2012

Workshop Report 2012

Workshop Report
INTERGERATED WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

GROUP PROJECT REPORT

CIVE 5033M
A CRITIQUE AND PERSONAL PROPOSAL

BY
IBRAHIM ABDULRAHMAN SUKAMARI
200594377

1|Page

Oniha James, Peter Youll, Johnathan Lloyd, Apakama Chioma,

Sarah Chadwick
3/26/2012

Workshop Report 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS
chapter 1 CRITIQUE ON EXERCISE 1 ................................................................................... 3
1.2.10

Summary of Report ................................................................................................. 3

1.2.20

The Strengths of the Group Proposal ...................................................................... 3

1.2.30

The Weaknesses Identified ...................................................................................... 3

MY PROPOSAL........................................................................................................................ 3
1.3.10

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 3

1.3.20

Methodology of Presentation................................................................................... 4

1.3.30

Method of Analysis ................................................................................................. 5

1.3.40

On Data Gap ............................................................................................................ 5

1.3.50

On Environmental Requirement .............................................................................. 5

1.3.60

On Getting Buy-In from Stakeholders..................................................................... 5

CRITIQUE EXERCISE 2 .......................................................................................................... 6

2.2.10

Summary of Report ................................................................................................. 6

2.2.20

Strengths of the Proposal ......................................................................................... 6

2.2.30

Weaknesses in the Proposal ..................................................................................... 6

MY PROPOSAL........................................................................................................................ 6
2.3.10

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 6

REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 7

2|Page

Workshop Report 2012

CRITIQUE ON EXERCISE 1
1.2.10 Summary of Report
The aim of the workshop is to describe a methodology to follow to present effectively an overview
of water resources availability in a catchment area that an intelligent layman can understand. To
achieve this aim the group started by discussing the methodologies that could be followed to
undertake an assessment of water resources in a catchment area, then it discussed the data need
and what to do to fill in data gaps, then how to account for environmental requirement, a brief on
the geographical extent of the assessment, and finally it discussed how to get buy in from
stakeholders.

1.2.20 The Strengths of the Group Proposal

The presentation of a list of parameters to be considered in the selection of a methodology for the
resource analysis is excellent in that the available water will more or less be a balance of surface
water, ground water, water for the environment, and abstractions and discharges. Also the range of
data need identified and suggested is wide enough to support an analysis of water resources
availability in a catchment. Furthermore, the proposal on how to get buy in from stakeholders is
excellent as it identified the need of effectively communicating the water resources availability, and
the suggestion that such presentation should be kept simple and short, and non-technical. The idea
of communicating the risks that are inherently possible in making an investment in the catchment is
very much on point.

1.2.30 The Weaknesses Identified

The main weakness of the proposal is that the group failed to answer the basic question of how to
make a presentation of an overview of water resources availability in a catchment area, let alone
doing it in a way that a layman can understand. I believe this question forms the crux of the
workshop; every other issue hangs on it. The group rather jumped into the procedures to come up
with the data for the presentation. Furthermore, although the group identified methods that could
be used to carry out an analysis of water resources availability, it failed to indicate the most suitable
it would use considering issues of how data hungry a methodology is and the data availability, and
how easily the information generated through such a methodology can be presented to the
stakeholders (Aldrick J, 2012). No clear approach to handling data gaps was presented. The
importance of consulting with the stakeholders and engaging them early on in the decision making
process was not considered in the group proposal.

MY PROPOSAL
1.3.10 Introduction
My proposal describes how I would present an overview of water resources in a catchment area. The
Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy (CAMS) forms the basis of my approach rather than
Water Framework Directive (WFD) approach on River Basin Management Plans because I consider a
catchment to be a subunit of a basin. Additional information to strengthen areas of perceived

3|Page

Workshop Report 2012

weaknesses in the group proposal is provided. Areas well presented in the group proposal are
ignored.

1.3.20 Methodology of Presentation

CAMS methodology would be adopted as a guide in designing the presentation. The presentation
would be pictorial and illustrative, as it is said: a single picture is worth a thousand words. The water
resources availability will be assessed through the CAMS, considering how fresh water is reliably
available (ground water, surface water), how much water the environment needs, and amount of
water already licensed for abstraction. This approach clearly reveals how much water is potentially
available for further and future abstractions.
Maps showing the available water resources would be used to show surface waters and their
features, similarly done for underground water. The volumes of water available shall be indicated on
the maps using suitable charts and the water need of all the sectors will also be presented thus. For
easy and effective communication of information on the availability of water resources within the
catchment that may be used for consumptive and non-consumptive purposes, a color-coded
resources availability status will be developed. For instance, blue dots may be used to indicate areas
with available water at all flows but with possibilities of restriction on abstractions, yellow dots to
indicate areas where no water is available for licensing at low flows, orange dots may indicate overlicensed areas where current abstractions is resulting in no water availability at low flows, and red
dots to indicate over abstracted areas. The sizes of the dots will be relative to quantity available (EA,
2006)
This concept will easily indicate the relative balance between committed and available resources,
showing whether licenses are likely to be available and highlighting areas where abstraction needs
to be reduced.
Furthermore, features and aspects of the environment that needs to be integrated into water
resources management shall be indicated on maps, so that quick references can be made to them in
the process of decision making. These would include:

Surface water features: the rivers and abstraction points

Geology and hydrogeology of the catchment: relates to earth forms and how ground water
sources would relate to surface waters.

Hydrological monitoring stations: important for data gathering, drought and flood
monitoring.

Major abstractions, transfers, and discharges: gives information on licensed abstractions and
for what use licenses are given.

Ecology and fisheries: designated conservation areas are identified such as Special
Protection Area (SPA), Sites of Biological Interests (SBI).

Recreation and amenity: identifies areas for recreational and educational purposes.

Water quality information: this informs compliance checks on quality by agencies or

institutions responsible for such.

Landscape and land use: topography influences the hydraulics of the resource in the
catchment, and land use has a bearing on the water quality.(EA, 2004)

4|Page

Workshop Report 2012

Finally, the summary of every available resource, the abstraction, discharges, water needs, and a
future scenario case would be tabulated.

1.3.30 Method of Analysis

A consistent methodology is required to assess the following concerns: surface water, ground water,
abstraction and discharges, water for the environment, and future abstraction needs. The balance of
these concerns gives the true available water resources.
Physical and mathematical models could be used to facilitate the analysis just like proposed in the
group proposal. However, I will favour the use of a bespoke model to Environmental Agency
requirements such as water balance (which is similar to flow naturalisation).
Knowing that catchment characteristics vary within catchment and between catchments, the
catchment will be broken down into smaller catchments recognising similarities in characteristics. In
areas where ground water resources are significant, a Ground Water Management Unit (GWMU) will
be defined. Similarly, for surface water, Assessment Points (Aps) will be located on the river
network. The water balance model calculates the following elements: river flows, ground water
recharge, abstraction, discharges, a resource allocation for the environment, and any other water
use or features that require protection.

1.3.40 On Data Gap

Common techniques used for data gap filing will be used such as: random choice from values
observed for that period, interpolation from adjoining values by plotting a smooth hydrograph,
double mass curve techniques, correlation with adjoining stations either of same or different
hydrologic element.

1.3.50 On Environmental Requirement

Assigning water between environmental and consumptive and non-consumptive purposes should
not be only a technical and scientific decision. The society should have a say in how much it is willing
to allocate to the environment at the expense of its survival (Hirji & Davis, 2009).

1.3.60 On Getting Buy-In from Stakeholders

Involving the stakeholders early on in the decision making process will give them a proprietary sense
of belonging to the development. This can be realised by setting up a stake holder group and
saddling it with the responsibility of presenting the key interests in the catchment to help identify
local issues of significance, offer views on proposals and play part in considering the possible
implications of the array of options identified. The quality of presentation in its simplicity would help
communicate clearly the availability of water resources. This will in no small measure help bridge
communication gap between the various specialists who would be having a stake in the decision
making process.

5|Page

Workshop Report 2012

CRITIQUE EXERCISE 2
2.2.10 Summary of Report
This group workshop report is aimed at drawing a plan of action for improving the number of salmon
to meet target in the presently failing stock in the Itchen River. The group came up with a number of
activities possibly causing the decline in the fish population and presented how they would be
responsible, suggested how to verify each pressure-cause effect and what action or actions to take
in the event of these actions being responsible. The group concluded with a recommendation on
how to identify the action to targets and economic appraisal for the best action or actions to take in
order to improve the population of salmon in the Itchen River.

2.2.20 Strengths of the Proposal

The group report identify very important actions that would possibly be the reason or reasons for
the decline in the fish population. The report considered pollution from several possible sources (
agricultural, fish farms, sewage treatment works, run-offs) and how it could affect the river ecology
and the fish normal life cycle (WWF, 2001), sedimentation of the river beds and its effect of
destroying the fish nesting habitat (Lisle & Lewis, 1992), over abstraction and its attendant
consequences on the river ecology, climate change and global warming with its various possible
ways of being responsible, and the actions of obstructions such as weirs and dikes on the fish
migration to their native spawning grounds. The suggestions on data acquisition needed to verify the
pressure-cause-action seems very reasonable as they sound all workable. Finally the
recommendations for actions and the possible economics analysis for implementing these actions
are excellent.

2.2.30 Weaknesses in the Proposal

A little discourse on drought would have added quality to the report. Drought is a factor identified to
greatly put pressure on a river ecosystem. It is reported that a severe and long drought between
1989 and 1992 is responsible a sharp dip in salmon stock in the Itchen River from which it has not
recovered to any great extent(River Itchen Sustainability Study: StudySummary, n.d.).
Furthermore, there is no clear plan of action stated for improving the salmon stock in the river.

MY PROPOSAL
2.3.10 Introduction
The plan of action I would form to turn around the current reality of declining salmon population in
the Itchen River would begin with taking a holistic management approach to the entire water
resources in the Itchen catchment. Focus would be on the principal environmental objectives for
surface and groundwater as set by the Water Framework Directive for the European Union:

prevent any further deterioration in the classification status of aquatic ecosystems, protect
them and improve the ecological condition of waters;

6|Page

Workshop Report 2012

aim to achieve at least good status for all waters

promote sustainable use of water as a natural resource

conserve habitats and species that are directly dependent upon water

progressively reduce or phase out release of individual pollutants or groups of pollutants

that present a significant threat to the aquatic environment

progressively reduce the pollution of groundwater; and

Contribute to mitigating the effects of floods and droughts. (NASCO, 2005)

Adopting an integrated water resources management plan in line with either the CAMS
methodology or the River Basin Management Plan will ensure the sustainable use of the water
resources. Issues with pollution, over obstruction, agricultural implications, run-offs, and even the
seemingly uncontrollable factors such as drought and climate change can be planned such that they
do not severely impact the ecosystem.
The group work has excellently dealt with the possible pressures and has proffered suggestions on
actions to take, accompanying each suggestion with an economic scenario. However, abstractions,
and channel characteristics and obstruction have been identified as the main factors responsible for
the decline in salmon stock in the Itchen River (NASCO, 2005). Also the issue of climate change and
global warming can never be over emphasised because it can bring about virtually every possible
singly identified pressure because it tends to distort the global ecosystem by shifting climate and
weather patterns. This distortion has a global effect and thus we can perhaps only mitigate impacts
arising from its effects by holistically considering the entire catchment and in relation to all
environmental components in it.

REFERENCES
Aldrick J, 2012, Resource material on integrated water resources management, school of civil
engineering, university of leeds, leeds
DFID ,2003, Handbook for the assessment of catchment water demand and use

Environmental Agency, 2006, The Test and Itchen catchment abstraction management strategy,
march 2012 available at http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/cam
Environmental Agency, 2004, The Tame, Goyt and Etherow catchment abstraction management
strategy, march 2012 available at http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/cam

EUROPEAN ANGLERS ALLIENCE. No Date. Salmon and Migration Barriers: Problems and Solutions
[online].
[Accessed
9
March
2012].
Available
from:
http://www.eaa-

7|Page

Workshop Report 2012

europe.org/fileadmin/templates/uploads/Positions/Salmon_and_Migration_Barriersfinal.pdf
Fisheries Research Services (FRS), 2006, What Salmon Smell: the Importance of Clean Rivers,
Accessed
online
[09/03/2012],
Available
at
http://www.riverdee.org.uk/FileLibrary/What%20Salmon%20Smell.pdf
GEORGE, DG. No Date. Upstream Migration of Salmon [online]. [Accessed 9 March 2012] Available
from: http://www.ecn.ac.uk/iccuk/indicators/33.htm
Hagerty,J, 2012, Fishing Techniques for River Salmon, Accessed Online [13/03/2012], Available at
http://www.ehow.com/way_5130872_fishing-techniques-river-salmon.html#ixzz1ozzFGyu0
Hijri & Davies, 2009, Environmental flows in water resources policies, plans and projects: findings
and
recommendations.
Available
from
http://www.siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWAT/Resources/Env_Flows_Water_v1.pdf

http://www.indiawaterportal.org/node/10482

IWMI. (Vol 29). The Water Policy Brief: Creating Healthy Working Rivers: Tje Wisdom of
Environmental
Flows.
Retrieved
March
26,
2012,
from
http://www.iwmi.cgiar.org/Publications/Water_Policy_Briefs/PDF/WPB29.pdf
Levy, D.A, 1992, Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences [13/03/2012], Available
at http://archive.greenpeace.org/climate/arctic99/reports/salmon.html
Lisle & Lewis. (1992). Effect of Sediment Transport on Survival of Salmonid Embryos in a Natural
Stream:
A
Simulation
Approach.
Retrieved
March
26,
2012,
from
http://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/lisle/LisleCJFAS92.pdf
Murchie, J. (Halcrow), 2005, River Itchen Sustainability Study - Study Summary, Accessed Online
[09/03/2012],
Available
at
http://www.riveritchensustainability.org.uk/Documents/StudySummary.pdf
NASCO. (2005). Protection , Restoration and Enhancement of Salmon Habitat Focus Area Report
North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organisation FOCUS AREA REPORT ON PROTECTION ,
RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT OF SALMON HABITAT. Management, (09), 1-38.
River Itchen Sustainability Study: Study Summary. (n.d.). Retrieved March 26, 2012, from
http://www.riveritchensustainability.org.uk/Documents/StudySummary.pdf
Schindler, D.W, 2001The cumulative effects of climate warming and other human stresses on
Canadian freshwaters in the new millennium [13/03/2012], Available at http://www.climate-andfreshwater.info/rivers-cold-ecoregions/case- -studies/detail.php?id=2069&tabelle=cold_rivers

8|Page

Workshop Report 2012

WWF. (2001). Wild Atlantic Salmon: The Status of Wild Atlantic Salmon: Atlantic. Retrieved from
assets.panda.org/downloads/salmon2.pdf

9|Page