Hood River Basin Study - PDF Free Download

Hood River Basin Study Agenda 1). Goals 2). Partners 3). Study Overview 4). Recommendations

Goals Evaluate: 1. Current and future water demands 2. Water conservation opportunities 3. Groundwater resources 4. Impacts of climate change to streamflow 5. Alternatives to maintain viable water use/supply 6. Impacts to fish habitat from climate and water supply alternatives

Partners 1. Hood River Water Planning Group Formed in 2008, stakeholders throughout Hood River Basin 2. United States Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) $250,000 in-kind contribution through WaterSMART Basin Study program. 3. Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD) $250,000 Water Conservation, Reuse, and Storage Grant. - Watershed Professional Network (Water Use, Water Conservation, PM) - Normandeau Associates (IFIM) - HRC, USGS (Groundwater)

Overview of Water Planning Study Climate Change Models Historical Meteorological 3 sets of Projected Meteorological Historical Precipitation Water Use Water Conservation Water Storage Surface Water Model (DHSVM) Groundwater Model (MODFLOW) Existing WR Infrastructure Existing WR Operations Existing Water Demands Water Rights Future Water Demands Water conservation Population change Potential new storage site(s) 4 Different Scenarios: 1 Historical streamflow timeseries 3 Projected streamflow timeseries Well pumping scenario? ASR scenario? Water Resources Model (MODSIM) Instream Flow AWS / Q relationships Evaluation of WR Metrics under Each Alternatives: Deliveries (shortfall amount, duration, % of time, cost) Reservoir volumes Hydropower Production Streamflows Habitat Suitability Analysis

Water Use Potable Average Annual Monthly Water Use Water Use (Million Gallons) 1800 9 1600 8 1400 7 1200 6 1000 5 800 4 600 3 400 2 200 0 1 0 Water Use (CFS) 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept City of Hood River Crystal Springs Ice Fountain Oak Grove City of Hood River Crystal Springs Ice Fountain Oak Grove Odell Parkdale The Dalles Odell Parkdale The Dalles

Water Use - Irrigation Farmers Irrigation District Average Monthly Diversion (cfs) 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept DID EFID FID MFID MHID

Water Use - Hydropower

Water Use - Hydropower FID 120 100 Plant 2 Plant 3 Flow (CFS) 80 60 40 20 0 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept

Water Use - Hydropower 60 MFID 50 Flow (CFS) 40 30 20 10 0 Plant 1 Plant 2 Plant 3 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept

Water Use - Instream 8 instream rights (priority dates from 1983-1998) 2 instream flow agreements (no priority dates)

Water Conservation - Potable Potential Water Savings (cfs) 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Toilet Retrofit Shower Retrofit Rate Structure Changes Outdoor Conservation 0 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept

Water Conservation - Irrigation Potential Savings (cfs) 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Sprinkler / Soil Moisture Sensor Pipe / Operational 0 DID EFID FID MFID MHID

Water Storage

Water Storage Site District (new/expand) Volume (ac-ft) Notes: 1. Cost depends on source of material. 2. Release rate calculated on 3 month release 3. Cost/cfs based on average cost (e.g., $20M for EFID) and 3 month release Cost 1 Release 2 (cfs) Cost / cfs 3 Neal Creek EFID (new) 2,557 $13-27M 14 $ 1.4M/cfs Kingsley Res. FID (expand) 561 $1.2 2.4M 3 $ 0.6M/cfs Laurance Lake MFID (expand) 370 $ 0.3M 2 $ 0.15M/cfs

Climate Change - temp & precip projections Climate Change Scenario More Warming Dry (MW/D) Median (MED) Less Warming Wet (LW/W) Average Precipitation Change (%) Average Temperature Change ( F) Winter Spring Summer Fall Avg. Winter Spring Summer Fall Avg. -3-7 -33 4-2 2.2 2.7 4.3 2.7 3.0 7 0-14 3 3 2.2 2.0 2.7 2.2 2.3 5 0-15 12 7 1.4 1.3 2.3 1.6 1.7 3 different climate scenarios

Surface Water Model - Snow Relative Extent (%) 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Modeled Basin-Wide Snow Extent Monthly Averages 1920-1949 1950-1979 1980-2009 2030-2060 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Month

Surface Water Model - Glaciers

Surface Water Model - Streamflow

Water Resource Modeling - Schematic

Water Resource Modeling - Alternatives ALT. DESCRIPTION CLIMATE 1 WATER DEMANDS 2 WATER CONSERVATION 3 WATER STORAGE 4 Base Historic climate, existing demands Historic (1980-2009) Existing Existing Existing Existing Future climate, existing demands Future (2030-2059) Existing Existing Existing Demands Future climate, future demands Future (2030-2059) Future (potable & irrig. increases) Existing Existing Conservation Future climate, future demands, water conservation. Future (2030-2059) Future (potable & irrig. increases) Future (irrig. water conservation) Existing Storage Future climate, future demands, water conservation, additional storage. Future (2030-2059) Future (potable & irrig. increases) Future (irrig. water conservation) Existing & New Storage (larger FID & MFID, new EFID)

Water Resource Modeling - Results Different climate scenarios

Water Resource Modeling - Results 600 500 400 East Fork Above Middle Fork, Monthly Mean Flows BASE MI, Existing MI, Demands MI, Conservation MI, Storage Flow (cfs) 300 200 100 0 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Different water resource alternatives

Water Resource Modeling - Results 180 160 140 120 East Fork Above Middle Fork, Monthly Mean Flows BASE MI, Existing MI, Demands MI, Conservation MI, Storage Flow (cfs) 100 80 60 40 20 0 June July Aug Sept Different water resource alternatives

Water Resource Modeling - Results

Instream Flow IFIM study of 5 reaches: Neal Creek East Fork (upper) East Fork (lower) Green Point West Fork Species of concern: Chinook Coho Steelhead Bull trout

Base (WY 1980-2010)

Existing (WY 2031-2060)

Demands (WY 2031-2060)

Conservation (WY 2031-2060)

Storage (WY 2031-2060)

80 th percentile AWS changes, median climate East Fork (lower) West Fork Green Point Neal Creek Spring Chinook Coho Winter Steelhead Spring Chinook Coho Winter Steelhead Bull Trout Spring Chinook Coho Winter Steelhead Coho Winter Steelhead Climate Demands Conservation Storage Spawning -46% -57% 53% 96% Juv. Rearing -6% -5% -5% -5% Spawning -17% -19% 2% 2% Juv. Rearing 1% 0% 1% 1% Spawning -5% -5% -5% -5% Juv. Rearing -11% -13% -5% -4% Spawning -7% -9% -6% -6% Juv. Rearing -1% -1% -1% -1% Spawning -5% -5% -5% -5% Juv. Rearing -1% -1% -1% -1% Spawning -13% -13% -13% -13% Juv. Rearing -2% -2% -2% -2% Spawning -3% -3% -2% -2% Adult -2% -2% -1% -1% Spawning -3% -6% -6% -5% Juv. Rearing -1% -1% -1% -1% Spawning 0% 0% 0% 0% Juv. Rearing 0% 0% 0% 0% Spawning -10% -10% -10% -10% Juv. Rearing -4% -6% -4% -4% Spawning -1% -1% -1% -1% Juv. Rearing -1% -1% -1% -3% Spawning 1% 1% 1% 1% Juv. Rearing 0% 0% 0% -1%

Potential Actions Potable Sprinkler Upgrade Piping Storage Type Period Savings (CFS) Cost ($M) Cost per CFS Notes Toilet Retrofit All 0.4 $ 2.6 M $ 7.2M/cfs $225 rebate/home Shower Retrofit All 0.2 $ 0.8 M $ 4.0 M/cfs $50 rebate/home Outdoor Summer 0.5 n/a n/a -25% of current outdoor Rate structure All (Summer) 1.8 (1.0) n/a n/a 25% rate increase DID Summer 0.5 $ 0.2 M $ 0.4 M/cfs EFID Summer 7.6 $2.7 M $ 0.4 M/cfs FID Summer 1.3 $ 0.6 M $ 0.4 M/cfs MFID Summer 6.0 $ 2.5 M $ 0.4 M/cfs MHID Summer 0.5 $ 0.2 M $ 0.4 M/cfs DID Summer 1.5 $ 1.4 M $ 0.95 M/cfs EFID Summer 21+ $28 M $ 1.3 M/cfs FID/MFID/MHID Limited EFID (new) summer 14 $13-27M $ 1.4 M/cfs 2,557 ac-ft FID (expand) summer 3 $1.2 2.4 M $ 0.6 M/cfs 561 ac-ft MFID (expand) summer 2 $ 0.3 M $ 0.15 M/cfs 370 ac-ft

Recommendations Implement irrigation efficiency upgrades Reduce or eliminate overflows and canal seepage in EFID Further evaluate expanding storage at Green Point and Laurance Lake Collect data for use in future analysis of reservoir storage in EFID Collect/use additional data for optimal streamflows for aquatic habitat Expand groundwater data collection Implement projects for increased summer streamflow and flexibility Refine modeling that was done as part of this Basin Study -particularly glacier, groundwater, stream temperature Other?