1. Integrated use of numerical models to support water resources decision making in Michigan
Thankful to Great Lakes Protection Fund who provided us the opportunity, environment and funding to carry out this research

2. Michigan’s Water Use Bill
February 28, 2006
Gov. Granholm, joined by PIRGIM (U.S. PIRG's Michigan chapter) and other members of Michigan’s environmental community, signed a landmark package of water-use bills, bringing long overdue protections to Michigan’s waters
On February 28, 2006, Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm signed a landmark package of water-use bills. Some of the significant protections it includes are:

3. Some water protection clauses from the Final Bill
An immediate prohibition against new large-scale water withdrawals that cause adverse resource impacts to trout streams. …
A permit requirement for new large-scale water withdrawals
… a requirement that the projects include plans to remedy any measurable impacts
On February 28, 2006, Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm signed a landmark package of water-use bills. Some of the significant protections it includes are:
Explain the highlighted phrases and link to ‘integrated work’

4. Policy Framework How landuse is modified by a project?
What are the landuse impacts on surface hydrology?
How surface hydrology and groundwater extraction impacts the subsurface hydrology?
What changes will take place in a groundwater dependent ecosystem due to modified subsurface hydrology?
What will be the impact of these changes on characteristic trout population?
How much impact on trout is acceptable?
adverse resource
impacts on
trout streams
How a proposed
project will affect
the ecology of a
trout stream?
Analyze
permit
requirements
Policy
Framework
Integrated
Science
Questions
Integrated
Modeling
Approach
Adverse impacts on trout streams can be QUANTIFED and remedial plans can be EVALUATED by answering a suite of integrated science questions. The anwers to the questions, blended with Policy Framework to resolve the permit requirements.
How a remedy
plan will mitigate
the impacts of
a proposed project
on the ecology of
a trout stream?
Evaluate
plans to remedy
any measurable
impacts

5. AIM
To develop an assessment tool, based on integrated models, that can be used to facilitate water resource related decision making in Michigan

6. Current Project Approvals
Hydrograph
With remediation
Without remediation
Natural
Project approvals in Michigan take care of:
Water Volumes (flood peaks, min/max flow rates etc)
Water Quality (suspended and dissolved materials)
What’s not currently incorporated in the process:
Water temperature – VITAL for SURVIVAL of TROUT

7. Frame work of our Problem
Policy
Decision
Project:
Land-use Change
H2O Extraction
Δ (Characteristic
Fish Population)
Integrated
Models

8. (3D, GIS-enabled Numerical model) (Lumped Parameter Model)
SOIL AND WATER
ANALYSIS TOOL
(Analytical model)
INTERACTIVE
GROUNDWATER
(3D, GIS-enabled Numerical model)
STREAM
TEMPERATURE
MODEL
(Lumped Parameter Model)
AQUATIC
ECOLOGY
MODEL
(Statistical Model)
IGW
SWAT
STEM
AEM

9. IGW SWAT STEM AEM GW Project Extraction Design GWIM Rates Data
Land-use
Change
IGW
Recharge
Rates
Soil
Data
SWAT
Δ (Baseflow)
GW & stream
Temperature
Data
STEM
Δ (Characteristic
Fish Population)
Δ (Stream
Temperature)
AEM

10. Part II CASE STUDY

11. Basis for case study
Trout population as proxy for environmental health
Trout survival – as a function of stream water temperature

12. Conceptual Setting 10˚C ~ 11˚C Graphics: Hassan Abbas
Photo Source:
Graphics: Hassan Abbas
10˚C ~ 11˚C

13. Q Q
Graphics: Hassan Abbas

14. Baseflow Change

15. STEM – Using Energy Balance
External Energy EN
Upstream
Energy
MOKO
Downstream
Energy
MFKF
Energy in Stream Arc
GW Energy
MGKG

16. Temperature Change
∆(Temperature) °C

17. Locating Sensitive Areas
Assessing a 700gpm Well for all locations in the study area
Well
Location
∆ (b-flow)
cfs
∆ (Temp) °C
Loc 1
-0.112
+0.18
Loc 2
-0.131
+0.21
Loc 3
-0.129
+0.20
Loc 4
-0.149
+0.23
Loc 5
-0.430
+0.77 . . .
Loc n
-0.458
+0.82

18. Sensitivity Maps for 700gpm Well placed at different locations
Baseflow Response
Temperature Response

19. Assessing Landuse Options
∆ (Temp) °C
Corn to brome grass
-0.28
Rangeland to forest
-0.31
Forest to pasture
-1.01
Pasture to alfalfa
-0.43
Etc.
-0.17 . .
Etc.
-0.02

20. Locating Sensitive Areas
Assessing a 700gpm Well for all locations in the study area
Well
Location
∆ (b-flow)
cfs
∆ (Temp) °C
Loc 1
-0.112
+0.18
Loc 2
-0.131
+0.21
Loc 3
-0.129
+0.20
Loc 4
-0.149
+0.23
Loc 5
-0.430
+0.77 . . .
Loc n
-0.458
+0.82

21. Table: Evaluating Management Options
Wells
Land-use
Change
Loc 1
Loc 2 …
Loc n
+3°C
+2°C
+1°C
Forest to pasture
-2°C +1 -1
Pasture to alfalfa
-1°C +2
Corn to Bromegrass
-3°C -2

25. Part IV Summary & Conclusions

26. Summary & Conclusions
In this preliminary work - with relevance to policy – dealing with the integrated science questions, we provide:
an analysis tool
a sensitivity map
reference table
Integration of hydrology, hydrogeology and ecology in policy/management framework –highlights the need for:
Data requirements for developing integrated models (e.g. stream temperature)
Data requirements for validation of integrated modeling results

27. …. summary/conclusions
Potential for statewide implications:
IGW – GIS enabled, can directly link with state wide GWIM and Wellogic databases
SWAT – statewide mode, also uses GWIM
AEM – Statistical model based on statewide data on trout streams
Deterministic frame work at present. Possible improvement when uncertainty is also evaluated

28. Thanks! abbashas@msu.edu