Search USGSSearch

USGS · 70121548

Instream water use in the United States: water laws and methods for determining flow requirements

Abstract

Water use generally is divided into two primary classes - offstream use and instream use. In offstream use, sometimes called out-of-stream or diversionary use, water is withdrawn (diverted) from a stream or aquifer and transported to the place of use. Examples are irrigated agriculture, municipal water supply, and industrial use. Each of these offstream uses, which decreases the volume of water available downstream from the point of diversion, is discussed in previous articles in this volume. Instream use, which generally does not diminish the flow downstream from its point of use, and its importance are described in this article. One of the earliest instream uses of water in the United States was to turn the water wheels that powered much of the Nation's industry in the 18th and 19th centuries. Although a small volume of water might have been diverted to a mill near streamside, that water usually was returned to the stream near the point of diversion and, thus, the flow was not diminished downstream from the mill. Over time, the generation of hydroelectric power replaced mill wheels as a means of converting water flow into energy. Since the 1920's, the generation of hydroelectric power increasingly has become a major instream use of water. By 1985, more than 3 billion acre-feet of water (3,050,000 million gallons per day) was used annually for hydropower generation (Solley and others, 1988, p. 45)-enough water to cover the State of Colorado to a depth of 51 feet. Navigation is another instream use with a long history. The Lewis and Clark expedition journals and many of Mark Twain's novels illustrate the extent to which the Nation originally depended on adequate streamfiows for basic transportation. Navigation in the 1980's is still considered to be an instream use; however, it often is based upon a stream system that has been modified greatly through channelization, diking, and construction of dams and locks. The present (1987) inland water navigation system in the conterminous United States consists of about 12,000 miles of maintained waterways, over which about 500 million tons of cargo is carried each year (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1988, p. 16). Although not so widely practiced in recent years, streams have been used to dispose of raw waste products from homes, communities, and factories. This use has been discouraged by law and public policy because of public health concerns and the damage it causes to the environment. Beginning in the mid-1960's, other instream uses gained new prominence in the water-resources arena-the assertion of a legal right to a free-flowing stream for biological, recreational, and esthetic purposes. These uses themselves, however, are not new. Riverine habitat always has produced fish, and the beauty of flowing water always has evoked a strong sense of esthetic appreciation. What is new is the emerging legitimacy and awareness of these noneconomic uses under State and Federal laws and regulations. In the past, environmental uses of flowing water were ignored, for the most part, under a long-standing legal tradition that favored offstream uses and certain instream uses that had a strong economic basis. The history of instream-flow policy debate really concerns those recently recognized types of interim uses. Although the more transitional water uses have been protected by law, the recognition of other in stream uses has resulted in substantial changes in State water laws. Although methods for determining the volume of water needed for most traditional water uses are relatively straight-forward and well-established, methods for determining water requirements for the in stream uses have been developed only recently and are continuing to evolve. Water laws that have favored the more traditional water uses, the inherent nature of conflict between instream and offstream water uses, and the special kinds of technological and philosophical problems posed by the "newer" types of instream uses are described below. Water laws that have been passed to accommodate the more recently recognized instream uses are summarized.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Berton L. Lamb, Harvey R. Doerksen. 1987. Instream water use in the United States: water laws and methods for determining flow requirements. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70121548

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Factors affecting benthic macroinvertebrate health in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, 2020–2023

Major waterways in the City of Roanoke (City) have failed to meet Virginia’s aquatic life designated use since 1996. Segments of the upper Roanoke River lack healthy benthic macroinvertebrate communities which prompted a total maximum daily load (TMDL) study by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) to identify the most probable stressor(s) causing the impairment. Excess fine sediment was identified as the most probable stressor impairing benthic macroinvertebrates on portions of the Roanoke River in 2006, and a watershed implementation plan published in 2016 required communities within the impaired watershed to implement projects that would reduce the load of fine sediment entering the Roanoke River. Additional benthic macroinvertebrate sampling and stream habitat assessments along the Roanoke River and Tinker Creek (a tributary to the Roanoke River that flows through the City) revealed continued impaired conditions, and subsequent stressor identification analysis was completed in 2023. Samples collected downstream of the City on the Roanoke River and Tinker Creek generally showed more impaired conditions relative to samples collected at locations upstream of the City. Based on this evaluation, sediment and sediment-bound polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were identified as probable stressors while specific conductance, total nitrogen, and sediment metals were possible stressors in Tinker Creek; however, only a sediment TMDL target was identified to address impaired benthic macroinvertebrate communities. In the Roanoke River upstream of the Niagara Dam, sediment and total phosphorus were identified as probable stressors, sediment polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and sediment PCB were considered possible stressors; however, the TMDL target was only for total phosphorus. The City partnered with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in 2016 to continuously monitor water quality and streamflow conditions on a major tributary of Tinker Creek, Lick Run, and by 2020, four similar monitoring stations were installed on the Roanoke River and Tinker Creek near the locations of benthic macroinvertebrate sampling. Monitored parameters included streamflow and/or gage height (water level), water temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, and turbidity. Turbidity is a measure of the relative clarity of the water and was previously used to model suspended-sediment concentrations at the monitoring stations. The City also contracted Kirk Environmental, LLP (KE) to collect benthic macroinvertebrate samples and stream habitat assessments near the locations of the water-quality monitoring stations. Identified benthic macroinvertebrates were used to calculate the Virginia Stream Condition Index (SCI), a multi-metric index composed of eight biological attributes that represent elements of the structure and function of the benthic macroinvertebrate community that measure diversity, composition, and tolerance to pollution. Study objective: In this report, benthic macroinvertebrate samples and stream habitat assessment scores collected at four locations on the Roanoke River and Tinker Creek by KE and the VDEQ between 2020 and 2023 were compared to measured water-quality and streamflow conditions prior to sampling to evaluate patterns between benthic macroinvertebrate health, water quality, and hydrology.

Virginia