Transcript Presentation

Paradigm Shift
Review of In-Stream Flow
Criteria to Update Vermont
Policy
Presented by: Alyssa Annino, Andie Blaser, Brad Hansen,
David Jaeger
The Natural Flow Regime
Duration
• Natural Flow
Regime
– Magnitude
– Timing
– Duration
– Frequency
– Rate of
Change
Rate of
change
Frequency &
Magnitude
Vermont In-Stream Flow
● 1993: Agency Procedure for
Determining Acceptable Minimum
Stream Flows
○ US Fish and Wildlife Threshold
○ Stream Hydrologic Analysis
○ Instream Flow Incremental Method
(IFIM Model)
● Out of date policy
Paradigm Shift in Flow Methods
Current System
Updated Strategies
Minimum Flows
Environmental Flows
Static: sets a standard
minimum flow
Dynamic: Integrates Natural flow
regime multiple flows and natural
regime
What Does This Look Like?
Flow Alterations in Vermont
● Snowmaking
○ Climate change pressure, need for more snowmaking
● Hydroelectric
○ Long-term contracts
● Agriculture
○ Regulation
● Drinking water sources
○ Unknown use
● Lake water level management
○ Streams dammed to raise water level for recreation
Photo by Martin Griff
Snowmaking
November 2015
June 2015
Hydroelectric
Approach
Need Statement: “The Agency of Natural
Resources’ procedure for managing instream
flows must be updated to reflect advances in
instream flow science and allow the Agency to
effectively manage the surface waters of
Vermont in the public interest.”
Literature review in cooperation with Eric Davis
and Jeff Crocker of the Vermont DEC Rivers
Program
Habitat Flow Requirements
Stream habitats classified over many factors dependent on streamflow
Flow alteration can lead to a decline in native, specialist species
Generalist, invasive species are better able to persist in altered flow systems
Applicable to floodplain and riparian species as well
Allow for natural extent of flooding
High flow pulses and Overbank flows
High flow pulses
TCEQ, 2008
Bioperiods - “Period during which certain biological processes dependent on stream flow rates occur or
”
are likely to occur
Connecticut DEEP, 2011
Based on fish life cycle
segments
Integrates biological
hydrological
information
Comparable
Paraseiwicz et al 2014
Bioindicators
Organisms grouped by flow tolerance used as indicators for flow alteration
LIFE (Lotic-Invertebrate Index for Flow Evaluation) Index
Method of assessing the impact of variable streamflow on benthic populations
Uses an index of taxa with corresponding flow group associations
LIFE scores compared with flow statistics, flow duration, and flow period
I LOVE THE
NATURAL
FLOW
REGIME!!
LIFE effective for a range of river types
LIFE suitable for use along with or in place of PHABSIM
More effective for measuring low-flow effects
www.lifeinfreshwater.org.uk
“If you build it they will come”
fanart.tv
wpcdn.clearvoice.com
Headwater Systems
Ephemeral and Intermittent
streams → Have 0 flow
days
Largely unprotected under
federal and state
regulations
Clean Water Act
Navigable waters, “significant
nexus”
Episodic connectivity with
downstream
New Hampshire
Pilot program
UCUT (Uniform Continuous Under-Threshold) Analysis
Maine
“Seasonal Aquatic Base Flow”
Median flow value
startingacleaningbusinesstips.com
maineaudubon.org
Connecticut
Bioperiods
all-science.com
wikipedia.com
Recommendations
Consider updating terminology
Minimum → Environmental
Consider including headwater streams
Define bioperiods for Vermont
Consider following New Hampshire’s
example
Select a holistic system for decision making
Consider using bioindicators
Acknowledgements
Eric Davis, River Ecologist, Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation
Jeff Crocker, Streamflow Protection Coordinator, Vermont Department of
Environmental Conservation
Breck Bowden, PhD, Patrick Professor of Watershed Science & Planning,
RSENR
Hana Aronowitz, TA, Environmental Science: Ecological Risk Assessment
Literature Cited
Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, VT (1993) Agency Procedure for Determining Acceptable Minimum Stream Flows, Watershed Management Division
Arthington, A. H., Bunn, S. E., Poff, N. L. and Naiman, R. J. (2006). The Challenge of Providing Environmental Flow Rules to Sustain River Ecosystems. Ecological Applications, 16: 1311–1318.
Caissie, J., Caissie, D., and El-Jabi, N. (2015). Hydrologically Based Environmental Flow Methods Applied to Rivers in the Maritime Provinces (Canada). River Res. Applic., 31: 651–662.
Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP). (2011). Stream Flow Standards and Regulations. Section 26-141b-1 to 26-141b-8, inclusive, of the Regulations of Connecticut
State Agencies.
Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) (2012). Summary of DEEP Streamflow Regulations, Sections 26-141b-1 to 26-141b-8 of the Regulations of Connecticut State
Agencies.
DePhilip, M., Moberg, T. (2013). Ecosystem Flow Recommendations for the Upper Ohio River Basin in Western Pennsylvania. The Nature Conservancy.
Hansen, W. F. (2001). "Identifying stream types and management implications." Forest Ecology and Management 143(1–3): 39-46.
Jowett, I. G. (1997). Instream Flow Methods: A Comparison of Approaches. Regulated Rivers: Research & Management, 13: 115-127.
Gomi, T., et al. (2002). "Understanding Processes and Downstream Linkages of Headwater Systems: Headwaters differ from downstream reaches by their close coupling to hillslope processes, more
temporal and spatial variation, and their need for different means of protection from land use." BioScience 52(10): 905-916
Grabowski, R. C. and A. M. Gurnell (2016). "Hydrogeomorphology—Ecology Interactions in River Systems." River Research and Applications 32(2): 139-141.
Lassaletta, L., et al. (2010). "Headwater streams: neglected ecosystems in the EU Water Framework Directive. Implications for nitrogen pollution control." Environmental Science & Policy 13(5): 423433.
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.
Lowe, W. H. and G. E. Likens (2005). "Moving Headwater Streams to the Head of the Class." BioScience 55(3): 196-197.
Maine Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) (2007). In-Stream Flows and Lake and Pond Water Levels. Chapter 587.
Meyer, J. L., et al. (2007). "The Contribution of Headwater Streams to Biodiversity in River Networks1." JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association 43(1): 86-103.
Nadeau, T.-L. and M. C. Rains (2007). JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association 43(1): 118-133.
New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (NHDES) and Watershed Management Bureau (WMB). (2015). Report of the Instream Flow Pilot Program (R-WD-15-1).
Poff NLR, Matthews JH. (2013). Environmental flows in the Anthropocene: past progress and future prospects, Curr Opin Environ Sustain
Poff, N. L., Richter, B. D., Arthington, A. H., Bunn, S. E., Naiman, R. J., Kendy, E., Acreman, M., Apse, C., Bledsoe, B. P., Freeman, M. C., Henriksen, J., Jacobson, R. B., Kennen, J. G., Merritt, D. M.,
O’Keeffe, J. H., Olden, J. D., Rogers, K., Tharme, R. E. and Warner, A. (2010). The ecological limits of hydrologic alteration (ELOHA): a new framework for developing regional environmental flow
standards. Freshwater Biology, 55: 147–170.
Parasiewicz, P. (2008). "Habitat time series analysis to define flow augmentation strategy for the Quinebaug River, Connecticut and Massachusetts, USA." River Research and Applications 24(4): 439452.