May Calibration Run - Idaho Department of Water Resources · May Calibration Run Presented by Allan Wylie, IDWR May 24, 2017. Preliminary. ... 7007 4970 4965 4960 4955 4950 4945 4940

May Calibration Run

Presented by Allan Wylie, IDWR

May 24, 2017

Preliminary

Important Changes

• Simulation period is Jan 1995 through Jan 2015

– Calibration period Jan 1998 through Jan 2015

• Only retaining observation wells with two or more

measurements– Want to lower transient predictive uncertainty

– Probably will have to relax this criteria

• Stage at Glendale Rd set at constant elevation

• Stage at Wood River Ranch set at constant elevation

• Include seepage run data on the dates of the survey

• Include gains between Heart Rock Ranch and

Stanton Crossing when it can be quantified

Observation Wells

– Wells with more than

one water level

observation within the

simulation period• 127 wells

Mean Residual (ft}

• <-30 .00

• -30 - -10 o -10 -10

• 10 - 30

.t. >30

• Wood River Cells Spring Cells

D Model Boundary

Observation Wells

– Wells with more than one

water level observation

– If fit was perfect

• Intercept = 0

• Slope = 1

• R2 = 1

• All points on the red line

¢::

-0 .!!:! QJ

-0 0 ~

Observation Wells

6500

6300

6100

5900

5700

5500

5300

5100

4900

4700

4500

y = 0.9882x + 58.509 R2 = 0.9945

4500 4700 4900 5100 5300 5500 5700 5900 6100 6300 6500

Measured {ft)

Observation Wells

– Wells with more than one

water level observation

within the simulation period

Mean Residual (ft}

• <-30 .00

• -30 - -10 o -10 -10

• 10 - 30

.t. >30

• Wood River Cells

4945

4940

4935

.. 4930 ~

:! 4925

4920

4915

4910

9

Jan-95 Dec-97 Dec-00 Jan-04 Jan-07 Dec-09 Dec-12 Jan-16

-+- Measured - Modelled --Modeled Warmup

Observation Wells

– Wells with more than one

water level observation

within the simulation period

Mea n Resi dual (ft}

• <-30 .00

• -30 - -10 o -10 - 10

• 10 - 30

.t. >30

• Wood River Cells Spring Cells

D Model Boundary ... QI QI ....

22 4785

4780

4775

4770

4765

4760

4755

Jan-95 Sep-97 Jun-00 Mar-03 Dec-OS Sep-08 Jun-11 Mar-14 Nov-16

-•- Measured - Modell ed --Modeled Warmup

Observation Wells

– Wells with more than one

water level observation

within the simulation period

Mea n Resi dual (ft}

• <-30 .00

• -30 - -10 o -10 - 10

• 10 - 30

.. ~ ~ ~

4 5000

4990

4980

4970

4960

4950

4940

Jan-95 Sep-97 Jun-00 Mar-03 Dec-OS Sep-08 Jun-11 Mar-14 Nov-16

-•- Measured - Modelled --Modeled Warmup

Observation Wells

– Wells with more than one

water level observation

within the simulation period

o -10 -10

• 10 - 30

.t. >30

• Wood River Cells Spring Cells

D Model Boundary

27 5555

5550

.. J 5545

5540

5535 Jan-95 Dec-97 Dec-00 Jan-04 Jan-07 Dec-09 Dec-12 Jan-16

-+- Measured - Modelled --Modeled Warmup

Observation Wells

– Wells with more than one

water level observation

within the simulation period

o -10 -10

• 10 - 30

.t. >30

• Wood River Cells Spring Cells

D Model Boundary .. Ill Ill ~

6002 5710

5708

5706

5704

5702

5700

5698

5696

5694

5692

Jan-95 Sep-97 Jun-00 Mar-03 Dec-OS Sep-08 Jun-11 Mar-14 Nov-16

-+- Measured - Modell ed --Modeled Warmup

Observation Wells

– Wells with more than one

water level observation

within the simulation period

Mean Residual (ft}

• <-30 .00

• -30 - -10 o -10 -10

• 10 - 30

.t. >30

• Wood River Cells Spring Cells

D Model Boundary

... QI QI ....

7009 4926

4924

4922

4920

4918

4916

4914

Jan-9S Sep-97 Jun-00 Mar-03 Dec-OS Sep-08 Jun-11 Mar-14 Nov-16

-•- Measured - Modelled - Modeled Warmup

Jan-95 Sep-97 Jun-00 Mar-03 Dec-OS Sep-08 Jun-11 Mar-14 Nov-16

- •- Measured - Modelled --Measured Warmup

Observation Wells

– Wells with more than one

water level observation

within the simulation period

Mea n Resi dual (ft}

• <-30 .00

• -30 - -10 o -10 -10

• 10 - 30

.t. >30

• Wood River Cells Spring Cells

D Model Boundary .. ~ ~ ....

7007 4970

4965

4960

4955

4950

4945

4940

Jan-95 Sep-97 Jun-00 Mar-03 Dec-OS Sep-08 Jun-11 Mar-14 Nov-16

-+- Measured - Modelled - Modeled Warmup

River Gains and Losses

• Transient Gains

– Nr Ketchum – Hailey

– Hailey – Stanton

Crossing

– Willow Creek

– Silver Cr Abv

Sportsman Access

– Silver Cr Blw

Sportsman Access

11'1 .... u

Nr Ketchum-Hailey

40

0 -+--------+--------+--------+-------t--------+-----+------------l

Jan-95 Dec-97 Dec-00 Jan-04 Jan-07 Dec-09 Dec-12 Jan-16

-•- Measured --Modelled --Modeled Warmup

River Gains and Losses

• Transient Gains

– Nr Ketchum – Hailey

– Hailey – Stanton

Crossing

– Willow Creek

– Silver Cr Abv

Sportsman Access

– Silver Cr Blw

Sportsman Access

800

600

400

Ill 200 ....

u

0

-200

-400

Jan-95 Dec-97

Hailey-Stanton Crossing

Dec-00

-•- Measured

Jan-04

--Modell ed

Jan-07 Dec-09

--Modeled Warmup

Dec-12 Jan-16

River Gains and Losses

• Transient Gains

– Nr Ketchum – Hailey

– Hailey – Stanton

Crossing

– Willow Creek

– Silver Cr Abv

Sportsman Access

– Silver Cr Blw

Sportsman Access

70

60

50

11'1 40 -IJ

30

20

10

0

Jan-95 Dec-97 Dec-00

-•- Measured

Willow Cr

Jan-07 Dec-09 Jan-04

--Modell ed --Modeled Warmup

•

Dec-12 Jan-16

River Gains and Losses

• Transient Gains

– Nr Ketchum – Hailey

– Hailey – Stanton

Crossing

– Willow Creek

– Silver Cr Abv

Sportsman Access

– Silver Cr Blw

Sportsman Access

300

250

200

11'1 150 -IJ

100

50

0

Jan-95 Dec-97

Silver Cr Above Sportsman

Dec-00

-•- Measured

Jan-04

--Modell ed

Jan-07 Dec-09

--Modeled Warmup

Dec-12 Jan-16

River Gains and Losses

• Transient Gains

– Nr Ketchum – Hailey

– Hailey – Stanton

Crossing

– Willow Creek

– Silver Cr Abv

Sportsman Access

– Silver Cr Blw

Sportsman Access

Ill .... u

Silver Cr Below Sportsman s ~----~-----~----~-----~----~-----~----~

3 --+-----------+---------+---------+-------+---------+-------+-------------<

1 --+---------+------+---------+-------+--------+-------+------------<

~ - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ --1 -+-------+------+-------+------+--------+------+------------i

-3 --+-----------+---------+---------+-------+--------+-------+------------<

-5 -+-------+------+-------+------+--------+------+------------i

Jan-95 Dec-97 Dec-00 Jan-04 Jan-07 Dec-09 Dec-12 Jan-16

-t-Measured -Modelled - Modeled Warmup

River Gains and Losses

• Heart Rock Ranch –

Stanton CrossingLegend

• USGS gages

SpringCells

• Silver Cr Abv

• Willow Creek

WoodRiverCells

N

A

80

70

60

50

~ 40 u

-0 ~ 30 Q)

-0 0 2 20

10

0

-10

-20

Heart Rock R to Stanton X y = 0.5237x - 3.8201 R2 = 0.6428

: ....... .. . • • • • • •

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75

Observed cfs

Seepage Runs

• August 2012

• October 2012

• March 2013

Legend

• USGS gages Wood River

• nrKet-H ul • Hui-Ket • Ket-G im

• Gim-Hai

• Hai-nBr • nBr-sBr

• sBr-G le

• Gle-Slu • s 1u-WRR - WRR-StC

Springs Willow er Buhler Orn

Patton Cr Cain Cr

Chaney Cr Mud Cr

• wnsoncr Cove Cr Loving Cr

Silver Abv

Silver Blw

N

A

100

80

60

40

20 J!! u "'Cl 0 a., a.,

"'Cl -20 0 2

-40

-60

-80

-100

-120 -40

August Seepage Run

-20

• Silver Cr

0 20

Measured cfs

•

X Wood River - 45 line

40 60

100

80

60

~ 40

u "'C QJ

20 QJ "'C 0 2:

0

-20

-40

-60

-40

IMarch Seepage Run

-20

• Silver C

0

Measured cfs

20

X Wood River - 45 line

•

40

100

80

60

40

~ u 20 "'C Q)

Q)

"'C 0 0 2:

-20

-40

-60

-80 -60

October Seepage IRun

-40 -20

• Silver Cr

0

Measured cfs

20

•

X Wood River - 45 line

40 60

Subsurface Discharge From Model

• Stanton Crossing

– Estimated ~ Negligible –

300 ac-f/yr

• 0 - 0.41 cfs

• Modeled = 0.03 cfs

– 24 ac-f/yr

• Picabo underflow

– Estimated ~ 4,000 – 53,000

ac-f/yr

• 5.5 – 73 cfs

• Modeled = 6.4 cfs

– 4600 ac-f/yr

Location Modeled cfs

Stanton C 0.03 0 0.41

Picabo 6.38 5.5 73

Range cfs

End