 This paper compares five different methods for calculating environmental flow requirements, EFRs, and finds that the VMF and Tasman methods provide the most accurate estimates when compared to locally calculated EFRs. These two methods allocate more water to EFRs during low flow periods, allowing for greater flexibility in water allocation. This allows for other water sectors such as irrigation to withdraw up to 40% of the flow during the low flow season, while still maintaining reasonable ecological conditions. This article was authored by A. V. Pastor, F. Ludwig, H. Bemans, and others.