner17
1Department of Biology & Graduate Degree Program in Ecology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, U.S.A.
2The Nature Conservancy, Charlottesville, VA, U.S.A.
3Australian Rivers Institute and eWater Cooperative Research Centre, Griffith University, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
4School of Aquatic & Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, U.S.A.
5The Nature Conservancy, Helena, MT, U.S.A.
6Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Wallingford, U.K.
7The Nature Conservancy, Brunswick, ME, U.S.A.
8Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, U.S.A.
9Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Athens, GA, U.S.A.
10U.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins, CO, U.S.A.
11Columbia Environmental Research Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Columbia, MO, U.S.A.
12U.S. Geological Survey, West Trenton, NJ, U.S.A.
13USDA Forest Service, Watershed, Fish, and Wildlife, Fort Collins, CO, U.S.A.
14Department of Environmental Resources, UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education, Delft, The Netherlands
15University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa
16International Water Management Institute, Colombo, Sri Lanka
17The Nature Conservancy, University Park, Pennsylvania, PA, U.S.A.

Tóm tắt

Summary1. 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 scientists, water‐resource managers and stakeholders to analyse and synthesise available scientific information into ecologically based and socially acceptable goals and standards for management of environmental flows.3. The ELOHA framework includes the synthesis of existing hydrologic and ecological databases from many rivers within a user‐defined region to develop scientifically defensible and empirically testable relationships between flow alteration and ecological responses. These relationships serve as the basis for the societally driven process of developing regional flow standards. This is to be achieved by first using hydrologic modelling to build a ‘hydrologic foundation’ of baseline and current hydrographs for stream and river segments throughout the region. Second, using a set of ecologically relevant flow variables, river segments within the region are classified into a few distinctive flow regime types that are expected to have different ecological characteristics. These river types can be further subclassified according to important geomorphic features that define hydraulic habitat features. Third, the deviation of current‐condition flows from baseline‐condition flow is determined. Fourth, flow alteration–ecological response relationships are developed for each river type, based on a combination of existing hydroecological literature, expert knowledge and field studies across gradients of hydrologic alteration.4. Scientific uncertainty will exist in the flow alteration–ecological response relationships, in part because of the confounding of hydrologic alteration with other important environmental determinants of river ecosystem condition (e.g. temperature). Application of the ELOHA framework should therefore occur in a consensus context where stakeholders and decision‐makers explicitly evaluate acceptable risk as a balance between the perceived value of the ecological goals, the economic costs involved and the scientific uncertainties in functional relationships between ecological responses and flow alteration.5. The ELOHA framework also should proceed in an adaptive management context, where collection of monitoring data or targeted field sampling data allows for testing of the proposed flow alteration–ecological response relationships. This empirical validation process allows for a fine‐tuning of environmental flow management targets. The ELOHA framework can be used both to guide basic research in hydroecology and to further implementation of more comprehensive environmental flow management of freshwater sustainability on a global scale.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Acreman M.C., 1998, Water and Population Dynamics, 25

10.1016/S1366-7017(01)00009-5

10.5194/hess-8-861-2004

10.1623/hysj.53.6.1105

10.1680/ensu.2009.162.1.13

Annear T., 2004, Instream Flows for Riverine Resource Stewardship

10.1002/rra.745

10.1002/rra.728

Arthington A.H., 2004, Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on the Management of Large Rivers for Fisheries, 37

10.1890/1051-0761(2006)016[1311:TCOPEF]2.0.CO;2

Arthington A.H., 2007, Water Requirements of Floodplain Rivers and Fisheries: Existing Decision Support Tools and Pathways for Development

10.2307/1940436

10.1890/1051-0761(2002)012[1247:MEASNF]2.0.CO;2

10.1111/j.1752-1688.2003.tb04428.x

Biggs H.C., 2003, The Kruger Experience. Ecology and Management of Savanna Heterogeneity, 59

10.1002/rra.847

10.1002/aqc.707

10.1002/0470848944.hsa 140

10.5194/hess-11-141-2007

Bovee K.D., 1998, Stream habitat analysis using the instream flow incremental methodology, U.S. Geological Survey, Information and Technology Report

10.1577/T02-079

Brown C.A., 2003, Using multicriteria analysis to develop environmental flow scenarios for rivers targeted for water resource development, Water SA, 29, 365

10.1007/s00267-002-2737-0

10.1002/rra.1247

CAWMA (Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture), 2007, Water for Food, Water for Life: A Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture

10.1080/13241583.2002.11465196

10.1002/rra.893

10.1111/j.1752-1688.2009.00306.x

10.1029/2005WR004222

10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.07.031

10.1017/S1464793105006950

10.2305/IUCN.CH.2003.WANI.2.en

10.1577/1548-8659(1984)113<39:RAOAIO>2.0.CO;2

10.1890/1051-0761(2001)011[1438:FDRIRT]2.0.CO;2

10.1007/s00267-005-0169-3

Gippel C.J., 2005, Encyclopedia of Hydrological Sciences, 1

10.1002/(SICI)1099-1646(199801/02)14:1<53::AID-RRR476>3.0.CO;2-Z

10.1126/science.1089967

(GWSP) Global Water System Project(2005)Science Framework and Implementation Activities. ESSP Report No. 3 Earth System Science Partnership. Available at:http://www.gwsp.org/products.html(last accessed on 18 March 2009).

10.1002/1099-1085(200011/12)14:16/17<2831::AID-HYP122>3.0.CO;2-O

10.3133/ofr20061093

10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00504.x

10.1016/j.geomorph.2006.01.014

10.1007/s10750-005-0998-3

10.1007/s10750-005-0993-8

10.1139/f07-108

10.1111/j.1365-2427.2009.02307.x

10.3133/sir20075206

10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.08.014

Kennen J.G., 2009, Application of the Hydroecological Integrity Assessment Process for Missouri Streams, 10.3133/ofr20091138

10.5751/ES-01682-110226

10.1002/rra.709

Kite G.W., 2000, Developing a Hydrological Model for the Mekong Basin: Impacts of Basin Development on Fisheries Productivity

10.1111/j.1365-2427.2008.02024.x

10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1998)124:2(224)

10.1029/95WR01485

10.3133/sir20055163

10.1029/1998GL900291

10.1016/j.tree.2003.10.002

10.1007/BF03161678

10.1890/1051-0761(2001)011[0530:EOFROF]2.0.CO;2

10.1111/j.1752-1688.2007.00099.x

10.1029/2002GL015999

10.2307/1939132

MGCAC (Michigan Groundwater Conservation Advisory Council), 2007, Report to the Michigan Legislature in Response to Public Act 34

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2003, Ecosystems and Human Well‐Being: A Framework for Assessment

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Synthesis Report

10.1002/rra.964

10.1139/f98-181

10.1023/B:EBFI.0000003846.54826.a6

10.1007/978-1-4612-4382-3_1

10.1007/s00267-002-2734-3

10.1007/s00267-002-2735-2

(NSTC) National Science and Technology Council, 2004, Science and Technology to Support Fresh Water Availability in the United States

10.1111/j.1365-2427.2009.02179.x

10.1002/rra.700

10.1126/science.1095780

10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01004.x

10.1890/060148

10.1002/rra.1044

10.1002/rra.748

10.1002/(SICI)1099-1646(199607)12:4/5<353::AID-RRR425>3.0.CO;2-6

10.1046/j.1365-2427.1996.00073.x

10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(2009)135:1(1)

10.2307/1941217

10.1139/f89-228

10.1111/j.1365-2427.2009.02272.x

10.2307/1313099

10.1890/1540-9295(2003)001[0298:RFAWWE]2.0.CO;2

10.1002/rra.902

10.1899/0887-3593(2006)025[0730:FTNONA]2.0.CO;2

Postel S., 1997, Nature’s Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems, 195

Postel S., 2003, Rivers for Life: Managing Water for People and Nature

10.2307/1312555

10.1071/MF94161

10.1034/j.1600-0633.2000.90105.x

10.1046/j.1365-2427.1997.d01-540.x

10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98488.x

10.1046/j.1523-1739.1996.10041163.x

10.1002/rra.892

10.1002/rra.910

10.1899/04-022.1

10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.10.018

10.1080/15715124.2009.9635372

10.1016/j.jhydrol.2005.07.054

Seelbach P.W., 1997, A Landscape‐Based Ecological Classification System for River Valley Segments in Lower Michigan

10.1111/j.1365-2427.2009.02271.x

10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(2002)7:4(270)

10.1111/j.1752-1688.2002.tb04344.x

10.1002/rra.826

10.1071/MF06183

10.1890/1051-0761(2006)016[1267:SEFTEC]2.0.CO;2

10.1111/j.1365-2427.2006.01713.x

Stuckey M.H., 2006, Low‐Flow, Base‐Flow, and Mean‐Flow Regression Equations for Pennsylvania Streams, 10.3133/sir20065130

10.1002/rra.736

10.2307/1468142

10.1046/j.1365-2427.2000.00535.x

10.1002/aqc.895

10.1029/2006WR005226

10.1126/science.289.5477.284

Wagener T., 2004, Rainfall–Runoff Modeling in Gauged and Ungauged Catchments, 10.1142/p335

10.1002/rrr.3450110108

10.1002/rra.914

10.1139/f92-242

10.1126/science.273.5281.1558

10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(2009)135:5(303)

10.1029/2008WR006833

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Freshwater Biology

Tập 55 Số 1

147-170

Thông tin tác giả