Flows and Recretion: A guide to studies for river professionals

Home Browse Search

Instream flow, the amount of water in a river, fundamentally affects recreation quality in most river settings. In the short term, flows determine whether a river is boatable, fishable, or swimmable, and they affect attributes such as the challenge of whitewater or the aesthetics of the "riverscape" (Brown, Taylor, & Shelby, 1991; Whittaker et al., 1993; Whittaker & Shelby, 2002). Longer term flow regimes (e.g., over a period of years) may also have effects on fish populations and other ecological resources (Bovee, 1996; Richter et al., 1997; Tharme, 2002), riparian environments (Jackson & Beschta, 1992), or channel features such as beaches, pools, and riffles (Hill et al., 1991). Many of these are critical for specific types of river recreation. Instream flows are commonly manipulated on regulated rivers through dam releases or out -of- stream diversions; as a result, flow management has become one of the most important issues on the river conservation agenda (Stanford et al., 1996; Poff et al., 1997; Richter et al., 1997). Natural resource agencies (e.g., U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) have been interested in assessing the impacts of flow regimes on recreation, and studies of flow - recreation Introduction relationships have become common in most Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licensing processes (see sidebar on "Hydropower Licensing and Recreation'). Flow- recreation issues are also relevant in other river - related issues such as navigability or water rights adjudications, or during reviews of federal dam operations. Considerable work on flow and recreation has occurred in the past two decades (Brown et al., 1991; Shelby, Brown, & Taylor, 1992; Whittaker & Shelby, 2002), and a variety of methods have been developed (see Whittaker et al., 1993 for a review). While these are effective approaches and methodological tools, applications and integration into decision - making processes have been uneven. For a variety of reasons, including varying study quality, recreation interests may have difficulty competing with other resources in regulated river decision - making. Several reasons help explain varying study quality. First, studies have generally been designed to answer specific questions in arenas such as FERC licensing, water adjudications, or navigability proceedings. This means that few studies have been conducted as part of a systematic research program that could expand the scope of studies, encourage basic research, and link related elements across studies. Second, studies are generally conducted by non - academic consultants or in -house utility staff. These professionals have fewer incentives to publish in the scientific literature, which limits information transfer. Informal "networking" remains the primary conduit for transmission of "knowledge" about how to conduct effective studies or integrate results. Third, there has been limited guidance from agencies (FERC or others) about standards for conducting and using studies. This allows the quality and scope of studies to vary case -by -case depending upon the level of interest, expertise, and support from individual agencies, utilities, researchers, or advocacy organizations. Some of these problems are systemic and challenging. However, clear standards for conducting and using studies would be a major improvement, particularly in FERC license proceedings. This paper offers a start toward that goal by recommending a conceptual perspective and a progression of study options, and then reviewing protocols, responsibilities, and products involved in those options. Some recreation users are unaware that flows affect their activities. Careful studies can document how flows affect important conditions in "recreation habitats" such as this swimmingarea on California's Klamath River at 600 cfs. Flows and Recreation: 1 A Guide for River Professionals