Evolution of a

Value-Based Process

for Protecting

Instream Flow1

by Daniel P. Muller,

Supervisory Physical Scientist,

and James L. Fogg,

Hydrologist, 

BLM, National Applied

Resource Sciences Center

Background

Protection of instream flows is a relatively recent development in the

western United States. Traditionally,

the water on these arid and semiarid

lands was used for agriculture,

municipal, and industrial purposes,

and water rights were granted to

the first person to divert water and

put it to a beneficial use under the

doctrine of prior appropriation.

This, in turn, led to overappropriation of major rivers and streams,

construction of storage facilities for

surface waters, and large-scale

development of ground-water supplies. More recently, western

streams and their associated riparian corridors have been increasingly

recognized for a number of other

values, such as the variety of habitats, resource uses, and human

activities they support. The doctrine of prior appropriation makes

allocation of streamflow to support

these values difficult. However,

instream flow protection for nontraditional uses has more recently

been recognized through either legislation or administrative rules by

the States. Case law has also served

to recognize and protect instream

uses. Identification of stream-related

resource values and quantification of

flows needed to support those values, though, remains problematic.

The Value-Based Process

Jackson et al. (1989) proposed a

comprehensive, interdisciplinary

process to establish relationships

between water-dependent resource

values and flows, and to incorporate

legal, technical, and administrative

aspects of water management. The

value-based approach differed from

previous approaches in that it

emphasized the assessment process

more than specific quantification

methods. Flow protection strategies were developed from the

quantified instream flow needs to

provide practical, legally effective,

and comprehensive water management recommendations.

The value-based process consists of

six basic steps:

1. Preliminary assessment and

study design

2. Description of flow-dependent

values

3. Description and quantification of

hydrology and geomorphology

4. Description of the effects of

flows on resource values

5. Identification of minimum flows

to protect values

6. Development of a strategy to

protect flows

Evolution of the Process

Over the past 10 years, BLM has

applied the value-based process

on approximately a dozen rivers.

The basic step-by-step approach

has worked well for less complex

assessments of river management

situations. However, when it is

applied to increasingly complex

river management situations such

as those involving storage, interbasin diversions, interstate compacts,

and international treaties, some

adjustments to the basic approach

are required. In these complex situations, the process has evolved from a

step-by-step approach that focuses

on the assessment of resource values

and their flow dependency into a

trichotomous process in which the

legal/institutional analyses and the

hydrologic characterization are more

extensive and occur concurrently

with, and frequently overshadow,

the assessment of flow-dependent

resources. For example, on large

rivers with significant storage projects in place, the legal/institutional

analyses may actually include several

supporting kinds of analyses (e.g.,

historical, geographical, and managerial) that must be completed

before the hydrologic analyses can

even occur. Similarly, for desert

streams of the arid southwest,

hydrologic characterization may

include detailed ground-water

investigations to support not only

the assessment of flow-dependent

resources, but also elaborate flowprotection strategies linking

ground-water and surface-water

management. Thus, whereas the

resource assessment identifies flows

needed to support resource values,

the hydrologic characterization and

legal/institutional analyses identify

both the physical and institutional

limits that will influence management decisions.

Integration of Analyses

The goal of the trichotomous

process is to integrate legal/institutional, hydrologic, and resource

value analyses throughout the

process. The final analysis, however,

RESOURCE NOTES

NO. 15 DATE 05/30/00

Range

Hydrology

1

A more comprehensive version of this article appears in: Olsen, Darren S and John P. Potyondy (eds.). 1999. Wildland

Hydrology. American Water Resources Association Symposium Proceedings, June 30-July 2, 1999, Bozeman, MT. pp. 261-266.

Range
Range

is the point at which water needs

and constraints and opportunities

are blended into flow recommendations and water management

considerations (Figure 1).

Figure 1 shows each step in the

overall process: analysis identifies

resource values and quantifies

related water needs, as well as

describes the physical and

institutional setting of the river;

evaluation reduces results from

analyses; and findings addresses

legal and practical solutions to

meeting instream flow needs.

BLM has used the value-based

process, both as it was proposed

and as it has evolved, to identify

instream flow needs and flow protection strategies on rivers in

Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, New

Mexico, and Utah. On several of

these streams, Federal reserved

water rights, State-appropriative

water rights, or other flow protection

mechanisms have been successfully

implemented.

References

Jackson, W.L., B. Shelby, A.

Martinez, and B.P. Van Haveren.

1989. An Interdisciplinary

Process for Protecting Instream

Flows. Journal of Soil and Water

Conservation 44(2):120-126.

Contact:

Jim Fogg, BLM

NARSC, RS-130

P.O. Box 25047

Denver, CO 80225-0047

phone (303) 236-0539

fax (303) 236-3508

email jfogg@blm.gov

Range

Range

Resource Notes are intended to be early

announcements of technical and informational topics for

Bureau of Land Management personnel and some of their customers.

Information in this Resource Note is based on the opinion and

experience of the author and has not been peer-reviewed. Conclusions

and opinions expressed herein do not

necessarily represent those of BLM. Use of trade names does not

imply U.S. Government endorsement of commercial products.

If you have received a copy of or found out about Resource

Notes in an indirect way and would like to be included in future

mailings, please send the following:

NAME, TITLE, MAILING ADDRESS and a list of the two or three

subject areas that you are most interested in or that most directly

relate to your job. Send this information to Phil Dittberner, BLM,

RS-140, P.O. Box 25047, Denver, CO. 80225-0047 or

phil_dittberner@blm.gov or FAX 303-236-3508.

If you would like to prepare a Resource Note for

distribution, or you have an idea and author in mind for a good

Resource Note, please contact Phil Dittberner at

303-236-1833, FAX 303-236-3508 or phil_dittberner@blm.gov with

the topic and the name of writer, including an address, phone number, and e-mail address.

Thank you for your interest in Resource NoteS.

Legal/Institutional Hydrologic Resource Values

Analysis Evaluation Findings

Water Rights

Management History

Infrastructure

Operating Principles

Other

Present Flow Conditions

Flow History

Geomorphology

Ground Water

Other

Fisheries

Boating

Riparian

Fishing

Aesthetics

Other

Water

Needs

Recommended Flows and

Management Considerations

Constraints and

Opportunities

Figure 1. Instream flow needs assessment process for complex river management situations.