The Water Withdrawal Assessment Process The Water Withdrawal - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

The Water Withdrawal Assessment Process The Water Withdrawal Assessment Process

• Context within regional water policy discussions

Context within regional water policy discussions

– – Aquatic ecosystems now a priority Aquatic ecosystems now a priority “ “user user” ” – – No No “ “Adverse Resource Impact Adverse Resource Impact” ” – – Ground Ground-

• & Surface

& Surface-

• water connections recognized

water connections recognized

• Groundwater Conservation Advisory Council

Groundwater Conservation Advisory Council

– – Convened by the legislature Convened by the legislature – – Broadly representative of societal water use interests Broadly representative of societal water use interests – – Charged with definitions, design of science Charged with definitions, design of science-

• based process

based process and screening tool, and guidance on policy and screening tool, and guidance on policy – – National science review panel National science review panel

The Flow Regime Paradigm

• - There is a geography of flow regimes
• - Fish species are adapted to habitats controlled by

certain quantities of, and variability in, river flows

Climate Geology Landuse

Flow regime

Hydraulics Channel Nutrients Temperature

0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 2.4 North Branch Kawkawlin River at Kawkawlin 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 2.4 Grand River at Eaton Rapids 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 2.4 Platte River at Haze Rd

Michigan rivers naturally have different flow regimes, and thus different habitat conditions, biological communities, sensitivity to disturbance, and potential for fishery management .

0 - 0.1 0.1 - 0.213 0.213 - 0.334 0.334 - 0.468 0.468 - 0.631 0.631 - 0.826 0.826 - 1.294 Yield (cfs/sq.mi)

Looking Glass River near Eagle Mean Monthly Flows

50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 Jan Feb March April May June July August Sept Oct Nov Dec Index Flow Gallons per Minute

Index Flow

Stressful, low flow period

The Water Withdrawal Assessment Process The Water Withdrawal Assessment Process

Groundwater Stream Flow Fish Populations

• Three Models Interact within the impact assessment model

Three Models Interact within the impact assessment model

Withdrawal Model Withdrawal Model -

• How much water is in the aquifer, is being

How much water is in the aquifer, is being withdrawn, and from where and how it will affect stream flow withdrawn, and from where and how it will affect stream flow Streamflow Model Streamflow Model -

• How much water is flowing in the stream

How much water is flowing in the stream during summer low flow periods during summer low flow periods Fish Impact Model Fish Impact Model -

• What fish are in the stream and what is the

What fish are in the stream and what is the likely effect of removing water on those groups of fish likely effect of removing water on those groups of fish

Feeds Supports

The Water Withdrawal Assessment Process The Water Withdrawal Assessment Process

This is the process that the user goes though to see whether This is the process that the user goes though to see whether the the proposed withdrawal is OK or is likely to cause an adverse proposed withdrawal is OK or is likely to cause an adverse effect on fish populations effect on fish populations

• Screening Tool

Screening Tool – – The Automated Analysis within the The Automated Analysis within the model based on general, state model based on general, state-

• wide data for a given

wide data for a given withdrawal withdrawal

• Site Specific Analysis

Site Specific Analysis – – Same process but using Same process but using professional evaluation of site professional evaluation of site-

• specific data on flow,

specific data on flow, geology or fish geology or fish

• 1. The Withdrawal Model
• Model needs to know how much water is in the local aquifer
• Automatically determines where the nearest streams are.

– Apportions the withdrawal effect between streams

• Calculates the likely reduction in flow due to the proposed

withdrawal

Rain and Snow – Recharge to area Rain and Snow – Recharge to area

Characteristics of the Withdrawal Model Characteristics of the Withdrawal Model

• Distance Matters

Distance Matters

– – A well adjacent to a river will very quickly get water either A well adjacent to a river will very quickly get water either from water that would have gone to the river or directly from water that would have gone to the river or directly from the river from the river – – A well farther from a river will get more water from A well farther from a river will get more water from storage and require a longer time to affect the stream storage and require a longer time to affect the stream

• Geology and Soil Matters

Geology and Soil Matters

– – Clay soils are Clay soils are “ “tight tight” ” and water does not move easily and water does not move easily – – Sandy soils are Sandy soils are “ “porous porous” ” and water flows quickly and water flows quickly

• 2. The Streamflow Model
• 2. The Streamflow Model
• Need to Know How Much Flow is in

Need to Know How Much Flow is in any any Stream Segment Stream Segment

• “

“Index flow Index flow” ”; low flow period in the year ; low flow period in the year

• Look at the segments where we know the flow (132 stream

Look at the segments where we know the flow (132 stream gauges in the State) and extrapolate these to the streams that gauges in the State) and extrapolate these to the streams that are not gauged are not gauged

Major Factors Used Major Factors Used

• Drainage Basin Size

Drainage Basin Size

• Forest Cover

Forest Cover

• Geology and Soils

Geology and Soils

• Precipitation

Precipitation

Looking Glass River near Eagle Mean Monthly Flows

50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 Jan Feb March April May June July August Sept Oct Nov Dec Index Flow Gallons per Minute

Index Flow

Stressful, low flow period

Major Factors in the Analysis

The geographic database contains info for 11,000 distinct watersheds and streams Info on watershed location, size, geology; and on stream flow, temperature, and fish populations Resulting maps closely match field experiences

• 3. The Fish Response Model
• 3. The Fish Response Model
• What fish populations live where in the streams

What fish populations live where in the streams and how do they respond to flow reductions in the and how do they respond to flow reductions in the summer (at low flow) summer (at low flow)

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Log Drainage Area (km2)

brook trout mottled sculpin brown trout brook stickleback burbot freshwater drum hornyhead chub logperch tadpole madtom northern pike pumkinseed rockbass golden redhorse smallmouth bass walleye white sucker rosyface shiner

Smallmouth bass

Fish habitat optima identified

• Low-flow yield, catchment area, and July mean temperature
• 82 most common species

( )

Each fish species has a habitat optimum and suitability curve. Each fish species has a habitat optimum and suitability curve.

Abundance Abundance Habitat Gradient (Flow or Temperature for instance) Habitat Gradient (Flow or Temperature for instance)

For ~ 60 fish species we determined these for 1) For ~ 60 fish species we determined these for 1) Catchment Catchment area, 2) summer base area, 2) summer base-

• flow

flow yield, and 3) July mean temperature. yield, and 3) July mean temperature. We assigned scores of 4, 3, 2, 1, 0 (respectively) to each 0.5 s We assigned scores of 4, 3, 2, 1, 0 (respectively) to each 0.5 standard deviation tandard deviation increment away from the optimum for that habitat variable. increment away from the optimum for that habitat variable.

Optimum Habitat Optimum Habitat ‘ ‘4 4’ ’ represents represents ‘ ‘best best’ ’ conditions conditions ‘ ‘4 4’ ’ is is ± ± 0.5 SD 0.5 SD ‘ ‘3 3’ ’ is is ± ± 0.5 to 1.0 SD 0.5 to 1.0 SD ‘ ‘2 2’ ’ is is ± ± 1.0 to 1.5 SD 1.0 to 1.5 SD ‘ ‘1 1’ ’ is is ± ± 1.5 to 2.0 SD 1.5 to 2.0 SD ‘ ‘0 0’ ’ is is ± ± > 2.0 SD > 2.0 SD

Score vs. relative density - All species 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 Score Relative density

Below state median Above state median 2X state median

Thriving Characteristic Abundance Abundance

Streams Cold Cool Warm Lg Rivers Sm Rivers Cold Trans We grouped Michigan streams into types and developed response models using an average of ~ 20 specific segments per type 20 Cold Sm Rivers 20 Warm Streams

X

Groundwater_vsec_statewide_6_14_07.shp Cold small river Cold stream Cool large river Cool small river Cool stream Transitional large river Transitional small river Transitional stream Warm large river Warm small river Warm stream

All River Segment Types

What Can the Fish Curves Tell Us About What Can the Fish Curves Tell Us About Functional Impairment? Functional Impairment?

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Proportion of flow removed Proportion

Characteristic species abundance Characteristic species remaining Thriving species thriving

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Proportion of flow removed Proportion

Characteristic species abundance Characteristic species remaining Thriving species thriving

Baseline or existing condition Baseline or existing condition Some replacement of sensitive species Some replacement of sensitive species Some density changes in fish Some density changes in fish Notable replacement by Notable replacement by tolerant species tolerant species Tolerant species dominant; Tolerant species dominant; ecological functions altered ecological functions altered Severe alteration of Severe alteration of ecological structure ecological structure and function and function

Interpretive criteria from Davies and Jackson 2006

What Can the Fish Curves Tell Us About What Can the Fish Curves Tell Us About Functional Impairment? Functional Impairment?

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 Proportion of index flow rem oved Proportion

A B C D Adverse Resource Impact Gradient of increasing risk

Interpreting the Fish Curves Interpreting the Fish Curves

Characteristic Fish Thriving Fish 90% 80%

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

Cold Streams