1

COLLEGE OF WATER CONSERVENCY AND HYDROPOWER

ENGINEERING

ACADEMIC YEAR 2014-2015,

MODULUS: SPECIAL TOPIC ON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND

ENGINEERING

STUDENT ID: M2014028

STUDENT NAME: BAGARAGAZA ROMUALD

MAJOR: WATER CONSERVANCY AND HYDROPOWER ENGINEERING

Lecturer Module Leader: YIPING LI

Topic on:

Impacts of water diversions and river management on floodplain in wetland

COLLEGE OF INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS

2

Abstract

This literature review on Water diversion and Floodplain wetlands is sites of high

biodiversity that depend on flows from rivers. Dams, diversions and river

management have reduced flooding to these wetlands, altering their ecology, and

causing the death or poor health of aquatic biota. Four floodplain wetlands,

illustration of these effects with succession changes in aquatic vegetation, reduced

vegetation health, declining numbers of water-birds and nesting, and declining

native fish and invertebrate populations. much of which is diverted upstream of

floodplain wetlands. More than 50% of floodplain wetlands on developed rivers

may no longer flood. Of the entire river basins in wetland, Some floodplain

wetlands are now permanent storages. This has changed their biota from one

tolerant of a variable flooding regime, to one that withstands permanent flooding.

Plans exist to build dams to divert water from many rivers, mainly for irrigation.

These plans seldom adequately model subsequent ecological and hydrological

impacts to floodplain wetlands. To avoid further loss of wetlands, an improved

understanding of the interaction between river flows and floodplain ecology, and

investigations into ecological impacts of management practices, is essential.

Keyword: impounded runoff, river regime, reservoirs, water diversions, biota,

floodplain.

3

Introduction on water diversion

Some Wetlands have disappeared or declined in many areas around the world

(Hollis 1990, 1992; Hollis & Jones 1991; Jones et al. 1995; Sparks 1995), and

water resource development is a major cause (Allan & Flecker 1993; Dynesius &

Nilsson 1994; Ligon et al. 1995; Thomas 1996; Milliman 1997; Lemly et al.,

2000). Dams on many of the worlds large rivers divert water, produce

hydroelectricity, assist navigation and control oods (Walker 1985; Dynesius &

Nilsson 1994; Power et al. 1995). Such changes have affected estuarine and

coastal ecology (Milliman 1997), and reduced the amount of water reaching ood

plain wetlands, affecting their ecology. Over a 27-year period from 1960 to 1987,

diversion of water for irrigation upstream caused water levels in this huge inland

sea (68 000 km2 ) to drop by 13 m, decreasing the wetland area by 40%,

and having a severe impact on biodiversity (Micklin 1988). Water resource

development, primarily driven by irrigated agriculture (Kingsford 1995a; Wasson

et al. 1996), is also affecting oodplain wetlands.

Reviews of literature regarding river ecology and impacts of water resource

development on biota in wetland have generally focused on within-channel

processes of rivers (Walker 1985; Lake & Marchant 1990; Barmuta et al. 1992;

Bren 1993; Lake 1995), not on oodplain wetlands, which are perhaps most

affected by water resource development. oodplain wetlands are sites of

extraordinary biological diversity with abundant and diverse populations of

waterbirds (Morton et al. 1990a, b; Kingsford 1995b; Halse et al. 1998), native sh

(Ruello 1976; Puckridge 1999), invertebrate species (Outridge 1987; Crome &

Carpenter 1988; Shiel 1990; Boulton & Lloyd 1991), aquatic plants (Pressey

1990; Roberts & Ludwig 1991) and microbes (Boon et al. 1996). This review

begins with the natural behaviour of rivers and their oodplains, and then

examines how dams, diversions and river management have affected oodplain

wetlands, focusing on four oodplain wetlands.

RIVERS AND THEIR FLOODPLAIN WETLANDS

Naturally owing oodplain rivers are among the more dynamic ecosystems on

earth (Power et al. 1995), with enormous spatial and temporal complexity. River

ows determine the distribution patterns of channels, back-swamps, marshes and

4

tributaries that make up the oodplain (Ward 1998). These oodplain wetlands

also include freshwater and saline lakes, anabranches, billabongs, lagoons,

overows and swamps. The ow regime of a river, and its connections to

oodplain wetlands, govern biotic responses, channel formation and sediment

transfer (Junk et al. 1989; Walker et al. 1995).

Floodplain wetlands receive water from rivers, the ow carries organic matter

(Outridge 1988). Other accumulated organic matter within the wetland may consist

of eucalypt leaf litter (Briggs & Maher 1983; Boulton 1991), aquatic macrophytes

from the last lling (Briggs et al. 1985), or terrestrial plants that colonise wetlands

when they dry. Arrival of water in a oodplain wetland sets off dynamic

ecological processes and interactions among a wide range of species.

Methanotrophic bacteria and algae may drive complex food webs (Bunn &

Boon 1993; Bunn & Davies 1999). Organic matter provides food for

microbes (Outridge 1988; Boon et al. 1996), zooplankton shredders and

scrapers (Lake 1995).Zooplankton emerge from newly ooded seed banks of

eggs and drought-resistant forms (Boulton & Lloyd 1992), and graze on microbes

(Boon & Shiel 1990) and plants. Sedentary biota such as aquatic macrophytes also

germinate from seed banks (Britton & Brock 1994).

Floodplain eucalypts use oodwater (Jolly & Walker 1996). Under storey

aquatic plants, such as lignum Muehlenbeckia orulenta, grow (Craig et al.

1991). Burrowing frogs, buried in a water-lled sac after the last ood (Lee &

Mercer 1967), emerge to feed and reproduce. Colonisers, such as sh larvae from

the river, arrive (Geddes & Puckridge 1989; Gehrke et al. 1995), although initial

high levels of tannins and low oxygen may limit habitat suitability (Gehrke et

al.1993). Abundant insects with rapid generation times also follow the ood

sequence (Maher & Carpenter 1984; Maher 1984), sometimes months after

ooding (Crome & Carpenter 1988). Aquatic macrophytes, invertebrates, frogs

and sh provide food for water- birds (Kingsford & Porter 1994), which

colonise the wetland from more permanent wetlands nearby (Kingsford 1996),

and breed later (Crome 1986; Lawler & Briggs 1991). A variety of reptiles and

the water rat Hydromys chrysogaster live in oodplain wetlands but knowledge of

their ecology remains relatively poor. Flowering eucalypts, frogs, sh and water-

birds may also attract terrestrial bird species such as honey- eaters and birds of

5

prey (Kingsford & Porter 1999). When oodplains dry, they may also provide

habitat for terrestrial animals (Briggs 1992).

The key drivers for these processes and subsequent high biodiversity are the lateral

connectivity to the river of the oodplain wetland, and the unpredictable ows that

are not well served by current models of river behaviour (Walker et al. 1995).

The River Continuum Concept (Vannote et al. 1980) and the Riverine

Productivity Model (Thorp & Delong 1994) adopt a riverine focus with little

emphasis on oodplain wetlands. Even the Serial Discontinuity Concept,

modelling impacts of dams, largely ignored oodplains initially (Ward &

Stanford 1995).

CHANGING FLOWS TO FLOODPLAIN WETLANDS

The primary objective of river management and the delivery of water for human

purposes, may be the antithesis of the provision of water to oodplain

wetlands. This objective was to provide . . . maximum supplies with minimum

waste (Water Conservation and Irrigation Commission 1971; p. 64), meaning

that the Murray-Darling Basin Commission must maximize the conservation of

water (i.e. reduce losses) under the Murray-Darling Basin Agreement (Wettin

et al. 1994). Wasted water ows to either oodplain wetlands, aquifers or the

sea. Even the language of river management extends this notion of waste. River

catchments are drainage divisions or basins ,rivers supply efuent, creeks

and oods are surplus ows (Wettin et al.1994), and high water losses occur

in oodplain wetlands (e.g. Macquarie Marshes, see Water Conservation and

Irrigation Commission 1971; p.61).

However, efuent creeks, surplus ows and lost water are the primary source of

water for oodplain wetlands. Temporary or permanent cut-off of the water

supply to oodplain wetlands can be achieved by lling dams, diverting ows

upstream, or river management on the river or oodplain (Table 1). Dams deny

oodplain wetlands of ows as they ll.

Dams can eliminate ows to oodplains by capturing the ood pulse and then

releasing this water for diversion, within the main river channel. Ecological

attention has generally focused more on the regulatory effects of dams, not on the

impacts of diversions. A cumulative synergy between dam building (including

6

building of weirs and off-river storages) and diversion increasingly alienates

oodplain wetlands by reducing the frequency and volume of ows to them. The

initial impact of the Hume Dam on average annual ows in the Murray River was

only 2% but, within 23 years, this had increased to 21% (Maheshwari et al. 1995),

despite increased ows diverted from eastward-owing rivers (Bevitt et al.

1998). Dams and diversions also affect the ow regime (Walker 1985), shifting

ooding from a spring to summer pattern on southern rivers (Maheshwari et al.

1995) and affecting temperature (Walker 1985), channel stability (Thoms &

Walker 1993; Walker & Thoms 1993) and salinity (Walker & Thoms 1993).

Storage releases, weir operations, rainfall rejection releases and timing of pumping

also affect natural ow variability.

After rainfall, dams and diversions of water upstream govern how much water

reaches oodplain wetlands.

Structures such as weirs, levees and block banks (Table 1) either stop or

reduce ows to the oodplain through efuent channels or distributaries (Water

Conservation and Irrigation Commission 1971; Kingsford, 1999c). Channels,

levees and drains across the oodplain can divert water to storages, denying

downstream oodplains of water. Also, water delivered at bank-full capacity

(Thoms & Walker 1993) or with low ows erodes river channels, reducing

overbank ows to oodplain wetlands.

Dams and weirs affect riverine fauna and ora (Bell et al. 1980; Harris 1984;

Walker 1985; Chessman et al. 1987; Doeg et al. 1987; Marchant 1989; Walker

& Thoms 1993) but ecological impacts on oodplain wetlands are poorly

understood. Loss of connectivity to the river changes aquatic systems to terrestrial

ecosystems. Aquatic plants, sedentary animals (burrowing frogs; aquatic

invertebrates) and microbes adapted to unpredictable ood events eventually die,

and are replaced by terrestrial vegetation. For long-lived oodplain species (e.g.

eucalypts), this may not occur for 20 or more years. Seed banks of aquatic plants

and invertebrate eggs have limited viability (Boulton & Lloyd 1992; Brock 1999).

Habitat loss may have widespread impacts for native sh and water-birds.

Regulation reduces the availability of oodplain habitat for young sh, which leads

to declining sh populations (Geddes & Puckridge 1989; Gehrke et al. 1995, 1999;

Harris & Gehrke 1997). Colonial water-birds (e.g. ibis, egrets and herons) breed on

7

only a few large oodplain wetlands in Australia (Marchant & Higgins 1990),

so reduced ooding may have an impact (Kingsford & Johnson 1999) on

continental populations. Changes in the timing of ooding may also have long-

term impacts. We know little of the lagged effects of reduced ooding on

populations capacities to respond to ooding (Boulton & Lloyd 1992; Walker

et al. 1995). Rare large oods may maintain population abundance across

landscapes for decades (Kingsford et al. 1999). Effects on food webs and other

ecological processes are poorly known, but may be severe (Power et al. 1996).

8

Table 1. The variety of structures and processes that affect river ows.

River management

structures

Description Purpose Location Time period

Block banks Earth levees used to

control water and

stop ooding

Increased efciency of water ow for irrigation

Main river Early 1900s

Channels Channels that

transfer water to

irrigation areas or

storages, bypass

natural oodplains or capture water

owing across oodplains

(i) Transfer of water

to irrigation users

(ii) Increased

efciency of water ow for irrigation (iii) Capture of

oodplain ows

Established irrigation

areas

Cutting Excavation to

convey water

through high ground

or between bends in

rivers

More efcient transfer of water

Dredging/Desnagging Estuaries and major

inland rivers dredged

to allow navigation

of large vessels.

Trees, aquatic

macrophytes and

rocks removed from

rivers

(i) Navigation

(ii) Increased

efciency of water ow for irrigation

Most estuaries and

rivers with large

dams

1800spresent

Farm dam Small dams (usually (i) Water supply for Rural areas

9

< 1 ha)

livestock

(ii) Water supply for

human

consumption

(iii) Recreation

Groyne A bank or other

structure built out

into a channel or

other water body

Modication of current ow and sediment deposition

or erosion patterns

Main rivers

Levees (i) Earthen banks

across oodplains (ii) Roads and

railways can have

similar effects

(i) Redirection of

water ows to increase

ooding or to harvest water to off-river

storages

(ii) Protection of

towns, crops and

homesteads

Locks Enclosed part of a

river, with gates, for

moving boats or

barges

Navigation Murray River 18501950

Pumps Pump water from

creeks or rivers to

irrigation areas or

off-river storages

(i) Industry

(ii) Irrigation

(iii) Mining

(iv) Public water

supply

10

(v) Hydroelectricity

Off-river storages

(on-farm storages or

ring tanks)

Public or private

water storages built

away from river

channels. They may

have earthen walls

(private) or be based

on billabongs or

temporary lakes that

are modied with block banks or walls

to

contain water

(i) Store water for

later use for

irrigation

(ii) Mining

1980spresent

Reservoirs or dams

(Government built)

Concrete wall built

across river or creek,

resulting in a large

storage of water

upstream

(i) Ponding of water

diverted for

irrigation, human

and livestock

consumption,

industry, cooling

coal-red power stations and mining

(ii) Generation of

electricity

(hydroelectricity)

(iii) Recreation

River transfers Water pumped from

one catchment to

Augmentation of

water resources in a

11

another catchment

Siphon A pipe which

conveys water from

a higher level to a

lower level over an

obstacle using

atmospheric pressure

only

Transfer of water

between irrigation

channels

under natural

channels

Table 1. The variety of structures and processes that affect river ows

12

Diversion structures

A primary purpose of many dams, both large and small, is to facilitate water

diversions. Although existing water supplies can be stretched much further and

new water infrastructure can be delayed using water conservation and efficiency

strategies described below, people will continue to divert water from rivers and

other surface sources for various purposes.

http://www.appropedia.org/Water_diversion.

Nearly 80 percent of water consumed in the United States comes from surface

supplies rivers, creeks and lakes. In California alone, there are more than 25,000

points of diversion from streams. Thus, there are at least 25,000 locations in the

state at which fish and other river organisms can be harmed in the process of

meeting our need for water. In many dam investigations, the question comes down

to: could we still divert water if the dam is removed or modified, or not built at all?

In many cases, the answer is yes. Several, more river-friendly alternatives to

traditional permanent dam diversion methods are discussed below, including:

Infiltration galleries and wells

Screened pipe intakes

Seasonal dams

Consolidated diversions ,http://www.appropedia.org/Water_diversion

Fugure.1 water diversion structure.

13

Figure 2.showing the main river and diverted blanch.

2.2 River channel water demand

River water demand includes sediment transmission water in flood season and

ecological water requirement in non-flood season.

a) Sediment transmission water in flood season

Consider sand reduction of water and soil conservation and sustainable main

channel, based on large amount of comprehensive analysis, the sediment

transmission water in flood season(Beijing, 2010)

b) The ecological water requirement in non-flood season

Mai

n r

iver

D

iver

ted

wat

er

14

Based on the comprehensive analysis of the Yellow River water resources, and

considering the current situation and future water supply and demand

situation.(Beijing, 2010).

2.3 Hydrology reach of the river

The operation of High Aswan Dam has its influence on flow rate and flow level

downstream Aswan Dam throughout the year. Historical records show remarkable

reduction in the maximum flow rate after High Aswan Dam. Although, Nile River

is regulated by High Aswan Dam throughout the year, the analysis of hydrological

data set shows increase in the released flow from High Aswan Dam during the

period between 1995 and 2008. The variation on flow discharge throughout the

water year which extends between August and july of the following year is

remarkable. During the period of maximum flow rate, discharge can reach up to

4.5 times the minimum flow rate. The fluctuation in the flow rate is reflected on

the water level downstream Aswan .(Raslan & Salama, 2015)

Diversion Head Works

Any hydraulic structure which supplies water to the off-taking canal is called a

headwork. Headwork may be divided into two:

a. Storage headwork.

b. Diversion headwork. (NA, 2011)

A Storage headwork comprises the construction of a dam on the river. It stores

water during the period of excess supplies and releases it when demand overtakes

available supplies. A diversion headwork serves to divert the required supply to

canal from the river. A diversion head works (or a weir) is a structure constructed

across a river for the purpose of raising water level in the river so that it can be

diverted into the off taking canals.(NA, 2011)

Diversion headworks are generally constructed on the perennial rivers which have

adequate flow throughout the year and, therefore, there is no necessity of creating a

storage reservoir. A diversion head works must be differentiated from a storage

work or a dam. A dam is constructed on the river for the purpose of creating a

large storage reservoir. The storage works are required for the storage of water on a

non-perennial river or on a river with inadequate flow throughout the year. On the

other hand, in a diversion head works, there is very little storage, if any.

15

If the storage on the upstream of a diversion head works is significant, it is called a

storage weir. If diversion headworks is constructed on the downstream of a dam

for the purpose of diverting water released from the u/s dam into the off taking

canals, it is called a pickup weir. Generally, the dam is constructed in the rocky or

the mountainous reach of the river where the conditions are suitable for a dam, and

a pickup weir is constructed near the commanded area in the alluvial reach of the

river.

A diversion head works serves the following functions: It raises the water level on

its upstream side, It regulates the supply of water into canals, It controls the entry

of silt into canals, It creates a small pond (not reservoir) on its upstream and

provides some pondage, It helps in controlling the vagaries of the river.

RIVERS AND THEIR FLOODPLAIN WETLANDS

Naturally flowing floodplain rivers are among the more dynamic ecosystems on

earth (Power et al. 1995), with enormous spatial and temporal complexity. River

flows determine the distribution patterns of channels, back swamps, marshes and

tributaries that make up the floodplain (Ward 1998). These floodplain wetlands

also include freshwater and saline lakes, anabranches, billabongs, lagoons,

16

overflows, swamps and waterholes in Australia. The flow regime of a river, and its

connections to floodplain wetlands, govern biotic responses, channel formation and

sediment transfer (Junk et al. 1989; Walker et al. 1995).

COMPONENT PARTS OF A DIVERSION HEADWORK

A diversion headwork consist of the following component parts

1. Weir or barrage, 2. Under sluices, 3. Divide wall, 4. Fish ladder, 5. Canal head

regulator, 6. Pocket or approach channel, 7. Silt excluders/Silt, 8. River training

works.

Layout of a Diversion Head Works and its components

Under sluice:

Under sluice sections are provided adjacent to the canal head regulators. The under

sluices should be able to pass fair weather flow for which the crest shutters on the

weir proper need not be dropped. The crest level of the under sluices is generally

17

kept at the average bed level of the river. During the floods the gates are opened so

afflux is very small.

A weir maintains a constant pond level on its upstream side so that the water can

flow into the canals with the full supply level (F.S.L.). If the difference between

the pond level and the crest level is less than 15 m or so, a weir is usually

constructed. On the other hand, if this difference is greater than 150 m, a gate-

controlled barrage is generally more suitable than a weir. In the case of a weir, the

crest shutters are dropped during floods so that the water can pass over the crest.

During the dry period, these shutters are raised to store water upto the pond level.

Generally, the shutters are operated manually, and there is no mechanical

arrangement for raising or dropping the shutters. On the 'other hand, in the case of

a barrage, the control of pondage and flood discharge is achieved with the help of

gates which are mechanically operated (NA, 2011)

TYPES OF WEIRS

The weirs may be broadly divided into the following types

Vertical drop weirs, Rock fills weirs., Concrete glacis or sloping weirs.

Vertical drop weirs

18

A vertical drop weir consists of a masonry wall with a vertical (or nearly vertical)

downstream face and a horizontal concrete floor. The shutters are provided at the

crest, which are dropped during floods so as to reduce afflux. The water is ponded

upto the top of the shutters during the rest of the period. Vertical drop weirs were

common in quite early diversion headworks, but these are now becoming more or

less obsolete.

The vertical drop weir is suitable for hard clay foundation as well as consolidated

gravel foundations, and where the drop is small. The upstream and downstream

cutofIwalls (or piles) are provided upto the scour depth. The weir floor is designed

as a gravity section.

Rockfill weirs

In a rockfill type weir, in addition to the main weir wall, there are a number of core

walls. The space between the core walls is filled with the fragments of rock (called

rockfill). A rockfill weir requires a lot of rock fragments and is economical only

when a huge quantity of rockflll is easily available near the weir site. It is suitable

for fine sand foundation. The old Okhla Weir across the Yamuna river is a rockfill

weir. Such weirs are also more or less obsolete these days.

19

Concrete sloping weir

Concrete sloping weirs (or glacis weirs) are of relatively recent origin. The crest

has glacis (sloping floors) on upstream as well as downstream. There are sheet

piles (or cut off walls) driven upto the maximum scour depth at the upstream and

downstream ends of the concrete floor. Sometimes an intermediate pile is also

driven at the beginning of the upstream glacis or at the end of downstream glacis.

The main advantage of a sloping weir over the vertical drop weir is that a hydraulic

jump is formed on the d/s glacis for the dissipation of energy. Therefore, the

sloping weir is quite suitable for large drops.

Impact of the Water Diversion Project on the Region

The shifted amount accounts and total runoff at the outlet of the Reservoir. This

will change mainstream influx and seasonal distribution in the middle and lower

reaches of the other River, leading to a series of secondary changes in varied

degrees in the following aspects: anti-flooding situation, river route sedimentation,

water quality, navigational activities, farming irrigation, industrial product ion and

urban development(DU Yun, 2006). The extent of potential environmental impacts

in these watersheds is especially troubling given the region is a recognized

biodiversity hotspot. According to Ricketts.

20

CONCLUSION

Since the idea of the water diversion is first proposed, aspects of the effort have

raised concerns and questions in the academic community. Most of the objections

relate to negative impacts on the environments of the water source and destination

areas as well as areas along the transfer route; technological limits on boring long

large tunnels and constructing big dams; the consequences of a geological disaster

that could imperil infrastructure, e.g., dams, tunnels, reservoirs, canals, power

stations, and sluices; and issues of international water resource allocation.

21

REFERENCES

1. Water Diversion, http://www.appropedia.org/Water_diversion accessed on 22-6-2015.

2. Beijing, U. O. (2010). Climate Change and Adaptation for Water Resources in Yellow River Basin, China.

3. DU Yun, W. X. C. S. (2006). Ecological Effects of the South-to-North Water Diversion Project on the Hanjiang River. (CAS Institute of Geodesy &

Geo-physics, Hubei Provinces Key Laboratory for Environment & Disaster Monitoring and Evaluation), Vol.20 No.3.

4. NA. (2011). Diversion Head Works,https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=WATER+DIVERsion+jour

nals. Water Science and diversion,

NV(https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=WATER+DIVERsion+journal

s).

5. Raslan, Y., & Salama, R. (2015). Development of Nile River islands between Old Aswan Dam and new Esna barrages. Water Science, 29(1), 77-

92. doi: 10.1016/j.wsj.2015.03.003

6. Allan J. D. & Flecker A. S. (1993) Biodiversity conservation in running waters. Bioscience 43, 3243.

7. Anon (1997a) WA will quadruple Ord scheme. Land Water News1, 8. 8. Australian Nature Conservation Agency (1996) A Directory of Important

Wetlands in Australia, 2nd edn. Australian Nature Conservation Agency,

Canberra.

9. Australian National Committee on Large Dams (1990) Register of large dams in Australia, 1990. (International Commission on Large Dams,

National Committee on Large Dams.)Hydroelectric Commission, Hobart.

10. Australian Water Resources Council (1975) Review of Australias Water Resources. Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra

11. Australian Water Resources Council (1987) 1985 Review of Australias Water Resources and Water Use, parts 1 and 2.(Department of Primary

Industries and Energy.) Australian Government Publishing Service,

Canberra.

12. Bacon P. E., Stone C., Binns D. L., Leslie D. J. & Edwards D. W. (1993) Relationships between water availability and

13. Chen, Y. W., and T. R. Li (1979), Land hydrology, in Physical Geography of China (in Chinese), pp. 6187, Peoples Educ. Press, Beijing.

14. Compilation Committee for Yangtze River Almanac (CCYRA) (1993),Yangtze River Almanac (in Chinese), Yangtze River Almanac Press,

Wuhan, China.

22

15. Compilation Committee for Yangtze River Almanac (CCYRA) (1994),Yangtze River Almanac (in Chinese), Yangtze River Almanac Press,

Wuhan, China.

16. Compilation Committee for Yangtze River Almanac (CCYRA) (1995), Yangtze River Almanac (in Chinese), Yangtze River Almanac Press, Wuhan,

China.

17. Compilation Committee for Yangtze River Almanac (CCYRA) (1997), Yangtze River Almanac (in Chinese), Yangtze River Almanac Press, Wuhan,

China.

18. Wang, S., J. Ca, and J. Zhu (2002), The interdecadal variations of annual precipitation in China during 1880s1990s (Chinese with English abstract), Acta Meteorol. Sin., 60, 637640.

19. Wang, T. H., and G. Z. Qian (1988), TheWaders in the Yangtze Estuary and the Hangzhou Bay, East China Normal Univ. Publ. House, Shanghai.

20. Wang, Z. L., and K. S. Peng (1999), Soil erosion and influencing factors in China, Ecol. Econ., 5, 4851

21. Cervantes J. Marijuana horticulture: the indoor/outdoor medical growers bible. Sacramento, CA: Van Patten Pub.; 2006.

22. Williams LE. Irrigation of wine grapes in California. Practical Winery and Vineyard Journal [Internet]. 2001 Dec; Available:

http://www.practicalwinery.com/novdec01p42.htm

23. Lytle DA, Poff NL. Adaptation to natural flow regimes. Trends Ecol Evol. 2004; 19(2):94100. PMID: 16701235

24. 18. Bunn SE, Arthington AH. Basic principles and ecological consequences of altered flow regimes for aquatic biodiversity. Environ Manage. 2002;

30(4):492507. PMID: 12481916 25. 19. Poff NL, Allan JD, Bain MB, Karr JR, Prestegaard KL, Richter BD, et al.

The natural flow regime. BioScience. 1997; 47(11):76984. 26. Power ME, Dietrich WE, Finlay JC. Dams and downstream aquatic

biodiversity: Potential food web consequences of hydrologic and

geomorphic change. Environ Manage. 1996; 20(6):88795. PMID:8895411 27. Deitch MJ, Kondolf GM, Merenlender AM. Hydrologic impacts of small-

scale in stream diversions for frost and heat protection in the California wine

country. River Res Appl. 2009; 25(2):11834. 28. 29. Deitch MJ, Kondolf GM, Merenlender AM. Surface water balance to

evaluate the hydrological impacts of small instream diversions and

application to the Russian River basin, California, USA. Aquat Conserve

Mar Freshw Ecosyst. 2009; 19(3):27484.

23

30. Starrs PF, Goin P. Field Guide to California Agriculture. University of California Press; 2010. 504 p.

31. Sawyer JO, Keeler-Wolf T, Evens J. A manual of California vegetation. California Native Plant Society Press; 2009. 1316 p.

32. Cashman SM, Kelsey HM, Harden DR. Geology of the Redwood Creek Basin, Humboldt County, California. 1995; U.S. Geological Survey

Professional Paper 1454-B. Available:

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/tmdl/records/region_

1/2003/ref2065.pdf

33. California Interagency Watershed Mapping Committee. California Interagency Watershed Map of 1999 (CalWater2.2.1) [Internet]. 2.2.1 ed.

Sacramento, CA: California Interagency Watershed Mapping Com-mittee;

2004. Available:

http://www.calfish.org/ProgramsData/ReferenceLayersHydrography/

CaliforniaInteragencyWatershedMapof1999.aspx

34. Humboldt Growers Association. Humboldt County Outdoor Medical Cannabis Ordinance Draft [Internet]. 2010. Available:

http://library.humboldt.edu/humco/holdings/HGA2.pdf

35. PRWEB. Leading California Marijuana Attorney Says Growers Must Focus on Water Conservation.2012 Mar 22. Available:

http://www.prweb.com/releases/marijuana-

attorney/california/prweb9316223.htm. Accessed 22 Jan 2014.

36. Lang M, Love M, Trush W. Improving Stream Crossings for Fish Passage. National Marine Fisheries Service. 2004. Available:

http://www.stream.fs.fed.us/fishxing/fplibrary/Lang_2004_Improving

stream_crossing_for_fish_passage_FINAL.pdf

37. Rantz SE. Average annual precipitation and runoff in north coastal California. United States Geological Survey. 1968. Report No.: HA298. Available: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/ha298

38. Rantz SE. Surface-water hydrology of coastal basins of northern California. United States Geological Survey. 1964. ReportNo.: WSP1758. Available: http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Prodesc/proddesc_24932.htm

39. Bailey LH. The Standard Cyclopedia of Horticulture: I. A-E. 1935. 1200 p. 40. Journal of Agricultural Research. U.S. Government Printing Office. 1915.

704 p.

41. Howell TA. Enhancing water use efficiency in irrigated agriculture. Agron J. 2001; 93(2):2819.

42. Jensen ME. Water Consumption by Agricultural Plants. In: Kozlowski TT, editor. Water Deficits and Plant Growth, Vol 2. New York: Academic Press

Inc; 1968. Available from: http://eprints.nwisrl.ars.usda.gov/742/1/92.pdf

24

43. North Coast Water Quality Control Board. Water Quality Control Plan for the North Coast Region.Santa Rosa, CA; 2011. Available:

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/northcoast/water_issues/programs/

basin_plan/083105-bp/basin_plan.pdf

44. Arismendi I, Safeeq M, Johnson SL, Dunham JB, Haggerty R. Increasing synchrony of high temperature and low flow in western North American

streams: double trouble for coldwater biota? Hydrobiologia. 2013 Jul;

712(1):6170. 45. Ricketts TH. Terrestrial ecoregions of North America: A Conservation

Assessment. Washington, D.C.:Island Press; 1999.

46. Abell RA. Freshwater Ecoregions of North America: A Conservation Assessment. Washington, D.C.:Island Press; 2000.

47. Special Animals List [Internet]. California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Natural Diversity Database;2015. Available:

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/pdfs/SPAnimals.pdf

48. Kelsey KA, West SD. Riparian Wildlife. In: Naiman RJ, Bilby RE, Kantor S, editors. River Ecology and Management: Lessons from the Pacific Coastal

Ecoregion. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 1998.

49. Miller NL, Bashford KE, Stream E. Potential Impacts of Climate Change on California Hydrology.JAWRA J AmWater Resour Assoc. 2003; 39(4):77184.

50. Hayhoe K, Cayan D, Field CB, Frumhoff PC, Maurer EP, Miller NL, et al. Emissions pathways, climate change, and impacts on California. Proc Natl

Acad Sci U S A. 2004; 101(34):124227. PMID:15314227 51. Schlenker W, Hanuman WM, Fisher AC. Water Availability, Degree Days,

and the Potential Impact of Climate Change on Irrigated Agriculture in

California. Climate Change. 2007 Mar 1; 81(1):1938. PMID:17415585 52. Mayer TD, Naman SW. Stream flow Response to Climate as Influenced by

Geology and Elevation. JAWRA J AmWater Resour Assoc. 2011 Aug 1;

47(4):72438. 53. Poff NL, Brinson MM, DayJWJr. Aquatic ecosystems and global climate

change. Pew Cent Glob Climate Change Arlington VA. 2002; 44.

54. Mohseni O, Stefan HG, Eaton JG. Global Warming and Potential Changes in Fish Habitat in U.S.Streams. Climate Change. 2003 Aug 1; 59(3):389409.