Arthington Angela H, Bunn Stuart E, Poff N LeRoy, Naiman Robert J
Centre for Riverine Landscapes and eWater Cooperative Research Centre, Griffith University, Nathan, Queensland, Australia.
Ecol Appl. 2006 Aug;16(4):1311-8. doi: 10.1890/1051-0761(2006)016[1311:tcopef]2.0.co;2.
Accounting for natural differences in flow variability among rivers, and understanding the importance of this for the protection of freshwater biodiversity and maintenance of goods and services that rivers provide, is a great challenge for water managers and scientists. Nevertheless, despite considerable progress in understanding how flow variability sustains river ecosystems, there is a growing temptation to ignore natural system complexity in favor of simplistic, static, environmental flow "rules" to resolve pressing river management issues. We argue that such approaches are misguided and will ultimately contribute to further degradation of river ecosystems. In the absence of detailed empirical information of environmental flow requirements for rivers, we propose a generic approach that incorporates essential aspects of natural flow variability shared across particular classes of rivers that can be validated with empirical biological data and other information in a calibration process. We argue that this approach can bridge the gap between simple hydrological "rules of thumb" and more comprehensive environmental flow assessments and experimental flow restoration projects.
考虑到不同河流流量变化的自然差异,并理解其对保护淡水生物多样性以及维持河流所提供的商品和服务的重要性,这对水资源管理者和科学家而言是一项巨大挑战。然而,尽管在理解流量变化如何维持河流生态系统方面已取得显著进展,但人们越来越倾向于忽视自然系统的复杂性,转而采用简单、静态的环境流量“规则”来解决紧迫的河流管理问题。我们认为这种方法是错误的,最终将导致河流生态系统进一步退化。在缺乏关于河流环境流量需求的详细实证信息的情况下,我们提出一种通用方法,该方法纳入了特定类别河流共有的自然流量变化的基本方面,并且可以在校准过程中通过实证生物学数据和其他信息进行验证。我们认为这种方法能够弥合简单水文“经验法则”与更全面的环境流量评估及实验性流量恢复项目之间的差距。