Model for Prescribing Ground‐Water Use Permits
Publication: Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
Volume 118, Issue 5
Abstract
In 1986 the Massachusetts Water Management Act was passed, allowing greater control over both surface and ground‐water withdrawals. The act has the dual goal of allowing sustained economic growth and protecting the natural environment, which is accomplished via a process of permitting all water withdrawals greater than 0.1 MGD. Economic growth is equated with water available for current and future use, and protection of the natural environment is interpreted to mean prevention of streamflow depletion. This paper presents a multiobjective linear programming management model that can assist in the determination of ground‐water permit conditions. The model is based on the interrelationship of ground and surface waters, and incorporates physical and institutional considerations. Results of the model provide allowable withdrawals for permit applicants for specified periods throughout the year. Results of the multiobjective model are compared with permits that were established by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. By following the guidance provided by the model results, permits could be established that allow withdrawal of larger quantities of water without sacrificing the environmental goal.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Cohon, J. L. (1978). Multiobjective programming and planning. Academic Press, New York, N.Y.
2.
Eheart, J. W., and Lyon, R. M. (1983). “Alternative structures for water rights markets.” Water Resour. Res., 19(4), 887–894.
3.
Glover, R. E., and Balmer, G. G. (1954). “River depletion resulting from pumping a well near a river.” Trans., American Geophysical Union, 35(3), 468–470.
4.
Hantush, M. S. (1965). “Wells near streams and semipervious beds.” J. of Geophysical Res., 70(12), 2829–2838.
5.
Hantush, M. S., and Marino, M. A. (1989). “Chance‐constrained model for management of stream‐aquifer system.” J. Water Resour. Plng. Mgmt., 115(3), 259–277.
6.
Illangasekare, T. H., and Morel‐Seytoux, H. J. (1982). “Stream‐aquifer influence coefficients as tools for simulation and management.” Water Resour. Res., ASCE, 18(1), 168–176.
7.
Illangasekare, T. H., and Morel‐Seytoux, H. J., (1986). “Algorithm for surface/ground‐water allocation under appropriation doctrine.” Ground Water, 24(2), 199–206.
8.
Ipswich River Basin: Volume I—Inventory and analysis of current and projected water use. (1987a). Massachusetts Dept. of Envir. Mgmt., Boston, Mass.
9.
Ipswich River Basin: Volume II—Analysis of water resources and water use and development of alternatives to meet projected water demand. (1987b) Massachusetts Dept. of Envir. Mgmt., Boston, Mass.
10.
Jenkins, C. T., “Techniques for computing rate and volume of stream depletion by wells.” Ground Water, 6(2), 37–46.
11.
Morel‐Seytoux, H. J., and Daly, C. J. (1975). “A discrete kernel generator for stream‐aquifer studies.” Water Resour. Res., 11(2), 253–260.
12.
Morel‐Seytoux, H. J. (1975). “A simple case of conjunctive surface‐ground‐water management.” Ground Water, 13(6), 506–515.
13.
Peralta, R. C., Kowalski, K. G., and Morel‐Seytoux, H. J. (1988). “Groundwater recharge planning using resolvent discrete kernels.” Trans. of the American Society of Agric. Engrg., 31(6), 1737–1742.
14.
Taylor, O. J. (1970). “Optimization of conjunctive use of water in a stream‐aquifer system, using linear programming.” U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 700C, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Va.
15.
Taylor, O. J., and Luckey, R. R. (1974). “Water management studies of a stream‐aquifer system, Arkansas River Valley, Colorado.” Ground Water, 12(1), 22–38.
16.
Theis, C. V. (1941). “The effect of a well on the flow of a nearby stream.” Transactions, American Geophysical Union, 22(3), 734–738.
17.
Young, R. A., and Bredehoeft, J. D. (1972). “Digital computer simulation for solving management problems of conjunctive groundwater and surface water systems.” Water Resour. Res., 8(3), 533–556.
18.
Young, R. A., Daubert, J. T., and Morel‐Seytoux, H. J. (1986). “Evaluating institutional alternatives for managing an interrelated stream‐aquifer system.” American J. of Agric. Economics, 68(4), 787–797.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management
Volume 118 • Issue 5 • September 1992
Pages: 543 - 561
Copyright
Copyright © 1992 ASCE.
History
Published online: Sep 1, 1992
Published in print: Sep 1992
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.