Matt Lindburg Feedback

[kswaim]

Feedback provided on September 19, 2018. May address some or all of these issues given sufficient time and/or funding. Numbered so that fixes for each issue can be indicated in subsequent comments to this issue.

1) The labels on x-axis on the hydrograph page all say Jan-1. I’m thinking they should reference different months?

2) For some reason, the interactive visualization on the hydrologic variability page doesn’t show up for me. On that page, I see a reference to “StateMod, Natural Flow time series”). If you’re using natural flows in the visualization (that I can’t see for some reason), I’m wondering if you should use gaged flows. Natural flow in StateMod is a calculated time series (at least in locations that are impacted by diversions, etc.). I don’t feel like a typical user of your website would immediately understand what natural flow represents, but they would readily understand what gaged flows mean. You talk about natural flow in a subsequent panel, so you could focus natural flow illustrations on the respective panel.

3) North Sterling maps:
a) You might consider labeling things like the river, direction of flow, the North Sterling Canal, etc. Would be good to label features on the aerial photos that are called out in the narrative. b) On the irrigation methods image, could you substitute ground-level pictures of a flood system (like show some siphon tubes or gated pipe) and a center pivot? I feel like those would provide more descriptive info than the aerial. c) Crops grown – could you also include a graph showing the relative proportions of crops grown? I realize it would only be a snapshot, but the question of relative proportions jumped immediately to mind. d) Another aspect of the North Sterling is their augmentation plan. You might consider including some narrative around irrigation wells and augmentation ponds within the N. Sterling service area.

4) Ditch diversion page:
a) A lot of structures are shown…many of which I’d never heard of. For example, in the Gilcrest area, I see the Scott Ditch, Rexford Ditch, Owl Ditch, Schneider Ditch, etc. I’ve never heard of these, but some seem to be historical (not active), perhaps associated with an augmentation plan, etc. Can you whittle the structures down to something focused on, for example, the structures that would show up on a straightline diagram? Just wondering if including all structures is as useful as showing structures that folks in the basin might be familiar with. I guess it depends on what you’re trying to convey. b) Might be interesting to the user to include some photos with examples of measurement structures.

5) Groundwater page: might be good to show a map of different groundwater aquifers in the basin (alluvial, various designated basins, Denver Basin). I feel like that might communicate more than the DSS screenshot. Also, I think I’ve seen some illustrations of different types of aquifers (i.e. alluvial, sedimentary bedrock, fractured rock). The illustrations might help illustrate the types of aquifers you describe.

6) Return flows: I see where you’re going with the snake diagram, but is there another illustration out there that shows diversion of water into an upstream ditch, resultant return flow, and subsequent diversion of water in a downstream ditch? Or a diagram showing the “hydrologic cycle” within a municipal system? Just not sure that the snake diagram directly illustrates the concept of return flows.

7) Natural, regulated, available flows: Would it be better to show a hydrograph on the South Platte further upstream than Julesburg?

8) Point flow models: You might consider editing the text to avoid the term “error” and instead use “remainder” or something like that. A casual observer might read “Point flow models will typically result in errors because of externalities….” and not realize what the error really represents. Also, there’s a statement saying that point flow models are constructed as nodes and links, but I feel like that’s more commonly true for a water allocation model rather than a point flow. The point flow models I’ve used and constructed were done fairly simply in a spreadsheet.

9) StateMod: Check your symbol coloring. Seems like the wells along the South Platte in District 64 are diversions, and I see other examples upstream (Jay Thomas shows up as a well, for example).

10) Ag water demands: One thing we’re trying to communicate with SWSI this time around is that we’re focusing on agricultural diversion demands rather than irrigation water requirements at the field level. Might be helpful for your page on agricultural demands if you could also describe system inefficiencies and how those inefficiencies lead to a need to divert more at the river than is necessary for the crop to consume. You could follow that up with a reference to return flows and how those inefficiencies aren’t necessary lost water…it is used by downstream water users. Also, the visualization doesn’t show up on my screen for some reason.

11) Municipal demands: Does the StateMod demand directly correspond to historical usage?

12) Environment and Recreation: Might be good to describe what the flushing and minimum flows mean and why they’re important (i.e. what’s driving the minimum values).

[kswaim]

Item 1: The labels on x-axis on the hydrograph page all say Jan-1.

I do not see this when viewing the page. However, I did notice that the date listed is in the format Month Day, 2001, so I fixed this to only show the month and day, as in Aug 03 or Sep 20.

[kswaim]

Item 9: StateMod nodes map -- some of the diversions are listed and symbolized as wells.

Fix: The StateMod file SP2016_H.xou gives the node type for each node; however, some nodes are listed more than once if they are classified as more than one type. Several nodes were listed as diversions and then listed a second time as wells. The TSTool data-processing file originally combined these together and kept only the "well" designation. I edited the processing steps to rewrite these nodes as "Diversion and Well". The map has now been updated to reflect the change. Note that "Wells" are no longer listed in the legend because none of the nodes designated as wells only have location data. **Note that this doesn't mean there aren't any well-only nodes in StateMod; it's just that they don't have any coordinates associated with them.

[smalers]

My feedback on Matt's comments are:

1. This may have been a blip and Kristin made some changes above. Hopefully this is not an issue.

2. I think the content would make more sense if he can see the visualization. Others have not had issues so need to keep an eye on this for Matt's computer.

3. These are good suggestions if there is funding later to enhance.

4. We purposefully include a lot of structures to convey the point that the system is complex so we don't want to filter that. It could be an issue as to whether we are showing all historical structures or only active structures. I suggest updating the text to indicate whether the map is showing only active diversions. As to whether images of measuring structures are shown, that could be added later, such as at the bottom of the scrollable page area, and would be most effective if it is a Colorado structure, not a stock photo.

5. Matt makes a good point about showing a map of aquifers and perhaps a link could be added to a site that provides that, if not already in place. The screen shot of query page has value because we are focusing in this sequence on measuring data whereas a map of aquifers is a bit broader. It might be best to have an interactive map with aquifers and wells that can be moused over with links to DWR, but we did not have resources to do that and CDSS map viewer has some of that. Maybe we should provide a link to the map viewer and provide sentence with basic instructions of how to view

6. Matt is right that the majority of the snake diagram does not focus on return flows, although the specific case of flows below Denver do illustrate this. Perhaps we should point out in the text that the South Platte and Arkansas rely on return flows and reuse to utilize lower basin supplies to meet multiple needs, as indicated by the river in those basins being narrower and more consistent width along the length. The story tends to focus on the entire basin and contrasting with west slope is interesting.

7. The Julesburg example gets to the issue of "how much water do we send to Nebraska" and is a bounding case. We've changed the language a bit to emphasize this.

8. Matt makes a good point. Change the language from "result in errors" to something like "The flows calculated from upstream reach gage, and diversions and inflows below that gage will typically be different from the measured flows at a lower gage. The difference between measured and calculated flows indicates measurement error and unaccounted-for inflows and outflows in the stream reach. This difference can be distributed throughout the reach to account for gains and losses between the bounding gages."

9. Was addressed by Kristin.

10. Matt makes good points. I suggest adding some content to the second Agriculture Demands page, such as "Water that is diverted at the river is delivered to field locations, typically by using a canal system. Water that is lost during conveyance returns to the groundwater and stream system for use by others. Similarly, irrigation methods result in a varying amount of return flows that can be used to meet downstream demands and environment, such as wetlands. Changing irrigation efficiency has impacts on downstream users and the environment."

11. StateMod municipal demands are based on historical usage, based on what is in the documentation.

12. I agree with Matt's comments. Perhaps we can add a sentence that flushing flows help remove sediment and keep vegetation from encroaching on the channel. Sedimentation interferes with biological processes, diversion infrastructure, and increases flood risk.

[kswaim]

Item 4: Confusion as to whether the diversions shown in the map include all or just active ones.

Fix: Added wording to the text to indicate that all diversions are shown, including historical and inactive.

[kswaim]

Item 8: Remove references to "error" in describing point flow models.

Fix: Removed references to error and clarified how flow differences are distributed.

[kswaim]

Item 12: Flushing and minimum flows.

Fix: Flushing flows are described in the paragraph that begins with "The protection of these varied environmental...". Added in the sentence "Minimum flows are the smallest amounts of flow that will maintain hydraulic parameters for fish habitat, such as specific velocities and water depths."

[kswaim]

Item 6: Snake diagram doesn't directly illustrate the concept of return flows.

Fix: Added text per Steve's comment. Leaving in snake diagram for now.

[kswaim]

Item 10: Added the following text: "When water is diverted from the river to agricultural land, it is done via a system of canals and/or ditches. These systems are not 100 percent efficient, meaning that some water is lost during conveyance. Because of this, there is a need to divert more water from the river than is necessary for crop consumption. Water lost during conveyance, however, is not necessarily truly lost, as it returns to the groundwater and ultimately to the river as return flows for use by downstream water users. Similarly, the amount of return flow varies by the method of irrigation (flood vs. sprinkler vs. drip). Changing irrigation methods has impacts on downstream users and the environment."

[kswaim]

Item 5: Might be good to show a map of different groundwater aquifers in the basin. Also, some illustrations of different types of aquifers (i.e. alluvial, sedimentary bedrock, fractured rock) might be helpful.

Fix: Provided a link to the CDSS Map Viewer and added text with basic instructions of how to view per Steve's comment.

Comment: Agree that aquifer illustrations would be helpful, but there is already quite a bit of text on this page. Also, the Citizen's Guide does a good job of describing aquifers and a link to the guide has been provided.