1
play

1 Modeling Committee Meeting December 5, 2017 202 202 Panhandle - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sep 09, 2023 •1.4k likes •1.95k views

202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Modeling Committee Meeting December 5, 2017 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Outline Evaluation of GAM RUN 16-031 MAG Seymour and Blaine Evaluation of GAM RUN 16-029 MAG

  1. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Modeling Committee Meeting December 5, 2017

  2. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Outline • Evaluation of GAM RUN 16-031 MAG • Seymour and Blaine • Evaluation of GAM RUN 16-029 MAG • Ogallala and Dockum • Allocation of Availability 2

  3. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Evaluation of GAM RUN 16-031 MAG Seymour and Blaine 3

  4. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Seymour and Bla lain ine MAGs: 2012 and 2017 2012 MAGs 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 Cou ounty Aquif Aq uifer Chil hildress Seymour 732 717 712 712 712 712 Coll ollingsworth th Seymour 16,010 14,250 13,348 11,329 10,241 10,241 Ha Hall Seymour 12,020 11,462 10,866 11,085 11,172 11,172 Chil hildress Blaine 15,206 15,206 15,206 15,206 15,206 15,206 Coll ollingsworth th Blaine 185,376 185,376 185,376 185,376 185,376 185,376 Ha Hall Blaine 11,509 11,509 11,509 11,509 11,509 11,509 2017 MAGs 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 2070 Cou ounty Aq Aquif uifer Chil hildress Seymour 2,961 3,246 3,317 3,308 3,317 3,297 Coll ollingsworth th Seymour 41,345 31,492 28,657 27,165 22,395 22,769 Ha Hall Seymour 15,446 16,751 19,666 22,861 25,861 24,595 Chil hildress Blaine 23,575 23,510 23,575 23,510 23,575 23,510 Coll ollingsworth th Blaine 2,060 2,054 2,060 2,054 2,060 2,054 Hall Ha Blaine 5,856 5,840 5,856 5,840 5,856 5,840 4

  5. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Childress County Seymour and Blaine MAG Comparison 25,000 Modeled Available Groundwater Estimates (Acre-Feet Blaine 20,000 15,000 per Year) 10,000 2012 2017 Seymour 5,000 2012 2017 - 2020 2020 2070 2070 2060 2060 2030 2030 2040 2040 2050 2050 5

  6. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Collingsworth County Seymour and Blaine MAG Comparison 200,000 Modeled Available Groundwater Estimates (Acre-Feet Blaine 180,000 160,000 140,000 120,000 per Year) 100,000 80,000 Seymour 60,000 40,000 2012 2017 2012 2017 20,000 - 2070 2020 2060 2030 2040 2050 6

  7. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Hall County Seymour and Blaine MAG Comparison 30,000 Modeled Available Groundwater Estimates (Acre-Feet 25,000 Seymour 20,000 Blaine per Year) 15,000 10,000 2012 2017 5,000 2012 2017 - 2020 2060 2070 2030 2040 2050 7

  8. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Summary: Seymour and Blaine • MAG volumes decrease significantly from 2012 to 2017 for the Blaine Aquifer in Collingsworth and Hall Counties • MAG volumes increase for the Blaine Aquifer in Childress County from 2012 to 2017 • Seymour Aquifer MAG volumes increase for all three counties from 2012 to 2017 8

  9. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Region A All Aquifers MAG Comparison 2017 and 2012 2020 2030 2040 2050 2060 3,500,000 Modeled Available Groundwater Estimates (Acre Feet per Year) Blaine 3,000,000 Blaine Seymour Seymour 2,500,000 2,000,000 Ogallala 1,500,000 Ogallala Ogallala Ogallala 1,000,000 Ogallala 2012 2012 2017 2012 2017 2017 2012 2017 2012 2017 500,000 Dockum Dockum Dockum Dockum Dockum 0 2050 2060 2020 2030 2040 9

  10. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Evaluation of GAM RUN 16-029 MAG Ogallala and Dockum 10

  11. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 GAM RUN 16-029 MAG • MODFLOW-NWT reduces pumping when saturated thickness reaches 30 feet • How does pumping (and thus availability) change through time? • Where do cutbacks occur? • What is the Ogallala saturated thickness through time? • If and how might this affect availability through planning period and for different WUGs?

  12. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Total Requested Pumping per Year Entire Model Area

  13. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Total Requested Pumping per Year GMA 1 Area

  14. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Total Requested Pumping per Year

  15. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Pumping Reductions in in HPAS GAM • The MODFLOW-NWT model assumes well production decreases when saturated thickness reaches 30 feet • Cutbacks occur only in the Ogallala in MAG run • Most cutbacks are in western counties of GMA 1

  16. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Total Actual Pumpin ing (after cutbacks) Entire Model Area

  17. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Total Actual Pumpin ing (after cutbacks) GMA 1 Area

  18. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Annual l Pumpin ing per r Co County (a (aft fter cutb tbacks)

  19. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Pumping Defi ficiency Entire Model Area

  20. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Pumping Defi ficiency GMA 1 Area

  21. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Pumping Defi ficiency per County 21

  22. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Projected Ogallala Saturated Thic ickness • Ogallala saturated thickness declining throughout model run from 2020 to 2070 • Max decline of 270 feet thickness in 2070 • Largest saturated thickness decline effects observed in the western Region A counties

  23. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 2020 Projected Ogallala Aquifer Thic ickness Gray zones are less than 30 feet saturated thickness 23

  24. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 2030 Projected Ogallala Aquifer Thic ickness 24

  25. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 2040 Projected Ogallala Aquifer Thickness 25

  26. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 2050 Projected Ogallala Aquifer Thickness 26

  27. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 2060 Projected Ogallala Aquifer Thickness 27

  28. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 2070 Projected Ogallala Aquifer Thickness 28

  29. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Ogallala Thic ickness Less than 30 feet 29

  30. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Percent Ogallala Thic ickness Less than 30 feet 30

  31. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Supply All llocations – Ogallala Aquifer

  32. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Considerations • Constrained geographically? • Decadal decline considerations? • Rate of decline? • MAG limitation • Competition for limited supplies? 32

  33. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Approach fr from Last Round 1. Modified modeling approach a. Put a well in every gridblock b. Perform “annual” modeling to match DFC locally c. Yielded a “supply” for every gridblock 2. Allocate supply geographically a. Designate IRR and MUN b. Add buffers to account for lateral flow 33

  34. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 2020 Ogallala Thickness Le Less th than 30 ft ft 34

  35. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 2030 Ogallala Thickness Le Less th than 30 ft ft 35

  36. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 2040 Ogallala Thickness Le Less th than 30 ft ft 36

  37. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 2050 Ogallala Thickness Le Less th than 30 ft ft 37

  38. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 2060 Ogallala Thickness Le Less th than 30 ft ft 38

  39. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 2070 Ogallala Thickness Le Less th than 30 ft ft 39

  40. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Example: Ogallala Availability by Type 40

  41. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Example: Ogallala Availability by Type 41

  42. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Example: Ogallala Availability by Type 42

  43. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 43

  44. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 44

  45. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Recommendations • Use the GAM RUN 16-029 MAG as is • Allocate irrigation and municipal availability according to distribution used in previous round of planning 45

  46. 202 202 Panhandle Regional Water Plan 1 Questions? 46

Recommend

More recommend