Simulation of groundwater flow and streamflow depletion in the Branch Brook, Merriland River, and parts of the Mousam River watersheds in southern Maine

Martha G. Nielsen; Daniel B. Locke

doi:10.3133/sir20145235

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20145235

Simulation of groundwater flow and streamflow depletion in the Branch Brook, Merriland River, and parts of the Mousam River watersheds in southern Maine

Martha G. Nielsen·Daniel B. Locke

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Watersheds of three streams, the Mousam River, Branch Brook, and Merriland River in southeastern Maine were investigated from 2010 through 2013 under a cooperative project between the U.S. Geological Survey and the Maine Geological Survey. The Branch Brook watershed previously had been deemed “at risk” by the Maine Geological Survey because of the proportionally large water withdrawals compared to estimates of the in-stream flow requirements for habitat protection. The primary groundwater withdrawals in the study area include a water-supply well in the headwaters of the system and three water-supply wells in the coastal plain near the downstream end of the system. A steady-state groundwater flow model was used to understand the movement of water within the system, to evaluate the water budget and the effect of groundwater withdrawals on streamflows, and to understand streamflow depletion in relation to the State of Maine’s requirements to maintain in-stream flows for habitat protection. Delineation of the simulated groundwater divides compared to the surface-water divides suggests that the groundwater divides in the headwater areas do not exactly correspond to the surface-water divides. Under both pumping and non-pumping conditions, groundwater flows from the headwaters of the Branch Brook watershed into the Mousam River watershed. Pumping in the Mousam River watershed captures a small amount of groundwater from the Branch Brook basin. The cumulative effect of groundwater withdrawals on base flows in two rivers in the study area (Branch Brook and the Merriland River) was evaluated using the groundwater flow model. Streamflow depletion in the headwaters of Branch Brook was 0.12 cubic feet per second (ft 3 /s) for the steady-state simulation, or about 10 percent of the average base flow at that location. Downstream on Branch Brook, the total streamflow depletion from all the wells was 0.59 ft 3 /s, or 3 percent of the average base flow at that location. In the Merriland River downstream from the Merriland River well, the total amount of streamflow depletion was 0.6 ft 3 /s, or about 7 percent of the average base flow. The groundwater model was used to evaluate several different scenarios that could affect streamflow and groundwater discharging to the rivers and streams in the study area. The scenarios were (1) no pumping from the water-supply wells; (2) current pumping from the water-supply wells, but simulated drought conditions (25 percent reduction in recharge); (3) current recharge, but with increased pumping from the large water-supply wells; and (4) drought conditions and increased pumping combined. Simulations of increased pumping in the water-supply wells resulted in streamflow depletion in the headwaters of Branch Brook increasing to 16 percent of the headwater base flow. Simulated increases in the pumping in the coastal plain wells increased the amount of streamflow depletion to 6 percent of the flow in Branch Brook and to 8 percent of the flow in the Merriland River. The additional stress of a drought imposed on the model (25 percent less recharge) had a substantial impact on streamflows, as expected. If the simulated drought occurred simultaneously with an increase in pumping, the base flows would be reduced 48 percent in the headwaters of Branch Brook, compared to the no-pumping scenario. Downstream in Branch Brook, the total reduction in flow would be 29 percent of the simulated base flows in the no-pumping scenario, and in the Merriland River, the reduction would be 33 percent of the base flows in the no-pumping scenario. The study evaluated two different methods of calculating in-stream flow requirements for Branch Brook and the Merriland River—a set of statewide equations used to calculate monthly median flows and the MOVE.1 record-extension technique used on site-specific streamflow measurements. The August median in-stream flow requirement in the Merriland River was calculated as 7.18 ft 3 /s using the statewide equations but was 3.07 ft 3 /s using the MOVE.1 analysis. In Branch Brook, the August median in-stream flow requirements were calculated as 20.3 ft 3 /s using the statewide equations and 11.8 ft 3 /s using the MOVE.1 analysis. In each case, using site-specific data yields an estimate of in-stream flow that is much lower than an estimate the statewide equations provide.

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations Report Report

Source-reported bounding extent: 43.303944586803205° to 43.4576541092803° latitude; -70.7571029663086° to -70.49789428710938° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Martha G. Nielsen, Daniel B. Locke. 2015. Simulation of groundwater flow and streamflow depletion in the Branch Brook, Merriland River, and parts of the Mousam River watersheds in southern Maine. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20145235

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Evaluating the number of realizations (train-test splits) necessary to ensure robust estimates of conventional hydrothermal resource favorability using Monte Carlo cross-validation, the Great Basin, Western USA

Supervised machine learning approaches used to produce favorability maps in resource assessments commonly partition an input dataset into training and testing subsets (that is, through train-test splits). However, if a single split is not representative of underlying resource conditions, the resulting favorability map may be biased, particularly with sparse or heterogeneous datasets. To mitigate the potential for unrepresentative favorability maps, recent works by U.S. Geological Survey researchers have used Monte Carlo cross-validation to implement a large number ( n) of randomized train-test splits to produce n realizations. The realizations are then aggregated using cell-wise median predictions to produce the resulting final favorability map, recognizing that the median will remove extreme values that might have been estimated from a comparatively few unrepresentative realizations. Theoretically, the median prediction at every cell converges to a single estimate as n approaches infinity, and the question addressed herein is: How many realizations are necessary to get a robust estimate (that is, an estimate unaffected by additional realizations)? Therefore, convergence metrics are described to identify the number of train-test splits and realizations needed to make a reliable map using the data and supervised machine learning workflow for conventional hydrothermal resource assessment of the Great Basin of the Western United States. For this study, robust prediction occurs with n approximately equal to 600 realizations, and smaller ensembles (for example, n is approximately equal to 200 or even 100) may be suitable during preliminary or exploratory analyses. Although the resulting threshold numbers will vary depending on the data and modeling approach used, the convergence metrics proposed and applied herein are applicable to other supervised machine learning studies that use Monte Carlo cross-validation.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2026

Groundwater budget for the Portneuf River Basin, southeastern Idaho

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Idaho Department of Water Resources, developed the first groundwater budget for the upper Portneuf River Basin in southeastern Idaho, a tributary of the Snake River. A groundwater budget for the Portneuf River Basin supports water resource and administrative management decisions within the basin and for downstream users of the eastern Snake River Plain aquifer. The analysis quantifies inflows, outflows, and residuals for an aquifer system defined by the Idaho Department of Water Resources under three recent precipitation conditions: an average year (2016), a dry year (2021), and a wet year (2023). The budget was calculated for the basin and for two subbasins delineated by the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Portneuf River at Topaz, Idaho (13073000): the above Topaz subbasin, which includes the Portneuf-Gem valley, and the below Topaz subbasin, which includes Marsh Valley. Aquifer inflows include mountain-front recharge; areal recharge; recharge from applied water, including recharge from irrigation, canal seepage, and effluent returns; groundwater flow into the basin; and reservoir seepage. Outflows include groundwater pumping for agricultural, municipal, and domestic uses; subsurface outflow through the Portneuf gap; and discharge to streams as base flow. Estimated annual inflows for the full basin ranged from 116,880 acre-feet in 2021 to 154,880 acre-feet in 2023, and outflows ranged from 132,190 acre-feet in 2016 to 158,490 acre-feet in 2023. Basinwide residuals, the change in storage plus uncertainty, were −2,410 acre-feet in 2016, −18,410 acre-feet in 2021, and −3,610 acre-feet in 2023, and each subbasin had a mixture of negative and positive residuals. These basinwide results, interpreted as change in storage plus water-budget uncertainty, indicate minor net losses that increase with dry conditions, consistent with well depth-to-water measurements indicating gradual multi-decadal declines. Patterns in subbasin residuals are driven by irrigation practices and surface-water management; for example, the above Topaz subbasin relies more on groundwater for irrigation, resulting in more negative residuals during dry years. In contrast, the below Topaz subbasin depends more on surface water, producing positive residuals during dry years because of irrigation losses and canal seepage. The analyses for both subbasins indicate decades-long groundwater declines, which agree with the overall negative residuals calculated. The largest sources of uncertainty include climate inputs (precipitation and evapotranspiration) and poorly constrained components such as groundwater inflow and tributary stream infiltration. These findings provide insight into how climatic variables and irrigation practices affect groundwater inflows and outflows within the Portneuf River Basin.

Idaho↗

USGS2026

World minerals outlook—Antimony, copper, graphite, niobium, potash, silicon, silver, and tungsten through 2030

Demand for mineral commodities continues to increase owing to rapid technological advancements and global economic growth. To support this increase in demand, information about current and near-term supplies of these mineral commodities is essential. Such data help evaluate the health and stability of global supply chains and protect against potential supply risks. Current production and production capacity data coupled with information regarding near-term expected changes (such as facility closures, planned expansions, or the completion of new mineral production projects) can provide insight into expected future market developments and expected available supply of mineral commodities. This report within the “World Minerals Outlook” series analyzes data for antimony, copper, natural graphite, niobium, potash, silicon metal, silver, and tungsten—eight mineral commodities listed in the 2025 List of Critical Minerals. World production data from 2019 through 2025, as well as estimated world capacity data from 2023 through 2025 were analyzed. Using these data, near-term (2026–2030) expected world capacities were estimated. For antimony, copper, niobium, silicon metal, silver, and tungsten, modest increases in production capacity of 4 to 10 percent were expected between 2025 and 2030, whereas capacities for natural graphite and potash were expected to increase by about 18 to 20 percent.

Scientific Investigations Report↗