This article was downloaded by: [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign]

On: 24 September 2013, At: 13:05

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Fisheries
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ufsh20

Instream Flow Regimens for Fish, Wildlife, Recreation

and Related Environmental Resources
a
Donald Leroy Tennant
a
Ohio Division of Wildlife, USA
Published online: 09 Jan 2011.

To cite this article: Donald Leroy Tennant (1976) Instream Flow Regimens for Fish, Wildlife, Recreation and Related
Environmental Resources, Fisheries, 1:4, 6-10, DOI: 10.1577/1548-8446(1976)001<0006:IFRFFW>2.0.CO;2

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1577/1548-8446(1976)001<0006:IFRFFW>2.0.CO;2

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 INSTREAM FLOW REGIMENS FOR FISH, WILDLIFE,
RECREATION
AND RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES

Donald Leroy Tennant

ABSTRACT

A quick, easy methodology is described for determining flows to protect the aquatic resources in both warmwater and coldwater
streams, based on their average flow. Biologists do their analysis with aid of hydrological data provided by the U.S. Geological Survey
(IJSGS). Detailed field studies were conducted on 11 streams in 3 states between 1964 and 1974, testing the "Montana Method." This
Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 13:05 24 September 2013

work involved physical, chemical, and biological analyses of 38 different flows at 58 cross-sections on 196 stream-miles, affecting both
coldwater and warinwater fisheries. The studies, all planned, conducted, and analyzed with the help of state fisheries biologists, reveal
that the condition of the aquatic habitat is remarkably similar on most of the streams carrying the same portion of the average flow.
Similar analyses of hundreds of additional flow regimens near USGS gages in 21 different states during the past 17 years substantiated
this correlation on a wide variety of streams. Ten percent of the average flow is a minimum instantaneous flow recommended to sustain
short-term survival habitat for most aquatic life forms.Thirty percent is recommended as a base flow to sustain good survival conditions
for most aquatic life forms and general recreation. Sixty percent provides excellent to outstanding habitat for most aquatic life forms
during their primary periods of growth and for the majority of recreational uses.

Introduction Method

Natural, free-flowing streams are one of the world's most The Montana Method is so brief it can be typed on a 3" x 5"
beautiful and valuable resources. Before the coming of Christ, card. It can be applied rapidly to many segments of thousands of
the Roman Emperor Justinian said: "By the law of nature certain streams by referring to Table 1 of this paper and surface water
things are common property; for example, the air, running records of the USGS.
water. and the sea." America's late Senator Norris from
Nebraska said: "The streams that are flowing downhill were Table 1. Instream flow regimens for fish, wildlife, recreation, and
given us b a creator. They do not belong to any special interest related environmental resources.
or to any individual. They belong to the people and ought to be
utilized for the benefit of all of them." Narrative description Recommended base flow regimens
Few streams in the United States have escaped degradation of flows Oct.-Mar. Apr.-Sept.
from land use practices or altered flows by some kind of man- Flushing or maximum 200% of the average flow
made "water development" project. Some recognition is finally Optimum range 60%-100% of the average flow
being given to instream flow regimens to protect the natural en- Outstanding 40% 60%
vironment. Scientists from many disciplines are seeking reliable, Excellent 30% 50%
practical methods for determining streamflow requirements to Good 20% 40%
protect fishes, waterfowl. furbearers, reptiles, amphibians, Fair or degrading 10% 30%
molluscs. other aquatic invertebrates, and related life forms from Poor or minimum 10% 10%
all the various people competing for our Nation's water. Severe degradation 10% of average flow to zero flow
With the help of several hydrologists and many State and " Most appropriate description of the general condition of the
Federal biologists, this quick, easy method was developed for stream flow for all parameters listed in the title of this paper.
determining flows to protect the aquatic resources in both
warmwater and coldwater streams. This methodology evolved
over the past 17 years from work on hundreds of streams in the The following intensive use of this method will produce a
states north of the Mason-Dixon Line between the Atlantic factual, conclusive streamflow study on any stream. First, deter-
Ocean and the Rocky Mountains. This work has been cited in a mine the average annual flow of the stream at the location(s) of
score of publications and is best known as the "Montana interest (listed as AVERAGE DISCHARGE by USGS and
Method." hereinafter called average flow). If the average flow is not
published by the USGS, it can quickly be calculated for you.
Visit the stream and observe, photograph, sample, and study flow
THE AUTIHOR: A native of Ohio, Donald L. Tennant regimens approximating 10%, 30%, and 60% of the average flow.
graduated from Ohio State University with a B.S. in Fish and Other flows can be studied, but these three regimens will cover a
Wildlife Conservation and worked for the Ohio Division of flow range from about the minimum to near the maximum that
Wildlife. For nineteen years he has been with the U.S. Fish and can normally be justified and recommended to protect the
Wildlife Service. natural environment on most streams.
The average flow of a stream (or any given portion or per-
6 FISHERIES Vol. 1, No. 4
 cent of the average flow) is a composite manifestation of the size Pictures may be the best data you will collect for selling
of the drainage area, geomorphology, climate, vegetation, and your recommendations to the general public, administrators of
land use. These relationships have been evaluated and reported construction agencies managing water development projects, and
also by other biologists and hydrologists. (Rantz 1964; Tennant judges or juries adjudicating water laws. Black and white
1957-1975). photographs and 35 mm slides of key habitat types (e.g., riffles,
On uncontrolled streams, study USGS records for daily, runs, pools, islands and bars) from elevated vantage points like
monthly, and annual flow patterns; then go to the field and bridges and high stream banks will give results superior to
check their gages until you can view and study natural flows ap- ground level shots or photos from aircraft high above the stream.
prozimating 10%, 30%, and 60% of the average flow. Record appropriate, vital information on all photographs and
If flows are controlled, begin by having the highest flow you slides as soon as they are received.
wish to study released first; then regulate so that each USGS monthly measurements of width, depth, and velocity
succeeding lower flow will begin the following midnight. Photos cover a variety of flows at most of their stream gage or cable
taken early the next morning will reveal the difference in ex- crossings. Obtain cross-sectional data on width, depth, and
posed substrate or wetted perimeter (Fig. 1). This is photographic velocity measurements from the local USGS field office for flow
"regression analysis." An interval of 8-10 hours will normally be regimens under study. Use this information to plot and compare
sufficient to negate any appreciable differences in flow levels due water widths, depths, and velocities to known requirements for
Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 13:05 24 September 2013

to bank storage. aquatic resources. As manpower and money permit, USGS will
make specific cross-sectional measurements of width, depth, and
velocity for government agencies at any point on any stream. It
requires proper experience, equipment, and plenty of time for
others to make the necessary cross-sectional measurements.
Study average daily, monthly, and annual stream-flow regimen
tables and previous historic low-flow data published by USGS to
learn the base flow patterns of the climatic year and help deter-
mine flows that mimic nature and justify your final recommen-
dations. Recommend the most appropriate and reasonable
nflow(s) that can be justified to provide protection and habitat for
all aquatic resources.

Results

Figure I. lissolri River below iolter I)am. Montana, showing Detailed field studies were conducted on 11 streams in 3
differiines bet e n flows of 3.00n) efs (55/ of the average flow) states between 1964 and 1974 testing the Montana Method
an 2.000 fs~(37 of he average flow). The vertical drop was 7 (Table 2). This work involved physical, chemical, and biological
inclilhe. Fh1ss redllced ahomit midnight will el.arly reveal analyses of 38 different flows at 50 cross-sections on 196 stream
differences in welledl sustrlate when photographed the next miles. affecting both coldwater and warmwater fisheries. Reports
morn ing (hotlograpic "regression anallysis"). or publications on 6 study streams are available as indicated in

Table 2. Detailed studies of instream flow regimens using the Montana Method.

Name of Miles Number of Different Parameters Type of

Stream State Date Studied Stations Flows Studieda Fisherv' Reference
Republican R. Nebraska 1964 40 3 4 W,D,V,S,B,C,T,F WW 25
Wind-Bighorn R. Wyoming 1968 50 10 3 W,D,S,B,C,T,F CW &WW 24
Marias R. Montana 1968 67 9 3 W,D,V,S,B,C,T,F CW &WW
Missouri R. Montana 1970 15 8 4 W.D.V.S.B,C,I,F CW &WW
Blacks Fork R. Wyoming 1971 16 4 3 W,D,V,S,C,I CW 31
Shoshone Creek Wyoming 1971 1 2 9 W,D,V,S,B,C,F CW
Ruby R. Montana 1971 1 4 3 W,D,V,S,B,C,F CW 10
W. Fk. Bitterroot Montana 1971 1 5 3 W,D,V,S,B,C,F CW 10
W. Rosebud R. Montana 1971 3 3 4 W,D,V,S,B,C,F CW 10
N. Platte R. Wyoming 1974 2 10 2 W,D,V,S,B,C,F CW & WW

Totals 196 58 38

"Parameters Studied: W, Width; D, Depth; V, Velocity; S, Substrate & Sidechannels; B, Bars & Islands; C, Cover; M, Migration;
T, Temperature; I, Invertebrates; F, Fishing & Floating; E, Esthetics & Natural Beauty.
hTvpe Fishery: WW, Warmwater; CW, Coldwater.

July - August 1976 7

 (I1NSTREAM FLO W-) rivers out on the prairies of mid-America and streams along the
coastal plains. This phenomenon of nature is dicumented with
Table 2. Numerous black and white photos and 35 mm slides
hundreds of black and white photographs and 35 mm slides that
were taken of all the flow stages studied at each cross-section.
are registered and filed with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
The studies. all planned, conducted, and analyzed with the help
(FWS) in Billings, Montana; Grand Island, Nebraska; and
of state fisheries biologists, reveal that the condition of the
Denver, Colorado.
aquatic habitat is remarkably similar on most streams carrying
the same portion of the average flow. Application of the Montana Method
Width, depth, and velocity are physical instream flow
parameters vital to the well-being of aquatic organisms and their Using the Montana Method it is easy to adjust to above or
habitat. Sixteen hundred measurements of these parameters for below water years and maintain stream flows that are appropriate
48 different flows on 10 of the streams cited in Table 2 show that portions of monthly, quarterly, or annual instream supplies of
they all increase with flow, and that changes are much greater at water. This helps fish, wildlife, and aquatic resources share sur-
the lower levels of flow (Fig. 2). Width, depth, and velocity all pluses and shortages of water equitably with other users.
changed more rapidly from no flow to a flow of 10% of the With the Montana Method, USGS measures the hydraulic
average than in any range thereafter. characteristics of the stream, and biologists interpret the
biological responses. This saves considerable precious time that
Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 13:05 24 September 2013

biologists can use on a more complete ecological analysis of

streamflow needs.
There is significant hydrological and biological evidence
that the Montana Method can be used successfully on streams
throughout the United States and in other parts of the world
(Rantz 1964: Whelan and Wood 1962). USGS data from cross-
sectional measurements is subject to computer analysis with
predicted flow parameters for width, depth, velocity, hydraulic
radius. etc. at any desired water stage between zero and historic
peak discharge.
USGS is considering the revision of stream flow data
programs for most of the states (U.S. Department of Interior).
The majority of existing gages may be discontinued under its
10% 30% 60% 100% 200% future program. Techniques like measuring channel geometry,
FIWU1: CUBIC
PE1CEN-C AVERACE FEETEE SECOND
(C-S)
interpolation from a known flow to an unknown flow, and cor-
relations with adjacent streams will be used to provide stream
Figoirc 2.idi. rath. de and velocit froivm ten fiell flow information at any point on any stream. Simple channel
tIts ,of inliream flow rgimens using the Mlontana Mlethod geometry measurements have produced average flow data as ac-
and thel I S(; h!ldrolrgy data. curate as 10 years of continuous gage records (Hedman and
Kastner 1974). The standard errors were lowest for mountain
Ten percent of the average flow covered 60% of the sub-
regions and in competition with 5 to 10 years of gaged records for
strates. depths averaged 1 foot, and velocities averaged 0.75 foot
the plains region. There is very little variation when results are
per second. Studies show that these are critical points or the
lower limits for the well-being of many aquatic organisms, par- compared between channel width and average flow (Fig. 3).
iowoo . . .......... .
ticularly fishes. This substantiates the conclusion that this is the
area of most severe degradation or that 10% is a minimum short-
term survival flow at best. Flows from 30% to 100% of average
result in a gain of 40% for wetted substrate, average depth in- ,/
creases from 1.5 to 2 feet, and average velocities rise from 1.5 to /,
2 feet per second. These are within good to optimum ranges for 100,000 ','
aquatic organisms; however, it requires 3 to 10 times the amount
of water needed for a short-term minimum or good base flow, and 0

gains or benefit/cost ratios may become questionable. Increasing i

I .
I. -:,,
flow frim 100% of average to 200% of average (doubled) only in- I
I

creases average wetted substrate by 10%, average depth increases R

z2
from 2 to 3 feet, and average velocity rises from 2 to 3.5 feet per
second. Velocities averaging 3.5 feet per second are probably too
1 ,,
U1
B F/.
high for the general well-being of most aquatic organisms but
good for moving sidiment, bedload, and white water boating, In
all 11 field tests of the Montana Method, water depth appeared
adequate for aquatic organisms whenever velocities were
satisfactory.
.aA ;
Analyses of hundreds of additional flow regimens near USGS
.,w
.A 400 ,ooo000
ACTIVECSNBELWIDTH
IN FEET
gages in 21 different states during the past 17 years substantiate Figiur :3. (Crrela l iol
i betsswi-en a average flow an (I channel width
these correlations between similar flows on a wide variety of for streamlll in Ihei mountain and plains regions of Colorado,
streams. Running waters studied ranged from small precipitous ansas. lltlontana. and romring. Ised with the permission of
brooks high in the Rocky Mountains, to large, low-gradient E.R. lidian.

8 FISHERIES Vol. 1, No. 4

 Mean annual discharge is one of the few criteria that will be
routinely provided by this future program. Therefore, the Mon-
tana Method can still be used with this new program, since it is
based primarily on knowledge of the mean annual discharge or
average flow. The ability to provide the average flow at any point
on any stream at any time would actually facilitate the use of the
Montana Method in the future.
Adopting the metric system would not require conversion
tables or other problems since this method is based on percen-
tages of the average flow however it is expressed.

Conclusions

Ten percent of the average flow: This is a minimum instan-

taneous flow recommended to sustain short-term survival IFilur 5. ighornl Iive r below Boy-sen )am. Wyoming. show-
habitat for most aquatic life forms. Channel widths, depths, and inig a Mmfl of
,I ) efs (30l/ of the average flow). Water depth was
Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 13:05 24 September 2013

velocities will all be significantly reduced and the aquatic habitat adnleqlal for Itrol movement. spawning, incubation, and
degraded (Figs. 2,4). The stream substrate or wetted perimeter % inl r surival in most r and pool areas for a distance of 45
cair Iils d(sltrea151i m. This is a hase flow recommended to
will be about half exposed, except in wide, shallow riffle or shoal
silstaiill good srv iil habitat for most aquatic life forms.
areas where exposure could be higher. Side channels will be
severely or totally dewatered. Gravel bars will be substantially areas. Most side channels will carry some water. Gravel bars will
dewalered. and islands will usually no longer function as wildlife be partially covered with water and many islands will provide
nesting. donning, nursery, and refuge habitat. Streambank cover wildlife nesting, denning, nursery, and refuge habitat. Stream-
for fish and fur animal denning habitat will be severely dimin- banks will provide cover for fish and wildlife denning habitat in
ished. Many wetted areas will be so shallow they no longer will many reaches. Many runs and most pools will be deep enough to
serve as cover for fishes. Riparian vegetation will not suffer
from lack of water. Large fish can move over riffle areas. Water
temperatures are not expected to become limiting in most stream
segments. Invertebrate life is reduced but not expected to
become a limiting factor in fish production. Water quality and
quantity should be good for fishing, floating, and general recrea-
tion, especially with canoes, rubber rafts, and smaller shallow
draft boats. Stream esthetics and natural beauty will generally be
satisfactorv.
Sixty percent of the average flow: This is a base flow
recommended to provide excellent to outstanding habitat for
most aquatic life forms during their primary periods of growth
and for the majority of recreational uses. Channel widths,
depths. and velocities will provide excellent aquatic habitat
Figure I. Illblican River below llardy Bridge. Nebraska. (Figs. 2,6). Most of the normal channel substrate will be covered
slhm ilig a flow of 12 cfs (0; of the average flow). Water depths with water, including many shallow riffle and shoal areas. Side
le re adceqiale 1) provide some fish cover, living space, move- channels that normally carry water will have adequate flows.
o1enl. aid fishing. TI'emperatures were within tolerable limits. Few gravel bars will be exposed, and the majority of islands will
This i a liinlitmrn instantaneous flow recommended to sus- serve as wildlife nesting, denning, nursery, and refuge habitat.
tain -hort-term srival habitat for most aquatic life forms.
The majority of streambanks will provide cover for fish and safe
serve as cover, and fish will be crowded into the deepest pools. denning areas for wildlife. Pools, runs, and riffles will be ade-
Riparian vegetation may suffer from lack of water. Large fish will IDonald . ' ,'1, 1ant
have difficulty migrating upstream over riffle areas. Water
temperature often becomes a limiting factor, especially in the
lower reaches of streams in July and August. Invertebrate life
will be severly reduced. Fishing will often be bery good in the
deeper pools and runs since fish will be concentrated. Many
fishermen prefer this level of flow. However, fish may be
vulnerable to overharvest. Floating is difficult even in a canoe or
rubber raft. Natural beauty and stream esthetics are badly
degraded. Most streams carry less than 10% of the average flow
at times, so even this low level of flow will occasionally provide
some enhancement over a natural flow regimen.
Thirty percent of the average flow: This is a base flow
recommended to sustain good survival habitat for most aquatic
life forms. Widths, depths, and velocities will generally be
satisfactory (Figs. 2,5). The majority of the substrate will be
covered with water, except for very wide, shallow riffle or shoal
July - August 1976 9
 (INSTREAM FLOW-) justify and apply benefit/cost ratios for fish to the 100 cfs
flow because this makes their "project purpose" look more
favorable on a comparable benefit/cost basis.
5. Stipulate that the downstream flow will not be less than the
inflow to impoundments, whenever operators of water
development projects cannot provide specific flow re-
quirements. Make this an integral part of every flow regimen
recommendation, preferably part of the same sentence.
6. Reduced releases to a stream should not exceed a vertical
drop of 6 inches in 6 hours. Fluctuations greater than this
may significantly degrade aquatic resources.
7. Request that maximum flows released from dams not exceed
twice the average flow. Prolonged releases of clear water
greater than this will cause severe bank erosion and degrade
the downstream aquatic environment.
Figure 6. North Fork Shoshone River near Wapiti, Wyoming,
8. Use "undepleted" USGS hydrology data for flow recommen-
showing a flow of 456 cfs (approximately 60% of the average
Downloaded by [University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign] at 13:05 24 September 2013

flow). Water widths, depths, and velocities very good for fish
dations that relate to the stream in its pristine conditions
and fishing in all riffles, runs and pools. This is a base flow (e.g., before dams, diversion, pumps, etc.). Otherwise,
recommended to provide excellent to outstanding habitat for recommendations from the Montana Method may relate to
most aquatic life forms during their primary periods of growth depleted stream conditions and result in less than ideal
and for the majority of recreational uses. flows.
quately covered with water and provide excellent feeding and 9. Avoid recommending minimum instantaneous stream flow
nursery habitat for fishes. Riparian vegetation will have plenty regimens less than 10% of the average flow since they will
of water. Fish migration is no problem in any riffle areas. Water result in catastrophic degradation to fish and wildlife
temperatures are not expected to become limiting in any reach resources and harm both the aquatic and riparian en-
of the stream. Invertebrate life forms should be varied and abun- vironments. Encourage lawmakers to pass legislation that
dant. Water quality and quantity is excellent for fishing and would prevent diversions or regulation at dams, whenever it
floating canoes, rafts, and larger boats, and for general recrea- would reduce streamflow below this level. If water develop-
tion. Stream esthetics and natural beauty will be excellent to out- ment projects cannot make it on 90% of the water carried by
standing. a stream, use of the remaining 10% probably won't justify
A flow of two to three times the average flow is often best their projects. Philosophically, it is a crime against nature to
for kayaks and whitewater canoeing. A flow of this magnitude is rob a stream of that last portion of water so vital to the life
also preferable for larger boats with inboard or outboard motors, forms of the aquatic environment that developed there over
like those many people use on the annual Missouri and eons of time.
Yellowstone River floats held in June and July in Montana.
LITERATURE CITED
Recommendations
HEDMAN, E.R., and W.M. KASTNER. 1974. Progress report on
1. Request "instantaneous flows" to prevent flow releases streamflow-characteristics as related to channel
from dams and diversion structures that are averaged over a geometry of streams in the Missouri River Basin.
day, month, or year, which permits erratic releases or even Open-File Rep. U.S. Geological Survey. 24 pp.
no flow at times. RANTZ, S.E. 1964. Stream hydrology related to the optimum
2. Recommend that dual or multiple outlets to all dams be discharge for king salmon spawning in the northern
designed and constructed so that minimum flows of an ap- California coast ranges. U.S. Geological Survey Water
propriate temperature and quality to protect the aquatic en- Supply Pap. (1779-AA). 16 pp.
vironment can be by-passed at all times, including during TENNANT, D.L. 1957-1975. Ecological Services studies and
drawdowns for safety inspections and emergency repairs. reports-major fish and/or wildlife input. (Un-
3. Insist that costs for providing of instream flows to protect published list of RBS and ES reports.) 3 pp.
the aquatic environment downstream below dams be project U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, GEOLOGICAL
costs, including costs for unforeseen emergency repairs and SURVEY. A proposed streamflow data program for
routine maintenance over the life of the project. [state].
4. Justify only that portion of a stream flow required to fulfill WHELAN, D.E., and R.K. WOOD. 1962. Low-flow regulations
specific instream needs. If fish need a flow of 100 cfs in a as a means of improving stream fishing. Pages 375-386
segment of stream where there are already legal re- in Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Conference,
quirements of 25 cfs for municipal water, 15 cfs for irriga- Southeastern Association of Game and Fish Com-
tion water transport, and 10 cfs for a U.S. Environmental missioners, Charleston, S.C.
Protection Agency water quality requirement, you logically
and legally should have to justify a flow of only 50 cfs.
Planners of water development projects may ask you to
Please inform the office immediately of any error or
change in your name or address. We are preparing our
Note: Complete copies of this report can be obtained free by records for the new directory.
writing U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Federal Building,
Billings, Montana 59101.
10 FISHERIES Vol. 1, No. 4