Rapid reconnaissance hydrogeologic modeling on public lands using analytic element solutions coupled with MODFLOW - application to the Eagle Creek watershed, New Mexico

There is frequently a need in land management agencies for a quick and easy method for estimating hydrogeologic conditions in a watershed for which there is very little subsurface information. Setting up a finite difference or finite element model takes valuable time that often is not available when decisions need to be made quickly. An analytic element model (AEM), GFLOW in this case, may enable the investigator to produce a preliminary steady-state model for a watershed, and to easily evaluate variants of the conceptual model. Use of preexisting data, such as stream gage data or USGS reports makes the job much easier. Solutions to analytic element models are obtained within seconds. The Eagle Creek watershed in central New Mexico is a site of local water supply issues in an area of volcanic and plutonic rocks. Parameters estimated by groundwater consultants and the USGS, and discharge data from three USGS stream gages were used to set up the steady-state analytical model (GFLOW). Matching gage records with line-sink fluxes facilitated conceptualization of local groundwater flow and quick analysis of the effects of steady water supply pumping on Eagle Creek. Because of steep topgraphy and limited access, a water supply well is located within the stream channel within 20 meters of the creek, and it would be useful to evaluate the effects of the well on stream flow. A USGS report (SIR 2010-5205) revealed a section of Eagle Creek with a high vertical conductivity which results in flow loss of up to 34 l/s (including flow to the water table and flow into alluvium) when the well was pumped and the water table was lowered below the channel bottom. The water supply well was simulated with a steady-state well pumping at the average and maximum rates of 12 l/s and 31 l/s. The initial simulation shows that pumping at these rates results in stream flow loss of 19% and 51%, respectively. The simulation was conducted with average flow conditions, and this information will be important in planning for management during periods of drought, as well as times of more normal precipitation; as water uses must be balanced with the needs of the existing ecosystem. Alternatives, such as low conductivity blocks between stream channels and different volumetric and geographic pumping scenarios may also be readily explored in an AEM. Exporting these scenarios into MODFLOW simulations will enable us to evaluate transient and cyclical pumping effects on the surface waters for each AEM conceptualization, as well as being able to simulate seasonal recharge. However, in many cases the use of MODFLOW may not be necessary, if the AEM proves sufficient to answer the relevant questions. Symbiotic use of GFLOW and MODFLOW will be an invaluable aid in evaluating groundwater and its uses in National Forest watersheds, especially in cases when time is a critical factor in informed decision-making.