Enhancing the Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service:

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


9062 Top of Dead Storage for Stateline Dam


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)


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


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


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



Station ID: 29 – JESU1 (Green River near Jensen, UT)

Flow (cfs)

Stage (ft)


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


Station ID: 35 – STIU1 (Strawberry River at Strawberry Reservoir, UT)

Flow (cfs)

Stage (ft)


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


Station ID: 99 – WFDC2 (Williams Fork at Williams Fork Reservoir near Parshall, CO)

Flow (cfs)

Stage (ft)


Submitted by

700-2000


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


1000-1500

Medium flow conditions – Flow ideal for boating/kayaking

Flows greater than 1000 cfs Typically experienced from July-September


700-1000

Low flow conditions – Potential for damage to boats/kayaks



Station ID: 106 – KRMC2 (Colorado River near Kremmling, CO)

Flow (cfs)

Stage (ft)


Submitted by

400-3000



1000-1600

High flow conditions – Powerful, unforgiving water for boating/kayaking


700-1000

Medium flow conditions – Flow ideal for boating/kayaking


500-700

Low flow conditions – Boat damage/abuse can occur


< 300 River too low to float boat or kayak



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

[email protected]

402-472-8238

http://drought.unl.edu

http://droughtreporter.unl.edu

Enhancing the Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service:

Documents

Transcript of Enhancing the Advanced Hydrologic Prediction Service: