Rangeland Water Developments at Springs:

Best Practices for Design, Rehabilitation, and 

Restoration

Joseph T. Gurrieri

Forest 

Service

Rocky Mountain 

Research Station

General Technical Report 

RMRS-GTR-405

January 

2020
All Rocky Mountain Research Station publications are published by U.S. Forest Service employees and are in the 

public domain and available at no cost. Even though U.S. Forest Service publications are not copyrighted, they are 

formatted according to U.S. Department of Agriculture standards and research findings and formatting cannot be 

altered in reprints. Altering content or formatting, including the cover and title page, is strictly prohibited.

ii

Gurrieri, Joseph T. 2020. Rangeland water developments at springs: best practices for design, rehabilitation, and 

restoration. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-405. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Rocky Mountain Research Station. 21 p.

Abstract

Springs serve an ecologically important role as perennial water sources, essential habitat for 

native species, and support for stream flow. Spring developments on rangelands provide water 

to livestock and wildlife. Thoughtful design of sustainable developments will supply water to 

livestock and wildlife while maintaining the intrinsic ecological functions and values of springs. 

This guide addresses spring development project planning as well as long-term sustainable 

management of springs. The objectives of spring development design are (1) to retain 

hydrologic conditions in the developed spring habitat that are similar to undeveloped reference 

habitats and (2) to create a system that is easy to install and maintain. We present two 

gravity-flow development designs that incorporate flow-splitting devices to regulate 

environmental flows and levels and to work in a wide range of hydrologic conditions.

_____________________________

Keywords: springs, wetlands, fens, spring box, grazing, range management

Cover: Prince of the forest spring, Idaho. (Photo by USDA Forest Service.)
iii

Author

Joseph Gurrieri is a Hydrogeologist with the USDA Forest Service, National Groundwater 

Technical Team in Lakewood, Colorado. He holds a M.S. degree in Geology from the 

University of Connecticut. He has been active in developing the groundwater program for the 

Forest Service and provides hydrogeologic services to Forest Service units nationwide. 

Acknowledgments

This publication has been a collaborative effort among three staff areas within the USDA 

Forest Service: Minerals and Geology Management; Forest and Range Management and 

Vegetation Ecology; and Watershed, Fish, Wildlife, Air, and Rare Plants. I thank these Forest 

Service individuals for reviewing, and providing feedback on the manuscript: Steve Gibson, 

Warren Ririe, Linda Spencer, Cynthia Tait, Mary Manning, Nat Gillespie, and Joy Archuleta. 

Zach Freed and Allison Aldous (The Nature Conservancy) were willing partners in testing and 

evaluating spring box designs and environmental flow analysis techniques. Mark Gonzalez 

(National Riparian Service Team), Abe Springer (Northern Arizona University), and Sherm 

Swanson (University of Nevada, Reno) provided technical reviews and advice on the concepts 

and methods presented. I relied heavily on the springs ecology and restoration research efforts 

by Larry Stevens and Jeri Ledbetter of the Spring Stewardship Institute. Chris Carlson and 

Chris Frisbee (Forest Service Headquarters) provided support and helpful advice on navigating 

the approval, review, and publication process. Doug Wewer (Region 4 Engineering) and Tim 

Stroope assisted with the spring box designs. Additionally, I thank Kate Dwire, Frank McCormick, and Patricia Cohn (Rocky Mountain Research Station) for reviewing the manuscript and 

facilitating publication. 
Table of Contents

Abstract...............................................................................................ii

Author ................................................................................................iii

Acknowledgments ............................................................................iii

1. Introduction ...................................................................................1

2. Purpose ..........................................................................................2

3. Background....................................................................................2

4. Definitions .....................................................................................3

5. Desired Conditions for Springs ....................................................4

6. Amount of Water to Divert ...........................................................5

6.1 Flow Splitting .........................................................................................8

7. Spring Development Designs ......................................................8

7.1 Design for Diffuse Discharge Systems (Fens, Wetlands) ....................9

7.2. Design for Discrete Discharge Systems (Springbrooks) ..................11

7.3. Trough Design .....................................................................................13

8. Rehabilitation/Restoration of Spring Developments ...............14

9. Things to Consider Before Implementing a

Spring Development Project ......................................................16

9.1. Planning Spring Developments ........................................................16

9.2. Designing Spring Developments ......................................................17

References ........................................................................................18

iv
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020 1

1. Introduction

National Forests manage rangelands as sustainable, natural ecosystems for a variety of

values and uses. Groundwater-dependent ecosystems are important components of rangelands 

that may be affected by management of surface resources. Among these groundwaterdependent ecosystems are springs and wetlands that provide valuable ecosystem services and 

clean water for rangeland management activities. 

Protecting springs and wetlands from excessive livestock trampling and contamination is 

essential for long-term viability of water sources and is an important component of land 

stewardship. Range improvement projects that provide water for livestock and/or wildlife need 

to assess the effects of development on springs. Historically, the goal for a successful spring 

development was to maximize flows captured for stock water. Today, the overall ecological 

health of local aquatic, riparian, and terrestrial systems, together with livestock requirements, 

are factored into project design. 

As competition for scarce water resources intensifies, the need for efficient and ecologically 

sustainable spring development will increase. This guide addresses spring development 

project planning as well as long-term sustainable management of springs. Increased awareness 

of alternatives for sustainable spring development expedites planning and informs defensible 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) decisions.

Range conservationists, hydrologists, ecologists, and other specialists experienced in spring 

evaluation, monitoring, and development contributed to this guide. Information has also been 

drawn from National Best Management Practices for Water Quality Management on 

National Forest System Lands, Volume 1 (USDA Forest Service 2012c) and work by the 

Nevada Springs Restoration Workshop Committee (2012). The Springs Stewardship Institute, 

The Nature Conservancy, and the Forest Service have collaborated since 2008 on mapping, 

describing, and protecting groundwater-dependent ecosystems in National Forests. These 

partnerships have resulted in better understanding of groundwater-dependent ecosystems and 

improved spring development designs that protect spring habitat while providing ample water 

for livestock and wildlife.
 2 USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020

2. Purpose

The purpose of this guide is to share new and existing approaches and tools to design,

rehabilitate, or restore spring developments that provide water for livestock or wildlife while 

protecting natural spring habitats. Forest Service rangeland managers and others responsible 

for aquatic or riparian resource management may benefit from this guide. 

3. Background

On Western rangelands, groundwater-dependent ecosystems (springs and wetlands) serve

an ecologically important role as perennial water sources, providing critical water for livestock, 

essential habitat for native species, and support for stream flow. In many watersheds, springs 

are the true headwaters providing clean, clear water for the benefit of downstream fish, fauna, 

flora, and communities who use the stream network. With their isolation and consistent water 

chemistry and flow rates, springs support many endemic, obligate, and rare aquatic species. 

Springs also supply water and forage for terrestrial wildlife and migratory birds. Springs were 

historically developed to capture flow for livestock watering or other uses without fully 

considering ecosystem services. Desiccation of spring habitats following diversion often 

eradicated aquatic communities and led to the extinction of species such as fish or snails. 

Recent assessments in support of land management plan revisions have shown that many 

developed springs on rangelands are in poor ecological condition (fig. 1) (Dwire et al. 2018; 

Paffett et al. 2018; USDA Forest Service 2017b). Unsuitable water developments for livestock 

and wildlife have come under increasing scrutiny by concerned conservationists, managers, 

and members of the public. 

Figure 1. Example of a poorly designed and maintained spring development. Lack of valves results in continuous 

flow and desiccation of the spring habitat. Trough is in the spring source area causing trampling of organic soils. 

Enclosure fence is nonfunctional. (Photo by USDA Forest Service.)
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020 3

Springs are frequently isolated from stream systems 

and are often developed in uplands to reduce grazing 

pressure in riparian areas along streams. Although upland developments may protect streams from livestock 

impacts, without appropriate livestock management 

(e.g., Swanson et al. 2015; U.S. Department of the 

Interior 2006) they transfer disturbance problems from 

streams to isolated upland springs and wetlands (U.S. 

Department of the Interior 2006). Springs are also

selected for development to provide protection 

structures to reduce disturbance. However, depending 

on grazing management and maintenance, they may 

concentrate livestock resulting in more disturbance.

Livestock and wildlife affect springs through 

herbivory and physical impacts, such as hoof-action and 

wallowing. Inappropriate livestock grazing can compact 

or churn wet soils; increase sediment, nutrients and 

pathogens; break up the root mass; and reduce plant 

cover and the abundance of desired plant and animal 

species. In some places, grazing degrades spring ecology 

(Perla and Stevens 2008). In other places, grazing and 

animal activity is natural and can be rejuvenating 

(Kodrick-Brown and Brown 2007). Appropriate 

disturbance regimes for specific ecological settings 

should be determined and maintained.

4. Definitions

Where groundwater reaches the surface, an

assemblage of plants and animals supported by groundwater may establish—hence the term groundwaterdependent ecosystems. Sometimes, groundwater 

emerges at a discrete point, usually called a spring. In 

many wetlands supported by groundwater, groundwater flow emerges in a more diffuse manner. Many 

permanent springs have associated wetlands of 

different types and extent. Likewise, many wetlands 

contain springs. Groundwater-dependent wetlands, such 

as fens, are in many cases springs covered by 

unconsolidated material (glacial deposits, pumice, 

or colluvium) that becomes saturated to the surface 

for prolonged periods, facilitating peat development. 

Groundwater emerging at or close to the ground surface 

and providing all or a significant portion of the available 

water is the common thread that links these features 

KEY POINTS

• A properly designed and

maintained water development

benefits livestock and sustains the 

ecological values of a spring or 

wetland.

• Protection of springs and wetlands on rangelands, especially

prevention of excess or prolonged

trampling and contamination, is

essential for the long-term

viability of spring habitats and

land stewardship.

• Innovative water developments

can help minimize detrimental

effects to spring and wetland

ecosystem health.

• Focus on maintaining or

enhancing ecological functions of

the site.

• The critical issue in many discrete

discharge springs is maintaining

wetted area in pools and channels.

• The critical issue in diffuse

discharge springs is maintaining a 

shallow water table and avoiding

drainage, incision, and excess soil 

oxidation.

• Consider the water needs of

plants and animals when planning 

water developments for

rangelands.

• Implementing/enforcing an

appropriate grazing system is

often the most important

component of spring habitat

protection.

• Collect no more water than

needed for the intended purpose

of the spring development.
 4 USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020

and their associated ecosystems. For the purpose of this guide, all of these isolated water 

features are referred to as springs with two sub-types: discrete discharge springs (fig. 2A) 

and diffuse discharge springs (fig. 2B). 

The following definitions are from Coles-Ritchie (2014). Restoration is the process of 

assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded. Ecological restoration focuses 

on re-establishing the composition, structure, pattern, and ecological processes necessary to 

facilitate terrestrial and aquatic ecosystem sustainability, resilience, and health under current 

and future conditions. Rehabilitation refers to a level of restoration defined by management 

objectives. Rehabilitation is not focused on restoring the site to predisturbance conditions, but 

rather improving the condition according to certain management objectives. Maintenance

consists of those actions and management guidance that result in the maintenance of a spring 

site’s existing ecological conditions and processes, particularly resiliency to disturbance. 

A B

Figure 2. (A) Discrete discharge spring where groundwater emerges at a point with flowing water. (B) Diffuse 

discharge spring where groundwater emerges diffusely with little or no flowing water. With A = aquifer, 

S = source, and I = impermeable layer. (Images from Springer and Stevens, 2009.)

5. Desired Conditions for Springs

Although management direction in individual land management plans may vary, consensus

over the past few years has settled on the following generic desired conditions for springs on 

rangelands:

• Groundwater systems function under normal patterns of recharge, flow, and discharge

and are free of contamination. Groundwater-dependent ecosystems (e.g., wetlands,

springs, and stream baseflows) have the water sources and hydrologic processes (e.g.,

water-table elevations) necessary to persist and to sustain associated plant and animal

species and peat production where present.

• The ecological structure, diversity, and function of springs, wetlands and other aquatic

ecosystems are maintained or restored.

• A diversity of types of springs across broad landscapes, especially spring types that are

not very common, such as pool-forming springs, mound-forming springs, or fens are

conserved.
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020 5

• The aquifer supplying water to groundwater-dependent ecosystems is not being affected

by groundwater withdrawal or loss of recharge.

• Soils of springs and wetlands are intact and functional; erosion and deposition are

within the natural range.

• Springbrooks, if present, are functioning naturally and are not entrenched, eroded,

dewatered, or substantially altered.

• Vegetation is composed of the anticipated cover of plant species associated with the site

environment; hydric species are present and are not replaced by upland species.

• Livestock herbivory and trampling are not adversely affecting springs and wetlands.

Some or all of these statements can guide a spring development project and be modified to 

reflect site-specific conditions. They are offered here as examples of what a site with an 

ecologically sustainable spring development might look like.

6. Amount of Water to Divert

Groundwater discharging from aquifers supports springs. Any activity that lowers or raises

the water table or groundwater discharge rate, or alters the groundwater chemistry, can affect 

the integrity of springs habitat. Extraction of groundwater from wells and springs may 

partially or completely dewater individual or entire complexes of springs, resulting in 

desiccation and fragmentation of springs habitat. Diversions that remove only a small 

proportion of flow, or slightly lower the water table, may minimally affect biota, as long as 

structure and function of the habitat are preserved. Diversions that occur infrequently or 

intermittently may also minimally affect biota. In general, as diversion volume increases, the 

spring’s water depths, temperatures, and velocities change, and species such as springsnails 

and wetland plants, which have very specific habitat requirements, are easily extirpated 

(Morrison et al. 2013; Sada 2008). 

For springs developed to provide water for livestock, the assessment of flow volume 

required is critical, especially if anticipated demand is a substantial portion of supply. Water 

requirements for beef cattle can range between roughly 6 and 18 gallons per animal per day 

(Lardy et al. 2008). A watering system designed with excessive flow rates wastes a valuable 

resource and may desiccate spring habitat. A watering system designed with inadequate flow 

rates deprives livestock of water and can cause unacceptable disturbance as animals linger at 

the site trying to drink.

When a spring or wetland is to be developed or rehabilitated, a hydrologic analysis can 

determine the proper diversion rate necessary to sustain the spring ecosystem. Determining 

hydrologic criteria, such as the water table depth necessary to provide sufficient soil moisture 

to plant roots, defines the acceptable level of change that can occur in flows before ecological 

impacts ensue (Aldous and Bach 2014). If water extraction shifts the hydrologic conditions 

below that defined by the criteria, ecological harm may occur, including impairment of wetland 

soils or loss of desired plant and animal communities. Figure 3 illustrates typical changes in 

wetland plants and soils associated with a dropping water table.
 6 USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020

Figure 3. Likely ecosystem changes associated with a dropping water table due to groundwater extraction. 

(Image courtesy of Aldous et al. 2014.)

Land managers seek to understand how much groundwater can be diverted from springs or 

wetlands without altering the overall ecological function, which includes persistence of native 

species. A key driver for diffuse discharge springs is the maximum depth to water table that the 

species in question can tolerate. So, it is important to know the groundwater depth 

requirements of local vascular herbaceous and bryophyte plant species. To estimate the 

environmental flows and levels needed to support the ecosystem, information should be 

gathered to quantify hydrological attributes, such as water table fluctuations, seasonal 

variation in discharge, and ecological attributes including species and their optimal soil water 

requirements. 

Available references for analyzing a water development regime that can maintain a healthy 

wetland plant community in a diffuse discharge setting include: USDA Forest Service 2017a, 

available from the National Groundwater Program staff, and Cooper and Merritt (2012). These 

references show how to develop hydrologic criteria for diffuse discharge springs by 

determining flow levels required to sustain or restore the spring. As an example, on the 

Fremont-Winema National Forest, an environmental flow and level analysis was used to design 

a spring development in a fen (Aldous et al. 2014). Analyses indicated that continuous 

diversion of over 1–2 gallons per minute throughout the grazing season would lower the water 

table and affect wetland plants in the area surrounding the spring box (fig. 4). However, with a 

float valve at the trough to stop overflow, intermittent diversion at higher rates was possible. 
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020 7

Figure 4. (A) Example of a spring development in a diffuse discharge spring (fen), Fremont-Winema National 

Forest. (B) Schematic plan view showing a cone of depression (also referred to as the area of influence), resulting 

from extraction of water from a collection box. (C) Schematic cross-sectional view showing the drawdown cone 

around the collection box. 

A

C

B

In the case of discrete discharge springs, habitat values center on the source and the springbrook. To estimate the environmental flows and levels needed to support the ecosystem, 

information should be gathered to quantify hydrological attributes such as wetted area, depth, 

flow volume and flow velocity. Substantial decreases in springbrook physical habitat (e.g., 

wetted area, depth, and velocity) occur with relatively small (10 percent to 20 percent) 

discharge reductions (Morrison et al. 2013). 

In most cases, only a small percentage of water can be diverted without significant 

ecological impacts. However, small diversions are usually adequate to supply water to livestock. With small flows and large needs for livestock water at key times, storage may be 

required. 

Three groundwater-ecology relationships are evident: 

1. For diffuse discharge springs, plant species distributions respond closely to the

position of the water table. The majority of wetland plants grow well where the depth to

the water table is approximately 20 cm or less (fig. 3). However, some species can

tolerate water tables up to 70 cm below the land surface (e.g., Carex aquatilis) (Aldous

and Bach 2014).
 8 USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020

2. For peatlands (generally associated with diffuse discharge springs), the process of peat

accretion depends on a high and stable water table provided by groundwater discharge

(fig. 3). Lowering the water table below 20 cm results in desiccation of organic soils

(Aldous and Bach 2014).

3. For discrete discharge springs, substantial decreases in springbrook physical habitat

quality can occur with relatively small (10 percent to 20 percent) discharge reductions

(Morrison et al. 2013).

In a few States, water rights laws may limit decision space on leaving water in the system 

for ecological purposes. A water rights specialist should be consulted to determine a viable, 

site-specific course of action. In some States, NRCS has stipulated that no more than 1⁄4 of the 

total flow of a spring should be diverted (total flow rate determined during the driest part of the 

year) (USDA NRCS 2017). While no scientific support for this criteria could be found, it can be 

used as a general rule of thumb for planning a spring development where no critical species or 

other mitigating issues exist. 

6.1 Flow Splitting 

To avoid extracting the entire flow from a spring, flow splitting ensures some flow remains 

in the source area while still providing water for livestock. Flow splitting generally involves 

fitting the spring box with piping and an adjustable flow splitter to regulate how much water 

continues to emerge at the source and how much is diverted for use. If the piping directs flow 

into a trough or tank, a shut-off valve keeps water from being diverted in the nongrazing season 

(or plant recovery period). Float valves keep the trough full but stop excess flow away from the 

spring. Float valves require frequent maintenance during the grazing season. 

7. Spring Development Designs

Published guidance for planning and installing spring developments provides important

engineering specifications, but do not focus on low impact alternatives or address aspects of 

ecological sustainability (for example, Sanderson et al. 1990; USDA Forest Service 1989; USDA 

NRCS 2006, 2010, 2011). However, they can and should be used in conjunction with this 

document. More recently, Ecological Considerations in Spring Development (USDA NRCS 

2016) acknowledges the ecological importance of springs and encourages careful evaluation of 

functions and values before development is undertaken. An inventory/evaluation using 

standard assessment methods (USDA Forest Service 2012a; 2012b; U.S. Department of 

Interior, 2020) can determine beforehand which functions and values to protect or enhance 

during development. 

The objectives of spring development design are to retain hydrologic conditions in the 

spring habitat that are similar to undeveloped reference habitats, and to create a system that is 

simple, cheap, and easy to install and maintain. We present two gravity-flow designs that 

incorporate flow-splitting devices to regulate environmental flows and levels, work in a wide 

range of hydrologic conditions, and are easy to construct. If development of undisturbed 
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020 9

springs cannot be avoided, then eco-friendly design principles should be incorporated. These 

designs (discussed below) are intended to protect the hydrology of the spring in three ways: 

1. Outside of the grazing season a shut-off valve in the spring box stops flow to the trough;

2. During the grazing season, water only flows to the trough when the float valve is

triggered; and

3. Even when the float valve is triggered, the water table will not drop below a preset

threshold in diffuse discharge springs, and a wetted channel area is maintained in

discrete discharge springs.

7.1 Design for Diffuse Discharge Systems (Fens, Wetlands)

For springs with diffuse natural flow that seeps from large saturated areas without a single 

point of discharge, the objective is to maintain a shallow water table. If the water table drops 

below certain ecological thresholds, water is no longer available for wetland vegetation. Figures 

5 and 6 show spring box designs for diffuse discharge situations. 

A traditional spring box sends all the water through a pipe—diverting it away from the 

natural spring and draining the water table down to the level of the pipe, sometimes a full 

meter below the surface, which is too deep to support wetland flora and fauna. In contrast, this 

diffuse discharge spring box design makes one simple adjustment—an elbow, or standpipe, 

that can be pivoted to the desired height and keeps the water table high enough to sustain the 

groundwater level needed by plants and animals. The adjustable elbow inserts into the inflow 

pipe within the spring box (figs. 5, 6) and allows the user to set the desired water table depth. 

The inflow pipe within the spring box can be shut-off to stop flow to the trough when livestock 

are not grazing. 

Figure 5. View of the interior of the spring box at a diffuse discharge spring. The elbow joint is adjustable and is

set to maintain the threshold water table depth determined for the spring and the season. (Photo courtesy of The 

Nature Conservancy.)
 10 USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020

DIFFUSE DISCHARGE SPRING 

NOTES

1.

2.

3.

PVC OR ABS PIPE 

RECOMMENDED

RECOMMENDED PIPE 

SIZE: 2", 3" OR 4".

LARGE ENOUGH FOR 

MAXIMUM SEASONAL 

SPRING FLOW 

WITHOUT FILLING PIPE.

STANDPIPE LENGTH 

DETERMINES RANGE OF 

HIGH/LOW WATER 

HEIGHT

CUTAWAY SECTION

OF SPRING BOX

OPEN BOTTOM OR

PERFORATED 

SPRING BOX 

PIPING

(SEE INSET ABOVE) 

WATER LEVEL 

STAND PIPE 

90° ELBOW 

SUPPLY LINE 

 ROTATED STAND PIPE

 TO ACHIEVE DESIRED

 GROUNDWATER LEVEL 

 KEEP JOINT WATERTIGHT, BUT LOOSE

 ENOUGH TO ROTATE STANDPIPE 

Figure 6. Gravity flow spring box design that incorporates features for regulating the amount of water 

extracted from a diffuse discharge (non-flowing) spring. The standpipe is rotated to achieve the desired groundwater level.
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020 11

7.2. Design for Discrete Discharge Systems (Springbrooks)

For springs with a discrete natural flow in which water emerges from one or more specific 

orifices, the objective is to maintain continuous flow throughout the spring channel or pool 

downstream. Interruption of flow and reduction in wetted areas in the spring channel or pool 

could impact obligate aquatic plants and animals. 

Alteration to discrete discharge springs can involve diversion from the preemergence area 

(upgradient) or postemergence (downgradient). Preemergence diversion involves excavating 

the spring’s groundwater source, installing a slotted pipe catchment system, back filling the 

excavation, and piping the water. Remember that constructing spring boxes directly into a 

spring emergence typically obliterates the source area—the most biologically important habitat 

of a springs ecosystem. Postemergence diversion may preserve some ecological function at the 

spring’s source but can affect downstream springbrook and wetland functions. 

For discrete discharge springs, a good design splits the spring box’s inflow pipe to direct 

water both to the spring ecosystem and to the trough (figs. 7, 8). Shortly after the split, 

adjustable valves on each pipe allow a user to control flow to spring and trough—cattle can 

have more water when they need it or the trough pipe can be completely shut off so all water 

goes to the spring ecosystem when no cattle are present. The adjustable valve on the spring 

box-to-trough pipe also acts as a seasonal shut-off valve. An overflow pipe returns excess water 

straight to the spring channel so that it is never dry.

Another, less intrusive water collection system for discrete discharge springs is a simple 

pipeline collection tray (fig. 9). It can be placed in a spring channel with minimal disturbance 

and little time and effort. Plugging by debris and algae growth can be a problem, aggravated 

by warm temperatures and sunlight. So, a tray design works best in shaded, cold-water spring 

channels.

Figure 7. Valves control the 

flow of water at this spring 

box. There is always some 

water routed to the spring to 

keep the ecosystem 

functioning. The trough is 

fitted with a float valve so 

water is diverted from the 

spring only when a demand 

is present. (Photo courtesy of 

The Nature Conservancy.)
 12 USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020

Figure 8. Gravity flow spring box 

design that incorporates features 

for regulating the amount of water 

extracted from a discrete discharge 

(flowing) spring with valves for 

regulating the amount of water 

apportioned between the trough and 

the ecosystem.

DISCRETE DISCHARGE SPRING 

NOTES

1.

2.

3.

PVC PIPE 

RECOMMENDED

RECOMMENDED PIPE 

SIZE: 2", 3" OR 4".

LARGE ENOUGH FOR 

MAXIMUM SEASONAL 

SPRING FLOW 

WITHOUT FILLING PIPE.

TOP OF OVERFLOW

STANDPIPE SHOULD BE 

2” MINIMUM ABOVE 

SUPPLY VALVE INVERTS

CUTAWAY SECTION

OF SPRING BOX

OPEN BOTTOM OR

PERFORATED 

SPRING BOX 

PIPING

(SEE INSET ABOVE) 

TO TROUGH 

OVERFLOW

STANDPIPE

90° ELBOW 

VALVE (TYP) 

 TURNED-DOWN 90° ELBOW

 WITH 1/4” HOLE ON TOP

WATER LEVEL 

TO SPRING CHANNEL

TO TROUGH 

LEVEL 

TO SPRING CHANNEL

TEE (TYP)

DRAIN VALVE (OPEN IN WINTER)

Figure 9. Pipeline collection tray in a spring channel. (Photo by USDA Forest Service.)
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020 13

7.3. Trough Design

Water flows from the spring box to the trough in designs for both diffuse and discrete 

spring developments. Troughs should be equipped with float valves that shut off inflow to the 

trough when it is full. This prevents overflow and wasted water (fig. 10). A “weep hole” drilled 

upstream of the float valve ensures that the trough has a small amount of water circulating 

through it to improve water quality. If a float valve is not feasible, excess flow should be piped 

from the trough outflow back into the spring habitat as close to the source as possible, and 

pipes should be buried to keep the water cool. Float valves require protection from damage by 

livestock or wildlife. They can be protected with fencing, expanded metal covers, or homemade 

log or plank shields (fig. 10). 

Figure 10a. Tractor tire trough at a spring. A large 

float valve like this resists damage from cattle. (Photo courtesy of The Nature Conservancy.) 

Figure 10b. Cheap and easy float valve 

protection using logs. (Photo by USDA Forest 

Service.)

Figure 10c. Trough with a float valve protected by 

an internal fence (effective, but not a bat 

friendly design). (Photo courtesy of the Bureau of 

Land Management.)

C

B

A
 14 USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020

A variety of wildlife use water troughs installed for livestock, but troughs can be deadly for 

animals that get in but cannot get out. Obstructions such as bracing, fencing, posts or 

vegetation over or adjacent to the trough can drastically reduce access for bats and birds that 

drink in flight. Many wildlife species, including sage grouse, accidentally drown in stock tanks 

that do not have adequate escape ramps. All troughs must have ramps. Wildlife escape 

structures are easy to build, are inexpensive, and can virtually eliminate wildlife mortality in 

water troughs. Properly designed and installed, these structures also improve livestock health 

by maintaining clean water that is uncontaminated by drowned animals. See Taylor and Tuttle 

(2012) and USDA NRCS (2012) for wildlife mitigation strategies at water developments.

8. Rehabilitation/Restoration of Spring Developments

Many water developments on rangelands are poorly designed or have fallen into disrepair

through lack of maintenance or nonuse (fig. 11). Lack of ongoing maintenance can threaten

springs and surface water quality and may pose a safety risk to the public, domestic animals,

and wildlife. Appropriate design elements are relatively easy to incorporate into spring 

developments. Obsolete spring developments can be rehabilitated or decommissioned when 

opportunities arise (such as allotment management plan revision, NEPA sufficiency review,

BMP review, or by encouraging a willing permittee). 

Figure 11. A development needing rehabilitation. Overflow from the trough does not return to the spring

ecosystem, wasting a valuable resource in a dry landscape and depriving aquatic fauna (spring snails) of habitat.

(Photo courtesy of The Nature Conservancy.)

To restore flow at the source and functionality of downstream springbrooks or wetlands, it

may be necessary to modify flow regulation structures. Most spring developments can be

improved by simple fixes such as installing a float valve on the trough, installing a flow

splitter, moving the trough to a less damaging location farther from the source, shifting the 

point of diversion downstream from the source, removing a dam, modifying a spring box 

and pipes, piping excess water back to the spring where soils support wetland vegetation, or 

reerecting/expanding an exclosure or riparian pasture fence (fig. 12).
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020 15

Figure 12. A well designed but poorly maintained spring development. A gravel-hardened surface next to the 

trough prevents erosion and sediment and the low elevation trough allows access for wildlife. Note: Enclosure 

fence around important wetland area is in disrepair. (Photo by USDA Forest Service.)

Restoration of springs ecosystems is easily accomplished if the source aquifer is relatively 

intact. Restoration efforts are often successful (Stacey et al. 2011), with benefits such as 

conservation of important water sources, enhanced availability and integrity of spring habitats, 

and the preservation of sensitive species (Stevens et al. 2016). Water developments can be 

decommissioned or reclaimed when the need for them ceases or when recurrent impacts 

indicate they cannot be properly managed with available resources.

Coles-Ritchie et al. (2014) and Stevens et al. (2016) provide useful guidance for spring 

restoration including background information on the nature of springs ecosystems, inventory 

and assessment protocols, and tools necessary for effective restoration and monitoring. 
 16 USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020

9. Things to Consider Before Implementing a Spring Development

Project

There are many concepts that practitioners, representing different disciplines and

perspectives, have integrated into livestock water developments to make them more 

sustainable. Here are some concepts to consider when planning or designing a spring 

development. 

9.1. Planning Spring Developments 

• Should the intrinsic ecological values of the spring have priority over market-based

grazing values? To decide, consider the spring’s accessibility, suitability as a backcountry

water source, suitability as habitat for special status species, aesthetics, and significance

to Tribal Nations (Mueller et al. 2017).

• What types of springs are present, and are some types more valuable than others?

Springs may be more significant to the landscape if they have the following

characteristics:

Large flow rate (biodiversity tends to increase with flow rate)

Large areal extent

No invasive species

An undisturbed condition (undisturbed springs are rare)

Presence of sensitive, unique, or obligate species

Rare spring type, such as mound-forming or fens

Cultural importance

• What is the existing condition of the spring versus the desired condition?

• Are native and/or sensitive species present? Sites with sensitive species (threatened,

endangered, species of interest, species of concern) will require more specialized and

thorough assessment of site conditions, and impact prevention, management, or

mitigation measures.

• What threats does the development pose for the spring habitat and how can we address

them?

• Are alternative methods and solutions available (e.g., changes in the grazing system)

that will (1) eliminate the need to modify the spring and associated habitat, or (2) allow

development of the spring while protecting native species and habitat?

• Is there a need to limit trampling of important springs habitat? If so, periodic recovery

periods, riparian pasture fencing, or exclosure fencing might be an option, but resources

and capacity for management and fence maintenance should be in place for the long

term.

• At desert springs, well-intended practices like fencing to exclude livestock may backfire

as vigorous wetland vegetation growth can consume surface water habitat needed by

aquatic biota (Kodrick-Brown and Brown 2007). In these situations, consider protective

riparian pasture fencing that allows controlled grazing to provide optimal levels of

disturbance and open water for fish and bats.
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020 17

9.2. Designing Spring Developments

• Formulate design objectives: ecological sustainability, delivery of water to livestock, and

cost of construction and maintenance.

• Inventory and assess spring ecosystem functions and values before starting a new spring

development.

• Implement a grazing system with livestock numbers, timing, duration and frequency

that mitigates livestock impacts to springs (Swanson et al. 2015; U.S. Department of the

Interior 2006).

• Conduct a hydrologic analysis to determine the flow rate of the spring and the amount of

water needed by livestock.

• Use a flow-splitting device to leave as much flow in the spring ecosystem as possible,

diverting the calculated livestock need into the trough. In many cases, a small flow rate

to the trough will meet livestock needs. Discrete discharge spring ecosystems may be

impacted if greater than 10 percent to 20 percent of flow is diverted.

• Use float valves and shut-off valves to stop outflow when there is no use.

• Constructing spring boxes directly into a spring emergence zone typically obliterates the

source area, which is the most biologically important habitat of a springs ecosystem.

• Avoid destructive trenching, excavation, or installation of grout walls or perforated pipe

systems into spring sources. When needed, place them in a downstream location or a

less unique habitat.

• If spring discharge is small, provide storage for flow collection during low-use periods so

that water is available during high-use periods.

• Place the water trough, tank, or pond well outside spring habitat to avoid or minimize

impacts to spring and wetland vegetation from livestock trampling or vehicle access.

• Route trough overflow back to the spring ecosystem, as close to the spring source as

possible. Bury pipelines to and from troughs to limit temperature increases of water

returning to spring habitat.

• Install wildlife escape ramps in all tanks and troughs.

• Harden the ground next to the trough or tank to avoid soil erosion and compaction.

• Plan and budget for regular and ongoing maintenance. If maintenance is in doubt,

design the system so it will need less maintenance.

• Perform implementation and effectiveness monitoring to evaluate success in meeting

design objectives and minimizing undesirable impacts to the spring ecology. (See USDA

Forest Service, in press).
 18 USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020

References

Aldous, A.R.; Bach, L.B. 2014. Hydro-ecology of groundwater-dependent ecosystems: applying 

basic science to groundwater management. Hydrological Sciences Journal. 59(3–4): 1–15.

Aldous, A.R.; Gurrieri, J.T.; Bach, L.B.; [et al.]. 2014. A groundwater balancing act: 

environmental flows and levels for groundwater-dependent fens of the antelope grazing 

allotment, Fremont-Winema National Forest, Oregon. Unpublished report on file with: U.S 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, National Groundwater Program Lakewood, CO, and 

The Nature Conservancy, Portland, OR. 34 p.

Coles-Ritchie, M.; Solem, S.J.; Springer, A.E.; [et al.]. 2014. Framework for Springs Stewardship Program and proposed action development: Spring Mountains National Recreation Area, 

Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-330. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 63 p.

Cooper, D.J.; Merritt, D.M. 2012. Assessing the water needs of riparian and wetland vegetation 

in the Western United States. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-282. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 125 p.

Dwire, K.; Mellmann-Brown, S.; Gurrieri, J. 2018. Potential effects of climate change on 

riparian areas, wetlands, and groundwater-dependent ecosystems in the Blue Mountains,

Oregon, USA. Climate Services. 10:44–52.

Kodric-Brown, A.; Brown, J.H. 2007. Native fishes, exotic mammals, and the conservation of 

desert springs. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 5: 549–553.

Lardy, G.; Stoltenow, C.; Johnson, R. 2008. Livestock water. AS-954, NRCS. Fargo, ND: North 

Dakota State University. 8 p.

Morrison, R.R.; Stone, M.C.; Sada, D.W. 2013. Environmental response of a desert springbrook 

to incremental discharge reductions: Death Valley National Park, California, USA. Journal of 

Arid Environments. 99: 5–13.

Mueller, J. M.; Lima, R.E.; Springer, A. E. 2017. Can environmental attributes influence 

protected area designation? A case study valuing preferences for springs in Grand Canyon 

National Park. Land Use Policy. 63: 196–205.

Nevada Springs Restoration Workshop Committee. 2012. Nevada Springs restoration workbook: A restoration guide for Nevada, Great Basin and Mojave/Sonoran desert springs: 

executive summary. Unpublished report on file with: U.S Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, National Groundwater Program, Lakewood, CO. 11 p.
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020 19

Paffett, K.; Stevens, L.E.; Springer, A.E. 2018. Ecological assessment and rehabilitation 

prioritization for improving springs ecosystem stewardship. In: Dorney, J.; [et al.], eds. 

Wetland and stream rapid assessments: development, validation, and application. Amsterdam: 

Elsevier: Chapter 4.5.3: 475–487. 

Perla B.S.; Stevens, L.E. 2008. Biodiversity and productivity at an undisturbed spring in 

comparison with adjacent grazed riparian and upland habitats. In: Stevens, L.E., Meretsky, 

V.J., eds. Aridland springs in North America: Ecology and conservation. Tucson, AZ:

University of Arizona Press: 230-243.

Sada, D. 2008. Synecology of a springsnail (Caenogastropoda: Hydrobiidae) assemblage in a 

Western U.S. thermal spring province. The Veliger. 50(2): 59–71.

Sanderson, H.R.; Quigley, T.M.; Swan, E.E.; [et al.]. 1990. Specifications for structural range 

improvements. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-250. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 120 p.

Springer, A. E.; Stevens, L. E. 2009. Spheres of discharge of springs. Hydrogeology Journal. 

17(1): 83-93. 

Stacey, C.J.; Springer, A.E.; Stevens, L.E. 2011. Have arid land springs restoration projects 

been effective in restoring hydrology, geomorphology, and invertebrate and plant species 

composition comparable to natural springs with minimal anthropogenic disturbance? CEE 

review 10-002 (SR87). Collaboration for Environmental Evidence: 

Stevens, L.E.; Ledbetter, J.D.; Springer, A.E.; [et al.]. 2016. Arizona springs restoration handbook. Spring Stewardship Institute, Museum of Northern Arizona, Flagstaff, AZ; and Sky Island 

Alliance, Tucson, AZ. 126 p.

Swanson, S. 2016. Integrated lentic riparian grazing management. In: Iwaasa, A.; Lardner, 

H.A.; Schellenberg, M.; [et al.], eds. Proceedings 10th International Rangelands Congress; 2016

July 18–22; Saskatoon, SK, Canada. 10(2.3-5): 454–456.

Swanson, S.; Wyman, S.; Evans, C. 2015. Practical grazing management to maintain or restore 

riparian functions and values. Journal of Rangeland Applications. 2: 1–28. ISSN: 2331-5512. 

Taylor, D.A.R.; Tuttle, M.D. 2012. Water for wildlife—A handbook for ranchers and range 

managers. Austin, TX: Bat Conservation International. 20 p.

USDA Forest Service. 1989. Facilities for watering livestock and wildlife, 89-1. Missoula, MT: 

Missoula Technology & Development Center. 71 p.
 20 USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020

USDA Forest Service. 2012a. Groundwater-dependent ecosystems: Level I inventory field 

guide: Inventory methods for assessment and planning. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-86a. Washington, 

DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 201 p. 

https://www.fs.fed.us/science-technology/geology/groundwater/publications.

USDA Forest Service. 2012b. Groundwater-dependent ecosystems: Level II inventory field 

guide: Inventory methods for project design and analysis. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-86b. 

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 131 p. 

https://www.fs.fed.us/science-technology/geology/groundwater/publications.

USDA Forest Service. 2012c. National best management practices for water quality 

management on National Forest System lands, volume 1: National core BMP technical guide. 

FS-990a. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 165 p.

USDA Forest Service. [In press]. National best management practices for water quality 

management on National Forest System lands, volume 2: National core BMP monitoring 

technical guide. FS-990b. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service.

USDA Forest Service. 2017a. Determining environmental flows and levels for groundwater 

dependent ecosystems. Unpublished report on file with: U.S Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, National Groundwater Program, Lakewood, CO. 7 p.

USDA Forest Service. 2017b. Manti-La Sal National Forest plan revision assessment report. On 

file with: Manti-La Sal National Forest, Price, Utah. 280 p.

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service [USDA NRCS]. 2006. Conservation practice 

standard: Spring development code 574. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Natural Resources Conservation Service. 4 p.

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service [USDA NRCS]. 2010. Chapter 32: Well design 

and spring development. In: Engineering Field Handbook, Part 631. Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 63 p.

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service [USDA NRCS]. 2011. Chapter 12: Springs and 

wells. In: Engineering Field Handbook, Part 650. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 51 p.

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service [USDA NRCS]. 2012. Wildlife escape ramps for 

livestock watering troughs. Portland, Oregon. 2 p.

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service [USDA NRCS]. 2016. Ecological considerations 

in spring development. Technical Note No. WNTSC TN 190-EQ-1. Portland, Oregon, West 

National Technology Support Center, Environmental Quality. 14 p.
USDA Forest Service RMRS-GTR-405. 2020 21

USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service [USDA NRCS]. 2017. Letter providing guidance 

on planning, designing, and installing spring developments in accordance with Virginia 

Conservation Practice Standard, Spring Development (code 574). Richmond, Virginia, January 

10, 2017.

U.S. Department of the Interior. 2006. Riparian area management: grazing management 

processes and strategies for riparian-wetland areas. Technical Reference 1737-20. BLM/ST/

ST-06/002+1737. Denver, CO: Bureau of Land Management, National Science and Technology 

Center. 105 p.

U.S. Department of Interior. 2020. Riparian area management: Proper functioning condition 

assessment for lentic areas. Technical Reference 1737-16. U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau 

of Land Management, National Operations Center, Denver, Colorado.
To learn more about RMRS publications or search our online titles:

RMRS web site at: https://www.fs.fed.us/rmrs/rmrs-publishing-services

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil 

rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions 

participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on 

race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual 

orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public 

assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any 

program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies 

and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program 

information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact 

the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact 

USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information 

may be made available in languages other than English.

To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination 

Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.

html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of 

the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-

9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, 

D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: program.intake@usda.gov.