Geology topics

Andrea E. Brookfield

Publications and source records attributed to Andrea E. Brookfield.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2024

Streamflow depletion caused by groundwater pumping: Fundamental research priorities for management-relevant science

Reductions in streamflow caused by groundwater pumping, known as “streamflow depletion,” link the hydrologic process of stream-aquifer interactions to human modifications of the water cycle. Isolating the impacts of groundwater pumping on streamflow is challenging because other climate and human activities concurrently impact streamflow, making it difficult to separate individual drivers of hydrologic change. In addition, there can be lags between when pumping occurs and when streamflow is affected. However, accurate quantification of streamflow depletion is critical to integrated groundwater and surface water management decision making. Here, we highlight research priorities to help advance fundamental hydrologic science and better serve the decision-making process. Key priorities include (a) linking streamflow depletion to decision-relevant outcomes such as ecosystem function and water users to align with partner needs; (b) enhancing partner trust and applicability of streamflow depletion methods through benchmarking and coupled model development; and (c) improving links between streamflow depletion quantification and decision-making processes. Catalyzing research efforts around the common goal of enhancing our streamflow depletion decision-support capabilities will require disciplinary advances within the water science community and a commitment to transdisciplinary collaboration with diverse water-connected disciplines, professions, governments, organizations, and communities.

Water Resource Research↗

USGS2023

Estimating groundwater pumping for irrigation: A method comparison

Effective groundwater management is critical to future environmental, ecological, and social sustainability and requires accurate estimates of groundwater withdrawals. Unfortunately, these estimates are not readily available in most areas due to physical, regulatory, and social challenges. Here, we compare four different approaches for estimating groundwater withdrawals for agricultural irrigation. We apply these methods in a groundwater-irrigated region in the state of Kansas, USA, where high-quality groundwater withdrawal data are available for evaluation. The four methods represent a broad spectrum of approaches: (1) the hydrologically-based Water Table Fluctuation method (WTFM); (2) the demand-based SALUS crop model; (3) estimates based on satellite-derived evapotranspiration (ET) data from OpenET; and (4) a landscape hydrology model which integrates hydrologic- and demand-based approaches. The applicability of each approach varies based on data availability, spatial and temporal resolution, and accuracy of predictions. In general, our results indicate that all approaches reasonably estimate groundwater withdrawals in our region, however, the type and amount of data required for accurate estimates and the computational requirements vary among approaches. For example, WTFM requires accurate groundwater levels, specific yield, and recharge data, whereas the SALUS crop model requires adequate information about crop type, land use, and weather. This variability highlights the difficulty in identifying what data, and how much, are necessary for a reasonable groundwater withdrawal estimate, and suggests that data availability should drive the choice of approach. Overall, our findings will help practitioners evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches and select the appropriate approach for their application.

Kansas↗

USGS2022

Quantifying streamflow depletion from groundwater pumping: A practical review of past and emerging approaches for water management

Groundwater pumping can cause reductions in streamflow (“streamflow depletion”) that must be quantified for conjunctive management of groundwater and surface water resources. However, streamflow depletion cannot be measured directly and is challenging to estimate because pumping impacts are masked by streamflow variability due to other factors. Here, we conduct a management-focused review of analytical, numerical, and statistical models for estimating streamflow depletion and highlight promising emerging approaches. Analytical models are easy to implement, but include many assumptions about the stream and aquifer. Numerical models are widely used for streamflow depletion assessment and can represent many processes affecting streamflow, but have high data, expertise, and computational needs. Statistical approaches are a historically underutilized tool due to difficulty in attributing causality, but emerging causal inference techniques merit future research and development. We propose that streamflow depletion-related management questions can be divided into three broad categories (attribution, impacts, and mitigation) that influence which methodology is most appropriate. We then develop decision criteria for method selection based on suitability for local conditions and the management goal, actionability with current or obtainable data and resources, transparency with respect to process and uncertainties, and reproducibility.

Journal of the American Water Resources Associatio↗

USGS2022

On the role of climate in monthly baseflow changes across the continental United States

Baseflow is the portion of streamflow that comes from groundwater and subsurface sources. Although baseflow is essential for sustaining streams during low flow and drought periods, we have little information about how and why it has changed over large regions of the continental United States. The objective of this study was to evaluate how changes in the climate system have affected observed monthly baseflow records at 3,283 USGS gauges over the last 30 years (1989–2019). We developed a statistical modeling framework to determine the relationship between monthly baseflow and monthly climate predictors (i.e., precipitation, temperature, and antecedent wetness). Overall, we found that baseflow trends and the factors influencing them vary by region and month. In the US Northeast, increases were detected earlier in the year (February and March) and in the summer (May and June), and were likely due to increasing precipitation, warmer temperature, and subsequent changes in snowmelt. Increasing baseflow in the US Pacific Northwest and Midwest were associated with increases in precipitation and antecedent wetness throughout the year. Decreasing trends were located in the US Southeast and Southwest. Baseflow trends in the US Southeast were only detected in March, possibly as a result of decreased precipitation during the spring. On the other hand, decreases in baseflow in the Central Southwestern United States occurred throughout the year. These trends were associated with a lack of precipitation and increases in temperature. Finally, we examined the relationship between monthly baseflow trends and changes in total water storage using monthly Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment mascon products from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. In this study, trends in total water storage were strongly associated with baseflow trends across the United States. The spatial and temporal variability in baseflow response to climate reported here can aid water managers in adapting to future climate change.

continental United States↗

USGS2016

Implications of projected climate change for groundwater recharge in the western United States

Existing studies on the impacts of climate change on groundwater recharge are either global or basin/location-specific. The global studies lack the specificity to inform decision making, while the local studies do little to clarify potential changes over large regions (major river basins, states, or groups of states), a scale often important in the development of water policy. An analysis of the potential impact of climate change on groundwater recharge across the western United States (west of 100° longitude) is presented synthesizing existing studies and applying current knowledge of recharge processes and amounts. Eight representative aquifers located across the region were evaluated. For each aquifer published recharge budget components were converted into four standard recharge mechanisms: diffuse, focused, irrigation, and mountain-systems recharge. Future changes in individual recharge mechanisms and total recharge were then estimated for each aquifer. Model-based studies of projected climate-change effects on recharge were available and utilized for half of the aquifers. For the remainder, forecasted changes in temperature and precipitation were logically propagated through each recharge mechanism producing qualitative estimates of direction of changes in recharge only (not magnitude). Several key patterns emerge from the analysis. First, the available estimates indicate average declines of 10–20% in total recharge across the southern aquifers, but with a wide range of uncertainty that includes no change. Second, the northern set of aquifers will likely incur little change to slight increases in total recharge. Third, mountain system recharge is expected to decline across much of the region due to decreased snowpack, with that impact lessening with higher elevation and latitude. Factors contributing the greatest uncertainty in the estimates include: (1) limited studies quantitatively coupling climate projections to recharge estimation methods using detailed, process-based numerical models; (2) a generally poor understanding of hydrologic flowpaths and processes in mountain systems; (3) difficulty predicting the response of focused recharge to potential changes in the frequency and intensity of extreme precipitation events; and (4) unconstrained feedbacks between climate, irrigation practices, and recharge in highly developed aquifer systems.

Journal of Hydrology↗