conservation of rivers essay

Sign up to get the latest WWF news delivered straight to your inbox

Why are rivers so important?

On World Rivers Day, we celebrate the world’s precious waterways. But across the world, and closer to home, rivers are under threat. Why are rivers so important? And what are we doing to protect them? 

It goes without saying, but fresh, clean water is essential for humans and nature to survive. Rivers are precious sources of fresh drinking water for people across the world. And when rivers are so badly polluted by industry or unevenly distributed by poor water management practices, it can be a case of life-or-death. This unfortunately happens across the world.  

We’re working with HSBC in Kanpur, India, to help more than 30 factories involved in the production of leather reduce their water use and pollution, benefitting the environment, workers and the local community with access to clean flowing water.  

With AB InBev, the world’s leading brewer with brands such as Budweiser under its wing, we’re working with communities to develop new enterprises and encourage sustainable farming practices along the River Rwizi in Uganda, securing this valuable water source for people and nature.

Freshwater habitats account for some of the richest biodiversity in the world, and rivers are a vital, vibrant ecosystem for many species.  

But even in the UK, over three quarters of our rivers fail to meet required health standards and face multiple threats – putting an increasing pressure on the diverse wildlife that call our beautiful rivers home: from kingfishers to otters and brown trout.

People depend on rivers for their way of life and their livelihoods. From fishing to agriculture, the way we manage our waterways has a direct impact on people’s lives.  

For example, in the Yangtze River in China, the introduction of a dam unintentionally prevented carp from spawning downstream, where a commercial fishery was located. By working with HSBC and the state-owned TGD (Three Gorges Dam) company, we worked to change how the dam operated, so that it mimicked the natural flow of the river. This boosted the carp population and allowed people to continue living off the river, when previously their livelihoods were at stake.  

It was similar story in the Mekong river basin spanning Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam and China’s Yunnan province, where a quarter of the world’s freshwater fish are caught. Overfishing has caused fish populations to plummet – bad news for the fish, and for the 60 million people in the region reliant on fish in their diets.  We provided support to local communities to manage conservation zones and prevent illegal fishing, and as a result local people have found it far easier to live sustainably off the river. 

Rivers are absolutely vital: for fresh drinking water, for people’s livelihoods and for nature. Unfortunately, they’re still threatened. We must commit to recovering freshwater biodiversity, restoring natural river flows and cleaning up polluted water for people and nature to thrive.  

To learn more about our work with rivers and freshwater, click  here . 

30,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today

Meet top uk universities from the comfort of your home, here’s your new year gift, one app for all your, study abroad needs, start your journey, track your progress, grow with the community and so much more.

Verification Code

An OTP has been sent to your registered mobile no. Please verify

Thanks for your comment !

Our team will review it before it's shown to our readers.

• School Education /

Essay on Water Conservation: Samples in 150, 200, 250 Words

• Updated on  
• May 8, 2024

What makes you curious to write an essay on water conservation? This life-saving resource is essential for all forms of life on Earth. Water is the essential natural resource present on Earth. Out of the total water present on Earth, 97.5% is salt water and 2.5% is fresh water. 70% of the human body is made of water. But, with the growing population , and climatic crisis , we are facing the urgent need to conserve water.

Water conservation is a hot topic, if you need a sample essay on water conservation then, you are at the right place. In this blog post, we have covered essays on water conservation in 100, 200, and 250 words. Further we are also providing a sample piece of writing on essay on water conservation. So, stay tuned and read further to get some ideas about water conservation!

Table of Contents

• 1 Essay on Water Conservation in 100 Words
• 2 Essay on Water Conservation in 200 Words
• 3.1 Water Scarcity
• 3.2 Ways to Conserve Water
• 4 Short Essay on Water Conservation

Also Read: World Water Day

Essay on Water Conservation in 100 Words

Water is crucial for all components of life which makes it a necessary resource for day-to-day activities. We use water for domestic activities like cooking, bathing, drinking, washing, etc. So, ultimately the consumption of water is very high. This makes it necessary to conserve water. Just as air, water is also important for life. Besides, water consumption, water pollution, and water scarcity are also some of the major water-related issues that need attention so that we can conserve water.

Every year we celebrate World Water Day on 22 March. This day is celebrated to spread awareness about the importance of water and run campaigns to conserve water on Earth. There are several ways to conserve water such as switching to showers, turning off taps when not in use, don’t pollute water bodies, storing rainwater, etc.

Also Read: Essay on Water Pollution

Essay on Water Conservation in 200 Words

Water is one of the Earth’s most precious resources. But the world is facing water scarcity. As per the SDA report 2022, around 2 billion people worldwide are lacking safe drinking water. This means they are more vulnerable to diseases and unhealthy life. 

Apart from the increasing population, climatic change is also hampering the quality of water. Floods and Droughts are more frequent due to the vulnerability of climate, thereby increasing the need to conserve water.

Water conservation is vital to meet the growing global demand for fresh water. Water consumption is very high for agriculture, industry, and households. By conserving water, we can ensure that there is a surplus amount of water to use and avoid conflicts over this limited resource.

Water conservation helps to maintain a balance in the ecosystem because every living thing on this planet is directly associated with the use of water. Reducing water consumption reduces the energy footprint associated with water supply.

The best ways of water conservation are rainwater harvesting , installing water plants, reusing water for gardening purposes, turning off taps when not in use, proper irrigation, installing automatic tap shut-off devices, not polluting water sources, and many more.

If we don’t want to witness the world die due to water scarcity then, it’s high time to conserve water and save the planet and future generations.

Also Read: Essay on Save Water

Water Conservation Essay 250 Words

Water conservation is a crucial step in protecting the environment. It is an important compound that supports life on Earth. The world has been facing water-related disasters due to scarcity of freshwater. 70% of the earth as well as the human body is composed of water, but there is a limited amount of freshwater to use. Owing to the ever-increasing population, climatic changes, global warming, and pollution, the need for the conservation of water is increasing. To do so, it is our fundamental duty to conserve water by planting more trees, managing water plants, storing rainwater, and making smart use of water. 

Water Scarcity

Water scarcity is a critical global issue that needs strict attention when the demand for freshwater exceeds the available supply of water. It can manifest in various ways, including a lack of access to clean drinking water, inadequate water for agriculture and industrial processes, and stressed or depleted natural water sources. 

Here are some factors that contribute to water scarcity:

• Climate change
• Growing population
• Global warming
• Inefficient water management
• Water pollution
• Increasing demand
• Poor irrigation techniques
• Wastage of water, and much more.

Ways to Conserve Water

Conserving water is crucial to help address water scarcity and ensure a sustainable water supply for both present and future generations. You can contribute individually by taking small measures to conserve water like turning off the tap. Likewise, here are some ways to conserve water:

• Drip irrigation technique
• Soil management
• Plantation of drought-tolerant crops
• Apply Mulching
• Recycle and reuse water
• Rainwater harvesting
• Desalination
• Spread awareness to conserve water
• Donate to the water cleaning campaign
• Implement proper water management techniques.

Also Read: Types of Water Pollution

Short Essay on Water Conservation

Find the sample of short essay on water conservation below:

Also Read: Essay on Save Environment: Samples in 100, 200, 300 Words

Water conservation is the individual or collective practice of efficient use of water. This helps in protecting the earth from the situation of water scarcity. We can individually contribute to water conservation by not wasting water, reducing the over-consumption of water, rainwater harvesting, etc. Water conservation is an important call because there is a limited amount of fresh water available on earth.

Here are 10 ways to save water. 1. Rainwater harvesting 2 Install water plants 3. Reuse water 4. Maintain proper water management plans 5. Fix the irrigation system 6. Use a bucket 7. Turn off the tap when not in use 8. Keep a regular check on pipe leakage 9. Do not pollute water bodies 10. Participate in water cleaning campaigns

Here are 5 points on the importance of water conservation: It helps the ecosystem; Water conservation is necessary for drought-prone areas; It helps reduce costs; Water conservation improves the quality of water; and Maintains the health of the aquatic ecosystem.

Related Topics

For more information on such interesting topics, visit our essay writing page and follow Leverage Edu .

Kajal Thareja

Hi, I am Kajal, a pharmacy graduate, currently pursuing management and is an experienced content writer. I have 2-years of writing experience in Ed-tech (digital marketing) company. I am passionate towards writing blogs and am on the path of discovering true potential professionally in the field of content marketing. I am engaged in writing creative content for students which is simple yet creative and engaging and leaves an impact on the reader's mind.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Contact no. *

Connect With Us

30,000+ students realised their study abroad dream with us. Take the first step today.

Resend OTP in

Need help with?

Study abroad.

UK, Canada, US & More

IELTS, GRE, GMAT & More

Scholarship, Loans & Forex

Country Preference

New Zealand

Which English test are you planning to take?

Which academic test are you planning to take.

Not Sure yet

When are you planning to take the exam?

Already booked my exam slot

Within 2 Months

Want to learn about the test

Which Degree do you wish to pursue?

When do you want to start studying abroad.

January 2024

September 2024

What is your budget to study abroad?

How would you describe this article ?

Please rate this article

We would like to hear more.

Have something on your mind?

Make your study abroad dream a reality in January 2022 with

India's Biggest Virtual University Fair

Essex Direct Admission Day

Why attend .

Don't Miss Out

The Saving Impluse: Why We Protect Rivers

Why do we protect rivers? There are many persuasive reasons why we should protect them, but why we do protect rivers can be more complicated, even mysterious.

In the U.S., rivers feed us by irrigating millions of acres of farmland. They store our drinking water. Their dams provide much of our electric power. They carry boats that carry our freight. Yet we sometimes declare part or all of a river off-limits to alteration, obstruction, diversion, or motorized use. Why?

There are many persuasive reasons to protect rivers. They fall into three categories:

Utility: Free-flowing rivers provide essential ecosystem services. For example, they provide and nourish critical habitat; they sustain springs and aquifers; and they regulate climate and disease.

Joy, wonder, contentment, or fun: People float rivers, fish them, swim them, paint and photograph them, and just look at them. Rivers connect us to our history and culture. They contain worlds just out of reach that stir our imagination.

Ethics: The authoritative description of the “ land ethic ” is still Aldo Leopold’s: The “land ethic changes the role of Homo sapiens from conqueror of the land-community to plain member and citizen of it. It implies respect for his fellow members, and also respect for the community as such." A river’s community includes people and other species that depend on it for life and livelihood. We all share ethical responsibility to that community.

If you accept just one of those reasons, then you have accepted responsibility to protect rivers. And such arguments do in fact persuade countless people to act every day on behalf of rivers.

But in addition to those motivators, I think something else is at work. This motivator is a shape-changer, hazy and hard to pin down. I call it “the saving impulse.”

I can best describe the saving impulse with a story.

In the early 17th century, an Englishman named Sir Robert Cotton amassed a collection of ancient books and manuscripts. It was arguably the most important private library the world has seen. It became the basis of the British Library.

Cotton did not acquire his books to read them. Many were written in earlier English languages that he and his contemporaries could not decipher. Needing a system for classifying books with unknown content, he came up with an ingenious solution. He set busts of Roman emperors at intervals atop his library shelves. Then he named each book after the emperor above it and added a letter and number to designate the shelf the book sat on and its place on the shelf.

One of those books is now one of the most famous volumes in the Western world. It sat beneath the bust of the Emperor Vitellius and is still known as Cotton Vitellius A XV. It contains the only known text of the great Old English saga Beowulf .

Who was responsible for saving this unintelligible book? I count at least eight people or groups of people.

The First Savers: Old English Bards. By the time Cotton got his hands on Vitellius A XV, the manuscript was hundreds of years old, and the poem itself was older than that. We now know from its language that the manuscript was written around 1000 A.D., but it contains words from the 8th century and refers to at least one historical event in the 6th century.

That is, it has some earmarks of an oral poem like Homer's Iliad and Odyssey. Such poems are kept in people’s memories, passing from generation to generation, changing gradually to accommodate social and political changes.

The Second Saver: the Scribe . The person who finally transcribed the poem must have been a monk. Hardly anyone else could write and have access to so much parchment. Still, despite some passages of Christian sugar-coating, the poem is blatantly pagan. God only knows why some anonymous monk wrote the 3,200 lines or how he justified his labor to his abbot.

Yet we are lucky that he did. Soon, in 1066, the Normans invaded England and changed history. French became the official language and changed Old English to Middle English. A century after the Conquest, hardly anyone could have read Vitellius A XV—let alone memorized it, as the bards did.

The Third savers: Generations of Anonymous Monks. For the next 500 years the unintelligible manuscript lay in English monasteries, somehow escaping fire, theft, flood, worms, and mold.

The Fourth Saver: Lawrence Nowell? In the 1530’s, Henry VIII celebrated his break from the Church of Rome by seizing English monasteries and burning their books. Someone—perhaps a certain Lawrence Nowell, Dean of Lichfield—rescued Vitellius A XV from the flames, for reasons we will never know.

The Fifth Saver, Robert Cotton. The destruction of monastic libraries contributed to a flood of old books and manuscripts on the English market. Luckily, a few people like Robert Cotton were there to acquire and care for them.

The Sixth Saver, Great Britain: After Cotton’s death, the entire library was moved to Westminster College, where it became the foundation for the British Library, but its travails were not over. In 1731 fire struck again and destroyed or damaged much of the Cottonian collection. Although the fire only scorched Vitellius A XV, its charred edges became brittle and started to flake away.

Seventh Saver: Thorkelin. No one yet understood the manuscript very well. Some thought that it was an Old Danish epic. With that in mind, an Icelander named Thorkelin made two copies of the poem in 1787, thinking he was preserving part of his Danish heritage. He reconstructed words at the edges of the pages as best he could. It is well he did, because much more of the manuscript has disintegrated since then.

The Final Savers: All of Us. Finally the first printed text appeared in 1815. Many new editions have followed, like flowers from a single, ancient seed. Read for pleasure and for scholarship, it has become an essential part of countless people’s heritage.

So we can identify at least some who saved the poem. Why they did is more complicated. What is this impulse to save? If we could ask the Beowulf savers why they did it, I am sure of only three things.

•    Their answers would have differed.

•    For about 700 years—from around   1100 until the age of modern scholarship—none of them even knew what they were saving.

•    None of them knew that they were saving the poem for my enjoyment.

People who help save rivers are the descendants of Sir Robert Cotton. In his time it was important to save rare and endangered elements of cultural history. In our time, our natural heritage is in jeopardy. Like Cotton, we do not understand everything in our rivers’ libraries.

Maybe saving rivers satisfies a need to be firmly rooted in the future. We can’t predict how a river will be important to people in the year 3000, which is about as distant from us as we are from the Beowulf scribe. All we know is that by saving the present we might enrich the future.

We have inherited a world of extraordinary variety and complexity in which people have survived and flourished for eons. No wonder we try to save its best and most endangered parts. But today, as in the past, not everyone acts on the saving impulse. We may always depend on those whom Carl Sandburg called “the saving minority.” By saving possibilities, they might save the rest of us.

The saving impulse seems uniquely developed in Homo sapiens. It is more far-sighted and more communal than, say, storing nuts to eat next winter. When we protect a river, we not only keep it and its community alive; we also keep alive what is best in ourselves. It is the human thing to do.

*    *    *

(Note: I have adapted some of this from my article “On Saving Diversity” in The Nature Conservancy News, Jan-Feb, 1982.) Jon Roush serves on WRC's Board of Directors

Stay on top of our work

Conserving Earth

Earth’s natural resources include air, water, soil, minerals, plants, and animals. Conservation is the practice of caring for these resources so all living things can benefit from them now and in the future.

Biology, Ecology, Earth Science, Geography, Geology, Conservation

Loading ...

Earth ’s natural resources include air , water , soil , minerals , fuels , plants, and animals. Conservation is the practice of caring for these resources so all living things can benefit from them now and in the future. All the things we need to survive , such as food , water, air, and shelter , come from natural resources. Some of these resources, like small plants, can be replaced quickly after they are used. Others, like large trees, take a long time to replace. These are renewable resources . Other resources, such as fossil fuels , cannot be replaced at all. Once they are used up, they are gone f orever . These are nonrenewable resources . People often waste natural resources. Animals are overhunted . Forests are cleared, exposing land to wind and water damage. Fertile soil is exhausted and lost to erosion because of poor farming practices. Fuel supplies are depleted . Water and air are polluted . If resources are carelessly managed, many will be used up. If used wisely and efficiently , however, renewable resources will last much longer. Through conservation, people can reduce waste and manage natural resources wisely. The population of human beings has grown enormously in the past two centuries. Billions of people use up resources quickly as they eat food, build houses, produce goods, and burn fuel for transportation and electricity . The continuation of life as we know it depends on the careful use of natural resources. The need to conserve resources often conflicts with other needs. For some people, a wooded area may be a good place to put a farm. A timber company may want to harvest the area’s trees for construction materials. A business may want to build a factory or shopping mall on the land. All these needs are valid, but sometimes the plants and animals that live in the area are forgotten. The benefits of development need to be weighed against the harm to animals that may be forced to find new habitats , the depletion of resources we may want in the future (such as water or timber), or damage to resources we use today. Development and conservation can coexist in harmony. When we use the environment in ways that ensure we have resources for the future, it is called sustainable development . There are many different resources we need to conserve in order to live sustainably. Forests A forest is a large area covered with trees grouped so their foliage shades the ground. Every continent except Antarctica has forests, from the evergreen -filled boreal forests of the north to mangrove forests in tropical wetlands . Forests are home to more than two-thirds of all known land species . Tropical rainforests are especially rich in biodiversity . Forests provide habitats for animals and plants. They store carbon , helping reduce global warming . They protect soil by reducing runoff . They add nutrients to the soil through leaf litter . They provide people with lumber and firewood. Deforestation is the process of clearing away forests by cutting them down or burning them. People clear forests to use the wood, or to make way for farming or development. Each year, Earth loses about 14.6 million hectares (36 million acres) of forest to deforestation—an area about the size of the U.S. state of New York. Deforestation destroys wildlife habitats and increases soil erosion. It also releases greenhouse gases into the atmosphere , contributing to global warming. Deforestation accounts for 15 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions. Deforestation also harms the people who rely on forests for their survival, hunting and gathering, harvesting forest products, or using the timber for firewood. About half of all the forests on Earth are in the tropics —an area that circles the globe near the Equator . Although tropical forests cover fewer than 6 percent of the world’s land area, they are home to about 80 percent of the world’s documented species. For example, more than 500 different species of trees live in the forests on the small U.S. island of Puerto Rico in the Caribbean Sea. Tropical forests give us many valuable products, including woods like mahogany and teak , rubber , fruits, nuts, and flowers. Many of the medicines we use today come from plants found only in tropical rainforests. These include quinine , a malaria drug; curare , an anesthetic used in surgery; and rosy periwinkle , which is used to treat certain types of cancer . Sustainable forestry practices are critical for ensuring we have these resources well into the future. One of these practices is leaving some trees to die and decay naturally in the forest. This “ deadwood ” builds up soil. Other sustainable forestry methods include using low-impact logging practices, harvesting with natural regeneration in mind, and avoiding certain logging techniques , such as removing all the high-value trees or all the largest trees from a forest. Trees can also be conserved if consumers recycle . People in China and Mexico, for example, reuse much of their wastepaper, including writing paper, wrapping paper, and cardboard. If half the world’s paper were recycled, much of the worldwide demand for new paper would be fulfilled, saving many of Earth’s trees. We can also replace some wood products with alternatives like bamboo , which is actually a type of grass. Soil Soil is vital to food production. We need high-quality soil to grow the crops that we eat and feed to livestock . Soil is also important to plants that grow in the wild. Many other types of conservation efforts, such as plant conservation and animal conservation, depend on soil conservation. Poor farming methods, such as repeatedly planting the same crop in the same place, called monoculture , deplete nutrients in the soil. Soil erosion by water and wind increases when farmers plow up and down hills. One soil conservation method is called contour strip cropping . Several crops, such as corn, wheat, and clover , are planted in alternating strips across a slope or across the path of the prevailing wind . Different crops, with different root systems and leaves, help slow erosion.

Harvesting all the trees from a large area, a practice called clearcutting , increases the chances of losing productive topsoil to wind and water erosion. Selective harvesting —the practice of removing individual trees or small groups of trees—leaves other trees standing to anchor the soil. Biodiversity Biodiversity is the variety of living things that populate Earth. The products and benefits we get from nature rely on biodiversity. We need a rich mixture of living things to provide foods, building materials, and medicines, as well as to maintain a clean and healthy landscape . When a species becomes extinct , it is lost to the world forever. Scientists estimate that the current rate of extinction is 1,000 times the natural rate. Through hunting, pollution , habitat destruction, and contribution to global warming, people are speeding up the loss of biodiversity at an alarming rate. It’s hard to know how many species are going extinct because the total number of species is unknown. Scientists discover thousands of new species every year. For example, after looking at just 19 trees in Panama, scientists found 1,200 different species of beetles—80 percent of them unknown to science at the time. Based on various estimates of the number of species on Earth, we could be losing anywhere from 200 to 100,000 species each year. We need to protect biodiversity to ensure we have plentiful and varied food sources. This is true even if we don’t eat a species threatened with extinction because something we do eat may depend on that species for survival. Some predators are useful for keeping the populations of other animals at manageable levels. The extinction of a major predator might mean there are more herbivores looking for food in people’s gardens and farms. Biodiversity is important for more than just food. For instance, we use between 50,000 to 70,000 plant species for medicines worldwide. The Great Barrier Reef , a coral reef off the coast of northeastern Australia, contributes about $6 billion to the nation’s economy through commercial fishing , tourism , and other recreational activities. If the coral reef dies, many of the fish, shellfish , marine mammals , and plants will die, too. Some governments have established parks and preserves to protect wildlife and their habitats. They are also working to abolish hunting and fishing practices that may cause the extinction of some species. Fossil Fuels Fossil fuels are fuels produced from the remains of ancient plants and animals. They include coal , petroleum (oil), and natural gas . People rely on fossil fuels to power vehicles like cars and airplanes, to produce electricity, and to cook and provide heat. In addition, many of the products we use today are made from petroleum. These include plastics , synthetic rubber, fabrics like nylon , medicines, cosmetics , waxes, cleaning products, medical devices, and even bubblegum.

Fossil fuels formed over millions of years. Once we use them up, we cannot replace them. Fossil fuels are a nonrenewable resource. We need to conserve fossil fuels so we don’t run out. However, there are other good reasons to limit our fossil fuel use. These fuels pollute the air when they are burned. Burning fossil fuels also releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, contributing to global warming. Global warming is changing ecosystems . The oceans are becoming warmer and more acidic , which threatens sea life. Sea levels are rising, posing risks to coastal communities. Many areas are experiencing more droughts , while others suffer from flooding . Scientists are exploring alternatives to fossil fuels. They are trying to produce renewable biofuels to power cars and trucks. They are looking to produce electricity using the sun, wind, water, and geothermal energy — Earth’s natural heat. Everyone can help conserve fossil fuels by using them carefully. Turn off lights and other electronics when you are not using them. Purchase energy-efficient appliances and weatherproof your home. Walk, ride a bike, carpool , and use public transportation whenever possible. Minerals Earth’s supply of raw mineral resources is in danger. Many mineral deposits that have been located and mapped have been depleted. As the ores for minerals like aluminum and iron become harder to find and extract , their prices skyrocket . This makes tools and machinery more expensive to purchase and operate. Many mining methods, such as mountaintop removal mining (MTR) , devastate the environment. They destroy soil, plants, and animal habitats. Many mining methods also pollute water and air, as toxic chemicals leak into the surrounding ecosystem. Conservation efforts in areas like Chile and the Appalachian Mountains in the eastern United States often promote more sustainable mining methods. Less wasteful mining methods and the recycling of materials will help conserve mineral resources. In Japan, for example, car manufacturers recycle many raw materials used in making automobiles. In the United States, nearly one-third of the iron produced comes from recycled automobiles. Electronic devices present a big problem for conservation because technology changes so quickly. For example, consumers typically replace their cell phones every 18 months. Computers, televisions, and mp3 players are other products contributing to “ e-waste .” The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that Americans generated more than three million tons of e-waste in 2007. Electronic products contain minerals as well as petroleum-based plastics. Many of them also contain hazardous materials that can leach out of landfills into the soil and water supply. Many governments are passing laws requiring manufacturers to recycle used electronics. Recycling not only keeps materials out of landfills, but it also reduces the energy used to produce new products. For instance, recycling aluminum saves 90 percent of the energy that would be required to mine new aluminum.

Water Water is a renewable resource. We will not run out of water the way we might run out of fossil fuels. The amount of water on Earth always remains the same. However, most of the planet’s water is unavailable for human use. While more than 70 percent of Earth’s surface is covered by water, only 2.5 percent of it is freshwater . Out of that freshwater, almost 70 percent is permanently frozen in the ice caps covering Antarctica and Greenland. Only about 1 percent of the freshwater on Earth is available for people to use for drinking, bathing, and irrigating crops. People in many regions of the world suffer water shortages . These are caused by depletion of underground water sources known as aquifers , a lack of rainfall due to drought, or pollution of water supplies. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 2.6 billion people lack adequate water sanitation . More than five million people die each year from diseases caused by using polluted water for drinking, cooking, or washing. About one-third of Earth’s population lives in areas that are experiencing water stress . Most of these areas are in developing countries. Polluted water hurts the environment as well as people. For instance, agricultural runoff—the water that runs off of farmland—can contain fertilizers and pesticides . When this water gets into streams , rivers , and oceans, it can harm the organisms that live in or drink from those water sources. People can conserve and protect water supplies in many ways. Individuals can limit water use by fixing leaky faucets, taking shorter showers, planting drought-resistant plants, and buying low-water-use appliances. Governments, businesses, and nonprofit organizations can help developing countries build sanitation facilities. Farmers can change some of their practices to reduce polluted runoff. This includes limiting overgrazing , avoiding over-irrigation, and using alternatives to chemical pesticides whenever possible. Conservation Groups Businesses, international organizations , and some governments are involved in conservation efforts. The United Nations (UN) encourages the creation of national parks around the world. The UN also established World Water Day, an event to raise awareness and promote water conservation. Governments enact laws defining how land should be used and which areas should be set aside as parks and wildlife preserves. Governments also enforce laws designed to protect the environment from pollution, such as requiring factories to install pollution-control devices. Finally, governments often provide incentives for conserving resources, using clean technologies, and recycling used goods. Many international organizations are dedicated to conservation. Members support causes such as saving rain forests, protecting threatened animals, and cleaning up the air. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) is an alliance of governments and private groups founded in 1948. The IUCN works to protect wildlife and habitats. In 1980, the group proposed a world conservation strategy . Many governments have used the IUCN model to develop their own conservation plans. In addition, the IUCN monitors the status of endangered wildlife, threatened national parks and preserves, and other environments around the world. Zoos and botanical gardens also work to protect wildlife. Many zoos raise and breed endangered animals to increase their populations. They conduct research and help educate the public about endangered species . For instance, the San Diego Zoo in the U.S. state of California runs a variety of research programs on topics ranging from disease control in amphibians to heart-healthy diets for gorillas. Scientists at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, in London, England, work to protect plant life around the world. Kew’s Millennium Seed Bank , for example, works with partners in 54 countries to protect biodiversity through seed collection. Kew researchers are also exploring how DNA technology can help restore damaged habitats. Individuals can do many things to help conserve resources. Turning off lights, repairing leaky faucets, and recycling paper, aluminum cans, glass, and plastic are just a few examples. Riding bikes, walking, carpooling, and using public transportation all help conserve fuel and reduce the amount of pollutants released into the environment. Individuals can plant trees to create homes for birds and squirrels. At grocery stores, people can bring their own reusable bags. And people can carry reusable water bottles and coffee mugs rather than using disposable containers. If each of us would conserve in small ways, the result would be a major conservation effort.

Tree Huggers The Chipko Movement, which is dedicated to saving trees, was started by villagers in Uttar Pradesh, India. Chipko means hold fast or embrace. The villagers flung their arms around trees to keep loggers from cutting them down. The villagers won, and Uttar Pradesh banned the felling of trees in the Himalayan foothills. The movement has since expanded to other parts of India.

Thirsty Food People require about 2 to 4 liters of drinking water each day. However, a day's worth of food requires 2,000 to 5,000 liters of water to produce. It takes more water to produce meat than to produce plant-based foods.

Tiger, Tiger Tigers are dangerous animals, but they have more to fear from us than we have to fear from them. Today there are only about 3,200 tigers living in the wild. Three tiger subspecies the Bali, Caspian, and Javan tigers have gone extinct in the past century. Many organizations are working hard to protect the remaining tigers from illegal hunting and habitat loss.

Articles & Profiles

Media credits.

The audio, illustrations, photos, and videos are credited beneath the media asset, except for promotional images, which generally link to another page that contains the media credit. The Rights Holder for media is the person or group credited.

Illustrators

Educator reviewer, last updated.

October 19, 2023

User Permissions

For information on user permissions, please read our Terms of Service. If you have questions about how to cite anything on our website in your project or classroom presentation, please contact your teacher. They will best know the preferred format. When you reach out to them, you will need the page title, URL, and the date you accessed the resource.

If a media asset is downloadable, a download button appears in the corner of the media viewer. If no button appears, you cannot download or save the media.

Text on this page is printable and can be used according to our Terms of Service .

Interactives

Any interactives on this page can only be played while you are visiting our website. You cannot download interactives.

Related Resources

Advertisement

Insight and Environment

Why rivers are important for everything from biodiversity to wellbeing.

The UK's 200,000 kilometres of waterway are in crisis. New Scientist's Save Britain's Rivers campaign reveals how crucial they are for the nation's health, wealth and resilience

By Graham Lawton

15 February 2023

The river Dee flows through England and Wales

Henry Ciechanowicz/Alamy

This article is part of  New Scientist and the  i’s  joint campaign, Save Britain’s Rivers .  The year-long collaboration will reveal what’s happening to the UK’s rivers and how to restore them through a series of special articles, films, podcasts and events.

STAND by a river in the UK and you are in touch with the ancients. Their short, gruff names – Thames, Leith, Taff, Lagan – speak volumes of the history of the islands, from ancient Britons through Romans, Saxons and Vikings. These rivers are part of the past and present. Yet they face an uncertain future.

All over the world, rivers are valuable, often sacred, cultural and practical assets. They are a defining feature of human settlements, exploited for millennia as a source of drinking water, food, irrigation, waste disposal, power, navigation, defence and even inspiration.

In the UK, many of these services are just as relevant today. Tap water comes mostly from rivers. Sewage is disposed into them – preferably treated but often not. Rivers irrigate crops, power homes, take away floodwaters and float boats. Millions of people spend some of their leisure time messing about on, or near, rivers.

The UK is a riverine country. Globally, about 0.8 per cent of the land is covered in freshwater. In the UK, that number is 3 per cent. It has about 1500 river systems , with a combined length of over 200,000 kilometres, ranging from gushing upland headwaters to languid floodplain meanderers, via a vast range of intermediate habitats.

By global standards, these rivers are short, narrow and shallow – “mere streams”, according to the National River Flow Archive at the UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology in Wallingford. Yet they are extremely diverse in character. According to a recent report by the National Committee UK of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), “rivers and their floodplains are among the most important environments in the UK”.

“It’s well known that rivers and their floodplains – and the two go hand in hand – support a disproportionate level of biodiversity relative to their size within landscapes,” says report co-author Stephen Addy at the James Hutton Institute in Aberdeen, UK.

The state of Britain's rivers: Slurry, silage and sewage

Drinking water and flood management

Although rivers are important for many reasons, their most obvious benefit in the UK is the water they supply. According to Water UK , which represents the country’s water industry, about two-thirds of tap water in England and Wales comes from rivers and the reservoirs and lakes they flow into; the rest is taken from aquifers. Northern Ireland and Scotland rely almost exclusively on rivers, reservoirs and lakes. All told, 87 per cent of the UK water supply comes from these sources.

According to government statistics , water companies in the UK abstract about 4.6 cubic kilometres of river, lake and reservoir water in England for the public supply every year. People drink it, bathe in it, flush their toilets with it, irrigate their gardens with it and use it to wash their clothes, floors and cars. Offices, shops, restaurants and other firms drink deep of it too.

Water is abstracted for other purposes. Electricity generators take 3.4 cubic kilometres to turn their steam turbines, while fish and watercress farms use 0.8 cubic kilometres and agriculture and private water supplies another 0.8. That adds up to a grand total of 9.6 cubic kilometres, equivalent to a cubic tank of water more than 2 kilometres in all dimensions.

Even in a relatively rainy country like the UK, that is milking it. The UK government estimates that about 1 in 5 surface water sources are depleted by over-abstraction , which has knock-on effects on river health.

The opposite problem – too much water – is an increasingly familiar hazard during the winter. Flooding is a growing problem as climate change causes extreme weather events, including biblical downpours. According to the Environment Agency, the UK has had six of its 10 wettest years on record since 1998 . Last year was the first to see three named Atlantic storms in the space of a week .

Natural floodplains can help to mitigate flood risk by corralling the excess water and releasing it slowly back into the river. That is especially true of riverine landscapes engineered by beavers, whose dams and pools massively slow the passage of water through the system. Where rain used to hit the ground and surge straight into the waterways, it now is trapped for weeks. Beavers are being reintroduced all over the UK after they gained legal protection last year .

Plastic waste dumped along the bank of the river Thames in London

Mark Phillips/Alamy

The problem is that many of those floodplains are far from natural, let alone beavered: housing estates and industrial development are often sited on them and these are generally quite useless at mitigating floods.

Water supplies and flood defences are two of many “ecosystem services” supplied by rivers. These are vital goods and services, such as water, pollination and clean air, that flow from nature, or what is increasingly referred to as natural capital.

Economic and health benefits

The UK was the first nation – and remains one of only 26 countries – to audit its natural capital. In 2012, the government established the (now disbanded) Natural Capital Committee (NCC) to advise it on the state of England’s natural capital, in order to help deliver its commitment “to be the first generation to leave the natural environment of England in a better state than it inherited”. In 2020, the NCC published its first set of accounts.

These are by no means complete, as the system for totting up natural capital, called experimental ecosystem accounting, remains a work in progress and nature is complex. But they still speak volumes about the value of rivers.

Water abstraction alone is worth £6.8 billion a year – essentially what it would cost to keep the taps on if rivers didn’t supply the UK with water – and the asset is worth £134 billion (the NCC stressed that these aren’t price tags on nature: given that the natural world supports all life on Earth, its value is infinite). Wetlands sequester 3.5 million tonnes of carbon a year, worth £831 million; that asset is valued at nearly £30 billion. Hydroelectricity generation produces 6865 gigawatt-hours a year, worth £136 million; the value of that asset is £2.2 billion.

These “provisioning and regulating” services are supplemented by some less tangible, but no less valuable cultural services. Around 1 in 10 of the UK’s 5.8 billion annual outdoor recreational and tourist visits are centred on freshwater, worth £681 million; the asset is worth £32 billion. Recreational fishing is a £1.7 billion a year industry. Around 2.7 million people gain health benefits from being in or around freshwater , worth £870 million a year. The asset value of this is nearly £48 billion. Even house prices benefit from the proximity of a river to the tune of £2.9 billion a year.

Essential habitats for biodiversity

One asset that has yet to be incorporated into natural capital accounting is biodiversity, but it is clear that rivers are an important repository of what is left in the UK. Globally, rivers and other bodies of fresh water are disproportionately biodiverse. Despite covering less than 1 per cent of Earth’s surface, they are home to around a third of described species of vertebrate , including approximately 40 per cent of all fish.

The UK’s rivers and the wetlands they feed are disproportionately biodiverse too, though to a lesser extent. They are home to around 10 per cent of the UK’s species , according to the Environment Agency. The IUCN lists 346 river-dependent species, some endangered, including eels, otters, the bar-tailed godwit and feather mosses. The Environment Agency says that over 10 per cent of UK freshwater and wetland species are threatened with extinction.

Rivers are biodiverse in part because they themselves are diverse. A short stretch of lowland river can feature 10 different habitats – pools, riffles (shallow water flowing quickly over stones), glides (deeper, slow-flowing water), backwaters, beds of aquatic vegetation, submerged tree roots, exposed sediment, riverbanks, riparian vegetation and floodplains – all of which provide food and shelter for a different repertoire of species. Further upstream are headwaters, waterfalls and rapids, which also host specialist species such as the freshwater pearl mussel, white-clawed crayfish, brook lamprey and bullhead, as well as juvenile salmon, trout and grey mullet. These juvenile fish will eventually migrate out to sea and become part of the UK fishing industry’s £713 million annual earnings .

Rare chalk streams and poor ecological health

England is also home to the vast majority of the world’s chalk streams, rare and internationally important habitats fed from alkaline aquifers in chalk and characterised by their gravel and flint beds and crystal clear water. They are home to unique ecosystems and have been described as an English Great Barrier Reef . There are only 210 of these waterways in the world and 170 of them are in England (the rest are in northern France).

Unsurprisingly, the value of ecosystem services is strongly related to the ecological state of the asset . In much of the UK, that isn’t a happy tale . England, Wales and Northern Ireland have no rivers considered to be in high ecological health, according to criteria laid down in the four nations’ Water Framework Directives ; only 14 per cent are good . The rest are moderate, poor or bad. None is in a good state in terms of chemical pollution and none is in good overall health. In Scotland, 8 per cent of rivers are in high ecological health.

The IUCN report is blunt on this issue, concluding that “truly natural [river] environments that have escaped both direct and indirect human alteration no longer exist”. However, there is hope, according to Addy. “There are some grounds for being optimistic. River restoration in the UK is undergoing a step change, there are more and more projects going on everywhere.”

• mental health /
• biodiversity /
• Save Britain's Rivers

Sign up to our weekly newsletter

Receive a weekly dose of discovery in your inbox! We'll also keep you up to date with New Scientist events and special offers.

More from New Scientist

Explore the latest news, articles and features

When nature gives people the 'ick'

Subscriber-only

The US is doing its biggest-ever survey of nature and wildlife

Why we need to be honest with children about the brutality of nature, environment, popular articles.

Trending New Scientist articles

• Search Menu

Sign in through your institution

• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Architecture
• History of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• History of Art
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical Literature
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Agriculture
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• Political History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Linguistics
• Browse content in Literature
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Music Cultures
• Music and Media
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cultural Studies
• Technology and Society
• Browse content in Law
• Company and Commercial Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Local Government Law
• Criminal Law
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Public International Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Police Regional Planning
• Property Law
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Microbiology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Palaeontology
• Environmental Science
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Psychology
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Ethics
• Business History
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic History
• Economic Systems
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Browse content in Environment
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Environmental Politics
• International Relations
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Economy
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Policy
• Russian Politics
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• Native American Studies
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Economic Sociology
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Migration Studies
• Organizations
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Reviews and Awards
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

• < Previous
• Next chapter >

1 Why Should We Care About Rivers?

• Published: November 2004
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

This chapter focuses on the importance of rivers, and explains why humans should care about them. Rivers provide water to drink, water that helps crops to grow, and the water that fuels or cools industries. Water is a universal solvent and is used at some stage in the manufacture of every product that people consume. Rivers transport wastes, and to some extent transform them. If not for this self-purifying function of rivers, many estuaries and deltas would be even more polluted. Rivers transport goods, generate power, and sustain recreation. The chapter emphasizes that the society which does not protect its rivers destroys its own lifelines. It also reveals that despite the history of public awareness of environmental issues in America, many people remain unaware of how substantially human activities have altered rivers across the nation.

Signed in as

Institutional accounts.

• GoogleCrawler [DO NOT DELETE]
• Google Scholar Indexing

Personal account

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code
• Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with a library card.

• Sign in with username/password
• Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

River Conservation and Water Resource Management

• © 2023
• Praveen Kumar Rai 0

Department of Geography, Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti Language University, Lucknow, India

You can also search for this editor in PubMed   Google Scholar

• Provides a comprehensive overview of the applications of recent technologies to river water conservation and management
• Addresses the increasing water demand in India through sustainable management
• Is useful for academics, practitioners, water managers, environmentalists, administrators, and students

Part of the book series: Advances in Geographical and Environmental Sciences (AGES)

2310 Accesses

11 Citations

1 Altmetric

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this book

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Other ways to access

Licence this eBook for your library

Institutional subscriptions

About this book

This book presents an up-to-date, systematic and scientific analysis of water resource problems in India and suggests measures to overcome them through effective water management. In addition, the book provides an overview of how changes in legislation, policies, institutional responsibilities, science, technology, practical techniques and public perception have influenced the ways of river management over the past years.

• River Conservation
• Water Resource Management
• Watershed Management
• Water Quality
• Water Harvesting

Table of contents (17 chapters)

Front matter, land use land cover changes and climate change impact on the water resources: a study of uttarakhand state.

• Ashish Mani, Deepali Bansal, Maya Kumari, Deepak Kumar

Remote Sensing Monitoring of Water Productivity in Agricultural Crops: A Review

• M. Chanev, I. Kamenova, L. Filchev

Assessment of Groundwater Quality in South Karanpura Coalfield Region, Jharkhand, India Using WQI and Geospatial Approach

• Akshay Kumar, Varun Narayan Mishra, Rahul Ratnam, Chaitanya B. Pande, Akhouri Pramod Krishna

Application of Wastewater in Agriculture: Benefits and Detriments

• Akanksha Verma, Anshu Gupta, Paulraj Rajamani

A GIS-Based Flood Risk Assessment and Mapping Using Morphometric Analysis in the Kayadhu River Basin, Maharashtra

• Bhagwan B. Ghute, Pranjit Sarma

Hydro-Chemical Characterization and Geospatial Analysis of Groundwater for Drinking and Agriculture Usage in Bagh River Basin, Central India

• Nanabhau S. Kudnar, Varun Narayan Mishra, M. Rajashekhar

A Comprehensive Review on the Impact of Climate Change on Streamflow: Current Status and Perspectives

• David DurjoyLal Soren, Jonmenjoy Barman, Brototi Biswas

Soil Erosion Susceptibility in Dima River Basin of Dooars Himalaya Using RUSLE and Geospatial Techniques

• Jonmenjoy Barman, Brototi Biswas

Hydro-Geological Investigation and Groundwater Resource Estimation

• Kuldeep Pareta

Myths, Architecture, and Rites: The Concept of Conservation of the Tri Danu Area in Bali in the Contemporary Struggle

• I Putu Gede Suyoga, Ni Ketut Ayu Juliasih, Mira Sartika

Impact of Land Use and Land Cover in Water Resources

• Deeksha, Anoop Kumar Shukla, Nandineni Rama Devi

An Assessment and Management of Ecotourism Based on Water and LULC: A Geospatial Approach of Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India

• Rajeev Singh Chandel, Praveen Kumar Rai, Shruti Kanga, Renuka Singh

A Spatiotemporal Study of Agriculture in the Chars of Brahmaputra Basin, Dhubri, Assam

• Roli Misra, Ritika Prasad, Bratati De

GIS-Based Novel Ensemble MCDM-AHP Modeling for Flash Flood Susceptibility Mapping of Luni River Basin, Rajasthan

• Mit J. Kotecha, Gaurav Tripathi, Suraj Kumar Singh, Shruti Kanga, Gowhar Meraj, Bhartendu Sajan et al.

Geospatial Modelling for Identification of Ground Water Potential Zones in Luni River Basin, Rajasthan

• Mit J. Kotecha, Gaurav Tripathi, Suraj Kumar Singh, Shruti Kanga, Bhartendu Sajan, Gowhar Meraj et al.

Hydrological Drought Analysis of Bearma Basin, Madhya Pradesh, India

• Satheesh Chothodi, Kundan Parmar, Hemant Patidar, Rahul Mishra

Correction to: Application of Wastewater in Agriculture: Benefits and Detriments

Editors and affiliations.

Praveen Kumar Rai

About the editor

Dr. Praveen Kumar Rai is an associate professor and the head of the Department of Geography, Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti Language University, Lucknow, India. He also served as an assistant professor at the Amity Institute of Geoinformatics and Remote Sensing, Amity University, Noida, India, and Department of Geography, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India. He has the teaching and research experience of more than 13 years in the field of remote sensing and GIS. He completed his M.Sc. in geography (specialization in remote sensing) in Banaras Hindu University, India, in 2006 and M.Tech. in remote sensing in the Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, Ranchi, India, in 2008. He was awarded a gold medal with his M.Tech. in remote sensing. He completed his Ph.D. in remote sensing at the Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, in 2013. His research interests include remote sensing and GIS, glaciology, health and disease modelling, disaster management and water resource management, among others. He has published more than 70 research papers in international and national journals and has published 5 books with Springer Nature and other publishing houses. He has visited many countries to deliver invited lectures as a keynote speaker. He also serves many international journals as an editorial board member as well as a reviewer.

Bibliographic Information

Book Title : River Conservation and Water Resource Management

Editors : Praveen Kumar Rai

Series Title : Advances in Geographical and Environmental Sciences

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2605-3

Publisher : Springer Singapore

eBook Packages : Earth and Environmental Science , Earth and Environmental Science (R0)

Copyright Information : The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023

Hardcover ISBN : 978-981-99-2604-6 Published: 28 June 2023

Softcover ISBN : 978-981-99-2607-7 Due: 23 December 2023

eBook ISBN : 978-981-99-2605-3 Published: 27 June 2023

Series ISSN : 2198-3542

Series E-ISSN : 2198-3550

Edition Number : 1

Number of Pages : VI, 352

Number of Illustrations : 4 b/w illustrations, 108 illustrations in colour

Topics : Water, general , Sustainable Development , Environmental Management

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• EPA Author Manuscripts

Understanding rivers and their social relations: A critical step to advance environmental water management

Elizabeth p. anderson.

1 Department of Earth and Environment and Institute for Water and Environment, Florida International University, Miami, Florida, USA

Sue Jackson

2 Australian Rivers Institute, Griffith University, Nathan, Queensland, Australia

Rebecca E. Tharme

3 Riverfutures Ltd, Buxton, UK

Michael Douglas

4 University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia

5 Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, Australia

Joseph E. Flotemersch

6 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA

Margreet Zwarteveen

7 IHE-Delft Institute for Water Education, Delft, the Netherlands

8 Amsterdam Institute for Social Science Research, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Chicu Lokgariwar

9 Peoples’ Science Institute, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India

Mariana Montoya

10 Wildlife Conservation Society, Lima, Peru

11 Integrated Research Center, The Field Museum, Chicago, Illinois, USA

Gail T. Tipa

12 (Ngai Tahu) Tipa and Associates Ltd, East Taieri, New Zealand

Timothy D. Jardine

13 School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada

Julian D. Olden

14 School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA

15 Water Practice, Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF-China), Beijing, China

John Conallin

16 Institute of Land, Water and Society, Charles Sturt University, Albury, New South Wales, Australia

Barbara Cosens

17 University of Idaho College of Law, Moscow, Idaho, USA

Chris Dickens

18 International Water Management Institute, Pretoria, South Africa

Dustin Garrick

19 School of Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

David Groenfeldt

20 Water-Culture Institute, Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA

Jane Kabogo

21 Ministry of Water and Irrigation, United Republic of Tanzania, Dodoma, Tanzania

Dirk J. Roux

22 Scientific Services, South African National Parks, George, South Africa

23 Sustainability Research Unit, Nelson Mandela University, George, South Africa

Albert Ruhi

24 Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA

Angela H. Arthington

25 Australian Rivers Institute, Griffith University, Nathan, Queensland, Australia

River flows connect people, places, and other forms of life, inspiring and sustaining diverse cultural beliefs, values, and ways of life. The concept of environmental flows provides a framework for improving understanding of relationships between river flows and people, and for supporting those that are mutually beneficial. Nevertheless, most approaches to determining environmental flows remain grounded in the biophysical sciences. The newly revised Brisbane Declaration and Global Action Agenda on Environmental Flows (2018) represents a new phase in environmental flow science and an opportunity to better consider the co-constitution of river flows, ecosystems, and society, and to more explicitly incorporate these relationships into river management. We synthesize understanding of relationships between people and rivers as conceived under the renewed definition of environmental flows. We present case studies from Honduras, India, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia that illustrate multidisciplinary, collaborative efforts where recognizing and meeting diverse flow needs of human populations was central to establishing environmental flow recommendations. We also review a small body of literature to highlight examples of the diversity and interdependencies of human-flow relationships—such as the linkages between river flow and human well-being, spiritual needs, cultural identity, and sense of place—that are typically overlooked when environmental flows are assessed and negotiated. Finally, we call for scientists and water managers to recognize the diversity of ways of knowing, relating to, and utilizing rivers, and to place this recognition at the center of future environmental flow assessments.

This article is categorized under:

Water and Life > Conservation, Management, and Awareness

Human Water > Water Governance

Human Water > Water as Imagined and Represented

1 |. INTRODUCTION

Freshwater is arguably the most critical substance for life on Earth: it is essential for ecosystem health and underpins the economies and lifeways of human populations around the world ( UN Environment, 2017 ; WWAP, 2018 ). For generations, water resource management as conceived and practiced in more industrialized regions of the world has construed freshwater as a natural, asocial substance that can be objectively known and—in efforts to maximize its potential as a resource—controlled and regulated for human welfare. Thus “knowing, accounting for and representing water apart from its social context” is part of a particular modern hydrological knowledge paradigm that, by the end of the twentieth century, had come to dominate the myriad ways to know and relate to freshwater ( Linton, 2014 , p. 111; Wantzen et al., 2016 ; Magdaleno, 2018 ).

For numerous reasons, the modern conception of water as a substance abstracted from social, cultural, and religious context has come under heightened scrutiny. Consequently, there has been greater interest in addressing how water is not just natural, but also historical, political, and cultural. This interest has generated attention to approaches other than eco-hydrological methods to know and understand water and has led to increased recognition of the complexity of the relations between water, society, and ecosystem processes. This is, for instance, manifest in recent scholarship on socio-hydrology ( Sivapalan, Savenije, & Blöschl, 2012 ) and the hydro-social cycle ( Bakker, 2012 ; Boelens, 2014 ; Linton & Budds, 2014 ), both bodies of work in which natural and social researchers collaborate because they acknowledge the need to understand water flows and systems as both social and natural ( Wesselink, Kooy, & Warner, 2017 ). Although the viewpoints emerging from socio-hydrology and the hydro-social cycle are founded on different knowledge paradigms, they are rooted in the core idea that water systems—like rivers—and society coevolve and emerge through continued engagement over space and time ( Wantzen et al., 2016 ). Ethnographic studies of customary hydraulic systems and their communal water management institutions have also contributed to such an understanding. These include the subak irrigation system (cooperatives) of Bali ( Lansing, 2006 ) and the self-sufficient acequia systems that have persisted for several hundred years in the southwestern United States ( Cox, 2014 ). The increased scholarly acknowledgement of the mutual constitution of society and water has also been translated into policies and international frameworks that seek to address complex, interdependent societal challenges, for example, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). A specific goal for water—SDG6: Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all —along with other SDGs focused on peace, justice, climate, conservation, and well-being, seek to explicitly link water and social relations ( Wiegleb & Bruns, 2018 ).

Those interested in environmental flows also increasingly recognize the importance and complexity of relationships between humans and freshwater bodies. According to the renewed Brisbane Declaration of 2018, the term environmental flows refers to: the quantity, timing, and quality of freshwater flows and levels necessary to sustain aquatic ecosystems which, in turn, support human cultures, economies, sustainable livelihoods, and well-being ( Arthington et al., 2018 ; Box 1 ). Environmental flow assessment—also sometimes referred to as environmental water allocation or environmental water management—is a critical step in establishing a societally-acceptable threshold between water available for off-channel allocations and water to be retained within or returned to a waterbody to sustain ecosystems. The science of environmental flows embraces the full range of aquatic ecosystems, however the focus of this paper is on rivers and their social relations.

THE BRISBANE DECLARATION AND GLOBAL ACTION AGENDA ON ENVIRONMENTAL FLOWS (2018)

In 2018, scientists, river conservationists, and water managers revisited the Brisbane Declaration and Global Action Agenda of 2007. In the decade between the first and second declarations, the environmental flow community had come to appreciate that “social and cultural dimensions of environmental flow management warrant far more attention” ( Arthington et al., 2018 , p. 2). Thus, a significant new element of the 2018 Declaration and Global Action Agenda is the emphasis given to “full and equal participation for people of all cultures, and respect for their rights, responsibilities and systems of governance in environmental water decisions” ( Arthington et al., 2018 , p. 12).

The Declaration sets out six statements, all pertinent in the context of this paper:

• Environmental flows are essential to protect and restore biodiversity, aquatic ecosystems, and the ecosystem services they provide for all societies.
• Environmental flows are critical to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritage.
• Environmental flows have been compromised and today many aquatic systems around the world are at risk.
• Implementation of environmental flows requires a complementary suite of policy, legislative, regulatory, financial, scientific, and cultural measures to ensure effective delivery and beneficial outcomes.
• Local knowledge and customary water management practices can strengthen environmental flow planning, implementation, and sustainable outcomes.
• Climate change increases the risk of aquatic ecosystem degradation and intensifies the urgency for action to implement environmental flows.

The Action Agenda contains over 30 recommendations to support and advance environmental flow implementation organized under the categories: leadership, management, and research. A central recommendation is to “develop and implement a legal basis for regulating water use, environmental flows, water rights, and licenses, including recognition of cultural heritage values, knowledge, and customary relationships with water” ( Arthington et al., 2018 , p. 12).

The revised Declaration “heralds a new era of scientific innovation, shared visions, collaborative implementation programs and adaptive governance of environmental flows, with ample opportunities for engagement across multiple sectors, disciplines, regions, and cultures” ( Arthington et al., 2018 , p. 7).

Despite the inclusion of a hydro-social perspective in the new definition and advances in several assessment frameworks ( Poff, Tharme, & Arthington, 2017 ), the science and practice of environmental flows has so far remained faithful to distinctly modern methodologic traditions. These traditions have their origins in the biophysical sciences and are mostly premised on a separation between nature and society. With some exceptions ( Acreman et al., 2014 ; King, Tharme, & Villiers, 2000 ; Poff et al., 2010 ), the overwhelming majority of approaches used for determining environmental flows remain based predominantly on (a) hydrology; (b) physical habitat simulation for fish or other aquatic biota; or (c) flow-ecology relationships where people are excluded from important ecological relations or concepts, like aquatic food webs ( Tharme, 2003 ). Few studies have considered the role of river flow in the livelihoods and well-being of local communities and highlighted vital social and economic dependencies. Consequently, the embedded, reciprocal, and constitutive relationships that many human populations have with water and rivers continue to be poorly understood.

We argue that a challenge for environmental flows research and implementation is to understand natural systems in relation to the social world, in line with what those who seek to advance hydro-social thinking are trying to do ( Wesselink et al., 2017 ), and to appreciate rivers and their flow regimes as social-ecological systems ( McGinnis & Ostrom, 2014 ). We posit that rivers are socially constituted in at least three ways. First, historical, social, and political processes and contexts shape ways of knowing (e.g., conceptualizing and making abstractions about water and eco-hydrological processes) and acting on the environment, or in this case, rivers and waterways. As we will describe, the growing commitment to environmental flows and the expansion of methodological approaches grew from a shared political concern from environmentalists and scientists about the future of rivers and river-dependent ecosystems and societies. They were particularly concerned about those waterways directly affected by the modernist mode of water management, one that transformed rivers through regulatory infrastructures or other river alteration measures. Second, implementation of the prescriptions promoted by environmental flows scientists and advocates requires effective frameworks, technologies and institutions (norms, rules, laws), as well as widespread political-social support and alignment with the aspirations of those people responsible for and living with rivers subject to alteration. Third, the implementation of environmental flows will have social and political consequences that result from decisions to redistribute water or share it differently, by “taking away” water from some and allocating it to others or allowing it to remain in the environment. Similar to environmental flows, the importance and influence of societal values, priorities, and perceptions of nature also are increasingly recognized as inherent to river restoration ( Lave, 2016 ; Smith, Clifford, & Mant, 2014 ).

This paper is the first to synthesize knowledge of relationships between people and rivers as conceived under the renewed definition of environmental flows (see Box 1 ). We trace the historical underpinnings of environmental flows and explore how social norms and values have influenced scientific understandings of rivers, a neglected aspect of the historiography of river science. We then review a specific but small body of literature that describes multidisciplinary efforts in which satisfying diverse flow needs for human livelihoods or well-being has been central to setting environmental flow recommendations. Several of these efforts were undertaken with the realization that implementing environmental flows requires active support of stakeholders, as well as their knowledge, spiritual beliefs, and the symbolic meanings they attribute to rivers. We conclude with a discussion of the diversity of flow-human relationships that typically remain overlooked when environmental flows are assessed and negotiated ( Table 1 ), and a call for greater recognition of these relationships.

Select examples of cases and references illustrating various interlinked relationships between humans and rivers from different regions and cultures of the world

The ideas presented here emerged from discussions among ~25 people at a week-long workshop on social and eco-hydrological linkages to environmental flows, convened in June 2017 at the Socio-Ecological Synthesis Center (SESYNC) in Annapolis, Maryland, USA. Workshop participants intentionally represented diverse backgrounds (e.g., government, non-government, Indigenous) and nationalities, and collectively brought together decades of experience in theory, research methods, assessment, negotiation, and implementation of environmental flows, and/or knowledge of the varied connections human societies maintain with rivers.

2 |. HOW HAS ENVIRONMENTAL FLOW SCIENCE HISTORICALLY CONCEIVED OF RIVER-HUMAN INTERACTIONS?

There is some evidence that state water management practices considered some aspects of societies’ relations with rivers and the social significance of flowing water, even before environmental flows took shape as a scientific field and river conservation practice in the late 20th century. Yet, this consideration was often partial, with river relationships maintained by certain marginalized groups, such as Indigenous peoples in setter societies, afforded little regard or protection by modernist (and in many cases, colonial) approaches to water management (see Emanuel, 2019 ; Estes, 2017 ; Robison, Cosens, Jacskon, Leonard, & McCool, 2018 ). In 1915, in a move to recognize the aesthetic value of a river, Oregon (USA) prohibited the diversion of water from certain streams that sustained the spectacular falls of the Columbia River Gorge ( Lamb & Doerksen, 1987 ). A 1917 agreement from India shows that the British colonial government recognized the importance of flows for religious purposes on the Ganges River and duly amended plans for water infrastructure following interjections from local rulers (General Administration Department, No. 10, April 28, 1917). In the 1960s–1970s, scientists in southern Africa investigated the intricate relationships between the livelihoods of the Thonga people and floodplain dynamics along the Pongola River ( Heeg & Breen, 1982 ; Tinley, 1964 ). Their studies informed recommendations for managed flow releases from an upstream impoundment to meet fishery and other tribal needs downstream, although that advice was not incorporated into operating rules at the time. Such frontrunners to the concept of environmental flows are not well recognized in the international scientific literature.

In the documented histories of river conservation (e.g., Poff & Matthews, 2013 ), it was the era of extensive dam building that promulgated the concept and practice of environmental flows. In the mid-20th century, and particularly in the United States, development of water supplies by the agencies of the state using large-scale infrastructure was the prevailing response to the problems of “modern” water management ( Linton, 2014 ). The first generalized set of environmental flow recommendations is commonly attributed to Donald Tennant, a biologist who, while working for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service during the 1950s–1960s, made hundreds of observations about flow-altered and unaltered rivers in Montana, Wyoming, and Nebraska. Based on these observations, Tennant devised the Montana Method for calculating minimum, moderate, and excellent flow levels to protect aquatic resources downstream from dams based on varying percentages of average annual or seasonal flow ( Tennant, 1976 ). By 1969, Montana had become the first U.S. state to provide for the legal acquisition of a water right for in-stream uses, a move that also allowed its fish and game department to acquire such rights ( Lamb & Doerksen, 1987 ). Other U.S. states followed suit, stimulating the need for scientifically legitimate methods of assessing flows. Although the Montana Method is often described as hydrology-based method, a lesser-known fact is that the underpinning research also included studies of “fishing and floating” and “esthetics and natural beauty” as outcomes linked to river flows, and documented water velocities suitable for white-water boating.

The 1970s–1980s witnessed a shift from equating environmental flows with hydrology-based minimums to greater recognition of relationships between flow and hydraulic conditions linked to physical habitat for aquatic organisms and to recreational uses of water ( Stalnaker, Lamb, Henriksen, Bovee, & Bartholew, 1995 ; Tharme, 2003 ). Additionally, in the United States, a growing multiple-use ethic of water led to the consideration of water budgets for different uses, such as instream fisheries, and understanding that these budgets vary across the year. During this period, the Instream Flow Incremental Methodology (IFIM), developed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey, and other partners, created an analytical framework to evaluate various alternatives for use of instream flows within a hydrologic time series. IFIM is often confounded with the Physical Habitat Simulation System (PHABSIM), a tool that links open channel hydraulics with aquatic biota and calculates habitat available for different fish life stages at varying flow levels ( Bovee & Milhous, 1978 ). However, PHABSIM forms only one component of IFIM. The overall structure of IFIM heralded recognition of the value of an interdisciplinary approach to instream uses, including not only water management and hydrology, but also political science and law. It offered a platform to recognize all users of water in decision-making about environmental flows, including recreational and Indigenous tribal uses ( Stalnaker et al., 1995 ). The more integrated framing of IFIM is not as frequently used, nor as well known as the quantitative aspects of PHABSIM, but in reality, it represented an early awareness of diverse human connections to the flow characteristics of rivers.

Appreciation for recreational uses and their linkages to river flow gained additional strength in the 1970s–1980s. Brown, Taylor, and Shelby (1991) reviewed ~25 river-specific studies of recreational quality, economic value, and esthetics, and their interactions with other needs for river flows. They distinguished between direct effects of river flows on recreational attributes of rivers—such as quality of flows for boating, fishing, and scenic beauty—and indirect or longer-term effects related more to the form and function of river channels and riparian habitats. These studies consistently identified a range of responses to putative minimum, optimum, and maximum flow conditions, thereby highlighting the importance of considering variation in perceptions among recreationalists ( Brown et al., 1991 ). Around the same time (1980s–1990s), in response to adjudication of water rights in the western U.S., the U.S. Forest Service developed an approach to identify channel maintenance flows to reflect the original intention of national forest protection defined in the Organic Administration Act of 1897 ( Schmidt & Potyondy, 2004 ). Flows that would maintain stream channels over time could also ensure the delivery of water to downstream users.

The development and application of more comprehensive approaches to determining environmental flows—often referred to as “holistic” approaches (sensu Tharme, 2003 )—represented a further development in systematically recognizing the connections between people and rivers ( Poff & Matthews, 2013 ). From the late 1980s, as scientists grew more aware of the inherent variability in a river’s hydrologic regime and the importance of this variability to multiple aspects of a river’s ecology ( Poff et al., 1997 ; Richter, Baumgartner, Wigington, & Braun, 1997 ), they were increasingly preoccupied with the conservation and management challenges posed by widespread river alteration, particularly by hydropower dams ( Cushman, 1985 ; Dynesius & Nilsson, 1994 ; Ligon, Dietrich, & Trush, 1995 ). This era (mid-1990s to early 2000s) saw the development and application of two new methodologies that incorporated societal goals for the future ecological condition of a river when setting flow objectives. The first of these was the Building Block Methodology (BBM) developed in South Africa ( King et al., 2000 ). A second methodology, known as Downstream Response to Imposed Flow Transformations (DRIFT), explicitly considered the “sociological” consequences of flow-related biophysical changes, giving them equal weight to other impacts encompassed by a “biophysical module” ( King & Brown, 2006 ). Using DRIFT, flow alterations affecting fisheries ( Arthington, Rall, Kennard, & Pusey, 2003 ), riparian vegetation, and water quality ( King, Brown, & Sabet, 2003 ) were considered by teams that comprised specialists involved in the fields of ecology, livestock health, public health, anthropology, sociology, water use, and resource economics ( King & Brown, 2006 ).

This period marked an advance in environmental flows through a broadened perspective to an ecosystem level, greater involvement from various stakeholders in establishing goals for river flow management, and recognition of socio-economic dependencies on flows and consequences of altered flows for human communities. Nevertheless, several limitations remained. Most environmental flow approaches of this time saw the natural world as separate from and external to the social world and sought to reconstruct an “original nature” against which human environmental practices such as flow alteration could be judged ( Richter et al., 1997 ). As a consequence of this framing and because of a biocentric approach to the research task, the focus in most methodologies remained on ecologically significant variables and processes, and their linkages to flow. Social considerations were limited to descriptions of how altered flows could affect vulnerable people; measured impacts typically related to subsistence reliance on fish and other aquatic resources, rather than being used as metrics to help set environmental flow recommendations around underlying human interactions with rivers. Furthermore, most progress on approaches described as “holistic” was still limited to a small number of regions, primarily South Africa and Australia ( Arthington, 2012 ; Poff & Matthews, 2013 ; Tharme, 2003 ).

By the turn of this century, the development and application of environmental flows had spread worldwide, with various motivating factors ( Poff et al., 2017 ). For example, in the African nations of Kenya and Tanzania, numerous flow assessments were conducted in response to new water policy frameworks that gave second priority to ecosystems in water allocation decisions, following satisfaction of basic human needs for water ( Dickens, 2011 ; Kabogo, Anderson, Hyera, & Kajanja, 2017 ; McClain, Kashaigili, & Ndomba, 2013 ). A proliferation of new hydropower projects precipitated environmental flow assessments in other places—such as Central and South America ( Anderson et al., 2018 ; Anderson, Pringle, & Rojas, 2006 ; Esselman & Opperman, 2010 ), southeast Asia including China ( Illaszewicz, Tharme, Smakhtin, & Dore, 2005 ; Wang et al. 2009 ; Blake et al., 2011 ) and Central Asia ( USAID, 2017 ). While these approaches maintained a heavy focus on hydrology or habitat-based methodologies, they included a social assessment component in some cases (e.g., Poff et al., 2017 ). Here, as with the cases referred to above, these assessments relied primarily on ecological variables to understand and quantify the relationships between people, flows and desirable ecosystem properties, often with a strong focus on economic consequences for riparian communities.

From the mid-2000s to the present, globalization has increasingly transformed and unified the science and practice of environmental flows. The first Brisbane Declaration (2007) established a common definition and global action agenda to advance environmental flows science and management. It also consolidated an international community of environmental flows practitioners that included scientists, water agencies, environmental NGOs, and engineers—those who had historically been involved—with newcomers to environmental flows from the financial, government, humanitarian, and development assistance sectors ( Poff & Matthews, 2013 ). Together, this community has expanded environmental flows science and practice far beyond its historical foundations. Today, numerous countries in Central and South America, Africa, and Asia have established legislation and advanced practical experience related to environmental flows ( Anderson et al., 2011 ; McClain & Anderson, 2015 ; Poff et al., 2017 ; Harwood et al. 2018 ).

The international community also moved to synthesize and scale up scientific knowledge of ecological responses to flow alteration ( Arthington, Bunn, Poff, & Naiman, 2006 ). The regional Ecological Limits of Hydrologic Alteration (ELOHA) framework emerged, and with it a river basin approach that articulates and quantifies testable hypotheses of ecological responses to altered flows to guide environmental flow determination ( Poff et al., 2010 ). The ELOHA incorporates human dimensions into environmental flow setting through explicit consideration of societal preferences for flow conditions and through its commitment to adaptive management ( Poff et al., 2010 ). Nevertheless, similar to earlier methodologies seeking to incorporate societal or human dimensions and variables, the core of ELOHA’s framework focuses on flow alteration-ecological response relationships. Among ELOHA’s limitations is that it has yet to consider the profound and complex interactions between people, river flows, and the governance of water, or to give critical attention to the relationships between science and society. ELOHA also privileged eco-hydrological science in the making of flow recommendations (see Finn & Jackson, 2011 ; Pahl-Wostl et al., 2013 ).

In an effort to incorporate matters of governance and strengthen the capacity for comparisons between different rivers, some researchers set out to improve the consideration ELOHA had given to the social sciences in a new framework referred to as Sustainable Management of Hydrological Alterations (SUMHA) ( Pahl-Wostl et al., 2013 ). The revised approach sought to achieve greater engagement in environmental flows research and traction within the water management sector by attending explicitly to the needs of stakeholders and including social sciences in assessment, sectoral tradeoff analysis, and other steps ( Pahl-Wostl et al., 2013 ). However, the framework could have benefited from deeper reflection on its foundational ontological and epistemological assumptions. As with previous methodologies, SUMHA and the underpinning ELOHA framework rely on an understanding of “nature” as external to social relations. More precisely, in these models, researchers conceive of water and ecosystems as resources that exist independently of social relations and can be objectively known and quantified by scientists. Furthermore, SUMHA adopts the framework of “ecosystem services” to bridge the social and eco-hydrological realms without questioning whether a universal approach to value articulation will assist the goal of understanding differences across the socio-ecological systems of the world’s rivers. Relational values are the key to pluralistic environmental valuation ( Himes & Muraca, 2018 ), and so the emphasis given by SUMHA to instrumental values is one of its limitations.

That SUMHA is premised on the ecosystem services framework is not surprising given that the globalization of environmental flows has been accompanied by growing and widespread recognition of the ecosystem services concept ( MEA, 2005 ). Freshwater ecosystem services are described as the numerous benefits humans derive from rivers and other aquatic systems in terms of provisioning goods like water, food, or fiber; regulating processes like flood control; supporting services like nutrient cycling or waste assimilation; and cultural appreciation of freshwater through spiritual and recreational benefits ( Bark et al., 2016 ).

Since the concept’s ascendance, freshwater ecosystem services have often been used in environmental flow assessments to describe a one-way flow of benefits from the human uses of rivers ( Forslund et al., 2009 ; Gilvear, Beevers, O’Keeffe, & Acreman, 2017 ; Gopal, 2016 ). Although the intention has been to raise awareness of human dependencies on rivers, in our view, the ecosystem services concept is inadequate in that it stresses nature’s provision of goods and services, but neglects the embedded, reciprocal and constitutive relationships that many human populations have with water and rivers ( Emanuel, 2019 ; Huertas & Chanchari, 2011 ; Jackson & Palmer, 2012 ; Tipa & Nelson, 2008 ). Rivers are not merely biophysical phenomena that constitute a component of an objectified and externalized nature that provides services to people. The relationship of the Lumbee people to the Lumbee river of North Carolina exemplifies the essential shortcoming of this economic concept. Informed by his experience as a Lumbee person and environmental scientist, Emanuel (2019) stresses the “bi-directional” or reciprocal relationship maintained by his tribe and its river. While acknowledging that the Lumbee River provides distinctive benefits, the relationship is not unidirectional:

“Lumbee people respect and honor the river, and they spend time in and around its waters for work, recreation, and worship. In doing so, the people and the river have each infused the other with identity to the extent that both share the same name (p. 5).”

As this quote reveals, rivers and their waters mediate social relationships through belief systems, cultural identity, institutions, knowledge and technology ( Figure 1 ). Flows connect people who relate to rivers through habitual practices and experiences that are influenced by ethics, morals and other means of socialization, and these relationships in turn shape flow regimes ( Emanuel, 2019 ; Wantzen et al., 2016 ). Human societies come to know the meaning of water and rivers from within social relationships ( Bakker, 2012 ; Krause & Strang, 2016 ). By emphasizing the relational character of human-river interactions, the concept and practice of environmental flows can provide a framework for improving our understanding of rivers as social-ecological systems.

(a) The lives and livelihoods of people across the Amazon are inextricably linked to seasonal fluctuations in river flows. Rivers are also a key component of the culture of many Amazonian Indigenous groups, such as the Shawi (pictured here). (b) Rivers offer spaces, goods, and functions that mediate social interactions. Here, a gathering of canoes in the Peruvian Amazon. Photo credits: Alvaro del Campo, The Field Museum, USA

To date, this kind of relational thinking has gained the most traction in contexts where Indigenous peoples have a significant stake in a water management issue. This is readily apparent in the recent spate of cases that have afforded legal status of personhood to rivers ( Pecharroman, 2018 ). For example, several authors have recently described developments in Australia where the idea of “cultural flows” ( Johnston et al., 2012 ; Magdaleno, 2018 ; Weir, 2009 ) has taken hold as a complement to orthodox approaches to environmental flows ( Jackson, 2017 ). Similarly, Finn and Jackson (2011) urged researchers to consider Indigenous people’s attachments to rivers in environmental flow assessment, specifically Indigenous cosmologies and ethical responsibilities in water governance. The next phase of environmental flows science, heralded by the Brisbane Declaration and Global Action Agenda 2018 ( Box 1 )—and the renewed definition of environmental flows—represents an opportunity to further these developments, to embrace these alternative views of sustainability, and to better consider the co-constitution of river flows, ecosystems, and society. In the next section, we explore case studies that have advanced our understanding of diverse human relationships with rivers. These cases represent a bridge to an emerging mindset that seeks to recognize and foster mutually beneficial relationships of interdependence between people and rivers, as well as support the full participation of those with a stake in water management decisions.

3 |. CASE STUDIES: A DIVERSITY OF RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN HUMANS AND RIVER FLOWS

There is a growing body of literature, mostly produced in the past decade, responding to the realization that the support of local people—those who most directly experience the effects of river alterations—is necessary if the goals of sustainable water management are to be met ( Conallin, Dickens, Hearne, & Allan, 2017 ; Kabogo et al., 2017 ; Lave, 2016 ). Attention within water governance to public participation and more generally to the importance of process coincided with changes in human rights law that have influenced international standards relating to community consent to water resource development. Two high profile international institutions have focused particular attention on the needs of Indigenous peoples who have suffered human rights violations and disproportionate negative impacts of large dams ( Carino & Colchester, 2010 ; Estes, 2017 ; Robison et al., 2018 ). Reporting in 2000, the World Commission on Dams helped establish as development best practice the requirement to respect the right of Indigenous peoples to give or withhold their “free, prior and informed consent” to development projects ( Carino & Colchester, 2010 ). Almost a decade later, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) affirmed the rights of Indigenous Peoples to “maintain and strengthen their distinctive spiritual relationship with their traditionally owned or otherwise occupied… waters” (Article 25 cited in Robison et al., 2018 , p. 856). The Declaration also imposed obligations on nation states to seek the free, prior and informed consent of Indigenous communities to water resource developments affecting them.

With this societal change in norms, it is becoming ever more important to satisfy the flow needs of riparian human populations dependent on rivers for their livelihood and well-being in setting environmental flow recommendations. This is a change from earlier considerations of human linkages to river flows, which focused heavily on recreational uses of rivers or scenic beauty (e.g., Brown et al., 1991 ). More recent studies have documented the linkages of river flows to floodplain agriculture, transportation, and social exchange, and to acts of reverence, cultural identity, or sense of place (see, e.g., Table 1 ; Figure 1 ).

In this section, we examine case studies from around the world that exemplify the more integrative conceptualization of environmental flows articulated in the Brisbane Declaration 2018. In that manifesto, environmental flows and aquatic ecosystems “ support human cultures, economies, sustainable livelihoods, and well-being ” ( Arthington et al., 2018 ; Box 1 ) and therefore need to build upon local ways of seeing and understanding rivers to protect not only well-established relationships, such as floodplain fisheries, but also the less visible and generally less easily quantifiable values of rivers in water resource allocation frameworks. Additionally, the selected cases offer a lens for a better understanding of power relations among stakeholders and the importance of trust in supporting and developing dynamic relationships between humans, river flow regimes, and aquatic ecosystems, through relationships that are sustainable, just, and inclusive.

3.1 |. The Patuca River, Honduras

The Patuca River, Honduras, is Central America’s third longest river and supports Indigenous Miskito and Tawahka who depend on it to sustain their lifeways. Additionally, the Patuca River is a primary conduit for transportation and communication in eastern Honduras, as much of its basin drains roadless areas. Since the 1970s, the national government has considered numerous hydropower projects. In 2006–2008, during planning for the Patuca III hydropower project, environmental flows were assessed under an agreement between The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and the Honduran National Electric Energy Corporation (ENEE) (see Esselman & Opperman, 2010 for a summary).

Scant published data on the ecology of the Patuca River were available to the environmental flows scientific team at the time of the assessment. Researchers sought to fill knowledge gaps by working with Indigenous Miskito and Tawahka. A diverse team of ecologists, hydrologists, and community members collected and systematized information for setting flow recommendations in workshops. Interviews with boat captains along the Patuca River linked low waters to extended travel time, increased risk of accidents, and associated costs. During workshops, Miskito and Tawahka community members annotated maps and photos to define river water levels important for key ecological components (e.g., fish, crocodile habitat), for vital social components (e.g., transportation, fishing), and for extreme events (e.g., Hurricane Mitch in 1998). External researchers relied on Indigenous knowledge of the river to form hypotheses about flow-dependent ecological characteristics of the Patuca River and to help them identify social factors that could be vulnerable to flow alterations ( Esselman & Opperman, 2010 ).

The process of establishing flow recommendations to ENEE for the operation of the Patuca III hydropower project focused on: (1) channel morphology; (2) aquatic organisms; and (3) terrestrial resources, human communities, and riparian forests. Researchers considered the reliance of Miskito and Tawahka communities on the Patuca River for transportation in flow recommendations, as well as the requirements for floodplain conditions to support agriculture and fisheries. Having identified the most challenging passage points for boat traffic, researchers estimated the flow levels above normal dry-season base flow level required to minimize barriers to river passage. The recommended flow rate was similar to the predicted mean outflow from the dam during normal dry-season operation.

The Patuca River case exemplifies incorporation of human dimensions in environmental flows in multiple ways. First, it involved a multidisciplinary team from diverse institutions and backgrounds, including numerous Indigenous people from the lower basin. Second, it relied primarily on local knowledge of Miskito and Tawahka peoples for understanding of flow-dependent ecological and social features of the Patuca River. Third, human dependencies on the flow dynamics of the Patuca River—for transportation, communication, floodplain agriculture, and fisheries—were incorporated as environmental flow recommendations.

3.2 |. The Ganga River, India

Millions of people consider India’s Ganga (Ganges) River sacred. Religious Hindu texts describe the river/goddess as: “ turbulent, sportive, moving, swift, leaping and booming ” and the River Ganga derives its name from the Sanskrit verb gam, meaning “to go” ( Eck, 1982 ). Over millennia, people throughout India have developed customs, rituals, and philosophies that reflect and align with the natural rhythms of the river. People depend on the Ganga for water for daily drinking and washing. Rituals such as ceremonial bathing and meditation, and traditional practices such as flood recession farming are critical to the maintenance of cultural identities. These uses of the Ganga were historically based on the availability of certain flows at different times of the year. ( Lokgariwar, Chopra, Smakhtin, Bharati, & O’Keeffe, 2014 ). People living beyond the basin also engage in some of these practices. For example, the Kumbh ceremony represents the world’s largest aggregation of people for a religious purpose. In 2013, over 80 million devotees visited Allahabad, India, to drink from and immerse themselves in the Ganga River to attain salvation ( WWF, 2013 ). The event’s significance was linked to high public expectations for adequate and clean flows in the Ganga during the celebration ( Sarkar, 2017 ).

Appreciating this context, environmental flow assessments undertaken by World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and partners for the Ganga River have focused on documenting and better quantifying socio-cultural relationships to flow, using the Building Block Methodology with inclusion of a component on cultural water requirements ( Lokgariwar et al., 2014 ; Figure 2 ). Review of historical and religious texts and participatory surveys and interviews with riverside human communities provided valuable information on the symbolic importance of the Ganga River locally and to the wider nation of India. Responses indicated that the built environment provided a means for record-keeping of historical flows, with temples and ghats (steps) marking levels of flow events. Interviewees frequently expressed cultural flow requirements with reference to depths at these sites and along banks, but also in terms of the width and depth of the Ganga channel. Using hydraulic cross-sections, the depths and widths required for cultural practices in different parts of the channel were converted into environmental flow requirements.

Flow needs for religious and spiritual practices were central to an environmental flow assessment for the Ganga River, India. Here, a gathering of pilgrims for the Kumbh festival. Photo credit: Chicu Lokgariwar

To complete the environmental flow assessment, levels of water necessary for worship, ritual bathing, and cremation rites were estimated under three scenarios: (a) flows for maintenance years (neither too wet nor too dry); (b) flows for drought years; and (c) flood flows for both maintenance and drought years. This was followed by an assessment of flow needs for a successful Kumbh in 2013. Here too, a review of texts and interviews with elders, religious leaders and visitors to the key bathing sites collected data on the desired water depth, water surface width, and velocity of the river at key bathing sites for two scenarios: (a) during the entire 12-week Kumbh and (b) during the special Snans (bathing periods) scheduled for six nonconsecutive days ( WWF, 2013 ).

Non-negotiable water depth levels were recommended for the Kumbh festival, as was a restriction on discharges of untreated waste into the Ganga River. These flow recommendations aligned well with geomorphological and biological objectives of the environmental flow assessment ( WWF, 2013 ). In response, the state government of Uttar Pradesh agreed to allocate an additional 200–300 m 3 /s for the two-month duration of the Kumbh festival ( Lokgariwar et al. 2014 ). During 2013, monitoring efforts showed that recommended water levels were maintained for more than 90% of the festival’s duration. To the best of our knowledge, the Ganga River case was a world first in giving the spiritual status of a river the highest priority for determination and implementation of environmental flows. The magnitude and importance of the celebration of the Kumbh in 2013 called for action on environmental flows, and presented an opportunity to highlight the conservation challenges facing rejuvenation of the larger Ganga Basin ( WWF, 2017 ).

3.3 |. The Athabasca River, Canada

The Athabasca River, Canada, is linked intimately to the culture and economy of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation (ACFN) and Mikisew Cree First Nation (MCFN). The rights of these First Nation peoples to hunt, trap, fish, and otherwise exercise their rights—all activities linked to the Athabasca River and the Peace-Athabasca Delta, a massive wetland complex ( Timoney, 2013 )—were recognized in Treaty No. 8 of 1899. Candler, Olsen, and DeRoy (2010) documented the relationships of the ACFN and MCFN to the river, including their concerns over navigation and broader water quality and quantity issues related to their practice of Treaty rights. Their study aimed to understand the possible effects of river alteration to the practice of Treaty rights, such as limited access, reduced quality of lands or waters for subsistence use, and erosion of opportunities for transmission of knowledge. Beyond the functional uses of the river for mobility and economic practice, for First Nations the Athabasca River is a sentient being whose liveliness drives the flow of water through the area, as indicated in a comment from an ACFN representative:

“When we were younger the Athabasca River was … a wild beast. In other words, because it was alive, it had tremendous amount of water, it fed all the tributaries, lakes and everything. When the spring flood and that occurred … it brings life to the delta and when it brought life to the delta it also kept our people healthy, our population stable and, in other words, it sustained our way of life for our people for the existence of who we are today.” ( Candler et al., 2010 , p. 12).

The 2010 study was conducted in the context of ongoing upstream oil sands development, a changing climate, and overall declining flows ( Sauchyn, St-Jacques, & Luckman, 2015 ). Candler et al. (2010) found that reductions in the quantity and quality of the Athabasca River’s flow associated with oil sands development were having adverse effects on the ability of ACFN and MCFN members to access territories, and to practice their Aboriginal and Treaty rights. Interviews with male navigators revealed that use of the river for drinking water, trapping, and teaching seemed to have declined more than use for hunting, transportation, and cultural/spiritual and wellness practices. All respondents reported that the seasonal flow of the Athabasca had changed over their lifetimes.

Based on these findings, researchers advanced environmental flow recommendations in the form of two preliminary thresholds. The first threshold, an Aboriginal Base Flow (ABF), recommends water levels for the Athabasca River and adjacent streams that allow ACFN members to fully practice their rights and access their territories. The second, an Aboriginal Extreme Flow (AXF), defines a low water level for the river below which loss of access would cause widespread disruption of Aboriginal and Treaty rights along the river, its tributaries, and the delta. Based on recollections of land-users and the normal year hydrograph of the Athabasca River, researchers made conservative estimates of flow conditions for the ABF and AXF. The study recommended that the Crown “sit with” both Nations to establish an Athabasca River Consultation and Accommodation Framework to govern future water management. This governance model would include: linking water abstraction activity to the duties of the Canadian Government under the treaty to both consult and accommodate First Nations, setting a goal for frequency of spring floods and further monitoring and refinement of AXF levels and their social and ecological impacts ( Baines, Steelman, & Bharadwaj, 2017 ).

The Athabasca River case is emblematic of the widening of scope of environmental flows in its explicit recognition of the flow definitions and needs of First Nation peoples of Canada. Even the names of the recommended flows—Aboriginal Base Flow and Aboriginal Extreme Flow—leave little doubt regarding the intended beneficiaries of these water management guidelines. The ability to practice Aboriginal rights, as recognized in a historic Treaty, and the well-being of First Nation peoples in the Athabasca River are dependent on river flows ( Baines et al., 2017 ). Additionally, the Athabasca case represents an attempt to account for Indigenous worldviews and the quality of people-place relationships, a challenging task for environmental flow assessments ( Finn & Jackson, 2011 ).

3.4 |. Murray-Darling Basin, Australia

During the past few decades there has been a significant investment in scientific research to inform environmental flow assessments in Australia, including experimentation in approaches to determining the flow requirements of Indigenous peoples ( Jackson, Pollino, Maclean, Bark, & Moggridge, 2015 ). Indeed, Indigenous leaders have initiated research into “cultural flows”, a concept which they define as “ water entitlements that [would be] legally and beneficially owned by the Indigenous Nations of a sufficient and adequate quantity and quality to improve the spiritual, cultural, environmental, social, and economic conditions of those Indigenous Nations ” ( Weir, 2009 ).

Jackson et al. (2015) describe two multidisciplinary case studies conducted in Australia’s Murray–Darling Basin to understand Indigenous values and explore the application of methods to derive water requirements to meet them. Participants shared their water values with researchers who quantified a limited set of water requirements necessary to sustain those values and then assessed whether these water requirements would be met under three alternative water management scenarios, one of which would entail a substantial reallocation of water to the environment.

The first case concerns the Werai State Forest, part of the Murray River complex of wetlands recognized under the Ramsar Convention. The Werai is described as a special place for Wamba Wamba people: it is a place “ seen by most of the local community as home ” ( Jackson et al., 2015 , p. 146). There are 349 registered Aboriginal cultural sites in the forest ( Yarkuwa Indigenous Knowledge Centre Aboriginal Corporation, 2009 ). Title to the Werai Forest is due to be handed back to the Wamba Wamba and the area is to be managed as an Indigenous Protected Area. Restoring “cultural water” to the wetland is a priority of the community ( Weir, Ross, Crew, & Crew, 2013 ). Threatening this goal, however, are changes in the frequency and duration of flooding of the Werai forest due to alterations to land use and river regulation. Concerned about the poor condition of the forest, traditional owners told researchers that they sought a more consistent delivery of environmental water under a flow regime that restores a balance in vegetation communities and provides suitable habitats for fish and waterbirds. The results of this preliminary investigation have been used by traditional owners in their discussions with the Commonwealth agency that delivers environmental water to features of ecological significance, along with a private group that brokers environmental water delivery to wetlands.

The second case, from the northern Murray–Darling Basin, concerned a small billabong (oxbow lake) that fills periodically during flood flows and the nationally registered heritage fish traps at Brewarrina on the Barwon–Darling River. Prior to European settlement, the billabong area was an important tribal meeting place. Between 1876 and 1967 it was the site of the Brewarrina Aboriginal Mission and it is now listed on the State Heritage Register. Environmental protection is a priority for the Ngemba people that maintain rights and responsibilities to their territories. Sites of spiritual significance represent important sources of cultural inspiration while also providing opportunities for recreational and subsistence pursuits, such as fishing and collecting bush foods. Two elders described why these places are special to them and their responsibilities to the river and its life: “ all legends, stories are along the river, for example where the billabong meets the river: it’s where the spirits are ” ( Jackson et al., 2015 , p. 147). Further, the heritage fish traps, as well as various other sites along the river provide evidence of past occupancy. Ngemba traditional owners stated that water needed to be allocated to sustain the “life force” flow of the river, to connect the billabong to the river at times of high flow, and to enable local sustainable development enterprises. According to Ngemba participants, changing flow regimes were the main causes of decreasing water quality and habitat loss. Researchers employed semi-structured interviews, workshops, photo voice elicitation and mapping methods to define a set of hydrologic requirements that quantified an acceptable flow regime or particular flow demands ( Jackson et al., 2015 ).

These preliminary studies demonstrate how Indigenous knowledge, values and priorities can contribute to the setting of water requirements in the Australian context. They demonstrated the potential for environmental flow assessment methods ( Finn & Jackson, 2011 ; Poff et al., 2010 ) to address direct Indigenous uses of water. Nevertheless, further discussion is required among Indigenous communities, water planners, and eco-hydrology specialists to extend these methods to meet a wider array of less tangible Indigenous values.

3.5 |. Kakaunui and Orari rivers, New Zealand

Maori, the Indigenous people of New Zealand, have developed many innovative approaches to the comanagement of freshwater ( Harmsworth et al. 2016 ). Cultural Flow Preference Studies (CFPS) offer one approach that has been implemented across New Zealand to convey to decision makers how flow regimes affect Maori cultural interests ( Tipa & Nelson, 2008 ; Tipa, Nelson, Home, & Tipa, 2016 ). A CFPS represents a different way of thinking about the role of people in the setting of environmental flows, and a new way of conceptualizing how people react to rivers. It recognizes that people view a landscape and make judgments concerning the type and quality of experiences they expect to have and the ease of accessing, exploring, using and functioning in the environment they are viewing ( Chenge, 2007 ; Kaplan & Kaplan, 1982 ).

To develop the CFPS approach, Maori provided descriptions of river flows, river use, and the attributes that describe healthy vibrant rivers that support cultural beliefs, values, and uses ( Figure 3 ). From these descriptions, valued flow attributes formed the basis for field assessments. Cultural assessments of sites identified by Maori utilize a process akin to customer satisfaction assessments and environmental preference studies ( Tipa, 2010 ). Cultural flow preferences, and importantly the flow thresholds, are calculated for four themes: mahinga kai —gathering of foods and other materials for cultural use (up to nine attributes); Wai Maori —freshwater (four attributes); hauora —well-being (three attributes), and cultural landscapes (three attributes).

(a) A tribal member completing a cultural assessment of a tributary of the Kakaunui River, New Zealand. (Photo: Kyle Nelson). (b) As part of the Kakaunui Cultural Flow Preference Study, tribal members chose to complement their cultural assessments with data about eel presence, collected through electrofishing (Photo: Myra Tipa)

We describe results of CFPSs in the Kakaunui and Orari river catchments in New Zealand ( Tipa & Nelson, 2012a , 2012b ). Through field visits, structured assessments, and observations, average scores for various flow attributes and for each of the four themes (i.e., Wai Maori, Cultural Landscape, Cultural Use, and Hauora) were determined at several sites in each catchment. These average scores were compared with average recorded river flows for the time and date of the assessment. Additional data were collected using experiential study methods, specifically personal interviews with tribal members, focus groups, the use of pictorial information, open ended questions, and cognitive mapping.

For the Kakaunui Catchment, the data confirmed that flows for one site in the Kakaunui Catchment (at Mill Dam) at or below 350 L/s were consistently scored as being unsatisfactory across all four themes. However, assessors also rated flows between 350 and 650 L/s as unsatisfactory and of concern for at least one of the themes. These initial analyses that consider the ratings for satisfaction and a weighting for the significance of each attribute suggested that the current minimum flow of 250 L/s could be considered too low by Maori ( Tipa and Nelson 2012b ). In the Orari River, the data suggested that Maori were highly unlikely to support a flow of less than 900 L/s because flows below this level exposed the riverbed, led to the accumulation of nuisance plants, and impeded fishing from Maori lands ( Tipa and Nelson 2012a ).

Flow conditions impact how Maori feel about a site. As kaitiaki (guardians), Maori are expected to ensure healthy condition of sites within their territories are available for all to engage with safely. However, when flows in the Kakaunui River were below 350 L/s for prolonged periods, Maori believed that the health of the sites prevented use; they did not believe that there was a good feel to the sites, and they were not proud of the condition of the sites. These feelings impact their cultural well-being. Maori also acknowledge a minimum flow is only one aspect of the flow regime. A range of flows, their timing, and duration all help determine whether or not a site supports cultural use and sustains ecosystems. Therefore, the flow assessment process is necessarily a partnership combining the expertise of biophysical and other scientists with the intimate knowledge and experience of Maori ( Tipa & Severne, 2010 ).

4 |. DISCUSSION

The above-mentioned cases represent early efforts to recognize, prioritize and incorporate the social and cultural importance of river flow regimes in environmental flow assessments. The purpose of this incorporation is to improve water management and governance by connecting human communities, satisfying spiritual and religious needs, and protecting Indigenous rights and well-being, in accordance with international human rights standards. Nevertheless, these cases only scratch the surface of the multitude of relationships between humans and rivers and the opportunities for incorporating them into environmental flows. We encourage further exploration of still under-recognized or hidden river flow values and dependencies. Examples might include the linkages between a river’s flow and: a sense of place, identity, subsistence resources, religious and ancestral belief systems, well-being, language or locally important narratives, and education practices, among others ( Table 1 ; Figure 4 ). We also urge wider acceptance and more explicit inclusion of diverse knowledge of rivers, not only limiting flow assessments to forms of expertise based on the hydrograph as the main framing principle. There are many examples of other ways of knowing or seeing rivers that are insightful for developing more sustainable and just interactions between societies and rivers. In the Amazon, rivers are central to the worldviews of Indigenous communities. Amazonian rivers can include features such as underwater cities which provide shelter to drowned relatives ( Fraser & Tello Imaina, 2015 ) and can sustain ancestors who protect water resources and whose existence is also influenced by flow ( Huertas & Chanchari, 2011 ). In north Australia, many Aboriginal traditions affirm the role of the Rainbow Serpent as driver of the hydrological cycle and bringer of the wet season floods ( Liedloff et al., 2013 ). In Africa, there is widespread belief in river Gods and spirits that have their own water requirements, often related to deep pools of clear water or waterfalls; these Gods can be angered by changes to flow regime through water infrastructure ( Breen, Jaganyi, Tham, & Zeka, 2006 ; Main, 1990 ; Siegel, 2008 ).

For many human populations around the world, river flows are linked to livelihood, identity, sense of place, religious beliefs and ceremonies, language systems, or educational practices. These embedded, reciprocal, and constitutive relationships between humans and rivers remain poorly understood, but can be critically important to assessment and implementation of environmental flows

In these and other water knowledge and management traditions, riparian communities are keen to hold on to their custodial rights and responsibilities and would like to maintain their relationships with each other and with the river. How to reconcile such desires with national policies and legislation is still very much an open question. Further, a movement to recognize rivers as agents with lifegiving force and personality has taken hold in Colombia, New Zealand, and India ( Pecharroman, 2018 ). Granting legal personhood to rivers foregrounds reciprocal exchanges between people and rivers, emphasizing mutual responsibilities over narrow utilitarian definitions of human benefit from water and resource extraction ( O’Donnell & Talbot-Jones, 2018 ). These new frontiers of water governance represent promising avenues for improving the assessment and implementation of environmental flows within the blueprint of the renewed Brisbane Declaration and Global Action Agenda ( Arthington et al., 2018 ).

The cases described in this paper illustrate opportunities for the adaptation of existing environmental flow methodologies to achieve greater consideration of river-human relationships, but also underscore the relevance of new approaches that use social and cultural perspectives for framing sustainable ways of living with rivers that can perhaps complement or partly replace typical environmental flow assessments. These cases are also consistent in underscoring the need for interdisciplinary teams that include social scientists so as to draw on their knowledge and methods. Notwithstanding those advances, the majority of environmental flow approaches still retain a modernist ontological framing, one in which scientific knowledge defines the river as a natural or biophysical entity that can be objectively known. Cultural values and social relations appear at best as additional factors or dimensions that need to be incorporated in the biophysical framing of environmental flow assessments. In this prevailing framing, alternative (nonmodern) ways of engaging with, talking about, living with and indeed defining and knowing rivers are relegated to the realm of “culture.”

For the science and practice of environmental flows to advance according to the internationally-agreed definition and actions recommended in the 2018 Brisbane Declaration, there is a need for increased acceptance that the production of scientific knowledge about rivers is itself also a social and cultural process ( Johnston et al., 2012 ; Magdaleno, 2018 ). All scientific concepts are partial and historical, as Poff and Matthews (2013) acknowledge in their history of the evolution of environmental flows. In developing the natural flow paradigm ( Poff et al., 1997 ), an idea that has provided a solid conceptual basis for environmental flows, river flow was seen as one of many significant environmental variables but it came to be considered the “master variable” governing river ecosystem characteristics and functions. In another sense, flow was seen as a ‘master variable’ in the era of widespread dam construction, for it could most readily be controlled or “mastered” with the know-how of scientists and engineers and through the infrastructure that harnessed the power of water.

Realization of the renewed Brisbane Declaration ( Box 1 ) requires a rethink of relationships between humans and rivers. A crucial step will be for researchers and water managers to reflexively acknowledge the diversity of ways of knowing, relating, and utilizing rivers, to move towards more locally or contextually situated assessments and negotiations of environmental flows. This will lead to better recognition of the mutual interdependencies between humans and rivers, and support the development of effective approaches to foster more mutually beneficial modes of relating to rivers in situations where water extraction and river regulation threaten to undermine the health of rivers and their dependent human communities. Achieving this requires that assessment and negotiation processes allow sufficient time for full inclusion of all interests and for disempowered groups to be afforded opportunities to influence project scope and methods. The Brisbane Declaration’s accompanying Global Action Agenda offers guidance for continued advancement towards incorporation of river-human relationships in environmental flows, through recommendations for leadership and governance, management, and research. The greatest challenge may be to deepen, pluralize and diversify understandings of the relationships between humans and rivers, and place the acceptance that there are many different ways of seeing and knowing rivers at the core of environmental flow assessments and their implementation.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Discussions at SESYNC that included Siva Sivaplan, Lisa Perras Gordon, Paul Lumley, and Jon Kramer helped inform material presented in this paper. We are grateful to the many people who participated in the case studies we describe and especially to Sarah Baines and Peter Esselman for review of material from the Athabasca and Patuca case studies, respectively. Special thanks go to Nadia Seeteram for her assistance with literature searches and reference management and to Ann Marshall for preparation of Figure 4 . The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The multidisciplinary and cross-regional collaboration that informed this paper was in large part supported by the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC) under funding received from the National Science Foundation DBI-1052875. S. Jackson was supported from a grant from the Australian Research Council’s Future Fellowships Program (project number FT130101145). M. Douglas was supported by the Australian Government’s National Environmental Science Program. C. Dickens recognizes Water, Land, and Ecosystems for support. E. Anderson acknowledges support from The MacArthur Foundation under grant agreements #16-1607-151 and G-106564-0. We thank Stuart Lane, Ryan Emanuel, and an anonymous reviewer for helpful comments that improved this manuscript.

Funding information

Australian Research Council, Grant/Award Number: FT130101145; John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Grant/Award Numbers: 16-1607-151, G-106564-0; U.S. National Science Foundation, Grant/Award Number: DBI-1052875

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors have declared no conflicts of interest for this article.

RELATED WIREs ARTICLES

Modern water and its discontents: a history of hydrosocial renewal

Water and Indigenous rights: Mechanisms and pathways of recognition, representation, and redistribution

FURTHER READING

• Acreman MC, & Dunbar MJ (2004). Defining environmental river flow requirements—A review . Hydrology and Earth System Sciences , 8 ( 5 ), 861–876. [ Google Scholar ]
• Awatere SR, Taura M, Watene-Rawiri Y, Reihana E, Te Maru K, & Harmsworth G (2017). Insights for government, councils and industry Wai Ora Wai Māori—A kaupapa Māori assessment tool . Technical report [ Google Scholar ]
• CDM Smith. (2016). Environmental flows in Rufiji River Basin assessed from the perspective of planned development in Kilombero and Lower Rufiji Sub-basins . Technical assistance to support the development of irrigation and rural roads infrastructure project (IRRIP2) . CDM Smith for USAID/Tanzania. [ Google Scholar ]
• CDM Smith. (2018). Water for the environment in Tanzania: Environmental flows through reserve implementation in the Rufiji River Basin. Extended Policy Brief . Tanzania: CDM Smith for USAID . [ Google Scholar ]
• Olden JD, Konrad C, Melis T, Kennard M, Freeman M, Mims M, … Williams J (2014). Are large-scale flow experiments informing the science and management of freshwater ecosystems? Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment , 12 , 176–185. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shelby B, Whittaker D, & Hansen W (1997). Streamflow effects on hiking in Zion National Park , Utah. Rivers , 6 ( 2 ), 80–93. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tweddle D (2010). Overview of the Zambezi River system: Its history, fish fauna, fisheries, and conservation . Aquatic Ecosystem Health, Management , 13 ( 3 ), 224–240. [ Google Scholar ]
• Xiqin W, Zhang Y, & Cassandra J (2009). Approaches to providing and managing environmental flows in China . International Journal of Water Resources Development , 25 ( 2 ), 283–300. [ Google Scholar ]
• Acreman MC, Overton IC, King J, Wood PJ, Cowx IG, Dunbar MJ, … Young WJ (2014). The changing role of eco-hydrological science in guiding environmental flows . Hydrological Sciences Journal , 59 ( 3–4 ), 433–450. [ Google Scholar ]
• Amberson S, Biedenweg K, James J, & Christie P (2016). The heartbeat of our people: Identifying and measuring how salmon influences Quinault tribal well-being . Society and Natural Resources , 29 ( 12 ), 1389–1404. [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson EP, Encalada A, Maldonado-Ocampo JA, McClain ME, Ortega H, & Wilcox BP (2011). Environmental flows: A concept for addressing effects of river alterations and climate change in the Andes. Chapter 23 In Herzog SK, Martinez R, Jorgensen PM, & Tiessen H (Eds.), Climate change effects on the biodiversity of the tropical Andes: An assessment of the status of scientific knowledge . San Jose dos Campos and Paris: Inter-American Institute of Global Change Research (IAI) and Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE). [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson EP, Jenkins CN, Heilpern S, Maldonado-Ocampo JA, Carvajal-Vallejos F, Encalada AC, … Tedesco PA (2018). Fragmentation of Andes-to-Amazon riverine connectivity by hydropower dams . Science Advances , 4 ( 1 ), eaao1642.. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Anderson EP, Pringle CM, & Rojas M (2006). Transforming tropical rivers: An environmental perspective on hydropower development in Costa Rica . Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Systems , 16 , 679–693. [ Google Scholar ]
• Arthington AH (2012). Environmental flows: Saving rivers in the third millennium (p. 406). Berkeley, CA: Univerity of California Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Arthington AH, Bhaduri A, Bunn SE, Jackson SE, Tharme RE, Tickner D, … Ward S (2018). The Brisbane declaration and global action agenda on environmental flows (2018) . Frontiers in Environmental Science , 6 , 45. [ Google Scholar ]
• Arthington AH, Bunn SE, Poff NL, & Naiman RJ (2006). The challenge of providing environmental flow rules to sustain river ecosystems . Ecological Applications , 16 ( 4 ), 1311–1331. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Arthington AH, Rall JL, Kennard MJ, & Pusey BJ (2003). Environmental flow requirements of fish in Lesotho Rivers using the DRIFT methodology . River Research and Applications , 19 ( 5–6 ), 641–666. [ Google Scholar ]
• Baines S, Steelman T, & Bharadwaj L (2017). Indigenous flows in the lower Athabasca River, Canada: A bridging dialogue to meaningfully impact water policy innovation Paper presented at international river foundation 20 th annual river symposium , Brisbane, Australia. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bakker K (2012). Water: Political, biopolitical, material . Social Studies of Science , 42 ( 4 ), 616–623. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bark RH, Colloff MJ, Hatton MacDonald D, Pollino CA, Jackson S, & Crossman ND (2016). Integrated valuation of ecosystem services from restoring water to the environment in a major regulated river basin . Ecosystem Services , 22 , 381–391. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bark RH, Robinson CJ, & Flessa KW (2016). Tracking cultural ecosystem services: Water chasing the Colorado River restoration pulse flow . Ecological Economics , 127 , 165–172. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bark RH, Robinson CJ, Jackson SE, & Flessa KW (2017). The co-construction of environmental (instream) flows and associated cultural ecosystem benefits In Schandl H & Walker I (Eds.), Social science and sustainability (pp. 131–144). Clayton South. Victoria, Australia: CSIRO Publishing. [ Google Scholar ]
• Blake DJH, Sunthornratana U, Promphakping B, Buaphuan S, Sarkkula J, Kummu M, Ta-oun M, Waleetorncheepsawat P, Boonyothayan S, Tharme R, Osbeck M, & Janprasart S (2011). E-flows in the Nam Songkhram River Basin. Final Report M-POWER Mekong Program on Water, Environment and Resilience, IUCN, IWMI, CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food, and Aalto University , Finland: 109 pp. [ Google Scholar ]
• Boelens R (2014). Cultural politics and the hydrosocial cycle: Water, power and identity in the Andean highlands . Geoforum , 57 , 234–247. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bovee KD, Milhous R (1978). Hydraulic simulation in instream flow studies: Theory and techniques . IFIP No. 5. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. [ Google Scholar ]
• Breen CM, Jaganyi J, Tham C, & Zeka S (2006). Integrating socio-economic and cultural values as additional components of the criteria for estimating and managing the ‘Reserve’ with an emphasis on rural communities Report Number 1195/1/06. Water Research Commission , Pretoria, South Africa: ISBN No. 1-77005-077-9. [ Google Scholar ]
• Declaration Brisbane. (2007). Environmental flows are essential for freshwater ecosystem health and human well-being ( www.eflownet.org ) . Paper presented at 10th international river symposium and international environmental flows conference , 3–6 September 2007, Brisbane, Australia. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brown TC, Taylor JG, & Shelby B (1991). Assessing the direct effects of streamflow on recreation: A literature review . Journal of the American Water Resources Association , 27 ( 6 ), 979–989. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cai X (2017). Living with floods: Household perception and satellite observations in the Barotse floodplain, Zambia . Physics and Chemistry of the Earth , 100 , 278–286. [ Google Scholar ]
• Candler C, Olsen R, & DeRoy S (2010). As long as the rivers flow: Athabasca River knowledge, use and change, Firelight Group Research Cooperative, Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, Mikisew Cree First Nation, Parkland Institute . Canada: Canadian Electronic Library. [ Google Scholar ]
• Carino J, & Colchester M (2010). From dams to development justice: Progress with ‘free, prior and informed consent’ since the World Commission on Dams . Water Alternatives , 3 , 423–437. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chenge CK (2007). Understanding Visual Preferences for Landscapes: An Examination of the Relationship between Aesthetics and Emotional Bonding A Dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of Doctor of Philosophy . Office of Graduate Studies, Texas A&M University. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chowdury RB, & Moore GA (2017). Floating agriculture: A potential cleaner production technique for climate change adaptation and sustainable community development in Bangladesh . Journal of Cleaner Production , 150 , 371–389. [ Google Scholar ]
• Conallin JC, Dickens C, Hearne D, & Allan C (2017, 2017). Stakeholder engagement in environmental water management In Horne AC, O’Donnell EL, Webb JA, Stewardson MJ, Acreman M, & Richter B (Eds.), Water for the Environment: From Policy and Science to Implementation and Management (pp. 173 , 173–188, 188). Academic Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cox M (2014). Applying a social-ecological system framework to the study of the Taos Valley Irrigation System . Human Ecology , 42 , 311–324. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cushman RM (1985). Review of the ecological effects of rapidly varying flows downstream of hydroelectric facilities . North American Journal of Fisheries Management , 5 , 330–339. [ Google Scholar ]
• DeGraaf G (2003). The flood pulse and growth of floodplain fish in Bangladesh. Fisheries Management and Ecology , 10 , 241–247. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dickens CWS (2011). Critical analysis of environmental flow assessments of selected rivers in Tanzania and Kenya (p. Viii+104) . South Africa: IUCN ESARO Office and Scottsville, INR. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dilts E (2005). Development of an integrated flow regime recommendation for the Cheoah River, N.C In Hatcher KJ (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2005 Georgia water resources conference . Athens, Georgia: Institute of Ecology, The University of Georgia. [ Google Scholar ]
• Douglas A, & Taylor J (1998). Riverine based ecotourism . International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology , 5 , 136–148. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dynesius M, & Nilsson C (1994). Fragmentation and flow regulation of river systems in the northern third of the world . Science , 266 ( 5186 ), 753–762. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Eck DL (1982). Ganga: The goddess in Hindu sacred geography In The divine consort: Radha and the goddesses of India (pp. 166–183). Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Religious Studies Series. [ Google Scholar ]
• Emanuel RE (2019). Water in the lumbee world: A river and its people in a time of change . Environmental History , 24 ( 1 ), 25–51. [ Google Scholar ]
• Esselman PC, & Opperman JJ (2010). Overcoming information limitations for the prescription of an environmental flow regime for a Central American River . Ecology and Society , 15 ( 1 ), 6. [ Google Scholar ]
• Estes N (2017). Fighting for Our Lives:# NoDAPL in Historical Context . Wicazo Sa Review , 32 ( 2 ), 115–122. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fey N (2014). Defining recreation streamflow needs in the Lower Dolores River , Unpublished report . [ Google Scholar ]
• Finn M, & Jackson S (2011). Protecting indigenous values in water management: A challenge to conventional environmental flow assessments . Ecosystems , 14 ( 8 ), 1232–1248. [ Google Scholar ]
• Forslund A, Renöfält BM, Barchiesi S, Cross K, Davidson S, Farrel T, Korsgaard L, Krchnak K, McClain M, Meijer K, & Smith M (2009). Securing water for ecosystems and human well-being: The importance of environmental flows Swedish Water House Report 24 , SIWI. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fraser B, & Tello Imaina L (2015). Culture, ecology get short shrift in river plans (pp. 6–8). Beverly, MA: EcoAmericas. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gilvear D, Beevers L, O’Keeffe J, & Acreman M (2017, 2017). Environmental flows and natural capital—free-flowing ecosystem services In Horne AC, O’Donnell EL, Webb JA, Stewardson MJ, Acreman M, & Richter B (Eds.), Water for the environment: From policy and science to implementation and management (pp. 155–176). Academic Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gopal B (2016). A conceptual framework for environmental flows assessment based on ecosystem services and their economic valuation . Ecosystem Services , 21 , 53–58. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hamerlynck O, Duvail S, Vandepitte L, Kindinda K, Nyingi D, Paul J, … Snoeks J (2011). To connect or not to connect? Floors, fisheries, and livelihoods in the Lower Rufiji floodplain lakes , Tanzania. Hydrological Sciences Journal , 56 ( 8 ), 1436–1451. [ Google Scholar ]
• Harmsworth G, Awatere S, & Robb M (2016). Indigenous Maori values and perspectives to inform freshwater management in Aotearoa-New Zealand . Ecology and Society , 21 ( 4 ), 9. [ Google Scholar ]
• Harris M (1998). The rhythm of life on the Amazon floodplain: Seasonality and sociality in a riverine village . The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute , 4 , 65–82. [ Google Scholar ]
• Harwood AJ, Tickner D, Richter BD, Locke A, Johnson S, & Yu X (2018). Critical factors for water policy to enable effective environmental flow implementation . Frontiers in Environmental Science , 6 , 37. [ Google Scholar ]
• Heeg J, & Breen CM (1982). Man and the Pongolo Floodplain South African National Scientific Programmes Report No. 56. CSIR , Pretoria, South Africa. [ Google Scholar ]
• Himes A, & Muraca B (2018). Relational values: The key to pluralistic valuation of ecosystem services . Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability , 35 , 1–7. [ Google Scholar ]
• Huertas B, & Chanchari M (2011). Agua, Cultura y Territorialidad en el pueblo Shawi del río Sillay . Lima, Peru: Terra Nuova. [ Google Scholar ]
• Illaszewicz J, Tharme R, Smakhtin V, & Dore J (Eds.). (2005). Environmental flows. Rapid environmental flow assessment for the Huong River Basin, Central Vietnam . Hanoi, Vietnam: IUCN Vietnam. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jackson S (2017, 2017). How much water does a culture need? Environmental water management’s cultural challenge and indigenous responses In Horne AC, O’Donnell EL, Webb JA, Stewardson MJ, Acreman M, & Richter B (Eds.), Water for the environment: From policy and science to implementation and management . Academic Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jackson S, & Palmer L (2012). Modernising water: Articulating custom in water governance in Australia and Timor Leste . International Indigenous Policy Journal , 3 ( 3 ), 7. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jackson S, Pollino C, Maclean K, Bark R, & Moggridge B (2015). Meeting Indigenous peoples’ objectives in environmental flow assessments: Case studies from an Australian multi-jurisdictional water sharing initiative . Journal of Hydrology , 522 , 141–151. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jacob C, McDaniels T, & Hinch S (2010). Indigenous culture and adaptation to climate change: Sockeye salmon and the St’át’imc people . Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change , 15 , 859–876. [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnston B, Hiwasaki L, Klaver I, Castillo AR, & Strang V (Eds.). (2012). Water, cultural diversity, and global environmental change: Emerging trends, sustainable futures? Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kabogo J, Anderson EP, Hyera P, & Kajanja G (2017). Facilitating public participation in water resources management : Reflections from Tanzania. Ecology and Society , 22 ( 4 ), 26. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kaplan S, & Kaplan R (1982). Cognition and the environment: Functioning in an uncertain world . New York, NY: Praeger. [ Google Scholar ]
• King J, & Brown C (2006). Environmental flows: Striking the balance between development and resource protection . Ecology and Society , 11 ( 2 ), 26. [ Google Scholar ]
• King J, Brown C, & Sabet H (2003). A scenario-based holistic approach to environmental flow assessment for rivers . River Research and Applications , 19 ( 5–6 ), 619–639. [ Google Scholar ]
• King J, Tharme R, & Villiers DE (2000). Environmental flow assessments for rivers: Manual for the Building Block Methodology . Water Research Commission Report No.TT131/00 [ Google Scholar ]
• Klaver I (2012). Placing water and culture. In Johnston B, Hiwasaki L, Klaver I, Castillo AR, & Strang V (Eds.), Water, cultural diversity, and global environmental change: Emerging trends, sustainable futures? (pp. 9–20). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer. [ Google Scholar ]
• Krause F, & Strang V (2016). Thinking relationships through water . Society and Natural Resources , 29 ( 6 ), 633–638. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lamb B, & Doerksen H (1987). Instream water use in the United States—Water laws and methods for determining flow requirements. In U.S. geological survey, national water summary— Hydrological events and water supply and use, water supply paper 2350 (pp. 109–116). Denver, CO: U.S: Geological Survey. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lansing JS (2006). Perfect order: Recognizing complexity in Bali . Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lave R (2016). Stream restoration and the surprisingly social dynamics of science . WIREs Water , 3 , 75–81. [ Google Scholar ]
• Liedloff A, Woodward E, Harrington G, & Jackson S (2013). Integrating indigenous ecological and scientific hydro-geological knowledge using a Bayesian Network in the context of water resource development . Journal of Hydrology , 499 , 177–187. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ligon FK, Dietrich WE, & Trush WJ (1995). Downstream ecological effects of dams . Bioscience , 45 , 183–192. [ Google Scholar ]
• Linton J (2014). Modern water and its discontents: A history of hydrosocial renewal. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews : Water , 1 ( 1 ), 111–120. [ Google Scholar ]
• Linton J, & Budds J (2014). The hydrosocial cycle: Defining and mobilizing a relational dialectical approach to water . Geoforum , 57 , 170–180. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lokgariwar C, Chopra R, Smakhtin V, Bharati L, & O’Keeffe J (2014). Including cultural water requirements in environmental flow assessment: An example from the upper Ganga River , India. Water International , 39 ( 1 ), 81–96. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lowery MM (2018). The lumbee Indians: An American struggle . Chapel Hill, NC: UNC Press Books. [ Google Scholar ]
• Magdaleno F (2018). Flows, ecology and people: Is there room for cultural demands in the assessment of environmental flows? Water Science and Technology , 77 ( 7 ), 1777–1781. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Main M (1990). Zambezi. Journey of a river (p. 313). Halfway House: Southern Book Publishers. Pty (Ltd). [ Google Scholar ]
• Mantyka-Pringle CS, Jardine TD, Bradford L, Bharadwaj L, Kythreotis AP, Fresque-Baxter J, … Slave River and Delta Partnership. (2017). Bridging science and traditional knowledge to assess cumulative impacts of stressors on aquatic ecosystems . Environment International , 102 , 125–137. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McClain ME, & Anderson EP (2015). The gap between best practice and actual practice in the allocation of environmental flows in integrated water resources management In Setegn S & Donoso M (Eds.), Sustainability of integrated water resources management . Switzerland: Springer. [ Google Scholar ]
• McClain ME, Kashaigili JJ, & Ndomba P (2013). Environmental flow assessment as a tool for achieving environmental objectives of African water policy, with examples from East Africa . International Journal of Water Resources Development , 29 ( 4 ), 650–665. [ Google Scholar ]
• McGinnis MD, & Ostrom E (2014). Social-ecological system framework: Initial changes and continuing challenges . Ecology and Society , 19 ( 2 ), 30. [ Google Scholar ]
• Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA). (2005). Ecosystem and human well-being . Washington, DC: Island Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Montag JM, Swan K, Jenni K, & Maule A (2014). Climate change and Yakama Nation tribal well-being . Climatic Change , 124 , 385–398. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nguyen TH, & Ross A (2017). Barriers and opportunities for the involvement of indigenous knowledge in water resources management in the Gam River Basin in north-east Vietnam . Water Alternatives , 10 ( 1 ), 134–159. [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Donnell EL, & Talbot-Jones J (2018). Creating legal rights for rivers: Lessons from Australia, New Zealand, and India . Ecology and Society , 23 ( 1 ), 7. [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Keeffe J, Graas S, Mombo F, & McClain M (2017). Stakeholder-enhanced environmental flow assessment: The Rufiji Basin case study in Tanzania . River Research and Applications , 2017 , 1–9. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ortiz E, Mendez A, Zarzycki A, & Alcorn J (2008). Fox walker on the Parapeti River, Bolivia: The origins of how we Guarani live In Staller JE (Ed.), Íví. Pre-Columbian landscapes of creation and origin (pp. 161–202). New York, NY: Springer. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pahl-Wostl C, Arthington A, Bogardi J, Bunn SE, Hoff H, Lebel L, … Tsegai D (2013). Environmental flows and water governance: Managing sustainable water uses . Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability , 5 , 1–11. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pecharroman L (2018). Rights of nature: Rivers that can stand in court . Resources , 7 , 13. [ Google Scholar ]
• Poff NL, Allan JD, Bain MB, Karr JR, Prestegaard KL, Richter BD, … Stromberg JC (1997). The natural flow regime: A paradigm for river conservation and restoration . Bioscience , 47 , 769–784. [ Google Scholar ]
• Poff NL, & Matthews JH (2013). Environmental flows in the Anthropocence: Past progress and future prospects . Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability , 5 , 1–9. [ Google Scholar ]
• Poff NL, Tharme RE, & Arthington AH (2017, 2017). Evolution of environmental flows assessment science, principles, and methodologies In Horne AC, O’Donnell EL, Webb JA, Stewardson MJ, Acreman M, & Richter B (Eds.), Water for the environment: From policy and science to implementation and management (pp. 203–236). Academic Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Poff NL, Richter BC, Arthington AH, Bunn SE, Naiman RJ, Kendy E, … Warner A (2010). The ecological limits of hydrologic alteration (ELOHA): A new framework for developing regional environmental flow standards . Freshwater Biology , 55 ( 1 ), 147–170. [ Google Scholar ]
• Richter BD, Baumgartner JV, Wigington R, & Braun DP (1997). How much water does a river need? Freshwater Biology , 37 , 231–249. [ Google Scholar ]
• Robison J, Cosens B, Jacskon S, Leonard K, & McCool D (2018). Indigenous water justice. Lewis & Clark Law Review , 22 ( 3 ), 873–953. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sarkar S (2017). India’s Kumbh Melas are running short of water . India: Scroll; https://scroll.in/article/811143/indias-kumbh-melas-are-running-short-of-water [ Google Scholar ]
• Sauchyn DJ, St-Jacques JM, & Luckman BH (2015). Long-term reliability of the Athabasca River (Alberta, Canada) as the water source for oil sands mining . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America , 112 , 12621–12626. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schmidt LJ, & Potyondy JP (2004). Quantifying channel maintenance instream flows: An approach for gravel-bed streams in the Western United States. Gen. Tech. Rep RMRS-GTR-128 . Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shelby B, Brown TC, & Baumgartner R (1992). Effects of streamflows on river trips on the Colorado River in Grand Canyon , Arizona. Rivers , 3 ( 3 ), 191–201. [ Google Scholar ]
• Siegel B (2008). Water spirits and mermaids: The copperbelt chitapo (p. 2). Furman University, Greenville, SC: Anthropology Publications. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sivapalan M, Savenije HHG, & Blöschl G (2012). Socio-hydrology: A new science of people and water . Hydrological Processes , 26 ( 8 ), 1270–1276. [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith B, Clifford NJ, & Mant J (2014). The changing nature of river restoration . WIREs Water , 1 , 249–261. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stalnaker C, Lamb BL, Henriksen J, Bovee K, & Bartholew J (1995). The instream flow incremental methodology: A primer for IFIM . Washington D.C.: United Stated Department of the Interior. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tennant DL (1976). Instream flow regimes for fish, wildlife, recreation and related environmental resources . Fisheries , 1 ( 4 ), 6–10. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tharme RE (2003). A global perspective on environmental flow assessment: Emerging trends in the development and application of environmental flow methodologies for rivers . River Research and Applications , 19 ( 5–6 ), 397–441. [ Google Scholar ]
• Timoney KP (2013). The Peace-Athabasca delta: Portrait of a dynamic ecosystem (p. 608). Edmonton, Canada: The University of Alberta Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tinley KL (1964). Fishing methods of the Thonga tribe in north-eastern Zululand and southern Mozambique . Lammergeyer , 3 ( 1 ), 9–39. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tipa G (2010). In Mulholland M (Ed.), Cultural opportunity assessments: Introducing a framework for assessing the suitability of stream flow from a cultural perspective . Wellington, New Zealand: Wai Maori Aoraki Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tipa G, & Nelson K (2008). Introducing cultural opportunities: A framework for incorporating cultural perspectives in contemporary resource management . Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning , 4 , 313–337. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tipa G, & Nelson K (2012a). Cultural flow preferences for the Orari catchment—A report prepared for Environment Canterbury Unpublished report . New Zealand: Tipa and Associates Ltd. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tipa G, & Nelson K (2012b). Identifying cultural flow preferences: The Kakaunui river case study . Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management , 138 ( 6 ), 660–670. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tipa G, Nelson K, Home M, & Tipa M (2016). Policy responses to the identification by Maori of flows necessary to maintain their cultural values [online] In 37th Hydrology, water resources symposium: Water, infrastructure and the environment (pp. 552–561). Barton, ACT: Engineers Australia. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tipa G, & Severne C (2010). Including Mātauranga Māori in environmental flow setting decisions NIWA client report: HAM2010–030, NIWA project: MFE10301, National Institute of Water, Atmospheric Research Ltd 301 Evans Bay Parade, Greta Point, Wellington, Private Bag 14901 , Kilbirnie, Wellington, New Zealand. [ Google Scholar ]
• UN Environment. (2017). A framework for freshwater ecosystem management Volume 1: Overview and country guide . New York, NY: United Nations. [ Google Scholar ]
• USAID Governing for Growth (G4G) in Georgia (2017). Methodology for the assessment of environmental flows for the rivers and streams of Georgia In Technical report prepared by Georgia’s Environmental Outlook (GEO) and Deloitte Consulting LLP (p. 19). Tbilisi, Georgia: GEO and Deloitte Consulting. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wang JX, Huang JK, Rozelle S, Huang QQ, & Zhang LJ (2009). Understanding the water crisis in northern China: What the government and farmers are doing . Water Resources Development , 25 ( 1 ), 141–158. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wantzen KM, Ballouche A, Longuet I, Bao I, Bocoum H, Cissé L, … Zalewski M (2016). River Culture: An eco-social approach to mitigate the biological and cultural diversity crisis in riverscapes . Ecohydrology and Hydrobiology , 16 ( 1 ), 7–18. [ Google Scholar ]
• Weir J (2009). Murray river country: A dialogue with traditional owners . Canberra, Australia: Aboriginal Studies Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Weir JK, Ross SL, Crew DRJ, & Crew JL (2013). Cultural water and the Edward/Kolety and Wakool river system, research report, AIATSIS Centre for Land and Water Research , Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, Canberra. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wesselink A, Kooy M, & Warner J (2017). Socio-hydrology and hydrosocial analysis: Toward dialogues across disciplines . WIREs Water , 4 , e1196. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wiegleb V, & Bruns A (2018). Hydro-social arrangements and paradigmatic change in water governance: An analysis of the sustainable development goals (SDGs) . Sustainability Science , 13 ( 4 ), 1155–1166. [ Google Scholar ]
• WWAP (United Nations World Water Assessment Programme). (2018). The United Nations world water development report 2018: Water for a sustainable world . Paris, France: UNESCO. [ Google Scholar ]
• WWF. (2013). Environmental flows for Kumbh 2013 at Triveni Sangam , Allahabad. Delhi, India: World Wildlife Fund- India. [ Google Scholar ]
• WWF. (2017). Listen to the river: Lessons from a global review of environmental flow success stories . Woking, UK: WWF-UK. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yarkuwa Indigenous Knowledge Centre Aboriginal Corporation. (2009). Submission to NSW forests assessment natural resources commission . Deniliquin, NSW, Australia: Yarkuwa Indigenous Knowledge Centre. [ Google Scholar ]

9 Ways You Can Help Save the Rivers

River conservation tips.

Humanity was successful thanks to rivers like the  Tigris and Euphrates , so treating them the same way we would treat a respected elder should be expected even without considering how important they still are today for many of the same purposes.  These simple ideas are a great way to help keep our rivers alive through water conservation and a bit of environmental friendliness .

Use Biodegradable Cleaning Products

Pick your soaps for biodegradability whenever possible. All of the cleaning products will run through your plumbing when they wash down the drain, and that’s why you can expect a fifty-story tall mutated lizard sometime soon. Research the product before you make the switch since many of them have at best a tenuous right to claim the title.

Plant a Tree

The root systems of plants cling to the surrounding soil and create stability. reducing the amount of dirt that runs into rivers and gums up the works. Trees have some of the widest and deepest roots of all flora, and they help with greenhouse gas emissions to boot. Just make sure to plant a species that can handle your biome.

Sweep Patios and Sidewalks Rather than Using the Hose

Because of water’s amazing solvent properties, we use it for cleaning tasks all around the house. When scrubbing something clean, such as dishes or your teeth, rely more on physical action than a constant stream of water to break up your dinner.

Volunteer for a Stream Clean-up or Wetland Restoration Event

If you’re struggling to come up with ways to help but have an excess of time and energy, just do a quick search online for conservation groups in your local area. Most of them would be more than happy to have an extra pair of hands, even if just for one day a year.

Limit Pesticide Use

Chemical sprays are typically water soluble. When you use these death-dealing substances on your garden or lawn, the runoff can seep into the ground and spoil aquifers or nearby rivers. The water treatment plants may stop these substances from doing harm to people, but the rivers and their inhabitants aren’t so lucky.

Educate through Exposure (and Have Some Fun!)

Go on a walk by a local river or nature preserve with an unwilling friend in tow. Although agoraphobia seems rampant these days, a little time in nature makes it harder for people to ignore its existence when you start discussing the rate of lost landscapes thanks to the environmental damage these days. People protect things they care about.

Fix Leaky Faucets

Out of necessity for the survival of our noisy children, we have the capability to tune out aggravating and persistent sounds. Don’t let your instincts rule your mind, and pay attention to the sounds coming out of your plumbing. A leaky faucet can contribute several gallons a month to the amount of water your household wastes.

Use Social Media to Spread the Word

Put that horde of followers you’ve carefully cultivated through witty one-liners and topical humor to use on behalf of the planet. All you have to do is link to helpful or informative articles (like this one!) with a few words and appropriate formatting. If you’re on Facebook, all you have to do is paste the link and submit the post, and the site generates a handy picture and synopsis of the link. What could be easier?

Mad River Boat Trips

All of the above ideas can be done with a minimal amount of effort, but you can always do more if you would like. For now, reward all that thinking about conservation you did with a whitewater rafting adventure or relaxing float down  Snake River .

• Clock 3.5 Hours
• Users Ages 6 or older & at least 50 lbs

Classic Boats... Classic Adventure!

You can’t go wrong with Mad River’s classic whitewater boats! There are non-paddling and paddling positions in this raft. Most people choose this option because they are first-time rafters or are traveling with small children.

• Most Popular

Small Boats... Big Adventure!

Most people choose this option because it’s the middle of the road among boat sizes, there is an option to paddle or not and the small boats are still guaranteed to knock your river booties off!

Conservation of nature's strongholds needed to halt biodiversity loss

Researchers argue for scaling-up area-based conservation to maintain ecological integrity.

To achieve global biodiversity targets, conservationists and governments must prioritize the establishment and effective management of large, interconnected protected areas with high ecological integrity, John G. Robinson from the Wildlife Conservation Society, US, and colleagues argue in an essay publishing May 21 in the open-access journal PLOS Biology .

The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), signed at the 2022 Conference of Parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity in Montreal, recognized the importance of protecting large areas of natural habitat to maintain the resilience and integrity of ecosystems. To halt biodiversity loss, these protected and conserved areas need to be in the right places, connected to one another, and well managed. One of the GBF targets is to protect at least 30% of the global land and ocean by 2030, known as the 30x30 target.

To achieve GBF targets, the authors propose prioritizing large, interconnected protected areas with high ecological integrity, that are effectively managed and equitably governed. They emphasize the importance of conserving landscapes at scales large enough to encompass functioning ecosystems and the biodiversity they contain. In many cases, this will require interconnected groups of protected areas that are managed together. Effective governance means that the diversity of stakeholders and rights holders are recognized and that the costs and benefits are shared equitably between them. The authors argue that protected and conservation areas that meet all four criteria -- which they name "Nature's Strongholds" -- will be disproportionately important for biodiversity conservation. They identify examples of Nature's Strongholds in the high-biodiversity tropical forest regions of Central Africa and the Amazon.

By applying the four criteria presented in this essay to identify Nature's Strongholds around the world, governments and conservationists can coordinate their efforts to best address threats to biodiversity, the authors say.

The authors add, "'Nature's Strongholds' -- large, interconnected, ecologically intact areas that are well managed and equitably governed -- are identified in Amazonia and Central Africa. The approach offers an effective way to conserve biodiversity at a global scale."

• Ecology Research
• Endangered Plants
• Biodiversity
• Rainforests
• Land Management
• Urbanization
• Environmental Policies
• Biodiversity hotspot
• Organic farming
• Agroecology
• Conservation biology
• Sustainable land management
• Deforestation
• Unified neutral theory of biodiversity

Story Source:

Materials provided by PLOS . Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Journal Reference :

• John G. Robinson, Danielle LaBruna, Tim O’Brien, Peter J. Clyne, Nigel Dudley, Sandy J. Andelman, Elizabeth L. Bennett, Avecita Chicchon, Carlos Durigan, Hedley Grantham, Margaret Kinnaird, Sue Lieberman, Fiona Maisels, Adriana Moreira, Madhu Rao, Emma Stokes, Joe Walston, James EM Watson. Scaling up area-based conservation to implement the Global Biodiversity Framework’s 30x30 target: The role of Nature’s Strongholds . PLOS Biology , 2024; 22 (5): e3002613 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3002613

Cite This Page :

Explore More

• Charge Your Laptop in a Minute?
• Caterpillars Detect Predators by Electricity
• 'Electronic Spider Silk' Printed On Human Skin
• Engineered Surfaces Made to Shed Heat
• Innovative Material for Sustainable Building
• Human Brain: New Gene Transcripts
• Epstein-Barr Virus and Resulting Diseases
• Origins of the Proton's Spin
• Symbiotic Bacteria Communicate With Plants
• Birdsong and Human Voice: Same Genetic Blueprint

Trending Topics

Strange & offbeat.

share this!

May 21, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

peer-reviewed publication

trusted source

Conservation of 'Nature's Strongholds' needed to halt biodiversity loss, say researchers

by Public Library of Science

To achieve global biodiversity targets, conservationists and governments must prioritize the establishment and effective management of large, interconnected protected areas with high ecological integrity, John G. Robinson from the Wildlife Conservation Society, US, and colleagues argue in an essay published May 21 in the open-access journal PLOS Biology .

The Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), signed at the 2022 Conference of Parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity in Montreal, recognized the importance of protecting large areas of natural habitat to maintain the resilience and integrity of ecosystems.

To halt biodiversity loss , these protected and conserved areas need to be in the right places, connected to one another, and well managed. One of the GBF targets is to protect at least 30% of the global land and ocean by 2030, known as the 30x30 target.

To achieve GBF targets, the authors propose prioritizing large, interconnected protected areas with high ecological integrity, that are effectively managed and equitably governed. They emphasize the importance of conserving landscapes at scales large enough to encompass functioning ecosystems and the biodiversity they contain.

In many cases, this will require interconnected groups of protected areas that are managed together. Effective governance means that the diversity of stakeholders and rights holders is recognized and that the costs and benefits are shared equitably between them.

The authors argue that protected and conservation areas that meet all four criteria—which they name "Nature's Strongholds"—will be disproportionately important for biodiversity conservation. They identify examples of Nature's Strongholds in the high-biodiversity tropical forest regions of Central Africa and the Amazon.

By applying the four criteria presented in this essay to identify Nature's Strongholds around the world, governments and conservationists can coordinate their efforts to best address threats to biodiversity, the authors say.

The authors add, "Nature's Strongholds—large, interconnected, ecologically intact areas that are well managed and equitably governed—are identified in Amazonia and Central Africa. The approach offers an effective way to conserve biodiversity at a global scale."

Journal information: PLoS Biology

Provided by Public Library of Science

Explore further

Feedback to editors

New fossils provide evidence for an 'Age of Monotremes'

7 hours ago

TESS finds intriguing world sized between Earth and Venus

NASA launches ground-breaking climate change satellite

May 25, 2024

Dyson spheres: Astronomers report potential candidates for alien structures, and evidence against their existence

You leave a 'microbe fingerprint' on every piece of clothing you wear—and it could help forensic scientists solve crimes

Saturday Citations: The cheapness horizon of electric batteries; the battle-worthiness of ancient armor; scared animals

Cosmic leap: NASA Swift satellite and AI unravel the distance of the farthest gamma-ray bursts

Scientists discover CO₂ and CO ices in outskirts of solar system

Charge your laptop in a minute? Supercapacitors can help; new research offers clues

New study discovers tiny target on RNA to short-circuit inflammation

Relevant physicsforums posts, looking for today's dna knowledge.

5 hours ago

And Now, here comes COVID-19 version BA.2, BA.4, BA.5,...

Dna-maternity test - could you see other relationship than mother.

May 19, 2024

Is it usual for vaccine injection site to hurt again during infection?

May 16, 2024

A Brief Biography of Dr Virgina Apgar, creator of the baby APGAR test

May 12, 2024

Who chooses official designations for individual dolphins, such as FB15, F153, F286?

May 9, 2024

More from Biology and Medical

Related Stories

Alarm bells ring as scientists uncover major flaws in ability to track changes to global conservation areas

Mar 18, 2024

Report: Governments are falling short on promises of effective biodiversity protection

World meets protected areas target, quality needs improving

May 19, 2021

More for less: A smarter way to protect biodiversity

Mar 6, 2024

Protected areas cover a sixth of Earth's land and freshwater

Time for a new global protected area target

Apr 11, 2019

Recommended for you

Heatmaps show trematodes congregate in certain parts of amphibians' bodies, often to dire physical consequences

May 24, 2024

Crows can deliberately plan how many calls to make, study shows

May 23, 2024

Parents of the year: Scavenging raptors demonstrate high level of collaboration in raising chicks

Study reveals key role of plant-bacteria communication for assembly of a healthy plant microbiome

Three sisters garden study finds balanced pollinator-plant network faces an uncertain future

Researchers propose use of electrical blackouts to determine impact of artificial light on wildlife

Let us know if there is a problem with our content.

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter

clock This article was published more than  1 year ago

States reach deal with Biden to protect drought-stricken Colorado River

The states along the Colorado River — a vital source of water and electricity for the American West — reached an agreement with the Biden administration to conserve an unprecedented amount of their water supply in exchange for $1.2 billion in federal funding, state and federal officials said Monday.

After nearly a year of negotiations and multiple missed deadlines, the deal is a temporary solution intended to protect the country’s largest reservoirs — Lake Powell and Lake Mead — from dropping to critical levels over the next three years. These reservoirs have fallen dramatically as the warming climate and the past two decades of drought have reduced the river’s natural flow by about 20 percent.

To stabilize the river, the three states that make up the Lower Basin — California, Arizona and Nevada — have agreed to voluntarily conserve 3 million acre-feet of water over the next three years, which amounts to 13 percent of these states’ total allocation from the river. The Biden administration has committed to compensating the states for three-quarters of the water savings — or 2.3 million acre-feet — which would amount to about $1.2 billion in federal funds, the people familiar with the talks said. The money from the Inflation Reduction Act would pay farmers, Native American tribes, cities and others who voluntarily forgo their supplies.

“There are 40 million people, seven states, and 30 Tribal Nations who rely on the Colorado River Basin for basic services such as drinking water and electricity,” Interior Secretary Deb Haaland said in a statement Monday. “Today’s announcement is a testament to the Biden-Harris administration’s commitment to working with states, Tribes and communities throughout the West to find consensus solutions in the face of climate change and sustained drought.”

The Colorado River drought, explained

The deal, which was first reported Monday by the New York Times but whose outlines The Washington Post detailed last week, came together over the past month in conference calls among state and federal officials and meetings in cities such as Las Vegas and Phoenix. It was pushed along by the publication last month of Interior’s environmental review of reservoir operations — which outlined two alternatives for how to distribute cuts in water usage among the Lower Basin states.

Neither of those alternatives were particularly palatable to the states, which nudged them toward compromise. The timing of that federal process also forced the issue, as the states had until May 30 to issue formal comments on the Interior Department alternatives. As part of the new deal, Interior plans to suspend the comment period and instead analyze the new proposal in the federal environmental review process. The goal is to sign a record of decision that revises the 2007 rules that govern operations at both lakes.

Tom Buschatzke, Arizona’s commissioner to the Colorado River talks, emphasized on Monday that the deal did not represent a final outcome and that the parties have agreed to a new proposal to be analyzed by the Interior Department in the months ahead.

“It is important to note that this is not an agreement — this is an agreement to submit a proposal and an agreement to the terms of that proposal to be analyzed by the federal government,” Buschatzke told reporters. “That is a really critical point for everyone to understand.”

Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs (D), California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) and Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo (R) sent a letter to Interior supporting the plan to scrap the draft environmental impact statement published last month and instead analyze the new deal.

“We have been informed that under almost all modeling conditions, the Lower Basin States consensus proposal would result in greater protections for Lake Mead and Lake Powell than either of the alternatives analyzed” in the existing environmental impact statement, the governors said.

The Colorado River is a major source of drinking water for some of the country’s largest cities, including Los Angeles and Phoenix. The river irrigates farmland that keeps U.S. supermarkets stocked with vegetables in winter. And it provides cheap hydropower to millions of people in the West.

But by early last year, Biden administration officials became increasingly concerned that the lakes’ water levels could soon drop so low that hydroelectric dams would have to shut down. The paltry amounts of runoff reaching these lakes — even in years when the Rocky Mountains got a decent snowpack — added to fears that “dead pool” was on the horizon , when the reservoirs might fall so low that dams would effectively block the river from flowing out.

In June, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Camille Calimlim Touton testified before the Senate that states needed to stop using 2 million to 4 million acre-feet of water — up to one-third of the river’s annual average flow — or the federal government would step in to protect the river.

The last time the basin states — Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Wyoming and New Mexico — had negotiated cutbacks in their usage, it had taken nearly six years. This time, Touton gave the states two months to reach a deal.

That launched intense negotiations that blew through two deadlines and at times involved bitter disputes between the parties. One central tension was between Arizona and California, the two states that pull the most from Lake Mead. If the cutbacks in water use followed the legal priority system, Arizona would be hit hard, risking the water supplies of Phoenix and Tucson. If the states deviated from the priority system and distributed cuts equally among the Lower Basin, California and its powerful farming regions such as the Imperial Valley stood to suffer a major blow.

The new deal among the states would require the Lower Basin to conserve at least 3 million acre-feet by 2026, with at least half of that coming this year. An acre-foot is about 326,000 gallons, what it would take to cover an acre of land with a foot of water.

Arizona, California and Nevada are still finalizing where all these water savings will come from within their states, but some of the outlines have emerged. California plans to contribute 1.6 million of the 3 million acre-feet over three years, according to a statement by the Colorado River Board of California. California is the largest user of the Colorado River, with an allocation of 4.4 million acre-feet per year.

“California’s water users will work quickly to implement conservation that will protect the system in the near term,” JB Hamby, the chairman of the Colorado River Board of California, said in a statement.

Nevada has pledged to conserve 285,000 acre-feet through 2026, according to John Entsminger, the Southern Nevada Water Authority general manager and state’s commissioner to the negotiations.

Entsminger said this amount would be saved in Lake Mead and would be uncompensated by the federal government. That’s because Nevada, which has a small allocation of 300,000 acre-feet per year from the river, wants to preserve the chance of getting some of that water back post-2027.

“For the state with a legal entitlement to 1.8 percent of the river, the water is more valuable to us than the federal money,” Entsminger said in an interview, adding that “there’s very solid comfort that this is going to be implemented.”

An Arizona official said the state was planning to conserve 1.1 million acre-feet of water between now and 2026.

The deal comes with emergency provisions if the reservoirs fall farther than expected in the next three years. The states would take additional action to protect reservoir elevations of 1,000 feet above sea level at Lake Mead and 3,500 feet at Lake Powell.

The heavy rain and snow that fell on Western states during winter helped ease the crisis on the Colorado and provided time and space for negotiators to reach a deal. With spring runoff, the reservoirs have started rising and dire predictions about reaching critical thresholds have receded, for now.

The 3 million acre-feet in reductions over three years is less than some of the plans laid out in the federal government’s environmental review. But state and federal officials have said they are comfortable that these reductions will be enough to protect the reservoirs until 2026, when the states and the federal government have been planning a major renegotiation of how Colorado River water is shared.

As part of this week’s agreement, the parties expect to formally start the 2026 process soon.

The fact that much of the water conservation could take place this year and next — as opposed to starting in 2024 under the alternatives outlined in the draft environmental impact statement — makes it a more appealing alternative that will leave reservoirs at higher levels, Entsminger said.

“We think it’s good policy,” he said. “But there are more steps to ultimately make this binding and enforceable.”

Entsminger said it was also a major step forward for protecting a vital water source for the West.

“This is probably the largest conservation plan in the history of the river,” he said.

Drought and the Colorado River

What is the Colorado River? Running southwest from the Rocky Mountains to Mexico’s Gulf of California, the river runs through seven states in the American West. It powers agricultural land and urban areas, serving roughly 1 in 10 Americans .

Why is the river drying up? A combination of chronic water overuse and historic drought conditions are creating chaos. The dry period has lasted more than two decades, draining the major reservoirs along the river. The amount of water being used far exceeds what’s actually available .

What’s being done? The Biden administration is pushing to cut 2 to 4 million acre-feet in water usage, and is in negotiations with the seven states affected . California, despite using more water than any state, is the remaining holdout. It has offered its own plan to conserve water.

Utah Family Land Donation Establishes Bear River Watershed Conservation Area

BRIGHAM CITY, Utah –  Today, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is accepting a 30-acre conservation easement conservation easement A conservation easement is a voluntary legal agreement between a landowner and a government agency or qualified conservation organization that restricts the type and amount of development that may take place on a property in the future. Conservation easements aim to protect habitat for birds, fish and other wildlife by limiting residential, industrial or commercial development. Contracts may prohibit alteration of the natural topography, conversion of native grassland to cropland, drainage of wetland and establishment of game farms. Easement land remains in private ownership. Learn more about conservation easement donation west of Brigham City, Utah, from the Ferry Ranch and Farm family. Their contribution formally establishes the Bear River Watershed Conservation Area as the 565th national wildlife refuge national wildlife refuge A national wildlife refuge is typically a contiguous area of land and water managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service  for the conservation and, where appropriate, restoration of fish, wildlife and plant resources and their habitats for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans. Learn more about national wildlife refuge .

The Ferry family – John, Ben and Joel – are long-time landowners who are passionate about conserving the land, wildlife, and resources for future generations. They are the first landowners to establish a conservation easement in this area.

“Our philosophy is we are in a unique mix of agriculture and wildlife,” said John Ferry. “We were looking at a synergistic, collaborative approach to ensure nothing in this oasis in the desert will change. There will be no threat of development, and the wetland habitat will be preserved. You have to strike a balance. Farming, ranching and conservation can all get along.” “It is through partnerships with conservation-minded private landowners, like the Ferry family, that together, we will find our greatest success in conserving these important landscapes for both people and wildlife,” said Regional Director Noreen Walsh. “The Ferry family are private landowners who are models for conservation. Through this easement donation, they join the Service in showing that once again, working landscapes and conservation are not mutually exclusive endeavors.”

In 2013, the Service approved the Bear River Watershed Conservation Area project aimed at working with private landowners to establish voluntary conservation easements. This allows landowners to retain their property rights and continue traditional activities on the easement such as livestock grazing and haying. This significant watershed encompasses more than 4.5 million acres, of which 920,000 acres are prioritized for easements, in the states of Utah, Wyoming, and Idaho.

The Conservation Area’s diverse landscapes support more than 200 species of birds, particularly migratory birds within the Central and Pacific Flyways. It also provides habitat and important migratory linkages for many mammals, such as elk and pronghorn, and its rivers and lakes support a number of native fish species, such as Bonneville cutthroat trout.

U.S. Congressman Rob Bishop represents landowners in the Bear River Watershed Conservation Area and praised the Ferry family for their outstanding land stewardship.

“In many of the programs we have, if they are driven by local concerns and need, they can be a benefit,” said Bishop. “Land conservation projects are an example of programs, that when locally controlled, allow the agricultural community to use their land and preserve a lifestyle that otherwise would be endangered. Federal programs can be done the right way, or they can be spun out to have negative consequences. This is being done the right way. As long as local interests maintain control of this process, it can be a benefit for all.”

To protect habitat, the Service recognizes that it is essential to work with private landowners on conservation stewardship. Fee, easement and lease are the three types of acquisition generally used by the Service when acquiring lands for inclusion in the National Wildlife Refuge System. The Service’s Refuge System is an unparalleled network of public lands and waters dedicated to the conservation of native wildlife and their habitats. With 565 refuges and 38 wetland management districts covering more than 150 million acres plus more than 418 million acres of marine national monuments, it is unrivaled as a conservation tool the world over. Refuges also are critical to the local communities that surround them, serving as centers for recreation, economic growth, and landscape health and resiliency. Every state has at least one national wildlife refuge, and there is a refuge within an hour’s drive of most major cities.

The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is working with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. For more information on our work and the people who make it happen in the West, connect with us through any of these social media channels:  Facebook ,  Twitter ,  Flickr ,  YouTube , and  Instagram .

Latest Press Releases

You are exiting the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service website

You are being directed to

We do not guarantee that the websites we link to comply with Section 508 (Accessibility Requirements) of the Rehabilitation Act. Links also do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Colorado River: Bill would allow 'taking' of rare pupfish, desert birds to get deal done

Imperial Irrigation District officials have figured out how to surmount a key hurdle to complete a Colorado River conservation deal worth nearly $800 million : pushing to have California legislators quickly pass a bill that would give them the power to kill endangered fish and birds, or in bureaucratic parlance, to "take" them.

District staff, the bill's sponsor and environmentalists say that likely wouldn't occur, thanks to funding to create habitat elsewhere, and due to backstop federal species protections that are actually stronger than the state's. But it is a counter-intuitive piece of lawmaking that has upset one longtime critic.

What's driving the legislation are a tiny desert pupfish and two types of birds, all nearing extinction, which have found unlikely refuge in the Imperial Valley's concrete drainage channels and marshy areas by the fast-drying Salton Sea. IID has agreed to use a whopping 800,000 acre-feet less river water through 2026, in exchange for hefty payments from the U.S. Department of Interior. Those savings mostly would be achieved by seasonal fallowing of alfalfa and other perennial crops by area farmers , who also would be paid.

But the drains and marshes providing vital habitat to the fish and birds could dry up if that much water is held back. That could harm or kill the species, which is forbidden under the California and U.S. Endangered Species Acts.

To get around the landmark laws, a new exemption deal piggybacking on an old one is now moving on an "urgency" basis though the California legislature. Dubbed Assembly Bill 2610, and authored by Assemblymember Eduardo Garcia, D-Coachella, it would allow the "take" of the silvery, finger-length pupfish; tiny, shy California black rails best known by their unique call; and Yuma Ridgeway's rails , a grey and cinnamon colored marsh bird the size of a chicken.

So what does "take" mean, in plain English?

"Under California law, 'take' really means killing or causing the death of (a protected animal), so for example, a pup fish, if all of the water was gone, that would be a take. But federal law is different, it's much broader. It includes harm and harassment and changes to the habitat. So they're very, very different standards," said Lisa Belenky, senior counsel for the Center for Biological Diversity, who said her organization and others have scrutinized C olorado River agreements between federal officials and different agencies and tribes in numerous states for potential impacts on species. She said they're not too concerned about this one.

"You know, when you say 'take or kill' that sounds very, very harsh," said Garcia. He said environmentalists would not be supporting the effort if that was its true intent. Rather than going through a more time-consuming effort to craft a brand-new bill with extended hearings and committee approvals, AB 2610 would amend a flexible conservation agreement that allows limited "take" in a portion of a controversial 2003 "quantification settlement agreement," under which IID is paid to divert another big piece of its legal Colorado River entitlement to suburban San Diego. IID holds among the oldest and by far the largest rights to water from the river.

"It just aligns within the authority that already exists," said Garcia.

Garcia noted it could help free up another $175 million in federal taxpayer money to continue construction of marshes and ponds elsewhere near the Salton Sea for the species. Those funds are tied to completion of the water conservation agreement.

"We need to keep the momentum going," he said, explaining 4,000 aces of new wetlands being built by state contractors are 90% complete, and another 4,000 acres or more could possibly be built with the additional funds.

IID vice president JB Hamby, who is also California's lead negotiator on Colorado River supply, agreed. He said the agency and farmers have been ready to conserve water for the entire system, and to construct better habitat as part of a possible long-term agreement for management of river resources after 2026 . An entire year slipped away without a short-term agreement between the district and Interior's U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, and, he said, the California legislation is a pro-active effort to help clear up the logjam.

"Farmers and the district are very eager to participate in some of these programs. We are motivated to be in a position to take a leadership position on the Colorado River," he said. "But the wildlife agencies have identified concerns that they would like to see addressed related to these two birds and this one fish that reside in and around IDs agricultural drainage - which is a very odd place, particularly for the pup fish, to live, but they thrive there."

He added, "It is very ironic that the largest user and perhaps the most important player in the future of Colorado River matters in coming to grips with climate change and drought ... is precluded by law from doing conservation unless we go out of our way to develop habitat for these very unique species ... No other user on the river has to go through all those hoops."

AB 2610 passed the Assembly on a bipartisan vote on May 2, and needs to be voted on by the state Senate next. If it wins passage there and Gov. Gavin Newsom signs it into law, it would take effect at once.

That upsets a former IID consultant and perennial critic of the agency, Tom Havens, who specializes in private water markets. In a series of emails and an interview, he expressed concerns about both the hurried timeline and some of the language in the bill, including the fact that on paper, it appears to tie IID to a decades old, low-ball figure of $175 per acre-foot for new conservation water.

"WHY does IID fail to fully inform the public about critical matters that will directly affect the lifeblood of Imperial Valley? What is the rush?" Havens said in one email. But IID's Colorado River water manager, Tina Shields, disputed Havens' claims, and said separate contracts would yield IID and area farmers at least $776 per acre-foot.

Environmentalists who keep an eagle eye on imperiled desert species say they're okay with the proposal, particularly if $65 million in state funding that they say is critically needed to keep building and restoring new habitat at the edge of the dwindling Salton Sea also survives in the 2024-25 budget.

"This is a pretty narrow bill, we know how it's going to work, and our biggest issue is making sure the Salton Sea is dealt with," said Kim Delfino, a Sacramento-based consultant who has tracked the sea and the species that depend on it for two decades. "This is is basically something they already had authority to do ... they're just asking to extend that authority."

Still, removing 800,000 acre-feet of water, or 260 billion gallons, could have real impacts on the ground.

She said the pupfish could be moved to new locations, not destroyed, and water officials could wait for nesting seasons by the two bird species to be done before any brush is removed.

"It's not like they're going to go in and start killing a whole bunch of fish and birds," she said.

She, like Belenky, noted there are other federal protections that would also remain in effect.

Feds need to give their approval, too

A state law doesn't override federal protections. Shields with IID said they had prepared a drain water management plan, and that federal biologists were close to beginning a 60 day review of all the arrangements.

A U.S. Bureau of Reclamation spokesman said in an email that while biologists examined and signed off on the effects of water conservation on species in or on the Colorado River itself, included in a final environmental impact report for which a record of decision was issued on Thursday, that isn't the case for the IID area, which begins 80 miles from the river.

"The wildlife consultations for effects that may occur off river have not yet been completed and we do not have a timeline."

Janet Wilson is senior environment reporter for The Desert Sun and co-authors USA Today Climate Point. She can be reached at [email protected]

Essay on Conservation of Nature for Students and Children

500+ words essay on conservation of nature.

Nature has provided us numerous gifts such as air , water, land, sunlight , minerals, plants, and animals. All these gifts of nature make our earth a place worth living. Existence on Earth would not be possible without any of these. Now, while these natural resources are present on Earth in plenty. Unfortunately, the necessity of most of these has increased extremely over the centuries due to growth in the human population.

What is Conservation of Nature?

Conservation of nature means the preservation of forests, land, water bodies, and minerals, fuels, natural gases, etc. And to make sure that all these continue to be available in abundance. Thus all these natural resources make life worth living on Earth. Life would not be imaginable without air, water, sunlight as well as other natural resources present on the earth.

Thus, it is essential to conserve these resources in order to retain the environment integral. Here is a look at the types of natural resources existing on Earth and the ways to conserve these:

Types of Natural Resources:

• Renewable Resources : These are resources such as air, water, and sunlight that refill naturally.
• Non-Renewable Resources: These are resources like fossil fuels and minerals that do not restock reform very slowly.
• Biotic: These originate from living beings and organic material like plants and animals.
• Abiotic: These come from non-living things and non-organic material. These comprise air, water, and land as well as metals like iron, copper, and silver.

Natural resources are also categories such as actual resources, reserve resources, stock resources and potential resources based on their development stage.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

How to Conserve Nature and Its Resources?

Many of the natural resources are being used at a faster rate as compared to their speed of production. There is so a necessity for conservation of nature and the natural resources it offers. Here are some of the ways in which these resources can be conserved:

Reduce Water Consumption

Water is available in abundance on Earth . This is one of the reasons people do not consider much before using it. However, if we keep using it at this speed. In the future, we may not be left with as much of it. Therefore, simple things such as turn off the tap while brushing or reuse the leftover water to water the plants can help in this direction.

Reduce Usage of Electricity

Use only as much energy as you require. It is thus advised to limit the usage of electricity. Simple habits such as turning off the lights before parting your room, turn off the electric appliances after use.  Switching to energy-saving fluorescent or LED bulbs can make a change.

Restrict Usage of Paper

Paper manufacturing depends only on trees. Increasing the use of paper means encouraging deforestation . This is one of the key reasons for concern is in today’s time Always ensure you use only as much paper as necessary. Stop taking print outs and use e-copies instead to do your bit.

Use Newer Agricultural Methods

The government must aware the methods such as mixed cropping, crop rotation. Also, the government should teach the minimum use of pesticides, insecticides. Appropriate use of manures , bio-fertilizers, and organic fertilizers to the farmers.

Spread Awareness

Spreading awareness about the conservation of nature is always a necessary step. It can be achieved only when more and more people understand its importance and the ways in which they can help. Besides this, it is essential to plant more and more tress. It is necessary to contribute towards lowering air pollution. We must use shared transport and employing rainwater harvesting systems to conserve nature.

Nature comprises of everything that surrounds us. The trees, forests, rivers, rivulets, soil, air all are the part of nature. Keeping nature and its resources integral. So, it is very important for the continuation of life on earth. It would be difficult to imagine life on earth, which has a spoiled natural environment.

Therefore, taking appropriate steps to conserve nature in its untouched form. It must be a priority for the human race. Only human beings with their power and ability can save nature in its purest forms.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App