Geology topics

Andrew J. Long

Publications and source records attributed to Andrew J. Long.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2026

Ensemble methods for history matching and uncertainty quantification with a watershed model

History matching of large hydrologic models is challenging due to data sparsity and non-unique process combinations (and associated parameters) that can produce similar model predictions. We develop an ensemble-based history matching (and uncertainty quantification) approach using an iterative ensemble smoother (iES) method for three cutouts of the National Hydrologic Model (NHM) and qualitatively compare the results and performance to the stepwise history matching approach. In the latter approach, subsets of parameters and observations were sequentially calibrated to a diverse range of observations to mitigate non-uniqueness and local minima. In iES, localization simulates the same causal connections between parameters and observations without the need (and computational cost) of sequential history matching steps. iES uses a weighted sum-of-squared-errors objective function which allows differential weighting of multiple data sources. Formal adoption of range observation also pushes results to within ranges of observation values rather than discrete values. Overall, the ensemble approach performs similarly to the stepwise approach. Both approaches performed poorly for the cutout representing a snowmelt-dominated watershed, indicating a structural issue in the process representation of the model. The main advantage of iES is quantification of uncertainty in both the history matching and the predictions of interest.

Journal of the American Water Resources Associatio↗

USGS2024

Numerical model of the groundwater-flow system near the southeastern part of Puget Sound, Washington

Groundwater flow in the active model area (AMA) was simulated using a groundwater-flow model. A steady-state model version of the model simulates equilibrium conditions, and a transient model version simulates monthly variability. The model corresponds to the physical and temporal dimensions of the conceptual model and groundwater budget. The steady-state model version represents average conditions for an 11-year period (January 1, 2005–December 31, 2015), and the transient model represents monthly hydrologic variability within that period. The 13-layer model was constructed using MODFLOW-NWT with a uniformly spaced grid consisting of 416 rows, 433 columns, and cells with a horizontal dimension of 500 feet (ft) on a side. The model was calibrated to measured values of water levels in wells and lakes and estimated base flow for selected streamflow measurement stations, commonly referred to as streamgages. Model calibration was accomplished using a combination of manual and automatic methods, including the Model-Independent Parameter Estimation (PEST) program that adjusted model input parameters with the aim of minimizing the difference between estimated and model-simulated values of hydraulic head and base flow. Model boundary conditions consist of all simulated groundwater inflow to and outflow from the AMA. For example, a stream reach that simulates a gain from or loss to groundwater is a boundary condition that allows water to exit or enter, respectively, the groundwater system. Other boundary conditions include springs, seeps, precipitation recharge, groundwater exchange with lakes and Puget Sound, and groundwater pumping. A comparison of the estimated groundwater budget to that simulated by the steady-state model version indicates that the relative percentages of total inflow or total outflow for six major categories of boundary conditions are similar for the two budgets. The model was used to simulate three suites of scenarios of potential drought and water-use changes. Scenario 1 suite consisted of the steady-state model version that was run with 0, 15, 20, and 25 percent reduction of precipitation recharge to assess the corresponding reductions in base flow with decreasing recharge. The last simulation for the scenario 1 suite consisted of the transient model version simulating 3 years of consecutive seasonal drought, defined by the months of May through September, to assess the corresponding base-flow reductions. Scenario 2 suite consisted of the steady-state model version with all simulated groundwater use removed, compared with a simulation that includes current groundwater use to evaluate changes to potentiometric surfaces and base flows. Scenario 3 suite consisted of a transient model version of the model that simulated pumping increases for four different categories of water-supply wells (compared to no pumping increases) to evaluate resulting reductions in base flow. Although, these scenarios provide examples of model applications and useful insights, many other scenarios could be simulated. A description of how to download the model is described in the body of this report. Uncertainty is associated with most model inputs. Groundwater levels, lake levels, and land-surface altitudes are relatively certain; other model inputs are far less certain, including precipitation recharge, base flow, hydraulic properties, water use, and the three-dimensional structure of subsurface hydrogeologic units. Models are useful not because of high levels of accuracy of all model inputs, but because they combine the best information and estimates available, thereby providing the best predictions available related to physical processes. The model described in this report simulates groundwater flow on a regional scale, which has inherent limitations for simulating hydrologic scenarios at local scales. Model structures and inputs were generalized to be consistent with this regional scale. For example, the actual groundwater system has much greater heterogeneity of hydraulic conductivity than is possible within the model’s degrees of freedom. Variations in hydraulic gradients over distances less than 500 ft cannot be simulated. The distances between model features, such as a pumping well and a stream, must be placed at 500-ft intervals and are co-located if both features are within the same model cell.

Washington↗

USGS2024

Evaluation of groundwater resources in the Upper White River Basin within Mount Rainier National Park, Washington State, 2020

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the National Park Service, investigated groundwater gains and losses on the upper White River within Mount Rainier National Park in Washington. This investigation was conducted using stream discharge measurements at 14 locations within 7 reaches over a 6.5-mile river length from near the White River’s origin at the terminus of the Emmons Glacier on Mount Rainier to the White River Entrance near the northeast boundary of Mount Rainier National Park. Locations selected for the stream discharge measurements were on the main channel of the White River and on tributary streams near their confluence with the White River. A soil-water-balance (SWB) model analysis was also performed on the White River basin to estimate groundwater recharge throughout the basin during the time of the study. Analyses were made for the White River basin at the sub-basin (zone) scale to determine groundwater input to the stream for individual stream reaches. The gridded SWB model was simulated at a 10-meter (m) horizontal resolution, where recharge simulations were constructed using five spatially distributed datasets. Daily climate data as input for the simulation included gridded daily precipitation and air temperature. Upon analysis of the seepage run results, three of the seven reaches showed groundwater gains in this study. The SWB model results were used in conjunction with the baseflow gain totals in the reaches to estimate the length of time for recharge to become base flow. Further analysis estimated the rates of groundwater flow in the zones with adjacent gaining reaches. A streamflow gain curve was created from a simple flow model for each of the zones to relate the recharge from the zones to the adjacent reaches on the White River and tributaries. The fit of the streamflow gain curve to the calculated streamflow gain during the seepage run was used to analyze where the recharge from each zone resulted as streamflow gain. Consecutive reach losses from zones D and L were immediately followed downstream by a relatively large gain in zone GH, indicating that the gain in the reach adjacent to zone GH could be from the recharge in zones D and L.

Washington↗

USGS2020

Spectral analysis to quantify the response of groundwater levels to precipitation — Northwestern United States

Persistent atmospheric patterns that lead to wet and dry seasons and droughts over periods of months to decades and longer-term climate change over periods of decades to millennia affect groundwater resources. Changes in groundwater storage and the resulting groundwater discharge from most aquifers is relatively slow and steady compared to the variability of daily precipitation. The response of groundwater levels to precipitation can be complex because of a combination of processes that include evapotranspiration, surface runoff, and infiltration of net recharge from precipitation through the vadose zone. Typically, this response is delayed and results in a change in groundwater storage reflected in a time series of groundwater levels. Understanding the relations between variations in precipitation and changes in groundwater storage is essential to water resources planning. The objectives of this study were to (1) characterize the relation between precipitation and responses in groundwater levels at seasonal to decadal scales and (2) to develop methods that are transferable on a continental scale to any groundwater-level record. Spectral analysis was applied to daily precipitation and groundwater levels for eleven monitoring wells in the northwestern Unites States with records ranging in length from 5.9 to 23.9 years. The analysis provided a quantitative characterization for each monitoring well that met both objectives and indicated that maximum and minimum precipitation rates generally occurred in December and August, respectively. Maximum groundwater levels occurred from February to August, and minimum values occurred from January to December. The lag in the annual peak response of groundwater to peak precipitation ranged from 2.2 to 8.8 months, with a median value of 5.3 months. Groundwater responses to wet and dry seasons were evident in the relatively high amplitude frequencies of 10 and 20 cycles per decade (cpdec). A high amplitude frequency at 1 cpdec represents a drought cycle that resulted in larger groundwater level changes than typical seasonal water level fluctuations.

Oregon, Washington↗

USGS2019

300,000 yr history of water-table fluctuations at Wind Cave, South Dakota, USA—Scale, timing, and groundwater mixing in the Madison Aquifer

Deposits of calcite coating the lower passages of Wind Cave in the southern Black Hills of South Dakota were precipitated under phreatic conditions. Data from samples associated with a new cave survey and hydrologic studies indicate that past water tables within Wind Cave reached a maximum height of 45 m above modern levels but were mostly confined to 25 m or less. Uranium-series ages for basal layers deposited on weathered wall rock indicate subaerial conditions in this part of the cave persisted between 1000 and 300 ka. Ages and elevations of wall coatings and cave rafts establish a 300,000 yr paleohydrograph indicating that water-table highstands occurred during interglacial or interstadial-to-early glacial periods and lowstands occurred during full-glacial and stadial episodes. Isotopes of Sr, U, C, and O from dated calcite samples were obtained to evaluate potential shifts in paleo-groundwater composition. For comparison, Sr and U isotopic compositions were determined for modern groundwater from 18 sites previously classified into five hydrogeologic domains. Isotope data for different domains tend to cluster in separate fields, although several fields overlap. Compositions of Calcite Lake (informal name) water reflect modern recharge to shallow aquifers. In contrast, speleothem data indicate that paleo-groundwater highstands were not supported by increased infiltration associated with local recharge, or by upwelling from deeper Proterozoic sources. Instead, cave water was similar to deeper, warmer groundwater from the Madison Aquifer discharging at modern artesian springs flanking the southern Black Hills. Highstands were likely influenced by large-scale hydraulic processes associated with recharge to the Madison Aquifer under the Laurentide ice sheet on the northeast side of the Williston Basin, causing increased hydrostatic pressures in confined aquifers on the south side of the basin.

South Dakota↗

USGS2019

Data management plan for the U.S. Geological Survey Washington Water Science Center

The primary mission of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Water Mission Area is to collect and disseminate reliable, impartial, and timely information needed to understand the water resources of the Nation, including data on streamflow, groundwater, water quality, water use, and availability. Management of data throughout the entire data lifecycle is necessary to meet the mission and maintain the USGS reputation of producing high-quality data as the Nation’s primary earth-science information agency. This document describes the data management procedures of the USGS Washington Water Science Center, including responsibilities of staff and workflow procedures.

Washington↗

USGS2019

Multivariate analysis of hydrochemical data for Jewel Cave, Wind Cave, and surrounding areas

Jewel Cave National Monument and Wind Cave National Park in South Dakota contain two of the six longest caves worldwide. These caves contain subterranean lakes that are important points of intersection between the water table of the Madison aquifer and the caves. During 2015 to 2017, several subterranean lakes were discovered in Jewel Cave, which previously was thought to be above the regional water table. The objectives of this study were to better understand the hydrology of the recently discovered lakes in Jewel Cave and to evaluate their relation or possible connection to similar subterranean lakes in Wind Cave. Both objectives align with National Park Service resource management purposes. Multivariate analysis, consisting of principal component analysis (PCA), cluster analysis, and end member mixing, was applied to hydrochemical data for 70 sites within and surrounding Jewel Cave and Wind Cave. Hydrochemical data consisted of the contents of major ions (Ca, Mg, Na, HCO3, Cl, Si, SO4), arsenic (As), strontium (Sr), uranium (U), stable isotopes of oxygen and hydrogen (δ18O, δ2H), radiogenic isotope ratios of strontium and uranium (87Sr/86Sr and 234U/238U), pH, and electrical conductivity (EC) in water samples. Five hydrogeologic domains were identified on the basis of PCA and cluster analysis for the area encompassing Jewel Cave and Wind Cave in the southern Black Hills. The Artesian 1 and Artesian 2 domains represent primarily artesian springs and surrounding groundwater, the East and West domains represent areas where Madison and Minnelusa aquifer rocks are at or near the land surface, and the Precambrian domain represents the Precambrian aquifer. Multivariate analysis indicates that the Jewel Cave area is part of the West domain and that Wind Cave is part of the East domain. End member mixing was applied to estimate that groundwater in the Jewel Cave area primarily was derived from the West domain and secondarily from the Precambrian domain. Jewel Cave and Wind Cave contain lakes that are well connected to regional groundwater flow in the Madison aquifer.

South Dakota↗

USGS2018

Williston Basin groundwater availability, United States and Canada

The Williston Basin contains important oil and gas resources for the Nation. Freshwater supplies are limited in this semiarid area, and oil and gas development can require large volumes of freshwater. Groundwater is the primary source of water for many water users in the Williston Basin, so to better understand these resources, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) assessed the groundwater availability in this area. The final phase of this assessment included a computer model that simulates how groundwater flows in the aquifer systems and simulates how changes in water use and natural conditions may affect the water resources. These results provide a tool for land and water-resource managers to determine how water can be used for multiple purposes in the Williston Basin. For additional information about this assessment and more in-depth descriptions and results, see Long and others (2018).

Williston Basin↗

USGS2018

Groundwater availability of the Williston Basin, United States and Canada

Executive Summary The Williston Basin of the Northern Great Plains is a sedimentary basin—a geologic bowl-like structure filled with layered sedimentary rocks dating as far back as the Paleozoic age. The basin, which is nationally important for the production of energy resources, spans Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota in the United States, and Manitoba and Saskatchewan in Canada. The three uppermost principal aquifer systems are the glacial, lower Tertiary, and Upper Cretaceous aquifer systems. As deep as 3,000 feet (ft) at the center of the basin, these are the most accessible aquifer systems in the basin and are the primary sources of potable groundwater in much of this area. The glacial aquifer system consists of Quaternary-age unconsolidated till, silt, clay, outwash sand and gravel, and occasional cobbles and boulders. The lower Tertiary and Upper Cretaceous aquifer systems consist primarily of sandstone, siltstone, mudstone, shale, and coal. As energy demands have increased in the basin, horizontal drilling and hydraulic-fracturing have been used (especially since 2005) to develop previously inaccessible formations—namely, the Bakken and Three Forks Formations. The basin has yielded a large supply of domestic oil and natural gas since the 1950s, but the technologies required to extract those materials use large amounts of freshwater. The increasing freshwater demands of energy production in the Williston Basin, in addition to population growth, have led to a need for new tools to assess groundwater resources.

Williston Basin↗

USGS2018

Construction and calibration of a groundwater-flow model to assess groundwater availability in the uppermost principal aquifer systems of the Williston Basin, United States and Canada

The U.S. Geological Survey developed a groundwater-flow model for the uppermost principal aquifer systems in the Williston Basin in parts of Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota in the United States and parts of Manitoba and Saskatchewan in Canada as part of a detailed assessment of the groundwater availability in the area. The assessment was done because of the potential for increased demands and stresses on groundwater associated with large-scale energy development in the area. As part of this assessment, a three-dimensional groundwater-flow model was developed as a tool that can be used to simulate how the groundwater-flow system responds to changes in hydrologic stresses at a regional scale. The three-dimensional groundwater-flow model was developed using the U.S. Geological Survey’s numerical finite-difference groundwater model with the Newton-Rhapson solver, MODFLOW–NWT, to represent the glacial, lower Tertiary, and Upper Cretaceous aquifer systems for steady-state (mean) hydrological conditions for 1981‒2005 and for transient (temporally varying) conditions using a combination of a steady-state period for pre-1960 and transient periods for 1961‒2005. The numerical model framework was constructed based on existing and interpreted hydrogeologic and geospatial data and consisted of eight layers. Two layers were used to represent the glacial aquifer system in the model; layer 1 represented the upper one-half and layer 2 represented the lower one-half of the glacial aquifer system. Three layers were used to represent the lower Tertiary aquifer system in the model; layer 3 represented the upper Fort Union aquifer, layer 4 represented the middle Fort Union hydrogeologic unit, and layer 5 represented the lower Fort Union aquifer. Three layers were used to represent the Upper Cretaceous aquifer system in the model; layer 6 represented the upper Hell Creek hydrogeologic unit, layer 7 represented the lower Hell Creek aquifer, and layer 8 represented the Fox Hills aquifer. The numerical model was constructed using a uniform grid with square cells that are about 1 mile (1,600 meters) on each side with a total of about 657,000 active cells. Model calibration was completed by linking Parameter ESTimation (PEST) software with MODFLOW–NWT. The PEST software uses statistical parameter estimation techniques to identify an optimum set of input parameters by adjusting individual model input parameters and assessing the differences, or residuals, between observed (measured or estimated) data and simulated values. Steady-state model calibration consisted of attempting to match mean simulated values to measured or estimated values of (1) hydraulic head, (2) hydraulic head differences between model layers, (3) stream infiltration, and (4) discharge to streams. Calibration of the transient model consisted of attempting to match simulated and measured temporally distributed values of hydraulic head changes, stream base flow, and groundwater discharge to artesian flowing wells. Hydraulic properties estimated through model calibration included hydraulic conductivity, vertical hydraulic conductivity, aquifer storage, and riverbed hydraulic conductivity in addition to groundwater recharge and well skin. The ability of the numerical model to accurately simulate groundwater flow in the Williston Basin was assessed primarily by its ability to match calibration targets for hydraulic head, stream base flow, and flowing well discharge. The steady-state model also was used to assess the simulated potentiometric surfaces in the upper Fort Union aquifer, the lower Fort Union aquifer, and the Fox Hills aquifer. Additionally, a previously estimated regional groundwater-flow budget was compared with the simulated steady-state groundwater-flow budget for the Williston Basin. The simulated potentiometric surfaces typically compared well with the estimated potentiometric surfaces based on measured hydraulic head data and indicated localized groundwater-flow gradients that were topographically controlled in outcrop areas and more generalized regional gradients where the aquifers were confined. The differences between the measured and simulated (residuals) hydraulic head values for 11,109 wells were assessed, which indicated that the steady-state model generally underestimated hydraulic head in the model area. This underestimation is indicated by a positive mean residual of 11.2 feet for all model layers. Layer 7, which represents the lower Hell Creek aquifer, is the only layer for which the steady-state model overestimated hydraulic head. Simulated groundwater-level changes for the transient model matched within plus or minus 2.5 feet of the measured values for more than 60 percent of all measurements and to within plus or minus 17.5 feet for 95 percent of all measurements; however, the transient model underestimated groundwater-level changes for all model layers. A comparison between simulated and estimated base flows for the steady-state and transient models indicated that both models overestimated base flow in streams and underestimated annual fluctuations in base flow. The estimated and simulated groundwater budgets indicate the model area received a substantial amount of recharge from precipitation and stream infiltration. The steady-state model indicated that reservoir seepage was a larger component of recharge in the Williston Basin than was previously estimated. Irrigation recharge and groundwater inflow from outside the Williston Basin accounted for a relatively small part of total groundwater recharge when compared with recharge from precipitation, stream infiltration, and reservoir seepage. Most of the estimated and simulated groundwater discharge in the Williston Basin was to streams and reservoirs. Simulated groundwater withdrawal, discharge to reservoirs, and groundwater outflow in the Williston Basin accounted for a smaller part of total groundwater discharge. The transient model was used to simulate discharge to 571 flowing artesian wells within the model area. Of the 571 established flowing artesian wells simulated by the model, 271 wells did not flow at any time during the simulation because hydraulic head was always below the land-surface altitude. As hydraulic head declined throughout the simulation, 68 of these wells responded by ceasing to flow by the end of 2005. Total mean simulated discharge for the 571 flowing artesian wells was 55.1 cubic feet per second (ft 3 /s), and the mean simulated flowing well discharge for individual wells was 0.118 ft 3 /s. Simulated discharge to individual flowing artesian wells increased from 0.039 to 0.177 ft 3 /s between 1961 and 1975 and decreased to 0.102 ft 3 /s by 2005. The mean residual for 34 flowing wells with measured discharge was 0.014 ft 3 /s, which indicates the transient model overestimated discharge to flowing artesian wells in the model area. Model limitations arise from aspects of the conceptual model and from simplifications inherent in the construction and calibration of a regional-scale numerical groundwater-flow model. Simplifying assumptions in defining hydraulic parameters in space and hydrologic stresses and time-varying observational data in time can limit the capabilities of this tool to simulate how the groundwater-flow system responds to changes in hydrologic stresses, particularly at the local scale; nevertheless, the steady-state model adequately simulated flow in the uppermost principal aquifer systems in the Williston Basin based on the comparison between the simulated and estimated groundwater-flow budget, the comparison between simulated and estimated potentiometric surfaces, and the results of the calibration process.

Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming↗

USGS2015

Effects of projected climate (2011–50) on karst hydrology and species vulnerability—Edwards aquifer, south-central Texas, and Madison aquifer, western South Dakota

Karst aquifers—formed by the dissolution of soluble rocks such as limestone—are critical groundwater resources in North America, and karst springs, caves, and streams provide habitat for unique flora and fauna. Springflow and groundwater levels in karst terrane can change greatly over short time scales, and therefore are likely to respond rapidly to climate change. How might the biological communities and ecosystems associated with karst respond to climate change and accompanying changes in groundwater levels and springflow? Sites in two central U.S. regions—the Balcones Escarpment of south-central Texas and the Black Hills of western South Dakota (fig. 1)—were selected to study climate change and its potential effects on the local karst hydrology and ecosystem. The ecosystems associated with the Edwards aquifer (Balcones Escarpment region) and Madison aquifer (Black Hills region) support federally listed endangered and threatened species and numerous State-listed species of concern, including amphibians, birds, insects, and plants. Full results are provided in Stamm and others (2014), and are summarized in this fact sheet.

South Dakota, Texas↗

USGS2015

Historical and projected climate (1901–2050) and hydrologic response of karst aquifers, and species vulnerability in south-central Texas and western South Dakota

Two karst aquifers, the Edwards aquifer in the Balcones Escarpment region of south-central Texas and the Madison aquifer in the Black Hills of western South Dakota, were evaluated for hydrologic response to projected climate change through 2050. Edwards aquifer sites include Barton Springs, the Bexar County Index Well, and Comal Springs. Madison aquifer sites include Spearfish Creek and Rhoads Fork Spring. Climate projections at sites were based on output from the Community Climate System Model of global climate, linked to the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model of regional climate. The WRF model output was bias adjusted to match means for 1981–2010 from records at weather stations near Madison and Edwards aquifer sites, including Boerne, Texas, and Custer and Lead, South Dakota. Hydrologic response at spring and well sites was based on the Rainfall-Response Aquifer and Watershed Flow (RRAWFLOW) model. The WRF model climate projections for 2011–50 indicate a significant upward trend in annual air temperature for all three weather stations and a significant downward trend in annual precipitation for the Boerne weather station. Annual springflow simulated by the RRAWFLOW model had a significant downward trend for Edwards aquifer sites and no trend for Madison aquifer sites. Flora and fauna that rely on springflow from Edwards and Madison aquifer sites were assessed for vulnerability to projected climate change on the basis of the Climate Change Vulnerability Index (CCVI). The CCVI is determined by the exposure of a species to climate, the sensitivity of the species, and the ability of the species to cope with climate change. Sixteen species associated with springs and groundwater were assessed in the Balcones Escarpment region. The Barton Springs salamander ( Eurycea sosorum ) was scored as highly vulnerable with moderate confidence. Nine species—three salamanders, a fountain darter ( Etheostoma fonticola ), three insects, and two amphipods—were scored as moderately vulnerable. The remaining six species—four vascular plants, the Barton cavesnail ( Stygopyrgus bartonensis ), and a cave shrimp—were scored as not vulnerable/presumed stable (not vulnerable and evidence does not support change in abundance or range of the species). Vulnerability of eight species associated with streams that receive springflow from the Madison aquifer in the Black Hills was assessed. Of these, the American dipper ( Cinclus mexicanus ) and the lesser yellow lady’s slipper ( Cypripedium parviflorum ) were scored as moderately vulernable with high confidence. The dwarf scouringrush ( Equisetum scirpoides ) and autumn willow ( Salix serissima ) were also scored as moderately vulnerable with moderate to low confidence, respectively. Other species were assessed as not vulnerable/presumed stable or not vulnerable/increase likely (not vulnerable and evidence supporting an increase in abundance or range of the species). Lower vulnerability scores for the Black Hills species in comparison to the Balcones Escarpment species reflect lower endemicity, higher projected springflow than in the historical period, and high thermal tolerance of many of the species for the Black Hills. Importantly, climate change vulnerability scores differed substantially for Edwards aquifer species when RRAWFLOW model projections were included, resulting in increased vulnerability scores for 12 of the 16 species.

South Dakota, Texas↗

USGS2015

RRAWFLOW: Rainfall-Response Aquifer and Watershed Flow Model (v1.15)

The Rainfall-Response Aquifer and Watershed Flow Model (RRAWFLOW) is a lumped-parameter model that simulates streamflow, spring flow, groundwater level, or solute transport for a measurement point in response to a system input of precipitation, recharge, or solute injection. I introduce the first version of RRAWFLOW available for download and public use and describe additional options. The open-source code is written in the R language and is available at http://sd.water.usgs.gov/projects/RRAWFLOW/RRAWFLOW.html along with an example model of streamflow. RRAWFLOW includes a time-series process to estimate recharge from precipitation and simulates the response to recharge by convolution, i.e., the unit-hydrograph approach. Gamma functions are used for estimation of parametric impulse-response functions (IRFs); a combination of two gamma functions results in a double-peaked IRF. A spline fit to a set of control points is introduced as a new method for estimation of nonparametric IRFs. Several options are included to simulate time-variant systems. For many applications, lumped models simulate the system response with equal accuracy to that of distributed models, but moreover, the ease of model construction and calibration of lumped models makes them a good choice for many applications (e.g., estimating missing periods in a hydrologic record). RRAWFLOW provides professional hydrologists and students with an accessible and versatile tool for lumped-parameter modeling.

Geoscientific Model Development↗

USGS2015

Potential application of radiogenic isotopes and geophysical methods to understand the hydrothermal dystem of the Upper Geyser Basin, Yellowstone National Park

Numerous geochemical and geophysical studies have been conducted at Yellowstone National Park to better understand the hydrogeologic processes supporting the thermal features of the Park. This report provides the first 87Sr/86Sr and 234U/238U data for thermal water from the Upper Geyser Basin (UGB) intended to evaluate whether heavy radiogenic isotopes might provide insight to sources of groundwater supply and how they interact over time and space. In addition, this report summarizes previous geophysical studies made at Yellowstone National Park and provides suggestions for applying non-invasive ground and airborne studies to better understand groundwater flow in the subsurface of the UGB. Multiple samples from Old Faithful, Aurum, Grand, Oblong, and Daisy geysers characterized previously for major-ion concentrations and isotopes of water (δ2H, δ18O, and 3H) were analyzed for Sr and U isotopes. Concentrations of dissolved Sr and U are low (4.3–128 ng g-1 Sr and 0.026–0.0008 ng g-1 U); consequently only 87Sr/86Sr data are reported for most samples. Values of 87Sr/86Sr for most geysers remained uniform between April and September 2007, but show large increases in all five geysers between late October 2007 and early April, 2008. By late summer of 2008, 87Sr/86Sr values returned to values similar to those observed a year earlier. Similar patterns are not present in major-ion data measured on the same samples. Furthermore, large geochemical differences documented between geysers are not observed in 87Sr/86Sr data, although smaller differences between sites may be present. Sr-isotope data are consistent with a stratified hydrologic system where water erupted in spring and summer of 2007 and summer of 2008 equilibrated with local intracaldera rhyolite flows at shallower depths. Water erupted between October 2007 and April 2008 includes greater amounts of groundwater that circulated deep enough to acquire a radiogenic 87Sr/86Sr, most likely from Archean basement rocks. Details of how the shallow and deep components interact and mechanisms causing these interactions remain unknown, but the data demonstrate the usefulness of obtaining Sr-isotope data from future sample campaigns. Geophysical methods that would be useful for characterization of the UGB subsurface properties and geothermal system include electromagnetic (EM), gravity, and ambient seismic. A suite of ground-based EM methods could be used in a synergistic combination together with airborne EM surveys to provide data for a range of spatial scales and resolutions. Existing thermal data for the shallow subsurface could be used to relate ground and airborne EM survey data to locations of geothermal fluids near the surface. Gravity surveys would be useful for mapping subsurface density anomalies and possibly monitoring changes in degree of saturation with groundwater. Ambient seismic surveys would be useful for estimating the thickness of unconsolidated deposits that contain the shallow groundwater system. A study that combines radiogenic isotope tracers with geophysical methods has the potential to better characterize the geothermal workings in the UGB. Insights gained could lead to a better understanding of the geothermal system and how Park infrastructure may cause perturbations. Measurements of radiogenic isotopes from multiple geysers and pools in localized areas within the UGB that are coupled with data from geophysical surveys would help refine conceptual models of mixing between deep- and shallow-derived subsurface fluids.

Wyoming↗

USGS2014

A framework for assessing water and proppant use and flowback water extraction associated with development of continuous petroleum resources

The U.S. Geological Survey is developing approaches for the quantitative assessment of water and proppant involved with possible future production of continuous petroleum deposits. The assessment approach is an extension of existing U.S. Geological Survey petroleum-assessment methods, and it aims to provide objective information that helps decision makers understand the tradeoffs inherent in resource-development decisions. This fact sheet provides an overview of U.S. Geological Survey assessments for quantities of water and proppant required for drilling and hydraulic fracturing and for flowback water extracted with petroleum; the report also presents the form of the intended assessment output information.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2014

Hydrogeologic framework of the uppermost principal aquifer systems in the Williston and Powder River structural basins, United States and Canada

The glacial, lower Tertiary, and Upper Cretaceous aquifer systems in the Williston and Powder River structural basins within the United States and Canada are the uppermost principal aquifer systems and most accessible sources of groundwater for these energy-producing basins. The glacial aquifer system covers the northeastern part of the Williston structural basin. The lower Tertiary and Upper Cretaceous aquifer systems are present in about 91,300 square miles (mi 2 ) of the Williston structural basin and about 25,500 mi 2 of the Powder River structural basin. Directly under these aquifer systems are 800 to more than 3,000 feet (ft) of relatively impermeable marine shale that serves as a basal confining unit. The aquifer systems in the Williston structural basin have a shallow (less than 2,900 ft deep), wide, and generally symmetrical bowl shape. The aquifer systems in the Powder River structural basin have a very deep (as much as 8,500 ft deep), narrow, and asymmetrical shape. The Williston structural basin has been an important oil and natural gas producing region since the 1950s, and production has increased substantially since the mid-2000s due to improved drilling and hydraulic fracturing methods from deep formations, such as the Bakken and Three Forks Formations. These improved methods require considerable volumes of freshwater mostly from shallow aquifers or surface water. Coal, lignite, and coal-bed natural gas are additional sources of energy in both basins that can affect the quality and quantity of shallow aquifers through strip mining and groundwater depletion. In 2011, the U.S. Geological Survey initiated a regional study of the glacial, lower Tertiary, and Upper Cretaceous aquifer systems in the Williston and Powder River structural basins with the goal to quantify groundwater availability. This report, together with a companion report of the conceptual flow model, provides an improved understanding of the groundwater flow systems and a basis for a numerical, regional groundwater-flow model. This study combines the lithostratigraphic units of the glacial, lower Tertiary, and Upper Cretaceous aquifer systems in the United States and Canada into 7 regional hydrogeologic units—glacial deposits, 4 bedrock aquifers, and 2 bedrock confining units—using general hydraulic properties. The glacial deposits are composed of till and glacial outwash sands and gravels with areas of cobbles and boulders. The four bedrock aquifers are the upper Fort Union, lower Fort Union, lower Hell Creek, and Fox Hills aquifers and are contained primarily in sandstone layers. The two confining units are the middle Fort Union hydrogeologic unit (shale) and upper Hell Creek hydrogeologic unit (contains less sandstone than the underlying lower Hell Creek aquifer). Water from hydrogeologic units in these three aquifer systems is relatively fresh and potable, whereas withdrawals seldom occur from units below the basal confining unit because of great depths (greater than 800 ft) and poor water quality. Analysis of about 300 electric (resistivity) and lithologic logs in the Williston structural basin and numerous existing publications for the Powder River structural basin were used to develop a three-dimensional hydrogeologic framework for both basins. Interpolated thicknesses of the glacial deposits, the lower Tertiary aquifer system, and the Upper Cretaceous aquifer system in the Williston structural basin are less than about 750; 2,250; and 1,050 ft, respectively. Interpolated thicknesses of the lower Tertiary aquifer system and the Upper Cretaceous aquifer system in the Powder River structural basin are less than about 7,180 and 5,070 ft, respectively. Interpolated horizontal hydraulic conductivity values for the Williston structural basin were as much as 25 feet per day (ft/d) in the glacial deposits and had smaller ranges in the lower Tertiary aquifer system (0.01–9.8 ft/d) and in the Upper Cretaceous aquifer system (0.06–5.5 ft/d). In the Powder River structural basin, the lower Tertiary aquifer system had a greater range of interpolated horizontal hydraulic conductivity values (0.10–11 ft/d) than the Upper Cretaceous aquifer system (0.02–5.7 ft/d). Transmissivity is greatest in the gravel zones of the glacial deposits (2,120 feet squared per day) and generally decreases with depth into the bedrock units. Regionally, water in the lower Tertiary and Upper Cretaceous aquifer systems flows in a northerly or northeasterly direction from the Powder River structural basin to the Williston structural basin. Groundwater flow in the Williston structural basin generally is easterly or northeasterly. Flow in the uppermost hydrogeologic units generally is more local and controlled by topography where unglaciated in the Williston structural basin than is flow in the glaciated part and in underlying aquifers. Groundwater flow in the Powder River structural basin generally is northerly with local variations greatest in the uppermost aquifers. Groundwater is confined, and flow is regional in the underlying aquifers.

Powder River Basin;Williston Basin↗

USGS2014

Conceptual model of the uppermost principal aquifer systems in the Williston and Powder River structural basins, United States and Canada

The three uppermost principal aquifer systems of the Northern Great Plains—the glacial, lower Tertiary, and Upper Cretaceous aquifer systems—are described in this report and provide water for irrigation, mining, public and domestic supply, livestock, and industrial uses. These aquifer systems primarily are present in two nationally important fossil-fuelproducing areas: the Williston and Powder River structural basins in the United States and Canada. The glacial aquifer system is contained within glacial deposits that overlie the lower Tertiary and Upper Cretaceous aquifer systems in the northeastern part of the Williston structural basin. Productive sand and gravel aquifers exist within this aquifer system. The Upper Cretaceous aquifer system is contained within bedrock lithostratigraphic units as deep as 2,850 and 8,500 feet below land surface in the Williston and Powder River structural basins, respectively. Petroleum extraction from much deeper formations, such as the Bakken Formation, is rapidly increasing because of recently improved hydraulic fracturing methods that require large volumes of relatively freshwater from shallow aquifers or surface water. Extraction of coalbed natural gas from within the lower Tertiary aquifer system requires removal of large volumes of groundwater to allow degasification. Recognizing the importance of understanding water resources in these energy-rich basins, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Groundwater Resources Program ( http://water.usgs.gov/ogw/gwrp/ ) began a groundwater study of the Williston and Powder River structural basins in 2011 to quantify this groundwater resource, the results of which are described in this report. The overall objective of this study was to characterize, quantify, and provide an improved conceptual understanding of the three uppermost and principal aquifer systems in energy-resource areas of the Northern Great Plains to assist in groundwater-resource management for multiple uses. The study area includes parts of Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming in the United States and Manitoba and Saskatchewan in Canada. The glacial aquifer system is contained within glacial drift consisting primarily of till, with smaller amounts of glacial outwash sand and gravel deposits. The lower Tertiary and Upper Cretaceous aquifer systems are contained within several formations of the Tertiary and Cretaceous geologic systems, which are hydraulically separated from underlying aquifers by a basal confining unit. The lower Tertiary and Upper Cretaceous aquifer systems each were divided into three hydrogeologic units that correspond to one or more lithostratigraphic units. The period prior to 1960 is defined as the predevelopment period when little groundwater was extracted. From 1960 through 1990, numerous flowing wells were installed near the Yellowstone, Little Missouri and Knife Rivers, resulting in local groundwater declines. Recently developed technologies for the extraction of petroleum resources, which largely have been applied in the study area since about 2005, require millions of gallons of water for construction of each well, with additional water needed for long-term operation; therefore, the potential for an increase in groundwater extraction is high. In this study, groundwater recharge and discharge components were estimated for the period 1981–2005. Groundwater recharge primarily occurs from infiltration of rainfall and snowmelt (precipitation recharge) and infiltration of streams into the ground (stream infiltration). Total estimated recharge to the Williston and Powder River control volumes is 4,560 and 1,500 cubic feet per second, respectively. Estimated precipitation recharge is 26 and 15 percent of total recharge for the Williston and Powder River control volumes, respectively. Estimated stream infiltration is 71 and 80 percent of total recharge for the Williston and Powder River control volumes, respectively. Groundwater discharge primarily is to streams and springs and is estimated to be about 97 and 92 percent of total discharge for the Williston and Powder River control volumes, respectively. Most of the remaining discharge results from pumped and flowing wells. Groundwater flow in the Williston structural basin generally is from the west and southwest toward the east, where discharge to streams occurs. Locally, in the uppermost hydrogeologic units, groundwater generally is unconfined and flows from topographically high to low areas, where discharge to streams occurs. Groundwater flow in the Powder River structural basin generally is toward the north, with local variations, particularly in the upper Fort Union aquifer, where flow is toward streams.

Manitoba;Montana;North Dakota;Saskatchewan;South D↗

USGS2014

Two approaches for incorporating climate change into natural resource management planning at Wind Cave National Park

Wind Cave National Park (WICA) protects one of the world’s longest caves, has large amounts of high quality, native vegetation, and hosts a genetically important bison herd. The park’s relatively small size and unique purpose within its landscape requires hands-on management of these and other natural resources, all of which are interconnected. Anthropogenic climate change presents an added challenge to WICA natural resource management because it is characterized by large uncertainties, many of which are beyond the control of park and National Park Service (NPS) staff. When uncertainty is high and control of this uncertainty low, scenario planning is an appropriate tool for determining future actions. In 2009, members of the NPS obtained formal training in the use of scenario planning in order to evaluate it as a tool for incorporating climate change into NPS natural resource management planning. WICA served as one of two case studies used in this training exercise. Although participants in the training exercise agreed that the scenario planning process showed promise for its intended purpose, they were concerned that the process lacked the scientific rigor necessary to defend the management implications derived from it in the face of public scrutiny. This report addresses this concern and others by (1) providing a thorough description of the process of the 2009 scenario planning exercise, as well as its results and management implications for WICA; (2) presenting the results of a follow-up, scientific study that quantitatively simulated responses of WICA’s hydrological and ecological systems to specific climate projections; (3) placing these climate projections and the general climate scenarios used in the scenario planning exercise in the broader context of available climate projections; and (4) comparing the natural resource management implications derived from the two approaches. Wind Cave National Park (WICA) protects one of the world’s longest caves, has large amounts of high quality, native vegetation, and hosts a genetically important bison herd. The park’s relatively small size and unique purpose within its landscape requires hands-on management of these and other natural resources, all of which are interconnected. Anthropogenic climate change presents an added challenge to WICA natural resource management because it is characterized by large uncertainties, many of which are beyond the control of park and National Park Service (NPS) staff. When uncertainty is high and control of this uncertainty low, scenario planning is an appropriate tool for determining future actions. In 2009, members of the NPS obtained formal training in the use of scenario planning in order to evaluate it as a tool for incorporating climate change into NPS natural resource management planning. WICA served as one of two case studies used in this training exercise. Although participants in the training exercise agreed that the scenario planning process showed promise for its intended purpose, they were concerned that the process lacked the scientific rigor necessary to defend the management implications derived from it in the face of public scrutiny. This report addresses this concern and others by (1) providing a thorough description of the process of the 2009 scenario planning exercise, as well as its results and management implications for WICA; (2) presenting the results of a follow-up, scientific study that quantitatively simulated responses of WICA’s hydrological and ecological systems to specific climate projections; (3) placing these climate projections and the general climate scenarios used in the scenario planning exercise in the broader context of available climate projections; and (4) comparing the natural resource management implications derived from the two approaches.

Report↗