Examining Trade-Offs in Piggybacking Flow Events while Making Environmental Release Decisions in a River System
AbstractHigh flow pulses (or spells or freshes) play a crucial role in maintaining the ecological health of a river system. Impoundment of water in a reservoir and release or diversion of water for human water needs has significantly altered the magnitude and frequency of flow pulses in many river s...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of water resources planning and management 2019-06, Vol.145 (6) |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | |
container_title | Journal of water resources planning and management |
container_volume | 145 |
creator | Kaur, Simranjit Horne, Avril C Nathan, Rory Szemis, Joanna M Gibson, Laura Costa, Alysson M Angus Webb, J Stewardson, Michael |
description | AbstractHigh flow pulses (or spells or freshes) play a crucial role in maintaining the ecological health of a river system. Impoundment of water in a reservoir and release or diversion of water for human water needs has significantly altered the magnitude and frequency of flow pulses in many river systems, often reducing river ecological health. A limited volume of water is sometimes available for release into the river to reintroduce pulses specifically aimed at meeting ecological requirements (environmental water). If aiming to achieve maximum environmental benefit, such releases from the reservoir should be timed to augment or piggyback natural unregulated catchment flow events. These decisions must be made in presence of uncertainty of near-future unregulated catchment inflows entering the river. Making flow release decisions under this uncertainty poses the risk of either not achieving the benefit of the environmental flow release because too little environmental water is released, or of causing flood damage because too much is released. To date, assessment of risks associated with piggybacking environmental flows have focused solely on the flooding risks. This paper considers assessment of trade-offs between environmental risks and flooding risks while making piggybacking decisions. The key contribution of the paper is a risk framework that allows for the assessment of both flooding and environmental risks when piggybacking of natural flow pulses occurs. The risk framework is used to assess rules or rules with varying levels of piggybacking on the trade-offs between environmental outcomes and flooding risks when releasing piggybacking flows under these rules for flow events under near-future forecast uncertainty. Spawning flows for a key fish species in the Yarra River in southeast Australia is used as a case study to compare three piggybacking rules. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0001048 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2195301680</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2195301680</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a385t-a90a2c789aa1544549d27640efea8a3d5c1d7d615f55e891285283c41d6bf6f83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kF1PwjAYhRujiYj-h0Zv9GLYbu3WeUdwqAkGMzBcNi9bh8V9YDtB_r0boF551eQ95zlNHoQuKelR4tPb6_5kEN3M4h4Nmedwxt0eIYQSJo5Q5_d2jDok8DwnZKF_is6sXTalgHC3g6roCwpd6nKBpwZS5YyzzGJd4he9WGznkLy30TCvNjhaq7K2ePOmc4WfYRdE5VqbqiyaBHIcq1yBVfheJdrqqtwNAY71Whk82dpaFefoJIPcqovD20Wvw2g6eHRG44enQX_kgCd47UBIwE0CEQJQzhhnYeoGPiMqUyDAS3lC0yD1Kc84VyKkruCu8BJGU3-e-Znwuuhqv7sy1censrVcVp-mbL6ULg25R6gvSNO627cSU1lrVCZXRhdgtpIS2QqWshUsZ7FsZcpWpjwIbmB_D4NN1N_8D_k_-A2pnn-1</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2195301680</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Examining Trade-Offs in Piggybacking Flow Events while Making Environmental Release Decisions in a River System</title><source>American Society of Civil Engineers:NESLI2:Journals:2014</source><creator>Kaur, Simranjit ; Horne, Avril C ; Nathan, Rory ; Szemis, Joanna M ; Gibson, Laura ; Costa, Alysson M ; Angus Webb, J ; Stewardson, Michael</creator><creatorcontrib>Kaur, Simranjit ; Horne, Avril C ; Nathan, Rory ; Szemis, Joanna M ; Gibson, Laura ; Costa, Alysson M ; Angus Webb, J ; Stewardson, Michael</creatorcontrib><description>AbstractHigh flow pulses (or spells or freshes) play a crucial role in maintaining the ecological health of a river system. Impoundment of water in a reservoir and release or diversion of water for human water needs has significantly altered the magnitude and frequency of flow pulses in many river systems, often reducing river ecological health. A limited volume of water is sometimes available for release into the river to reintroduce pulses specifically aimed at meeting ecological requirements (environmental water). If aiming to achieve maximum environmental benefit, such releases from the reservoir should be timed to augment or piggyback natural unregulated catchment flow events. These decisions must be made in presence of uncertainty of near-future unregulated catchment inflows entering the river. Making flow release decisions under this uncertainty poses the risk of either not achieving the benefit of the environmental flow release because too little environmental water is released, or of causing flood damage because too much is released. To date, assessment of risks associated with piggybacking environmental flows have focused solely on the flooding risks. This paper considers assessment of trade-offs between environmental risks and flooding risks while making piggybacking decisions. The key contribution of the paper is a risk framework that allows for the assessment of both flooding and environmental risks when piggybacking of natural flow pulses occurs. The risk framework is used to assess rules or rules with varying levels of piggybacking on the trade-offs between environmental outcomes and flooding risks when releasing piggybacking flows under these rules for flow events under near-future forecast uncertainty. Spawning flows for a key fish species in the Yarra River in southeast Australia is used as a case study to compare three piggybacking rules.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0733-9496</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1943-5452</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0001048</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: American Society of Civil Engineers</publisher><subject>Case studies ; Catchment area ; Damage assessment ; Decisions ; Ecological risk assessment ; Ecology ; Environmental assessment ; Environmental release ; Environmental risk ; Fish ; Flood damage ; Flooding ; Floods ; Frameworks ; High flow ; Inflow ; Natural flow ; Reservoirs ; Risk assessment ; River systems ; Rivers ; Spawning ; Technical Papers ; Tradeoffs ; Uncertainty ; Water ; Water demand ; Water resources management</subject><ispartof>Journal of water resources planning and management, 2019-06, Vol.145 (6)</ispartof><rights>2019 American Society of Civil Engineers</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a385t-a90a2c789aa1544549d27640efea8a3d5c1d7d615f55e891285283c41d6bf6f83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a385t-a90a2c789aa1544549d27640efea8a3d5c1d7d615f55e891285283c41d6bf6f83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttp://ascelibrary.org/doi/pdf/10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0001048$$EPDF$$P50$$Gasce$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttp://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0001048$$EHTML$$P50$$Gasce$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,75936,75944</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kaur, Simranjit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Horne, Avril C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nathan, Rory</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Szemis, Joanna M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gibson, Laura</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Costa, Alysson M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Angus Webb, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stewardson, Michael</creatorcontrib><title>Examining Trade-Offs in Piggybacking Flow Events while Making Environmental Release Decisions in a River System</title><title>Journal of water resources planning and management</title><description>AbstractHigh flow pulses (or spells or freshes) play a crucial role in maintaining the ecological health of a river system. Impoundment of water in a reservoir and release or diversion of water for human water needs has significantly altered the magnitude and frequency of flow pulses in many river systems, often reducing river ecological health. A limited volume of water is sometimes available for release into the river to reintroduce pulses specifically aimed at meeting ecological requirements (environmental water). If aiming to achieve maximum environmental benefit, such releases from the reservoir should be timed to augment or piggyback natural unregulated catchment flow events. These decisions must be made in presence of uncertainty of near-future unregulated catchment inflows entering the river. Making flow release decisions under this uncertainty poses the risk of either not achieving the benefit of the environmental flow release because too little environmental water is released, or of causing flood damage because too much is released. To date, assessment of risks associated with piggybacking environmental flows have focused solely on the flooding risks. This paper considers assessment of trade-offs between environmental risks and flooding risks while making piggybacking decisions. The key contribution of the paper is a risk framework that allows for the assessment of both flooding and environmental risks when piggybacking of natural flow pulses occurs. The risk framework is used to assess rules or rules with varying levels of piggybacking on the trade-offs between environmental outcomes and flooding risks when releasing piggybacking flows under these rules for flow events under near-future forecast uncertainty. Spawning flows for a key fish species in the Yarra River in southeast Australia is used as a case study to compare three piggybacking rules.</description><subject>Case studies</subject><subject>Catchment area</subject><subject>Damage assessment</subject><subject>Decisions</subject><subject>Ecological risk assessment</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Environmental assessment</subject><subject>Environmental release</subject><subject>Environmental risk</subject><subject>Fish</subject><subject>Flood damage</subject><subject>Flooding</subject><subject>Floods</subject><subject>Frameworks</subject><subject>High flow</subject><subject>Inflow</subject><subject>Natural flow</subject><subject>Reservoirs</subject><subject>Risk assessment</subject><subject>River systems</subject><subject>Rivers</subject><subject>Spawning</subject><subject>Technical Papers</subject><subject>Tradeoffs</subject><subject>Uncertainty</subject><subject>Water</subject><subject>Water demand</subject><subject>Water resources management</subject><issn>0733-9496</issn><issn>1943-5452</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kF1PwjAYhRujiYj-h0Zv9GLYbu3WeUdwqAkGMzBcNi9bh8V9YDtB_r0boF551eQ95zlNHoQuKelR4tPb6_5kEN3M4h4Nmedwxt0eIYQSJo5Q5_d2jDok8DwnZKF_is6sXTalgHC3g6roCwpd6nKBpwZS5YyzzGJd4he9WGznkLy30TCvNjhaq7K2ePOmc4WfYRdE5VqbqiyaBHIcq1yBVfheJdrqqtwNAY71Whk82dpaFefoJIPcqovD20Wvw2g6eHRG44enQX_kgCd47UBIwE0CEQJQzhhnYeoGPiMqUyDAS3lC0yD1Kc84VyKkruCu8BJGU3-e-Znwuuhqv7sy1censrVcVp-mbL6ULg25R6gvSNO627cSU1lrVCZXRhdgtpIS2QqWshUsZ7FsZcpWpjwIbmB_D4NN1N_8D_k_-A2pnn-1</recordid><startdate>20190601</startdate><enddate>20190601</enddate><creator>Kaur, Simranjit</creator><creator>Horne, Avril C</creator><creator>Nathan, Rory</creator><creator>Szemis, Joanna M</creator><creator>Gibson, Laura</creator><creator>Costa, Alysson M</creator><creator>Angus Webb, J</creator><creator>Stewardson, Michael</creator><general>American Society of Civil Engineers</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20190601</creationdate><title>Examining Trade-Offs in Piggybacking Flow Events while Making Environmental Release Decisions in a River System</title><author>Kaur, Simranjit ; Horne, Avril C ; Nathan, Rory ; Szemis, Joanna M ; Gibson, Laura ; Costa, Alysson M ; Angus Webb, J ; Stewardson, Michael</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a385t-a90a2c789aa1544549d27640efea8a3d5c1d7d615f55e891285283c41d6bf6f83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Case studies</topic><topic>Catchment area</topic><topic>Damage assessment</topic><topic>Decisions</topic><topic>Ecological risk assessment</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Environmental assessment</topic><topic>Environmental release</topic><topic>Environmental risk</topic><topic>Fish</topic><topic>Flood damage</topic><topic>Flooding</topic><topic>Floods</topic><topic>Frameworks</topic><topic>High flow</topic><topic>Inflow</topic><topic>Natural flow</topic><topic>Reservoirs</topic><topic>Risk assessment</topic><topic>River systems</topic><topic>Rivers</topic><topic>Spawning</topic><topic>Technical Papers</topic><topic>Tradeoffs</topic><topic>Uncertainty</topic><topic>Water</topic><topic>Water demand</topic><topic>Water resources management</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kaur, Simranjit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Horne, Avril C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nathan, Rory</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Szemis, Joanna M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gibson, Laura</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Costa, Alysson M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Angus Webb, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stewardson, Michael</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution & Environmental Quality</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Journal of water resources planning and management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kaur, Simranjit</au><au>Horne, Avril C</au><au>Nathan, Rory</au><au>Szemis, Joanna M</au><au>Gibson, Laura</au><au>Costa, Alysson M</au><au>Angus Webb, J</au><au>Stewardson, Michael</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Examining Trade-Offs in Piggybacking Flow Events while Making Environmental Release Decisions in a River System</atitle><jtitle>Journal of water resources planning and management</jtitle><date>2019-06-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>145</volume><issue>6</issue><issn>0733-9496</issn><eissn>1943-5452</eissn><abstract>AbstractHigh flow pulses (or spells or freshes) play a crucial role in maintaining the ecological health of a river system. Impoundment of water in a reservoir and release or diversion of water for human water needs has significantly altered the magnitude and frequency of flow pulses in many river systems, often reducing river ecological health. A limited volume of water is sometimes available for release into the river to reintroduce pulses specifically aimed at meeting ecological requirements (environmental water). If aiming to achieve maximum environmental benefit, such releases from the reservoir should be timed to augment or piggyback natural unregulated catchment flow events. These decisions must be made in presence of uncertainty of near-future unregulated catchment inflows entering the river. Making flow release decisions under this uncertainty poses the risk of either not achieving the benefit of the environmental flow release because too little environmental water is released, or of causing flood damage because too much is released. To date, assessment of risks associated with piggybacking environmental flows have focused solely on the flooding risks. This paper considers assessment of trade-offs between environmental risks and flooding risks while making piggybacking decisions. The key contribution of the paper is a risk framework that allows for the assessment of both flooding and environmental risks when piggybacking of natural flow pulses occurs. The risk framework is used to assess rules or rules with varying levels of piggybacking on the trade-offs between environmental outcomes and flooding risks when releasing piggybacking flows under these rules for flow events under near-future forecast uncertainty. Spawning flows for a key fish species in the Yarra River in southeast Australia is used as a case study to compare three piggybacking rules.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>American Society of Civil Engineers</pub><doi>10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0001048</doi></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0733-9496 |
ispartof | Journal of water resources planning and management, 2019-06, Vol.145 (6) |
issn | 0733-9496 1943-5452 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2195301680 |
source | American Society of Civil Engineers:NESLI2:Journals:2014 |
subjects | Case studies Catchment area Damage assessment Decisions Ecological risk assessment Ecology Environmental assessment Environmental release Environmental risk Fish Flood damage Flooding Floods Frameworks High flow Inflow Natural flow Reservoirs Risk assessment River systems Rivers Spawning Technical Papers Tradeoffs Uncertainty Water Water demand Water resources management |
title | Examining Trade-Offs in Piggybacking Flow Events while Making Environmental Release Decisions in a River System |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T09%3A47%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Examining%20Trade-Offs%20in%20Piggybacking%20Flow%20Events%20while%20Making%20Environmental%20Release%20Decisions%20in%20a%20River%20System&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20water%20resources%20planning%20and%20management&rft.au=Kaur,%20Simranjit&rft.date=2019-06-01&rft.volume=145&rft.issue=6&rft.issn=0733-9496&rft.eissn=1943-5452&rft_id=info:doi/10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0001048&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2195301680%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2195301680&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |