Evaluating Irrigation Efficiency: Toward a Sustainable Water Future for Montana

Lonsdale, Whitney R.; Cross, Wyatt F.; Dalby, Charles E.; Meloy, Sara E.; Schwend, Ann C.

doi:10.15788/mwc202011

Cited by 8 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Increased irrigation efficiency and its negative effects on recharge have also been widely documented in the GYA's river valleys (venn et al 2004;Kendy and Bredehoeft 2006;Lonsdale et al 2020). Thus, these aquifers are susceptible to the effects of climate change through loss of natural recharge, as well as through the same feedback mechanism observed on the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer.…”

Section: Groundwater and Climate Change In Idahomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Careful irrigation practices provide an opportunity to recharge groundwater to buffer climate-driven impacts in the future. A water management strategy called managed aquifer recharge (intentional introduction of water into aquifers through injection wells or seepage ponds) allows aquifers to serve as large natural reservoirs, increasing the resilience of both surface water and groundwater supplies to climate change (Lonsdale et al 2020). Important fish and wildlife habitat in GYA's valley areas can be maintained and enhanced in a warming climate with carefully planned managed aquifer recharge (Kendy and Bredehoeft 2006;van Kirk et al 2020).…”

Section: Groundwater and Climate Change In Idahomentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Greater Yellowstone climate assessment: past, present, and future climate change in greater Yellowstone watersheds

Hostetler¹,

Whitlock²,

Shuman³

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Greater Yellowstone Area (GYA) is one of the last remaining large and nearly intact temperate ecosystems on Earth (Reese 1984; NPSa undated). GYA was originally defined in the 1970s as the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, which encompassed the minimum range of the grizzly bear (Schullery 1992). The boundary was enlarged through time and now includes about 22 million acres (8.9 million ha) in northwestern Wyoming, south central Montana, and eastern Idaho. Two national parks, five national forests, three wildlife refuges, 20 counties, and state and private lands lie within the GYA boundary. GYA also includes the Wind River Indian Reservation, but the region is the historical home to several Tribal Nations. Federal lands managed by the US Forest Service, the National Park Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service amount to about 64% (15.5 million acres [6.27 million ha] or 24,200 square miles [62,700 km2]) of the land within the GYA. The federal lands and their associated wildlife, geologic wonders, and recreational opportunities are considered the GYA’s most valuable economic asset. GYA, and especially the national parks, have long been a place for important scientific discoveries, an inspiration for creativity, and an important national and international stage for fundamental discussions about the interactions of humans and nature (e.g., Keiter and Boyce 1991; Pritchard 1999; Schullery 2004; Quammen 2016). Yellowstone National Park, established in 1872 as the world’s first national park, is the heart of the GYA. Grand Teton National Park, created in 1929 and expanded to its present size in 1950, is located south of Yellowstone National Park1 and is dominated by the rugged Teton Range rising from the valley of Jackson Hole. The Gallatin-Custer, Shoshone, Bridger-Teton, Caribou-Targhee, and Beaverhead-Deerlodge national forests encircle the two national parks and include the highest mountain ranges in the region. The National Elk Refuge, Red Rock Lakes National Wildlife Refuge, and Grays Lake National Wildlife Refuge also lie within GYA.

show abstract

Section: Groundwater and Climate Change In Idahomentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Groundwater and Climate Change In Idahomentioning

confidence: 99%

Greater Yellowstone climate assessment: past, present, and future climate change in greater Yellowstone watersheds

Hostetler¹,

Whitlock²,

Shuman³

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Throughout this paper return flow is used to describe the additional groundwater discharge to a stream resulting from irrigation. The additional groundwater baseflow provided by return flows can be an important component of the seasonal water balance of irrigated alluvial aquifers and provide an additional source of flow during critical low-discharge periods (Venn et al, 2004;Kendy and Bredehoeft, 2006;Fernald et al, 2010;Lonsdale et al, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, in the Colorado subbasin where flood irrigation is the primary method of irrigation, mean annual return flows are estimated to be on the order of hundreds of thousands of acre feet per year (∼0.1-1 km 3 ) (Colorado Department of Water Resources, 2016). Another example is provided by a recent study by Lonsdale et al (2020) in Montana where flood irrigation is also common. They found that of the 10.5 million-acre feet (12.95 km 3 ) that are on average diverted annually for irrigation, almost 8 million acre-feet (9.86 km 3 ) are not consumed and likely contribute to groundwater recharge.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Essaid and Caldwell (2017) found that return flows comprised 60-70% of late summer streamflow in the Smith River in Montana, US and Crosa et al (2006) estimated that return flows accounted for up to 80% of flow in the Amu Darya River in Asia. Additional recharge from stream irrigation can significantly alter the water balance of aquifers (Lonsdale et al, 2020), resulting in long-term increases in groundwater elevation (Scanlon et al, 2005(Scanlon et al, , 2007Gates et al, 2012) and groundwater discharge to streams (Knight et al, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Physical Controls on Irrigation Return Flow Contributions to Stream Flow in Irrigated Alluvial Valleys

Ferencz

Tidwell

2022

Front. Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Irrigation can be a significant source of groundwater recharge in many agricultural regions, particularly in arid and semi-arid climates. Once infiltrated, irrigation recharge can travel via subsurface flowpaths that return to the river system in a lagged manner, supplementing natural streamflow weeks, months, or even years from when the irrigation was applied. In regions that experience low flows during summer and early fall, return flows can be a significant source of supplementary streamflow. Many water planning and operations models either ignore return flows or roughly approximate them with analytical solutions. Thus, return flows represent an important but often overlooked component of the hydrological exchange and overall water balance in agricultural regions. This study uses groundwater models to explore a wide range of factors that control irrigation return flow timing in irrigated alluvial valleys. A sensitivity analysis approach is used to assess how factors such as the extent of irrigated land adjacent to a stream, irrigation recharge rate, aquifer hydraulic conductivity, aquifer thickness, water table configuration, and seasonal fluctuations in stream stage control the timing of subsurface return flows. Modeling is conducted using MODFLOW models representing an irrigated alluvial valley adjacent to a stream. While a simplification of the full complexity in real systems, the models are a significant advancement from the analytical solution and provide new insight into the timescales of return flows over a broad range of possible conditions. To contextualize our modeling results, they are compared to an analytical solution commonly used for approximating return flows to evaluate its performance. Our findings show what factors and conditions influence return flow timing and control whether they contribute to streamflow over short term (months) or longer term (seasonal) time scales.

show abstract

Can Agricultural Managed Aquifer Recharge (Ag‐MAR) Recover Return Flows Under Prior Appropriation in a Warming Climate?

Morrisett,

Van Kirk,

Null

2024

Water Resources Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Groundwater return flow to streams is important for maintaining aquatic habitat and providing water to downstream users, particularly in irrigated watersheds experiencing water scarcity. However, in many agricultural regions, increased irrigation efficiency has reduced return flows and their subsequent in‐stream benefits. Agricultural managed aquifer recharge (Ag‐MAR)—where artificial recharge is conducted via irrigation canals and agricultural fields—may be a tool to recover these return flows, but implementation is challenged by water supply and water management. Using climate‐driven streamflow simulations, an integrated operations‐hydrology model, and a regional groundwater model, we investigated the potential for Ag‐MAR to recover return flows in the Henrys Fork Snake River, Idaho (USA). We simulated potential Ag‐MAR operations for water years 2023–2052, accounting for both future water supply conditions and local water management rules. We determined that Ag‐MAR operations reduced springtime peak flow at the watershed outlet by 10%–14% after accounting for return flows. Recharge contribution to streamflow peaked in July and November, increasing July–August streamflow by 6%–14% and November–March streamflow by 9%–14%. Furthermore, sites where Ag‐MAR was conducted incidental to flood irrigation had more water available for recharge, compared to sites requiring recharge rights, which are junior in priority to agricultural rights. Mean annual recharge volume for the incidental recharge sites averaged 12% of annual natural streamflow, ranged from 269 to 335 Mm3, and was largely available in April and October. We demonstrate Ag‐MAR can effectively recover groundwater return flows when applied as flood irrigation on agricultural land with senior‐priority water rights.

show abstract

Evaluating Irrigation Efficiency: Toward a Sustainable Water Future for Montana

Cited by 8 publications

References 23 publications

Greater Yellowstone climate assessment: past, present, and future climate change in greater Yellowstone watersheds

Greater Yellowstone climate assessment: past, present, and future climate change in greater Yellowstone watersheds

Physical Controls on Irrigation Return Flow Contributions to Stream Flow in Irrigated Alluvial Valleys

Can Agricultural Managed Aquifer Recharge (Ag‐MAR) Recover Return Flows Under Prior Appropriation in a Warming Climate?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About