When Groundwater Pumping Goes Unmanaged, · PDF fileWhen Groundwater Pumping Goes Unmanaged,...
Transcript of When Groundwater Pumping Goes Unmanaged, · PDF fileWhen Groundwater Pumping Goes Unmanaged,...
When Groundwater Pumping Goes Unmanaged, Unintended Consequences Happen:
the Central Sands as Case Study
George J. Kraft
http:///dnr.wi/gov/forestry
- Wisconsin State Historical Society
Floating sludge mat, Wisconsin River - 1969
Fish Kill – Wisconsin River
Photos courtesy Bob Martini
“Because it is so heavily tapped … the Colorado River rarely reaches its delta…”—Brian Clark Howard
National Geographichttp://environment.nationalgeographic.com/
The Santa Cruz RiverCourtesy of Robert Glennon, USGS original source.
The Santa Cruz RiverCourtesy of Robert Glennon, USGS original source.
- Insert name of source here
Groundwater & Pumping Basics
Insert water cycle slide
With Pumping
West streamEast stream
No Pumping
East streamWest stream
Fancy-pants groundwater system
Wisconsin Groundwater Use985 Million GPD (USGS, 2009)
050
100150200250300350400
IrrigationPublic supply
Stock/aquaculture
DomesticIndustrial
Commercial
Mining
The Central Sands as Case Study
A Little History
�1930’s – Irrigation starts from surface water and pits
�1950s – A crack down on surface water pumpers without permits begins.
Irrigators realize that shallow pits are not regulated, more pumping from pits and later from wells.
“The public will not stand for the destruction of streams... We have the water now, but what will we have if we pump it out at a faster rate?”
- V.J. Muench, Isaac Walton League, 1950
“Wisconsin has vast water resources… Irrigation ... has no permanent effect on the ground or surface water levels.... No reasonable person is concerned about this....”
- Wisconsin Agricultural Water Conservation Committee, 1959
Central Counties Groundwater Use 213 MGPD (78 BGPY, USGS 2009)
0255075
100125150175200
StockPublic
Domestic
Industry
Irrigation
Long Lake Oasis, Waushara County
Long Lake Oasis, Waushara County
Plainfield Lake, Waushara County
Pickerel Lake, Portage County
Wolf Lake
Little Plover (Dried up part of year from 2005-2009)
“ It’s a Record Drought! ”
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1930 1950 1970 1990 2010
Prec
ipit
atio
n (in
)
Hancock 1930-2010
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
1930 1950 1970 1990 2010
Prec
ipit
atio
n (in
)
Stevens Point 1931-2010 Precipitation
2005
2005
42.6 inches
39.3inches
Long Lake -
The Drought Years
1958
Pumping Effects on Central Sands Water Levels and Streamflows
Water level average declines from pumping
Plover 2.0
Streamflow average declines from pumping
1959-1987: AVG = 10 cfs, LOW = 3.9 cfsDel Monte 0.12 Whiting 0.67Irrigation 2.77Plover 0.98TOTAL DIVERSION 4.5 cfs
Lessons Learned
People Have a Huge Capacity to Explain Things Away
1. Impervious surface reduced infiltration.2. Dewatering for the Plover water main drained the aquifer.3. Lake Michigan is down – St. Clair River connection.4. The Little Plover didn’t exist until the farmers dynamited it in during the 1920s.5. Record drought.6. Some ponds got filled at the head of x river.7. Dams used to compress water in the aquifer and cause more groundwater storage.8. Dredging in the Buena Vista Marsh.9. Low water in the Wisconsin River.10. Pumping in the Fox Valley.11. Pumping by cranberry producers in Wood / Jackson Counties.12. Some gullies around lakes were filled.13. Lake Superior is down.14. People living on lakes pump lots of water.15. Springville pond was drained.16. McDill Pond was drained.17. Water is being pumped into the deep subsurface for oil production in Texas.18. Irrigation doesn’t use water – it all goes back into the ground.
Beware of the “Tweak” !(Things that don’t really change save water)
• Talking• “Bricks in the toilet”• Conservation leaflets in utility bills• Irrigation scheduling• Low pressure nozzles• No irrigating during rain storms
• Many, many more ...
Beware of the Hydro-Illogical Cycle
Wet period
Disinterest, more pumping
Dry
Concern
Awareness
Talk about management
The Hydro-Illogical Cycle
Status of Groundwater Mgt in Wis
� For practical purposes, no statutory protection of lakes, streams, and wetlands from pumping harms.
� Amount of groundwater pumped, where, and pumping impacts are poorly understood.
What we need in gw mgt?
1. A standard for protection.
2. Assessment for new wells.
3. Resource information : how much water pumped where, trends in pumping development, designating potential problem areas.
4. Management tools and processes for overpumped areas
5. Fair, efficient, economical, allow access to resource.
What Can Be Done Now?
Local assessments of new withdrawals
Assessment where future developments may occur
Common ground