Hydrological Sciences Journal

ISSN: 0262-6667 (Print) 2150-3435 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/thsj20

Hydrology-based assessment of environmental

flows: an example from Nepal

V. U. SMAKHTIN , R. L. SHILPAKAR & D. A. HUGHES

To cite this article: V. U. SMAKHTIN , R. L. SHILPAKAR & D. A. HUGHES (2006) Hydrology-

based assessment of environmental flows: an example from Nepal, Hydrological Sciences Journal,
51:2, 207-222, DOI: 10.1623/hysj.51.2.207

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1623/hysj.51.2.207

Published online: 19 Jan 2010.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 2530

View related articles

Citing articles: 16 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=thsj20
 Hydrological Sciences–Journal–des Sciences Hydrologiques, 51(2) April 2006 207

Hydrology-based assessment of environmental flows: an

example from Nepal

V. U. SMAKHTIN1, R. L. SHILPAKAR2 & D. A. HUGHES3

1 International Water Management Institute, PO Box 2075, Colombo, Sri Lanka
v.smakhtin@cgiar.org
2 International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, Khumaltar, Lalitpur, PO Box 3226, Kathmandu, Nepal
3 Institute for Water Research, Rhodes University, PO Box 94, Grahamstown 6140, South Africa

Abstract The paper examines the applicability of several desktop hydrology-based environmental flow
assessment methods—Tennant, range of variability approach (RVA) and South African desktop reserve
model (DRM)—in the specific context of Nepal. Some of these techniques are modified, following the
discussion of their limitations. It is indicated that hydrology-based methods of environmental flow
assessment represent a necessary first step in planning for environmental allocations in developing
countries. It is shown that use can be made of complementary features of existing environmental flow
assessment techniques to arrive at justified estimates of environmental flows, even in the conditions of
limited basin-specific eco-hydrological knowledge. The methods described in the paper could also be
used in other countries—by relevant departments, agencies and organizations, which are engaged in
ecosystem management and preservation of aquatic environment. This research intends to promote the
need for environmental water allocation planning in river basin development and to streamline the
inclusion of environmental water demand assessments into relevant national policies.
Key words eco-hydrology; environmental flows; flow duration curve; Nepal; river flow; time series;
water resources planning
Evaluation à base hydrologique de débits réservés environnementaux: un exemple
Népalais
Résumé L’article examine l’applicabilité de plusieurs méthodes de bureau d’évaluation à base
hydrologique du débit réservé environnemental—la méthode de Tennant, l’approche de la gamme de
variabilité RVA et le modèle Sud-Africain DRM—au contexte spécifique du Népal. Certaines de ces
techniques sont modifiées, suite à la discussion de leurs limites. Il est indiqué que les méthodes à base
hydrologique d’évaluation du débit réservé environnemental représentent une première étape nécessaire
pour la planification des allocations environnementales dans les pays en voie de développement. Nous
montrons qu’il est possible d’utiliser des éléments complémentaires de différentes techniques existantes
d’évaluation du débit réservé environnemental pour produire des estimations justifiées des débits
réservés environnementaux, y compris dans les conditions d’informations éco-hydrologiques limitées
pour le bassin étudié. Les méthodes décrites dans cet article pourraient également être utilisées dans
d’autres pays—par les services, agences et organisations pertinentes qui sont engagées dans la gestion
des écosystèmes et la préservation de l’environnement aquatique. Cette recherche a pour ambition de
promouvoir la nécessité d’une planification environnementale de l’allocation de l’eau lors du
développement d’un bassin versant et de rationaliser l’inclusion d’évaluations de la demande
environnementale en eau au sein des politiques nationales pertinentes.
Mots clefs éco-hydrologie; débits réservés environnementaux; courbe des débits classés; Népal;
écoulement fluvial; série temporelle; planification des ressources en eau

INTRODUCTION

The protection of the aquatic environment is a high priority for water resource
managers throughout the world. Many countries, developing ones in particular, face a
number of water-related challenges, including an increasing demand for water on the
one hand, and the need to allocate a share of water to maintain the functioning of
freshwater-dependent ecosystems in a river basin on the other. This share is often
referred to as “environmental flows”, “environmental water requirements” (EWR),
“environmental demand” (Lankford, 2002; Dyson et al., 2003; Smakhtin et al., 2004).
Many methodologies for determining these requirements have emerged in recent years.

Open for discussion until 1 October 2006 Copyright © 2006 IAHS Press
208 V. U. Smakhtin et al.

They are known as environmental flow assessments (EFAs) and may be conducted
using a range of techniques, which differ significantly in the level of accuracy and
input information required (Tharme, 2003). Different EFA methodologies should be
and are used for different purposes, which range from general water resources planning
to the setting of detailed plans for managed dam releases. In some developed countries,
there is a move towards hierarchical two-tier frameworks to guide EFA over a range of
spatial scales, driven by the availability or access to resources, including data, time,
technical capacity and finances (Dyson et al., 2003). These tiers include: (a) compre-
hensive assessment, using primarily holistic methodologies, and (b) planning-type,
desktop assessment, using primarily ecologically relevant hydrological characteristics
(indices) or analysis of hydrological time series.
The former adopt a whole-ecosystem view in assessing environmental flow
requirements, whereby ecologically and/or socially important flow events are identi-
fied and an ecologically acceptable flow regime is defined by a multi-disciplinary
panel of experts. These methods include substantial amounts of field work and may
take significant amounts of time and resources to complete for a single river basin (e.g.
King & Louw, 1998).
Desktop EFA methods (e.g. Tennant, 1976; Hughes & Hannart, 2003) are more
suitable for initial, reconnaissance-level assessments of environmental flow require-
ments in unregulated river basins and/or river basins where the pressure on water
resources is not yet extreme, but starting to grow. Many rivers still fall into this
category. It is therefore important that the movement towards environmentally and
socially sustainable water resources management starts at this point. Once the develop-
ments have occurred and adverse impacts have manifested themselves, it is much more
difficult to reverse the environmental damage done to rivers. Also, the use of simple
and quick, planning-type methods may be seen as the starting point towards the
understanding of environmental water requirements and, hence, it is important that
these approaches are accepted in principle. While such methods provide estimates of
low confidence, they may be used to set the feasible limits for future water resource
exploitation and change the common existing perceptions about insignificance of
environmental water allocations in basin planning and about the very nature of such
allocations.
Regardless of the type of the EFA methods, all of them have been designed and/or
applied in a developed country context. Distinct gaps in environmental flow know-
ledge and practice are evident in current approaches to water resources management in
almost all developing countries, most of which lack technical and institutional capacity
to establish environmental water allocation practices (Tharme & Smakhtin, 2003). The
existing EFA methods are either too complex and resource-intensive (comprehensive
holistic approaches), or not tailor-made for the specific conditions of a particular
country, region or basin (desktop methods). To promote the emerging concepts of
environmental flow assessment and management, it is important, amongst others:
(a) to change the current dominant perceptions of environmental water demand being
the least important; (b) to create awareness among the responsible authorities about the
existing methodologies and processes which are to be followed; and (c) to illustrate the
applicability of these approaches through relevant case studies in specific countries.
This paper attempts to address the above issues through the examination of the
existing desktop, hydrology-based EFA approaches and to illustrate their applicability

Copyright © 2006 IAHS Press

 Hydrology-based assessment of environmental flows: an example from Nepal 209

in a specific context of Nepal, which is a developing country. In Nepal, rivers are

important sources of drinking and irrigation water, mechanical and hydroelectric
power and economic aquatic resources, such as fish. Establishing environmentally
adequate and socially acceptable limits of river exploitation is of utmost importance.
Nepal also boasts an extraordinary natural beauty, which stimulates tourism, despite
on-going national conflict. Maintaining a healthy aquatic environment is therefore
important from this perspective as well. The need to minimize adverse environmental
and social impacts of projects such as hydropower and irrigation development is high
on the international agenda, which also has implications for Nepal. However, the
country’s environmental policy and legislation are in their infancy (Bhandari, 2001)
and do not specify nor even mention ecologically acceptable limits of water
withdrawals. None of the existing desktop (or any EFA) methods has ever been
applied in Nepal, or even illustrated using the data from any Nepalese river basins. The
East Rapti River basin, which features one of the main tourist attractions of Nepal,
Royal Chitwan National Park, has been selected for this study.

THE STUDY BASIN

Nepalese hydrology has some distinctive features, which make the design and
implementation of a future national environmental flow management programme
interesting and challenging. Most of the rivers have steep gradients and are often fed,
at least partially, by glaciers. Yet, the country climate is monsoon driven, which results
in a high seasonal variability of rainfall and runoff (Kansakar et al., 2002).
The East Rapti River originates in the Mahabharat mountain range, about 25 km
southwest of Katmandu (Fig. 1) at approximately 2000 m a.s.l. It joins the Narayani

Fig. 1 A schematic map of the East Rapti River basin, showing major tributaries, the
location of existing flow (EF) and rainfall stations and the area of Royal Chitwan
National Park.

Copyright © 2006 IAHS Press

210 V. U. Smakhtin et al.

River, one of the four major rivers in Nepal, after flowing for 122 km. The catchment
area above the confluence of East Rapti with Narayani is 3084 km2. The mean annual
precipitation (MAP) in the basin is approximately 2000 mm (Shilpakar, 2003). About
90% of total annual rainfall occurs during the period from May to October. Approxi-
mately 65% of the basin area is covered by forest and a further 27% by cultivated
agriculture, primarily paddy, wheat and maize.
The primary feature of the river basin is the Royal Chitwan National Park (RCNP),
which was established in 1973 and designated as a World Heritage Site in 1984
(Fig. 1). The RCNP covers an area of 923 km2, of which 710 km2 falls within the East
Rapti basin (approximately 23% of the basin area). The RCNP has an important role in
the socio-economic, ecological and institutional environments of the basin. It harbours
endangered plant species such as Cyathea spinulosa (tree fern), Cycas (Cycas
pentinata), and several orchids (KMTNC, 1996). There are more than 40 species of
mammals, a total of 486 species of birds, and about 49 species of amphibians and
reptiles in the park. The park is renowned for its endangered one-horned rhinoceros,
tigers, gharial crocodiles, four horned antelope, Gangetic dolphin, black and white
storks, python, etc. (KMTNC, 1996).
The main occupation of the people in the basin is agriculture and 46% of the
farmers own less than 0.5 ha of land (Ghimire et al., 2000) indicating the subsistence
nature of agriculture and the importance of irrigation for maintaining livelihoods.
Irrigation is by far the largest water user in the basin. There are 94 irrigation systems
that irrigate about 9500 ha (IWMI, 2000) with water being diverted mostly from the
middle reaches of the main river and tributaries including Dhongre khola (river/
stream), Kayar khola and Khageri khola (Fig. 1). The Bote and Danuwar, the most
unprivileged and predominantly illiterate tribes who have limited access to agricultural
land and other alternative jobs, depend heavily on fishing. Apart from the irrigation
and the park needs (and associated need to maintain fisheries for local communities),
the East Rapti River is used for domestic needs, industry and recreation (IWMI, 2000).

DESKTOP ASSESSMENTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL FLOWS

Simulating river hydrology

Planning-type EFA methodologies are normally hydrology-driven, implying that flow

time series have to be available for sites where an EFA is performed. It is also generally
agreed that environmentally acceptable flow regimes should mimic natural, or at least
unregulated, patterns of flow variability in a river (Richter et al., 1997; Hughes &
Hannart, 2003). High flows of different frequency are important for channel main-
tenance, bird breeding, wetland flooding and maintenance of riparian vegetation.
Moderate flows may be critical for cycling of organic matter from river banks and for
fish migration, while low flows of different magnitudes are important for algae control,
water quality maintenance and the use of the river by local people. Maintenance of
flow variability is an important consideration, given that managed environmental
allocations are still frequently specified as a “minimum flow”.
The natural flow variability is best described by time series of daily discharges,
although monthly time series may also be acceptable and sufficient (e.g. Hughes &

Copyright © 2006 IAHS Press

 Hydrology-based assessment of environmental flows: an example from Nepal 211

Münster, 2000). These time series for each selected site have to be either derived from
available observed flow records, or simulated by an appropriate model. The environ-
mentally acceptable flow regimes, i.e. actual flows to meet the environmental require-
ment, are then derived for each site from either the observed or simulated flow time
series.
Comprehensive EFA methods would normally require a field visit for selection of
study sites. In desktop methods, such sites may be selected on the basis of their
location relative to the part of the basin where EFA is necessary (e.g. a nature reserve
or a park, as is the case of the RCNP), and major basin water developments. All the
desktop EFAs described below have been performed at this study site, which is
referred to in the text as the EF (“environmental flow”) site. This site is located at the
confluence between Khageri khola and East Rapti River, about 2 km downstream from
Sauraha, which is one of the main entry points to the RCNP. The main tourist activities
start downstream of this point and, in addition to the ecological requirement, a
minimum flow in the river has to be maintained downstream of this point for the
operation of ferries and boats (IWMI, 2000). The details of this ungauged estimation
site are listed in Table 1 together with the three sites at which flow is measured in the
river basin and for which observed daily flow data of satisfactory quality (Smakhtin &
Shilpakar, 2005) were available.

Table 1 Observation points and estimation sites in the East Rapti River basin.
River Code* Location Area (km2)
E. Rapti SS1 Rajaiya 576
Manahari SS2 Manahari 427
Lothar SS3 Lothar 172
E. Rapti EF Downstream of the East Rapti and Khageri confluence. Near 2219
Sauraha—main entry point to RCNP.
*SS: source sites (flow gauges); EF: environmental flow estimation site.

Representative daily flow time series for the EF site have been generated in this
study using a spatial interpolation technique described by Hughes & Smakhtin (1996).
The technique is based on typical flow duration curves (FDCs), which are cumulative
distributions of daily flows, for each calendar month of the year. The main assumption
of the spatial interpolation technique is that flows occurring simultaneously at sites in
reasonably close proximity to each other correspond to similar percentage points on
their respective FDCs. The site at which streamflow time series are generated is called
a destination site. The site with recorded time series is called a source site. In essence,
the procedure is to transfer the streamflow time series from the location where the data
are available at gauged source sites (SS in Table 1) to another location where the time
series are needed (EF site in Table 1). The technique involves two steps:
– generation of FDC tables for SS and EF site for each month of the year and
– simulation of the time series using estimated FDCs for the EF site.
For ungauged sites, a FDC table could be simulated using either a regional FDC or
the table from a nearby gauge. In this study, a regional FDC was first calculated as the
average of three observed FDCs which were first normalized by their corresponding
long-term mean flows (Smakhtin et al., 1997). This regional non-dimensional FDC

Copyright © 2006 IAHS Press

212 V. U. Smakhtin et al.

was then used to estimate the FDC at the EF site by multiplying the ordinates of the
regional curve by an estimate of mean flow at the EF site, calculated using a regional
regression model for Nepal (Rees et al., 2002):
MAR = MAP + (0.187*ELEV) – 764.712 (1)
where MAR is mean annual runoff (mm), MAP is mean annual precipitation (mm) and
ELEV is mean catchment elevation in m above mean sea level. A digital elevation
model constructed by Shilpakar (2003) was used to calculate ELEV for the catchment
upstream of the EF site. The MAP input into equation (1) was based on Thiessen
polygon weighted observed (1976–2001) MAPs from all the stations in and around the
East Rapti River basin (Fig. 1).
Simulation of the time series using the estimated FDCs for the EF site includes
selection of the source site, from which the information will be transferred to the
destination sites, and assigning a weighting factor to each source site associated with the
degree of similarity between the source and destination sites’ flow regimes. The degree of
similarity, and the corresponding weighting factor, are high if both a source and a
destination site display sequentially similar flow regimes (i.e. if there is a peak flow at the
source site, there will also be a peak flow at the destination site). This may be ensured if
the source sites are in close proximity to the destination site, or if they are representative
of natural hydrological variability in the surrounding region. After the source sites are
selected and weighting factors are assigned, the procedure is as follows: for each day
(a) identify the percentage point position of the source site’s streamflow on the source
site’s FDC (for the relevant month); and (b) read off the flow value for the equivalent
percentage point from the destination site’s FDC. If more than one source site was used,
the final step is to calculate the weighted average of the estimated destination site flow
values. More details of this procedure, including its graphical illustration, can be found in
Hughes & Smakhtin (1996), while Smakhtin & Shilpakar (2005) give more details about
the application of this technique to the East Rapti River basin.
An extract from the simulated time series at the EF site is shown in Fig. 2 along
with the concurrent observed flow record at the upstream flow gauge on the same river
(SS1 at Rajaya) in Fig. 1. Although no direct comparison is possible in this case, the
pattern of flow variability at both sites is obviously similar. This is due to the fact that
the resultant flow time series at the downstream destination EF site represents a
nonlinear scaled combination of the flows at three upstream flow gauges (SS1, SS2
and SS3), which were used as source sites with weights, roughly proportional to their
catchment areas (0.5, 0.4 and 0.1, respectively). None of the source flow regimes is
regulated or significantly modified at present. The results were also rated as
“satisfactory” in discussions with the representatives of the Department of Hydrology
and Meteorology of Nepal.

Previous environmental flow recommendations and their hydrological

interpretation

Only one previous attempt to assess the “environmental” flow needs in the basin is
known to the authors (IWMI, 2000). In that study, the focus was on the minimum
discharge and depth of water in the river. Minimum flow maintenance was deemed

Copyright © 2006 IAHS Press

 Hydrology-based assessment of environmental flows: an example from Nepal 213

800

700

600
Discharge, m3s -1

500

400

300

200

100

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Days since 1 January 1987

Rajaya gauge upstream EF site dow nstream

Fig. 2 Observed (Rajaya gauging station —SS1) and simulated (EF site) hydrographs
in the East Rapti River.

necessary in the East Rapti River at the RCNP border (EF site) primarily to cater for
the needs of tourist activities (i.e. boat/ferry passage). It was also presumed that once
such a minimum flow is set, it will also contribute positively to the maintenance of
flora and fauna in the riverine forest and flood plains of the park and will ensure
livelihood means for people settled here. However, there was no real scientific basis on
which to decide how much water is necessary to manage the park and sustain its
environment. It was arbitrarily assumed that at least 15 m3 s-1 had to be left in a river at
the EF site at all times. This flow ensures a width of at least 50 m with a mean depth of
approximately 1 m and a velocity of 0.3 m s-1. The depth of 1 m was deemed necessary
for ferry operation, but no ecological or other motivation for the flow was suggested.
This “assessment” did not use any of the existing (even simple) environmental flow
methods. Effectively, only a quantitative “statement of perceptions” was made and a
need for “further research” in this area was emphasized.
The flow of 15 m3 s-1 is difficult to interpret even in the context of the MAR at the
site, since no MAR was estimated at that time. However, with the daily time series,
which have been simulated in this study, this flow value can be interpreted. For
example, the flow of 15 m3 s-1 is exceeded approximately 95% of the time and appears
to be unrealistically low. A constant flow of 15 m3 s-1 or higher does not take into
account hydrological variability and therefore is in conflict with the whole concept of
environmental flow allocation.

Linking flow variability and the Tennant method

The most straightforward approach to introducing hydrological variability could be the

combination of the lookup flows suggested by Tennant (1976) with a typical FDC

Copyright © 2006 IAHS Press

214 V. U. Smakhtin et al.

and/or hydrographs generated at the EF site. Tennant separated the MAR range into
several ecologically important classes, which correspond to different levels of aquatic
habitat maintenance or degradation. A threshold of 10% of the MAR reserved for the
aquatic ecosystem was considered to be the lowest limit for environmental flow
recommendations, which is assumed to correspond to severe degradation of a system).
Fair/good habitat conditions could be ensured if 35% of the MAR is allocated for
environmental purposes, while an allocation of 60–100% of the MAR represents an
environmental optimum.
Once the “ecological” MAR target is set, with input from experts and in
accordance with Tennant thresholds (e.g. “maintain good aquatic habitat at 40% of the
MAR”), the natural variability of flows may be mimicked by using a flow time series
or a FDC at the site. However, both the original Tennant method and its extensions
remain scientifically weak. The selection of a threshold is arbitrary and attempts to use
it with time series will lead to an equal scaling down of all naturally occurring flows,
including high and low flows. Such scaling is not justified ecologically and could have
adverse impacts during low flow periods. However, one positive aspect which may
come from the Tennant approach is the awareness that 10% of the MAR may be
considered the lowest and least desirable threshold for environmental flow allocations
and that at least 35% of the total natural MAR, coupled with the maintenance of
elements of natural flow variability, may need to be retained in the river throughout the
basin to ensure adequate maintenance of riverine ecosystems.

Modified range of variability approach

One way of maintaining flow variability across the full flow regime is to protect the
flow across the entire flow duration curve. Some of the earlier suggested EFA methods
may be interpreted from this perspective. The range of variability approach (RVA)
developed by Richter et al. (1997) is a good example of such a technique, where the
role of hydrological variability in structuring and maintenance of a freshwater depen-
dent ecosystem is raised to the highest level. Thirty-two hydrological parameters,
which jointly reflect different aspects of flow variability (magnitude, frequency,
duration and timing of flows), are estimated from a natural daily flow time series at a
site of interest. It is further suggested that, in a modified (ecologically acceptable) flow
regime, all 32 parameters should be maintained within the limits of their natural
variability. For each parameter, a threshold of one standard deviation (SD) from the
mean is suggested as a default limit for setting environmental flow targets in the
absence of other supporting ecological information. The RVA may be applied as a
desktop EFA tool. It ensures that sufficient water is available for human uses and
accepts that the full range of natural streamflow variability will not be possible to
maintain in regulated or otherwise affected river systems.
At the same time, despite the relatively advanced nature of the RVA, the number
of parameters used is too large for the level of subjectivity associated with their
selection. In addition, either many parameters are likely to be correlated with each
other, or there is little difference between their values. Figure 3 illustrates the
distribution of four time series of RVA parameters (1-, 7-, 30- and 90-day minima)
extracted from the simulated 27-year long discharge time series at the EF site. It is

Copyright © 2006 IAHS Press

 Hydrology-based assessment of environmental flows: an example from Nepal 215

40

35

30
% of mean daily discharge

25

20

15

10

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Probability, %

1-day minima 7-day minima 30-day minima 90-day minima

Fig. 3 Distribution of low-flow discharges with different averaging intervals (four
RVA parameters) at the Rajaya gauging station.

clear that even the difference between the 1-day and 90-day minimum flow values is
relatively small and equals approximately 6% of the mean flow throughout the entire
range of extracted flow minima. The differences between flow minima of other
averaging intervals are even less. A similar situation occurs at the “top end” of the
flow range, where high flows of different averaging intervals (1-, 3-, 7-, 30- and
90-day maxima) are calculated. This points to the possibility of rationalizing the
technique. In essence, modifications to the RVA are to reduce the number of flow
parameters, express them all as flows on the FDC and, following the RVA default
threshold, assume that the attained value of each selected parameter should be:
(mean – SD) ≤ parameter ≤ (mean + SD) (2)
The RVA parameters representing 12 monthly means are required as they jointly
capture the seasonal flow distribution, which is one primary aspect of flow variability,
and also reflect, to a certain degree, both the timing and magnitude of flow events.
These flows, however, do not reflect the variability of flows at the top and low ends of
the flow range. They have therefore been supplemented by another four RVA para-
meters: mean 1-day and 30-day annual maxima and mean 1-day and 30-day annual
minima. This reduces the number of RVA parameters to 16. The percentage of time
that each of these flows is exceeded is then estimated directly from the annual, period-
of-record FDC. Table 2 summarizes the results of this analysis for the EF site.
Given that the most likely future scenario in the East Rapti basin, as in most
impacted river systems, is the overall reduction of different flows, it is the first part of
(equation (2)) above, which is of primary importance. This is a low-threshold
condition: (mean – SD) ≤ parameter. The assumption used to construct a FDC corre-
sponding to this condition is that the 16 low-threshold flow parameters (Table 2,

Copyright © 2006 IAHS Press

216 V. U. Smakhtin et al.

Table 2 Selected RVA parameter analysis for EF site.

Parameter time series Mean, % time flow SD, Low High
name (m3 s-1) exceeded (m3 s-1) (mean – 1SD), (mean + 1SD),
(m3 s-1) (m3 s-1)
January mean 27.2 63.2 4.6 22.6 31.8
February mean 22.9 73.3 3.7 19.2 26.6
March mean 19.9 82.3 4.0 15.9 23.9
April mean 20.2 81.3 6.5 13.8 26.7
May mean 24.3 69.7 9.5 14.8 33.8
June mean 68.8 33.4 48.1 20.6 116.9
July mean 227.6 9.67 100.1 127.4 327.7
August mean 287.6 5.96 152.4 135.2 440.0
September mean 240.0 8.64 88.8 151.2 328.7
October mean 99.9 27.2 29.0 70.9 128.8
November mean 49.2 40.0 9.4 39.9 58.6
December mean 33.2 53.3 4.3 28.9 37.5
1-day minimum 14.3 95.3 3.5 10.8 17.8
30-days minimum 17.0 89.1 3.6 13.4 20.7
1-day maximum 1451.1 0.33 733.5 717.6 2184.6
30-days maximum 340.8 4.15 145.3 195.5 486.0

column 5) are exceeded the same amount of time in the modified (target) flow time
series as the 16 parameters in the natural flow time series (Table 2, column 2).
Therefore, each flow in column 5 is plotted against its corresponding time of
exceedence (Table 2, column 3). The resultant FDC (lower curve in Fig. 4) represents
the summary of an environmental flow regime in which the selected 16 flow
parameters are at their lowest acceptable RVA limit of (mean – SD). Figure 4 also
displays the original FDC, representing the natural flow regime at the site. Markers on

10000

1000
-1
Discharge, m s
3

100

10

1
0.01 0.1 1 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 99 99.9 99.99
% time exceeded

Original FDC Modified FDC

Fig. 4 Annual flow duration curves at the EF site showing the location of 16
parameters in original (natural) and modified (target) environmental flow time series.

Copyright © 2006 IAHS Press

 Hydrology-based assessment of environmental flows: an example from Nepal 217

1000

100
Discharge, m3s -1

10

1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Days since 1 January 1971

Environmental Flow Natural Flow

Fig. 5 Simulated natural and environmental flow hydrographs at the EF site.

the original and modified curves indicate the flows listed in Table 2 (columns 2 and 5,
respectively).
This FDC can now also be converted into a complete time series of environmental
flows using the spatial interpolation approach described earlier. The interpretation of
this approach needs only a minor change. The destination FDC is now the one
representing the environmental flows (Fig. 4, lower curve), while the source FDC and
time series are those representing the natural flow regime. The “environmental”
hydrograph (Fig. 5) represents the regime calculated using the modified RVA method
and may be interpreted as the “environmental water demand”. It retains most of the
features of natural flow variability. The differences between the natural and
“environmental” hydrographs at any particular time should ideally be considered as
water available for other uses.
The long-term mean annual environmental flow requirement estimated by this
method amounts to 56% of the natural MAR. This may be perceived as a high require-
ment for the default minimum acceptable threshold (1 SD) used in calculations in the
absence of basin-specific ecological information. On the other hand, it is lower than
Tennant’s optimal range threshold of 60% of the natural MAR. In this context, the
value obtained from RVA may be seen as an estimate of the lowest acceptable
environmental flow allocation, given the high conservation importance of the river.
The original RVA approach is certainly well motivated, but requires a great deal of
hydrological and ecological data plus understanding to apply successfully. Given the
current limited understanding of eco-hydrological relationships for rivers, the RVA
modifications, similar to the one illustrated above are justified. They can make the
technique much easier to apply, while preserving its original concepts, although they
do not take away the issue of arbitrary threshold setting.

Copyright © 2006 IAHS Press

218 V. U. Smakhtin et al.

A South African desktop model for ecological reserve determination

Another hydrology-based planning-type EFA methodology was developed by Hughes

& Münster (2000) and further refined by Hughes & Hannart (2003). It is known as the
“desktop reserve model” (DRM) and it emerged from the results of many
comprehensive assessments of the ecological reserve of South African rivers. The
“ecological reserve for rivers” is effectively a South African term for “environmental
flows”. Quantifying the ecological reserve involves determining the water volumes and
flow rates which will sustain a river in a pre-determined condition. The latter is
referred to as an “ecological management category” (or, more recently, “level of
ecological protection”) and is related to the extent to which this condition deviates
from natural. There are four levels (or categories) of ecological protection (A, B, C and
D) where A rivers are largely natural and D are largely modified.
The DRM originates from the building block methodology (BBM) described by
King & Louw (1998). “Building blocks” (BBs) are environmental flows, which jointly
comprise the ecologically acceptable, modified flow regime. The major BBs are low
flows (baseflows), small increases in flow (“freshes”) and larger high flows, which are
required for river channel maintenance. BBs are defined for each of the 12 calendar
months and differ between “normal years” and “drought years”. The first are referred
to as “maintenance requirements” and the second as “drought requirements”. The set
of BBs therefore includes: maintenance low flows, maintenance high flows, drought
low flows and drought high flows.
Hughes & Münster (2000) analysed the results of previous comprehensive
environmental flow assessments of South African rivers in the context of hydrological
variability of these rivers, and developed empirical relationships which related the
above BBs to flow variability. These relationships allow the environmental flows for
an ungauged site to be estimated, if the hydrology for this site is available or can be
generated, as in the case of the East Rapti River.
The main assumption of the DRM, which emerged from the analysis of the
comprehensive reserve estimates, is that the rivers with more stable flow regimes (a
higher proportion of their flow occurring as baseflow) may be expected to have
relatively higher low-flow requirements in normal years (“maintenance low-flow
requirements” in reserve terminology). Rivers with more variable flow regimes would
be expected, from a purely hydrological perspective, to have relatively lower
maintenance low-flow requirements and/or lower levels of assurance associated with
them. The consequence of these assumptions is that the long-term mean environmental
requirement would be lower for rivers with more variable flow regimes. The DRM
therefore explicitly introduced the principle of “assurance of supply” for environ-
mental water requirements.
Technically, the DRM (and associated software) allows for the estimation of main-
tenance and drought low and high flows, and for assurance rules to be established that
specify their expected frequency of occurrence. The underlying concepts of the DRM
are attractive and, to an extent, ecologically justified (as they emerge from the results
of comprehensive assessments, which involve a variety of ecological disciplines). One
stumbling block for applications in Nepal, or other countries, is that regional DRM
parameters have been estimated on the basis of South African case studies, but are not
generally available for other areas. At the same time, the DRM is, perhaps, the most

Copyright © 2006 IAHS Press

 Hydrology-based assessment of environmental flows: an example from Nepal 219

advanced desktop EFA method to date, which can be further developed and applied to
different physiographic and ecological conditions. One advantage of the DRM is that it
is based on monthly flow data which are more readily available or accessible in
developing countries.
There are four sets of parameters that need to be quantified before the model can
be applied to a new region (see Hughes & Hannart, 2003, for further details):
– The parameters that determine the annual values of the BBs for different levels of
ecological protection, estimated using a hydrological index based on a measure of
variability that includes the proportion of total flow occurring as baseflow.
– The parameters of the baseflow separation procedure (digital filtering) that allows
the baseflow proportion of total flow to be estimated from the monthly flow time
series (Hughes et al., 2003).
– The parameters that determine the seasonal distribution of the annual values of the
BBs.
– The parameters that determine the assurance rules, which combine the main-
tenance and drought requirements into continuous curves specifying the frequency
with which flows of certain magnitudes are expected to occur.
It is very difficult to interpret baseflow response from monthly flow data, as all of
the short-term variations are smoothed. However, if some daily data are available, as is
the case for the East Rapti basin, regional monthly baseflow separation parameters can
be calibrated against the results of a baseflow separation performed on the daily data
(Hughes et al., 2003). The result of applying this approach suggested that the long-
term mean baseflow response of the basin is some 65% of total flow and allowed the
parameter values of the digital filtering procedure to be estimated.
Figure 6 provides an example of one month’s (August) assurance rule curve
(together with the associated natural FDC) for a B level of ecological protection. The

500

450

400

350
Mean Monthly Flow (m s )
-1
3

300

250

200

150

100

50

0
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 99%
% Assurance
Natural Total EWR Flows Low flow EWR Only
Fig. 6 An example of environmental flow (EWR) assurance rule curves compared to
an equivalent natural FDC for August at the EF site, Sauraha.

Copyright © 2006 IAHS Press

220 V. U. Smakhtin et al.

minimum low flow is assumed to be the monthly drought BBM requirement, while the
maximum low flow is somewhat higher than the maintenance low flow. The para-
meters are defined to ensure that the shapes of the monthly assurance curves for low
and total flow requirements reflect the shapes of the natural FDCs. To generate a time
series of environmental flows, the same principles as the spatial interpolation model
(Hughes & Smakhtin, 1996) are used. The reference flows and FDC at the EF site are
used as the source, while the total flow assurance curves are used as the destination
FDC.
In the absence of specific information on the ecological flow requirements of
Nepal rivers, the South African parameters used to derive the annual BB components
have not been modified in this application of the model to the Nepal region. However,
the hydrological index value obtained for the Nepal data (1.1) is very low compared to
most South African rivers, suggesting that some adjustment of the relationships may
be required. This is supported by the fact that, for a B category river, the maintenance
low- and high-flow requirements are estimated as 43.4% and 7.4% of MAR. Further
detailed studies of the ecological requirements of these systems may suggest that the
high-flow requirement is too low. Similarly, the drought low-flow requirement sug-
gested by the model (14% MAR) may be too low for a river such as the East Rapti,
which has such a low degree of variation in annual flow (monthly coefficients of
variation between 0.17 and 0.71). It is interesting to note that the previous assumption
of a minimum flow of 15 m3 s-1 (exceeded approximately 95% of the time in the
simulated natural flow time series) is exceeded approximately 86% of the time in the
DRM estimates of mean monthly flow for a B category level of protection.
Smakhtin et al. (2004) attempted to use the concepts behind DRM to evaluate the
total environmental water requirements of the world’s rivers. The assessment was done
on the assumption that rivers have to be maintained at least at a C level of ecological
protection, representing a “fair” condition. From this preliminary assessment (and
without any re-calibration of the model), most rivers in Nepal were found to have an
environmental requirement of 20–25% of natural MAR. This is less than half the
environmental flow requirement determined by the modified RVA method (56%).
However, after re-calibration, briefly outlined above, the model suggests that, for a C
category, the East Rapti River would have an estimated long-term average requirement
of approximately 35% of the natural MAR. A B category requirement (probably more
suitable for the high conservation priority of the basin) would be approximately 50%
MAR, a value closer to the results of the RVA method. However, the RVA and DRM
approaches are not directly comparable because the RVA target of (mean – SD) has
not been interpreted in terms of any ecological objectives, while the ecological
objectives for a B ecological category of the DRM approach are also somewhat vague.

CONCLUSIONS

The study attempts to interpret several hydrology-based, desktop EFA methods in the
context of a developing country, using the East Rapti River in Nepal as an example. It
is shown that some of the existing desktop techniques are too simplistic and do not
take into account the recent eco-hydrological theories (Tennant). Others are too
elaborate for the level of subjectivity associated with them (RVA). Yet others are

Copyright © 2006 IAHS Press

 Hydrology-based assessment of environmental flows: an example from Nepal 221

developed for a specific country/region (DRM) and need to be tested and re-calibrated
for additional physiographic and climatic environments (such as the monsoon and ice-
melt driven flow regimes of Nepal) before they can be reliably applied. There is
therefore a need to further develop, modify and test existing methods in specific river
basins.
The study also illustrates how the required hydrological information can be
generated for the locations where EFA are intended. These methods need to be
efficient and account for the constraints of limited observed data, which is typically the
case in most of the developing world. This hydrological information (natural flow time
series) is necessary, regardless of the type of EFA method chosen and can also be used
for different engineering applications.
The study illustrates how existing hydrology-based techniques (RVA and DRM)
can be modified to simplify the process of EFA in the absence of local eco-
hydrological knowledge and expertise and yet to preserve the principles of flow
variability in the estimation process.
One of the major problems in environmental flow assessments, effectively
reflected in all the methods used (and also inherent in some comprehensive tech-
niques), is the elusive search for environmentally acceptable thresholds, below which
there is some significant change in the system. In reality, the relationships between
river flows and ecological functioning are likely to be continuous rather than threshold
driven. This suggests a consistent decline in ecosystem health with reduced water
availability. In the absence of clear thresholds, setting environmental flows becomes a
matter of establishing a compromise between social and economic preferences and our
scientific understanding of the requirements for ecological protection as a critical
component of sustainable water resource utilization. Linking the two is the challenge
for the future, particularly in developing countries. It is essential that, in such
countries, programmes for establishing environmentally acceptable limits for water
resources exploitation consider not only the relationships between flow and the river
ecosystems, but also the interaction of rural communities with the river flow and
ecosystems. In fact, the ideal situation is that the riparian communities are considered
as an integral part of the riverine ecosystem. This could lead to a development of a new
field of work, for example a “socio-hydrology” or “socio-ecology”, but is more
suitable for comprehensive EFA methods. While such methods may represent the
direction which should be followed in principle, the planning, low-confidence methods
need to be used as the first step to safeguard, albeit implicitly, at least some of the
environmentally and socially important riverine functions.

Acknowledgements This study was supported from IWMI core funds.

Mr V. S. Mishra, Irrigation Engineer from Department of Irrigation, Nepal, is thanked
for help with data provision. Mr B. L. Manandar and Dr D. Gautam of the Department
of Hydrology and Meteorology, Nepal, are acknowledged for their valuable comments
on issues related to data quality and hydrological simulation. Dr D. Pant (IWMI-
Nepal) and Ms M. Shrestha (ICIMOD, Nepal) are gratefully acknowledged for the
provision of some documentation and fruitful discussions during the course of the
study.

Copyright © 2006 IAHS Press

222 V. U. Smakhtin et al.

REFERENCES
Bhandari, V. (2001) The relevance of Nepalese environment protection act and rules on old hydropower plants. A Journal
of the Environment 6(7), 58–67.
Dyson, M., Bergkamp, G. & Scanlon, J. (eds) (2003) Flow. The Essentials of Environmental Flows. IUCN, Gland
Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
Ghimire, D. P., Dutta, J. P., Poudel, R., Khatri-Chhetri, T. B., Adhikari, K. R., Shukla, A., Uprety, G. & Devkota, B.
(2000) Socio-economic and stakeholders analysis in the East Rapti River Basin of Nepal. Water Management Study
Program, Institute of Agriculture and Animal Sciences (IAAS) and IWMI. Unpublished Report.
Hughes, D. A. & Hannart, P. (2003) A desktop model used to provide an initial estimate of the ecological instream flow
requirements of rivers in South Africa. J. Hydrol. 270, 167–181.
Hughes, D. A. & Münster, F. (2000) Hydrological information and techniques to support the determination of the water
quantity component of the ecological reserve. Water Research Commission Report TT 137/00, Pretoria, South
Africa.
Hughes, D. A. & Smakhtin, V. U. (1996) Daily flow time series patching or extension: a spatial interpolation approach
based on flow duration curves. Hydrol. Sci. J. 41(6), 851–871.
Hughes, D. A., Hannart, P. & Watkins, D. (2003) Continuous baseflow separation from time series of daily and monthly
streamflow data. Water SA 29(1), 43–48.
IWMI (International Water Management Institute) (2000) Water accounting for East Rapti River basin, Nepal.
Unpublished Report. Katmandu, Nepal.
Kansakar, S. R., Hannah, D. M., Gerrard, J. & Rees, G. (2002) Flow regime characteristics of Himalayan river basins in
Nepal. In: FRIEND 2002—Regional Hydrology: Bridging the Gap between Research and Practice (ed. by
H. A. J. van Lanen & S. Demuth) (Proc. Fourth FRIEND Conf., Cape Town, March 2002), 425–432. IAHS Publ.
274. IAHS Press, Wallingford, UK.
King, J. & Louw, D. (1998) Instream flow assessments for regulated rivers in South Africa using Building Block
Methodology. Aquatic Ecosystems Health Manage. 1, 109–124.
KMTNC (King Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation) (1996) Royal Chitwan National Park After Twenty Years. An
Assessment of Values, Threats and Opportunities. King Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation. Kathmandu,
Nepal.
Lankford, B. A. (2002), Environmental water requirements: a demand management perspective. J. Chart. Instn Water
Environ. Manage. 17(1), 19–22.
Rees, G., Crocer, K., Zaidman, M., Cole, G., Kansakar, S., Chalise, S., Kumar, A., Safar, A. & Singhal, M. (2002)
Application of the regional flow estimation method in the Himalayan region. In: FRIEND 2002—Regional
Hydrology: Bridging the Gap between Research and Practice (ed. by H. A. J. van Lanen & S. Demuth) (Proc. Fourth
FRIEND Conf., Cape Town, March 2002), 433–440. IAHS Publ. 274. IAHS Press, Wallingford, UK.
Richter, B. D., Baumgartner, J. V., Wigington, R. & Braun, D. P. (1997) How much water does a river need? Freshwater
Biol. 37, 231–249.
Shilpakar, R. L. (2003). Geo-information procedures for water accounting: a case of the East Rapti River Basin, Nepal.
MSc Thesis. ITC, Enschede, The Netherlands.
Smakhtin, V. U., Creuse-Naudine, E. & Hughes, D. A. (1997) Regionalization of daily flow characteristics in part of the
Eastern Cape, South Africa. Hydrol. Sci. J. 42(6), 919–936.
Smakhtin, V. U., Revenga, C. & Döll, P. (2004) A pilot global assessment of environmental water requirements and
scarcity. Water Int. 29, 307–317.
Smakhtin, V. U. & Shilpakar, R. L. (2005) Planning for environmental water allocations: an example of hydrology-based
assessment in the East Rapti River, Nepal. IWMI Research Report 89, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Tharme, R. E. (2003) A global perspective on environmental flow assessment: emerging trends in the development and
application of environmental flow methodologies for rivers. River Res. Applic. 19, 1–45.
Tharme, R. E. & Smakhtin, V. U. (2003) Environmental flow assessment in Asia: capitalizing on existing momentum.
In: Proc. First Southeast Asia Water Forum (Chiang Mai, Thailand, 17–21 November 2003), vol. 2, 301–313.
Thailand Water Resources Association, Bangkok, Thailand.
Tennant, D. L. (1976) Instream flow regimens for fish, wildlife, recreation and related environmental resources. Fisheries
1, 6–10.

Received 18 July 2005; accepted 1 December 2005

Copyright © 2006 IAHS Press