Communication and Water Resource Management in South Kingstown and Narragansett, Rhode Island - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Communication and Water Resource Management in South Kingstown and Narragansett, Rhode Island PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: 23fd60-ZDc1Z



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Communication and Water Resource Management in South Kingstown and Narragansett, Rhode Island

Description:

The Water Resources Board ... The Water Resources Board. The Implementation Team: where worlds collide ... Water Resources Board (Kathy Crawley) Research Methods ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:43
Avg rating:3.0/5.0

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Communication and Water Resource Management in South Kingstown and Narragansett, Rhode Island


1
HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH?
Communication and Water Resource Management in
South Kingstown and
Narragansett,
Rhode Island
Alex Coria 3/22/2005
2
Overview
  • Study Questions and Hypotheses
  • Study sites
  • Background
  • Research Methods
  • Findings
  • Conclusions and Recommendations

3
Study Question
  • Are there problems of communication in South
    Kingstown and Narragansett which may affect the
    long-term ecological health of the Chipuxet River
    and the Mink Brook, and if so, what are they?

4
Hypotheses
  • Lack of knowledge
  • Lack of information-sharing
  • Differences between written plans and actions
    carried out

5
Study Sub-Questions
  • What is known about the state of the Chipuxet
    River and the Mink Brook?
  • How informed are town planners, water suppliers
    and the WRB about ecological issues facing the
    Chipuxet and the Mink, and how are they
    addressing those issues?
  • Where do town planners, water suppliers and the
    WRB get their information?

6
Overview
  • Study Questions and Hypotheses
  • Study sites
  • Background
  • Research Methods
  • Findings
  • Conclusions and Recommendations

7
(No Transcript)
8
Overview
  • Study Questions and Hypotheses
  • Study sites
  • Background
  • Research Methods
  • Findings
  • Conclusions and Recommendations

9
Background
  • Rhode Island - water-rich?

10
Background
  • Rhode Island - water-rich?
  • yes and no - could mean trouble for the ecology
    of water resources.

11
Background
  • What is safe yield?

12
Background
  • What is safe yield?
  • The practicable rate of withdrawing water from
    the aquifer perennially for human use.
    (Little, 1991, from the American Society of
    Engineers.)

13
Background
  • What is safe yield?
  • The practicable rate of withdrawing water from
    the aquifer perennially for human use.
    (Little, 1991, from the American Society of
    Engineers.)
  • What is practicable?

14
Background
  • What is safe wellfield yield?
  • the amount of water that can practicably be
    pumped perennially from a developed wellfield
    without causing long-term storage depletion or
    unacceptable stream-flow, wetland, environmental
    or water-quality impacts. SGP Section
    722.02-03(1.)

15
Background
  • What is safe wellfield yield?
  • the amount of water that can practicably be
    pumped perennially from a developed wellfield
    without causing long-term storage depletion or
    unacceptable stream-flow, wetland, environmental
    or water-quality impacts. SGP Section
    722.02-03(1.)
  • What is unacceptable?

16
Background
  • What is safe wellfield yield?
  • the amount of water that can practicably be
    pumped perrennially from a developed wellfield
    without causing long-term storage depletion or
    unacceptable stream-flow, wetland, environmental
    or water-quality impacts. SGP Section
    722.02-03(1.)
  • What is unacceptable?

17
Background
  • The Water Resources Board

18
Background
  • The Water Resources Board
  • Regulates the development, protection and
    conservation of water resources

19
Background
  • The Water Resources Board
  • Regulates the development, protection and
    conservation of water resources
  • Facilitates water resources management on a
    watershed level

20
Background
  • The Water Resources Board
  • The Implementation Team
  • where worlds collide

21
Background
  • The Water Resources Board
  • The Implementation Team
  • where worlds collide
  • This study Planners and Water Suppliers

22
Overview
  • Study Questions and Hypotheses
  • Study sites
  • Background
  • Research Methods
  • Findings
  • Conclusions and Recommendations

23
Research Methods
  • Document Review
  • Comprehensive Plans
  • Water Supply System Management Plans

24
Research Methods
  • Interviews
  • Water Suppliers (URI, NWD, SKWD, KWD)
  • Town Planners (SK and Narragansett)
  • Water Resources Board (Kathy Crawley)

25
Research Methods
  • Analysis of USGS streamflow data for the Chipuxet
  • Literature review for the Mink

26
Overview
  • Study Questions and Hypotheses
  • Study sites
  • Background
  • Research Methods
  • Findings
  • Conclusions and Recommendations

27
Findings
  • Chipuxet
  • Chipuxet River
  • Low flows getting lower and possibly more
    frequent over time, so thought to be stressed
  • One-to-one relationship between withdrawal and
    streamflow depletion

URI
KWD
South Kingstown Planning
28
Findings - Chipuxet
Kingston
URI
SK Planning
SK Planning
URI
Kingston
29
Findings
Findings
Mink
  • Mink Brook
  • Has been thought to be stressed since 1991 at
    least.
  • Very little research, no stream gage.

UWRI
NWD
SKWD
South Kingstown Planning
Narragansett Planning
30
Findings
Findings
Mink
  • Mink Brook
  • Has been thought to be stressed since 1991 at
    least.
  • Very little research, no stream gage.

UWRI
NWD
SKWD
South Kingstown Planning
Narragansett Planning
31
Findings - Mink
SKWD
NWD
UWRI
SK Planning
Narr. Planning
Narr. Planning
?
SK Planning
UWRI
NWD
SKWD
32
Findings
Water Resources Board
33
Findings
Water Resources Board
34
Findings
Water Resources Board
35
Findings
  • Water Resources Board
  • Planners say they have little, if any, contact
    with the WRB WRB says they have good contact,
    when necessary.
  • Water suppliers report varied levels of contact,
    from seeing the WRB as a nonregulatory,
    background mediator, to cooperating regularly
    with the Board, to serving on the Board.
  • The Water Supply System Management Planning
    process is constantly in flux.

36
Overview
  • Study Questions and Hypotheses
  • Study sites
  • Background
  • Research Methods
  • Findings
  • Conclusions and Recommendations

37
Conclusions
  • Potential Problems
  • Lack of knowledge
  • Lack of information-sharing
  • Differences between written plans and actual
    policy

38
Conclusions
  • Potential Problems
  • Lack of knowledge
  • Lack of information-sharing
  • Differences between written plans and actual
    policy
  • Actual Problems
  • Lack of knowledge (empirical and personal) about
    the status of the Mink and Chipuxet
  • Lack of information-sharing between water
    suppliers and town planners
  • Differences between Plans and interviews policy
    and knowledge
  • Frustration with regulators from water
    suppliers and planners

39
Conclusions
  • Potential Problems
  • Lack of knowledge
  • Lack of information-sharing
  • Differences between written plans and practical
    action
  • Actual Problems
  • Lack of knowledge (empirical and personal) about
    the status of the Mink and Chipuxet
  • Lack of information-sharing between water
    suppliers and town planners
  • Differences between Plans and interviews policy
    and knowledge
  • Frustration with regulators from water suppliers
    and planners.

Everyone
SK, UWRI
SKP, SKWD, NP, NWD, URI, UWRI?
KWD, NP, NWD, UWRI
40
Recommendations
Recommendations
  • Comprehensive Plan requirements regarding water
    supply.
  • Reporting in WSSMP of wellfield yield that will
    not violate streamflow standards. (once they are
    set.)
  • Standardize research and reporting methods and
    fund research on stream ecology and hydrology.
  • Consistency among Comprehensive Plans and WSSMPs
    re future demand.
  • Annual watershed check-in meetings.

41
Recommendations
Recommendations
  • More detailed information from water suppliers
    re major developments.
  • Towns should comment on WSSMP requirements.
  • Tri-town study proposed by Narragansett should be
    carried out.
  • Water suppliers and towns should be required to
    provide updates on this studys progress and/or
    findings as a condition of their next Plan
    approval.
  • The WRB should work with the towns to identify
    potential sources of funding.

42
Acknowledgements!
  • Harold Ward
  • Beverly OKeefe, WRB
  • Jeff Ceasrine (NWD), Clark Collins (NP)
  • John Schock (SKWD), Ray Nickerson (SKP)
  • Anna Prager (SK)
  • Henry Meyer (KWD)
  • Dave Lamb (URI)
  • Kathy Crawley (WRB)
  • Anne Veeger
  • Lynn Carlson
  • Caroline Karp, Allison Sobel, Erin Bray
  • Mike Ahnrud, Statewide Planning
  • Steve Hamburg and Chris Zarcadoolas
  • My family
  • The A-squad and others (who know who they are)
  • CES community
About PowerShow.com