U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

NATIONAL STUDY OF WATER

MANAGEMENT DURING DROUGHT

THE REPORT TO THE U.S. CONGRESS

NATIONAL STUDY OF WATER MANAGEMENT DURING DROUGHT

SEPTEMBER 1995 IWR REPORT 94-NDS-12

NATIONAL STUDY OF WATER MANAGEMENT

DURING DROUGHT

THE REPORT TO THE U.S. CONGRESS

PREPARED BY

U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

WATER RESOURCES SUPPORT CENTER

INSTITUTE FOR WATER RESOURCES

iii

National Study of Water Management During Drought

The Report to the U.S. Congress

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ............................................................... v

Acknowledgements ............................................................... ix

Findings of the National Drought Study ............................................... xi

The nature of drought ....................................................... xi

The seriousness of the problem ............................................... xi

Shortcomings in the way we have dealt with droughts .............................. xii

Law and drought ......................................................... xiii

Lessons from the Case Studies ............................................... xiv

The DPS Method ......................................................... xiv

I. Introduction ................................................................... 1

A. Study Authority .......................................................... 1

II. Problem Identification ........................................................... 3

A. The subject area of this study. ............................................... 3

B. The definition of drought. .................................................. 3

C. Water Supply Planning and Drought .......................................... 5

D. Concerns Across the Country ............................................... 6

E. Drought Impacts That Could be Addressed by Better Water Management ............ 12

III. The Current State of Water Management During Drought .............................. 17

A. Existing Drought Response Plans and Measures ................................ 17

B. Shortcomings of Existing Plans ............................................ 18

C. Long term water allocation and drought ...................................... 19

D. Allocating water among competing activities during drought ...................... 19

E. The need for additional structural capacity .................................... 20

F. Legal and institutional issues ............................................... 21

G. Lessons Learned from the California Drought (1987-1992) ....................... 23

IV. A Framework for Drought Planning and Management ................................ 29

A. The DPS Method ....................................................... 31

B. New Tools for the DPS Method ............................................ 37

1. Shared Vision Models and Traditional Models (37); 2. Virtual Drought Exercises

(39); 3. The National Drought Atlas (40); 4. Managing Water Conservation (43); 5. 

Trigger Planning (46); 6. Involving the Public and Decision Makers (47); a. Circles of

Influence (47); b. Decision Maker Interviews (48); c. Shared Vision Models and

Collaboration (48); d. ADR (48)

C. Summary results of the major field studies (DPS's) ............................. 49
iv
v

Executive Summary

The droughts of the late 1980s and early 1990s caused persistent and widespread conflicts among

water users despite the federal, state and local planning efforts in place before the droughts began.

Although details differ from place to place, these plans can be broadly characterized. Federal

plans were meant to assure that the authorized purposes of federal reservoirs were met. State

plans defined the stages of drought, the emergency response powers of the governor, and

(sometimes) a general way of prioritizing water allocation by the type of use. Local (city or water

utility) plans identified stages of drought, drought response measures for each, and named

drought committees and task forces.

With all this planning, why was there still conflict and confusion in our responses to drought?

The Corps concluded after the first year of the Drought Study, as did many other reviewers, that

the problems in water management during drought are manifestations of problems in water

management in general (IWR, 91-NDS-1). Just as recessions may reveal weaknesses in the

management practices of a company that made money when business was good, these droughts

revealed weaknesses in water management systems which were hidden in the years when water

was plentiful.

In the United States, water management problems come not from limited overall supply, but from

problems in regional availability, management and usage (Foster, 1988). Water is not always

where people want to use it, and the ways we allocate and use water have not been entirely

successful in achieving economic efficiency, equity, and environmental quality. Taken as a

whole, the U.S. always has more water than it needs. About 1,400 billion gallons of water per

day is available in the conterminous 48 states. Less than a third of that (380 billion gallons) is

withdrawn for all human uses, and most of that is returned to streams. In all but a few places in

the U.S., a year long drought so severe that it can be expected only twice a century will still

produce from one half (50%) to two-thirds (67%) the average precipitation for the year (IWR,

94-NDS-4). 

There is broad agreement, if not consensus, among water scholars about what the primary flaws

in American water management are: inefficiency and lack of holistic management (rooted in the

division of water management responsibilities according to political boundaries and agency

missions); the practice of pricing water below its real value; and the failure to involve

stakeholders in water management. Ignorance is a problem, too. Multiyear droughts in

California (IWR, 93-NDS-5) and the Columbia River Basin (Lee, 1992) show we have much to

learn about long term environmental management of river basin ecosystems. 

Water managers face the challenge of increasingly complex and conflicting water uses, as well

as increased demands (in some areas) from rapid population growth. In some cases, we have had

to choose between two or more competing environmental needs (Monberg, 1994). Budgets have

been restricted at both federal and state levels, and water supply issues compete for funding not
 The case studies were conducted on the Kanawha River Basin (West Virginia, Virginia, *

and North Carolina), the Marais des Cygnes-Osage River Basin (Kansas and Missouri), the

Cedar and Green River Basins (Washington), and the James River (Virginia).

vi

only with crime and education, but with other water issues: water quality, wastewater treatment,

and infrastructure maintenance and replacement. As the era of dam building draws to a close,

performance once secured through sheer abundance of water supply storage must now be assured

by more skillful management.

Recognizing that the key to better water management during drought is to improve current water

resources planning and management practices, the principles and practice of water management

were revisited as part of the National Drought Study to develop an innovative, integrated, and

collaborative approach to drought management. The DPS planning approach is based on the

principles of multiobjective water management derived from the Harvard Water Program of the

late 1950's and early 1960's, modified and implemented in Federal water studies, and codified in

"Principles and Guidelines" (P&G) for federal water planning. Like the P&G, the DPS method

requires the explicit establishment of problems and the goals and objectives for water

management and the articulation of what the study area would be like if the study produced no

change in water management. Like the P&G, the DPS method compares alternatives to that

status quo; and the use of commensurable measures, such as economic efficiency, to help identify

society's best interests when one water use must suffer if another is to prosper. The DPS Method

differs from the P&G, though, in that it is designed to be used when non-structural and nonFederal solutions are the norm. The DPS method was also inspired by the process that led to a

multi-government agreement on water supply for the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area in the

early 1980's. Those agreements were facilitated by easily understood computer simulations of

a water supply system that convinced decision makers that the safe yield of the system could be

increased more, and at a lower economic and environmental cost, by interconnecting existing

reservoirs rather than building additional reservoirs (Eastman, 1987). This approach has been

tested and refined in four regional case studies (called Drought Preparedness Studies , or DPS's) *

that collectively represent much of the diversity found in American water management.

Many water utilities, states, and river basin organizations already had prepared drought plans (see

page 17). The features that distinguish a DPS from these traditional drought preparedness efforts

are that the DPS:

 uses collaboratively built shared vision computer models to bridge the gap between

the information specialized water models can provide and the way people negotiate water

decisions.

involves stakeholders in a way that balances the benefits of broad participation with

the problems of managing a large study group.
vii

 is designed to reduce impacts, not just allocate water shortages

 integrates drought response with long term water resources management

 lets regional managers benefit from expertise and experience from around the country

 assembles planning teams from existing organizations, linking them in a way that

addresses the fragmentation of responsibilities among agencies without creating new

bureaucracies

In addition to the four major case studies, the Corps is currently applying the DPS method in

drought preparedness efforts at two Corps projects (the Rogue River in Oregon and the

Youghiogheny River in Pennsylvania) to determine how effective these methods can be even

when the time and budget allotted for the studies are minimal. The Corps is concurrently

reviewing its regulations and policies for operating its projects during drought to see how they

could be improved based on these and other National Drought Study case studies.

The DPS method can be applied to water issues beyond drought because it is based on sound

principles for multipurpose, multiobjective water resources management. The DPS method has

already influenced the way water is managed outside the drought case study areas. State water

departments in Washington and Virginia, the Interstate Conference on the Potomac River Basin,

and the Susquehanna River Basin Commission are already incorporating elements of the DPS

method in drought management and long term water resources management. The DPS method

will be used in the Comprehensive Study of the Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa and ApalachicolaChattahoochee-Flint River Basins, and elements of the method are being used in the Central and

Southern Florida Study (the "Everglades Study"). These techniques were shared with water

managers from Corps districts, the Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S. State Department, the

Bonneville Power Administration, the Interstate Conference on the Potomac River Basin and

other groups in a technology transfer session held in September 1994 in Alexandria, Virginia.

It appears from the favorable reaction of the case studies and others who are using the methods

in studies unrelated to the Drought Study that use of the DPS method will become more common

in the future. This was the ultimate goal of the National Drought Study: not just to prescribe a

better way to manage water, but to implement it and reap the benefits.
viii
ix

Acknowledgements

This report was produced as part of the National Study of Water Management During Drought,

which was managed by the Institute for Water Resources (IWR) of the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers. It is one of 17 reports which will be produced, including "Managing Water For

Drought", the main technical summary of the innovative approaches that were developed and

used during the National Drought Study. 

The study benefitted from the experiences, research, critical analysis, and writing of the over one

hundred professionals who worked directly on the National Drought Study, but the contributions

of three people were most influential in the preparation of this report.

The central theme of the Drought Study, the use of the methods and tools of multiobjective water

resources planning to prepare a drought response, is based on the work of Dr. Eugene Z. Stakhiv,

Chief of IWR's Policy and Special Studies Division. Dr. Stakhiv had made the case in previous

papers that the multiobjective federal planning methods were unique in that they constituted a

comprehensive and uniform set of principles for water resources planning and management that

had been established and tested by an unprecedented coalition of researchers and practioners.

Moreover, he had demonstrated that these principles and methods, which have traditionally been

applied to the development of federally financed water projects, could be used to address regional

objectives. Under his direction, the National Drought Study developed these concepts one step

further, applying these principles to what were primarily regional and operational water

resources matters.

Mr. Zoltan L. Montvai, of the Corps' Headquarters Planning Division, oversaw the National

Drought Study from its inception to its final products. He tirelessly reviewed and criticized drafts

of this report and offered advice to assure that it answered the questions raised during the design

of the National Drought Study. The Planning Division is headed by Dr. G. Edward Dickey. 

Brigadier General (Ret.) William Whipple, Jr. co-wrote "Managing Water for Drought" and

rewrote an early draft of this report and criticized subsequent revisions. As he had in other parts

of the study and other reports, he provided the rest of the team with the insights he has garnered

during his half century of experience in water resources planning, construction, and management.

Additional material for this summary report was also provided by Dr. Hanna Cortner (University

of Arizona), Mr. Charles Lancaster, Dr. William Lord (University of Arizona), Dr. Richard

Palmer (University of Washington), and Dr. Gene Willeke (Miami (Ohio) University).

The report, of course, is a synthesis of the National Drought Study. The report on the first year

of the study (IWR, 91-NDS-1) acknowledges the many professionals who set the course and

collaborative tone for the study. Of those, however, three people deserve to be acknowledged

again since they shaped the study in its infancy. Harry Kitch (Corps Headquarters), Randy
x

Hanchey and Kyle Schilling (past and current directors of IWR) shaped the basic study direction,

making sure the scope and subject matter of the study would include non-Corps and non-federal

problems and viewpoints. 

William J. Werick

Principal Author and Study Manager
xi

Findings of the National Drought Study

The nature of drought

1. Definition. Droughts are periods of time when natural or managed water systems do not provide enough

water to meet established human and environmental uses because of natural shortfalls in precipitation or

streamflow.

2. Drought management is a subset of water supply planning. The distinction between a "drought"

problem and a "water supply" problem is essentially defined by the nature of the best solution. Urban areas

that persistently use more than the safe yield of their water supply systems may have frequent or even

standing drought declarations that could only be eliminated through strategic water supply measures. Those

measures can be structural, such as the construction of new reservoirs, or non-structural, such as

conservation.

3. Drought response problems are water management problems. Participants at a National Science

Foundation Drought Workshop concluded that attempts to understand and address the failings of water

management during drought would be unsuccessful unless shortcomings in the larger context of water

management are also understood and addressed. This was also one of the conclusions drawn by the Corps

of Engineers in the first year of the National Drought Study (IWR, 91-NDS-1), and the premise upon which

the DPS method was built.

The seriousness of the problem

4. Concern is widespread. Fifty percent of all water supply utilities asked their customers to reduce

consumption during the 1988 drought (Moreau, 1989). In a 1990 poll, forty-one percent of U.S. mayors

anticipated water shortages in the next several years, caused by drought, growing population, water

pollution, and leaks from distribution lines (Conserv90).

5. Water use is stable nationally. Several reports in the 1970s forecast rapid increases in American water

use. There has been no national assessment of water use since then, and an impression lingers to this day

that water use is increasing. In fact, total American water use is less now than it was in 1980, although

there is growth and more intense competition for water in some regions. Water use forecasts are different

from water demand forecasts because demand is a function of price. This stabilization in the quantity of

water used is largely due to the impact of new legislation, technological advances, and the opportunity

costs, economic and environmental, for developing new supplies. 

6. Several states reported that water quality suffered during drought because low flows affected their

ability to dilute effluents from wastewater treatment plants and sustain the aquatic ecosystem.
xii

7. Drought impacts are difficult to measure. This is because:

 They are often reported as reductions from the benefits a water system can support when water

is plentiful; this approach often overstates the problem because these drought "costs" are usually

based on sizing the water system so as to maximize return on the economic and environmental

investments in the water system and is not necessarily based on efficient use of the water resource.

 Impacts caused by drought are difficult to separate from impacts that occur coincidentally

during a drought. Because droughts continue for much longer than floods, earthquakes, or wind

storms, external factors (such as recessions, market changes, land management, and fishing

practices) may also contribute to the impacts associated with drought, as was the case recently in

California.

 Regional drought impacts are often more than offset at the national level by gains in production

somewhere else in the country.

8. Drought impacts understate our aversion to droughts. Despite the overestimation of impacts

induced by the above factors, the level of conflict and anxiety droughts stimulate is still apt to be far greater

than the magnitude of impacts would suggest. On a national and even a state level, the impacts to

agriculture and urban areas from the California drought were relatively small, but the drought was

newsworthy for years and played a significant role in the passage of new state and new federal laws.

Observations of droughts in the 1980's suggest that turmoil will be greater when the losses are felt more

personally and when long term entitlements to water use are threatened.

Shortcomings in the way we have dealt with droughts

9. Learning from the past. Lessons learned during ongoing droughts are too rarely documented, critically

analyzed, and shared with other regions;

10. Price and efficient use. Water is almost always priced below its economic value to users or full cost

to produce. This tends to impede efficient use of water and misrepresent the demand for water. National

Drought Study reviews of water use in Boston and California suggest that shortages of water are sometimes

just shortages of low priced water.

11. Assessing risk. Information about expected drought severity and duration is not readily available, so

risk assessments cannot be quantified as well.

12. The problems are integrated, solutions are not. Management responsibilities for problems that are

physically integrated in a river basin are fragmented by agency missions and political boundaries. The
xiii

many disciplines required to analyze drought problems and develop and institute solutions are poorly

coordinated.

13. Typical problems with traditional drought plans include (IWR, 91-NDS-1):

 they may not recognize newer uses of water

 they are usually designed for the drought of record, without consideration of the rarity of that

drought

 they often are not understood or endorsed by those who will suffer the impacts of the drought

 they may not sufficiently address equity issues or economic differences in the use of water

 they are often triggered by indicators not related in a known way to impacts.

 

 they are better characterized as documents rather than ways of behaving, and so their

effectiveness diminishes as staff changes occur and time passes between plan preparation and

drought.

14. There are three time frames for response planning. Drought responses can be classified as

strategic, tactical, and emergency measures. Strategic measures are long term physical and institutional

responses such as water supply structures, water law, and plumbing codes. Tactical measures, like water

rationing, are developed in advance to respond to expected short term water deficits. Emergency measures

are implemented as an ad hoc response to conditions that are too specific or rare to warrant the

development of standing plans. 

15. Technology transfer. Methods for managing water for multiple objectives have been developed and

tested over decades, but that tradition resides in the agencies that built the extensive complex of federal

dams, not in the organizations responsible for preparing tactical drought plans. This expertise must be

transferred before that institutional memory is retired.

16. Law and drought. Law sometimes drives and sometimes constrains water management during

drought. Basic appropriations doctrine discourages water conservation, because water not put to beneficial

use may be lost, but many western states have modified the basic doctrine to accommodate conservation.

In addition, sixteen eastern states have legislation recognizing the need to conserve water supplies.

17. Basin transfers and drought. Diversions are strategic measures designed to increase water supply

reliability. During a severe drought, if the necessary facilities exist and the state law allows, temporary

interbasin diversions may be authorized to meet the needs of the most severely affected areas.
xiv

Lessons from the Case Studies

18. Domestic water users are willing and able to curtail water use during a drought. During the first

two years of the drought, a mixture of voluntary and mandatory conservation in California's cities reduced

water use from 10 to 25%. In the last three years of the drought, urban conservation efforts were generally

more intense. Similar savings were recorded in Seattle and Tacoma, Washington in their 1992 drought.

19. Investments in infrastructure can increase the options for adaptive behavior. Water banking,

storage for instream flow maintenance, conjunctive use of groundwater and surface water, regional

interdependence, and economies of scale require a water storage, allocation and distribution system.

California's storage and distribution system provided the flexibility and resiliency to withstand severe

droughts, even in the face of rapidly growing population and increasing urban and environmental demands

on a fixed supply of water.

20. Droughts act as catalysts for change. Complex sociopolitical systems, which reflect a multitude of

competing and conflicting needs, are not particularly well suited for crisis management. Yet despite these

well understood and accepted deficiencies in the democratic decision making process, the overall

conclusion is that communities not only weathered the drought in a reasonably organized manner, but also

introduced a series of useful water management reforms and innovations that will influence future water

uses in a positive manner.

21. Conservation may or may not reduce drought vulnerability. To the extent that methods of reducing

water use during droughts, such as discouragement of outdoor use and physical modifications to toilets and

faucets to reduce water use, are used as long term water conservation measures that allow the addition of

new customers to a water supply system, drought vulnerability is increased. When normal use becomes

more efficient, efficiency gains are harder to realize during a drought. But it is not always that simple. In

the Boston Metropolitan area, for example, long term conservation will reduce drought vulnerability

because some of the water saved will also be stored for use during droughts and because some of the most

effective long term conservation savings (such as the detection and repair of leaks) cannot be implemented

quickly enough to be as effective as a drought response.

The DPS Method

22. The lineage of the DPS method. The DPS method is derived from the traditional strategic water

resources planning framework, but addresses two common shortcomings in water management: the

separation between stakeholders and the problem solving process, and the subdivision of natural resources

management by political boundaries and limited agency missions. 
xv

23. Drought responses are primarily behavioral. The DPS method reflects the fact that, like responses

to earthquakes and fires, drought responses are largely behavioral, and their success depends on people

understanding their role, and knowing how their actions fit into a larger response. 

24. Collaboration between agencies and stakeholders can make planning much more effective. This

collaborative approach:

 harnesses the knowledge and creativity of stakeholders near the beginning of problem solving

efforts;

 makes it more likely that stakeholders can take actions unilaterally to reduce their drought

vulnerability;

 builds broader, deeper stakeholder support for water management plans.

25. Lessons learned from past efforts at collaborative planning are abundant and must be heeded.

The benefits of participatory planning are not guaranteed by simply making the planning process accessible.

There is a substantial body of research and practical experience with participatory planning, especially in

water resources, that is often overlooked. The temptation is to believe that honesty and common sense will

suffice. The participatory methods used and developed during the Drought Study recognized and managed

these potential liabilities:

 public involvement can involve considerable expense.

 the "public" that gets involved in planning may be self-selected and unrepresentative of the

public that will be affected by drought. 

 if the public is actually involved in the study process (as opposed to just expressing problems

and goals in workshops or surveys), then additional efforts may be required to provide technical

training and to coordinate the work of public task forces.

 the misapplication of the techniques of group process can result in the use of stakeholder

opinions on issues that should be addressed by experts.

 broader citizen participation increases the risk that the planning process will be slowed or

stopped.

26. The problem solving team should be appropriate to the problem set. Rarely will there be one

agency or political entity whose responsibilities include all the problems a region will face during future

droughts. The creation of the DPS team, then, is the creation of a new entity whose collective interests and

responsibilities are pertinent to the set of problems addressed. Thus, the DPS team constitutes a new,

integrated community that more closely reflects the integrated nature of the problemshed.
xvi

27. The objectives for the drought response must be articulated early and clearly. The DPS method

uses 5 management parameters including the criteria decision makers will use in approving or rejecting

new plans, planning objectives, constraints, measures of performance, and environmental, economic, and

social effects. Developing good planning objectives early is paradoxically the most important and most

often ignored step in the drought planning process.

28. Innovations. The DPS method takes advantage of several innovations developed in parallel during

the National Drought Study:

 The shared vision model (see Finding 29)

 Circles of influence and decision maker interviews

 Water Conservation Management

 Trigger Planning

 The National Drought Atlas

 Virtual Drought Exercises

29. Shared vision models are computer simulation models of water systems built, reviewed, and tested

collaboratively with all stakeholders. The models represent not only the water infrastructure and operation,

but the most important effects of that system on society and the environment. Shared vision models take

advantage of new, user-friendly, graphical simulation software to bridge the gap between specialized water

models and the human decision making processes. Shared vision models helped DPS team members

overcome differences in backgrounds, values, and agency traditions.

30. A Virtual Drought Exercise is a realistic simulation of a drought using the shared vision model to

simulate that experience without the risk associated with real droughts. Virtual Drought Exercises can be

used to exercise, refine and test plans, train new staff, and update plans to reflect new information. 

31. The National Drought Atlas (IWR, 94-NDS-4) is a compendium of statistical information designed

to help water managers and planners answer questions about the expected frequency, duration and severity

of droughts. The Atlas provides a national reference for precipitation and streamflow statistics that will

help planners and manage assess the risks involved in alternative management strategies.

32. Water conservation management is the prioritization and selection of water conservation measures

based on their estimated benefits and costs. A new version of a widely used water use forecasting model,
xvii

IWR-MAIN, provides a powerful new tool for linking water savings with specific combinations of water

savings measures.

33. Trigger Planning is a collaborative and continuous process for updating water supply needs

assessments and responding in time, but just in time, with the necessary economic and environmental

investments necessary to address those needs. Trigger planning uses a shared vision model and the DPS

method to minimize those investments while reducing the frequency of drought declarations caused by

inadequate water supply. Trigger planning was tested and refined in the Boston metropolitan area.

34. There are simple ways to improve agency collaboration with elected officials and stakeholders.

The DPS method used "circles of influence" to effectively and efficiently involve stakeholders in the

development of plans. The circles created new ways for people to interrelate and interact, without

destroying the old institutions, their responsibilities or advantages. In addition, during the DPS's, political

scientists conducted interviews with elected officials and other influential political agents. The interviews

were included in reports available to the entire study team, and were used to assure the planning process

addressed issues critical to the public and elected officials.

1

(

The primary objective of

the study was to find a

better way of managing

water during drought in

the United States.

(

National Study of Water Management During Drought

I. Introduction

In response to the droughts of 1988, Section 707, "Capital Investment

Congress funded a four year National

Study of Water Management

During Drought led by the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers. The

primary objective of the study was to

find a better way to manage water

during drought in the United States.

(The study was not intended to

address drought problems that do not

involve water management, such as

drought related forestry problems and

crop losses on non-irrigated farms).

This report describes the results the

study team acheived in each of the

major components of the study.

 A. Study Authority

This study was conducted under the

authority of Sections 707 and 729 of

the Water Resources Development

Act of 1986 (WRDA 86).

Section 729, "Study of Water

Resources Needs of River Basins and

Regions", directs the Secretary of the

Army, in coordination with the

Secretary of the Interior and in

consultation with other governmental

agencies, to study "water resources

needs of river basins and regions of

the United States." This section

specifically requires consultation with

"State, interstate, and local

government entities.

Needs for Water Resources",

authorizes the Secretary to estimate

long term capital investment needs

for, among other things, municipal

and industrial water supply. 

These authorities allowed the Corps

to:

investigate water resources needs

for all purposes, including those

purposes such as municipal water

supply for which users bear the

financial burden in new federal

reservoirs. 

investigate these issues at the

national level, in collaboration with

the states and other federal water

agencies.

The National Drought Study was not

intended to be a complete response to

Sections 707 and 729. A plan of

study was developed by a task force

composed of leading Corps of

Engineers, university, and state water

managers. The plan of study was

based on directives contained in

Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) budget justifications. 

The study process was designed to

encourage participation across the

spectrum of stakeholders and

management agencies. 
2

The study plan was to: management during drought were

determine the concerns related to management in general. The report

water management during drought recommended that the remainder of

throughout the country; the study be devoted to the testing of

describe the ways water is management during drought and the

managed during drought and identify conduct of supportive technical

the linkage between management studies.

methods and concerns;

identify impediments to improving

those methods; the new drought preparedness

design a method that would address case studies;

the identified concerns;

test and refine the new method in developed;

case studies across the country;

share the findings with the water were integrated in a project called

management community and look for "Trigger Planning" in Boston;

ways to implement the new method.

The OMB language divided the study studies were conducted in

into two parts. In the first part collaboration with the U.S. Advisory

(FY90), the Corps was directed to Commission on Intergovernmental

complete an overview of the problem, Relations (ACIR) to improve the

make preliminary suggestions for effectiveness of the working

change, and recommend whether relationship between water agencies

further study was justified. and elected officials and water

The "National Study of Water

Management During Drought; Report This report is organized around these

on the First Year of the Study" found steps.

that the problems with water 

symptomatic of the problems of water

an alternative approach to water

In the second part of the study:

method was tested and refined in 4

the National Drought Atlas was

drought and water supply planning

a series of conceptual and field

agencies and the public.
Drought

Water Management

During Drought

Forest Fires

Dryland Farming

 Losses

Water Management

Water Supply

Long Term

Non-Point

Source

Pollution

3

Figure 1. The Subject of This Study

II. Problem Identification

A. The subject area of this study.

The subject of the National Study of

Water Management During Drought

is the intersection of drought and

water management. As Figure 1

illustrates, there are water

management and drought issues

which fall outside the subject of this

report.

For example, drought related forestry

problems and crop losses on nonirrigated farms are not affected by the

storage, conveyance, allocation and

pricing of water; they are the direct

result of reduced precipitation. One

of the products of the Drought Study,

however, the National Drought Atlas,

provides state of the art statistical B. The definition of drought.

information that should be useful in

managing these sorts of problems.

Similarly, water managers deal with

many issues besides drought.

However, a direct connection can be

made to long term water supply, and

the Drought Study did examine this

connection. The phrase "water

supply" is used here in a broad sense,

meaning the provision of water for

hydropower, navigation, recreation,

and instream flow needs, as well as

for municipal, industrial and

agricultural consumption. The

"drought" that was subject of the

National Drought Study is best

defined in the context of water supply

planning.

There are at least 10 meteorological,

4 agricultural, 3 hydrologic, and 3

socioeconomic definitions of drought

used in water management literature

(IWR, 91-NDS-3). Some authors

restrict its use to what others call

meteorological drought (less

precipitation than usual, with "less"

sometimes quantified). Others use

"drought" to refer to agricultural

drought (not enough precipitation for

crops), or hydrologic drought (less

water available than usual, typically

defined statistically in terms of less

than normal streamflow). But in

water systems that use distant sources

of water or large reservoirs,

declarations of drought may be

unrelated to the amount of local

rainfall, so this definition was too
4

Figure 2. A Graphic Definition of Drought

broad to fit the subject of the National Although this definition is useful and

Drought Study. For the purposes of problem, it is still too broad to be

the National Drought Study, a used in determining whether a recent

socioeconomic definition was used: shortfall in precipitation should be

Droughts are periods of time when

natural or managed water systems

do not provide enough water to meet

established human and

environmental uses because of

natural shortfalls in precipitation or

streamflow.

This definition is represented declared too early, droughts will be

graphically in Figure 2. Over a

period of time, supply will vary based

on precipitation and streamflow.

These variations can be reduced and

smoothed by the use of natural and

man-made storage facilities, both on

the surface and in the ground.

appropriate for a national study of the

treated as a drought. This is because

a determination that the water system

cannot provide enough water is often

dependent on future inflows that

cannot be forecasted accurately. 

In most areas of the country, there are

risks involved in setting the threshold

at which reduced precipitation and

streamflow are officially declared to

be droughts. If the droughts are

declared more frequently and

sometimes unnecessarily. If

managers wait longer to declare a

drought, water supplies that could

reduce the impacts of a prolonged

drought will be depleted if water use

is not reduced early in the drought.
Water Supply

Yield (mgd)

0 Storage (thousands of acre-feet)

Estimated Minimum Daily Flow

Mean Daily Flow

90%

95%98%

99%

320

300

a b

5

Figure 3. An illustration of safe yield curves. Adding

storage trades present days costs for increases in reliability

(shown as 90%, 95%, etc.) or yield.

C. Water Supply Planning and

Drought

Figure 2 helps illustrate the difference

and the connectedness between

drought and water supply.

Water supply planning is a strategic

endeavor that attempts to balance

water supply and use, mindful of

economic and environmental costs.

Water supply planners forecast future

water use and calculate how often the

existing or alternative water supply

systems would fail to deliver that

amount of water. They generally

accept less than 100% reliability - that

is, they accept the fact that droughts

will occasionally be declared -

because the environmental, social, or

economic costs required to completely

eliminate droughts is too great. These

residual problems (shown in Figure 2

as drought) can be addressed more

efficiently through tactical responses -

such as lawn watering bans or special

rules governing the release of water

from reservoirs during such episodes.

The tradeoffs between the number of

drought declarations, water use, and

storage capacity are shown in Figure

3. Of the many ways that the adequacy

of water supply is measured, the most

basic and universal is "safe yield". If a

system is said to have a safe yield of

300 million gallons of water a day at

98% reliability, it means that it can

support water use of 300 million

gallons per day (mgd) 98% of the

time. This is usually based on records

of streamflow gages, which are from

40 to 100 years long in many places in

the country. For a fixed capacity of

storage (a in Figure 3) this system

could be described as having a safe

yield of 300 mgd at 98% reliability or

320 mgd at 95% reliability. Figure 3

also shows that increasing storage

from a to b can increase the reliability

of 300 mgd water service from 98% to

99%. This is a strategic measure that

uses present day investments to reduce

the number or severity of future

droughts. 

Many of the drought concerns across

the country come from areas where

municipal water needs or recreational

needs have outstripped the growth of

water supply systems. In the case of

municipal needs, the imbalance can be

caused simply by the rate of

population growth, the costs of new

supply, or the length of time required

to obtain approval for new supply

structures. Recreational water use is

almost always incidental to other uses;

people simply take advantage of water

storage reservoirs built for other

purposes. Yet recreation has a

significant economic and political
6

dimension, and water managers The information from these surveys

everywhere are learning that recreation was refined, checked and

can raise the "use" line in Figure 2,

either increasing the frequency of

drought declarations or adding to the

opportunity costs of reducing drought

impacts to traditional water uses.

The distinction between a "drought"

problem and a "water supply" problem

is essentially defined by the nature of

the best solution. Urban areas that

consistently use more than the safe

yield of their water supply systems

may have frequent or even standing

drought declarations that could only

be eliminated through strategic water

supply measures. Those measures can

be structural, such as the construction

of new reservoirs, or non-structural,

such as conservation.

D. Concerns Across the Country 

The National Drought Study began

with an assessment to determine what

the impacts of drought were and what

problems there were with drought

response mechanisms.

In 1990, then Assistant Secretary of

the Army for Civil Works Robert

Page wrote to each of the 50

Governors, asking for their help with

this study, and they responded,

expressing their main concerns and

naming a state study coordinator.

Those concerns are summarized in

Table I. Corps division offices were

asked to report what they felt were the

principal drought problems (Figure 4)

and major impediments (page 18) to

reducing those problems. 

supplemented during three workshops,

co-sponsored with the Western States

Water Council and the International

Drought Information Center. Water

managers, environmentalists, and

researchers participated in these

workshops.

Throughout the first year of the study,

existing drought plans and notable

case studies with drought management

implications were reviewed. Finally,

the Drought Study team participated

in other reviews of the subject (such

as the National Science Foundation

workshop on drought) and reviewed

papers written on the impacts of

drought and shortcomings of the water

management system. All of these

efforts were summarized in the Report

on the First Year of Study (91-NDS1). Lessons Learned from the

California Drought (1987-1992) (93-

NDS-5), further contributed to the

understanding of the problems.

The results of these assessments

shaped the remainder of the National

Drought Study in two fundamental

ways: 

The study team focused on ways to

address the subject areas of greatest

concern: the inadequacies of water

resources planning, the division of

responsibility by agency missions and

political boundaries, and lack of

communication between agencies,

elected officials, and stakeholders.

Case studies were chosen to

represent a cross section of the issues

the assessments had revealed. 
7

NEW ENGLAND REGION: Not a problem over much of area, but there is an increasing

susceptibility to drought of public sector water supply and lack of redundancy of water supplies.

Maine Not a major problem, but there are some concerns about agricultural damage,

forest fires, and river pollution.

New

Hampshire

Public water supply and river water quality because of importance to tourism.

Vermont Livestock frequently affected.

Massachusetts Conflict between irrigation and municipal and industrial use.

Connecticut Domestic water supply biggest concern.

Rhode Island Lack of redundancy in community water supplies and inability to develop new

supplies

MID-ATLANTIC REGION: Salt water intrusion and water supply along coast and Delaware

River.

New York New York City's water supply system which is overburdened and currently

operating above safe yield. There are lesser water supply problems in Rochester

and Syracuse areas.

New Jersey Domestic water supply is the biggest concern; saltwater intrusion in Delaware

River is on-going concern.

Pennsylvania Public water supplies are a major concern, especially the numerous small supply

systems. Agriculture and crop losses.

Delaware Declines in ground water levels in confined aquifers, salt water intrusion,

increasing municipal and industrial usage

Maryland Drought is not a major concern because of state effort to deal with water supply. 

Salt water intrusion is concern in coastal areas; some areas have sufficient water

but need better retrieval capability (e.g., new wells) to access it.

Virginia Southeastern coastal areas have water supply problems

TABLE I. GOVERNORS CONCERNS
8

SOUTH-ATLANTIC REGION: Increasing municipal and industrial use, management of major

river systems

North

Carolina

Impacts to agriculture and domestic uses.

South

Carolina

Need for management and coordination of surface and ground water resources;

Management of Savannah River reservoirs.

Georgia Many northern communities have insufficient water supply and access to recreation

lakes.

Florida Competition between agricultural uses and others; Municipal and industrial use;

Everglades water; fish and wildlife; Recreation

Alabama Droughts affect agriculture first, and then hydropower, navigation, and recreation

LOWER MISSISSIPPI BASIN: Impacts to agriculture, Mississippi River low flows, drought

impacts in Mississippi-Missouri-Ohio River Basin, which drains 41% of contiguous U.S., impacts

Mississippi River delta

Mississippi The 1988 drought was devastating to farming community; Northeastern low flows

and catfish farm pumping.

Arkansas M&I supplies, especially those with marginal storage; damage to row crops and

pasture crops; damage to livestock and poultry; instream flow needs. Agriculture is

the major problem - irrigation is extensive (86% from ground water).

Louisiana Not a major concern, but Mississippi River and Sabine River flows may drop below

water intakes during severe droughts.

OHIO RIVER BASIN: Ohio River low flows. Municipal water supplies of medium- to

small-sized communities

West Virginia Drought is not a major concern for communities, but there are instream needs

(recreation and environment) that may be impacted.

Tennessee Water quality and recreation impacts; domestic supply of towns in eastern

Tennessee.

Kentucky Competition between municipal water supply and irrigated agriculture.

Ohio Municipal supplies (medium-sized communities);instream flow needs.

Indiana Ohio River navigation, water supply distribution systems.

TABLE I (CONTINUED) GOVERNORS CONCERNS
9

LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN/SOUTH PACIFIC COAST REGION: Increasing

municipal water supply needs versus irrigation needs 

Arizona Groundwater overdraft; drought impacts on rangelands, stock watering; conflict

between cattle and wildlife (stock ponds); shortages on Colorado River system;

Federal water/regulation claims; instream flows and fish and wildlife.

Nevada Priorities have changed dramatically: water switched from agriculture to municipal

and other competing uses, such as fisheries, wildlife habitat.

California People expect more water than there is. Aesthetics - recreation, streams and

reservoirs; agriculture, primarily in foothills (valleys have switched to

groundwater); fires; municipal supplies, especially for poor planners; salt water

intrusion; hydropower; tourism/recreation.

NORTHWEST & PACIFIC COAST REGION Municipal water supply needs of smaller

communities, competition between power and fish/recreation in northwest

Idaho Anadromous fisheries; use of Idaho streamflow for augmentation of flows

downstream; smaller communities have water supply problems; competition

between M&I and irrigation; hydropower; tourism/recreation.

Oregon Coastal communities affected by one dry summer because of lack of storage;

power and fish/recreation; forest fires - resource and environmental loss; Federal

water/regulation claims; agriculture.

Washington Municipal and industrial water supply in western part of state. The state is

concerned about wetlands; agriculture; hydropower; tourism/recreation; navigation

Alaska Drought is not a major concern.

Hawaii Small communities have only short-term water supply. Most droughts are

short-term events; agriculture.

TABLE I (CONTINUED) GOVERNORS CONCERNS
10

PLAINS STATES: Agricultural impacts, management of the Missouri River Mainstem reservoirs,

competition between lake recreation and downstream uses, small community water supplies

North Dakota Missouri River management and planning on a basin basis; Lack of contingency

water supply plans for many cities in the state; Agriculture; Tourism/recreation.

South Dakota Primary concern is the use of Missouri River reservoirs to supply water for

downstream users. Problems in 1988 were forest fires and crop failures.

Nebraska 1989 drought affected farmers and ranchers all across state; FERC relicensing and

downstream irrigation needs; Small community M&l and an aging well system;

Instream flows/fish & wildlife.

Kansas Agriculture and M&I. Western Kansas depends on Ogallala Aquifer which faces

potential depletion; the east uses more surface water.

SOUTHWEST REGION: Agricultural impacts

Oklahoma Agriculture; Federal water/regulation claims; Tourism/recreation; Instream

flows/fish and wildlife; Hydropower.

Texas Mostly agricultural impacts; Curtailments of all other uses for domestic and

livestock uses; Irrigation and urban uses compete with recreation; Wildlife; Tourism

impacts; Drought impacts differently across the state, but is most common in

southwest central portion; Salt water intrusion.

New Mexico Only 2 towns with chronic water supply problems (most of state relies on ground

water); Major problem hampering water development is endangered species (e.g,

Animas-La Plata); Agriculture.

ROCKY MOUNTAIN WEST REGION: Agricultural impacts; competition for water between

agriculture and instream use, increasing municipal water supply needs

Montana Water shortage is persistent; Irrigators versus full stream users (especially trout

fishing); Hydropower; Effluent dilution; Federal water/regulation claims.

Wyoming Agriculture; Fires.

Colorado Agriculture; Effluent dilution; Tourism/recreation.

Utah Environmental health (drinking water) especially for small spring-dependent

communities; agriculture, especially grazing; Instream flow/fish and wildlife.

TABLE I (CONTINUED) GOVERNORS CONCERNS
11

Figure 4. Corps divisions reported what they considered to be the worst potential drought problems.
12

E. Drought Impacts That Could be

Addressed by Better Water

Management

There are conceptual problems which argued that with the enactment or

make it very difficult to provide revision of several impending

useful estimates of the damage environmental protection laws (the

droughts cause, but there are some Safe Drinking Water Act, Energy

broad conclusions which can be Efficiency Act, and Clean Water

drawn from the research and case Act), the trend towards more

study experience of the National effective use of water will continue

Drought Study. and that overall water use in the U.S.

Fifty percent of all water supply

utilities asked their customers to

reduce consumption during the 1988

drought (Moreau, 1989). In a 1990

poll, forty-one percent of U.S. expected agricultural impacts from

mayors anticipated water shortages in drought, but this was primarily in the

the next several years, caused by area of dryland farming. Agriculture

drought, growing population, water thrived despite the drought in

pollution, and leaks from distribution California until 1991; the net loss that

lines. (Conserv90, 1990). year in agricultural benefits across the

Other national studies have warned of drought is estimated to be about $80

potential water shortages by million (IWR, 94-NDS-10).

comparing the safe yield of water Navigation losses in 1988 were

systems to per capita projections of estimated to be about $1 billion

water use. (U.S. WRC, 1978). (Riebsame, 1990). Lost

Figure 5 shows that the national hydropower can often be replaced

commissions have, in the past, with power from other sources, but it

forecasted sharply increasing water is generally more expensive and

use. These forecasts were based on causes more air pollution. The 1988

fairly simple assumptions. drought caused an estimated $200

The reality is that nationally, the production (President's Interagency

quantity of freshwater withdrawn is Committee, 1988), but that cost

less than it was in 1975, although continued to climb in California.

municipal and industrial water use During the six year California

has increased somewhat. The drought, electric power customers

national studies did not take into paid an additional $3.8 billion (IWR,

account very important factors such 94-NDS-6) to replace electricity

as the impact of water pollution generated at hydropower plants with

control regulation on industrial and power generated by thermal plants.

thermoelectric power cooling uses, The increased use of fossil fuels

nor of technological developments

which made water use more efficient

in a number of industrial processes

(Stakhiv, 1989). In fact, it can be

will stay about the same or decline,

even as population grows.

Nearly half the governors asked by

the National Drought Study said they

U.S. because of the California

million increase in the cost of energy
0 

100 

200 

300 

400 

500 

600 

700 

800 

900 

1000 

1100 

1200 

1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Historic and Projected Fresh Water Withdrawals 1955-2000

Year

1128

1000

888.4

804

563

490

330

1510

NWC - National Water Commission

RFF - Resources For the Future

SSC - Sen. Select Comm

WRC - Water Resources Council

338 Bgd 339 Bgd 378 Bgd

1980

1985 1990

- USGS Estimates of Actual

Freshwater Withdrawals

(Solley 1993)

13

Figure 5. Past national assessments of future water use did not account for the effects of recent

environmental legislation. Figures at right show projections for 2000 (Stakhiv, 1989).

also worsened air pollution, and the

discharge of cooling water from the

thermal plants caused increased

stream temperatures, a hazard to

some species of fish. 

Many reaches of large rivers that

routinely produce walleye, northern

pike, and yellow perch were dry in

1988 (IWR, 93-NDS-5) and the

drought affected public use of

beaches, boat ramps, and boat docks.

Many observers felt that the most

severe drought impacts were

environmental (Riebsame, 1990;

IWR, 93-NDS-5) but the cumulative

stress on an ecosystem is difficult to

judge (Riebsame, 1990).

Several states reported that water

quality was impaired because low

flows affected their ability to dilute

effluents from wastewater treatment

plants (IWR, 91-NDS-1).

Several cautions apply in interpreting

the seriousness of these impacts:

Drought impacts are generally

reported as reductions from the

benefits a water system can support

when water is plentiful. Comparing

system outputs during droughts and

normal conditions can overstate the

problem, however, because at least

some of these temporary reductions

could be eliminated only by much
14

larger long term economic and production somewhere else in the

environmental investments in the country. The economic impacts (the

water system. Just as the impacts of reduction consumer and producer

a Thanksgiving weekend traffic jam surplus) of the drought to agriculture

do not necessarily justify a wider in California was estimated to be

highway, drought impacts do not about $276 million, but the effect

necessarily justify increases in the nationally was only $80 million

safe yield of water supply systems. because of the offsetting increases in

Figure 6 shows the "normal"

distribution of economic benefits that

the Missouri River Main Stem

reservoir system can generate during

times of normal precipitation. If long

term investments are not made, in

some cases the impacts in one

category of water use (such as

recreation or domestic consumption)

could be reduced only by imposing

greater impacts in another area of

water use. The third step in the

Drought Preparedness Study Method

(Describe the Status Quo, page 34) is

borrowed from traditional strategic

water resources planning. It is

designed to reduce confusion California drought (Table II) were

surrounding the estimates of drought small except for those related to the

impacts by forcing a comparison reduction in hydropower production,

between current and proposed and the power industry saw the

drought management alternatives, reduction as an inevitable and

rather than allowing comparison of acceptable cost of harnessing the

drought to non-drought conditions. energy in the hydrologic cycle. Most

Impacts caused by drought are damages were more important, but

difficult to separate from impacts that they were difficult to measure and

occur coincidentally during a drought. ascribe to just the drought. Despite

Because droughts continue for much all this, the drought was newsworthy

longer than floods, earthquakes, or for years and played a significant role

wind storms, external factors (such as in the passage of new state and new

recessions, market changes, land federal laws, including new federal

management, and fishing practices) legislation concerning the allocation

may also contribute to the impacts of water from the Central Valley

associated with drought. Project (IWR, 93-NDS-5). The

Regional drought impacts can be from the experience on the east coast

offset at the national level, by gains in as a result of the drought of the

other parts of the country (IWR, 94-

NDS-10). Industrial losses may also

be largely offset by production gains

elsewhere. The benefits provided by

navigation, recreation, and power

facilities may be offset somewhat, but

there is generally an economic

penalty in using alternative sources

(IWR, 94-NDS-9).

Despite the overestimation of impacts

induced by these factors, the level of

conflict and anxiety droughts

stimulate is still apt to be far greater

than the magnitude of impacts would

suggest. Economic damages from the

observers believed that environmental

California experience is not dissimilar
15

Figure 6. Average annual economic benefits from the Missouri River Main Stem Reservoirs, in millions of

dollars (Corps of Engineers, MRD, 1990).

1960's. Then President Lyndon B. 1962). Nonetheless, the actual

Johnson intervened to help avoid a economic impacts of that drought

threatened reduction of streamflow were also relatively small (Russell,

from New York to Pennsylvania that 1970).

could have caused saltwater to enter

Philadelphia's drinking water supply Observations of droughts in the

during that drought. The crisis 1980's suggest that turmoil will be

spurred changes in Federal water greater when the losses are felt more

resources planning procedures personally and when long term

(Holmes,1979), introducing the multi- entitlements to water use are

objective approach associated with threatened.

the Harvard Water Program (Maass,
16
17

III. The Current State of Water Management During Drought

A. Existing Drought Response

Plans and Measures

There were many drought plans in

place before the 1988 droughts. The State Level Responses. State

plans were prepared by different drought responses take several forms.

levels of government and by private State water law, especially in the

utilities. Plans sometimes overlapped west, helps establish priority of use

each other geographically, each plan for water (along with Federal laws

with its own assumptions, objectives, and legal concepts such as the public

and decision rules. Coordination, trust). States may also have water

collaboration, and communication quality regulatory responsibilities that

among the various entities responsible affect drought operations. 

for water management during drought

was not as effective as it could have State drought plans are a relatively

been (Grigg, 1988; GAO, 1993). new concept. In 1982, only New

The most common types of plans York, Colorado, and South Dakota

were these: had plans (Wilhite, 1990). By the

Utility Responses. A utility may be Study, more than half the states had

small or large, a public or private drought management plans (IWR, 91-

corporation or part of a city NDS-1). Some of these plans are

government. Power utilities, more concerned with impacts to

especially those that produce or dryland farming than water

market hydropower, also have to management. In general, state plans

adjust their operations during drought. are designed to monitor and distribute

About half of all urban water supplies information and make

in the county were adversely affected recommendations concerning

by the 1988 drought. About half of responses to the governor. In the

all utilities had drought contingency west, that response can include the

plans in place before 1988 (Wilhite, condemnation of water rights, but this

1990). Although they vary power has never been used (WSWC,

considerably in detail from one utility 1986).

to another, drought contingency plans 

generally follow similar forms Basin and subbasin plans. The

throughout the country, namely a Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of

sequence of increasingly stringent Reclamation, the Tennessee Valley

steps to augment supplies or reduce Authority, and the California

demands. Within this format there is Department of Water Resources, as

a wide variation in the number of well as basin authorities such as the

steps in the sequence, the kinds of

triggering indexes (if any), and

expected responses to each step.

beginning of the National Drought
18

Delaware River Basin Commission water is almost always priced

and the Susquehanna River Basin below its economic value to users or

Commission each have plans for full cost to produce;

drought response. Stimulated by

recent drought experience, all Corps information about expected

of Engineers reservoirs now have drought severity and duration is not

written drought contingency plans. readily available, so risks cannot be

The recent drought in California led quantified;

to the repeal of the Warren Act,

allowing the Bureau of Reclamation In a survey of Corps offices at the

to use its storage and conveyance beginning of the National Drought

facilities more effectively to reduce Study, the impediments to successful

drought impacts (IWR, 93-NDS-5). drought management that were rated

In the 1988 drought, TVA acted "serious" most often were the lack of

quickly to establish temporary water techniques for evaluating social,

use priorities, monitor water quality, institutional, and political impacts of

organize state task forces, and water shortages, and difficulties of

coordinate releases to supplement using those impacts as criteria in

flows in the lower Ohio and defensible management decisions.

Mississippi Rivers (IWR, 91- NDS1). The TVA Management Task Typical problems with traditional

Force facilitates information flow drought plans include (IWR, 91-

among agencies (IWR, 91-NDS-3). NDS-1):

B. Shortcomings of Existing Plans

Overall management inadequacies

identified during the first year of they are usually designed for the

study include: drought of record, without

management responsibilities for drought

problems that are physically

integrated in a river basin are they often are not understood or

fragmented by agency missions and endorsed by those who will suffer the

political boundaries; impacts of the drought

the many disciplines required to they may not sufficiently address

analyze drought problems and equity issues or economic differences

develop and institute solutions do not in the use of water

work together as well as they should;

lessons learned during ongoing indicators not related in a known way

droughts are too rarely documented, to impacts.

critically reviewed, and shared with 

other regions;

they may not recognize newer uses

of water

consideration of the rarity of that

they are often triggered by
19

they are better characterized as state regulations concerning its use.

documents rather than ways of Policy and practice include drought

behaving, and so their effectiveness contingency plans, and reservoir

diminishes as staff changes occur and allocations and operating policies. 

time passes between plan preparation

and drought.

C. Long term water allocation and feasibility studies, a conscious effort

drought is made to allocate water according to

Managing Water During Drought

(IWR, 94-NDS-8) divides the ways of

dealing with drought into strategic,

tactical, and emergency measures.

Strategic measures are long term

physical and institutional responses

such as water supply structures, water

law, and plumbing codes. Tactical

measures, like water rationing, are

developed in advance to respond to

expected short term water deficits.

Emergency measures are

implemented as an ad hoc response to

conditions that are too specific or rare

to warrant the development of

standing plans.

Estimates of the physical capacity of

systems to respond to droughts (and

the value of improving that capacity)

should be based on an evaluation of

both strategic and tactical measures.

D. Allocating water among

competing activities during

drought. 

The Report on the First Year of Study

(IWR, 91-NDS-1) described the

hierarchy of rules for making these

allocations: the U.S. Constitution,

treaty, law, policy, and practice.

Laws include state laws governing the

right to use water, and federal and

In some strategic water resources

planning efforts, such as federal

the overall goals of water

management such as environmental

quality, economic efficiency, and

equity. Methods for managing water

for multiple objectives have been

developed and tested over decades,

but that tradition resides in the

agencies that build federal dams, not

in the organizations responsible for

preparing tactical plans.

Other approaches to long term

allocation were not designed to effect

the broadest benefits or limit impacts,

making it difficult to institute drought

response measures that do.

Allocation of surface water in

western states is based on the level

and starting date of rights holders use.

Basic riparian law limits allocations

that inflict harm on other riparian

users, but it has no inherent

mechanism that encourages the

highest economic or environmental

use of the water. The right to pump

groundwater in most of the United

States has been based on the rights of

land ownership. However, there are

trends in all of these systems to

reflect concerns about the impacts of

water use.

In states in which the right to use

water is based on prior use, junior

water users may receive no water

during a drought, while senior users
200 

220 

240 

260 

280 

300 

320 

340 

360 

75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92

Water Use in the Boston Area

MWRA Deliveries 1975-1992

Legend

Year

20

Figure 7. The Greater Boston Metropolitan Area dramatically

increased the reliability of water system through conservation.

Safe yield is at about 98% reliability.

receive full deliveries, no matter the

economic, social, or environmental

consequences of that allocation. New

laws, regulations, and innovative

drought response programs have

changed this to some extent (see page

21 for a discussion of trends in water

law and allocation). Water markets

are increasingly being used to buy,

sell, and lease water rights

(MacDonnell, 1989). In a pure

market, water would be allocated

according to users willingness to pay,

a reflection of the relative worth of

the impacts of shortfalls in water

deliveries to users. But unless

represented by governmental or

private buyers, broad public values in

water use may be under-represented

in an unregulated market allocation.

E. The need for additional

structural capacity. 

The determination that more water

storage or distribution infrastructure

is needed can be realistically be made

only through regional water supply

studies, but some of the work done as

part of the National Drought Study

provides general insights on how

communities address the question.

Santa Barbara, California, tried, but

was unable, to expand its water

supplies as its population grew.

Many feared that abundant water

would draw too many people to the

area. In fact, growth continued

despite the limits on water, and when

a drought hit Santa Barbara in 1987,

the city had to use water police to

enforce up to 45% reductions in water

use. Water from the state and a new

desalting plant built at the end of the

drought eventually provided

additional capacity, but at great

expense and too late to mitigate most

of the drought impacts (IWR, 93-

NDS-5).

Long term demand management will

not necessarily reduce drought

vulnerability. It will help in the

Boston area, which had been

delivering more water than the safe

yield of its water system for many

years. ("Safe yield" is defined in

traditional probabilistic terms (page

5). MWRA defines safe yield as the

minimum amount of water that could

be delivered based on the rate that

water flowed into the system from

October 1949 to September 1980.

This period includes the 1960's

drought, the most severe drought in

Boston's record (IWR, 94-NDS-9).

During a more severe drought, the
21

water system could not deliver 300 1. Site Specific Programs

mgd.) The vigorous water

conservation campaign Boston has The trend of water law both in the

pursued reduced water use well east and the west is to apply new,

below the safe yield, which means improved approaches to specific

that drought responses will be geographic areas where problems are

necessary much less often, if at all sufficiently obvious to warrant

(Figure7) (IWR, 94-NDS-9).

Moreover, because of the size of

Boston's Quabbin Reservoir relative

to average annual inflows, water

savings can be carried over from wet

to dry years. Thus, the amount of

water in storage at the beginning of a

drought will now likely be greater

than it would have been without

conservation.

Ironically, some of the most common

long term water conservation

measures will likely increase drought

vulnerability. If the amount of water

used per person in toilets, showers,

and outdoor use is permanently

reduced to allow more people to share a fixed supply of water, increases in

efficiency will not yield as great a

savings during drought.

F. Legal and institutional issues

Law sometimes drives and sometimes constrains water management during

drought. The National Drought Study

identified the areas where the law

was changing or needed to change to

allow better water management

during drought (94-NDS-14).

Because state water laws and

regulations are so important in water

allocation decisions, conditions vary

from state to state. Nationwide,

though, eight issues were identified as

most significant.

political action. In Virginia, recent

statutes allow the State Water Control

Board to designate management areas

within which restrictions may be

imposed to meet emergency

conditions. Indiana, North Carolina,

South Carolina and New Jersey allow

restrictions on groundwater use in

specific areas. In the west, the

Arizona Groundwater Management

Act establishes special use

restrictions in certain areas.

2. Quantification of Water

Allocations

Many senior tribal and federal water

rights are recognized in principle, but

no amount has been set in an

adjudication process. Some western

states are taking steps to adjudicate

existing water rights in order to

determine how much water is really

needed. The threat of adjudication -

an expensive establishment of a fixed,

quantified right to use water - often

spurs negotiated accommodation

during drought.

3. Public Trust Doctrine and

Instream Flows

The full extent of the public interest

in water is not always recognized by

water allocation decisions. The

public trust doctrine holds that the

sovereign government retains

ultimate control of the water resource
22

(

New laws and recent court

rulings have accelerated a

trend in the West to

accommodate efficiency

and environmental quality

within the framework of

the appropriation doctrine.

(

(

In most states, allocation

of ground water is handled

differently from that of

surface water.

This complicates the

preparation of drought

plans which should

provide for most effective

use of ground and surface

water combined.

(

to serve public trust purposes, which recognizing the need to conserve

may include recreation and ecological water supplies.

values associated with instream

flows. The public trust doctrine has 5. Transbasin Diversions

been explicitly recognized in some

form in nine eastern and western Diversions are strategic measures

states. In California, a court decision designed to increase water supply

requires California water managers to reliability. During a severe drought,

take the public trust into account in if the necessary facilities exist and the

the planning and management of state law allows, temporary interbasin

water resources. diversions may be authorized to meet

In most states, instream flows are, to affected areas.

some extent, explicitly protected

(IWR, Installation Water, 1994). A A number of eastern states have

1989 survey lists eight western states altered the riparian law prohibition

with instream flow laws, and four against such diversions, allowing

which protect instream flows by transfers in certain limited situations,

means other than allocation. In the consistent with the public interest. 

east, many states have authorized

agencies to establish minimum Basic appropriation law does not limit

stream flows or water levels. transbasin diversion of water, but

4. Water Conservation diversions due to the adverse impacts

Basic appropriations doctrine law is toward allowing some

discourages water conservation, transbasin diversions, but applying

because water not put to beneficial specific restrictions on them.

use may be lost. But California and

Oregon have enacted salvage laws 6. Groundwater Law and

which allow conserved water to be Conjunctive Use Management

used for other purposes or conveyed

to a third party. Utah courts have In most states, allocation of ground

come to the same conclusion. Water water is handled differently from

marketing or water banking may also surface water (Blomquist, 1991). In

have the effect of encouraging some states there is no provision at all

conservation by allowing users to for state allocation of ground water.

transfer their conserved supplies to This may prevent the most effective

others. Some western states, such as conjunctive use of ground and surface

California, have passed new laws water for droughts. Only two states

protecting the rights of users who use in the east have expressly provided

less water during drought and transfer for conjunctive surface and

the water saved to others. Sixteen groundwater management. The main

eastern states have legislation development of conjunctive use

the needs of the most severely

several western states do limit such

to the exporting area. The trend in the

management in the west has been on
23

Figure 8. Two Six Year California Droughts of the 20th

Century

an incremental, site-specific basis,

rather than a statewide program. 

G. Lessons Learned from the

California Drought (1987-1992).

The full value of the experiences of

those who have survived a severe

drought can be realized only if the

lessons are recorded, critically

analyzed, and communicated to

others who can use the information.

The National Drought Study's

investigation of the California

drought (IWR, 93-NDS-5 and 94-

NDS-6) was designed to achieve

those ends.

The lessons learned study captured

the views of some 100 key members

of the California water community

representing 57 organizations. The

participating organizations

represented federal, state, regional,

and local water supply agencies as California drought (Figure 8), and it

well as environmental, private, and was never as intense as the 1976-1977

governmental entities that influence drought. Nonetheless, it held the

water management in the state. attention of the media and politicians

The approach to identifying the

important lessons of the drought 2. Impacts

consisted of three research activities:

literature review of published and including the California Department

unpublished documents of Water Resources (1991), it was

field interviews, and the drought were suffered by the

critical review of the draft findings problems, such as high stream

by survey participants and other water temperatures recorded in the Upper

professionals. Sacramento River, began during the

The study team identified nine the drought on the environment

lessons learned (Table IV).

1. Magnitude of this drought

The 1987-1992 drought was not "the

big one". In terms of streamflow, it

was very similar to the 1929-1934

for years. 

According to many observers,

likely that the most severe impacts of

environment. Environmental

first year of drought. The impacts of

consisted of a pronounced effect on
24

Sector Duration Loss ($) Percent Decline in

Sector Activity

Study

Agriculture 1991 250 million 1.4% CDWR, 1992

Green Industry 1991 460 million 7% NDS-10

Hydroelectric

Power

1987-1992 11 billion 39%* CDWR, 1991

U.S.E.I.A., 1993

* - the percent decline in hydroelectric power production compared to a "typical" year. Consumers spent $14.8

billion to replace this loss in hydropower with electricity produced by other sources, a net replacement cost to

consumers of $3.8 billion.

TABLE II. ESTIMATES OF REVENUE LOSSES IN THE HARDEST HIT INDUSTRIES

fisheries and aquatic resources, two areas, less than five dollars per

particularly species such as salmon. week per household in the San

The economic losses of the six-year and-a-half dollars per week in the Los

drought are difficult to quantify Angeles region. About 90% of

because only limited data are estimated costs result from replacing

available, and it is difficult to dead landscaping, purchasing water

separate drought impacts from other conserving irrigation fixtures, and

occurrences such as the simultaneous xeriscaping (IWR, 94-NDS-10).

recession in California. Table II

shows losses in revenues to

agriculture, landscaping and

hydropower. Estimates of lost

economic benefits (i.e., the reduction

of consumer and producer surplus)

were $276.3 million in agriculture in

California ($80 million nationally due

to increases in production elsewhere

in the country) and $3.8 billion in

energy because lost hydropower was

replaced by more costly sources. 

The impacts on individual households

were primarily behavioral, and to a

lesser extent economic. A small

study of residential economic impacts

in the Los Angeles and San Francisco

Bay area (IWR, 94-NDS-10)

estimated drought impacts to be about

$500 million in 1991 for each of the

Francisco Bay area and less than two3. Responses

During the first two years of the

drought, a mixture of voluntary and 

mandatory conservation in

California's cities reduced water use

from 10 to 25%. In the last three

years of the drought, urban

conservation efforts were generally

more intense. 

Urban water use adjustments included

rate increases for the industrial and

commercial sectors, and waterconserving life-style adjustments for

the residential sector. 

On February 1, 1991, Governor Pete

Wilson signed Executive Order No.

W-3-91 establishing a State Drought
25

Emergency Water Bank to meet Figure 9 Deliveries, SWP - CVP, 1987-1992

critical water needs, a major

innovation. It created a voluntary

market for the transfer of water on an

economic basis.

Because of the extensive water storage

and distribution investments in

California, the State Water Project

(SWP) and Central Valley Project

(CVP) did not reduce water deliveries

significantly until 1990 (Figure 9).

New federal and state legislation

reduced institutional impediments to

drought response. In 1991, the U.S.

Congress repealed the Warren Act,

which had prohibited the transport of

non-CVP water in Federal aqueducts,

and the California legislature passed

Water Transfers (called AB 10x),

which declared that temporary

transfers of water for drought relief

would not affect any water rights.

These change made the Water Bank

much more successful.

The most important legal change came

as the drought was ending: the CVP

Improvement Act of 1992 (U.S Public

Law 102-575), reallocates an

estimated 800,000 acre-feet of

California's developed water from

off-stream to in-stream uses. It is

unlikely the bill would have passed if

the long drought did not engage the

media and public in a debate on the

equity of California water allocation

since it was vigorously opposed by the

agricultural community. 

Many of the lessons learned are

valuable, but intangible in nature, and

can be assigned to the rubric of

wisdom and experience; that is,

mistakes that should not be repeated.

Others reaffirmed conventional

wisdom associated with decisions and

practices in previous droughts. Most

important are the many tangible, longlasting changes that were made in

California's water management

institutions as well as those of the

Federal government. Table III lists

the major federal and California laws

that were changed as a result of the

drought.

There was also an overarching

realization that California's vast water

storage and distribution network made

many of the long-term structural and

institutional changes possible. Water

banking, storage for instream flow

maintenance, conjunctive use of

ground and surface water, regional

interdependence, and economies of

scale require a water storage,

allocation and distribution system.

The existing system provided the

flexibility and resiliency to withstand

severe droughts, even in the face of

rapidly growing populace and

increasing urban and environmental

demands on a fixed supply of water.

Table IV summarizes the lessons

learned.
26

Year Month Legislation or Agreement Government

1988 Apr Drought Emergency: Declared by CDWR California

Aug Federal Disaster Assistance Act of 1988: Enables Secretary of the

Interior to assist temporary water transfers.

Federal

1989 Jan Assembly Bill 982 (AB 982): Expedites procedures for temporary

water transfers.

California

1991 Feb Executive Order W-3-91: Established a Drought Action Team, the

Water Bank, community rationing plans, urban water conservation,

and alliances with environmental groups.

California

Apr H.R. 1281 Dire Emergency Supplemental Appropriations (Pub

Law 102-27): Appropriates $25 million in drought relief funds for

Western States.

Federal

Jun 1902 Reclamation Act Revisions (H.R. 355): Repeals Warren

Act, which prohibited conveyance of nonproject water. Bars delivery

of subsidized water to farms over 960 acres. Farmers receiving

Federally subsidized water will pay delivery costs. 

Federal

Dec Memorandum of Understanding: Agreement between Urban and

Environmental interests groups. Developed "Best Management

Practices" for Urban Water Conservation.

California

Water Transfers (AB 10x): Declares temporary transfers of water

for drought relief will not affect any water rights

California

Urban Water Management Plan (AB 11x): Requires Urban water

suppliers to prepare and submit an urban water shortage contingency

plan. Non compliance disqualifies suppliers from State drought

assistance. 

California

Water Resources (AB 16x): Authorizes the State Water Resources

Control Board to adopt drought response emergency regulations for

270 days without Office of Administrative Law approval.

California

1992 Dec CVP improvement Act of 1992 (U.S. Pub Law 102-575):

Reallocates 800,000 acre-feet annually from off-stream to in-stream

uses (fish and wildlife), develops water transfer provisions. 

Federal

TABLE III. MAJOR STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION PASSED DURING THE DROUGHT
27

The complexity of impacts of a sustained drought demands more sophisticated planning. For

example, reduced hydropower production means more thermal power must be used. That

creates higher fuel costs, but it also increases air pollution and thermal pollution of streams.

Severe drought can change longstanding relationships and balances of power in the

competition for water. The CVP Improvement Act of 1992 (U.S Public Law 102-575),

which has been called one of the most important pieces of environmental legislation ever

passed, was vigorously opposed by the agricultural community. The drought created the

political support for the radical change by prompting a shift in urban support from

agriculture to the environment.

Irrigation can provide complementary environmental benefits. For example, flooded

California rice paddies were used to provide habitat for migrating wildfowl.

Drought can convince communities to accept water management options that are not

seriously considered during normal years. Santa Barbara built a desalting plant and voted to

use State Water Project supplies; neither had been accepted before the drought.

The success of drought response plans should be measured in terms of the minimization and

equitable redistribution of the impacts (as opposed to simply alleviating shortages), but there

is much to be learned about the best ways of accomplishing this goal. Most drought response

rules satisfy the rights of different users or try to reduce water deliveries equally to all users,

no matter the value of water to each user. The water bank, on the other hand, created a

market that allocated water according to its value to users.

Severe droughts can expose inadequacies in state and federal water institutions, causing

significant institutional and legal changes. The repeal of the Warren Act (federal) and the

safeguarding of water rights in water banking (state) are two significant examples of this.

Increases in water rates should precede or accompany rationing plans. California utilities

reported that water users reacted more favorably to concurrent increases and drought

declarations than to price increases announced after months of conservation. Also, since

almost all utility costs are fixed, starting price increases and curtailment at the same time

reduces revenue shortfalls.

Mass media can play a positive role in drought response, but water managers should be

involved in designing the message. The media will try to answer the public's simple

questions ("when will the drought be over?"). Water managers must accommodate that need

for bottom line information, but must assure that the media does not mislead through

oversimplification.

Market forces are an effective way of reallocating water supplies. The Water Bank was

generally considered a success by agriculture, the cities, and environmental groups.

TABLE IV. LESSONS FROM THE 1987-1992 CALIFORNIA DROUGHT
28
29

IV. A Framework for Drought Planning and Management

The first year of the drought study takes advantage of recently refined

was devoted to an analysis of national databases and a new

problems and a collaborative search statistical method that reduces the

for measures that could be probable error in estimating the

implemented to improve the nation's expected frequency of long duration

readiness for drought. The Report on droughts.

the First Year of Study (IWR, 91-

NDS-1) made thre e

recommendations:

Test and refine a model

approach to drought preparedness studies and workshops of the National

in case studies across the country. Science Foundation, the Western

The model approach was developed States Water Council, the

during the first year after water International Drought Information

agencies, stakeholders, and water Center, and the Interstate Council on

experts reported on the strengths and Water Policy all indicated that water

shortcomings of drought plans and law, the cooperation and

responses by utilities, states, and communication among government

reservoir operators. agencies, and the successes and

Produce a National Drought

Atlas. Drought plans are typically

designed in response to the drought of

record. But the eastern United States

was in crisis in the 1960's because

when a drought larger than the

drought of record occurred. The method, described on the next few

expected frequencies of droughts that

large had been, at best, very difficult

to estimate statistically. And in

practice, the data, skills, and methods

were often insufficient to develop the

estimates. The National Drought

Atlas was proposed to provide a

national reference for precipitation

and streamflow statistics. The Atlas

Conduct topical studies on issues

such as water law, institutions, and

negotiation. A review of case

histories, scholarly papers and the

failures of alternative dispute

resolution should be studied to see

how these areas could contribute to

better drought responses.

The primary contribution of the

National Drought Study is the DPS

pages. The Atlas (page 40) is a tool

that will help water managers answer

questions about the probable location,

duration and severity of future

droughts. Results of the topical and

special studies (page 43) informed

the development of the DPS method

and can be used in future drought

preparedness studies.
3 1 2

4

8

7

6

9

10

5

30

Figure 10. Case Studies Conducted During the National Drought Study

Four river basins were chosen to test and refine 1. Kanawha River DPS (WV, NC, VA

the "DPS Method" of managing water during 2. James River DPS (VA)

drought. In addition, smaller studies were 3. Marais des Cygnes-Osage Rivers DPS

conducted in the Boston and Harrisburg areas. (KA-MO)

The National Drought Study collaborated with a 4. Cedar-Green Rivers DPS (WA)

team of western universities on a gaming 5. The Boston Area (MA)

exercise in which the Colorado River States 6. Susquehanna River Basin (PA)

experienced a severe (computer simulated) 7. Colorado River (7 states)

drought. The DPS method is now being tested on 8. California (Lessons Learned, Impacts from the

low budget preparedness efforts at two Corps Drought)

lakes (9 and 10). 9. Rogue River, Lost Creek Lake (OR)

10.Youghiogheny River Lake (PA)
31

(

The first year study

recommended testing a

drought preparedness

method based on principles

for multi-objective water

resources management.

(

A. The DPS Method

Bad water management often occurs when facts are confused with values, when means are confused with

ends, and when technical judgments are made by citizens and politicians while value judgments are made

by scientists and professionals.

- William B. Lord (Water Resources Bulletin,1984)

The real need is to institutionalize drought management into improved overall water management systems.

- Conclusions from a National Science Foundation Drought Water Management Workshop,

February 1990 (Grigg, 1990)

Efforts to deal with water geographically typically encounter strong resistance from bureaucracies that are

functionally organized for different purposes.

- Peter Rogers (America's Water; 1993)

The NSF workshop participants DPS Method is not that it includes so

concluded that attempts to understand much that is new, but that it makes

and address drought problems will be practical and whole what is well

unsuccessful unless shortcomings in regarded in theory. Undergirding the

the larger context of water well established planning, evaluation,

management are also understood and and implementation steps is the

addressed. This was also one of the innovation of the shared vision

conclusions drawn by the Corps of model, a method of visualizing future

Engineers in the first year of the droughts that would have been

National Drought Study (IWR, 91- impossible before recent advances in

NDS-1), and the premise upon which personal computers. Hence, as

the DPS method was built. conceived in this study, Drought

The DPS method is derived from

techniques of multiobjective, are joint efforts requiring

multipurpose water resources intergovernmental cooperation with

planning first established during the those who have a stake in how water

Harvard Water Project and refined by is allocated and used.

experience in federal water project

planning. These well founded constitute a more general version

techniques were adapted for use in of the planning methods and

situations which the federal evaluation principles of federal water

government plays a smaller role and resources planning principles

the solutions are much more likely to (U.S.WRC, 1983). 

be non-structural. The strength of the

Preparedness Studies:
32

1. Build a team and identify problems.

2. Develop objectives and metrics for evaluation.

3. Describe the status quo; that is, what will happen in future droughts

if the community does nothing more to prepare itself?

4. Formulate alternatives to the status quo.

5. Evaluate alternatives and develop study team recommendations.

6. Institutionalize the plan.

7. Exercise and update the plan and use it during droughts.

TABLE V. THE SEVEN STEPS OF THE DROUGHT PREPAREDNESS METHOD

accommodate the extensive important municipalities are

responsibilities of state, regional, and adequately represented on the

local entities in drought situations. working group, as well as important

are results oriented. Reports and interest groups. The DPS approach to

written plans are by-products of drought management is distinguished

behavioral changes that reduce by being a joint collaborative

environmental, economic, and social approach by Federal and non-Federal

impacts from drought. agencies, designed to recognize the

take advantage of experience, levels of government in solving the

research, and expertise from across complex problems of drought

the country. management. A DPS is conducted

 integrate long and short term

responses. 

 are dynamic, because plans are

exercised in regularly conducted

virtual droughts

Although a DPS is a joint cooperative

effort between interested parties, it

needs a sponsor to provide funding,

and a leader to initiate it. The leader

must assure that appropriate state

officials, regional agencies, and

industrial, commercial, and public

inherent responsibility of different

through seven steps (Table V),

applied in an iterative fashion.

Step 1: Build a team and identify

problems.

There is a natural, physical

integration of water problems in a

river basin; the challenge is to

assemble a problem solving team that

can work with a corresponding

wholeness. The first step in the DPS

method was designed to overcome

two common shortcomings in water
33

management: the separation between unrepresentative of the public that

stakeholders and the problem solving will be affected by drought. 

process, and the subdivision of

natural resources management by the more the public is actually

political boundaries and limited involved in the study process,

agency missions. the more effort may be required to

In a DPS, water managers and coordinate the work of public task

stakeholders work together to specify forces.

problems and develop solutions.

Compared to the more common the misapplication of the

approach in which water managers techniques of group process can result

develop plans and then present them in the use of stakeholder opinions on

to stakeholders in public meetings, issues that should be addressed by

this collaborative approach: experts.

harnesses the knowledge and broader citizen participation

creativity of stakeholders near the increases the risk that planning will

beginning of problem solving efforts; be slowed or stopped.

 makes it more likely that there may be insufficient interest in

stakeholders can take actions these problems between droughts to

unilaterally to reduce their drought attract stakeholders to a planning

vulnerability; effort.

builds broader, deeper stakeholder In the DPS, a simple approach called

support for water management plans. "circles of influence" (see page 47)

Water managers do not surrender representativeness, and it worked

their responsibility or authority well. This approach is built on the

because of this collaboration. In fact, common themes in three very

water management decisions are less different examples of organizational

likely to be challenged (and effectiveness (none water related) and

overridden) if managers develop is consistent with research on how

public understanding, input, and people work together well. 

support prior to the drought. 

Broadening study participation may political entity whose responsibilities

also pose some problems: include all the problems a region will

 money spent on public DPS team constitutes a new,

involvement is not available for integrated community that more

technical studies. closely mirrors the integrated nature

 the "public" that gets involved in

planning may be self-selected and

provide technical training and to

was used to balance effectiveness and

Rarely will there be one agency or

face during future droughts. The

of the problems.
34

(

The success of drought

response plans should be

measured in terms of the

minimization and equitable

redistribution of the

impacts of shortages, as

opposed to the shortages

themselves

Lessons Learned from the

California Drought (1987-

1992) (NDS-5)

(

Step 2: Develop planning objectives

and metrics for evaluation of

alternatives

A successful DPS team will reduce navigation depths can be maintained

drought impacts through the at 8 feet, or the percentage of time

implementation of their that surface storage can supply water

recommended measures. But what at the rate of 300 million gallons per

makes one plan better than another? day (see page 5 for an explanation of

And what criteria will those who "safe yield" at a stated reliability).

must approve the plan demand that it Performance measures track success

meet? Until the DPS team identifies in meeting individual planning

the criteria that define a successful objectives, but are less helpful in

study, they cannot manage to discriminating between alternatives

succeed. that help one objective but hurt

Developing good planning objectives management improve one

early is paradoxically the most performance measure at the expense

important and most often ignored step of another, alternatives can be

in the planning process. How can a compared using the commensurable

team manage to achieve objectives if

they have not agreed on what those

objectives are? The DPS method

uses five management parameters

including the criteria decision makers dollars. Environmental and

will use in approving or rejecting new sociological effects are also

plans, planning objectives,

constraints, measures of

performance, and environmental,

economic, and social effects.

Planning objectives are concise,

formally structured statements which

explain how and when a study will try

to affect a specific water use in a

specific place (for example, "increase

the reliability of recreation on Lake

Lanier during drought"). Constraints

are natural system or legal boundaries

that limit operational alternatives,

such as required minimum flows.

Performance measures and effects

are quantified indications of how well

an alternative drought response plan

addresses the decision criteria,

planning objectives and constraints.

Performance measures are statistics

concerning how often the system will

achieve a designated state: for

example; the percentage of time that

another. When changes in water

effects of plans. In water resources

management, the most common

commensurate outputs are economic

efficiency and income, measured in

commonly grouped, although there is

no metric for either group that is

equivalent to dollars.

Step 3: Describe the status quo

The status quo is simply a collective

best estimate of what future droughts

will be like without changes brought

about by the DPS. In other words, it

postulates a "business as usual"

approach to problem solving and

decision making. But the status quo

does not mean that nothing is being

done. In fact it must include all

change expected outside the DPS,

such as the effects of national

legislation or recent water price

increases. Figure 16 shows, for
35

example, that new plumbing codes status quo, measuring how well they

will substantially reduce water use, meet the objectives developed in step

but an additional rebate program will 2. Alternatives that do not measure up

have little additional effect. The are eliminated or redesigned in an

costs of the rebate program should be interactive process, until the team is

compared to the improvement over ready to recommend a plan to

the status quo, which includes water decision makers.

reductions caused by the change in

plumbing codes. This step is designed to produce a

The status quo serves as the baseline effective, defensible fashion. It

from which to measure the strengths begins with a quick screening of

and weaknesses of alternative drought many alternatives using decision

responses (using the parameters criteria, planning objectives, and

agreed to in the previous step), and a constraints, and concludes with more

consensus view of the problems detailed evaluation and tradeoff

stakeholders will face if they fail to according to performance measures

agree on an alternative. This and economic, environmental, and

collective agreement on what the social effects using the shared vision

future holds unless the DPS team can model.

find a better alternative is captured in

a shared vision model.

Step 4: Formulate Alternatives

The DPS method assures that the closely mirrors the integrated nature

formulation of alternatives is of the problemshed. But as the team's

thorough, efficient, and directly planning work nears completion, it

related to the planning objectives. must find a way to institutionalize

The procedures for this step are approach so that it can outlive the

designed to reduce the risk that a DPS DPS for use in the next drought. To

team will overlook good alternatives, do that, decision makers must

to assure that alternatives are approve the recommendations of the

formulated in an appropriate level of DPS team and agree to change water

detail, and to recognize the influence management institutions.

of group dynamics on the formulation

of alternatives. The attention early in the study

Step 5: Evaluate alternatives and

develop study tea m

recommendations

In this step, the team compares

proposed alternatives against the

study team recommendation in a cost

Step 6: Institutionalize the plan

The DPS team constitutes a new,

integrated community that more

that integrated problem solving

process to the criteria that decision

makers would use before accepting a

recommendation from the study team

is designed to minimize reformulation

delays at this step.
36

The DPS will not be sufficient in Because drought response plans

itself to effect some become outdated as water uses

recommendations, such as changes in change in nature and quantity,

the authorized purposes of existing exercises can also stimulate useful

Corps projects. The parties present updates. 

can agree to support such a move; but

the official action must follow the During the conduct of the four

appropriate process. demonstration studies, Dr. Richard

In many cases either a formal or researcher and the developer of the

informal agreement between state and simulation model used in the first

Federal agencies will be required. Potomac River drought exercise,

Step 7: Exercise, update and use the

plan 

It is common wisdom that responses much more realistically than ever

to emergencies such as fires, before. He suggested that the

earthquakes, even floods will not

work well unless they are exercised

before the emergency. Perhaps

because the onset of droughts is so

much slower, "exercises" for drought

responses are very unusual. But like

other emergencies, drought plans are

largely behavioral, and their success

depends on people understanding

their role, and knowing how their

actions fit into a larger response. 

Palmer, a University of Washington

suggested that the shared vision

models and close collaboration

among stakeholders in a DPS would

make it possible to simulate a drought

resultant Virtual Drought Exercise

could be used in the years after a

tactical drought plan had been

designed to exercise a regional

drought preparedness strategy. This

would let agencies address new water

uses and train new staff and

stakeholders. 
Production 

Reservoir Releases

Stream Flow

Water Supply

37

READ (5,1000) SUPPROCW

1000 FORMAT (180F5.3)

DO I=1,180

IF SUPPROCW<20000 GO TO 20

IF SUPPROCW<40000 GO TO 30

PRODUCT(I)=80000

Figure 11. Traditional models are built from

words assembled in a special computer

language, so they can be understood (and hence

reviewed and trusted) only by those who know

the language.

Figure 12 Shared vision models represent complex systems using a combination of diagrams and

mathematical relationships. This diagram shows that production is a function of water supply.

B. New Tools for the DPS Method

The DPS method takes advantage of several innovations developed in parallel during the National Drought

Study: the shared vision model; Virtual Drought Exercises; the National Drought Atlas; water conservation

management; Trigger Planning; and decision maker interviews and circles of influence. These are

described on the following pages.

1. Shared Vision Models and Traditional Models

The phrase "shared vision" was applied to the computer

simulation models used in the National Drought Study

DPS's because the models were built, reviewed, and

tested collaboratively with all stakeholders. The

models represent not only the water system, but the

effects of that system on society and the environment.

Shared vision models do not necessarily take the place

of existing, specialized models; they take advantage of

new, user-friendly, graphical simulation software to

bridge the gap between those specialized water models

and the human decision making processes.
 0

140000 Water Suppy Production

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

90000

100000

110000

 0

 0

 0

40000

80000

Water Supply

80000

80000

80000

80000

80000

80000

80000

38

Figure 13. Mathematical relationships can be defined using graphs and equations in another "level" of

the shared vision model accessed by pointing and "clicking" on an object with the computer mouse. 

Because software is available now that is much more user friendly, simulation models of water systems

can be built so that stakeholders and decision makers can use, understand, and trust them. This means that

models can:

 be built much more quickly and inexpensively.

 be reviewed and tested for errors by more people.

 more easily be designed to suit the people who will use the models, rather than computer experts.

 be modified easily and quickly, and so are well suited to use in negotiating operating decisions after

a broad group of people have examined a range of possible forecasts and plans.

 simulate both the hydrology and the important needs of water users.

In the language of diplomats and negotiators, the shared vision model becomes a single text negotiating

reference, representing a set of assumptions that stakeholders agree on. 
39

2. Virtual Drought Exercises

A Virtual Drought Exercise is a the virtual drought; that is, data

realistic simulation of a drought using synthesized for the exercise,

the shared vision model. Anyone including forecasts, initial storage

who has been close to the amounts, inflows, and demand

management of water during a variables. These data are not shared

drought knows that it is an with the participants except as they

extraordinary learning experience. are revealed during the unfolding of

The only problem is that the learning the virtual events.

comes at the time of the disaster.

Virtual Drought Exercises allow two versions of the shared vision

water managers and user model, modified for this specific

representatives to simulate that application. The first is used by the

experience without the risk associated facilitator to track the performance of

with real droughts. the system as decisions are made.

Virtual Drought Exercises can be to estimate the impacts from

used to exercise, refine and test plans, alternative management decisions.

train new staff, and update plans to

reflect new information. A Virtual The first virtual drought was held in

Drought Exercise (VDE) is composed Tacoma, Washington on August 4,

of: 1993. The exercise was configured

a facilitator, to explain the rules of decision makers and stakeholders

the VDE and manage the time spent played their assigned roles in

on negotiations. developing decisions on reservoir

 participants, namely the people requirements, and the initiation of

who would represent water agencies conservation efforts. It was well

and stakeholder groups during a received by the participants and can

drought be used as a model for other regions

 a member of the press or a public

affairs specialist to represent the

needs and influence of the media

The second is used by the participants

as a one day workshop in which

releases, minimum flow

interested in exercising water plans.
40

3. The National Drought Atlas

One of the problems identified during probability of occurring (Maass,

the first year of the National Drought 1962).

Study was the difficulty regional

planners had in estimating the For example. record low precipitation

probable severity and duration of in the early and middle 1960's created

ongoing or future droughts. a drought emergency in New England

This is a problem during an ongoing had designed water systems on the

drought, because the best response to drought of record, but the 1960's

a short drought is usually not a good drought was more severe (Holmes,

response for a long drought. For 1979).

example, a rapid release of stored 

water might completely eliminate the There is no inherently correct level of

shortfalls of a short drought, while long term protection or tactical

depleting storage and leaving the response. Communities must assume

region more vulnerable to the effects risks in making tradeoffs between the

of a long drought. frequency and severity of economic

There are similar problems when Atlas provides probabalistic

planners do not know the probable information to inform those risk

severity or duration of future assessments. The information

droughts. Planners often measure the includes the expected frequency,

performance of tactical and strategic duration and severity of droughts in

plans by simulating their operation terms of precipitation and

using precipitation and runoff streamflow. An analysis of recorded

recorded during historic droughts, Palmer Drought Index levels is also

either the worst on record, or the included. 

worst in recent memory. Analysts can use the Atlas to help

The primary disadvantage to this

approach has been the inability to rarity of historic droughts,

estimate the probability of a similar providing an objective measure of

drought occurring in the future. If the confidence in the use of the historic

most severe droughts on record are drought to test drought plans. 

very unlikely to reoccur during the

period planned for, then planners may expected probability of various

expend too many natural and levels of precipitation over a 1 to 60

economic resources by designing month period, which can help provide

systems or plans to eliminate impacts a probabilistic answer to the

that are unlikely to happen. If the inevitable question, "When will the

worst historic drought is fairly likely drought be over?"

to reoccur, then planners may endorse

systems and plans that are inadequate The Atlas was a collaborative effort

for droughts that have a reasonable headed by the Corps of Engineers in

and the mid-Atlantic states. Planners

and environmental impacts. The

estimate the:
41

cooperation with Miami University are based on a regional frequency

(Ohio), the National Climate Data analysis of the 1,119 stations in the

Center (NCDC), and International Historical Climatology Network

Business Machines (IBM). The Atlas (HCN). The HCN is composed of

was based on recently refined verified data from stations with long

national precipitation and streamflow historic records; it was developed by

data sets. The statistics were the National Oceanographic and

generated using a method (referred to Atmospheric Administration

as l-moment analysis) developed at (NOAA) for climate change studies.

IBM by J.R. Hosking and J.R. Wallis

that permits greater confidence in

estimating drought frequencies from

the relatively small number of

droughts for which there are

precipitation and streamflow records.

The Atlas includes statistics in three

categories:

Precipitation. The percentage of site (rather than regional) frequency

normal precipitation that can be analysis for a subset of the Historical

expected for a variety of durations Climatological Data Network

and starting months at various (HCDN), developed by the U.S.

frequencies for 111 "clusters" Geological Survey.

covering the contiguous 48 states.

Clusters are groups of gages that

share the same statistical properties.

Population statistics properly

developed for clusters of similar

stations have been shown to be more

reliable than population statistics

developed independently for each

individual station. 

The Atlas provides the percent of

normal precipitation that can be

expected in each cluster for

frequencies of from once every 5 to

once every 50 years. The durations

are 1, 2, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 60

months. For durations of 1, 2, 3 and

6 months, percentage of normal

precipitation is provided for each

starting month from January through

December. The values are provided

in tables and graphs. These statistics

Streamflow. The percentage of

normal streamflow that can be

expected at various frequencies for

durations of up to 12 months at

individual gaging stations in the 48

contiguous states. The frequencies

are the same as for precipitation.

These statistics represent the

estimated population based on an at-

Palmer Index. The Palmer

Drought Severity Index, is used by

some States as an indicator of drought

severity, and is often the signal to

begin or discontinue elements of a

drought contingency plan. The

Palmer Index was first calculated on

a regular basis in 1965, as a means of

providing a single index of drought

severity. The index is essentially an

index of soil moisture. The Atlas

tabulates the percentage of the

historic record during which the

Palmer Drought Severity Index

(PDSI) fell below -3, -4, and -5. The

PDSI was calculated at 1,135

precipitation stations, including all of

the HCN stations. These are at-site,

sample statistics.
42

To aid the user in applying these

statistics, the Atlas includes:

a map of the U.S. showing average

annual precipitation. The map is the

first national precipitation map since

1962, and is based on the HCN.

A United States map showing the

precipitation clusters

A United States map showing the

precipitation stations.
43

Figure 14. Forecasts of employment by industry are

combined with information on water use per employee in

each industrial category to forecast industrial water use. 

Figure 15. Disaggregated water use forecast algorithms

rely on forecasts of explanatory variables, such as the types

of housing people will occupy.

4. Managing Water Conservation

The populations of many cities in the

western United States are growing

very rapidly at a time when the

economic and environmental costs of

developing new sources of water

supply have never been more difficult

to justify. Because water use

forecasts drive the size and timing of

new water supply projects, urban

water planners have turned to

disaggregated forecasting systems to

improve the accuracy of their

forecasts. Studies have long shown

that the amount of water a city will

use depends not just on the

population, but the types of industry

and housing, its climate, regulations,

and the personal wealth of its citizens

(Linaweaver, 1966). A

disaggregated water use forecast is

based on independent forecasts of

these explanatory variables. The

Metropolitan Water District of

Southern California, Phoenix, and

Las Vegas have used IWR-MAIN, a

computerized water use forecasting

system (IWR, 94-NDS-11), and other

cities, such as Seattle, have used

similar disaggregated water use

forecasting models to more reliably

estimate the need for additional

supplies. 

But many cities are attempting to

reduce per capita consumption of

water use to avoid or delay the

development of new supplies.

The population of the city of Boston

is expected to grow only 4%, from

541,434 to 563,345 during the period

1990-2020. Like many western

cities, the Massachusetts Water

Resources Authority will use IWR-
44

Figure 16. City of Boston water use will decline mainly

because of national plumbing code changes and higher

water rates. (Note: Figure 5 shows water use for the

Greater Boston Metropolitan Area).

MAIN based forecasts to assure that

the Boston area has adequate future

water supplies. But MWRA and the

National Drought Study used a new

version (6.0) of IWR-MAIN for a

new purpose: to begin to manage the

investments MWRA makes in water

conservation (IWR, 94-NDS-11).

The feature of IWR-MAIN 6.0 that

makes it a valuable aid in managing

conservation programs is a

supplemental forecasting algorithm

based on the number and types of

water fixtures that will be in use over

time under different scenarios. 

In this study, modelers estimated the

current mix of non-conserving,

standard and conserving toilets,

showerheads and faucet aerators in

Boston. For toilets, for example,

these categories correspond to 5.5,

3.5, and 1.6 gallons per flush fixtures. increases Boston levied from 1990 to

Water use was then forecast under 4 1992 is shown. During that period,

assumptions. In the baseline, the water and wastewater prices were

savings expected from leak detection raised 33.9 percent in real terms. 

and repair was the only mitigating

factor. Passive conservation shows With a complete set of these

the reduction of water use because incremental forecasts, an agency can

fixtures that meet the requirements of determine the combination of

the Energy Policy Act of 1992 will be measures that will produce a desired

used in remodeling and new reduction in water use at the lowest

construction. That law specifies the cost. The joint use of IWR-MAIN

maximum water use for fixtures and the Trigger Planning STELLA

manufactured after January 1994: 1.6 II® model (see page 46) provides a

gallon per flush toilets, 2.5 gallon per rigorous and systematic framework

minute showerheads, and 2.75 gallons which can be used to evaluate the

per minute faucets. necessity and cost-effectiveness of

Active conservation includes passive

savings, plus the amount saved by

offering rebates to encourage people

to replace inefficient water fixtures

before they fail. Finally, the water

use reduction expected with price

demand and supply measures.
45

Figure 17. Trigger planning keeps economic and

environmental investments in water supply low while

avoiding catastrophic water supply failures.

5. Trigger Planning

The Massachusetts Water Supply

Authority, the Water Supply Citizens

Advisory Committee (WSCAC) and

the Corps of Engineers collaborated

on a National Drought Study project

called "Trigger Planning".

Trigger Planning uses the DPS

method and a shared vision model to

quantitatively link strategic and

tactical plans. This is done through the

use of an explicit set of performance

criteria or targets which "trigger" the

nature and timing of decisions to

implement strategic plans.

Trigger Planning promises greater

flexibility than traditional planning.

Commitments to invest economic and

environmental resources in water

supply solutions can be made MWRA now defines this as the time

incrementally, in time, but "just in when forecasted use reaches a

time". When a long term forecast specified percentage of the system's

shows the need for new supplies, safe yield (the supply of water that

promising alternatives may progress could be sustained by the system

through the design, environmental throughout the historic record,

impact assessment, and including the drought of record). The

implementation phases while leading trigger points are fixed in time by

indicators continue to be monitored. backtracking from the time the system

The leading indicators include the trigger points indicate when activities

conditions of local sources, proposed to investigate, design and implement

projects, laws, regulations and each alternative must be initiated in

agreements, watershed conditions and order to prevent the system from

operational procedures, precipitation reaching the critical state.

and streamflow, public views, and

building permits. These leading Estimates of critical points and trigger

indicators are used to forecast points will be readjusted to reflect this

scenarios describing future system updated information. These estimates,

supply and demand conditions, which in turn, may impact the decision to

are in turn used to estimate when the proceed with the implementation of an

system is likely to reach a critical alternative. In this way,

point of unacceptable performance. implementation will be postponed as

will reach a critical state. These

late into the time horizon as possible.
46

(

When existing

organizations are too

restrictive to deal with

water issues in a holistic

way, circles of influence

can create new ways for

people to interact, without

destroying the old

organizations or their

responsibilities and

advantages.

(

Figure 18. Circles of Influence

6. Involving the Public and Decision Makers

Decision making should include all affected interest groups.

- Long's Peak Working Group (America's Waters: A New Era of Sustainability, 1992)

The goals for water management are

set by the public through its elected

officials. These goals are translated

into practical guidance by policy

makers in water management

agencies. But because droughts may

not reoccur for years, or even

decades, a gap may develop between

the practical effects of those policies

and the original intent of lawmakers

and the public. Stakeholders in

particular may not be aware of how Circle A encompasses the traditional

system operating policies will affect experts concerned with study

the uses of water important to them. management and technical analysis.

The National Drought Study The makeup of this circle is more

sponsored research and case study likely to be multi-agency than some

demonstrations of methods that would traditional technical study teams,

allow the parties to drought conflicts where one agency performed the

to work better together. study and other agencies reviewed its

a. Circles of Influence

"Circles of influence" were used to one representative from each major

balance effectiveness and the stakeholder class (such as industrial

representativeness of participation. users). Team members in Circle B

This approach was built on the may review and revise draft papers

common themes in three very from Circle A, and act as the points

different examples of organizational of contact between the study and their

effectiveness (none water related) and industries and interest groups. 

is consistent with research on how

people work together well. Circle C is much larger than B

DPS team members can belong to from each major stakeholder,

one of three circles, A through C. management agency, and each

Each successive circle from A advocacy group, rather than one from

through C has broader representation each class. Circle C may meet twice

but less personal involvement. a year in fairly formal workshop

results.

Circle B includes Circle A as well as

because it includes a representative

settings.
47

Regional decision makers (agency between political and agency

heads and elected officials) constitute perspectives on water management

a fourth circle, "D". They were (94-NDS-14). In two DPS's, ACIR

involved formally at the beginning asked political experts to determine

and end of the DPS's, and were kept what elected officials expected from

informed during the study through drought preparedness efforts. For the

their study representatives. James River DPS, the focus was on

For the most part, stakeholders and policy for Virginia. For the Seattle

decision makers outside Circle A area, the focus was on Seattle's

communicated with the members of perspective on regional water

"A" in forums that existed before the management. In both cases, the

DPS, thus lowering the administrative result was valuable to the DPS staff

burden on the study. These and also provided new insights to

connections were usually through officials concerned.

common workplaces, related work

groups, or professional organizations.

The connections were based on a

combination of trust and

communication. Individuals who Differences in backgrounds, values,

were able to work on the study, or and agency traditions can reduce the

who had not yet come to trust the effectiveness of drought

process were free to move into the preparedness. In the National

central circles, and vice versa. While Drought Study, the team

existing institutions may be too collaboration on the development of

restrictive to deal with water issues in the shared vision models gave team

a holistic way, the circles created a members a chance to appreciate and

new ways for people to interrelate understand each others perspectives.

and interact, without destroying the

old institutions, their responsibilities

or advantages.

b. Decision Maker Interviews

Unless decision makers, including process which use a variety of

politicians are involved from the methods developed in legal, labor

beginning, water managers have no relations, and other fields.The Corps

assurance that their recommendations has led efforts to use ADR in water

will be implemented. These are resources management. Managing

social choices and they involve Water for Drought (IWR, 94-NDS-8)

politics (Dickey, 1993). includes an annex describing the

The U.S. Advisory Commission on and how they can be used in

Intergovernmental Relations (ACIR) conjunction with a shared vision

helped two DPS's bridge the gap model.

the development of a state water

c. Shared Vision Models and

Collaboration

d. ADR

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR)

is the name given to non-litigious

interventions in the decision making

range of dispute resolution processes
48

C. Summary results of the major field studies (DPS's)

The DPS method has been tested and and the process. The participants in

refined in four major case studies this study used their shared vision

across the country. Each case study model in August 1994 to negotiate

was selected to represent different Corps reservoir releases, Tacoma

physical conditions and water withdrawals for municipal water and

management concerns. Each study increased flows to facilitate salmon

provided different insights and migration and spawning (Corps of

lessons, forcing the study team to Engineers, 1994). Acceptance of the

confront realistic planning situations method on the Cedar River has come

and constraints. The results, as a more slowly, but there is

consequence, were mixed. In each demonstrable evidence that the DPS

case, however, the DPS approach method will strongly influence future

contributed to a substantial water management processes there,

improvement in the methods and too. The James River DPS (Virginia)

mechanisms available to the team considered two alternatives to

participants before the study. the status quo: a new drought

The Kanawha River DPS (in West including Norfolk, and a state water

Virginia, Virginia, and North policy for Virginia. The DPS team

Carolina) produced agreement on helped clarify the advantages of a

new water management procedures state water policy, which was being

that will increase water quality and actively considered by the Virginia

recreation during future droughts Assembly towards the conclusion of

without hurting other water that study, but did little to reduce the

management purposes. The new near term vulnerability of the five

method is expected to save millions city region. Nonetheless, the Virginia

of dollars in tourism revenue during Department of Environmental Quality

the next severe drought. has adopted many of the features of

The Cedar and Green River DPS resources planning.

(Seattle-Tacoma, Washington)

involved two neighboring river The Marais des Cygnes-Osage DPS

basins, each with different primary had a promising beginning, but the

management agencies, but many of completion of the study was delayed

the same stakeholders. Participants on when staff was reassigned to

the Green River portion of the study Missouri flooding problems, so

have integrated the DPS methods into results are not available at this time.

the general practice of water The DPS method helped Kansas and

management, reducing the amount of Missouri understand how their two

time required to negotiate water dissimilar water management systems

management decisions, and the would work together in a severe

confidence and trust in the decisions drought. Kansas is an appropriation

response plan for a five city area

the DPS method for state water
49

state with prioritized water rights and would otherwise have occurred in a

highly managed "assurance districts", drought. The case studies were

and Missouri is the downstream state, chosen because they represented

subject to riparian water law. This difficult challenges, so the limited

study should be completed late in success on the James and the Cedar

1994. still represents an improvement on

The numerous large and small The shortcomings in those

successes in all the case studies offer experiments were used to refine the

convincing proof that the method can study method.

reduce the conflicts and impacts that

what otherwise would have occurred.
50
51

Bibliography

Blomquist, W., 1991. Coordinating Water Resources in the Federal System: The Groundwater-Surface

Water Connection. U.S. Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. Report A-118. 

California Department of Water Resources, 1992. Economic Impact of Drought on California Agriculture

in 1991. Division of Planning, Internal note. Sacramento, CA. July 1992.

Conserv90 poll, June 1990. Conserv90 was a conference on water conservation co-sponsored by the

American Society of Civil Engineering, American Water Works Association, American Water Resources

Association, and the National Water Well Association. The cities polled were Los Angeles, Pittsburgh,

Chicago, San Francisco, Phoenix, Boston, Seattle, Little Rock, Sand Diego, Salt Lake City, Reno, Trenton,

Santa Barbara, Virginia Beach, Macon, Columbus, Albuquerque, El Paso, Tampa, Des Moines, Louisville,

and Charleston, WV. 

Eastman, P., 1987. "Metropolitan Washington Area Water Supply," in Social and Environmental

Objectives in Water Resources Planning and Management. W. Viessman and K. Schilling, (eds.) pp. 55-

71; Proceedings of the Engineering Foundation Conference, Santa Barbara, CA, May 1986; American

Society of Civil Engineers, New York, New York. 

Foster, H. and P. Rogers, 1988. Federal Water Policy: Towards an Agenda for Action. Discussion Paper.

John F. Kennedy School of Government. Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

Grigg, N. and E. Vlachos, November, 1988. Drought Water Management, Proceedings of a National

Workshop, Washington, D.C.; A Report for the Natural and Man-Made Hazards Mitigation Program of

the National Science Foundation.

Holmes, B., 1979. History of Federal Water Resources Programs and Policies, 1961-1970. U.S.

Department of Agriculture. Miscellaneous Publication No. 1379.

Lee, Kai, 1992. Compass and Gyroscope. Island Press. Washington, D.C.

Linaweaver, F.P. Jr., J. Beebe, F. Skrivan, 1966. Data Report of the Residential Water Use Research

Project, Johns Hopkins University, Department of Environmental Engineering Science, Baltimore, MD.

Long's Peak Working Group; America's Waters: A New Area of Sustainability; Report of the Long's Peak

Working Group on National Water Policy; The Natural Resources Law Center; University of Colorado,

Boulder; December, 1992.

Maass, A., 1962. Design of Water Systems; Harvard University Press; Cambridge, MA.

Lord, William B., 1984. "Institutions and Technology: Keys to Better Water Management." Water

Resources Bulletin, 20(5): 653, October.

MacDonnell, L., 1989. "Recent Developments in Water Marketing and Water Transfers," Water

Resources Update. vol. 79; pp. 19-21. The Universities Council on Water Resources.
52

Monberg, H., 1994. Western Resources Wrap-Up Series XXXII, No. 3 Date: 1-20-94. A recent example

of conflicting environmental objectives. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) may not be able

to preserve an endangered species such as the Colorado River humpback chub, generally regarded as a trash

fish, if it and/or its habitat are in conflict with another endangered species, such as the bald eagle. The

conflict between types of endangered species is found in the draft environmental impact statement (EIS)

released on January 6, 1994 on the operation of the Glen Canyon Dam on the Colorado River in Northern

Arizona.

Moreau, David and Keith Little, 1989; Managing Public Water Supplies During Droughts; Experiences

in the United States in 1986 and 1988; Water Resources Research Institute Report No. 250; University of

North Carolina.

President's Interagency Drought Policy Committee, 1988. The Drought of 1988; Final Report on the

President's Interagency Drought Policy Committee; U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

Riebsame, W., S. Chagnon, and T. Karl, 1990. Drought and Natural Resources Management in the United

States; Impacts and Implications of the 1987-1990 Drought. Natural Hazards Research and Applications

Information Center, University of Colorado, Boulder. p. 54.

Rogers, Peter, 1993. America's Water: Federal Roles and Responsibilities. The Twentieth Century Fund.

MIT Press. Cambridge, MA.

Russell, C.S., D.G. Arey, and R.W. Kates, 1970. Drought and Water Supply; Implications of the

Massachusetts Experience for Municipal Planning. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Stakhiv, Eugene Z.; Achieving Social and Environmental Objectives in Water Resources Planning: Theory

and Practice; Social and Environmental Objectives in Water Resources Planning and Management; 1986;

Proceedings of and Engineering Foundation Conference sponsored by ASCE; Edited by Warren Viessman,

Jr. and Kyle E. Schilling; p. 107-125.

Stakhiv, Eugene Z., James R. Hanchey, 1989. Policy Implications of Climate Change. Report on the First

U.S.- Canada Symposium on Impacts of Climate Change on the Great Lakes Basin; Joint Report No. 1

of the U.S. National Climate Program and the Canadian Climate Centre. National Climate Program

Office/NOAA, Rockville, MD.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1990. Draft Phase I Report for the Review and Update of the Missouri

River Mainstem Water Control Manual, Missouri River Division; Omaha, Nebraska.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1994. "Weekly Summary for the Period 8/26/94 - 9/2/94". Engineering

Division, Hydrology & Hydraulics Branch, Seattle District; Seattle, Washington.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1991. National Study of Water Management During Drought; Report on

the First Year of Study. IWR 91-NDS-1. The analysis of existing drought response mechanisms was based

on Corps reviews of state, urban, and Corps reservoir drought contingency plans, and independent reviews

of drought plans, especially Moreau and Little (1989) (above); the U.S. General Accounting Office, June
53

1989, "Corps of Engineers' Drought Management of Savannah River Projects", Report to the Honorable

Butler Derrick, House of Representatives, GAO/RCED-89-169, and The National Regulatory Research

Institute, 1989; Compendium on Water Supply, Drought, and Conservation. Prepared by Janice A. Beecher

and Ann P. Laubach. 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1991. The National Study of Water Management During Drought; A

Research Assessment. Prepared by Planning and Management Consultants Ltd. IWR Report 91-NDS-3

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1994. The National Drought Atlas. Developed by the University of Miami

(Ohio); the National Data Climate Center (NOAA), and IBM's Thomas J. Watson Research Center for the

Institute for Water Resources. IWR Report 94-NDS-4.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1994. The National Study of Water Management During Drought; Lessons

Learned from the California Drought (1987-1992) (IWR Report 93-NDS-5).

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1994. The National Study of Water Management During Drought; Lessons

Learned from the California Drought (1987-1992) - Executive Summary. IWR Report 94-NDS-6.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1994 (in preparation). Trigger Planning for the MWRA Service Area. IWR

93-NDS-9.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, (in preparation). Human and Environmental Impacts: California Drought

1987-92. IWR NDS-94-10.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources, 1994. Water Use Forecasts for the Boston

Area Using IWR-MAIN 6.0. IWR 94-NDS-11.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources, (in preparation). Installations Water

Resources Planning Series for Fixed Army Installations, Volume III, Summary of Water Rights, State

Laws and Administrative Procedures.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources, (in preparation). Governance and Water

Management During Drought (IWR Report 94-NDS-14). Prepared by the Advisory Commission on

Intergovernmental Relations (ACIR). NDS-14 addresses the general subject of technical water

management within the American democratic process. It includes papers on law, decision making, public

involvement, and two case studies that provided information on political decision criteria to water

managers.

U.S. Energy Information Administration, 1994. Electric Power Annual 1992. Washington, DC.

U.S. Government Accounting Office, 1993. Federal Efforts to Monitor and Coordinate Responses to

Drought. Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Committee on Energy

and Commerce, House of Representatives; GAO/RCED-93-117. Washington, D.C.
54

U.S. Water Resources Council, 1983. Economic and Environmental Principles and Guidelines for Water

and Related Land Resources Implementation Studies. Washington, D.C.

U.S. Water Resources Council, December 1978. The Nation's Water Resources 1975-2000.

Western States Water Council 1986. Western State Drought Management (prepared by A. Willardson;

WSWC). The statement in the text that no Governor has had to condemn water rights because of shortages

during a drought was reconfirmed with Mr. Willardson in November 1993.

Wilhite, D., 1990. Planning for Drought; A Process for State Government, International Drought

Information Center, Technical Report Series 90-1. University of Nebraska-Lincoln.
55

National Study of Water Management During Drought Reports

Previously published reports include:

The National Study of Water Management During Drought: Report on the First Year of Study (IWR Report 91-

NDS-1) prepared by the Institute for Water Resources, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Fort Belvoir, Virginia.

A Preliminary Assessment of Corps of Engineers Res ervoirs, Their Purposes and Susceptibility to Drought (IWR

Report 91-NDS-2), prepared by the Hydrologic Engineering Center, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Davis ,

California.

An Assessment of What is Known About Drought (IWR Report 91-NDS-3) prepared by Planning Management

Consultants, Ltd., Carbondale, Illinois.

Lessons Learned from the California Drought (1987-1992) (IWR Report 93-NDS-5) prepared by Planning and

Management Consultants, Ltd., Carbondale, Illinois.

Executive Summary: Lesson Learned from the California Drought 1987-1992 (IWR Report 94-NDS-6) is a

concise summary of NDS-5 (above), with some new information that became available after NDS-5 wa s

published.

Computer Models for Water Resources Planning and Management (IWR Report 94-NDS-7) summarizes brand

name models in eight categories: general purpose software (such as spreadsheets), municipal and industria l

water use forecasting, water distribution systems (pipe networks), groundwater, watershed runoff, strea m

hydraulics, river and reservoir water quality, and river and reservoir system operations.

Managing Water for Drought (IWR Report 94-NDS-8) is the main report from the National Drought Study. It

describes the planning method developed and tested during the National Drought Study, with informatio n

pertinent to drought from a number of related fields such as wate r law, hydrology, alternative dispute resolution,

computer modeling, politics, public involvement, water use forecasting, economics and environmental impact

measurement, and other areas.

A number of reports presenting the final results of the National Study will be published in the Fall of 1995.

The National Drought Atlas (IWR Report 94-NDS-4) is a compendium of statistics which allows regional water

managers to determine the probability of droughts of a certain magnitude and duration.

Drought Impacts in a P&G Planning Context (IWR Report 94-NDS-9) 

Human and Environmental Impacts: California Drought 1987-92 (IWR Report 94-NDS-10) NDS-9 is a collection

of papers by California researchers who attempted to measure the impacts of the drought on the Californi a

economy and environment. NDS-10 shows how drought impacts can be measured in the accounting system of

Principles and Guidelines . It uses the results of NDS-8 as an example.

Water Use Forecasts for the Boston Area Using IWR-MAIN 6.0 (IWR Report 94-NDS-11) demonstrates one of

the first uses of a beta test version of the new generation of MAIN. The objective of this study was to determine

the relative effectiveness of long term water conservation measures.

National Study of Water Management During Drought: Report to Congress (IWR Report 94-NDS-12 )

summarizes the results of the entire study.
56

William J. Werick Dr. Eugene Z. Stakhiv

Study Manager Chief, Policy and Special Studies Div.

Institute for Water Resources Institute for Water Resources

Casey Building Casey Building

7701 Telegraph Road 7701 Telegraph Road

Alexandria, VA 22315-3868 Alexandria, VA 22315-3868

Telephone: (703) 355-3055 Telephone (703) 355-2370

Trigger Planning for the MWRA Service Area (IWR Report 94-NDS-13) documents the development of wha t

might be called "just in time" water supply enhancement; a management system that can reduce economic and

environmental investments in supply and demand measures while maintaining necessary water supply reliability.

Governance and Water Management During Drought (IWR Report 94-NDS-14). Prepared by the Advisor y

Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (ACIR). NDS-14 addresses the general subject of technical water

management within the American democratic process. It includes papers on law, decision making, publi c

involvement, and two case studies that provided information on political decision criteria to water managers.

Colorado River Gaming Exercise (IWR Report 94-NDS-15) documents the use of a shared vision model in a

gaming exercise to evaluate operational and institutional alternati ves for the management of the Colorado River.

This report was prepared as a joint p roject with the Study of Severe Sustained Drought in the Southwest United

States.

Shared Vision Models and Collaborative Drought Planning (IWR Report 94-NDS-16), prepared by th e

University of Washington for the Corps of Engineers, documents the use of the shared vision model in th e

National Drought Study case studies.

Lessons Learned from the National Drought Study Case Studies will be published in the Fall of 1995, contingent

on the completion of the Marais des Cygnes-Osage DPS , which was delayed by the flooding on the Missour i

River during the Summer of 1993.

For further information on the National Drought Study, contact either:

Reports may be ordered by writing (above address) or calling Arlene Nurthen, IWR Publications, at (703) 355-

3042.