Book contents
- Sustainability of Engineered Rivers in Arid Lands
- Sustainability of Engineered Rivers in Arid Lands
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Challenge
- 2 Global Climate Change and the Rivers
- 3 Reservoirs
- 4 Depletion of Groundwater
- 5 Endangered Food Security
- 6 Declining Environmental Flows
- Part III Engineered Rivers
- Part IV Response
- Part V Conclusion
- Index
- References
6 - Declining Environmental Flows
from Part II - Challenge
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 September 2021
Book contents
- Sustainability of Engineered Rivers in Arid Lands
- Sustainability of Engineered Rivers in Arid Lands
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Challenge
- 2 Global Climate Change and the Rivers
- 3 Reservoirs
- 4 Depletion of Groundwater
- 5 Endangered Food Security
- 6 Declining Environmental Flows
- Part III Engineered Rivers
- Part IV Response
- Part V Conclusion
- Index
- References
Summary
This chapter discusses the impact of river engineering on natural flow regimes and the attendant effects on ecosystems. Changes in flow regimes have resulted in huge ecological change, including the creation of exotic species that replace or compete with the native species. Many rivers in arid regions have growing populations and economic activity dependent on their water supplies. Restoring natural flows may not be possible.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Sustainability of Engineered Rivers In Arid LandsChallenge and Response, pp. 66 - 76Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Arthington, A. H. (2012). Environmental Flows: Saving Rivers in the Third Millennium. Berkeley: University of California Press, p. 406.Google Scholar
Bennett, J., Brauch, B., and Urbanczyk, K. M. (2012). Estimating Ground Water Contribution from the Edwards Trinity Plateau Aquifer to the Big Bend Reach of the Rio Grande, Texas. South-Central Section – 46th Annual Meeting (8–9 March 2012).Google Scholar
Booker, J. F. and Ward, F. A. (2002). Restoring Instream Flows Economically: Perspectives from an International River Basin. In Fernandez, L. and Carson, R. T., eds., Both Sides of the Border: Transboundary Environmental Management Issues Facing Mexico and the United States. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 235–252.Google Scholar
Dahm, C. N., Edwards, R. J., and Gelwick, F. P. (2005). Gulf Coast Rivers of the Southwestern United States. In Benke, A. C. and Cushing, C. E., eds., Rivers of North America. Burlington, MA: Elsevier Academic Press.Google Scholar
Dean, D. J. and Schmidt, J. C. (2011). The Role of Feedback Mechanisms in Historical Changes of the Lower Rio Grande in the Big Bend Region: Geomorphology. Journal of Geomorphology, 126, pp. 333–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, R. J. and Contreras-Balderas, S. (1991). Historical Changes in the Ichthyofauna of the Lower Rio Grande (Río Bravo del Norte), Texas and Mexico. Southwestern Naturalist, 36(2), pp. 201–212.Google Scholar
Grafton, R. Q., Pittock, J., Davis, R. et al. (2013). Global Insights into Water Resources, Climate Change and Governance. Nature Climate Change – Perspective. https://doi.org/10.1038/NClimate1746Google Scholar
Horne, F. and Beisser, S. (1977). Distribution of River Shrimp in the Guadeloupe and San Marcos Rivers of Central Texas, U. S. A. (Decapoda, Caridea). Crustaceana, 33, pp. 56–60.Google Scholar
Hubbs, C., Edwards, R. J., and Garrett, G. P. (2008). An Annotated Checklist of the Freshwater Fishes of Texas, with Keys to Identification of Species. Supplement in 2nd Edition of Texas Journal of Science, 43(4), pp. 1–87.Google Scholar
Lower Laguna Madre Basin and Bay Expert Science Team (2012). Rio Grande, Rio Grande Estuary, Environmental Flows Recommendation Report. Austin, TX: TCEQ.Google Scholar
Lower Rio Grande Basin and Bay Area Expert Science Team (LRGBBEST) (2012). Environmental Flows Recommendation Report. Final Submission to the Environmental Flows Advisory Group. Austin, TX: TCEQ. Available at www.tceq.texas.gov/assets/public/permitting/watersupply/water_rights/eflows/lowerrgbbest_finalreport.pdfGoogle Scholar
Moring, B. J. (2002). Baseline Assessment of Instream and Riparian-Zone Biological Resources on the Rio Grande in and Near Big Bend National Park, Texas. Water-Resources Investigations Report 02-4106. Austin, TX: U.S. Department of Interior, Geological Survey, p. 33.Google Scholar
Neves, R. J, Bogan, A. E., Williams, J. D., Ahlstedt, S. A., and Hartfield, P. W. (1997). Status of Aquatic Molluscs in the Southeastern United States: A Downward Spiral of Diversity. In Benz, G. W. and Collins, D. F., eds., Aquatic Fauna in Peril: The Southeastern Perspective. Decatur, GA: Southeastern Aquatic Research Inst. Lenz Design and Communications, pp. 43–85.Google Scholar
Padilla, R. and Young, C. (2006). Monitoring Aggradational and Degradational Trends on the Middle Rio Grande, NM. In Proceedings of the Eighth Federal Interagency Sedimentation Conference, Reno, NV.Google Scholar
Poff, N. L. and Zimmerman, J. K. H. (2010). Ecological Responses to Altered Flow Regimes: A Literature Review to Inform the Science and Management of Environmental Flows. Freshwater Biology, 55, pp. 194–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Porter, S. D. and Longley, G. (2011). Influence of Ground and Surface Water Relations on Algal Communities in the Rio Grande Wild and Scenic River. Texas State: Edwards Aquifer Research and Data, p. 54.Google Scholar
Rood, S. B. and Mahoney, M. (1990). Collapse of Riparian Poplar Forests Downstream from Dams in Western Prairies: Probable Causes and Prospects for Mitigation. Environmental Management, 14, pp. 451–464.Google Scholar
Smakhtin, V. and Eriyagama, N. (2008). Developing a Software Package for Global Desktop Assessment of Environmental Flows. Environmental Modelling and Software, 23, pp. 1396–1406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sood, A., Smakhtin, V., Eriyagama, N. et al. (2017) Global Environmental Flow Information for the Sustainable Development Goals. Colombo: International Water Management Institute, p. 37. https://doi.org/10.5337/2017.201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stromberg, J. C., Lite, S. J., Marler, R. et al. (2007). Altered Stream Flow Regimes and Invasive Plant Species: The Tamarix Case. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 16, pp. 381–393.Google Scholar
UNEP and UNEP-DHI (2015). Transboundary River Basins: Status and Future Trends. Nairobi: UNEP.Google Scholar
Upper Rio Grande Basin and Bay Expert Science Team (URGBBEST) (2012). Environmental Flows Recommendation Report. Austin, TX: TCEQ. Available at www.tceq.texas.gov/assets/public/permitting/watersupply/water_rights/eflows/urgbbest_finalreport.pdfGoogle Scholar
Van Metre, P. C., Mahler, B. J., and Callender, E. (1997). Water Quality Trends in the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo Basin Using Sediment Cores from Reservoirs. USGS Fact Sheet FS-221-96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vörösmarty, C. J., McIntyre, P. B., Gessner, M. O. et al. (2010). Global Threats to Human Water Security and River Biodiversity. Nature, 467(7315), pp. 555–561.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wada, Y., Wisser, D., and Bierkens, M. F. P. (2014). Global Modelling of Withdrawal, Allocation and Consumptive Use of Surface Water and Groundwater Resources. Earth System Dynamics, 5, pp. 15–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ward, G. and Schmandt, J. (2013). The Rio Grande/ Rio Bravo of the U.S. and Mexico. Available at www.harcresearch.org/publication/984Google Scholar
Wohl, E. E. (2004). Disconnected Rivers: Linking Rivers to Landscapes. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, p. 301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeug, S. C., Winemiller, K. O., and Tarim, S. (2005). Response of Brazos River Oxbow Fish Assemblages to Patterns of Hydrologic Connectivity and Environmental Variability. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 134, pp. 1389–1399.Google Scholar