1

IWCEnvironmental Flows and Management

Scenarios

December 2009

Prof. Angela Arthington

Australian Rivers Institute, Griffith University

Room 1.09C, Building N13

3735 7403

Management Scenario 1

Determining e-flows for a new reservoir on a river like the Li Jiang

• Rapid assessment, with limited resources and data

DRIFT MethodologyDownstream Response to Imposed Flow Transformation

• Comprehensive assessment, with time to collect field data

ELOHA Framework

Ecological Limits of Hydrologic Alteration

Environmental Flow Methodologies

Proactive approaches, used at planning stage of new developments

Question:

How much can we change a river’s flow regime before unacceptable ecological changes occur?

Examples:

DRIFT – South Africa

Benchmarking Methodology – Australia

ELOHA – Australia & USA

2

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

J F b M A M J J l A S O t N Dharg

e (m

3*

104 )

Natural annual flow pattern

ProactiveEnvironmental Flow approaches are used at the planning stage of new developments

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

BankfullPulseLow and high flows

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Ave

rage

Mon

thly

Dis

ch

Water for river ecosystem

Water for human ‘uses’

Modified flow pattern

DRIFT - Scenario based-interactive approach

“DRIFT provides an assessment of the ecological consequences of altering the flow regime of river reaches or a single river system made up of several reaches.

DRIFT employs an Expert Panel approach.

DRIFT is typically focused on alterations to flow volume due to water storage, hence loss of flow downstream.

DRIFT flow components include:dry and wet season low flowsflow pulses within the channel (within year floods)floods of various return intervals, 1:2, 1:15; 1:10, 1:20

-0 8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

Near natural

Moderately modified

Present River State = Near natural

core

DRIFT SOLVER OUTPUTLinking output to a river condition classification

Note thatvariation around themean increases

-2

-1.8

-1.6

-1.4

-1.2

-1

-0.8

0 50 100 150 200 (56%) 250 300 350 (99%) 400

Total volume used (MCM)(Percentage MAR in brackets)

Significantly modified

Highly significantly modified

DR

IFT

Inte

gri

ty S

c

with degree of departure of flowvolume fromnatural (100%)

i.e. Experts lesssure of ecologicalresponse to largedepartures of flowvolume fromnatural.

3

DRIFT studies for river by riverassessment are expert panel methods

Current regional-scale assessmentmethods tend to be “rule of thumb” e.g. % MAR

Regional e-flow “standards”

ELOHA - Regional scale flow assessment

“Challenge paper” Arthington, Poff, Bunn, Naiman (2006). Ecol. Applications 16: 1311-18.

“The Ecological Limitsof Hydrologic Alteration (ELOHA): a framework for developing regional environmental flow standards”Poff, Richter, Arthington et al. (2009)Freshwater Biology Special Issue

Arthington, Bunn, Poff and Naiman 2006

Ecological Limits of Hydrologic Alteration - ELOHA

Step 1. Hydrologic Foundation

SCIENTIFIC PROCESS - ELOHA

Stream HydrologicClassification

Degree of HydrologicAlteration

Hydrologic Alteration

by River Type

BaselineHydrographs

DevelopedHydrographs

Hydrologic Modeland Stream Gauges

Geomorphic Stratification

Step 3. Flow Alteration

Step 2. Stream Classification

Poff, Richter, Arthington et al. FW Biology 2009

Monitoring

AcceptableEcological Conditions

SocietalValues and

Management Needs

Implementation

SOCIAL PROCESS

Adaptive Adjustments

Flow Alteration-Ecological Response Relationships

by River Type

Ecological Data and Indices

Environmental Flow Standards

Flow - EcologyHypotheses

Step 4. Flow-Ecology Relationships

4

ELOHA - Scenario based-interactive approach

“ ELOHA provides an assessment of the ecological consequences of altering the flow regime of rivers with different types of flow regime

ELOHA employs a Scientific Panel approach and more field work than DRIFT

ELOHA considers all ecologically relevant features of the flowELOHA considers all ecologically relevant features of the flow regime, drawn from the Natural Flow Regime Paradigm and Bunn & AA (2002), etc

ELOHA flow components include:- magnitude (flow volume)- timing, frequency and duration of any flow magnitude (i.e. low

flows, no flow, channel pulses, floods)- rate of change in flow (e.g. hydrograph rise and fall)- predictability of flow patterns over time (e.g. seasonal vs highly

variable)

ELOHA ADVANTAGES

Riv

er D

isch

arge

0

2

4

6

8 MississippiMekong

Time Time

ELOHA recognises that rivers have different types of flow regime

ELOHA classifies rivers according to their flow regime type

ELOHA seeks to develop flow alteration – ecological relationships based on ecologically relevant flow metrics for each flow class

ELOHA’s flow alteration – ecological relationships are specific to each class of river, and preferably, to each type of flow regime change

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

Classify rivers based on natural flows(gauged or simulated)

1. Classification based on reference

0

20000

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

Class A

Class C

Class B

Axis I

Axi

s II

stream flow data

5

Health indicator 1

Mean and error for reference streams

1 2

3

4 5

4. Flow-response relationships for ecological health data from reference and flow-modified streams for each flow variable

Flow alteration – ecological response relationships

Sustainable level of change

Unsustainable

Departure from reference flow condition(flow variable X)

Health indicator 2

Mean and error for reference streams

Dep

artu

re fr

om re

fere

nce

heal

th c

ondi

tion

4 5

1 2 3

4

5

Management Scenario 1

Determining e-flows for a new reservoir on a river like the Li Jiang

Comprehensive ELOHA assessment

Develop flow alteration – ecological response relationships for several similar rivers that have already been altered, to guide the development of environmental flow rules on Li Jang River

ELOHA field trial SEQ

Obi Obi

Six Mile

Yabba

Research steps

1. Classify natural flow regimes2. Identify flow regulation gradient3. Establish referential field study design4. Explore ecological responses to natural flow

gradient5. Explore ecological responses to gradient of

flow regulation6 Explore ecological responses to other factors

Regulated

No

Yes

Nerang

Moogerah

Maroon

6. Explore ecological responses to other factors

Measures of response

Channel/habitat structureWater quality, temperatureRiparian & aquatic vegetationFish

Species richness, assemblage structure, native vs alien species richness/abundance, total abundance/density, biomass, guilds, recruitment

6

Ordination (SSHMDS) of sites based on pre-development (IQQM) metrics

2 dimensions, stress = 0.117

SEASON

MeanZeroDay

CVDaily

HSNum

LSNum

MedAnnMaxHSDur

(b)

1

1

111111 11 1

111

1 11111111

111

22

22

222

222222 2

2223

3

333

444 444444

444

4 444

4

5

55 55

5

555

55 555

555 6

Teewah Ck

(a)

Low dischargeLow seasonalityHigh daily variability

Axis 1

BFI

SEASON

MA3-90day Max

ARI_1y r

MDF_Sep

MA1day Max

MRateRise/Fall

LSDur

ARI_10y r

MA7day MinMA30day Min

MA90day Min JDMin

Sp_MeanAnnMax

ARI_2y r

MDF_J,M,M,J,N

5555

66

6

6

Axis 1

High dischargeHigh seasonalityLow daily variability

6 classes of pre-development flow regimes1 = 26 nodes from all major rivers2 = 17 nodes from Mary, Brisbane and Logan-Albert 3 = 5 nodes from Logan-Albert, lower Mary River, Teewah Creek 4 = 17 nodes from Mary and Brisbane 5 = 18 nodes from Mary, Maroochy, Brisbane, Maroochy, Gold Coast6 = 5 nodes from 5 catchments, 3 rising in Maleny plateau

Significantly correlated metrics, P≤0.02

Also a gradient of spell number and duration

Photo: seqwater.com.au

Dam construction time line

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Photo: seqwater.com.au

Gradient in flow regime alteration across SEQ study area Two dimensional ordination (SSHMDS) of sites based on historic (gauge) metrics1

11

11 1

22

2

2

2222

2

22

2

2

2

3

3

3

33

33 3

333

3

33

333

3

444

4

4

4

4

44

4

5

55 55

55

5

Teewah

BFI

MeanZeroDayLSDur

HSDur

SEASON

PREDICTCONSTAN

HSNum

MA30-90day Max

MDF_Sep

MDF_Jul

MA30-90day Min

ARI_1y r

MedAnnMax

Sp_MeanAnnMax

RateRise/Fall

MDF_Jan

MDF_Nov

MDF_Mar, May

ARI_10y r

MA1-7day Min

LSNum

Teewah Creek includedStress = 0.084

5 flow regime classes

Class 1 4 regulated, Burnett Ck, Bris, Logan,Teewah

244 45

Axis 1 Axis 1

LSNum

PREDICT

HSNum

HSDur

LSDurMeanZeroDay

BFILSNum

MA1-90day MaxRateRise/Fall

CONSTAN

SEASON

MA90day MinMA30day Min

MA1-7day Min

ARI_1,2y rMDF_Nov

MedAnnMaxMDF_Sep

MDF_Jan,May ,Jul

ARI_10y rMDF_Mar

11

111

2

22

2 2

2222

22

22

2

33

3 3

3

33

33

3

33

33

3

33

3

4

44

4

4

4

4

4

44

4

4

5

5

5

5

5

5 55 5

Axis 1Teewah Creek excludedStress = 0.082

Class 214 gauges Mary, Brisbane , 2 regulated

Class 319 gauges Mary & Logan-Albert, Nerang reg.

Class 4 12 gauges 5 catchments, Six Mile Ck reg.

Class 56 gauges Maroochy (~ class 5), 2 regulated

7

Gower Metric - multivariate metric of degree of flow regulation

Referential field study design

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

we

r met

ric

Reynolds

Obi Obi

NerangYabba

Brisbane River

Hydrological Class 1Hydrological Class 2

Hydrological Class 5

Class 1 = 2 reg. samples (Obi Obi, Six-Mile), Class 2 = 3 reg. samples (Reynolds, Yabba, Burnett), Class 4 = Brisbane River, studied previously, Class 5 = 1 reg. sample (Nerang)

0

0.05

0.1

Munna C

kM

ary R (F

ish.Pckt)

Mary R

(Bellbird)

Mary (D

agun Pckt)

Coom

era RB

risbane R (Linville)

Logan R (R

ound Mt)

Logan R (F

orest Hom

e)C

anungra Ck

Tinana C

k (Bauple)

Kandanga C

kM

ary (Moy P

ckt)B

risbane R (G

regors)A

lbert R (Lum

eah)Logan R

(Rathdow

ney)M

ary R (M

iva)M

oololah RP

etrie Ck

Logan R (Y

arrahap.)S

tanley RA

mam

oor Ck

Wide B

ay Ck (K

ilkiv.)C

aboolture RB

ack Ck

Em

u Ck

Eudlo C

kN

orth Maroochy R

Albert R

(Brom

fleet)S

ix Mile C

kT

eviot Bk (O

verflow)

Brem

er R (W

alloon)T

eewah C

kT

inana Ck (T

agigan)G

lastonbury Ck

Wide B

ay Ck (B

rooyar)B

remer R

(Adam

s Br.)

Currum

bin Ck

Brisbane R

(Savages)

Sth M

aroochy R (K

iamba)

Mudgeeraba C

kS

outh Pine R

Burnett C

k (Maroon D

am)

Brisbane R

(Wivenhoe D

am)

Lockyer Ck

Yabba C

k (Borum

ba Dam

)N

erang R

Running C

kO

bi Obi C

kR

eynolds Ck

Gow Brisbane River

Burnett

Six mile

Fish survey methods (based on Pusey et al. 1993, 2004)Multiple pass electrofishing & block seine

Total surveyed is usually 60-80m stream length seine haul after e fishing

flow

Fish sampled at pool-riffle-run sequences, where possible

Fish identified, counted, measured, returned to site

Samples kept for condition, diet and reproductive status

Habitat structure assessed in-stream and along banks

Total surveyed is usually 60 80m stream length seine haul after e-fishing

Habitat Assessment

An assessment of habitat is performed at 100 ‘nodes’ randomly placed along transects within the total length of sampled area

Physical variables, substrate composition and

In-stream habitat sampling point

Flow

25

30

35

40

Bank habitat sample

am (

m)

In-stream habitat sampling point

Flow

25

30

35

40

Bank habitat sample

am (

m)

microhabitat structure are

measured / estimated

Bank habitat sampling occurs every 10m on both banks

Methods described inPusey et al. (2004)

Flow

Left bankRight bank

0

5

10

15

20

E D C B A

Transect

Dis

tanc

e up

str e

a Flow

Left bankRight bank

0

5

10

15

20

E D C B A

Transect

Dis

tanc

e up

str e

a

8

Fish Data Collection

At the completion of each sampling trip, the following fish and habitat information is available:

• CPUE, species richness, fish assemblage structure and other ecological metrics

• Length histograms of all fish captured

• Fish biomass may also be obtained through previously defined length weight relationships (Pusey et al. 2004)

• Fish associations with habitat at a range of spatial scales

• Fish condition, reproductive status and diet (from laboratory analysis)

M. adspersa - gudgeon

L. unicolor - spangled perch

T. tandanus - eel-tailed catfish

M. duboulayi - rainbowfish

Native fish families (11) and species (21) andnumber of sites where present in 2008 surveys

19/21

16/21

15/21

18/21

Introduced families (2) and species (4)B. Cowell

10/21 sites2/21 sites

Box and whisker plots of important metrics driving gauge classification, identified by clustvarsel

9 metrics6 = discharge magnitude2 = high & low flow spell duration1 = discharge constancy

Class 1 streams4 regulatedHigh values for MA1dayMin & constancyLow zero flow days, low LS duration (suggests water releases from dams)Low values for high spell durationLow values for ARI_1yr & ARI_10yr (indicates high flows are stored)

1 unregulatedTeewah Ck has high groundwater flow

9

Ordination of Fish Abundance (CPUE) Data

Site scale3 dims, stress=0.168

Gauge flow classes shown

Alien taxa in red textAxis 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

33

3

33

3

3

3

3

3

3

4

4

4

44

4

5

5

5

5

55 5

55

5

Axis 1

Hypsel . sp 1

Water Velocity

Submerged Veg

Width

Mud

R. ornatus

L. unicolor

A.reinhardti i

G. australis

H. gall ii

M. duboulayi

P. signiferH. klungzing.H. compressa

X. maculatusMacrophytes

M. adspersa

G. holbrookiA. agassizi i

Axis 1

0 200 400

Axis 1

HSDurLSDur

MedAnnMax

MeanZeroDay

MA1dayMinMA3dayMinMA7dayMin

LSNumHSNum

MA1-7dayMax

ARI-1yrMDF_May/Jul

CPUE

Flow Metrics

-150

-120

-90

-60

-30

0

30

60

90

More zero flow days In some regulated sites

1. Ordination of fish assemblage structure at all reference and regulated sites based on CPUEshows distinctive spatial patterns in fish assemblages

2. Flow metrics (6 of 9) are consistent between altered hydrological classification and those significantly correlated with the ordination patterns for fish assemblages.

hi h ll d i

Results of fish assemblage ordination

- high spell duration- low spell duration- zero flow days- MA1dayMin, median annual maximum flow- ARI_1yr

3. All of these metrics have been altered from natural, and are affecting the structure of fish assemblages

4. Alien fish species are associated with regulated sites, indicating poor ecological health

Plotting flow alteration – ecological response relationships

Obs

erve

d

/ E

1

Within IQQM hydrological class Between IQQM hydrological classes

bser

ved

/ pe

cted

temporal samples (4x2 ref. sitesx 4 surveys = 32)

reference steams

regulated streams

O

Departure from reference flow condition

O

Departure from reference flow conditione.g. Gower metric for regulated study sites

Within hydrological class can compare raw reference and regulated site data.Only need to divide observed (regulated) by expected (reference) if exploring flow-ecological response along the entire flow regulation gradient, e.g. along the Gower gradient, or a gradient based on an individual, driving flow metric.

Ob

exp

Reynolds

Obi Obi

Hydrological class 1

10

Change in 1 year ARI (% difference from IQQM values)

100

(IQQM-Gauge)IQQM

x100

-140

-120

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Gauge value for 1 year ARI smaller than IQQM value

Gauge value for 1 yGauge ARI is greater than Natural ARIear ARI larger than IQQM value

Gauge ARI is less than Natural ARI

Change in 10 year ARI flood (% difference from IQQM values)

(IQQM-Gauge)IQQM

x100

-350

-300

-250

-200

-150

-100

-50

0

50

100

Gauge value for 10 year ARI smaller than IQQM value

Gauge value for 10 year ARI larger than IQQM value

Change in mean number of zero days(Difference from IQQM value)

(IQQM-Gauge)

-150

-120

-90

-60

-30

0

30

60

90

Higher number of zero flow days in gauge flow recordMore zero flow days in some regulated sitesmber of zero flow days in IQQM flow record

11

Change in low flow spell duration(% difference from IQQM values)

200

(IQQM-Gauge)IQQM

x100

-1600

-1400

-1200

-1000

-800

-600

-400

-200

0

200

Longer low flow spells in gauge record than IQQM record

Does ecological response change along flow alteration gradients within flow classes?

Obs

erve

d

/ E

1

Within IQQM hydrological class Between IQQM hydrological classes

bser

ved

/ pe

cted

temporal samples (4x2 ref. sitesx 4 surveys = 32)

reference steams

regulated streams

O

Departure from reference flow condition

O

Departure from reference flow conditione.g. Gower metric for regulated study sites

and across the full flow regime gradient?

Ob

exp

Reynolds

Obi Obi

Health indicator 1

Mean and error for reference streams

1 2

3

4 5

4. Flow-response relationships for ecological health data from reference and flow-modified streams for each flow variable

Flow alteration – ecological response relationships

Sustainable level of change

Unsustainable

Departure from reference flow condition(flow variable X)

Health indicator 2

Mean and error for reference streams

Dep

artu

re fr

om re

fere

nce

heal

th c

ondi

tion

4 5

1 2 3

4

5

12

De velop flow rules for SEQ RiversTentative findings to protect the ecological health of

fish assets

Keep the following flow metrics within specified % change from natural

High spell duration Low spell durationZero flow daysMA1dayMin Median annual maximum flowARI_1yr

Repeat analysis for short-term flow metrics, at defined antecedent flow intervals, e.g. leading up to spawning period.

Compare with results for riparian vegetation, aquatic plants

ELOHA SUMMARY

Advantages of ELOHA

“ ELOHA employs a Scientific Panel approach and can be as rigorous as funds allow.

ELOHA provides an assessment of the ecological consequences of altering the flow regime of rivers with different types of flow regime.

ELOHA considers all ecologically relevant features of the flow regime, drawn from the Natural Flow Regime Paradigm and Bunn & AA (2002), etc

ELOHA can consider any abiotic or ecological feature or asset of the river ecosystem.

ELOHA methods gather strength from the study of several rivers with altered flow regimes.

Flow alteration – ecological response plots are very useful to guide scenario assessment.

e.g. what will happen to water quality in pools if small flows are taken out of the river and stroed in a reservoir?

e.g. what will happen to fish diversity or fisheries biomass if ARIs of floods are reduced?

e.g. what will happen to prawn biomass if there are many more days with zero flow?

13

Outcomes of ELOHA studies

ELOHA is being trialled in several parts of the USA, setting rules for pumping of groundwater and abstractions from surface flows

The Murray-Darling Basin’s Water Plan is applying an ELOHA-type approach to assess the flow requirements of the Basin’s rivers

The SEQ study is the first full trial of the ELOHA framework in Australia

Publications on the ELOHA Framework

Arthington, Angela H., Stuart E. Bunn, N. LeRoy Poff, Robert J. Naiman (2006). The challenge of providing environmental flow rules to sustain river ecosystems. Ecological Applications 16 (4): 1311-1318.

Arthington A.H., R.J. Naiman, M.E. McClain and C. Nilsson (2009). Preserving the biodiversity and ecological services of rivers: new challenges and research opportunities. Freshwater Biology, Special Issue on Environmental Flows; Science and Management.

Poff N. L., B. D. Richter, A. H. Arthington, S.E. Bunn, R. J. Naiman, E. Kendy, M. Acreman, C. Apse, B.P. Bledsoe, M. C. Freeman, J. Henriksen, R. B. Jacobson, J. G. Kennen, D. M. Merritt, J. H. O’Keeffe, J. D. Olden, K. Rogers, R. E. Tharme and A Warne (2009). The ecological limits of hydrologic alteration (ELOHA): a new framework for developing regional environmental flow standards. Freshwater Biology, Special Issue on Environmental Flows; Science and Management.