enhancing the advanced hydrologic prediction service:
Post on 14-Jan-2016
47 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Enhancing the Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service:A Program to Develop A Low-Flow/Stage Database
for Selected NWS Forecast Points in the Upper Colorado River Basin
August 18, 2009 – Boulder, CO
Mark Svoboda, Climatologist, Monitoring Program Area Leader, NDMCDr. Donna L. Woudenberg, Drought Management Specialist, NDMC
Dr. Cody L. Knutson, Water Resources Scientist, NDMC Doug Kluck, NOAA-NWS CRHQ
Outline
Context
High-flows vs. Low-flows
Completed Low-flow Projects
Upper Colorado River Basin Project
A real-time tool: The DIR
Wrap-up: What can it mean to SWSI?
Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service
• Flood early warning system
• Network of >4300 stream gauges
• Providing current river flow/stage data
• Up to 7-day forecasts at many forecast points
• 90-day probabilistic forecasts at about 1/3 of the forecast points
http://www.weather.gov/ahps/
AHPS Regional Map
AHPS Products
Minor Flooding: minimal or no property damage, butpossibly some public threat or inconvenience.
Moderate Flooding: some inundation of structures androads near stream. Some evacuations of people and/orproperty to higher elevation is necessary.
Major Flooding: extensive inundation of structures androads. Significant evacuations of people and/or transferof property to higher elevations.
AHPS Flood Classifications
River Stage and Flood Impact InformationGunnison River at Grand Junction
(Photo taken by Ken Dewey, 2001)
Photos, Maps, Flood Stages, and Historical Data
Cumulative Chance of Exceeding Levels (90 day outlook)
The values along the x axis show the probability of reaching a particular flow (y axis). CS = conditional simulation; HS = historical simulation
Weekly Chance of Exceeding Levels (90 day forecast)
High-flows vs. Low-flows
Although providing great benefits for flood protection, the AHPS system does not provide the same information for low flow events.
Low flows in rivers and streams can have similarharmful effects in terms of health, economic, and environmental consequences.
Low-flow / Drought ImpactsEconomic
Costs and losses to agricultural and livestock producers
Loss from timber production
Loss from fishery production
Loss to recreation and tourism industry
Energy-related effects
Water Suppliers
Transportation Industry / navigation
Decline in food production/disrupted food supply
EnvironmentalDamage to animal species
Hydrological effects
Damage to plant communities
Increased number and severity of fires
Wind and water erosion of soils, reduced soil quality
Air quality effects (e.g., dust, pollutants)
Visual and landscape quality (e.g., dust, vegetative cover, etc.)
Low-flow / Drought Impacts
SocialHealth
Increased conflicts (“water wars”)
Reduced quality of life, changes in lifestyle
Disruption of cultural belief systems (e.g., religious and scientific views of natural hazards)
Reevaluation of social values (e.g., priorities, needs, rights)
Public dissatisfaction with government drought response
Perceptions of inequity in relief, possibly related to socioeconomic status, ethnicity, age, gender, seniority
Loss of cultural sites
Increased data/information needs, coordination of dissemination activities
Recognition of institutional restraints on water use
Objective 1: Identify low flow/stage related impacts near NWS forecast points
Objective 2: Use impact information to establish low flow/stage warning triggers (drought stages)
Objective 3: Develop low flow/stage river forecasts
Incorporate data into the NWS National Hydrologic Database and the AHPS system
Led to the development of a low flow/stage impacts database for AHPS forecast points
Completed Low-flow Projects
Upper Mississippi River Basin (2004) MN – 21 forecast points
North Platte River Basin (2005) CO, WY, and NE – 17 forecast points
Upper Missouri Basin (2006)WY, MT, and ND – 45 forecast points
Upper Trinity River Basin (2007)TX – 29 forecast points
Red River of the North (2007)ND & MN – 35 forecast points
• Conducted internet and literature reviews• Collected information on potential low flow impacts from federal, state, and local water experts
Completed Low Flow Projects
Experts Were Asked to Provide Information on:
• The impacts of low river levels• The stage/flow at which impacts occur• Which AHPS site(s) best reflect the impacts• Other factors that affect particular impacts/locations
Key Findings
• loss of municipal, industrial, and agricultural water• activation of water rights regulation procedures • activation of state and local drought response plans• reduced recreational opportunities• hydropower losses• dredging to maintain navigation• fish and wildlife losses• exposure of infrastructure• increased effluent testing (NPDES)
Developing a better understanding of low river impacts at the local level will provide the benefit of more detailed information for water resources planning applications at all levels, as well as in advancing the development of the AHPS system.
Conclusion of Case Studies…
2008-2009 Low-flow ProjectsUpper Colorado (164) & ACT-ACF (58)
NIDIS Pilot Programs
Upper Colorado River Basin164 stations – Central Region NWS/NIDIS
ACT-ACF50 + 8 stations – Southern Region NWS/NIDIS
Upper Colorado RiverBasin Project
2008-2009 Upper Colorado River Low-Flow Project
Identify potential low flow/stage impacts near 164 forecast points
Upper CO 164 Stations
Progress made with 2/3; need information for remaining third
Examples of impacts received/recorded in following slides
Flow (cfs)
Stage (ft)
Impacts Timing/Other Considerations
Submitted by
9163.2 Top of Active Conservation for Stateline Dam
Source – U.S. Bureau of Reclamation – Data webhttp://www.usbr.gov/dataweb/dams/ut82904.htm
9096.5 Top of Inactive Conservation for Stateline Dam
Source – U.S. Bureau of Reclamation – Data webhttp://www.usbr.gov/dataweb/dams/ut82904.htm
9062 Top of Dead Storage for Stateline Dam
Source – U.S. Bureau of Reclamation – Data webhttp://www.usbr.gov/dataweb/dams/ut82904.htm
2.2 -2.8 cfs
Advise water restrictions for residents in the town of Valley. Only allowed to water trees and shrubs, and watering only to be performed every other day.
Rocky Irick – Bridger Valley Joint Powers Board (personal communication)
2.6 – 2.8 cfs
Restrict farmer’s use of irrigation water to maintain adequate water supply for residents of . Water diversion from Smiths Fork to Blacks Fork for longer period than normal.
** is in the process of changing water rights so this may not be a problem in the future**
Rocky Irick – Bridger Valley Joint Powers Board (personal communication)
7.0 cfs Instream flow recommendation for a 4.6 mile stretch of the East Fork of Smith’s Fork Creek (below Stateline Dam)
**Application on file, but permit not yet granted.
Source – Green River Basin Water Planning Process (Final Report, 2001) – Technical Memoranda (Instream Flows in Wyoming), prepared for Wyoming Water Development Commission Basin Planning Program
Low-Flow Related Impacts in the Upper Colorado River Basin National Weather Service / National Drought Mitigation Center
Station ID: 14 – SLRW4 (Smiths Fork at Stateline Reservoir, WY)
Flow (cfs)
Stage (ft)
Impacts Timing/Other Considerations
Submitted by
2000 to 20000
Recommended flow for boating/kayaking
Source: Eddy Flower – Kayaking Information (http://www.eddyflower.com/RunDetail.aspx?RunId=901)
8,300 Peak flow magnitude- (Dry-90 to 100% exceedance)
Flow and temperature recommendation by hydrologic condition to benefit endangered fishes-Spring Peak Flow
Flow and Temperature Recommendations For Endangered Fishes in Downstream of Flaming Gorge Dam-Final Report 2000(http://www.ead.anl.gov/pub/doc/flaminggorgeflowrecs.pdf)
Spring Peak Flow Anticipated Effects (Dry-90 to 100% exceedance)
Spring peak flow-No floodplain inundation but some flooding of off-channel habitats. May benefit recruitment of CO pike minnow in some years
Flow and Temperature Recommendations For Endangered Fishes in Downstream of Flaming Gorge Dam-Final Report 2000(http://www.ead.anl.gov/pub/doc/flaminggorgeflowrecs.pdf)
900-1,100
Mean base-flow magnitude(Dry-90 to 100% exceedance)-Gradually declining flows after the spring peak will provide reproductive cues to CO pikeminnow and humpback chub adults. Warmer temperatures also promote better growth of endangered fishes
Flow and temperature recommendation by hydrologic condition to benefit endangered fishes-Summer through winter base flow – About June 15 to March 1
Flow and Temperature Recommendations For Endangered Fishes in Downstream of Flaming Gorge Dam-Final Report 2000(http://www.ead.anl.gov/pub/doc/flaminggorgeflowrecs.pdf)
1,100 to 1,500
Mean base-flow magnitude(Moderately Dry-70 to 90% exceedance) Gradually declining flows after the spring peak will provide reproductive cues to CO pikeminnow and humpback chub adults. Warmer temperatures also promote better growth of endangered fishes
Flow and temperature recommendation by hydrologic condition to benefit endangered fishes-Summer through winter base flow – About June 15 to March 1
Flow and Temperature Recommendations For Endangered Fishes in Downstream of Flaming Gorge Dam-Final Report 2000(http://www.ead.anl.gov/pub/doc/flaminggorgeflowrecs.pdf)
Low-Flow Related Impacts in the Upper Colorado River Basin National Weather Service / National Drought Mitigation Center
Station ID: 29 – JESU1 (Green River near Jensen, UT)
Flow (cfs)
Stage (ft)
Impacts Timing/Other Considerations
Submitted by
This gauge has been discontinued. People use the releases from the dams for the same numbers.
Keith Hooper - Central Utah Water Conservancy District(435) 738-2951 Submitted information 8/5/09
Low-Flow Related Impacts in the Upper Colorado River Basin National Weather Service / National Drought Mitigation Center
Station ID: 35 – STIU1 (Strawberry River at Strawberry Reservoir, UT)
Flow (cfs)
Stage (ft)
Impacts Timing/Other Considerations
Submitted by
7,790Boat ramps cannot be used for most motorized watercraft at or below this stage
Source: water – Williams Fork Reservoir official websitehttp://www.denverwater.org/recreation/williams.html
Low-Flow Related Impacts in the Upper Colorado River Basin National Weather Service / National Drought Mitigation Center
Station ID: 99 – WFDC2 (Williams Fork at Williams Fork Reservoir near Parshall, CO)
Flow (cfs)
Stage (ft)
Impacts Timing/Other Considerations
Submitted by
700-2000
Recommended flow for boating/kayaking
Source: Eddy Flower – Kayaking Information (http://www.eddyflower.com/CountryDetail.aspx?StateId=1)
1500+ High flow conditions – Powerful, unforgiving water for boating/kayaking
Flows greater than 1000 cfs Typically experienced from July-September
Source: Eddy Flower – Kayaking Information (http://www.eddyflower.com/CountryDetail.aspx?StateId=1)
1000-1500
Medium flow conditions – Flow ideal for boating/kayaking
Flows greater than 1000 cfs Typically experienced from July-September
Source: Eddy Flower – Kayaking Information (http://www.eddyflower.com/CountryDetail.aspx?StateId=1)
700-1000
Low flow conditions – Potential for damage to boats/kayaks
Source: Eddy Flower – Kayaking Information (http://www.eddyflower.com/CountryDetail.aspx?StateId=1)
Low-Flow Related Impacts in the Upper Colorado River Basin National Weather Service / National Drought Mitigation Center
Station ID: 106 – KRMC2 (Colorado River near Kremmling, CO)
Flow (cfs)
Stage (ft)
Impacts Timing/Other Considerations
Submitted by
400-3000
Recommended flow for boating/kayaking
Source: Eddy Flower – Kayaking Information (http://www.eddyflower.com/CountryDetail.aspx?StateId=1)
1000-1600
High flow conditions – Powerful, unforgiving water for boating/kayaking
Source: Eddy Flower – Kayaking Information (http://www.eddyflower.com/CountryDetail.aspx?StateId=1)
700-1000
Medium flow conditions – Flow ideal for boating/kayaking
Source: Eddy Flower – Kayaking Information (http://www.eddyflower.com/CountryDetail.aspx?StateId=1)
500-700
Low flow conditions – Boat damage/abuse can occur
Source: Eddy Flower – Kayaking Information (http://www.eddyflower.com/CountryDetail.aspx?StateId=1)
< 300 River too low to float boat or kayak
Source: Eddy Flower – Kayaking Information (http://www.eddyflower.com/CountryDetail.aspx?StateId=1)
Low-Flow Related Impacts in the Upper Colorado River Basin National Weather Service / National Drought Mitigation Center
Station ID: 141 – GEPC2 (Gunnison River below Gunnison Tunnel, CO)
Potential Contacts
NDMC staff contact various water experts in the region, such as:
• National Weather Service • United States Geological Survey• US Army Corp of Engineers• US Bureau of Reclamation• Natural Resources Conservation Service• State and Regional Water Agencies and Organizations• Soil and Water Conservation Districts• Community water managers near AHPS points
They help identify potential low-flow related impacts that can be linked to river flow/stages at NWS AHPS forecast points.
A Colorado Example
1) What effects would typically occur as the White River flow decreases at the AHPS forecast point near Meeker (WRMC2; #31)?
2) At what general stage/flow would those impacts occur?3) Are these impacts seasonal? Or specifically drought-related?
Current White River AHPS Forecast Pointat Meeker, Colorado
What would happen as stage/flow decreases?
An example of a seven-day river forecast hydrograph with indicators of critical low flow and flood levels. The red line indicates the flood level. The tan line indicates the critical low flow level at this forecast point. The blue line shows the current river level and the green line is the actual forecast.
North Central River Forecast Center
Future Work for River Forecast Centers…
An example of a 90-day streamflow outlook for low water. The values along the x axis show the probability of reaching a particular flow (y axis). The brown zone at the bottom of the graph shows the critical level for this forecast point at which low water impacts begin to take effect. CS = conditional simulation; HS = historical simulation.
North Central River Forecast Center
The Drought Impact Reporter
The Drought Impact Reporterhttp://droughtreporter.unl.edu
Why Record Drought’s Impacts?
NDMC mission in a nutshell:
To reduce vulnerability to drought…
• Impacts point to vulnerability• Mitigation and response
Drought Impact Reporter (DIR)
On-line since July 2005 >10,000 impacts logged, 2006-2009
First searchable, multi-source, archived database of drought impacts in the U.S.
Combines data from multiple sources into a unified map
Media, public, government documents, etc.
NOAA1% Gov’t
4.6%Public4.2%
Media89%
Other1.2%
Who Can Submit a Report?
Anyone interested in reporting the impacts of drought
We need to increase non-media reporting!
You can become a “drought spotter”
“Add an Impact”
Building DIRv2
DIR 2.0 EnhancementsMore user-friendly design
More efficient use of screen spaceImproved searching and mapping
Change in category namesDistinguishes between reports and impacts New “submit a report” form (w/ photo upload)Ability to “tap” existing networks for drought information (ex. CoCoRaHS)Coming Soon! (4Q 2009)
Enhanced County Level Information
Networks to Add
CoCoRaHSNWS Drought ReportsState reports: water restrictions, burn bans
Cropwatchers (Farm Bureau)Extension AgentsResearchers
SummaryThe Upper Colorado Low-flow Project will prove to be beneficial to managers, planners, and decision-makers in a number of ways, including:
by providing more detailed information for water resources planning applications at all levels
by enhancing the existing AHPS
Potential for low flow forecasts
Impacts as ground truth for indices (reality check)
by providing a high quality baseline document for the NIDIS Pilot Project in the region
Thank you!We welcome your participation and input as we work to improve the Drought Impact Reporter and other tools at the NDMC.
Please contact me:
Mark Svoboda
msvoboda2@unl.edu
402-472-8238
http://drought.unl.edu
http://droughtreporter.unl.edu
top related