USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · sir20065184

Application of a stream-aquifer model to Monument Creek for development of a method to estimate transit losses for reusable water, El Paso County, Colorado

Abstract

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Colorado Springs Utilities, the Colorado Water Conservation Board, and the El Paso County Water Authority, began a study in 2004 to (1) apply a stream-aquifer model to Monument Creek, (2) use the results of the modeling to develop a transit-loss accounting program for Monument Creek, (3) revise the existing transit-loss accounting program for Fountain Creek to incorporate new water-management strategies and allow for incorporation of future changes in water-management strategies, and (4) integrate the two accounting programs into a single program with a Web-based user interface. The purpose of this report is to present the results of applying a stream-aquifer model to the Monument Creek study reach. Transit losses were estimated for reusable-water flows in Monument Creek that ranged from 1 to 200 cubic feet per second (ft 3 /s) and for native streamflows that ranged from 0 to 1,000 ft 3 /s. Transit losses were estimated for bank-storage, channel-storage, and evaporative losses. The same stream-aquifer model used in the previously completed (1988) Fountain Creek study was used in the Monument Creek study. Sixteen model nodes were established for the Monument Creek study reach, defining 15 subreaches. Channel length, aquifer length, and aquifer width for the subreaches were estimated from available topographic and geologic maps. Thickness of alluvial deposits and saturated thickness were estimated using lithologic and water-level data from about 100 wells and test holes in or near the Monument Creek study reach. Estimated average transmissivities for the subreaches ranged from 2,000 to 12,000 feet squared per day, and a uniform value of 0.20 was used for storage coefficient. Qualitative comparison of recorded and simulated streamflow at the downstream node for the calibration and verification simulations indicated that the two streamflows compared reasonably well. No adjustments were made to the model parameters. Differences between recorded and simulated streamflow volumes for all calibration and verification simulations ranged from about –8.8 to 7.5 percent; the total error for all simulations was about –0.7 percent. The model was used to estimate bank-storage losses for 10 to 15 native streamflows for each reusable-water flow of 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, 50, 100, and 200 ft 3 /s. Then the 10 to 15 bank-storage loss values were used in least-squares linear regression to estimate a relation between bank-storage loss and native streamflow for each of the 12 reusable-water flow rates. The 12 regression relations then were used to develop “look-up” tables of bank-storage loss for reusable-water flows ranging from 1 to 200 ft 3 /s (in 1-ft 3 /s increments). Additional model simulations indicated that (1) when the ratio of downstream native streamflow to upstream native streamflow was less than 1, bank-storage loss generally increased and (2) when the ratio of downstream native streamflow to upstream native streamflow was larger than 1, bank-storage loss generally decreased. These results were used to develop a bank-storage loss adjustment factor based on the ratio of native streamflow at the downstream node to native streamflow at the upstream node. The model also was used to estimate a recovery period, which is the length of time needed for the bank-storage loss to return to the stream. The recovery period was 1 day for six subreaches; 2 days for four subreaches; between 3 and 12 days for four subreaches; and 28 days for one subreach. Channel-storage losses are about 10 percent of the reusable-water flow for most of the subreaches, except for two subreaches, where the channel-storage losses are about 20 percent, and one subreach, where the losses are about 30 percent, owing to the greater channel lengths. Evaporative losses were estimated by the use of monthly pan-evaporation data and the incremental increase in stream width resulting from any reusable-water flows. Monthly pan-evaporation data were converted to a daily rate. The daily rate, when multiplied by the stream-width increase (in feet) that results from reusable-water flow and by the subreach length (in miles) gives the daily evaporative loss in cubic feet per second.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 38.71766178810086° to 39.131125517089906° latitude; -104.92218017578125° to -104.74639892578125° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Gerhard Kuhn, L. Rick Arnold. 2006. Application of a stream-aquifer model to Monument Creek for development of a method to estimate transit losses for reusable water, El Paso County, Colorado. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20065184

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Baseline water-quality inventory and summary for the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park, New Jersey

The Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park (PAGR), established in 2011 in the City of Paterson, New Jersey, contains many cultural, historical, and natural resources. Because of the PAGR’s young age and limited resources, a long record of natural resource data is not available for use to guide future park management and planning decisions. A detailed natural resource inventory was identified as an immediate need in the “Foundation Document—Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park,” given the history of extensive industrial activity throughout the PAGR and the Passaic River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service and the Urban Waters Federal Partnership for the Lower Passaic River, inventoried water-quality monitoring efforts and compiled historical water-quality data from secondary data sources to define baseline conditions in the PAGR and the surrounding study area. This report documents the methods used to harmonize water-quality data aggregated from multiple sources for the PAGR study area. Procedures implemented during data harmonization include compiling data from multiple sources, assessing the dataset for completeness, addressing metadata concerns, and creating a consistent and quality-assured dataset for future analysis. The harmonized dataset contains 14 aggregated surface-water sites, 1,103 individual sampling days, and 32,000 water-quality records throughout the period of record defined for this study (1952–2021). Summary statistics and comparison to water-quality criteria are provided for focus parameters that can support PAGR management, including field properties, suspended material, total dissolved solids, specific conductance, chloride, sulfate, Escherichia coli, nutrients, contaminants of concern related to fish consumption advisories, and litter and floatable debris. A spatial data gap was identified for the recreational area near the base of the Great Falls and immediately downstream from a known combined sewer overflow discharge location. Analytic data gaps were identified for continuous streamflow and water-quality parameters, floatable debris characterization, and harmful algal blooms identification. Continuous collection of contaminants of concern was identified as a temporal data gap, as these parameters were not consistently collected within the study area. The water-quality data synthesis and summary presented in this report can assist PAGR staff in understanding the complex baseline water resources within the study area and can serve as a baseline to design future water-quality monitoring efforts and evaluate changes in water quality over time. The harmonized dataset, as well as future New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Harbor Discharge Group monitoring data and assessments, can also be used to examine the status and trends in surface-water quality, support compliance with the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and further investigate changes to park water resources that can affect ecological and human health.

New Jersey↗

Slip tendency and dilation tendency of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report presents the results of slip tendency and dilation tendency analysis of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, in the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This effort was undertaken as part of two studies: the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office-funded Innovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project, which is a multidisciplinary, multi-institution effort to develop new methodologies and best practices to accelerate the discovery of new, commercially viable hydrothermal resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Resources Investigations Project. The goal of this work is to identify faults and fault segments that are appropriately oriented to be stress-loaded for slip or to dilate under the ambient stress conditions. Both conditions may make such faults more likely to host permeability and fluid flow relative to other faults in the region. Slip tendency and dilation tendency were calculated for all fault segments in the study area from the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database. Results demonstrate that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency are common in the Great Basin region. The areas containing many high slip tendency and dilation tendency fault segments are associated with high strain rates. These areas also host a relatively high proportion of the known hydrothermal systems. This indicates that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency in areas with high strain-rate are potentially most prospective for hosting hydrothermal systems. The database published in coordination with this report contains the slip tendency and dilation tendency results data, including the fault geometry and stress data used to calculate these quantities, for both the Great Basin study area and the smaller INGENIOUS study area.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, ↗

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York, and coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York, and nearby coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater emergence flooding. Groundwater emergence fooding refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As a part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the coastal areas of Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Partnership, formerly called the Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 grid cells that were 900 meters by 900 meters (approximately 3,000 feet by 3,000 feet), for the purpose of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard score was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percentage of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A scenario with a higher sea-level position was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard score was reviewed in conjunction with the National Land Cover Database to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk of potential groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface waterbodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, in the scenario with higher sea-level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated for some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea-level condition and the higher sea-level position scenario.

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗