Flows and Recretion: A guide to studies for river professionals

Home Browse Search

Documentation Needs and Explicit Criteria for Progressing to Level 3 Studies A Level 2 report should document reconnaissance efforts and findings, possibly integrating them with Level I information in a single revised report. Major sections need to identify specific recreation opportunities, identify flow - dependent attributes, identify rough flow ranges (if possible), and assess whether project operations are likely to have impacts on those opportunities. Agency and stakeholder review is important, and may be implemented differently in traditional, alternative, or integrated planning processes. Earlier reporting allows more time to plan additional work (if needed) or integrate findings with work from other resource areas. The report should include explicit decisions about whether additional study is necessary for each opportunity and reach. The utility and consultants typically outline the issues in the report, but review by agencies and stakeholders (via working groups) can make those decisions more collaborative, or identify disputes. Deciding whether to launch more intensive Level 3 studies is the critical study output; this depends on answers to the same questions discussed for the adequacy of Level 1 efforts. For opportunities where users are relatively insensitive to flows, or where project effects do not appear substantial, Level 2 information is likely to be sufficient. However, if project operations are likely to have direct and noticeable effects and flow regime changes are possible, greater precision may be necessary. Intensive Study Options (Level 3) For opportunities that are obviously flow- dependent and where precise information about flow needs or project effects is needed, more intensive effort is recommended. Several options for different types of recreation studies are described below. Multiple Flow Reconnaissance Assessments Objective Improve precision of estimated flow ranges for recreation opportunities by assessing multiple flows. Generally applicable to boating, fishing, tubing, or swimming on reaches with logistical complications that prevent evaluations associated with controlled flow studies (see additional issues below). Typical approach Similar to single flow assessments, these differ by assessing multiple flows. Participation by recreation users is typically limited (see controlled flow studies below), but may be important. Quantitative ratings (by panels or experts) are commonly made for all relevant opportunities and conditions. Photos of key sites and conditions, along with rough measurements of key features (e.g., pools, current speed) may be useful, particularly for non - boating and fishing conditions. Qualitative notes or focus group discussions after are used to summarize opinions about the feasibility or quality of different types of opportunities at different flows. 22 1 Flows and Recreation: A Guide for River Professionals Product Summary of reconnaissance efforts and findings. A list of participants, evaluation results, photos, measurements, and discussion notes may be provided in appendices. Usually presented in a report that is supplemental to Phase 1 and 2 reports. Responsibilities As with other assessments, utilities (or their consultants) have primary responsibility, but agencies and stakeholders commonly participate in fieldwork and review evaluation forms. Additional issues Multiple -flow assessments that rely on expert judgments usually occur when logistical constraints make it difficult to assemble or maintain an evaluation panel. Example problems might include the inability to control flows (necessitating opportunistic fieldwork when natural flows are close to target levels) or difficult access to the river reaches. For some opportunities, potential participants (e.g., tubers or swimmers) may not be particularly sensitive to flow changes (or able to express preferences for specific flows), so it may be efficient and effective to have experts evaluate key conditions (which assumes the need to carefully document conditions and assumptions). Multiple -flow assessments often focus on more than one recreation activity, which may present logistical challenges. Given trade -offs between the number of sites that can be assessed and the quality of assessments, identifying representative locations or reaches for more intensive work is critical. Choosing the number and increments of flows is a case -by -case decision that generally depends on Phase 1 and 2 findings and requests from other resource areas (fisheries, etc.). Assessments of two to four flows are common. Cautions & limitations Expert judgments are often sufficient when supported with clear documentation of conditions at different flows, but user, agency, or stakeholder participation is important and powerful.