|
<br />8 BIOLOGICAL REPORT 29
<br />
<br />Chapter 2. Choosing the Appropriate
<br />Assessment Tools
<br />
<br />Every water management decision that includes
<br />instream flow protection offers a unique challenge,
<br />(nstream flow decisions may include a federal per'
<br />mit or license, an operating schedule for a water
<br />storage project, a state instream flow water right.
<br />or an element in a state water management plan,
<br />No matter which of these decisions is being ad-
<br />dressed, each requires an understanding of several
<br />factors before an appropriate instream flow assess.
<br />ment technique can be chosen,
<br />Several considerations guide the choice of tech.
<br />nology for instream flow needs assessments, in-
<br />cluding statutory authority, history of water use,
<br />technical orientation, available fiscal resources,
<br />and time allowed to complete studies, In addition,
<br />there is an ongoing debate about the relative sci.
<br />entific merits of competing instream flow assess-
<br />ment technologies (Granholm et al. 1985; Mathur
<br />et al. 1985; Estes and Orsborn 1986), All factors
<br />heighten the challenge of selecting the right tech,
<br />nology to guide establishment of stream flow pro.
<br />tection, When choosing a technology, the analysts'
<br />concentration is often initially directed to the
<br />technical details of the procedures, such as meas,
<br />urement of stream transects or operation of com-
<br />puter models, However, experienced professional
<br />biologists and engineers responsible for assess.
<br />ments recognize that harder policy questions
<br />must first be answered, Analysts ultimately de.
<br />cide to use a technique as much because it fits the
<br />political and environmental problems they face as
<br />because the technology meets scientific standards
<br />(Lamb 1986),
<br />
<br />A Dichotomy of Techniques
<br />
<br />Political and environmental problems can be
<br />conveniently divided into two categories depending
<br />on the objectives of the decision process: standard.
<br />setting or incremental, In a standard,setting prob.
<br />lem, the analyst is called on to recommend an
<br />instream flow requirement to guide general
<br />and, usually,low,intensity decisions setting slimit
<br />
<br />below which water cannot be diverted (Trihey and
<br />Stalnaker 1985), This process might be called pre-
<br />liminary planning. An incremental problem refers
<br />to a high.intensity, high.stakes negotiation over a
<br />specific development project. The tenn incremental
<br />implies the need to answer the following question:
<br />What happens to the variable of interest (e.g"
<br />aquatic habitat, recreation value) when the flow
<br />changes?
<br />Rather than a clear dichotomy, it may be appro.
<br />priate to picture these two types of decisions on a
<br />continuum ranging from the settingofnoncontro-
<br />versial standards for overall planning to conflict
<br />over establishing incremental differences in flow
<br />levels, No matter where on the continuum a prob-
<br />lem falls, there is an additional question: How
<br />many variables are important? The answer to this
<br />question may be as simple as saying the problem
<br />is one species offish or one type of recreation, The
<br />answer may also be expressed as a flow regime
<br />that meets the needs of several decision variables,
<br />For example, a flow regirr:e may be instituted to
<br />satisfy channel and riparian maintenance, fish
<br />habitat, and recreational uses of the water, AI.
<br />though it is most common for incremental prob.
<br />lems to present themselves as multi-purpose
<br />questions, it is not uncommon for standard-set-
<br />ting questions to require answers for more than
<br />one decision variable.
<br />Whether a problem falls under the category of
<br />standard,setting or incr~mental is not a question
<br />of scientific credibility; defensible scientific analy.
<br />sis is always required because answers to both
<br />types of questions must be trustworthy, Moreover,
<br />expert judgement is required in both standard-
<br />setting and incremental problems. This judge-
<br />ment comes into play in reaching conclusions
<br />based on the technology that is chosen, as well as
<br />in choosing the appropriate method, There is one
<br />other consideration, Standard.setting techniques
<br />are inappropriate for brokered decisions because
<br />brokered decisions require the exploration of al-
<br />ternatives. In other words, the standard that has
<br />
|