Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-ph5wq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-29T10:40:05.637Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - Groundwater and surface water connectivity

from Part I - Understanding ‘water’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2011

Rory Nathan
Affiliation:
Sinclair Knight Merz
Richard Evans
Affiliation:
Sinclair Knight Merz
R. Quentin Grafton
Affiliation:
Australian National University, Canberra
Karen Hussey
Affiliation:
Australian National University, Canberra
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Surface water and groundwater are often treated as separate entities. However, almost all surface water is in continuous interaction with groundwater. In a few isolated cases there is virtually no interaction between the two, but in the majority of cases there is substantial interaction, albeit highly variable, temporally and spatially. Often surface water streams gain water from groundwater systems, and as a result extractions from groundwater will reduce streamflows. Sometimes the reverse is true, and groundwater is replenished by leakage from the streamflow channels (and/or from inundated floodplains); in these cases it is the withdrawal of water from streams reduces the recharge to groundwater.

The interaction between surface water and groundwater is hidden from view, and historically we have tended to manage the two resources separately. As a result we have often double-accounted and even double-allocated the same resource – once as surface water and a second time as groundwater – even though physically we are dealing with the same parcel of water.

We have often not recognised this interaction because groundwater moves very slowly beneath the surface. The time taken for groundwater extractions to influence streamflows may range from days to many decades. Thus, the interaction we become aware of today might be the legacy of actions taken many years earlier.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, M. B., Bathurst, J. C., Cunge, J. A., O'Connell, P. E. and Rasmussen, J. (1986a). An introduction to the European Hydrologic System–Systeme Hydrologique Europeen, SHE, 1: History and philosophy of a physically based, distributed modeling system. Journal of Hydrology, 87, 45–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abbott, M. B., Bathurst, J. C., Cunge, J. A., O'Connell, P. E. and Rasmussen, J. (1986b). An introduction to the European hydrologic system–Systeme Hydrologique Europeen, SHE, 2: Structure of a physically-based, distributed modeling system. Journal of Hydrology, 87, 61–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alley, W. M. and Leake, S. A. (2004). The journey from safe yield to sustainability. Ground Water, 42(1), 12–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bakker, M. and Anderson, E. I. (2003). Steady flow to a well near a stream with a Leaky Bed. Ground Water, 41(6), 833–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergstrom, S. (1995). The HBV model. Chapter 13 in Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology, ed. Singh, V. P.. Littleton, Colo: Water Resources Publications.Google Scholar
Beven, K. J. (2002). Uncertainty and the detection of structural change in models of environmental systems. In Environmental Foresight and Models: A Manifesto, ed. Beck, M. B.. Amsterdam, London, New York: Elsevier Science, pp. 227–50.Google Scholar
Beven, K. J. and Kirkby, M. J. (1979). A physically-based variable contributing area model of basin hydrology. Hydrological Sciences Bulletin, 24(1), 43–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beverly, C. R., Nathan, R. J., Malafant, K. W. and Fordham, D. (1998). Development of a simplified unsaturated module for providing recharge estimates to saturated groundwater models. Hydrological Processes, 13, 653–75.3.0.CO;2-3>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blomquist, W., Schlager, E. and Heikkila, T. (2004). Common Waters, Diverging Streams. Washington: RFF Press.Google Scholar
Boughton, W. C. (2004). The Australian water balance model. Environmental Modelling & Software, 19, 943–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braaten, R. and Gates, G. (2002). Groundwater–surface water interaction in inland New South Wales: a scoping study. Water Science & Technology, 48(7), 215–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brodie, R. S., Baskaran, S., Ransley, T. and Spring, J. (2005). The seepage meter: progressing a simple method of directly measuring water flow between surface water and groundwater systems. Proc. NZHS-IAH-NZSSS Auckland Conference, Nov–Dec 2005.
Brodie, R. S., Sunderaram, B., Tottenham, R., Hostetler, S. and Ransley, T. (2007). An Overview of Tools for Assessing Groundwater Surface Water Connectivity. Canberra: Bureau of Rural Sciences.Google Scholar
Brunner, P., Simmons, C. T. and Cook, P. G. (2009). Spatial and temporal aspects of the transition from connection to disconnection between rivers, lakes and groundwater. Journal of Hydrology, 376, 159–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnash, R. J., Ferral, R. L. and McGuire, R. A. (1973). A Generalized Streamflow Simulation System: Conceptual Modelling for Digital Computers. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Weather Service, and State of California, Department of Water Resources, Silver Springs, MD / Sacramento, California.
Butler, J. J, Jr, Zlotnik, V. A. and Tsou, M. S. (2001). Drawdown and stream depletion produced by pumping in the vicinity of a partially penetrating stream. Ground Water, 39(5), 651–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chapman, T. G. and Maxwell, A. I. (1996). Baseflow separation – comparison of numerical methods with tracer experiments. Institute Engineers Australia National Conference. Publication 96/05, 539–45.
Chiew, F. H. and McMahon, T. A. (1994). Application of the daily rainfall–runoff model MODHYDROLOG to 28 Australian catchments. Journal of Hydrology, 153, 383–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Contreras, S., Boer, M., Alcala, F. J. et al. (2008). An ecohydrological modelling approach for assessing long-term recharge rates in semiarid karstic landscapes. Journal of Hydrology, 351(1–2), 42–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, P. G., Favreau, G., Dighton, J. C. and Tickell, S. (2003). Determining natural groundwater influx to a tropical river using radon, chlorofluorocarbons and ionic environmental tracers. Journal of Hydrology, 277, 74–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, P. G., Lamontagne, S., Berhane, D. and Clark, J. F. (2006). Quantifying groundwater discharge to Cockburn River, Southeastern Australia, using dissolved gas tracers 222Rn and SF6. Water Resources Research, 42(10), W10411.1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darama, Y. (2001). An analytical solution for stream depletion by cyclic pumping of wells near streams with semipervious beds. Ground Water, 39(1), 79–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darcy, H. (1856). Les Fountains Publiques De La Ville De Dijon. Paris: Victor Dalmont.Google Scholar
Dickinson, W. T., Holland, M. E. and Smith, G. L. (1967). An experimental rainfall–runoff facility. In Hydrology Paper, 25, 81 pp. Colorado State University, Fort Collins.Google Scholar
,Environment Canterbury (2000). Guidelines for the Assessment of Groundwater Abstraction Effects on Stream Flow. Environmental Monitoring Group, Environment Canterbury, Technical Report ROO/11.
,Environment Southland (2004). Management of stream depletion effects resulting from groundwater abstraction. Appendix 4 to the Proposed Groundwater Variation to the Southland Regional Freshwater Plan. Environment Southland, March 2004.
Evans, R. S. (2007). The Impact of Groundwater Use on Australia's Rivers. Canberra: Land and Water Australia.Google Scholar
Fox, G. A., DuChateau, P. and Durnford, D. S. (2002). Analytical model for aquifer response incorporating distributed stream leakage. Ground Water, 40(4), 378–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Genereux, D. P., Hemond, H. F. and Mulholland, P. J. (1993). Use of radon-222 and calcium as tracers in three-end-member mixing model for streamflow generation on the west fork of Walker Branch Watershed. Journal of Hydrology, 142, 167–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glennon, R. (2002). Water Follies: Groundwater pumping and the fate of America's fresh waters. Washington D.C.: Island Press.Google Scholar
Glover, R. E. (1974). Transient Groundwater Hydraulics. Littleton, Colorado: Water Resources Publications.Google Scholar
Glover, R. E. and Balmer, C. G. (1954). River depletion resulting from pumping a well near a river. American Geophysical Union Transactions, 35(3), 468–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodrich, D. C., Williams, D. G., Unkrich, C. L. et al. (2003). Multiple approaches to estimate ephemeral channel recharge. In Proc. 1st Interagency Conference on Research in the Watersheds, eds. Renard, K. G., McElroy, S., Gburek, W., Canfield, E. and Scott, R. L.. Oct. 27–30, Benson, AZ, pp. 118–24.Google Scholar
Gordon, N. D., McMahon, T. A., Finlayson, B. L., Gippel, C. J. and Nathan, R. J. (2004). Stream Hydrology: An Introduction for Ecologists, 2nd edn. John Wiley & Sons, 429 pp.Google Scholar
Grayson, R. B. and Blöschl, G. (2000). Spatial Patterns in Catchment Hydrology: Observations and Modeling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hall, F. R. (1968). Baseflow recessions–a review. Water Resources Research, 4(5), 973–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hantush, M. S. (1965). Wells near streams with semipervious beds. Journal of Geophysical Research, 70 (12), 2829–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardie, R. and White, L. (2004). An assessment of factors that may impact on future flows in the River Murray System. Proc. 4th Australian Stream Management Conference, pp. 287–92.Google Scholar
Hubbell, J. M., Bishop, C. W., Johnson, G. S. and Lucas, J. G. (1997). Numerical groundwater flow modelling of the Snake River Plain Aquifer using the superposition technique. Ground Water, 35(1), 59–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, B. (1999). Unsteady stream depletion from ground water pumping. Ground Water, 37(1), 98–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hydrogeologic, Inc. (2003). MODHMS Software (Version 2.0) Documentation. Volume I: Groundwater flow modules; Volume II: Transport modules; Volume III: Surface water flow modules. Herndon, USA.
,Institute of Hydrology (1980). Low Flow Studies Research Report 1, Institute of Hydrology, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar
Jenkins, C. T. (1968). Computation of rate and volume of stream depletion by wells. In Techniques of Water Resources Investigations of the United States Geological Survey, Chapter D1, Book 4, Hydrologic Analysis and Interpretation. USGS.Google Scholar
Kalf, F. R. and Woolley, D. R. (1977). Application of mathematical modelling techniques to the alluvial aquifer system near Wagga Wagga, New South Wales. Journal of Geological Society of Australia, 24, 179–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kazmann, R. G. (1948). The induced infiltration of river water to wells. EOS TransactionsAmerican Geophysical Union, 29, 85–92.Google Scholar
Kennedy, V. C., Kendall, C., Zellweger, G. W., Wyerman, T. A. and Avanzino, R. J. (1986). Determination of the components of stormflow using water chemistry and environmental isotopes, Mattole River Basin, California. Journal of Hydrology, 84, 107–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LaBolle, E. M., Ahmed, A. A. and Fogg, G. E. (2003). Review of the integrated groundwater and surface-water model (IGSM). Ground Water, 41(2), 238–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, C. H., Chen, W. P. and Lee, R. H. (2006). Estimation of groundwater recharge using water balance coupled with base-flow-record estimation and stable-base-flow analysis. Environmental Geology, 51(1), 73–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowe, L., Etchells, T., Malano, H., Nathan, R. and Potter, B. (2009). Addressing uncertainties in water accounting. Proc. 18th World IMACS / MODSIM Congress, Cairns, Australia, 13–17 July 2009.
McDonald, M. G. and Harbaugh, A. W. (1988). Techniques of water-resources investigations of the United States geological survey. In Chapter A1: A Modular Three-Dimensional Finite-Difference Ground-Water Model, Book 6, Modelling Techniques. USGS, USA.Google Scholar
Watson, Montgomery (1993). Integrated Groundwater and Surface Water Model Documentation and User Manual. Montgomery Watson (Supervising Engineer A. Ali Taghavi).
Morris, E. M. (1980). Forecasting flood flows in grassy and forested basins using a deterministic distributed mathematical model. IAHS Publication No. 129 (Hydrological Forecasting), International Association of Hydrological Sciences, Wallingford, U.K., pp. 247–55.
Mudgway, L. B., Nathan, R. J., McMahon, T. A. and Malano, H. M. (1997). Estimation of salt export from high water table areas: I: identification of processes using a physically-based model. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 123(2), 79–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, R., Neal, B., Morden, R., Nathan, R. and Evans, R. (2008). Basejumper – a tool for analysing time trends in baseflow. Water Down Under 2008 (incorporating 31st Engineers Australia Hydrology and Water Resources Symposium), pp. 2741–46.
Nathan, R. J. and McMahon, T. A. (1990a). Evaluation of automated techniques for base flow and recession analyses. Water Resources Research, 26(7), 1465–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nathan, R. J. and McMahon, T. A. (1990b). Identification of homogeneous regions for the purposes of regionalisation. Journal of Hydrology, 121, 217–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nathan, R. J. and Mudgway, L. B. (1997). Estimation of salt export from high water table areas: II: identification of regional salt loads using a lumped conceptual model. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 123(2), 91–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neal, B. P., Nathan, R. J. and Evans, R. (2004). Survey of baseflows in unregulated streams of the Murray–Darling Basin. Proc. 9th Murray–Darling Basin Groundwater Workshop, 17–19 Feb 2004, Bendigo, Victoria.Google Scholar
Santhi, C., Allen, P. M., Muttiah, R. S., Arnold, J. G. and Tuppad, P. (2008). Regional estimation of base flow for the conterminous United States by hydrologic landscape regions. Journal of Hydrology, 351(1–2), 139–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, V. P. (1995). Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology. Littleton, Colo: Water Resources Publications.Google Scholar
Singh, V. P. and Frevert, D. K. (eds.) (2002). Mathematical Models of Small Watershed Hydrology and Applications. Littleton, Colo: Water Resources Publications, pp. 335–67.
Singh, V. P. and Woolhiser, D. A. (2002). Mathematical modelling of watershed hydrology. ASCE Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 7(4), 270–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sivakumar, B. (2004). Dominant processes concept in hydrology: moving forward. Hydrological Processes, 18(12), 2349–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sloto, R. A. and Crouse, M. Y. (1996). HYSEP: a computer program for streamflow. U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations Report 96–4040, U.S. Dept. Interior.
Sophocleous, M., Koussis, A., Martin, J. L. and Perkins, S. P. (1995). Evaluation of simplified stream–aquifer depletion models for water rights administration. Ground Water, 33(4), 579–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugawara, M. (1995). Tank model. Chapter 6 in Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology, ed. Singh, V. P.. Littleton, Colo: Water Resources Publications.Google Scholar
Todini, E. (1988). Rainfall–runoff modelling: past, present and future. Journal of Hydrology, 100, 341–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uhlenbrook, S. and Hoeg, S. (2003). Quantifying uncertainties in tracer-based hydrograph separations: a case study for two-, three- and five-component hydrograph separations in a mountainous catchment. Hydrological Processes, 17, 431–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walton, W. C. (1963). Estimating the infiltration rate of a streambed by aquifer test analysis. International Association of Scientific Hydrology, 8, 409–20.Google Scholar
Werner, P. W. and Sundquist, K. J. (1951). On the groundwater recession curve for large watersheds. International Association of Hydrological Sciences (IAHS), 33, 202–13.Google Scholar
Weyer, E. and Bastin, G. (2008). Leak detection in open water channels. Proc. of the 17th World Congress, The International Federation of Automatic Control, Seoul, Korea, July 6–11, 2008.CrossRef
Wheater, H. S., Jakeman, A. J. and Beven, K. J. (1993). Progress and directions in rainfall–runoff modelling. In Modelling Change in Environmental Systems, eds. Jakeman, A. J., Beck, M. B. and McAleer, M. J.. John Wiley & Son.Google Scholar
Winter, T. C., Harvey, J. W., Franke, O. L. and Allet, W. M. (1998). Groundwater and Surface Water – A Single Resource. US Geological Survey Circular 1139.
Zlotnik, V. A. and Huang, H. (1999). Effect of shallow penetration and streambed sediments on aquifer response to stream stage fluctuations (analytical model). Ground Water, 37(4), 599–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×