David S Brookshire (UNM) Craig D. Broadbent (IWU) Don Coursey (U of C) Vince Tidwell (Sandia) SILPE

Transcription

1 David S Brookshire (UNM) Craig D. Broadbent (IWU) Don Coursey (U of C) Vince Tidwell (Sandia) SILPE 1

2 Introduction Over the course of 5 years we engaged with stake holders to design a real-time marketplace A basin specific hydrologic and economic model was created with the goal to: evaluate third party effects price differentials under the doctrine of prior appropriations 2

3 Water Law in the West Doctrine of Prior Appropriations the first person to use water from a source for beneficial use has the right to continual use with new users allowed to use water for beneficial use as long as they do not impinge on the previous user. 3

4 Physical Constraints Active Water Resource Management Area (AWRM)-enables OSE to actively manage water Makes up only small portion of basin Approximately 800 acres of irrigated agriculture Basin has seen rapid growth in domestic well use Modeled Local hydrology Ephemeral tributary contribution Reservoir losses Crop ET Groundwater interaction 4

5 Crops Crops Basin Schematic Ephemeral Tributary Groundwater Flow Bear Canyon Reservoir Ephemeral Tributary Groundwater Flow 5

6 Grijalva to Montoya Montoya to BCR BCR to Montoya Montoya and Kenly 1 AgriUse Grijalva Soil Water Grijalva CropSeepageGrijalv a AgriUse Montoya Soil Water Montoya CropSeepageMonto ya AgriUse Kenly1 Soil Water Kenly 1 CropSeepageKenly1 Change to equal precip_alt if precip is precip_array to be included in irrigation PrecipGrijalva PrecipMontoya PrecipK1 IrrigGrijalva IrrigMontoya River Leakage GtoM Grijalva OpenEvap Montoya IrrigK1 River Leakage MtoBCR River Leakage BCRtoM River Leakage MK1 OpenEvap Grijalva SeepageGrijalv a Grijalva cfs Montoya cfs cfs Montoya OpenEvap Kenly1 SeepageK1 K cfs M_total G_total upstream_tributarie s Grijalva M reset G reset 0.00 cfs SeepageMonto ya Montoya 0.00 cfs BCR K1 reset K1_total Kenly cfs upstream flow adj 1.63 cfs 1.71 cfs 1.86 cfs 1.50 cfs Upstream Flow upstream_gw_gain GtoM GtoM Outflow MtoBCR MtoBCR Outflow BCRtoM BCRtoM Outflow MK1 Sheppard GtoM BCRtoM MtoBCR MK1 Heuchling 2 3 and 4 Heuchling 1 and 2 Kenly 2 and Heuchling 1 Kenly 1 and Kenly 2 Kenly1 AgriUse Heuchling3 Soil Water Heuchling 3 CropSeepageH3 AgriUse Heuchling2 Soil Water Heuchling 2 CropSeepageH2 AgriUse Heuchling1 Soil Water Heuchling 1 CropSeepageH1 AgriUse Kenly2 Soil Water Kenly 2 CropSeepageK2 PrecipH3 MK1 Outflow PrecipH2 IrrigH3 PrecipH1 PrecipK2 IrrigK2 SeepageH3 IrrigH2 IrrigH1 H3 River Leakage K2H1 OpenEvap Kenly2 SeepageK2 River Leakage K1K2 River Leakage H234 River Leakage H1H2 K2 AgriUse Heuchling4 Soil Water Heuchling 4 CropSeepageH4 OpenEvap Heuchling3 OpenEvap Heuchling2 SeepageH2 SeepageH1 H cfs H2 OpenEvap Heuchling1 Heuchling3 Kenly2 Heuchling2 Heuchling1 H1 reset H3 reset Heuchling1 Kenly2 PrecipH4 Heuchling2 H2 reset H1_total K2_total K2 reset H3_total H2_total 2.46 cfs IrrigH4 SeepageH4 H4 Heuchling4 K2H1 Outflow K1K2 Outflow OpenEvap Heuchling4 H4_total H234 H1H2 Outflow H1H2 K2H1 Willow_Springs K1K2 Shingle H4 reset Brunner H234 H1H2 K2H1 K1K2 Heuchling to San Lorenzo Heuchling3 AgriUse SanLorenzo Soil Water San Lorenzo CropSeepageSL 1.70 cfs Mimbres Gage Tributary Inflow Calculations Error tributary_percent tributary_flow H234 Outflow PrecipSL precip_alt Correlate error with precip, and then distribute to tributaries based on drainage area Error spreadsheet is unconnected. Reconnect when ready to calibrate. Not sure what to do with Bear Canyon since it is dammed. Maybe run it in 1930 b/f dam and then use that error percent as BCR inflow after the dam. irrig_season_start Heuchling4 River Leakage HtoSL IrrigSL SL reset SeepageSL SL returnconveyance sanlorenzo SL_total SL_diversion SanLorenzo 0.56 cfs HtoSL Outflow 1. San Lorenzo East 2. San Lorenzo West 3. Heuchling 3 4. Heu chling 4 5. Heuchling 2 6. Heuchling 1 7. Montoya 8. Grijalva 9. Kenly Kenly 1 HtoSL HtoSL Priority Order System diversion rules are not based on any priority except for san lorenzo call. In order to consider 3rd party effects when banking, we may need to add more details. Irrigation days matrix was set up to have irrigation on different days, which may alleviate some effects. Methods: Integrated Modeling Grijalva to San Lorenzo Heuchling to San Lorenzo Heuchling4 Heuchling3 Hydrology model Upper Mimbres river, Nine irrigation ditches, Bear Canyon Reservoir, Fluvial and regional groundwater system, Domestic and irrigation demands Water rights Priority allocations, and Priority call procedures 4.49 cfs FS donations instream flow AgriUse SanLorenzo Soil Water San Lorenzo CropSeepageSL H234 Outflow FS right PrecipSL instream_flow_chec k Upper Mimbres: Grijalva to San Lorenzo River Leakage HtoSL IrrigSL SL reset SeepageSL SL returnconveyance sanlorenzo SL_total SL_diversion SanLorenzo HtoSL Outflow HtoSL Open Water Ev HtoSL 6

7 Mimbres Trading Market Interface 7

8 The Experimental Setup Coupled the Hydrologic model to the experimental interface to run 4 treatments 13 participants representing the actual users in the basin participated in a 4 week experiment First two sessions informed participants on the legal structure of prior appropriations and how to use the interface Second two sessions participants utilized the software to engage in market transactions 8

9 Mimbres Treatments No Stacking No Call Baseline scenario, we generate this scenario Call 1986 Water Year 2treatments conducted 9/12 Stacking 1968 Water Year 2 Treatments conducted 9/12 Our Understanding is this is a legal constraint and we did not conduct these experiments? Call- senior water rights can require that junior water rights stop using water so the water will reach the senior users Stack- two or more water rights of different priorities are used for the same use and in the same place of use 9

10 Expected Results Price Efficiency Expected Price = Observed Market Price Number of transactions by priority date Market should alleviate the impacts of a call, that is fewer calls or less users impacted by a call Do third party effects exist 10

11 Results: Weighted Average Market Price Stacking No Call Scenario Weighted average price by month- the shaded area of the box represents one standard deviation 11

12 Results:No Stacking With A Call Scenario Weighted average price by month- the shaded area of the box represents one standard deviation 12

13 Results: Total Number Of Trades With A Stack No Call Scenario Later priority dates trade more from May to August Earlier priority dates have a higher number of trades in the fall and early spring 13

14 Results: Total Number Of Trades With A No Stack Call Scenario Later priority dates have higher total traders in the beginning of the year and in the fall 14

15 Results: Effects Of Water Leasing On A Call A Call was expected in July and August We observed a smaller call, both in number of ditches and length as a result of market transactions Expectations for Call Priority Date June July Aug 1895 X X 1894 X X 1893 X 1880 X Observed Call In No Stack 1 Observed Call In No Stack 2 Priority Date June July Aug Priority Date June July Aug 1895 X X 1895 X 1894 X X 1894 X

16 River Channel Results: Third Party Effects Two types of effects Within ditch effects Trades within a ditch only (i.e. right ditch or left ditch only) Across ditch effects Trades from the right ditch to the left ditch or left to right ditch Representation of 3 rd party effects Diversion A B Diversion C Return Flow D E Return Flow F 16

17 Take Aways Observed prices seem to not differ much from expectations Still analyzing the results to investigate if price differentials exist Relatively consistent trading pattern by priority date by month The market decreased the number of users impacted by a call Data is still being analyzed to understand if third party effects exist 17

18 18