meeting target resource objectives; (2) specific description of a conceptual model; and (3) evaluation of the overall execution of the instream flow processes, models, and analyses employed.
Therefore, several recommendations for the PWP include:
A clear definition of the phrase “sound ecological environment” needs to be provided to supply context for instream flows in Texas.
The PWP should present a state-wide context for individual subbasin studies. This can be accomplished with two levels of oversight: one at the state level for management and program consistency and one at the subbasin level for goals and approaches that are tailored to the specific needs of the study basin.
The PWP should present clear and specific goals for the state-wide instream flow program and recognize the need to develop individual subbasin goals that nest within the state-wide instream flow programmatic goal(s).
The PWP flowchart for instream flow studies should be revised to include several important steps in planning and conducting an instream flow study as suggested in Figure 4-2.
The PWP and the TOD should describe how existing information and reconnaissance studies will be used to guide the detailed technical evaluations of hydrology, physical processes, biology, and water quality.
A suite of measurable, ecological indicators should be established for the state-wide program and each basin-specific study; the indicators should be responsive to instream flows. These indicators can be used in adaptive management, monitoring and validation activities to measure progress towards achieving a sound ecological environment in Texas rivers.
The PWP or TOD should provide information about how adaptive management will be implemented for the program as a whole and for individual river basins.
The PWP should provide additional information about the type and degree of stakeholder involvement in the instream flow studies.