and methods. Third, the use of the 

 term "minimum flow" has created prob- 

 lems. Traditionally, minimum flow 

 has been used to describe the ulti- 

 mate minimum that developers must 

 leave in the stream, having taken 

 all the rest. Overuse of this term 

 has tended to crowd the real issue-- 

 that there are instream uses, each 

 having a specific range of flow re- 

 quirements. For the purpose of this 

 presentation, I am using this defini- 

 tion of instream flow uses: "All 

 beneficial uses of water in a stream 

 channel, such as fish and wildlife 

 habitat, navigation, hydropower, rec- 

 reation, and aesthetics." There are 

 four general categories in which in- 

 stream flow problems can be classi- 

 fied: (1) quantity, (2) quality, (3) 

 physical barriers, and (4) flow fluc- 

 tuations. Instream flow problems can 

 also be a combination of these four 

 categories. Furthermore, problems 

 may result from the cumulative effect 

 of several small projects, any one of 

 which by itself would not cause in- 

 stream flow problems . 



proposed, where commitments and eco- 

 nomic feasibility permit, will be 

 submitted by Corps districts as op- 

 eration and maintenance items for in- 

 clusion in the President's budget. 



As we continue our evaluation 

 of instream flow problems and needs, 

 consideration will be given to de- 

 veloping a separate program and 

 funding source to solve instream 

 flow needs, such as a line item in 

 the President's budget. 



In addition to the above, all 

 existing projects here in the South- 

 western Division are being evaluated 

 with respect to stream flows for 

 fish and wildlife needs. This eval- 

 uation is not of the detail fre- 

 quently associated with the planning 

 of new projects. The time and fund- 

 ing constraints require that this 

 information be based upon data on- 

 hand. This information will, of 

 course, be incorporated into the 

 overall evaluation of instream flow 

 needs . 



Implementation of the Presi- 

 dent's directive has brought about 

 increased emphasis by the Corps on 

 water control management in our 

 projects. As a first step in es- 

 tablishing a Corps-wide approach to 

 meeting the President's directive, 

 the Corps is currently making a 

 project-by-project evaluation of all 

 its existing water resources proj- 

 ects. These evaluations will be 

 used to assess the magnitude of 

 instream flow-related problems and 

 needs, the potential costs re- 

 quired to meet these needs, the 

 opportunities that might exist for 

 enhancing instream flows affected 

 by projects, and will serve as a 

 basis to establish priorities in 

 carrying out the necessary action. 

 Until the information is gathered 

 and evaluated, high priority proj- 

 ects for which solutions have been 



It is the policy of the Chief 

 of Engineers that reservoir regula- 

 tion procedures be evaluated con- 

 tinually. The objective of this 

 policy is to improve water manage- 

 ment in light of changing condi- 

 tions . 



There are a number of available 

 methodologies for determining the 

 water requirements for instream uses, 

 but none of these methods is uni- 

 versally applicable. Policy stud- 

 ies related to instream flow re- 

 quirements are being conducted un- 

 der the auspices of the Institute 

 for Water Resources. Technical stud- 

 ies are presently ongoing under the 

 Corps Environmental and Water Qual- 

 ity Operational Studies Program at 

 the Waterways Experiment Station. 

 These studies will assist the Corps 

 in future planning needs in project 



106 



