1 / 30

Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer Model: Design and Use

Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer Model: Design and Use. WIMS Conference – Sept. 14, 2006 Allan Wylie, Hydrologist Hydrology Section, IDWR Michael Ciscell - Sr. GIS Analyst Adjudication Bureau, IDWR. Outline. Location Model Committee Introduction to the Model Model Inputs Model Structure

sonnagh
Download Presentation

Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer Model: Design and Use

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer Model:Design and Use WIMS Conference – Sept. 14, 2006 Allan Wylie, Hydrologist Hydrology Section, IDWR Michael Ciscell - Sr. GIS Analyst Adjudication Bureau, IDWR

  2. Outline • Location • Model Committee • Introduction to the Model • Model Inputs • Model Structure • Calibration Targets • How the Model is Used

  3. Eastern Snake Hydrologic Modeling Committee • Comprised of professionals working on Idaho water issues on the eastern Snake Plain • Agency representative • IDWR, BOR, USGS, US Fish and Wildlife Service • Industry Representative • Idaho Power Co • Researchers • U of I, IWRRI • Consultants • Surface water users, ground water users, spring users

  4. Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer

  5. Model Inputs • Identify Budget Components • Hydrogeologic processes • Prior studies • Input from ESHMC

  6. Formalize Representationof Budget Components • Guided by purpose of projectand natureof studyarea • Focus on components most likely to reduce model uncertainty

  7. Assemble & Test Budget Assemble Sense Check Sense Check Test Calibration Balance Sense Check

  8. Model Structure • Numerical model • Grid • Number of rows, number of columns, number of layers • River representation • Springs representation • Data • Water table elevation • Snake River • Compute ground water contribution to river or river contribution to ground water • Gains or losses • Irrigated lands/Consumptive Use • PODs w/Priority Date & Rate of Diversion

  9. Grid • Rotation 31.4˚ counter clockwise • 104 rows • 209 columns • 1 mi by 1 mi • 1 layer

  10. Snake River • 5 river reaches above Minidoka • Ashton to Rexburg • Heise to Shelly • Shelly to near Blackfoot • Near Blackfoot to Neeley • Neeley to Minidoka • Minidoka to Milner/Springs • Gains not statistically significant

  11. Springs • 6 Spring reaches • Devils Washbowl – Buhl • Buhl – Thousand Springs • Thousand Springs • Thousand Springs – Malad • Malad • Malad – Bancroft • 45 drain cells

  12. Calibration Targets • Water table elevation data • USGS data • IDWR data • Reach gain and loss data • IDWR reach gain and loss program • USGS gaging station data • Watermaster diversion data

  13. Water Table Elevation • Steady State - • No change in magnitude or direction of ground water flow • Rarely occurs in nature, • important in modeling • Transient • Seasonal • Mass measurement • Trend

  14. Steady State • May 1, 1982 to November 1, 2000 • All water table elevation observations averaged • 1008 observations

  15. Snake River • Snake River reaches • Monthly gains and losses for five river reaches

  16. Snake River • Ashton to Rexburg

  17. Springs • Nine springs with significant time series

  18. The Model • Steady state • 1008 water table elevation observations • 5 Snake River gain and loss observations • 6 spring observations • Transient • 12717 water table elevation observations • 725 Snake River gain and loss observations • 1526 spring discharge observations

  19. How the Model Is Used • Curtailment scenario • Demonstrate that the model could be used to simulate a curtailment of ground water users • CREP • Used to simulate effect of taking land out of production • Managed recharge • Simulate effect of proposed recharge projects • Conversion • Simulate effects of converting land from ground water to surface water irrigation

  20. A Curtailment Scenario • Uncertainty • Response functions • Model grid • Irrigated lands • Water rights data base

  21. Uncertainty • Model is simulation • Model misfit • Standard error less than 20 ft • Water level change about 4000 ft • Measurement uncertainty • Largest is river gains

  22. Response Function • If left alone all aquifer water will discharge into the Snake River • Water pumped from anywhere in the aquifer would discharge to the Snake River • Water pumped may have come from the Snake River • Response Function is % of impact of that cell on the respective river reach

  23. Irrigated LandsIncluded in Each Grid Cell

  24. Ground Water Points of Diversion

  25. Grid Response for a Reach

  26. Model Layers

  27. Select Priority Date

  28. PODs Affecting Reach

  29. Other Uses • Managed Recharge • Simulate effect of proposed recharge projects • Project near Jerome is being worked • CREP • Used to simulate effect of taking land out of production • Applications being taken on Eastern Snake Plain • Conversion • Simulate effects of converting land from ground water to surface water irrigation

  30. Questions? Allan.Wylie@idwr.idaho.gov Michael.Ciscell@idwr.idaho.gov

More Related