Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · sir20065154

Estimated water use and availability in the Pawtuxet and Quinebaug River basins, Rhode Island, 1995-99

Abstract

Water availability became a concern in Rhode Island during a drought in 1999, and an investigation was needed to assess demands on the hydrologic system from withdrawals during periods of little to no precipitation. The low water levels during the drought prompted the U.S. Geological Survey and the Rhode Island Water Resources Board to begin a series of studies on water use and availability in each drainage area in Rhode Island for 1995–99. The study area for this report, which includes the Pawtuxet River Basin in central Rhode Island (231.6 square miles) and the Quinebaug River Basin in western Rhode Island (60.97 square miles), was delineated as the surface-water drainage areas of these basins. During the study period from 1995 through 1999, two major water suppliers withdrew an average of 71.86 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) from the Pawtuxet River Basin; of this amount, about 35.98 Mgal/d of potable water were exported to other basins in Rhode Island. The estimated water withdrawals from minor water suppliers were 0.026 Mgal/d in the Pawtuxet River Basin and 0.003 Mgal/d in the Quinebaug River Basin. Total self-supply withdrawals were 2.173 Mgal/d in the Pawtuxet River Basin and 0.360 Mgal/d in the Quinebaug River Basin, which has no public water supply. Total water use averaged 18.07 Mgal/d in the Pawtuxet River Basin and 0.363 Mgal/d in the Quinebaug River Basin. Total return flow in the Pawtuxet River Basin was 30.64 Mgal/d, which included about 12.28 Mgal/d that were imported from other basins in Rhode Island. Total return flow was 0.283 Mgal/d in the Quinebaug River Basin. During times of little to no recharge in the form of precipitation, the surface- and ground-water flows are from storage primarily in the stratified sand and gravel deposits; water also flows through the till deposits, but at a slower rate. The ground water discharging to the streams during times of little to no recharge from precipitation is referred to as base flow. The PART program, a computerized hydrograph-separation application, was used to analyze the data collected at two selected index stream-gaging stations to determine water availability on the basis of the 75th, 50th, and 25th percentiles of the total base flow; the base flow for the 7-day, 10-year low-flow scenario; and the base flow for the Aquatic Base Flow scenario for both stations. The index stream-gaging stations used in the analysis were the Branch River at Forestdale, Rhode Island (period of record 1957–1999) and the Nooseneck River at Nooseneck, Rhode Island (period of record 1964–1980). A regression equation was used to estimate unknown base-flow contributions from sand and gravel deposits at the two stations. The base-flow contributions from sand and gravel deposits and till deposits at the index stations were computed for June, July, August, and September within the periods of record, and divided by the area of each type of surficial deposit at each index station. These months were selected because they define a period when there is usually an increased demand for water and little to no precipitation. The base flows at the stream-gaging station Branch River at Forestdale, Rhode Island were lowest in August at the 75th, 50th, and 25th percentiles (29.67, 21.48, and 13.30 Mgal/d, respectively). The base flows at the stream-gaging station Nooseneck River at Nooseneck, Rhode Island were lowest in September at the 75th percentile (3.551 Mgal/d) and lowest in August at the 50th and 25th percentiles (2.554 and 1.811 Mgal/d). The base flows per unit area for the index stations were multiplied by the areas of sand and gravel and till in the studyarea subbasins to determine the amount of available water for each scenario. The water availability in the Pawtuxet River Basin at the 50th percentile ranged from 126.5 Mgal/d in August to 204.7 Mgal/d in June, and the total gross water availability for the 7-day, 10-year low-flow scenario at the 50th percentile ranged from 112.2 Mgal/d in August to 190.4 Mgal/d in June. The Scituate Reservoir safe yield was 83 Mgal/d in all scenarios. Water availability in the Quinebaug River Basin ranged from 13.94 Mgal/d in August to 30.53 Mgal/d in June at the 50th percentile. The total gross water availability for the 7-day, 10-year low-flow scenario at the 50th percentile ranged from 14.26 Mgal/d in August to 42.69 Mgal/d in June. Because water withdrawals and use are greater during the summer than other times of the year, water availability in June, July, August, and September was compared to water withdrawals in the basin and subbasins. The ratios of water withdrawn to water available were calculated for the 75th, 50th, and 25th percentiles for the subbasins; the closer the ratio is to 1, the closer the withdrawals are to the estimated water available, and the less net water is available. Withdrawals in July were higher than in the other summer months in both basins. In the Pawtuxet River Basin, the ratios were close to 1 in July for the estimated gross yield (from sand and gravel and from till and from the Scituate Reservoir safe yield), 7-day, 10-year low-flow scenario, and Aquatic Base Flow scenario at the 75th percentile and in August for all three scenarios at the 50th and 25th percentiles. In the Quinebaug River Basin, the ratios were close to 1 in August for the estimated gross yield; 7-day, 10-year low-flow scenario; and Aquatic Base Flow scenario. A long-term water budget was calculated for 1941 through 1999 to identify and assess the basin and subbasin inflow and outflows for the Pawtuxet and Quinebaug River Basins. The water withdrawals and return flows used in the budget were from 1995 through 1999. Inflow was assumed to be equal to outflow; total inflows and outflows were 574.9 Mgal/d in the Pawtuxet River Basin and 148.4 Mgal/d in the Quinebaug River Basin. Precipitation and return flow were 95 and 5 percent of the estimated inflows to the Pawtuxet River Basin, respectively. Precipitation was 100 percent of the estimated inflow to the Quinebaug River Basin; return flow was less than 1 percent of the inflow. Evapotranspiration, streamflow, and water withdrawals were 46, 41, and 13 percent, respectively, of the estimated outflows in the Pawtuxet River Basin. Evapotranspiration and streamflow were 49 and 51 percent, respectively, of the estimated outflows in the Quinebaug River Basin. Water withdrawals were less than 1 percent of outflows in the Quinebaug River Basin.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 41.60312076451184° to 42.00950942549379° latitude; -71.79977416992188° to -71.39877319335938° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Emily C. Wild, Mark T. Nimiroski. 2007. Estimated water use and availability in the Pawtuxet and Quinebaug River basins, Rhode Island, 1995-99. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20065154

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↗