Lessons from Immersive Online Collaborative Modeling to Discuss More Adaptive Reservoir Operations
Publication: Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
Volume 150, Issue 7
Abstract
This work had the purpose to provoke discussion about more adaptive reservoir operations. This work created online collaborative modeling environments by using web spreadsheets (Google Sheets) during a video conference session. In each session, up to 6 collaborators immersed in water user roles. Then the collaborators consumed, saved, and traded water in response to their available water, other choices, and real-time discussion of choices. The collaboration was an alternative to prior offline or high-performance computing efforts that programmed water allocation rules to try to satisfy forecasted water demands across hydrologic scenarios. The collaboration also differed from prior efforts that excluded stakeholders, extracted data from participants, had a lead modeler or facilitation team mediate participant interactions with a model, or built a model then presented findings at the project end. In model sessions, collaborators improved more adaptive operations rather than separately developed and tested competing alternatives. 26 Colorado River managers and experts demonstrated use for a combined Lake Powell-Lake Mead water bank. The author used discussion and feedback to synthesize 10 lessons. For example, model to provoke discussion and insights rather than propose a solution, solicit feedback early, allow trades to increase flexibility, and recognize limits of model acceptability and adoption. To generate more actionable insights, next steps are engage multiple groups within the same model session and explore more management alternatives.
Practical Applications
Researchers, consultants, facilitators, and project leaders can build their own online collaborative model environments for their study system(s). Leaders can invite basin managers, stakeholders, colleagues, students, and the public to collaborate during video conference or in-person sessions. Leaders can also use the collaborative model environment(s) to prompt discussion of future basin operations, solicit feedback to improve operations, and/or make the model environments more user friendly. 26 Colorado River Basin managers and experts demonstrated use for a combined Lake Powell-Lake Mead water bank.
Formats available
You can view the full content in the following formats:
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
I thank the 26 Colorado River managers and experts for their time, engagement, collaboration, and discussion. This work benefited from a USD 50 donation from a private individual. The donation was used to purchase software to generate the online model guide. Five collaborators who participated in a model session and two anonymous reviewers gave feedback that improved this article. This work represents the views of the author, not Utah State University.
References
Abdallah, A. M., D. E. Rheinheimer, D. E. Rosenberg, S. Knox, and J. J. Harou. 2022. “An interoperable software ecosystem to store, visualize, and publish water resources systems modelling data.” Environ. Modell. Software 151 (May): 105371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2022.105371.
Alafifi, A. H., and D. E. Rosenberg. 2020. “Systems modeling to improve river, riparian, and wetland habitat quality and area.” Environ. Modell. Software 126 (Apr): 104643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2020.104643.
Allhands, J. 2021. “It could take at least 500,000 acre-feet of water a year to keep Lake Mead from tanking.” Accessed November 8, 2021. https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/joannaallhands/2021/11/08/lake-mead-could-get-extra-water-from-lower-basin-annually/6306601001/.
Babbitt, C. 2019. “The Groundwater Game: A new hands-on way to learn about groundwater management.” Accessed June 7, 2023. https://blogs.edf.org/growingreturns/2019/07/18/new-groundwater-game-teaches-sustainable-management-trading/.
Beckstead, B., and C. Hoerner. 2012. “Does the upper basin have a delivery obligation or an obligation not to deplete the flow of the Colorado River at Lee Ferry?” Accessed March 25, 2024. http://www.waterpolicy.info/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Delivery-Obligation-memo.pdf.
Bourget, E. C., S. M. Langsdale, and M. van den Belt. 2013. “Featured collection introduction: Collaborative modeling for decision support as a tool to implement IWRM.” J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 49 (3): 605–608. https://doi.org/10.1111/jawr.12071.
Bourget, L. 2011. Converging Waters: Integrating collaborative modeling with participatory processes to make water resources decisions. Washington, DC: USACE.
Bradley, D., and K. Collins. 2022. “Lake Powell 2017 area and capacity tables.” Accessed March 25, 2024. https://www.usbr.gov/uc/water/Lake_Powell_Area_Capacity_Table_Report_FINAL.pdf.
Carson, C. A., C. H. Stone, F. E. Wilson, E. H. Watson, and L. C. Bishop. 1948. “Upper Colorado river basin compact.” Accessed September 7, 2021. https://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/g1000/pdfiles/ucbsnact.pdf.
Castle, A., and J. Fleck. 2019. “The risk of curtailment under the Colorado River compact.” SSRN eLibrary. Accessed March 25, 2024. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3483654.
Colorado River Compact. 1922. “Colorado River compact.” Accessed March 25, 2024. https://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/pao/pdfiles/crcompct.pdf.
Dickes, A. C., A. Kamarainen, S. J. Metcalf, S. Gün-Yildiz, K. Brennan, T. Grotzer, and C. Dede. 2019. “Scaffolding ecosystems science practice by blending immersive environments and computational modeling.” Br. J. Educ. Technol. 50 (5): 2181–2202. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12806.
Ewen, T., and J. Seibert. 2016. “Learning about water resource sharing through game play.” Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 20 (10): 4079–4091. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-20-4079-2016.
Fleck, J., and A. Castle. 2022. “Green light for adaptive policies on the Colorado river.” Water 14 (1): 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14010002.
Harou, J., M. Pulido-Velazquez, D. E. Rosenberg, Josue Medellin-Azuara, J. R. Lund, and R. E. Howitt. 2009. “Hydro-economic models: Concepts, design, applications, and future prospects.” J. Hydrol. 375 (3–4): 627–643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.06.037.
Horne, A., J. M. Szemis, S. Kaur, J. A. Webb, M. J. Stewardson, A. Costa, and N. Boland. 2016. “Optimization tools for environmental water decisions: A review of strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities to improve adoption.” Environ. Modell. Software 84 (Jun): 326–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.06.028.
IBWC (International Boundary Water Commission). 2021. “Minutes between the United States and Mexican sections of the IBWC.” Accessed July 22, 2021. https://www.ibwc.gov/Treaties_Minutes/Minutes.html.
Kamarainen, A. M., S. Metcalf, T. Grotzer, and C. Dede. 2015. “Exploring ecosystems from the inside: How immersive multi-user virtual environments can support development of epistemologically grounded modeling practices in ecosystem science instruction.” J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 24 (2): 148–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-014-9531-7.
Kasprzyk, J. R., S. Nataraj, P. M. Reed, and R. J. Lempert. 2013. “Many objective robust decision making for complex environmental systems undergoing change.” Environ. Modell. Software 42 (12): 55–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2012.12.007.
Kuhn, E., and J. Fleck. 2019. Science be dammed: How ignoring inconvenient science drained the Colorado River. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press.
Langsdale, S., A. Beall, E. Bourget, E. Hagen, S. Kudlas, R. Palmer, D. Tate, and W. Werick. 2013. “Collaborative modeling for decision support in water resources: Principles and best practices.” J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 49 (3): 629–638. https://doi.org/10.1111/jawr.12065.
Leeflang, B. 2021. “Colorado River coding: Pre 1922 compact water use.” Accessed April 11, 2022. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5501466.
MacDonnell, L. J., D. H. Getches, and W. C. Hugenberg. 1995. “The law of the Colorado River: Coping with severe sustained drought.” J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 31 (5): 825–836. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.1995.tb03404.x.
Madani, K., T. W. Pierce, and A. Mirchi. 2017. “Serious games on environmental management.” Sustainable Cities Soc. 29 (Feb): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2016.11.007.
Michaud, W. R. 2013. “Evaluating the outcomes of collaborative modeling for decision support.” J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 49 (3): 693–699. https://doi.org/10.1111/jawr.12066.
Nasr-Azadani, E., D. H. Wardrop, and R. P. Brooks. 2023. “Pathways for the utilization of visualization techniques in designing participatory natural resource policy and management.” J. Environ. Manage. 333 (May): 117407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117407.
Porse, E. C., S. Sandoval-Solis, and B. A. Lane. 2015. “Integrating environmental flows into multi-objective reservoir management for a transboundary, water-scarce river basin: Rio Grande/Bravo.” Water Resour. Manage. 29 (8): 2471–2484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-015-0952-8.
Prairie, J. 2020. “Colorado River basin natural flow and salt data.” Accessed March 25, 2024. https://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/g4000/NaturalFlow/current.html.
Rosenberg, D. E. 2021. “Colorado River coding: Grand Canyon intervening flow.” Accessed April 11, 2022. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5501466.
Rosenberg, D. E. 2022. “Adapt lake mead releases to inflow to give managers more flexibility to slow reservoir drawdown.” J. Water Resour. Plann. Manage. 148 (10): 02522006. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0001592.
Rosenberg, D. E. 2023. “Colorado River Basin water accounts: Provoke discussion about more adaptive reservoir operations.” Accessed June 8, 2023. https://www.hydroshare.org/resource/dd17d7bdf25d4da0abeaf381c9fa2df0/.
Runge, M. C., et al. 2015. Decision analysis to support development of the Glen Canyon Dam long-term experimental and management plan. Reston, VA: USGS.
Salehabadi, H., D. Tarboton, E. Kuhn, B. Udall, K. Wheeler, E. Rosenberg, S. Goeking, and J. C. Schmidt. 2020. Stream flow and losses of the Colorado River in the Southern Colorado Plateau. Logan, UT: Utah State Univ.
Schmidt, J. C., M. Kraft, D. Tuzlak, and A. Walker. 2016. Fill mead first: A technical assessment. Logan, UT: Utah State Univ.
Schulze, J., R. Martin, A. Finger, C. Henzen, M. Lindner, K. Pietzsch, A. Werntze, U. Zander, and R. Seppelt. 2015. “Design, implementation and test of a serious online game for exploring complex relationships of sustainable land management and human well-being.” Environ. Modell. Software 65 (Aug): 58–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.11.029.
Seibert, J., and M. J. P. Vis. 2012. “Irrigania—A web-based game about sharing water resources.” Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 16 (8): 2523–2530. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-2523-2012.
Smith, R., E. Zagona, J. Kasprzyk, N. Bonham, E. Alexander, A. Butler, J. Prairie, and C. Jerla. 2022. “Decision science can help address the challenges of long-term planning in the Colorado River Basin.” J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 58 (5): 735–745. https://doi.org/10.1111/1752-1688.12985.
Ten Tribes Partnership. 2018. “Colorado river basin ten tribes partnership tribal water study.” Accessed March 26, 2024. https://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/programs/crbstudy/tws/finalreport.html.
USBR (United States Bureau of Reclamation). 2007. “Colorado River Interim guidelines for lower basin shortages and coordinated operations for lake Powell and Lake mead—Final environmental impact statement.” Accessed March 27, 2024. http://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/programs/strategies/FEIS/index.html.
USBR (United States Bureau of Reclamation). 2008. “Law of the river.” Accessed December 8, 2021. https://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/g1000/lawofrvr.html.
USBR (United States Bureau of Reclamation). 2019. Agreement concerning Colorado river drought contingency management and operations. Washington, DC: USBR.
USBR (United States Bureau of Reclamation). 2020. Review of the Colorado river interim guidelines for lower basin shortages and coordinated operations for Lake Powell and Lake Mead. Washington, DC: USBR.
USBR (United States Bureau of Reclamation). 2021. Boulder Canyon operations office—Program and activities: Water accounting reports. Washington, DC: USBR.
US Bureau of Reclamation and National Park Service. 2016. “Glen canyon dam long-term experimental and management plan final environmental impact statement.” Accessed April 4, 2024. http://ltempeis.anl.gov/documents/final-eis/.
Van den Belt, M. 2004. Mediated modeling: A systems dynamics approach to environmental consensus building. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Voinov, A., N. Kolagani, M. K. McCall, P. D. Glynn, M. E. Kragt, F. O. Ostermann, S. A. Pierce, and P. Ramu. 2016. “Modelling with stakeholders—Next generation.” Environ. Modell. Software 77 (Jun): 196–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.11.016.
Wang, J., and J. C. Schmidt. 2020. Stream flow and losses of the Colorado river in the Southern Colorado plateau. Logan, UT: Utah State Univ.
Wheeler, K., et al. 2021. Alternative management paradigms for the future of the Colorado and Green rivers. Logan, UT: Utah State Univ.
Wheeler, K. G., C. J. Robinson, and R. H. Bark. 2018. “Modelling to bridge many boundaries: The Colorado and Murray-Darling River basins.” Reg. Environ. Change 18 (6): 1607–1619. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-018-1304-z.
Wheeler, K. G., J. C. Schmidt, and D. E. Rosenberg. 2019. “Water resource modelling of the Colorado river—Present and future.” In Strategies. Logan, UT: Utah State Univ.
Wurbs, R. A. 2005. Comparative evaluation of generalized river/reservoir system models. College Station, TX: Texas Water Resources Institute.
Yates, D., J. Sieber, D. Purkey, and A. Huber-Lee. 2005. “WEAP21—A demand-, priority-, and preference-driven water planning model Part 1: Model characteristics.” Water Int. 30 (4): 487–500. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060508691893.
Zagona, E. A., T. J. Fulp, R. Shane, T. Magee, and H. M. Goranflo. 2001. “Riverware: A Generalized tool for complex reservoir system modeling.” J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 37 (4): 913–929. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.2001.tb05522.x.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
Volume 150 • Issue 7 • July 2024
Copyright
This work is made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
History
Received: Jun 20, 2022
Accepted: Dec 20, 2023
Published online: Apr 26, 2024
Published in print: Jul 1, 2024
Discussion open until: Sep 26, 2024
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.