Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Februal)' 2003 <br /> <br />ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE WATER MANAGEtv1ENT <br /> <br />r~~~~~~--~~-~~~~--~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~~-~~~~~--~-~~~~ <br />I' 1 I <br />,~ Step 1 ~ Step 2 l <br />. J ~ <br />~ I <br />I I <br />l I <br />r:: I r <br />01 t <br />E I t <br />ell <br />'tii t : <br />c i <br />e I <br />II) .1 <br />~ : <br />e I <br />~ I <br />I <br />1 <br />~ <br />~ <br />I <br />I <br />i <br />1 <br /> <br />-__J <br /> <br /> <br />1--- -.--- ---, <br /> <br />I 1 <br />, I <br />rJ) l Foster CoUabbrative I <br />C I Dlatogue to Search l <br />~ ! for Solutlqns : <br />. 0 l I <br />i i Step 5, ~ i, . . f <br />.c f Conduct Wat~r . . -1-, <br />~I ' 1 <br />- m I ' Managenient l <br />fJ'J l experiments to I <br />t Sesol\l8. u.nc+rtalnty r <br />I ~ <br />~ __ _- _- _- _- __ _ - _- _- _- _"- -- -- -- _- _--- __ -- -- -- ~___ t-+~ -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---- -- ---- -- -- -- -- -----~, <br />I . Step B :t, ..- . l <br />I ~ . <br />en Design and ,ImPlement. . I <br />~ ~ I . an Adaptive . l' ' <br />~ G) ~ Manageme~t Plan' I <br />ct 0)1 Yo I <br />"1:1' co l · monnor ng " <br />< a ~ · fundln:g , <br />~ · gOV'8rnarce , <br />. I · adaptability. . . 1 <br />, ~ <br />I ; - I <br /> <br />---~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~--~~-~~-~~--~~~~-~~~~~~--~--~~~- <br /> <br />Fso. 2. A fran1cwork for ecologically s~staina~lo ,w~ter management, <br /> <br />do not occur every year; rates of tlood rise and fan; <br />and the interannual variability in each oftllese elements <br />(ArthillgtOl'l and Zalucld' 19981 King and Louw 1998, <br />Trush et at 2000), The particular .flow components 0 r <br />statistics used to define flow requirements in different <br />parts of the world necessarily vary to some degree, <br />depending upon regional differences i-q. annual hydro- <br />logic patterns. Ecosystem flow requirements can be <br />, specified as numerical ranges within which the flow <br />component is to be maintained (o.gq Fig. 3; Richter et <br />aI. 19970), or they can be ej(pressed as threshold li1nits <br />for specific flow characteristics (Table 1" Fig. 4) that <br />should not be crossed (Rogers and Biggs 1999, Richter <br />alld Richter 2000). ' <br />Generally, the greater the numbeL' of flow character.. <br />istics used to describe ecosystem requirementst the bet- <br /> <br />209 <br /> <br />- , <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />ter Ithe chanoes of attaining the desit-ed flow regime~ . <br />On lthe other hand, the flow needs should be described <br />usi~g .only as many characteristics as necessary. It is <br />usuJally possible to identify a limited number of chaL~'" <br />act~ristics necessary to describe.flow conditions of con.. <br />cerp. For exanlplel even thOl.lgh natural ,floods are es.. <br />se1'l:tial in sustaining river ecosystems, their natural V~l.'" <br />iab!lity may not be constrained in a particular water- <br />shdd in the absence of dams.. Therefore)' there may be <br />. no lnetd to prescribe flood flow characteristics unless <br />ne~ dams are proposed in the future. This Inay help <br />Si~plify the assessment of th,e ecological suitability of <br />va~ious water management alternatives.. Prhnary ntten... <br />tiOf should be given to flow characteristics that have <br />be4n or may be altered by human influences (Rogers <br />an~ Bestbier 1997, Rogers and Biggs 1999)~ <br />