PROCEDURES FOR THE DIVISION OF THE WATERS OF THE ST. MARY AND MILK RIVERS
prepared by
United States Geological Survey, Department of the Interior, Helena, Montana
and
Water Survey Division, Meteorological Service of Canada, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Calgary, Alberta and Regina, Saskatchewan
2018 Edition
(supersedes the 1975, 1979, 1991, and 2003 edition) 2018 Revisions Log
Section(s) Page(s) Description of Change Table of Contents --- Updated section 6.1-6.9 page numbers Revisions Log --- Added 2018 revisions log 6.1 6.2-6.3 Revised procedure: non-apportioned basins within the Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River 6.9 6.77 Updated contact list for interim reports
Appendix B B.10 Updated contact list Appendix E E.2 Updated contact list Appendix H All Revised to include email contact notification list for annual IJC report distribution Appendix I All Revised to include email contact notification list for Procedures Manual updates
Revision Dated: 2/15/2018 2017 Revisions Log
Section(s) Page(s) Description of Change Table of Contents --- Updated section 5.2.4 page number Revisions Log --- Added 2017 revisions log Definitions 2.1 Updated recent agency name/acronym changes 4.6 4.21, 4.23 Updated position title, contact information 5.2.3 5.4-5.9 Updated to reflect current use of Penman equation in ET determinations 5.5.1 5.13 Updated to reflect current computation procedures 5.6.3 5.27 Updated contact information 6.2.3 6.12 Updated agency (AEP) acronym 6.7 6.45 Change in Middle Cr Reservoir Special comp procedure 6.8 6.51 Change in form to reflect Middle Cr Reservoir comp update 6.9.3 6.77 Updated contact list for interim reports
Appendix B B.10 Updated contact list Appendix C C.26-C.32 Added MILKNAT2010 user manual Appendix D All Added recent forms, removed field personnel birth date information Appendix E All Updated list of water management contacts Appendix H All Updated annual IJC report distribution list Appendix I All Updated Procedures Manual distribution list Appendix M All Updated with signed memoranda
Revision Dated: 2/23/2017 2013 Revisions Log
Section(s) Page(s) Description of Change Revisions Log --- Added 2013 revisions log Table of Contents Updated to reflect page number/section heading changes Definitions 2.1 Updated with new agency names and acronyms 4.2 4.4 Updated equation to show application of a 1-day lag to Lake Sherburne contents change 4.4 4.7 Removed “U.S. Border Patrol” 4.6 4.21-4.23 Added (new) sections 4.6.1 and 4.6.2, updated contact list and page numbers 5.1 5.2 Updated last paragraph 5.4 5.12 Removed “U.S. Border Patrol” 5.5 5.13 Updated to reflect change in interim MILKNAT computational procedures, removed section 5.5.2 (IJC MILKNAT Spreadsheet Application), renumbered pages 5.6 5.25-5.27 Added (new) sections 5.6.1 and 5.6.2, updated contact list and page numbers 5.7 5.28 Page number 6.2 6.7 Updated to clarify determination of Net Reservoir Evaporation Loss 6.3 6.22 Updated agency name changes 6.4 6.24 Updated agency name changes 6.5 6.25-6.33 Updated agency name changes, added index-velocity method to section 6.5.7 (Huff Pumping Canal) 6.6 6.36 Updated agency name changes 6.7 6.45 Updated agency name changes 6.9 6.75-6.77 Added (new) sections 6.9.1 and 6.9.2, updated contact list and page numbers
Appendix A All Updated station list Appendix B B.10 Updated contact list Appendix C C.26 Added MILKNAT2010 User Manual as replacement for section 5.5.2 Appendix D All Added recent forms, removed field personnel birth date information Appendix E All Updated Water-Management contact list Revision Dated: 2/12/2013 2013 Revisions Log
Section(s) Page(s) Description of Change Appendix F All Updated to reflect current procedures and station assignments Appendix G All Updated agency name and rounding rule changes Appendix H All Updated annual IJC report distribution list Appendix I All Updated Procedures Manual distribution list Appendix J All Updated to reflect current publication specifications Appendix M All Updated with signed memoranda
Revision Dated: 2/12/2013 2012 Revisions Log
Section(s) Page(s) Description of Change Revisions Log --- Added 2012 revisions log Table of Contents Updated to reflect page number/section heading changes 4.5 4.9 Updated computer pathname to directories and files 4.6 4.21-4.22 Contact list and page numbers updated 5.2 5.9 Updated Section 5.2.6.1 5.5 5.13-5.27 Updated to reflect change in interim MILKNAT computational procedures 5.6 5.28 Contact list and page numbers updated 6.9 6.75-6.76 Updated Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River interim report mailing list Appendix E All Updated Water-Management contact list Appendix H All Updated annual IJC report distribution list Appendix I All Updated Procedures Manual distribution list
Revision Dated: 2/16/2012 2010 Revisions Log
Section(s) Page(s) Description of Change Revisions Log --- Added 2010 revisions log Table of Contents Updated to reflect page number/section heading changes 3.0 3.3 Added 2007 Letter of Intent for the Eastern Tributaries of Milk 4.3.3 4.6 Added Letter of Intent conference call paragraph 4.5.4 4.20 NEW SECTION, St Mary R summary table used to track cumulative Letter of Intent deficits 4.6 4.21-4.22 Mailing list and page numbers updated 5.3 5.11 Added Letter of Intent conference call paragraph 5.5.4 5.23 NEW SECTION, Milk R summary table used to track cumulative Letter of Intent deficits 5.6 5.24 Mailing list and page numbers updated 5.7 5.25 Page number updated 6.2 6.5-6.21 Updated section 6.2.2.2 and subsequent page numbers 6.3 6.22-6.23 Page numbers updated 6.4 6.24 Page numbers updated 6.5 6.25-6.32 Page numbers updated 6.5.8 6.33-6.35 Index-velocity computations method added, page numbers updated 6.6 6.36-6.44 Page numbers updated 6.7 6.45-6.47 Page numbers updated 6.8 6.48-6.74 Page numbers updated, added section 3.8.4 (Penman’s Equation) 6.9 6.75-6.76 Updated Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River interim report mailing list 6.10 6.77-6.78 Added Hyde/Woodward report (2006) 6.11 6.79 Page numbers updated Appendix E All Updated Water-Management contact list Appendix H All Updated annual IJC report distribution list Appendix I All Updated Procedures Manual distribution list
Revision Dated: 2/18/2010 2009 Revisions Log
Section(s) Page(s) Description of Change Revisions Log --- Added 2009 revisions log. 4.6 4.20-4.21 Mailing list updated 5.6 5.23 Mailing list updated 6.9 6.73 Updated Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River interim report mailing list. Appendix E All Updated Water-Management contact list Appendix H All Updated annual IJC report distribution list. Appendix I All Updated Procedures Manual distribution list. Appendix L Map 1 Updated St. Mary and Milk River Drainage Basins map.
Revision Dated: 2/17/2009 2008 Revisions Log
Section(s) Page(s) Description of Change Revisions Log --- Added 2008 revisions log. Table of Contents All Updated to reflect inclusion of 2007 Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River Letter of Intent 4.6 4.20-4.21 Mailing list and example letter updated 5.6 5.23 Mailing list updated 6.2 6.6-6.7 Description of Reesor Reservoir net reservoir computations updated 6.3 6.21-6.22 Updated to include 2007 Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River Letter of Intent 6.9 6.73 Updated Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River interim report mailing list. Appendix B All Updated to include Eastern Tributaries Letter of Intent section. Appendix E All Updated Water-Management contact list Appendix H All Updated annual IJC report distribution list. Appendix I All Updated Procedures Manual distribution list. Appendix L Map 1 Updated St. Mary and Milk River Drainage Basins map
Revision Dated: 2/21/2008 2006-2007 Revisions Log
Section(s) Page(s) Description of Change Revisions Log --- Added 2006-2007 revisions log. Table of Contents --- Updated Section 6.0 page numbers 5.0 All All page numbers were revised to reflect new page created in section 5.1. 5.1 5.1, 5.2 Added two paragraphs of historical background information. 5.2.3 5.3, 5.4 Added paragraph and Figure 5.1 to describe change in evapotranspiration applications. 5.2.4.3 5.7 Added historical reference and recent decision to remove Verdigris Coulee from computations. 5.2.5 5.8 Revised to accurately describe history of West-East travel time applications. 5.2.6 5.9 Revised year in last sentence to 2006. 5.3 5.10-5.11 Minor editorial changes in each sub-section. 5.4.2 5.12 Agency name change, “U.S. Customs” is now “U.S. Customs and Border Protection”. 5.5.1 5.13-5.14, Updated pathnames, filenames and menu displays (eliminated 4-day option). 5.18-5.22 Updated examples with year 2004 5-day lag computations. 5.6 5.23 Updated personnel changes (Rich Moy replaced by Larry Dolan). 6.2-6.11 All All page numbers were revised after adding reservoirs background section. 6.2.2 6.4-6.8 Added historical background, other minor revisions scattered throughout text. 6.3 6.21 Agency name change, “Sask Water” is now “Saskatchewan Watershed Authority (SWA)” 6.4 6.23 Agency name change, “U.S. Customs” is now “U.S. Customs and Border Protection”. 6.5 6.24, 6.28 Agency name change, “Sask Water” is now “Saskatchewan Watershed Authority (SWA)” 6.8 All Updated examples of Tables 10 and 14. 6.9 6.72 Updated Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River interim report mailing list. Appendix H All Updated annual IJC report distribution list. Appendix I All Updated Procedures Manual distribution list.
Revision Dated: 2/22/2007
Revisions Log
REVISION DATED: 02/24/2005
Section Page(s) Description of Change Revisions Log --- New section. Table of Contents --- Added Section 6.2.2.6 and Appendix M (Memoranda). 2.0 2.1 Updated agency name changes (Alberta Environment, Saskatchewan Watershed Authority). 4.3.3 4.6 Corrected erroneous date in second paragraph (i.e., between March 1 and May 31). 4.6 4.20, 4.21 Updated St. Mary interim report mailing list. 5.6 5.20 Updated Milk River interim report mailing list. 6.2.2.3 6.6, 6.7 Updated explanatory notes and form to reflect change in reservoir evaporation calculations. 6.2.2.6 6.8 Added new “Stage-Capacity Tables” section. 6.2.3 6.9 Added new paragraph describing change in Lodge Creek basin minor diversions application. 6.4 6.21 Revised PFRA pasture access paragraph. 6.9 6.69, 6.70 Updated Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River interim report mailing list. 6.10 6.71, 6.72 Added reports by R. Hopkinson (1999) and M. Seneka (2002) to bibliography. Appendix E All Updated mailing list for interim reports. Appendix H All Updated annual IJC report distribution list. Appendix I All Updated Procedures Manual distribution list. Appendix M M.1, M.2 New appendix.
02/24/2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION...... 1.1 2.0 DEFINITIONS ...... 2.1 3.0 BACKGROUND ...... 3.1 4.0 ST. MARY RIVER ...... 4.1 4.1 Introduction ...... 4.1 4.2 Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow ...... 4.2 4.2.1 Division Periods ...... 4.2 4.2.2 Lake Sherburne ...... 4.2 4.2.2.1 Storage changes ...... 4.2 4.2.2.2 Reservoir evaporation ...... 4.2 4.2.2.3 Reservoir contents computation ...... 4.3 4.2.3 St. Mary Canal ...... 4.3 4.2.4 St. Mary River at International Boundary ...... 4.3 4.2.5 Natural-Flow Computations ...... 4.4 4.2.5.1 Provisional Computations ...... 4.4 4.2.5.2 Final Computations ...... 4.4 4.3 Water Division ...... 4.5 4.3.1 Shares ...... 4.5 4.3.2 Surplus and Deficit Deliveries ...... 4.5 4.3.3 Letters of Intent ...... 4.6 4.4 Field Procedures ...... 4.7 4.4.1 Field Schedules ...... 4.7 4.4.2 Border-Crossing Privileges ...... 4.7 4.5 Computation Procedures and Forms...... 4.8 4.5.1 USGS Computer Programs ...... 4.8 4.5.2 WSD Spreadsheet ...... 4.10 4.5.3 Manual Computations and Forms ...... 4.11 4.5.4 St. Mary Division Letter of Intent Summary Form ...... 4.20 4.6 Information Exchange of Interim ...... 4.21 4.6.1 Hydrometric Data ...... 4.21 4.6.2 Interim Reports ...... 4.22 4.6.3 Contact List for Interim Reports ...... 4.23 5.0 MILK RIVER ...... 5.1 5.1 Introduction ...... 5.1 5.2 Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow ...... 5.3
2/12/2013 5.2.1 Division Periods ...... 5.3 5.2.2 Hydrologic Factors ...... 5.3 5.2.3 Evaporation/Evapotranspiration ...... 5.3 5.2.4 Consumptive Uses ...... 5.6 5.2.4.1 Irrigated Agriculture ...... 5.6 5.2.4.2 Municipal and Domestic Consumption ...... 5.8 5.2.4.3 Verdigris Coulee ...... 5.8 5.2.5 West-East Travel Time ...... 5.8 5.2.6 Natural-Flow Computations ...... 5.10 5.2.6.1 Provisional Computations ...... 5.10 5.2.6.2 Final Computations ...... 5.10 5.3 Water Division ...... 5.11 5.3.1 Shares ...... 5.11 5.3.2 Surplus and Deficit Deliveries ...... 5.11 5.3.3 Letters of Intent ...... 5.12 5.4 Field Procedures ...... 5.13 5.4.1 Field Schedules ...... 5.13 5.4.2 Border-Crossing Privileges ...... 5.13 5.5 Computation Procedures and Forms...... 5.14 5.5.1 Computational Procedures ...... 5.14 5.5.2 Forms ...... 5.16 5.5.3 Milk River Letter of Intent Summary Form ...... 5.26 5.6 Information Exchange of Interim Reports ...... 5.27 5.6.1 Hydrometric Data ...... 5.27 5.6.2 Interim Reports ...... 5.28 5.6.3 Contact List for Interim Reports ...... 5.29 5.7 References ...... 5.31 6.0 EASTERN TRIBUTARIES OF THE MILK RIVER ...... 6.1 6.1 Introduction ...... 6.1 6.2 Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow ...... 6.4 6.2.1 Division Periods ...... 6.4 6.2.1.1 Flows from March 1 to October 31 ...... 6.4 6.2.1.2 Flows Outside the March 1 to October 31 Period ...... 6.4 6.2.2 Reservoirs ...... 6.5 6.2.2.1 Storage Changes ...... 6.6 6.2.2.2 Evaporative Losses ...... 6.6 6.2.2.3 Net Reservoir Depletions ...... 6.10 6.2.2.4 Reservoir Contents ...... 6.11 2/16/2018 6.2.2.5 Monthend Contents Table ...... 6.11 6.2.2.6 Stage-Capacity Tables ...... 6.12 6.2.3 Minor Diversions ...... 6.13 6.2.4 Domestic Projects ...... 6.14 6.2.5 Channel Losses ...... 6.16 6.2.5.1 Frenchman River Basin Channel-Loss Factors ...... 6.17 6.2.5.2 Battle Creek Basin Channel-Loss Factors ...... 6.18 6.2.5.3 Lodge Creek Basin Channel-Loss Factors ...... 6.18 6.2.6 Return Flows ...... 6.21 6.2.6.1 Frenchman River Basin Return Flows ...... 6.21 6.2.6.2 Battle Creek Basin Return Flows ...... 6.21 6.2.6.3 Lodge Creek Basin Return Flows ...... 6.22 6.3 Water Division ...... 6.23 6.3.1 Shares ...... 6.23 6.3.2 Surplus and Deficit Deliveries ...... 6.23 6.3.3 Artificial Deficits ...... 6.24 6.3.4 Letter of Intent ...... 6.24 6.4 Field Procedures ...... 6.25 6.4.1 Field Schedules ...... 6.25 6.4.2 Border-Crossing Privileges ...... 6.25 6.4.3 AESB Pasture Access ...... 6.25 6.5 Frenchman River Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures ...... 6.26 6.5.1 Cypress Lake – 11AC037 ...... 6.26 6.5.2 Belanger Creek Diversion to Cypress Lake – 11AC064 ...... 6.26 6.5.3 Cypress Lake East Outflow Canal – 11AC060 ...... 6.26 6.5.4 Eastend Canal near Eastend – 11AC052 ...... 6.30 6.5.5 Val Marie Pump No. 1 – 11AC068 ...... 6.30 6.5.6 Val Marie Pump No. 2 ...... 6.30 6.5.7 Huff Lake Pumping Canal – 11AC066 ...... 6.31 6.5.8 Huff Lake Gravity Canal – 11AC065 and Newton Lake Main Canal – 11AC054 ...... 6.34 6.6 Battle Creek Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures ...... 6.37 6.6.1 Shepherd Ditch near Consul – 11AB020 ...... 6.37 6.6.2 McKinnon Ditch near Consul – 11AB044 ...... 6.37 6.6.3 Return Flow from Consul and Nashlyn Projects ...... 6.37 6.7 Lodge Creek Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures ...... 6.46 6.7.1 Middle Creek Reservoir – 11AB080 ...... 6.46 6.7.1.1 Middle Creek Reservoir Bedford Outlet – 11AB114 ...... 6.46 6.7.1.2 Middle Creek Reservoir Flood Spillway – 11AB115 ...... 6.47 2/16/2018 6.7.1.3 Walburger Coulee below Diversions – 11AB086 ...... 6.47 6.7.2 Stokke – Buchanan Irrigation Projects Usage ...... 6.47 6.7.3 Squaw Coulee near Willow Creek – 11AB103 ...... 6.48 6.8 Other Computation Procedures and Forms...... 6.49 6.8.1 Lodge Creek Basin ...... 6.49 6.8.1.1 Lodge Creek Natural Flow Computation Spreadsheets ...... 6.49 6.8.2 Battle Creek Basin ...... 6.56 6.8.2.1 Battle Creek Natural Flow Computation Spreadsheets ...... 6.56 6.8.2.2 Example of 2001 Return Flow Analysis ...... 6.62 6.8.3 Frenchman River Basin ...... 6.64 6.8.3.1 Frenchman River Natural Flow Computation Spreadsheets ...... 6.64 6.8.3.2 CANAL Program Documentation ...... 6.69 6.8.4 Penman’s Equation ...... 6.74 6.9 Information Exchange of Interim Reports ...... 6.76 6.9.1 Hydrometric Data ...... 6.76 6.9.2 Interim Reports ...... 6.77 6.9.3 Contact List for Interim Reports ...... 6.78 6.10 References...... 6.79 6.11 Other Information Sources ...... 6.81
2/16/2018 APPENDICES
A Lists of stations ...... A.1 . International gauging stations operated jointly by the United States and Canada, St. Mary and Milk River drainage basins ...... A.2 . Gauging stations operated independently by either the United States or Canada, St. Mary and Milk River drainage basins ...... A.4 B 2001 and 1991 Letters of Intent, St. Mary and Milk Rivers Streamflow Transfer ...... B.1 . 2001 Letter of Intent ...... B.2 . Procedures for Computation of Deficit and Surplus Deliveries to better utilize waters of St. Mary and Milk Rivers ...... B.4 o St. Mary River ...... B.4 o Milk River ...... B.5 . 1991 Letter of Intent ...... B.6 . 2007 Letter of Intent, Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River ...... B.7 C Documentation related to Milk River Natural-Flow Computations ...... C.1 . Hanson Method ...... C.2 . 1988 correspondence regarding mean daily water-consumption estimates for use during dry years ...... C.6 . MILKNAT2000b User Manual ...... C.16 . MILKNAT2010 User Manual ...... C.26 D Copies of correspondence regarding border-crossing privileges ...... D.1 E List of water-management contacts ...... E.1 F Exchange of field data and requirements for publication ...... F.1 G Preparation of Annual Report to the IJC ...... G.1 . St. Mary River ...... G.7 . Milk River...... G.14 . Battle Creek ...... G.20 . Lodge Creek ...... G.22 . Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River ...... G.27 . Frenchman River...... G.32 H Distribution list for Annual Report to the IJC ...... H.1 I Distribution list for Procedures Manual ...... I.1 J Publication Specifications ...... J.1 . Annual Report to IJC ...... J.2 . Procedures Manual ...... J.12 K Conversion Factors ...... K.1 L Maps ...... L.1 2/12/2013 Introduction
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The division of the waters of the St. Mary River and Milk River, including its tributaries, is governed by the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 which specifies the proportion of the natural flow to which each country is entitled. The subsequent Order of the International Joint Commission (IJC) dated October 4, 1921, gives general procedural guidelines for determining natural flow.
The natural-flow determinations are done on an interim basis to provide near real-time information for water management to ensure that each country receives its share of the natural flow. In order to provide timely information, it is necessary to use provisional data including approximations: therefore, the natural-flow computations are redone at year-end when final data are available. The year-end computations represent a final account of the division and are included in the annual report to the IJC. The procedures, assumptions, and approximations used in determining the natural flow evolved with time but were not documented until, at the January 1975 meeting of the Field Representatives, it was decided to document the methods used to compute the natural flow. Since then, the documentation has been continually refined and updated to reflect new or modified procedures.
The intent of this report is to: 1. Document the procedures and assumptions used in determining natural flow. 2. Document the reasoning for certain procedures or assumptions. 3. Act as a user's manual for determining the natural flow on an interim and annual basis.
This Procedures Manual is organized into main sections dealing with the St. Mary River, the Milk River, and the Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River. The appendices contain station lists, historical documents, data-exchange guidelines, maps, schematics, publication specifications, and mailing lists for the interim and final reports. A companion document to this manual is the Procedural Guide for International Gauging Stations on Boundary Waters between Canada and the United States of America (1985)1. This guide contains information on designation and operation of international gauging stations and the full text of the 1909 Boundary Waters Treaty and the 1921 Order of the International Joint Commission.
______
1Huberman, S., Slater, J.E., and Condes, A., 1985, Procedural Guide for International Gauging Stations on Boundary Waters between Canada and the United States of America: Ottawa, Canada, Department of the Environment, Inland Waters Directorate WRB Report IWD-HQ-WRB-PG-85-1; Reston, Va., U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 85-329, 104 p.
1.1 1/23/2013 Definitions
2.0 DEFINITIONS
AAFC – Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.
AESB – Agri-Environment Services Branch; previously known as Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration (PFRA).
AEP – Alberta Environment and Parks.
BOR – Bureau of Reclamation, Department of the Interior.
DCP – Data Collection Platform (for satellite transmission of hydrometric information).
Deficit delivery – a deficit delivery has occurred if, at the end of a division period, the terms of the Treaty have not been met at a specific division point, or if a discharge criterion has not been met.
Diversion – a man-made transfer of water from a stream for use at some other location.
IJC – International Joint Commission.
IJC Report – annual report to the IJC on the Division of the Waters of the St. Mary and Milk Rivers.
Imperial Units – Inch-pound (or English) units.
MSC – Meteorological Service of Canada.
Natural Flow – the quantity of water which would naturally flow in any watercourse had the flow not been affected by man-made features.
Order – October 4, 1921, Order of the IJC.
SWSA – Saskatchewan Water Security Agency; previously known as Saskatchewan Watershed Authority (SWA) .
SI – International System of Units.
SPC – Saskatchewan Power Corporation.
Surplus delivery – a surplus delivery has occurred if, at the end of a division period, an exceedance in the terms of the Treaty has occurred at a specific division point, or if a discharge criterion has been exceeded.
Treaty – Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909.
USGS – United States Geological Survey, Department of the Interior.
WSD – Water Survey Division, Meteorological Service of Canada, Environment Canada and Climate Change; previously known as Hydrometric Monitoring Division (HMD), Monitoring and Operations Division (MOD), Water Resources Branch (WRB), and more traditionally as Water Survey of Canada (WSC).
2.1 2/23/2017
Background
3.0 BACKGROUND The St. Mary River begins (or originates) in northwestern Montana on the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains and flows north across the International Boundary into Alberta, emptying into the Oldman River near Lethbridge. The St. Mary River has a fairly regular and dependable flow during the summer irrigation period because of its source in the high elevation snow fields and glaciers of Glacier National Park. Winter flows are sustained by a ground-water base flow. The Milk River begins (or originates) in the foothills of the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains in Montana, flows northeasterly across the International Boundary into Alberta and, turning eastward, roughly parallels the boundary for about 350 river kilometres (220 miles), re-crosses the International Boundary into Montana, and empties into the Missouri River. The river flow is dependent on spring snowmelt and rainfall in the foothills and is thus less regular and dependable than the St. Mary River as a source of water. A map showing the St. Mary and Milk River drainage basins is contained in Appendix L. When early development of agriculture extended into the semi-arid areas of western Canada and the United States, it was soon evident that irrigation would be essential. The Governments of both countries agreed to determine the water supplies available and the lands upon which they could be economically utilized. The following is a brief chronology of events from the late 1800s related to the development of the division of the St. Mary and Milk Rivers: 1891 Colonel E.S. Nettleton, Chief Engineer, U.S. Department of Agriculture, reported on a reconnaissance investigation for a proposed canal to divert a part of the waters of the St. Mary River to the Milk River for irrigation in eastern Montana. 1893 Canada, by an Act of Parliament, incorporated the Alberta Irrigation Company and empowered the Company to engage in irrigation and to purchase or sell lands south of the fiftieth parallel of latitude in Alberta. 1894 The first diversion from the Milk River for irrigation purposes occurred at the Fort Belknap Canal near Harlem, Montana. The Fourth Annual Irrigation Congress passed a motion urging the appointment of a joint Canada-United States commission to investigate and report upon International waterways affecting irrigation interests in both countries but no action followed. 1895 A survey in Canada showed the feasibility of irrigating a large tract of southern Alberta land by diverting water from the St. Mary River near the International Boundary. 1898 Construction work commenced on the southern Alberta irrigation project.
3.1 February 2017
Background
1900 The United States Reclamation Service determined that a diversion canal from the St. Mary River could be routed across the divide to the headwaters of the Milk River which would allow water to flow through Canada to the lower Milk River valley for irrigation. 1901 Canada, concerned over the possible loss of St. Mary River water due to the United States diversion canal, initiated surveys to determine the feasibility of diverting water from the Milk River for irrigation use. 1903 Following negotiations between the United States and Great Britain, the International Waterways Commission was appointed to investigate and report upon the conditions and uses of the water adjacent to the boundary between the United States and Canada. The question of the use of the waters of the St. Mary and Milk Rivers was brought before the Commission but no action could be taken as Congress had limited the jurisdiction of the United States section of the Commission to waters whose natural outlet was the St. Lawrence River. 1904 The first section of the Canadian Milk River Canal was completed. The diversion alarmed United States irrigators who prompted the United States Government to protest the Canadian Milk River Canal. 1905 Canada invited the United States to suggest a plan for the settlement of the St. Mary-Milk Rivers dispute. 1906 The United States Reclamation Service commenced construction on the diversion canal to divert water from the St. Mary River to the Milk River in Montana. 1907 The United States submitted its proposals for resolving the St. Mary River dispute; however, the International Waterways Commission had already begun to draft a treaty between Great Britain and the United States. The draft treaty covered the matter of the use of boundary waters in general between the United States and Canada and proposed the establishment of a joint commission to administer the treaty. 1909 The Boundary Waters Treaty was signed and Article VI therein expressly provided for the handling of the St. Mary-Milk Rivers problem: the measurement and division of the waters was to be under the direction of the International Joint Commission (IJC) which was established by the Treaty. 1921 The Treaty did not specify the method of measurement or division of the waters and the controversy that erupted over this question was almost as intense as the one which led to the negotiation of the Treaty. The IJC held a number of public hearings to settle the arguments and on October 4, 1921, issued an order on the method of measurement and division. The Order provided additional guidance regarding the division of waters of the St. Mary and Milk Rivers and also provided for the division of the Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River. This Order is still in effect although the actual computations procedures have evolved through a process of cooperative consultation between the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and what is now the Water Survey Division (WSD).
3.2 February 2017
Background
1991 A Letter of Intent to better utilize the waters of the St. Mary and Milk Rivers was signed by the Accredited Officers. The Letter specified that a more beneficial use of the waters of the St. Mary and Milk Rivers could be achieved by allowing Canada to accumulate a deficit on the Milk River until the end of September of any year. In exchange, the United States would be allowed to accumulate a deficit on the St. Mary River from March through May. 2001 A revised Letter of Intent to better utilize the waters of the St. Mary and Milk Rivers was signed by the Accredited Officers. This Letter replaced the 1991 Letter of Intent and clarified the timing and quantity of allowable deficit deliveries. Both Letters of Intent are shown in Appendix B. 2007 A Letter of Intent to better utilize the waters of the Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River was signed by the Accredited Officers. The Letter provided an apportionment procedure to provide for a more beneficial use by both countries by allowing increased flexibility in the storage and release of water in the Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River. A copy of the Letter of Intent is available in Appendix B. Three of the eastern tributaries of the Milk River have sufficient current usage to require a formal division. These tributaries: Frenchman River, Battle Creek and Lodge Creek, begin in the Cypress Hills area of southeastern Alberta and southwestern Saskatchewan and flow in a southeasterly direction to join with the Milk River in Montana. Division of the water of these tributaries began in 1937 in the Frenchman River basin, 1957 in the Battle Creek basin and 1961 in the Lodge Creek basin. The remaining major tributaries--Woodpile, East Fork Battle, Lyons, Whitewater, Rock, and McEachern Creeks--do not as yet have sufficient usage in Canada to warrant a division of flow.
3.1 TECHNICAL WORKING GROUPS 3.1.1 Milk River Technical Working Group (MRTWG) In 2000 and 2001, the Milk River basin experienced two consecutive low flow years. During each of these low flow years, the use of the existing procedures resulted in determinations of significant negative natural flows at the Eastern Crossing during the summer months. While computation of negative natural flows can be expected to occur from time to time due to inherent inaccuracies in the procedure, the persistence of negative flows over an extended period of time indicates that the procedures being used to determine one or more of the parameters (discharge, enhanced evaporation, consumptive use, seepage, travel times, etc.) may potentially have a significant systematic error. A systematic error, if it exists, may also impact the record during years of higher flow when the reduced flow does not show up as negative values and hence is harder to identify. Investigations and studies were considered for making improvements to the accuracy and timeliness of the Milk River apportionment computations (MRTWG Annual Report to the Field Representatives, 2005).
3.3 February 2017
Background
In March 2002, Mr. Russell Boals, the Canadian Field Representative to the IJC, created a Terms of Reference for a technical study group to address issues/ concerns regarding natural flow computations. At the 2003 International Records Meeting in Montana, the Field Representatives for the United States and Canada accepted the Terms of Reference and established the Milk River Technical Working Group (MRTWG Annual Report to the Field Representatives, 2005). The following outlines the initial Terms of Reference and the membership of the technical working group: The technical working group will undertake the following investigations and provide interim and final reports, as necessary to the Field Representatives for the United States and Canada. The specific items to be studied include: 1. Evaluate the potential methods for determining when to apply Dry Year Consumption Uses for the determination of the natural flow of the Milk River, and recommend a methodology including the need to update the estimate of consumptive uses for dry, median, and wet years and the distribution of these consumption uses throughout the year. 2. Evaluate the present procedure of zeroing negative natural flow values by assessing the cause for these values to be negative, and recommend options for improvement to the procedures or the need for guidelines in the application of zeroing negative natural flows. 3. Develop a field study plan for determining travel times and assessing losses in the Milk River between the Western and Eastern crossings. 4. Identify other data, procedural, or technology limitations and barriers that restrict the determination of the Milk River Natural Flow in a timely manner. The technical working group will have representation from USGS, Environment Canada, Bureau of Reclamation, Province of Alberta, and the State of Montana and will be chaired by the Environment Canada representative. Dated March 07, 2002
3.1.2 Eastern Tributaries Technical Working Group (ETTWG) Similarly with the MRTWG, there was an understanding that further improvements could be made to the accuracy and timeliness of the Eastern Tributaries natural flow computations. In March 2002, Mr. Russell Boals, Canadian Field Representative to the IJC, created a Terms of Reference for a technical group to review several long standing concerns. The Terms of Reference was accepted at the February 2003 International Records Meeting in Helena Montana and the Eastern
3.4 February 2017
Background
Tributaries Technical Working Group was established (ETTWG Annual Report to the Field Representatives, 2005). The following outlines the initial Terms of Reference and the membership of the technical working group: The technical working group will undertake the following investigations and provide interim and final reports, as necessary, to the Field Representatives for the United States and Canada. The specific items to be studied include: 1. Review the technical studies that have been undertaken by the Committee of Hydrology (COH) of the Prairie Provinces Water Board (PPWB) on Middle and Lodge Creeks and identify a study plan for assessing the elements of the COH study including: • Use of on-site precipitation and evaporation to assess reservoir depletions. • Inclusion of appropriate adjustments to the Altawan pan evaporation data for use at Greasewood, Massy, Michel, Bare Creek and Mitchell reservoirs. • Alternative approaches for adjusting reported at-site minor irrigation diversions to provide an estimate of the effect of these projects on the natural flows at the interprovincial boundary. • Assess the appropriateness of channel loss estimation procedures, and recommend any long-term field investigations which may be required to further improve the estimation of channel losses. 2. Identify other procedural modifications that should be investigated and incorporate into the study plan developed under Terms of Reference 1.0. 3. Evaluate the present procedure of zeroing negative natural flow values by assessing the cause for these values to be negative, and recommend options for improvement to the procedures or the need for guidelines in the application of zeroing negative natural flows. 4. Develop a draft discussion statement outlining considerations and potential procedures for managing deficit deliveries on the Eastern Tributaries which occur at the end of the fifteen day apportionment divisional periods. 5. Identify other data, procedural, or technology limitations and barriers that restrict the determination of the natural flow of the Eastern Tributaries in a timely manner. The technical working group will have representation from USGS, Environment Canada, Bureau of Reclamation, Province of Alberta, Province of Saskatchewan, and the State of Montana and will be chaired by the USGS representative. Dated March 07, 2002
3.5 February 2017
Background
3.1.3 St. Mary-Milk Rivers Technical Working Group (SMRTWG) Procedures have been developed over time to remove the effects of human activities so a reasonable approximation of the natural flow, or apportionable flow, in each basin can be determined. The procedures and formulae that have evolved, through the assistance of the technical working groups, for each basin are both unique and complex. There remains an understanding that further improvements could be made to the accuracy and timeliness of the respective St. Mary River, Milk River, and Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River natural flow computations (SMRTWG Annual Report to the Field Representatives, 2014-15). During the International Records Meeting held in February 2013, the Field Representatives discussed the commonality of purpose for the MRTWG and the ETTWG. The Field Representatives agreed to close the MRTWG and ETTWG and constitute a new technical working group, the St. Mary-Milk Rivers Technical Working Group. The two technical working groups were merged and a Terms of Reference for the newly formed technical group was developed. Consideration was given for retaining work plans that had an on-going status from previous technical working groups. The evolving functions of the group were also considered in the formation of the new technical working group. The SMRTWG was formally established in April, 2013 under a Terms of Reference written by Mr. Russell Boals, the Canadian Field Representative to the IJC. (SMRTWG Annual Report to the Field Representatives, 2014-15). The roles and functions of the technical working groups have evolved over time. Initially, the technical working groups addressed specific work items listed in the Terms of Reference. The groups have developed to be more involved with initiating and dealing with general work items. The technical working groups have evolved into an advisory role to the Field Representatives, providing invaluable investigations and insight regarding natural flow procedures and computations. As reflected in the Terms of Reference, the amalgamated technical working group would further develop this role as an advisory group to the Field Representatives. In addition to undertaking investigations and studies, the technical working group would foster open communication to ensure timely exchange of information, identify operational issues, and support the beneficial use of water with respect to the Letter of Intent (SMRTWG Annual Report to the Field Representatives, 2014). The following outlines the Terms of Reference and the membership of the technical working group: The St Mary and Milk Rivers Technical Working Group (SMRTWG) replaces the Milk River Technical Working Group (MRTWG) and the Eastern Tributaries Technical Working Group, (ETTWG) which were both established in 2002. The St Mary and Milk Rivers Technical
3.6 February 2017
Background
Working Group scope of work includes the St Mary and Milk Rivers and their tributaries in the State of Montana and the Provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan. The St Mary and Milk Rivers Technical Working Group will undertake the following investigations and provide an annual progress report during the annual International Records meeting or final reports, as necessary, to the Field Representatives for the United States and Canada. The specific items to be studied include: 1. Assist in the evaluation and development of alternative methods for determining consumptive use for the Milk River basin considering the estimate of consumptive uses for dry, median, and wet years and the distribution of these consumption uses throughout the year as per a Plan of Study. 2. Assess and make recommendations on alternate methods of determining evaporation and evapotranspiration losses in Milk River Channel on a near real-time basis 3. Implement a field study plan for determining travel times and assessing losses and gains in the Milk River between the Western and Eastern crossings of the International Boundary. 4. Undertake the work required to complete the following ETTWG Work Plan Elements: • 2009 Work Plan Element 6.1: Investigate Return Flow Processes in the Nashlyn Area of the Battle Creek Basin. • 2006 Work Plan Element 6.1: Investigate return flow processes in all basins of the Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River. • 2006 Work Plan Element 6.2: Assess appropriateness of channel-loss equations used in apportionment of the Eastern Tributaries. 5. Develop discussion papers and make recommendations on matters of technical interest such as the following: • Investigate use of head-discharge relationships at stations equipped with artificial control (weirs) structures. • Conduct a sensitivity analysis on the components used to determine the Milk River natural flow in the MilkNat2010 model. 6. Identify other data, procedural, or technology limitations and barriers that restrict the determination of the natural flow for the St. Mary and Milk River basins in a timely manner. 7. Undertake other investigations and projects as assigned by the Field Representatives.
3. 7 February 2017
Background
In addition to undertaking the above investigations and studies, the St Mary and Milk Rivers Technical Working Group will foster open communications amongst the participants to ensure the timely exchange of information, the identification of operational issues, and the beneficial use of water with respect to the Letters of Intent. The technical working group will have representation from USGS, Environment Canada, Bureau of Reclamation, Province of Alberta, Province of Saskatchewan, and the State of Montana and will be co- chaired by the USGS and Environment Canada representative. Representation from o basin associations and organizations will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Dated: April 11, 2013
3. 8 February 2017 St. Mary River Introduction
4.0 ST. MARY RIVER
4.1 INTRODUCTION
The waters of the St. Mary River are divided in accordance with the Order of the IJC dated October 4, 1921. In general terms, Rule I states that during the irrigation season (April 1 to October 31), Canada shall be entitled to three-fourths of the natural flow at the International Boundary when the natural flow is 666 cubic feet per second (ft3/s) (18.9 cubic meters per second (m3/s)) or less. Flows in excess of 666 ft3/s (18.9 m3/s) shall be divided equally between the two countries. During the non-irrigation season (November 1 to March 31) the natural flow at the International Boundary shall be divided equally between the two countries.
Although the Order states “…keep a daily record of the natural flow…”, division of flow on this frequency was not practical and twice-monthly accounting reports (or divisions) of daily natural flows were adopted whenever a diversion is being made to the St. Mary Canal. Generally, reports are not necessary during the remainder of the year when the only depletion by the United States is storage in Lake Sherburne. The mean annual discharge into this reservoir is only about one-quarter of the mean annual natural flow of the St. Mary River at the International Boundary.
Lake Sherburne, the only storage reservoir in the St. Mary River basin in the United States, is used to store a portion of the United States' share for diversion to the Milk River. This water, after passing through Canada, is utilized by the United States in the lower Milk River valley.
A schematic map (No. 5 in Appendix L) of the St. Mary River basin shows the monitored points used in the natural-flow computations.
In very general terms, the natural flow of the St. Mary River at the International Boundary is computed from the recorded discharge records for the St. Mary River at the International Boundary adjusted for storage or release at Lake Sherburne and the diversion into the St. Mary Canal.
4.1 1/23/2013 St. Mary River Procedure for Determining Natural Flow
4.2 PROCEDURE FOR DIVISION OF NATURAL FLOW
4.2.1 Division Periods
During the irrigation season (April 1 to October 31) provisional computations are made twice-monthly (every 15 or 16 days) to determine natural flows, shares, and deliveries during the period. Similar computations are made in March when a diversion from the St. Mary River into the St. Mary Canal occurs. Examples of all the water-division computations and forms are shown in section 4.5. The natural flow during the remainder of the non-irrigation season (November through February) is computed using form INT-3 for convenience. Provisional natural-flow computations are exchanged between WSD and USGS for checking as soon as possible. The summary sheet, INT-1 or computer equivalent, is sent to the agencies listed in section 4.6.
4.2.2 Lake Sherburne
4.2.2.1 Storage changes Any water that is stored in Lake Sherburne depletes the natural flow and is charged to the United States. Conversely, any water released from Lake Sherburne augments the natural flow and is credited to the United States. The amount of water stored or released on a given day is computed as the difference in reservoir contents between adjacent midnight readings.
Any storage or release that takes place at Lake Sherburne requires about one day to affect the flow at the International Boundary; therefore, a 1-day lag is applied to the data for Lake Sherburne. For instance, a volume of water released from Lake Sherburne on the first day of the month would appear in the natural-flow computations on the second day of the month.
4.2.2.2 Reservoir evaporation The net evaporation loss is fairly insignificant due to:
1. the reservoir having consistently cool surface conditions. 2. a small net increase in open water surface due to reservoir construction, (the reservoir was originally two smaller lakes) and 3. the reservoir having a short retention time.
For these reasons, evaporation has not been included in the calculation of natural flow since 1983.
4.2 2/12/2013 St. Mary River Procedure for Determining Natural Flow
4.2.2.3 Reservoir contents computation Reservoir contents are computed using the midnight stage readings in Imperial units (adjusted for datum and sensor resets) from the real-time DCP record and the stage-capacity table. Wind and seiche effects are graphically eliminated when necessary, and the "smoothed" trace is used to compute the midnight readings.
When water is being released from Lake Sherburne and the lake level drops below a stage of about 34 feet (ft), drawdown will affect the outside gauge (USGS usage “gage”) readings because the orifice is attached to the upstream side of an old wooden crib-type weir about 500 ft upstream from the gauge. When this occurs, interpolation of the stage data is necessary to estimate gauge heights, as even the outside gauges do not indicate true lake level. Fortunately, this happens very infrequently and only for short periods of time. The explanation is given here only to alert the unfamiliar hydrographer to the situation.
When applying minor stage corrections (<0.03 ft), consideration should be given to the limitations of the sensing and recording instruments on such a large body of water.
Midnight contents and 24-hour changes can be determined once the correct midnight stage reading has been computed and entered into the USGS Fortran77 computer program, SHER. Detailed instructions and an example of Lake Sherburne monthly output are given in section 4.5.
4.2.3 St. Mary Canal
The volume of diversion charged to the United States is gauged ten miles downstream from the canal intake. At this point, a double syphon transfers the flow from the left bank to the right bank of the St. Mary River. Any channel loss between the intake and the gauge is assumed to eventually return to the river channel and become part of the recorded flow at the International Boundary. Likewise, when the syphon valves are open, all canal flow returns to the river and any flow recorded at the gauge is revised to zero. Stage data are collected in SI units. Dates and times of syphon operations are obtained from the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR).
4.2.4 St. Mary River at International Boundary
Daily discharge values are computed from real-time DCP stage data which is collected in Imperial units.
4.3 2/12/2013 St. Mary River Procedure for Determining Natural Flow
4.2.5 Natural-Flow Computations
The natural flow of the St. Mary River at the International Boundary is defined as the flow which would have reached Canada had it not been for man-made changes in the drainage basin. Because the United States has constructed Lake Sherburne and the St. Mary Canal, the effects of these features on the natural flow must be accounted for by computations.
The equation used to compute the natural flow of the St. Mary River is as follows:
Natural Flow at = Total flow used by the U.S. + Recorded flow at International (contents change in Lake International Boundary Sherburne* plus flow diverted Boundary into the St. Mary Canal)
*With 1-day lag applied.
Several computer programs developed by the USGS are used to compute natural flow and display the water-division results. Detailed instructions regarding the computer programs and examples of output are given in section 4.5.
Manual computations are made on form INT-1 (shown in section 4.5.3) if access to the USGS computer system is not available.
In most years, the initial release from Lake Sherburne is made when Swiftcurrent Creek is full of ice and Lower St. Mary Lake is at its annual low level. Consequently, the water released takes 4 to 5 days to reach the boundary. When the amount of water released exceeds the recorded flow at the boundary, the computations indicate negative natural flow. Prior to 2002, these negative values were set to zero because an assumption had been made that the natural flow should realistically be some positive number. In 2002, the United States and Canadian Field Representatives agreed, on a technical basis, that negative natural flow values should be kept and used in the water division accounting.
4.2.5.1 Provisional Computations Provisional semi-monthly natural-flow computations are made by the country responsible for the monthly field visit. Interim results need to be distributed no later than 5 working days after the monthend.
4.2.5.2 Final Computations Final natural-flow computations are made by the USGS, Helena.
4.4 2/12/2013 St. Mary River Water Division
4.3 WATER DIVISION
4.3.1 Shares
In accordance with the IJC Order of 1921, Canada is entitled to three-fourths and the United States one-fourth of the natural flow of the St. Mary River at the International Boundary during the irrigation season (April 1 to October 31) when the natural flow is 666 ft3/s (18.9 m3/s) or less. Flows in excess of 666 ft3/s (18.9 m3/s) are divided equally between the two countries. During the non-irrigation season (November 1 to March 31), all flows are divided equally between the two countries.
Computations can be done manually using the St. Mary River Natural Flow Division Table, originally prepared by O.H. Hoover (Department of Mines and Resources, Dominion Water and Power Bureau, Calgary, written commun., 50 p.) in 1937. This form is used to determine shares up to 5,000 ft3/s during the irrigation season. Computations, however, generally are done using a computer program where shares are automatically generated from an internal division table.
4.3.2 Surplus and Deficit Deliveries
The 1921 Order does not specify an accounting procedure for surplus or deficit deliveries in any given period. As a result, the following procedure has evolved: deficit deliveries carry over from one period to another, are cumulative, and must be made up by subsequent surplus deliveries; surplus deliveries do not carry over from one period to another, are not cumulative, and cannot be used to make up future deficits.
The 1921 Order also does not specify a procedure to refund deficit deliveries. Over time, a procedure has evolved to refund any deficit in the subsequent division period or at a time beneficial to both countries.
Modifications to the accounting procedures for surplus and deficit deliveries were adopted by the Accredited Officers in 1991. Additional modifications were adopted in 2001. These modifications are described in section 4.3.3 and Appendix B.
4.5 2/18/2010 St. Mary River Water Division
4.3.3 Letters of Intent
In 1991, the Accredited Officers agreed that a greater beneficial use of the waters of the St. Mary and Milk Rivers could be achieved by simply allowing Canada to accumulate a deficit on the Milk River until the end of September. In exchange, the United States would be allowed to accumulate a deficit on the St. Mary River from March to May, during which time the United States is usually diverting as much water as possible into the Milk River system. Both deficits would be limited to 2,000 cfs-days (4,900 cubic decametres (dam3)), and would be made up with future surplus deliveries or a balance of deficits between the two river systems.
In 2001, the procedure was revised and a new agreement was adopted by the Accredited Officers. This new agreement allows the United States to accumulate a deficit up to 4,000 cfs-days (9,800 dam3) on the St. Mary River between March 1 and May 31 of each year. Deficits greater than the allowed cumulative total of 4,000 cfs-days (9,800 dam3) are to be refunded in the subsequent division period. During June 1 through July 15 of each year the United States may reduce the accumulated deficit to 2,000 cfs-days (4,900 dam3) with surplus deliveries. The remaining deficit is not refundable until after September 15 of each year. Any deficit deliveries during the June 1 to September 15 period must be refunded with surplus deliveries in the subsequent division period. On September 15 of each year, outstanding deficits accumulated by Canada on the Milk River can be used to offset deficit deliveries accumulated by the United States on the St. Mary River. All remaining outstanding deficits are to be equalized by October 31.
A separate accounting of the Letter of Intent deficits is made for each division period using form found in section 4.5.4.
On or about July 1, and again by September 15 of each year, the Field Representatives of the Accredited Officers and representatives of the United States Bureau of Reclamation, Montana Department of Natural Resources, and Alberta Environment shall participate in a conference call or meeting to discuss refund of remaining deficit deliveries.
Both Letters of Intent are shown in Appendix B.
4.6 2/18/2010 St. Mary River Field Procedures
4.4 FIELD PROCEDURES
4.4.1 Field Schedules
The USGS has primary responsibility for the monitoring and record computations at the Lake Sherburne and St. Mary River at International Boundary hydrometric gauging stations. The WSD has the primary responsibility for the St. Mary Canal at St. Mary River Crossing hydrometric station. All stations are operated and visited monthly on a cooperative basis by alternating months of responsibility during the irrigation season. A 4-6 week visitation interval is maintained during the non-irrigation season when a diversion is not being made. If diversions to the St. Mary Canal have begun, then all stations involved in the St. Mary division will be visited on a monthly basis.
The USGS and WSD are responsible for the ownership and maintenance of hydrometric gauging stations located within their respective countries.
4.4.2 Border-Crossing Privileges
Servicing hydrometric gauging stations along the International Boundary often requires the crossing of the boundary at uncontrolled points. Special border-crossing privileges have been granted by United States and Canadian governments to the USGS and WSD for servicing the boundary stations. These privileges require that the hydrometric personnel follow special check-in procedures with Canada Customs, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Refer to Appendix D for details on the procedures.
4.7 2/12/2013 St. Mary River Computation Procedures and Forms
4.5 COMPUTATION PROCEDURES AND FORMS
4.5.1 USGS Computer Programs
The USGS has the primary responsibility to provide the final St. Mary River natural-flow division report. Several computer programs or scripts have been developed to compute and generate interim and final water-division reports. These programs, followed by a brief description, are listed below:
nflo – UNIX alias or shortcut for script, /home/nmidtlyn/sbin/main.ksh, which is used to initiate main natural-flow computation menu (shown below).
************************************************ * * * WELCOME TO * * MAIN NATURAL FLOW * * DIRECTORY * * * * MENU * * * ************************************************ ************************************************
1__ Milk River at Eastern Crossing 2__ Milk River at Harlem 3__ St. Mary River 4__ EXIT
Please enter your option number now.
mwdl.f77 -- This program computes natural flow for the St. Mary River at International Boundary on a user-defined monthly basis and automatically incorporates a 1-day lag to Lake Sherburne data. Midnight gage height elevations for Lake Sherburne and daily discharge figures for St. Mary Canal and St. Mary River are used to compute natural flow. Data can be entered automatically or manually using other programs contained in the main menu.
table1.f77 -- This program will generate March to October natural-flow printouts in both cfs-days and dam3 and a summary table (in dam3 and acre- feet). The metric copies are used in the annual IJC report (Table 6, Appendix A). Data should be finalized before initiating this program.
sher.f77 -- This program was developed to replace the manually computed Lake Sherburne change in contents form. The program computes daily contents and change in contents from automatically retrieved or manually entered Lake Sherburne gauge-height elevations.
4.8 2/16/2012 St. Mary River Computation Procedures and Forms
To begin computations of interim St. Mary River natural flows, computer access must be established to the USGS Sun server, s5dmthln.cr.usgs (I.P. address 136.177.224.5) in Helena, Montana where the computational programs reside.
Enter the “nflo” command (in lower-case) or “/datasection/nat.flow/main.ksh” once a connection has been made to the USGS s5 computer. Enter option number “3” (St. Mary River option), and the following menu will appear:
************************************************ * * * WELCOME TO * * ST MARY RIVER WATER DIVISION * * DIRECTORY * * * * MAIN MENU * * * ************************************************ ************************************************
1 __ Retrieve DCP data stored in ADAPS 2 __ EDIT/REVIEW Lake Sherburne data 3 __ Print Lake Sherburne summary to DATA printer 4 __ EDIT/REVIEW St. Mary Canal/River data 5 __ Run MONTHLY division 6 __ Print MONTHLY division to DATA printer 7 __ List MONTHLY results on screen 8 __ Run FINAL division with TABLE 1 summary 9 __ Print FINAL results to DATA printer 10 __ List FINAL results on screen 11 __ List directory 12 __ Return to MAIN Natural Flow Menu 13 __ EXIT
Please enter your option number now.
The above menu is self-explanatory. Follow instructions provided with each option.
Important: Please note that several data files (z.ksh, data.file, sdata.file, and tbdata.file) include date fields that need to be updated annually. These files are located in the directory /datasection/nat.flow/stmary. Line items in each file which require annual updates are:
z.ksh (the above menu script) – beginning (-b) and ending dates (-e) nwts2rdb -osherrdb -n05015500 -tdv -d2 -s32400 -b20020101 -e 20021231 nwts2rdb -ostmcrdb -n05018500 -tdv -d1 -s3 -b20020101 -e 20021231 nwts2rdb -ostmbrdb -n05020500 -tdv -d5 -s3 -b20020101 -e 20021231
data.file – Number of days in February 28 !* VARIABLE DAYSMO(2) (DAYS IN FEBRUARY)
sdata.file -- Number of days in February and computational year 28 /* XX NUMBER OF DAYS IN FEBRUARY THIS YEAR. 4 /* XXXX COMPUTATION YEAR. 1988 OR 1989, ETC.
4.9 2/16/2012 St. Mary River Computation Procedures and Forms
tbdata.file – Computation years and number of days in February. Starting and ending months and units of data files are optional.
2002 !* XXXX COMPUTATION YEAR. 1984 OR 1985 ETC.. 28 !* XX NUMBER OF DAYS IN FEBRUARY THIS YEAR. 3 10 !* XX XX STARTING AND ENDING MONTHS 1 1 1 !* X X X UNITS OF DATA FILES, 1=CFS 2=CMS
4.5.2 WSD Spreadsheet
The WSD has developed a Microsoft Excel 97 spreadsheet program to duplicate the USGS computer programs and generate provisional monthly St. Mary River water-division reports. An example of this program is shown below.
Natural Flow of St.Mary River at International Boundary Provisional Report for June, 2002. Quantities in cfs-days
1 5 8 9 12 13 14 15 16 United States Flow in excess St. Mary Share St.Mary Canadian Share of Lake Sherburne Canal Total St. Mary River St. Mary River River at I.B. St. Mary River at I.B. Canadian Net Change in Mean Daily Used by United at of Computed Volume Flow States International at Mean Daily Natural IF(Total>666, Mean Daily Flow Lagged 1 day Diverted Boundary International Flow 0.75*666 + 0.5*(Total-666), by St.Mary Gauged Boundary Computed Else: 0.75*Total) Canal ref: Mean Daily Flow Mean Daily Mean Daily Flow Day Table No.8 Table No.28 Natural Flow col 4+col 7 col 9 + col 12 col 13 - col 15 col 12 - col 15
Previous 1 1616 636 2252 4150 6402 3035 3367 783 2 1342 636 1978 4130 6108 2888 3220 910 3 1041 632 1673 3820 5493 2580 2913 907 4 838 650 1488 3450 4938 2303 2635 815 5 827 653 1480 3330 4810 2239 2571 759 6 1002 646 1648 3410 5058 2363 2695 715 7 1162 629 1791 3380 5171 2420 2751 629 8 905 614 1519 3600 5119 2393 2726 874 9 938 491 1429 4270 5699 2684 3015 1255 10 909 459 1368 5930 7298 3483 3815 2115 11 830 217 1047 5380 6427 3048 3379 2001 12 586 216 802 4770 5572 2620 2952 1818 13 579 228 807 4580 5387 2527 2860 1720 14 637 212 849 4470 5319 2493 2826 1644 15 778 199 977 4770 5747 2707 3040 1730 15 day Balance: 18675
16 891 184 1075 5230 6305 2987 3318 1912 17 1199 156 1355 5810 7165 3417 3748 2062 18 1507 131 1638 5900 7538 3603 3935 1965 19 1130 51 1181 6000 7181 3425 3756 2244 20 695 4 699 5980 6679 3174 3505 2475 21 336 2 338 5760 6098 2883 3215 2545 22 307 1 308 5620 5928 2798 3130 2490 23 376 0 376 5760 6136 2902 3234 2526 24 463 0 463 6220 6683 3175 3508 2712 25 344 0 344 6530 6874 3271 3603 2927 26 42 0 42 6630 6672 3170 3502 3128 27 (51) 0 (51) 6650 6599 3133 3466 3184 28 (67) 0 (67) 6700 6633 3150 3483 3217 29 (887) 0 (887) 6850 5963 2815 3148 3702 30 837 0 837 7070 7907 3787 4120 2950
15 day Balance: 40039 TOTAL 58714
4.10 2/16/2012 St. Mary River Computation Procedures and Forms
4.5.3 Manual Computations and Forms
When access to either the USGS or WSD computer programs cannot be established, manual computations and forms can be used to calculate natural flow and water division of the St. Mary River.
The following forms can be used when necessary:
INT-1 – Natural flow and water division of St. Mary River at International Boundary INT-2 – Daily summary of contents for Lake Sherburne at Sherburne, MT INT-3 – Worksheet to compute annual summaries for IJC report
Examples of blank, completed, and computerized forms (INT-1C, INT-2C) are shown on the following pages.
4.11 2/16/2012 St. Mary River Computation Procedures and Forms
Blank INT-1
4.12 2/16/2012 St. Mary River Computation Procedures and Forms
Example of completed Form INT-1
4.13 2/16/2012 St. Mary River Computation Procedures and Forms
Blank Form INT-2
4.14 2/16/2012 St. Mary River Computation Procedures and Forms
Example of completed INT-2
4.15 2/16/2012 St. Mary River Computation Procedures and Forms
Blank INT-3
4.16 2/16/2012 St. Mary River Computation Procedures and Forms
Example of completed INT-3
4.17 2/16/2012 St. Mary River Computation Procedures and Forms
Example of INT-1C
4.18 2/16/2012 St. Mary River Computation Procedures and Forms
Example of INT-2C
4.19 2/16/2012 St. Mary River Computation Procedures and Forms
4.5.4 St. Mary Division Letter of Intent Summary Form
This table provides a summary of the calculated natural flow and water division of the St. Mary River for each division period and a cumulative summary of Letter of Intent (LOI) deficits and deficits outside the LOI. An example of a completed form is shown below.
20-Jan-10
SUMMARY OF ST. MARY RIVER DIVISION FOR 2009* QUANTITIES IN CFS-DAYS
DIVISION PERIOD NATURAL CANADA'S RECEIVED *LOI DEFICIT DEFICIT AT FLOW SHARE BY RECEIVED BY CANADA TO OUTSIDE LOI INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY CANADA ABOVE SHARE BELOW SHARE DATE TO DATE
MAR 1 - MAR 15 1,461 730 1,067 337 0 0
MAR 16 - MAR 31 1,186 593 1,107 514 0 0
APR 1 - APR 15 2,462 1,846 1,892 46 0 0 APR 16 - APR 30 11,554 7,884 5,252 2,632 2,632 0
MAY 1 - MAY 15 14,464 9,734 8,867 867 3,499 0
MAY 16 - MAY 31 39,224 22,280 24,506 2,226 1,588 0
JUNE 1 - JUNE 15 38,926 21,964 22,505 541 1,047 0
JUNE 16 - JUNE 30 34,394 19,698 19,260 438 1,047 438
JULY 1 - JULY 15 21,317 13,160 13,333 173 1,047 265
JULY 16 - JULY 31 18,918 12,128 12,394 266 1,047 0
AUG 1 - AUG 15 12,107 8,553 8,857 304 1,047 0
AUG 16 - AUG 31 9,613 7,134 7,228 94 1,047 0
SEP 1 - SEP 15 5,196 3,895 3,924 29 1,047 0
SEP 16 - SEP 30 4,099 3,075 3,101 26 0 OCT 1 - OCT 15 3,079 2,307 2,560 253 0
OCT 16 - OCT 31 4,993 3,745 3,525 (220) 220 220
TOTAL
* Letter of Intent allows for a deficit up to 4,000 cfs-days between March 1 and May 31 which may be reduced to no less than 2,000 cfs-days between June 1 and July 15. The remaining deficit is not refundable until after September 15 of that year unless agreed upon in writing by the Field Representative for Canada.
Due to the favourable water supply conditions for the Alberta portion of the St. Mary River basin and the limited water supply conditions in United States portion of the Milk River basin, the IJC Field Representatives agreed that a portion of the 2,226 cfs-days over-delivery during the period May 16 to 31 will be applied against United States deficit delivery under the Letter of Intent for the St. Mary River reducing the deficit to 1,047 cfs-days.
U.S.A. share of Milk River waters outstanding as of September 15, 2009 969 cfs-days
4.20 2/16/2012 St. Mary River Information Exchange of Interim Reports
4.6 INFORMATION EXCHANGE OF INTERIM REPORTS
This section provides guidance regarding the electronic exchange of interim reports between Canada and the United States and supplements established procedures provided for the exchange of original field data as provided in Appendix F. Additional guidance concerning exchange of hydrologic information is available in PART II of the Procedural Guide for International Gauging Stations on Boundary Waters between Canada and the United States of America (1985)1.
4.6.1 HYDROMETRIC DATA
Hydrometric data used in the interim St. Mary River natural flow computations are routinely transmitted electronically, along with a cover letter (see example below), to the field hydrographer responsible for joint operation of the gage and their accountable manager(s). An accountable manager is defined as someone who supervises the individuals collecting field data and prepares the natural flow compilations. In Canada, the accountable managers are the appropriate District Managers of the Alberta and Saskatchewan-Manitoba Districts. In the United States, the International Waters Unit Chief or the Montana Water Science Director are considered the accountable managers.
The accountable managers are to ensure that hydrometric data are checked prior to transmittal and delivered in a timely manner. A confirmation email will be sent upon receipt and approval of all electronically transferred files or delivery of original field notes. An example of a field data exchange cover letter is shown below:
Enclosed are the discharge measurement notes and gage inspection notes for the June 5-7, 2012 field activities. Please note the following sensor reset correction:
Milk River at Western Crossing of International Boundary June 5, 2012 at 1415MST, GH=0.834 m, Q=2.24 cms -0.024 m purging correction at 1355 hours
If you have any questions regarding the data please don't hesitate to call me or
Best regards,
1Huberman, S., Slater, J.E., and Condes, A., 1985, Procedural Guide for International Gauging Stations on Boundary Waters between Canada and the United States of America: Ottawa, Canada, Department of the Environment, Inland Waters Directorate WRB Report IWD-HQ- WRB-PG-85-1; Reston, Va., U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 85-329, 104 p.
4.21 02/12/2013 St. Mary River Information Exchange of Interim Reports
4.6.2 INTERIM REPORTS
Interim natural-flow and water-division reports, form INT-1 or INT-1C, and the St. Mary Division Letter of Intent summary table are routinely transmitted electronically or mailed, along with a cover letter (see example below) to all parties listed in the contact list table (Section 4.6.3).
All interim streamflow and natural flow computations are to be checked prior to being sent to the reciprocating accountable office for review. The interim natural flow computations should include the following attachments; provisional monthly natural flow computation (form INT-1C) or WSD spreadsheet, daily summary of Lake Sherburne contents (form INT-2C), St. Mary River provisional daily discharge computations for period covered by natural flow computation, St. Mary Canal at St. Mary Crossing provisional daily discharge computations for period covered by natural flow computation, and Lake Sherburne provisional computed midnight stage values for period covered by natural flow computation. A St. Mary division Letter of Intent (LOI) summary table shall also accompany the interim natural flow computation report. All interim natural flow computations and LOI summary tables will be reviewed by the other accountable party before the interim report can be released to other stakeholders listed in the interim reports contact list.
Example of interim report cover letter:
Enclosed are the provisional St. Mary River natural flow computations and water division (in cfs-days) for the month of May 2012 and the 2012 St. Mary Letter of Intent (LOI) cumulative division summary table.
Please note that only one deficit period (May 1-15) has occurred so far this year. The current LOI deficit- to-date balance is 599 cfs-days.
If you have any questions regarding the data please don't hesitate to call me or
Best regards,
4.22 02/12/2013 St. Mary River Information Exchange of Interim Reports
4.6.3 CONTACT LIST FOR INTERIM REPORTS
John M. Kilpatrick Dave Moncur Director, Wyoming-Montana Water Science Operations Manager Center Environment and Climate Change Canada United States Geological Survey Water Survey Division 3162 Bozeman Avenue Rm 854, 220 4th Ave. Helena, MT 59601 Calgary, AB T2G 4X3 [email protected] [email protected]
Clayton Jordan Carmen delaChevrotière Bureau of Reclamation Transboundary Water Quantity Specialist Montana Area Office Transboundary Secretariat P.O. Box 30137 Alberta Environment and Parks Billings, MT 59107-0137 11th Floor Oxbridge Place [email protected] 9820 – 106 St. Edmonton, AB T5K 2J6 [email protected]
Paul Azevedo Muhammed Sabur Chief, Water Management Bureau Water Policy Implementation Montana Department of Natural Resources Alberta Environment and Parks and Conservation 2nd Floor, Provincial Building P.O. Box 201601 200 – 5 Avenue South 1424 9th Ave. Lethbridge, AB T1J 4L1 Helena, MT 59620-1601 [email protected] [email protected] Larry Dolan John Mahoney Hydrologist Operations Support Manager Montana Department of Natural Resources Southern Operations (infrastructure) and Conservation Alberta Environment and Parks P.O. Box 201601 Provincial Building, Second Floor 1424 9th Ave. 200 - 5 Avenue S. Helena, MT 59620-1601 Lethbridge, AB T1J 4L1 [email protected] [email protected]
Mike Dailey Terrence Lazarus Hydrologist General Manager Montana Department of Natural Resources St. Mary River Irrigation District 222 Sixth Street South Lethbridge, AB P.O. Box 1269 [email protected] Glasgow, MT 59230-1269 [email protected]
Tim Romanow Executive Director Milk River Watershed Council Canada 240 Main St. Milk River, AB T0K1M0 [email protected]
4.23 02/15/2018 Milk River Introduction
5.0 MILK RIVER
5.1 INTRODUCTION
The waters of the Milk River are divided in accordance with the Order of the IJC dated October 4, 1921. In general terms, Rule II states that during the irrigation season (April 1 to October 31), the United States shall be entitled to three-fourths of the natural flow at the Eastern Crossing of the International Boundary when the natural flow is 666 ft3/s (18.9 m3/s) or less. Flows in excess of 666 ft3/s are divided equally between the two countries. During the non-irrigation season (November 1 to March 31), the natural flow at the eastern crossing of the International Boundary shall be divided equally between the two countries.
Natural-flow computations for the irrigation season are made on a daily basis with interim division reports distributed monthly to interested agencies.
A schematic map (No. 6 in Appendix L) depicts the Milk River basin and shows the monitored points used in the natural-flow computations.
During the irrigation season, water is diverted from the St. Mary River in the United States, via the U.S. St. Mary Canal, to the North Fork Milk River (named the North Milk River in Canada). The Milk River in essence is used as a conveyance channel so that the United States share of the St. Mary River can be utilized for irrigation in the lower United States portion of the Milk River basin.
In general terms, during the irrigation season, the natural flow of the Milk River at Eastern Crossing of International Boundary has been calculated by utilizing the recorded discharge records observed at the following locations: North Fork Milk River above St. Mary Canal, near Browning; North Milk River near International Boundary; Milk River at Western Crossing of International Boundary; Verdigris Coulee near the Mouth; Milk River near Milk River, Alberta; and Milk River at Eastern Crossing of International Boundary. In addition, adjustments are made for increased evapotranspiration losses attributable to diverted St. Mary River water, and water stored or utilized for irrigation (consumptive uses) in both countries. During the periods when the St. Mary River diversion is zero, the natural flow is assumed to be that flow being recorded at Milk River at Eastern Crossing of the International Boundary plus the consumptive uses for agriculture. The natural flow during the non-irrigation season is approximated as the recorded flow of Milk River at Milk River, Alberta.
Over the years the approach for determining the natural flow of the Milk River has evolved. Prior to the mid 1970’s, uses of the Milk River natural flow by Canada and the United States were assumed to be less than the respective shares would have been for each country and no formal apportionment was made. By 1977, it became apparent that the increasing numbers of sprinkler irrigation systems in the basin were capable of using all of the natural flow for long periods of time. Consequently, a
5.1 1/12/2013 Milk River Introduction
more comprehensive natural-flow computation procedure was developed and adopted beginning in 1985. The revised computation procedure included an approximate accounting of irrigation consumptive uses in both countries that was based on work by Thompson (1986). Apart from depletions or consumptive uses, there was also the opportunity on the Canadian side to augment the Milk River streamflow by the inter-basin transfer of water in Canada using Verdigris Coulee. The practice of transfering water through Verdigris Coulee was to serve two purposes: 1) to supply supplemental water for agriculture in Verdigris Coulee, and 2) to augment Milk River flows when deficit deliveries to Montana by Canada were determined.
Additional refinements continue to be made and documented in subsequent sections of this manual as processes become better understood or when changes in water management practices have occurred.
5.2 1/12/2013
Milk River Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
5.2 PROCEDURE FOR THE DIVISION OF NATURAL FLOW
5.2.1 Division Periods
During the irrigation season (April 1 to October 31), provisional computations are made twice-monthly (every 15 or 16 days) to determine natural flows, shares, and deliveries during the period. During the non-irrigation season (November 1 to March 31), no provisional computations are made.
5.2.2 Hydrologic Factors
Many factors need to be taken into consideration when computing the natural flow of the Milk River. Among these are tributary inflows, ground- water contributions, surface-water evaporation, channel losses, and bank storage. Due to water diverted from the St. Mary River to the Milk River via the St. Mary Canal, these factors cannot be studied individually. Consequently, a collective term, net east-west change, is used to describe the combined effect of all factors when computing the natural flow. Net east-west change is simply the arithmetic difference between the recorded flow at Milk River at Eastern Crossing of International Boundary and the total recorded flow at the western crossings (i.e., North Milk River at International Boundary plus Milk River at Western Crossing).
5.2.3 Evaporation/Evapotranspiration
Evaporation loss from the Milk River is increased due to increased surface area resulting from the addition of St. Mary Canal water. This incremental evaporation loss is the computed difference of how much water was lost to the atmosphere under actual conditions as compared to what would have been lost under natural conditions.
Prior to diversion from the St. Mary basin, surveys were conducted along the Milk River which were used to develop relationships of discharge versus area, and then discharge versus unit evaporation. This second relationship, in table form, along with pan evaporation data from Whiskey Gap (observer) and Manyberries (experiment station), was used to determine the incremental evaporation loss due to St. Mary Canal water from 1952 to 1987 in the final calculations. Prior to 1952, the Spreckly Formula was used in the final computations.
Pan evaporation data from Fort Assinniboine, Montana were used to determine incremental evaporation loss in the provisional (or interim) natural flow computations between 1984 and 2012.
In 1988, an evapotranspiration model based on studies by F. I. Morton (1978, 1979, 1983, 1985) replaced pan evaporation in the final calculation.
5.3 2/23/2017 Milk River Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
A summary of Morton's studies in the Milk River basin can be found in Thompson (1986).
In 2000, use of Morton’s model in the final calculations was discontinued because of difficulties in obtaining reliable meteorological data and loss in ability to run Morton’s model on Environment Canada’s computing system when the VAX operating system was replaced by a Windows NT operating system. Daily pan evaporation data from Onefour, Alberta were then used in the final computations to determine incremental evaporation loss rather than the several meteorological variables (average air temperature, average dew point temperature, and sunshine duration) required by Morton’s model.
Daily pan evaporation is simply determined by the difference in water level readings from day to day. Water in the pan is regularly supplemented and thus readings are accordingly adjusted. In the event that precipitation occurred between readings, the net pan evaporation is defined as the total precipitation which occurred between the pan readings plus the difference in the pan readings if the water level in the pan is less than the previous day’s level; or if the water level was higher, then net pan evaporation is defined as the precipitation minus the increase in water elevation.
It is accepted that water evaporates at a greater rate from a pan than from a reservoir due, primarily, to different heat storage characteristics and it is also accepted that the evaporation rate from flowing water is greater than for a still reservoir. Because of the uncertainty in computing actual evaporation from pan evaporation and to keep the computations as uncomplicated as possible, stream evaporation, (i.e., evaporation from flowing water), is defined as:
STREAM EVAPORATION = 1.08 (GROSS RESERVOIR EVAPORATION) where GROSS RESERVOIR EVAPORATION = 0.70 (NET PAN EVAPORATION)
or STREAM EVAPORATION = 0.756 (NET PAN EVAPORATION)
The conversion coefficient of 0.756 has been applied to pan evaporation data since May 1976; prior to that, a coefficient of 0.907 was used.
An alternative means of deriving evapotranspiration values was later developed and used during the 2000 to 2012 computations to estimate evapotranspiration loss values. This method involved use of an evaporation pan adjustment (EPA) in order to generate an approximate Morton’s evapotranspiration (ET) model result. This adjustment was based upon a comparison between the results of Morton’s model (the approved method for deriving evapotranspiration values) and pan evaporation measured with the Class ‘A’ evaporation pan at Onefour, Alberta. It was determined that Morton’s ET model results could be reasonably estimated if a factor of 0.85 was applied to the net evaporation pan data. A comparsion of the two methods is shown in Figure 5.1.
5.4 2/23/2017 Milk River Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
Figure 5.1 Comparison of 0.85 Factor Applied to Onefour, Alberta Gross Evaporation Pan Data to Morton's ET
1600
1400
1200
1000
y = x R2 = 0.8819 800 Red lines indicate +- 5% confidence
0.85 Pan ET(dam3) bands 600
400
200
0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Morton's ET (dam3)
The stream evapotranspiration values used in the final natural flow computations were estimated by applying a EPA factor of 0.85 to the evaporation pan data measured at Onefour, Alberta as follows;
STREAM EVAPOTRANSPIRATION = 0.85 (NET PAN EVAPORATION)
Beginning in 2013, daily pan evaporation data from Onefour, Alberta were no longer available so another method of estimating evapotranspiration losses was implemented and used in both the interim and final natural flow computations. This method, a Penman equation derived by Hyde and Woodward (2006) (referred to as the Saskatchewan Water Survey Division (SK WSD) modifed Penman equation) with a 1.05 coefficient applied, was investigated and recommended for use in several reports by the Milk River Technical Working Group (2007, 2008, 2009, 2012) to the Field Representatives of the Accredited Officers.
This modified Penman method was selected because the required input data (air temperature, relative humidty, net solar radiation, and wind speed) could be easily automated. In 2013, these data were provided by the Milk River at Eastern Crossing of the international boundary climate station. Another benefit of this method was it’s ability to provide near real-time estimates of evapotranspiration losses.
PENMAN’S EQUATION
5.5 2/23/2017 Milk River Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
A discrete version of Penman’s equation used in estimating evaporative losses is as follows:
∆Qn + γEa E = ∆ + γ
where E = daily evaporation (mm) from a water surface Δ = rate of change of vapor pressure at the air temperature Qn = net radiation in evaporation units (mm) γ = Psychrometric constant Ea = bulk aerodynamic estimate of evaporation
Further explanation of the above parameters is available in Section 6.8.4 of this manual and in the report: Comparison of Pan Derived Gross Evaporation at Altawan, Saskatchewan by W. Hyde and J. Woodward (2006).
5.2.4 Consumptive Uses
5.2.4.1 Irrigated Agriculture Prior to the mid-1970s, uses of the natural flow of the Milk River by Canada and the United States were assumed to be less than their respective shares and no formal apportionment was made. By 1977, the increasing numbers of sprinkler irrigation systems were capable of using all of the natural flow for long periods of time. Consequently, a more comprehensive natural-flow-computation and water-division procedure was developed and has been used since 1985. The revised computation procedure includes an approximate accounting of irrigation consumptive uses in both countries.
Irrigation consumptive uses are described in detail by Thompson (1986). They are approximations for an "average” year and are given below. The period July 1-31 differs from Thompson (1986) due to an error in Table 8.
Milk River mean daily water-consumption for irrigation
PERIOD UNITED STATES CANADA (m3/s) (ft3/s) (m3/s) (ft3/s) Apr 1 - May 15 0.00 0 0.00 0 May 16 - 31 1.16 41 0.71 25 Jun 1 - 15 1.16 41 0.74 26 Jun 16 - 30 0.17 6 0.28 10 Jul 1 -31 0.31 11 0.51 18 Aug 1 - 31 0.25 9 0.42 15 Sep 1 - 15 0.17 6 0.28 10 Sep 16 - Oct 31 0.00 0 0.00 0
5.6 2/23/2017 Milk River Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
These consumptive-use estimates have been used since 1985 except during dry years. In 1988, G. Morton (Water Survey Division) developed another set of mean daily water-consumption estimates for irrigation (see documentation in Appendix C) for use during dry years. These “dry year” approximations are given below:
PERIOD CANADA (m3/s) (ft3/s) Apr 1 - May 15 0.00 0 May 16 - 31 0.25 9 Jun 1 - 15 0.28 10 Jun 16 - 30 0.28 10 Jul 1 -31 0.51 18 Aug 1 - 31 0.42 15 Sep 1 - 15 0.28 10 Sep 16 - Oct 31 0.00 0
PERIOD UNITED STATES (m3/s) (ft3/s) Mar 1 - Apr 30 0.20 7 May 1 - 15 0.48 17 May 16 - 31 0.68 24 Jun 1 - 15 0.68 24 Jun 16 -30 0.08 3 Jul 1 - 20 0.14 5 Jul 21 – Aug 31 0.00 0 Sep 1 – 15 0.00 0 Sep 16 - Oct 31 0.00 0
Beginning in 1991, a method of adjusting these average values by a factor (0.8, 0.9, 1.1, etc.) was proposed to provide for a more systematic adjustment to seasonal precipitation patterns, water availability, field observations, and reports of usages. Because most of the water used is from high-elevation runoff or from the St. Mary-water-laden Milk River, the adjustments should be small except in the most extreme cases. A brief discussion of hydrologic conditions and agricultural consumption should be included in the Milk River section of the Annual Report to the IJC each year.
Periodic reviews should be made of water rights and reports of usage in the basin, and average-year consumptive use estimates should be revised accordingly.
In 2005, Alberta began a pilot program to determine actual consumptive use by measurement of direct withdrawls from the Milk River. In 2008, Montana initiated a similar program to determine actual consumptive use in
5.7 2/23/2017 Milk River Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
the United States portion of the upper Milk River basin. Though actual consumptive use was determined the current natural-flow computations continue to use approximate consumptive use values determined by Thompson (1986).
5.2.4.2 Municipal and Domestic Consumption The Milk River basin upstream from the Eastern Crossing of the International Boundary is sparsely populated farm and range land. According to Thompson (1986), municipal and domestic consumption is small in comparison to other uses at this time; therefore, no accounting of those uses is necessary.
5.2.4.3 Verdigris Coulee Beginning in the 2005 irrigation season, Verdigris Coulee inflows are no longer considered in the natural flow computation.
Although this water is no longer considered in the calculation it is important to understand some of the history.
Prior to 1986, Verdigris Coulee was considered a dry channel that would only very rarely naturally spill water into the Milk River.
For the period from 1986 to 2004 inclusive, Alberta made an effort to both increase irrigation and stock watering potential in Verdigris Coulee and to accommodate Canadian deficits on the Milk River that can occur during the irrigation season. Alberta proposed to, and occasionally did, transfer Canadian St. Mary basin water into Verdigris Coulee. This was accomplished by the transfer of water out of Weston Lake and Verdigris Lake. Both lakes, which are headwaters to Verdigris Coulee, can be artificially recharged with water from Ridge Reservoir to the west. The water flowing at Verdigris Coulee near the Mouth was then considered recharge water that had overflowed from both lakes and, therefore, is not natural to the Milk River system and hence for the purpose of the apportionment computation was credited to Canada as negative consumptive use in the natural-flow computations.
In 2005 the State of Montana requested that Alberta discontinue the practice of delivering water through Verdigris Coulee citing concerns with the quality of the water.
5.2.5 West-East Travel Time
Daily flows at Western Crossing must be lagged by 4 or 5 days to account for travel time along the approximately 320 river kilometres (200 miles) between the Western Crossing and the Eastern Crossing of the International Boundary. Prior to 1991, a lag time of 5 days, which was based on dye studies, was used in the computations; however, subsequent hydrograph comparisons indicated that the shorter 4 day travel time resulted in more realistic natural-flow hydrographs. In 2004, the Milk River Technical Working Group reviewed the application of 4 or 5 day lag times using a
5.8 2/23/2017 Milk River Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
hydrographic comparison of 2002 data and recommended that a 5 day lag time be used.
Daily flows at Western Crossing are currently lagged by 5 days in the computations. For example, the recorded flows at the North Fork Milk River, North Milk River, and the Milk River at Western Crossing hydrometric stations that occur on May 1 are used to compute the natural flow at Eastern Crossing on May 5.
Flows at Verdigris Coulee near the Mouth hydrometric station, which are no longer used in the computations, were historically lagged by 2 days.
During the non-irrigation season, recorded daily flows at Milk River at Milk River, Alberta are treated as equal to those at Milk River at Eastern Crossing and are not lagged.
5.9 2/23/2017 Milk River Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
5.2.6 Natural-Flow Computations
5.2.6.1 Provisional Computations Provisional (or interim) monthly natural- flow computations are made by the USGS using provisional real-time streamflow computed by the USGS National Water Information System (NWIS) automated data acquistion processing software (ADAPS). Also, because evapotranspiration data from the meteorological gauges in Alberta are not user-ready, pan evaporation data from the Fort Assinniboine Experiment Station near Havre, Montana are used to compute provisional evaporation losses.
Prior to 2011, provisional computations were derived from a Fortran 77 program which implemented the "Hanson method" to compute the incremental evaporation loss due to St. Mary Canal water. Documentation of the “Hanson method” is provided in Appendix C.
In 2011 and 2012, provisional computations were determined by inputting provisional mean daily discharge and converted pan evaporation data into MILKNAT2010, a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet application. Detailed instructions regarding the spreadsheet application and examples of the output are given in section 5.5.2.
Beginning in 2013, provisional computations were determined by inputting provisional mean daily discharge and Milk River at Eastern Crossing climate data into MILKNAT2010.
5.2.6.2 Final Computations Final natural-flow computations are made by WSD, Calgary using approved discharge data from pertinent streamflow gauges, consumptive irrigation uses for both countries, and evapotranspiration data, which were used to calculate incremental evaporation loss due to St. Mary Canal water. Prior to 2013, pan evaporation data from Onefour, Alberta, were used. Beginning in 2013, evapotranspiration is computed from climate data obtained from the Milk River at Eastern Crossing meteorlogical station using the SK WSD modifed Penman equation with a 1.05 coefficient applied. Since February 2015, with approval from the Field Representatives, the application of a 1.05 coefficient to the SK WSD modified Penman equation has been discontinued, replaced by a 1.00 coefficient in MILKNAT2010. Detailed instructions regarding the spreadsheet application and examples of the output are given in section 5.5.2.
Please note that since 2006, any calculated negative natural flows are assumed to be "zero" in both the provisional and final computations.
5.10 2/23/2017 Milk River Water Division
5.3 WATER DIVISION
5.3.1 Shares
In accordance with the IJC Order of 1921, the United States is entitled to three-fourths (up to 500 ft3/s) and Canada one-fourth (up to 166 ft3/s) of the natural flow of the Milk River at the Eastern Crossing of the International Boundary during the irrigation season (April 1 to October 31) when the natural flow is 666 ft3/s (18.9 m3/s) or less. Flows in excess of 666 ft3/s (18.9 m3/s) are divided equally between the two countries and added to the earlier entitlements of 500 ft3/s for the United States and 166 ft3/s for Canada. Flows during the non-irrigation season (November 1 to March 31) are divided equally between the two countries.
5.3.2 Surplus and Deficit Deliveries
The 1921 Order does not specify an accounting procedure for surplus or deficit deliveries in any given period. As a result, the following procedure has evolved: deficit deliveries are not permitted however if they do occurr they carry over from one period to another, are cumulative, and must be made up by surplus deliveries; surplus deliveries do not carry over from one period to another, are not cumulative, and cannot be used to make up future deficits.
The 1921 Order also does not specify a procedure to refund deficit deliveries. Over time, a procedure evolved to refund any deficit in the subsequent division period or at a time beneficial to both countries.
A Letter of Intent modifying the accounting procedures for surplus and deficit deliveries was adopted by the Accredited Officers in 1991. Additional modifications to the Letter of Intent were adopted in 2001. These modifications are described in section 5.3.3 and Appendix B.
5.11 2/18/2010 Milk River Water Division
5.3.3 Letters of Intent
In 1991, the Accredited Officers, in consultation with Montana and Alberta, agreed that a greater beneficial use of the waters of the St. Mary and Milk Rivers could be achieved by simply allowing Canada to accumulate a deficit on the Milk River until the end of September. In exchange, the United States would be allowed to accumulate a deficit on the St. Mary River from March to May, during which time the United States is usually diverting as much water as possible into the Milk River system. Both deficits would be limited to 2,000 cfs-days (4,900 dam3), and would be made up with future surplus deliveries or a balance of deficits between the two river systems.
In 2001, the procedure was revised and a new agreement, agreed to by Alberta and Montana, was adopted by the Accredited Officers. This new agreement allows Canada to accumulate a deficit up to 2,000 cfs-days (4,900 dam3) on the Milk River from June 1 to September 15. On September 15 of each year, outstanding deficits accumulated by Canada on the Milk River can then be used to offset deficit deliveries accumulated by the United States on the St. Mary River. All remaining outstanding deficits are to be equalized by October 31.
A separate accounting of the Letter of Intent deficits is made for each division period using form found in section 5.5.4.
On or about July 1, and again by September 15 of each year, the Field Representatives of the Accredited Officers and representatives of the United States Bureau of Reclamation, Montana Department of Natural Resources, and Alberta Environment shall participate in a conference call or meeting to discuss refund of remaining deficit deliveries.
Both Letters of Intent are shown in Appendix B.
5.12 2/18/2010 Milk River Field Procedures
5.4 FIELD PROCEDURES
5.4.1 Field Schedules
During March, each country will be responsible for opening and operating stations in their own country, with Canada making one trip to the United States stations as follows:
North Fork Milk River above St. Mary Canal, near Browning – end of month Lake Sherburne – middle of month
During the remainder of the field season, both countries will alternate months of responsibility for servicing all stations within the basin except for the Milk River at Eastern Crossing. The Milk River at Eastern Crossing will be measured (access permitting) in the middle of each month by the USGS and at end of each month by WSD.
The USGS and WSD are responsible for maintenance of hydrometric gauging stations located within their respective countries.
5.4.2 Border-Crossing Privileges
Servicing hydrometric gauging stations along the International Boundary often requires the crossing of the boundary at uncontrolled points. Special border-crossing privileges have been granted by United States and Canadian government agencies to the USGS and WSD for servicing the boundary stations. These privileges require that the hydrometric personnel follow special check-in procedures with Canada Customs, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Refer to Appendix D for details on the procedures.
5.13 1/12/2013 Milk River Computation Procedures and Forms
5.5 COMPUTATION PROCEDURES AND FORMS
5.5.1 Computational Procedures
Milk River natural flows are computed and flow apportionment determined using the Milk River Natural Flow computational spreadsheet (or MILKNAT2010) developed by the USGS. This spreadsheet is a revised version of MILKNAT2000, an interactive Java-based program used during the computational years 2000 through 2010. The MILKNAT2000 program was a revised version of an earlier Fortran 77 program, MILKNAT, which was used between the years 1985 and 1999. Prior to 1985, computations were done manually using various paper forms.
The MILKNAT2010 application is a Microsoft Excel 97-2003 spreadsheet which generates a series of monthly tables (or pages) to a unique Microsoft Excel output spreadsheet. Detailed instructions are available in the MILKNAT2010 User Manual (see Appendix C).
Final natural-flow computations are provided by WSD, Calgary using climate data furnished by the Milk River at Eastern Crossing meteorological station and final discharge data provided by WSD and USGS.
Provisional monthly natural flow-computations are provided by USGS using climate data furnished by the Milk River at Eastern Crossing meteorological station and provisional discharge data provided by USGS.
Prior to 2011, provisional monthly natural flow-computations were provided by a USGS computer program (as explained in section 5.2.6.1). In February 2011, the MILKNAT2010 spreadsheet application was adopted by the U.S. and Canadian Field Representatives of the Accredited Officers to compute both final and provisional Milk River natural-flow computations.
The apportionable flow computations the MilkNat2010 spreadsheet can be expressed as follows:
QECnat = QWCnat + EWChangeNETrec + IET + QUSEtotalnet
Where; QECnat is the natural flow of Milk River at Eastern Crossing, QWCnat is the natural flow of Milk River at the Western Crossing of the international boundary, EWChangeNETrec is the net recorded change in flow between Eastern Crossing and Western Crossing, IET is the increase in evapotranspiration of Milk River water resulting from increases in flow from diversions to the Milk River, and QUSEtotalnet is net consumptive usage by the US and Canada.
5.14 2/32/2017 Milk River Computation Procedures and Forms
QWCnat is determined from the mean flow for the day, typically with a 5-day lag (t-5), at the gaging station North Fork Milk River above St. Mary Canal near Browning, Montana (QNMABOVErec) (06133500) (11AA032) plus the mean flow for the day, typically with a 5-day lag (t-5), at the gaging station Milk River at Western Crossing of the International Boundary (QWCrec) (06133000) (11AA025). Using the method to determine flow diverted to the Milk River by the US, this can also be expressed as the mean flow for the day, typically with a 5-day lag (t-5), for North Milk River near International Boundary (QNMIBrec) (06134000) (11AA001) minus flow diverted to the Milk River by the US (QUSdiv) plus the mean flow for the day, typically with a 5-day lag (t-5), at the gaging station Milk River at Western Crossing of the International Boundary (QWCrec) (06133000) (11AA025).
EWChangeNETrec is determined from the mean flow for the day (t) at gaging station Milk River at Eastern Crossing of the International Boundary (QECrec) (06135000) (11AA031) minus the mean flow for the day, typically with a 5-day lag (t-5), at gaging station North Milk River near International Boundary (QNMIBrec) (06134000) (11AA001) minus the mean flow for the day, typically with a 5-day lag (t-5), at gaging station Milk River at Western Crossing of the International Boundary (QWCrec) (06133000) (11AA025). This parameter accounts for any tributary inflow to the Milk River between Western Crossing and Eastern Crossing.
IET is the increase in evapotranspiration resulting from the increase in surface area of water in the Milk River resulting from diversions to the river via the St. Mary Canal.
QUSEtotalnet is the estimated quantity of water used by the United States for irrigation in the upper Milk River basin plus the estimated quantity of water used by Canada for irrigation in the Milk River basin.
5.15 2/32/2017 Milk River Computation Procedures and Forms
5.5.2 Forms
Forms on the following pages are copies of:
INT-4 – Monthly record of evaporation and climatological observations at Ft. Assinniboine, MT
INT-4AB – Reported irrigation use in Alberta
INT-4MT – Reported irrigation use in Montana
INT-5TAB1 – Summary of Milk River Division table (in CFS-DAY)
INT-5TAB2 – Summary of Milk River Division table (in DAM3)
INT-6TAB1 – Final monthly summary of daily natural flow and water division of Milk River
INT-6TAB2 – Final monthly summary of actual flows in the Milk River basin
INT-6TAB3 – Final monthly summary of consumptive use in Milk River basin
INT-6TAB4 – Final monthly summary of evapotranspiration loss in Milk River basin
5.16 2/32/2017 MilkINT River-4 Computation Procedures and Forms
5.17 2/32/2017 Milk River Computation Procedures and Forms
INT-4AB
5.18 2/32/2017 Milk River Computation Procedures and Forms
INT-4MT
5.19 2/32/2017 Milk River Computation Procedures and Forms
INT-5TAB1
Table 1: Summary of Milk River Division for 2010 Received by U.S.A. Division Period at Natural U.S.A Received Above Below International Flow Share by U.S.A Share Share Boundary [CFS-DAY] [CFS-DAY] [CFS-DAY] [CFS-DAY] [CFS-DAY] MAR 1 - MAR 15 1548.0 773.9 1548.0 774.1 MAR 16- MAR 31 5263.6 2631.9 5263.6 2631.7 APR 1 - APR 15 3594.0 2695.5 3594.0 898.5 APR 16 - APR 30 5823.0 4367.2 5823.0 1455.8 MAY 1 - MAY 15 10078.4 7105.4 10078.4 2973.1 MAY 16 - MAY 31 13474.5 9126.8 13073.6 3946.7 JUNE 1 - JUNE 15 11675.2 8013.7 11283.4 3269.7 JUNE 16 - JUNE 30 28467.7 16589.0 28319.3 11730.3 JULY 1 - JULY 15 9617.7 6949.2 9347.3 2398.1 JULY 16 - JULY 31 6239.9 4680.0 5951.5 1271.5 AUG 1 - AUG 15 3177.2 2382.9 2954.6 571.7 AUG 16 - AUG 31 4768.5 3576.3 4531.1 954.8 SEP 1 - SEP 15 2982.5 2237.0 2834.2 597.2 SEP 16 - SEP 30 3074.1 2305.6 3074.1 768.5 OCT 1 - OCT 15 1979.1 1484.4 1979.1 494.7 OCT 16 - OCT 31 1946.9 1460.2 1946.9 486.7 TOTAL 113710.3 76379.0 111602.1
5.20 2/32/2017
Milk River Computation Procedures and Forms
INT-5TAB2
Table 2: Summary of Milk River Division for 2010 Received by U.S.A. Division Period at Natural U.S.A Received Above Below International Flow Share by U.S.A Share Share Boundary [DAM3] [DAM3] [DAM3] [DAM3] [DAM3] MAR 1 - MAR 15 3787.2 1893.3 3787.2 1893.9 MAR 16- MAR 31 12877.9 6439.2 12877.9 6438.7 APR 1 - APR 15 8792.9 6594.7 8792.9 2198.2 APR 16 - APR 30 14246.5 10684.8 14246.5 3561.7 MAY 1 - MAY 15 24657.6 17383.8 24657.6 7273.8 MAY 16 - MAY 31 32966.3 22329.5 31985.5 9656.0 JUNE 1 - JUNE 15 28564.2 19606.2 27605.7 7999.5 JUNE 16 - JUNE 30 69648.4 40586.3 69285.4 28699.1 JULY 1 - JULY 15 23530.4 17001.8 22868.9 5867.1 JULY 16 - JULY 31 15266.4 11449.9 14560.8 3110.9 AUG 1 - AUG 15 7773.2 5830.0 7228.7 1398.7 AUG 16 - AUG 31 11666.6 8749.8 11085.8 2336.0 SEP 1 - SEP 15 7297.0 5472.9 6934.0 1461.1 SEP 16 - SEP 30 7521.0 5640.8 7521.0 1880.2 OCT 1 - OCT 15 4842.0 3631.7 4842.0 1210.3 OCT 16 - OCT 31 4763.3 3572.6 4763.3 1190.7 TOTAL 278200.9 186867.3 273043.2
5.21 2/32/2017 Milk River Computation Procedures and Forms
INT-6TAB1 Table 1 Summary Of 5aily Net Change, Natural Flow, 9vaporative and Net Consumptive Uses of Milk River at 9astern Crossing of International .oundary May , 2010
Total Consumptive eficit
Share xcess Use astern astern to U.S. 9 Western Crossing Crossing vaporative ast to West ast to West Trans. Loss Trans. Crossing Net Change Net 9 Incremental 9 eficit to U.S.
U.S. Canada U.S. Canada xcess / 5 9 Natural Flow at Natural Flow at ate atate 9 5 / 5
C9,T2 C10,T2 C8,T4 C3,T3 C8,T3 (9-6) Cumulative 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 May 01 302.2 679.0 31.0 0.0 0.0 1012.2 759.2 253.0 253.0 253.0 May 02 261.5 737.1 64.4 0.0 0.0 1063.0 797.2 265.8 265.8 518.8 May 03 270.8 140.3 54.1 0.0 0.0 465.2 348.9 116.3 116.3 635.1 May 04 352.6 388.1 5.9 0.0 0.0 746.6 560.0 186.6 186.6 821.7 May 05 307.5 2553.3 34.2 0.0 0.0 2895.0 1855.3 1039.7 1039.7 1861.4 May 06 406.8 2894.6 34.5 0.0 0.0 3335.9 2075.7 1260.2 1260.2 3121.6 May 07 885.4 982.1 51.9 0.0 0.0 1919.4 1367.5 551.9 551.9 3673.5 May 08 1412.2 -150.7 29.3 0.0 0.0 1290.8 968.1 322.7 322.7 3996.2 May 09 1899.1 -717.2 27.2 0.0 0.0 1209.1 906.8 302.3 302.3 4298.5 May 10 996.5 391.6 14.7 0.0 0.0 1402.8 1052.1 350.7 350.7 4649.2 May 11 620.1 1096.1 20.1 0.0 0.0 1736.3 1275.9 460.4 460.4 5109.6 May 12 521.9 1403.8 27.7 0.0 0.0 1953.4 1384.5 568.9 568.9 5678.5 May 13 603.4 1509.7 29.9 0.0 0.0 2143.0 1479.3 663.7 663.7 6342.2 May 14 632.6 1217.7 22.2 0.0 0.0 1872.5 1344.0 528.5 528.5 6870.7 May 15 815.6 773.6 23.2 0.0 0.0 1612.4 1209.3 403.1 403.1 7273.8 15day Tot 10288.2 13899.1 470.3 0.0 0.0 24657.6 17383.8 7273.8 7273.8 7273.8 May 16 811.9 906.1 28.0 100.2 61.3 1907.5 1361.5 546.0 484.7 484.7 May 17 719.8 1223.1 31.8 100.2 61.3 2136.2 1475.9 660.3 599.0 1083.7 May 18 704.1 1240.3 27.0 100.2 61.3 2132.9 1474.2 658.7 597.4 1681.1 May 19 820.8 999.9 23.8 100.2 61.3 2006.0 1410.8 595.2 533.9 2215.0 May 20 818.7 914.8 24.8 100.2 61.3 1919.8 1367.7 552.1 490.8 2705.8 May 21 750.0 919.3 3.7 100.2 61.3 1834.5 1325.0 509.5 448.2 3154.0 May 22 650.4 749.5 14.6 100.2 61.3 1576.0 1182.0 394.0 332.7 3486.7 May 23 575.1 563.6 5.8 100.2 61.3 1306.0 979.5 326.5 265.2 3751.9 May 24 535.7 455.6 9.1 100.2 61.3 1161.9 871.4 290.5 229.2 3981.1 May 25 485.1 531.2 19.5 100.2 61.3 1197.3 898.0 299.3 238.0 4219.1 May 26 420.0 518.7 4.2 100.2 61.3 1104.4 828.3 276.1 214.8 4433.9 May 27 367.5 521.3 8.0 100.2 61.3 1058.3 793.7 264.6 203.3 4637.2 May 28 324.9 783.5 32.3 100.2 61.3 1302.2 976.6 325.6 264.3 4901.5 May 29 298.6 2043.3 18.7 100.2 61.3 2522.1 1668.8 853.3 792.0 5693.5 May 30 302.6 4530.8 48.6 100.2 61.3 5043.5 2929.5 2114.0 2052.7 7746.2 May 31 325.4 4220.9 49.9 100.2 61.3 4757.7 2786.6 1971.1 1909.8 9656.0 16day Tot 8910.6 21121.9 349.8 1603.2 980.8 32966.3 22329.5 10636.8 9656.0 9656.0 May Tots 19198.8 35021.0 820.1 1603.2 980.8 57623.9 39713.3 17910.6 16929.8 16929.8
All figures in cubic decameters.
Approved by: ______For Canada; ______For The United States;
5.22 2/32/2017 Milk River Computation Procedures and Forms
INT-6TAB2 Table 2 Summary of 5aily Actual Flows In The Milk River .asin May , 2010
Milk River at astern ast-West ast-West Flow River West Canal Change ast Crossing Crossing 9 Mary .asin West ate atate 9 Int. .oundary Net 9 Net Above St.Mary St.Mary Above ast - West Mean Crossing 5 Crossing Natural Flow at N.Fork Milk River 9 Milk River at Milk N.Milk River Near 5 iversion from St. Total Flow at West Flow West at Total 11AA032 11AA001 11AA025 11AA031 (3-2) (3+4) (5+7)/2 (2+4) (5-7) 11AA005 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 May 01 46.5 1683.1 255.7 2617.8 1636.6 1938.8 2278.3 302.2 679.0 1752.3 May 02 44.0 1687.7 217.5 2642.3 1643.7 1905.2 2273.8 261.5 737.1 1968.5 May 03 58.7 1744.3 212.1 2096.7 1685.6 1956.4 2026.6 270.8 140.3 2921.9 May 04 71.0 1759.7 281.6 2429.4 1688.7 2041.3 2235.4 352.6 388.1 3980.6 May 05 188.4 1388.9 119.1 4061.3 1200.5 1508.0 2784.6 307.5 2553.3 2947.0 May 06 183.5 1261.5 223.3 4379.4 1078.0 1484.8 2932.1 406.8 2894.6 2142.6 May 07 178.6 1393.8 706.8 3082.7 1215.2 2100.6 2591.6 885.4 982.1 1707.0 May 08 185.9 1615.6 1226.3 2691.2 1429.7 2841.9 2766.6 1412.2 -150.7 1584.1 May 09 146.8 1399.2 1752.3 2434.3 1252.4 3151.5 2792.9 1899.1 -717.2 1618.5 May 10 95.4 1092.7 901.1 2385.4 997.3 1993.8 2189.6 996.5 391.6 1888.0 May 11 83.2 887.0 536.9 2520.0 803.8 1423.9 1972.0 620.1 1096.1 2141.7 May 12 80.7 723.9 441.2 2568.9 643.2 1165.1 1867.0 521.9 1403.8 2009.8 May 13 80.7 561.0 522.7 2593.4 480.3 1083.7 1838.6 603.4 1509.7 1843.3 May 14 90.5 581.6 542.1 2341.4 491.1 1123.7 1732.6 632.6 1217.7 2002.2 May 15 110.1 647.0 705.5 2126.1 536.9 1352.5 1739.3 815.6 773.6 2203.4 15day Tot 1644.0 18427.0 8644.2 40970.3 16783.0 27071.2 34021.0 10288.2 13899.1 32710.9 May 16 110.1 635.6 701.8 2243.5 525.5 1337.4 1790.4 811.9 906.1 2169.2 May 17 112.5 611.3 607.3 2441.7 498.8 1218.6 1830.2 719.8 1223.1 1982.4 May 18 134.6 661.2 569.5 2471.0 526.6 1230.7 1850.8 704.1 1240.3 1798.6 May 19 154.1 682.1 666.7 2348.7 528.0 1348.8 1848.8 820.8 999.9 1646.7 May 20 154.1 659.2 664.6 2238.6 505.1 1323.8 1781.2 818.7 914.8 1507.9 May 21 146.8 625.6 603.2 2148.1 478.8 1228.8 1688.4 750.0 919.3 1318.2 May 22 137.0 589.2 513.4 1852.1 452.2 1102.6 1477.4 650.4 749.5 1197.6 May 23 124.8 566.6 450.3 1580.5 441.8 1016.9 1298.7 575.1 563.6 1153.6 May 24 124.8 557.4 410.9 1423.9 432.6 968.3 1196.1 535.7 455.6 1099.4 May 25 105.2 515.3 379.9 1426.4 410.1 895.2 1160.8 485.1 531.2 1062.5 May 26 88.1 529.3 331.9 1379.9 441.2 861.2 1120.6 420.0 518.7 1046.6 May 27 80.7 569.3 286.8 1377.4 488.6 856.1 1116.8 367.5 521.3 1670.1 May 28 78.3 582.2 246.6 1612.3 503.9 828.8 1220.6 324.9 783.5 5045.2 May 29 73.4 569.5 225.2 2838.0 496.1 794.7 1816.4 298.6 2043.3 4449.9 May 30 78.3 578.4 224.3 5333.5 500.1 802.7 3068.1 302.6 4530.8 4735.4 May 31 88.1 606.2 237.3 5064.4 518.1 843.5 2954.0 325.4 4220.9 3424.0 16day Tot 1790.9 9538.4 7119.7 37780.0 7747.5 16658.1 27219.3 8910.6 21121.9 35307.3 May Tots 3434.9 27965.4 15763.9 78750.3 24530.5 43729.3 61240.3 19198.8 35021.0 68018.2
All figures in cubic decameters. Grey areas indicate the volume of diversion observed is probably due to groundwater flow into channel section between stations 05A9029 and 11AA001, and is not added into the monthly total.
5.23 2/32/2017 Milk River Computation Procedures and Forms
INT-6TAB3 Table 3 Summary of Daily Consumptive Use In Milk River .asin May , 2010 Consumptive Use in U.S. Consumptive Use in Canada Total Coulee Total Verdigris Irrigation Irrigation Storage(+) Storage(+) Release(-) Inter. Transfer Reservoir Evap. Date at EastDate Crossing 11AA038 (4+5+6-7) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 May 01 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 May 02 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 May 03 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 May 04 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 May 05 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 May 06 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 May 07 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 May 08 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 May 09 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 May 10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 May 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 May 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 May 13 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 May 14 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 May 15 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 15day Tot 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 May 16 100.2 100.2 61.3 0.0 0.0 - 61.3 May 17 100.2 100.2 61.3 0.0 0.0 - 61.3 May 18 100.2 100.2 61.3 0.0 0.0 - 61.3 May 19 100.2 100.2 61.3 0.0 0.0 - 61.3 May 20 100.2 100.2 61.3 0.0 0.0 - 61.3 May 21 100.2 100.2 61.3 0.0 0.0 - 61.3 May 22 100.2 100.2 61.3 0.0 0.0 - 61.3 May 23 100.2 100.2 61.3 0.0 0.0 - 61.3 May 24 100.2 100.2 61.3 0.0 0.0 - 61.3 May 25 100.2 100.2 61.3 0.0 0.0 - 61.3 May 26 100.2 100.2 61.3 0.0 0.0 - 61.3 May 27 100.2 100.2 61.3 0.0 0.0 - 61.3 May 28 100.2 100.2 61.3 0.0 0.0 - 61.3 May 29 100.2 100.2 61.3 0.0 0.0 - 61.3 May 30 100.2 100.2 61.3 0.0 0.0 - 61.3 May 31 100.2 100.2 61.3 0.0 0.0 - 61.3 16day Tot 1603.2 1603.2 980.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 980.8 May Tots 1603.2 1603.2 980.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 980.8
All figures in cubic decameters.
5.24 2/32/2017 Milk River Computation Procedures and Forms INT-6TAB4 Table 4 Summary of 5aily 9vapotranspiration Loss In The Milk River .asin May , 2010 9vaporation Loss based on Transpiration Loss From
Phreatophyte Loss ast Crossing Flow ast-West ast-West at West West at Crossing vapo. Transp. Transp. vapo. Zone Incremental 9 Mean Flow 9 Increase in Natural Flow Surface (mm) Surface ate atate 9 vap. Loss From River 5 9 (mm) C8,T2 C9,T2 (5-6) (4+7) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 May 01 2.5 - - 55.0 24.0 31.0 31.0 May 02 4.9 - - 109.7 45.3 64.4 64.4 May 03 5.1 - - 101.6 47.5 54.1 54.1 May 04 0.5 - - 11.2 5.3 5.9 5.9 May 05 2.0 - - 53.4 19.2 34.2 34.2 May 06 2.0 - - 56.3 21.8 34.5 34.5 May 07 4.6 - - 116.4 64.5 51.9 51.9 May 08 2.7 - - 73.7 44.4 29.3 29.3 May 09 3.2 - - 88.4 61.2 27.2 27.2 May 10 2.1 - - 45.6 30.9 14.7 14.7 May 11 3.1 - - 59.4 39.3 20.1 20.1 May 12 4.3 - - 81.4 53.7 27.7 27.7 May 13 5.1 - - 94.9 65.0 29.9 29.9 May 14 4.3 - - 78.1 55.9 22.2 22.2 May 15 5.4 - - 96.7 73.5 23.2 23.2 15day Tot 51.8 0.0 0.0 1121.8 651.5 470.3 470.3 May 16 6.0 - - 110.7 82.7 28.0 28.0 May 17 6.0 - - 112.0 80.2 31.8 31.8 May 18 4.9 - - 92.1 65.1 27.0 27.0 May 19 4.8 - - 90.4 66.6 23.8 23.8 May 20 5.4 - - 99.5 74.7 24.8 24.8 May 21 0.8 - - 15.1 11.4 3.7 3.7 May 22 4.0 - - 66.4 51.8 14.6 14.6 May 23 1.8 - - 28.3 22.5 5.8 5.8 May 24 3.1 - - 47.2 38.1 9.1 9.1 May 25 6.3 - - 96.1 76.6 19.5 19.5 May 26 1.1 - - 16.7 12.5 4.2 4.2 May 27 1.8 - - 26.9 18.9 8.0 8.0 May 28 5.9 - - 91.1 58.8 32.3 32.3 May 29 2.1 - - 39.3 20.6 18.7 18.7 May 30 2.4 - - 71.8 23.2 48.6 48.6 May 31 2.6 - - 76.4 26.5 49.9 49.9 16day Tot 59.0 0.0 0.0 1080.0 730.2 349.8 349.8 May Tots 110.8 0.0 0.0 2201.8 1381.7 820.1 820.1
All figures in cubic decameters unless otherwise specified. 9vaporation loss from River Surface calculation used Pan Model Ratio 0.85
5.25 2/32/2017 Milk River Computation Procedures and Forms
5.5.3 Milk River Letter of Intent Summary Form
This table provides a summary of the calculated natural flow and water division of the Milk River for each division period and a cumulative summary of Letter of Intent (LOI) deficits and deficits outside the LOI. An example of a completed form is shown below.
19-Jan-10
SUMMARY OF MILK RIVER DIVISION FOR 2009* QUANTITIES IN CFS-DAYS
DIVISION PERIOD NATURAL UNITED RECEIVED *LOI DEFICIT DEFICIT AT FLOW STATE'S BY RECEIVED BY UNITED STATES TO OUTSIDE LOI INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY SHARE U.S.A. ABOVE SHARE BELOW SHARE DATE TO DATE
MAR 1 - MAR 15 0 0
MAR 16 - MAR 31 0 0
APR 1 - APR 15 3,914 2,936 3,916 980 0 0
APR 16 - APR 30 5,948 4,463 5,949 1,486 0 0
MAY 1 - MAY 15 4,725 3,518 4,724 1,206 0 0
MAY 16 - MAY 31 4,549 3,412 4,149 737 0 0
JUNE 1 - JUNE 15 3,683 2,762 3,293 531 0 0
JUNE 16 - JUNE 30 1,347 1,009 1,197 188 0 0
JULY 1 - JULY 15 219 165 0 215 215 0
JULY 16 - JULY 31 217 163 0 234 449 0
AUG 1 - AUG 15 104 78 0 199 648 0
AUG 16 - AUG 31 44 32 0 228 876 0
SEP 1 - SEP 15 289 216 0 77 953 0
SEP 16 - SEP 30 410 309 410 101 0 0
OCT 1 - OCT 15 0
OCT 16 - OCT 31 0 TOTAL
* Letter of Intent (LOI) allows for a deficit up to 2,000 cfs-days between June 1 and September 15. The remaining deficit is not refundable until after September 15 of that year unless agreed upon in writing by the Field Representative for the United States. Canadian LOI deficits on the Milk River were reduced to zero through a balancing with U.S. St Mary deficits as per the LOI.
Canadian share of St Mary River waters deficit outstanding as of September 15, 2009 1,047 cfs-days
5.26 2/32/2017 Milk River Information Exchange of Interim Reports
5.6 INFORMATION EXCHANGE OF INTERIM REPORTS
This section provides guidance regarding the electronic exchange of interim reports between Canada and the United States and supplements established procedures provided for the exchange of original field data as provided in Appendix F. Additional guidance concerning exchange of hydrologic information is available in PART II of the Procedural Guide for International Gauging Stations on Boundary Waters between Canada and the United States of America (1985)1.
5.6.1 HYDROMETRIC DATA
Hydrometric data used in the interim St. Mary River natural flow computations are routinely transmitted electronically, along with a cover letter (see example below), to the field hydrographer responsible for joint operation of the gage and their accountable manager(s). An accountable manager is defined as someone who supervises the individuals collecting field data and prepares the natural flow compilations. In Canada, the accountable managers are the appropriate District Managers of the Alberta and Saskatchewan Districts. In the United States, the International Waters Unit Chief or the Montana Water Science Director are considered the accountable managers.
The accountable managers are to ensure that hydrometric data are checked prior to transmittal and delivered in a timely manner. A confirmation email will be sent upon receipt and approval of all electronically transferred files or delivery of original field notes. An example of a field data exchange cover letter is shown below:
Enclosed are the discharge measurement notes and gage inspection notes for the June 5-7, 2012 field activities. Please note the following sensor reset correction:
Milk River at Western Crossing of International Boundary June 5, 2012 at 1415MST, GH=0.834 m, Q=2.24 cms -0.024 m purging correction at 1355 hours
If you have any questions regarding the data please don't hesitate to call me or
Best regards,
1Huberman, S., Slater, J.E., and Condes, A., 1985, Procedural Guide for International Gauging Stations on Boundary Waters between Canada and the United States of America: Ottawa, Canada, Department of the Environment, Inland Waters Directorate WRB Report IWD-HQ- WRB-PG-85-1; Reston, Va., U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 85-329, 104 p.
5.27 02/15/2018 Milk River Information Exchange of Interim Reports
5.6.2 INTERIM REPORTS
Interim natural-flow and water-division reports, form INT-5TAB1 or WSD, and the Milk River Division Letter of Intent summary table are routinely transmitted electronically or mailed, along with a cover letter (see example below) to all parties listed in the contact list table (Section 5.6.3).
All interim streamflow and natural flow computations are to be checked prior to being sent to the reciprocating accountable office for review. The interim natural flow computation and water division report should include the MILKNAT2010 output spreadsheet (MilkNatyyyymmddhhmmss.xls) for period covered by natural flow computation. A Milk River division Letter of Intent (LOI) summary table shall also accompany the interim natural flow computation report. All interim natural flow computations and LOI summary tables will be reviewed by the reciprocating accountable party before the interim report can be released to other stakeholders listed in the interim reports contact list.
Example of interim reports cover letter:
Enclosed are the provisional Milk River natural flow computations and water division (in cfs-days) for the month of May 2012 and the 2012 Milk River Letter of Intent (LOI) cumulative division summary table.
Please note a zero deficit for the period.
If you have any questions regarding the data please don't hesitate to call me or
Best regards,
5.28 02/15/2018 Milk River Information Exchange of Interim Reports
5.6.3 CONTACT LIST FOR INTERIM REPORTS
Interim reports of natural flow and water division are routinely transmitted electronically or mailed to the following without a formal cover letter: John M. Kilpatrick Dave Moncur Director, Wyoming-Montana Water Science Operations Manager Center Environment and Climate Change Canada United States Geological Survey Water Survey Division 3162 Bozeman Avenue Rm 854, 220 4th Ave. Helena, MT 59601 Calgary, AB T2G 4X3 [email protected] [email protected]
Clayton Jordan Carmen delaChevrotière Montana Area Office Transboundary Water Quantity Specialist Bureau of Reclamation Transboundary Secretariat P.O. Box 30137 Alberta Environment and Parks Billings, MT 59107-0137 11th Floor Oxbridge Place [email protected] 9820 – 106 St. Edmonton, AB T5K 2J6 [email protected] Larry Dolan John Mahoney Hydrologist, Water Management Bureau Operations Support Manager Montana Department of Natural Resources and Southern Operations (infrastructure) Conservation Alberta Environment and Parks 1424 9th Ave. Provincial Building, Second Floor P.O. Box 201601 200 - 5 Avenue S. Helena, MT 59620-1601 Lethbridge, AB T1J 4L1 [email protected] [email protected]
Matt Miles Muhammed Sabur Havre Water Resources Regional Office Water Policy Implementation Montana Department of Natural Resources and Alberta Environment and Parks Conservation 2nd Floor, Provincial Building 210 6th Ave. 200 – 5 Avenue South P.O. Box 1828 Lethbridge, AB T1J 4L1 Havre, MT 59501-1828 [email protected] [email protected] Mike Dailey Brian Hills Hydrologist, Water Management Bureau Resource Manager Montana Department of Natural Resources and Alberta Environment and Parks Conservation Provincial Building, Second Floor 222 Sixth Street South 200 - 5 Avenue S. P.O. Box 1269 Lethbridge, AB T1J 4L1 Glasgow, MT 59230-1269 [email protected] [email protected] U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs Terrence Lazarus P.O. Box 980, Route 1 General Manager Harlem, MT 59526 St. Mary River Irrigation District Lethbridge, AB [email protected] Tim Romanow BSc Executive Director Milk River Watershed Council Canada 240 Main St. Milk River, AB T0K1M0 Phone: 403-647-4342 [email protected] 5.29 02/15/2018 Milk River References
5.7 REFERENCES
Khanna, V., Natural Flow User Manual and Program Documentation, July 1987.
Morton, F.I., 1978, Estimating evapotranspiration from potential evaporation— Practicality of an iconoclastic approach: Journal of Hydrology, v. 38, p. 1-32.
Morton, F.I., 1979, Climatological estimates of lake evaporation: Water Resources Research, v. 15, no. 1, p. 64-76.
Morton, F.I., 1983, Operational estimates of areal evapotranspiration and their significance to the science and practice of hydrology: Journal of Hydrology, v. 66, no. 1-4, p. 1-76.
Morton, F.I., 1985, Milk River evaporation studies during 1982, 1983 and 1984: Ottawa, Ontario, Environment Canada.
Thompson, R.E., Jr., 1986, Natural flow and water consumption in the Milk River Basin, Montana and Alberta, Canada: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 86-4006, 46 p.
5.30 2/12/2013
6.0 EASTERN TRIBUTARIES OF THE MILK RIVER
6.1 INTRODUCTION
Article VI of the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 determines the amount of water each country is entitled to receive from the St. Mary and Milk Rivers. The measurement and division of the water was made the responsibility of the Reclamation Officers of the United States and the Irrigation Officers of Canada under the direction of the IJC.
The wording of the Treaty was rather ambiguous, and a controversy arose which made it necessary for the IJC to hold a series of hearings at St. Paul, Minnesota; Detroit, Michigan; Ottawa, Ontario; Chinook, Montana; and Lethbridge, Alberta. As a result of these hearings, the IJC issued the October 4, 1921 Order to the Reclamation and Irrigation Officers on how to measure and apportion the water between the United States and Canada.
The sections of the IJC 1921 Order which pertain to the eastern tributaries are as follows:
Section III The natural flow of the eastern (otherwise known as the Saskatchewan or northern) tributaries of the Milk River at the points where they cross the International Boundary shall be divided equally between the two countries.
Section V For the purpose of carrying out the apportionment directed in Paragraphs I, II, and III hereof the said Reclamation and Irrigation officers shall jointly take steps:
(a) To ascertain and keep a daily record of the natural flow...of the eastern tributaries of the Milk River at the International Boundary by measurement in each case:
(1) At the gauging station at the International Boundary. (2) At all places where any of the waters which would naturally flow across the International Boundary at that particular point are diverted in either country prior to such crossing. (3) At all places where any of the waters which would naturally flow across the International Boundary at that particular point are stored, or the natural flow thereof increased or decreased prior to such crossing.
6.1
To carry out the instructions contained in the Order, a network of gauging stations was established and procedures developed by Canada and the United States. The computational procedure is essentially a project depletion method whereby diversions, accretions, and reservoir storage changes are measured and adjustments made to the recorded flow of the stream at the International Boundary. Adjustment items considered are major diversions, return flow, minor project diversions, reservoir storage change, evaporation, and channel losses. Time of travel is considered by application of an average value.
Although the Order states "...keep a daily record of the natural flow...", reporting of flow at this frequency has not been practical based on available resources. Until 1993, division of natural flows was carried out on a 10-day basis. With greater availability of real-time data in the Eastern Tributary area, closer monitoring of flow conditions during division periods was possible. For this reason, the period length was changed from 10 days to twice-monthly (every 15 or 16 days).
During the period March 1 to October 31, natural-flow determinations for Lodge Creek, Battle Creek, and the Frenchman River are provided to interested agencies every month and, during critical times, at the end of each division period. In general, no computation of the division of flow is made during the winter period as there is usually very little flow and, of that flow, the United States typically receives its share or more.
In 1978, monitoring of Woodpile Coulee, East Fork Battle Creek, and McEachern Creek was suspended. The report "Water Use Development on the Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River" (Johnson, 1978) recommended that the water right licenses in each of the basins should be reviewed annually and the gauging stations be considered for re-activation when the median annual diversion in Canada exceeds 25 percent of the median annual flow recorded at the International Boundary. At the February 1989 meeting of the Field Representatives, it was decided that this review be conducted each year the annual Field Representative meeting is hosted by WSD, Regina.
At the 2017 International Records Meeting the Field Representatives approved recommendations for a revised procedure regarding non-apportioned basins within the Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River as outlined below:
1. Retain current procedure of using a comparison of median diversions and median annual recorded flow as outlined in the Johnson Report and the Procedures Manual. This procedure was used by SK – WSA in 2014 study of Woodpile Creek, East Fork Battle (Coteau) Creek, and McEachern Creek.
2. Apportionment of basins shall be investigated more extensively when the median annual diversion in Canada exceeds a 25% threshold of the median annual flow recorded at the IB. The investigation will follow the same procedure used by SK – WSA in 2015 to study Lyons Creek and Whitewater Creek basins. The following three components would be included in the investigation:
6.2
Assess median annual diversion in comparison to median annual recorded flow data up to 1978 Assess median annual diversion in comparison to an estimated median annual flow at present Assess median annual diversion in comparison to an estimated median natural flow at present. Once the investigation is completed, the Field Representatives will make the final determination as to whether the threshold has been reached and if further investigation is warranted. These further investigations might include use of remote sensing to determine consumptive use, reconnaissance of diversion projects identified as in poor condition, and/or installation of temporary gauging stations to obtain current recorded flow.
3. The procedures outlined above in 1 and 2 shall be used for all non-apportioned basins within the Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River. This review will continue to be completed every three years as per the Field Representatives recommendation in 1989.
At present, usage of water in Canada from Lyons Creek, Whitewater Creek, and Rock Creek is not sufficient to warrant a formal apportionment of flow. Gauging of Whitewater Creek near International Boundary was suspended in 1980 after 53 years of record. In 1981, Rock Creek below Horse Creek was suspended as an international gauging station but it is still operated by the USGS as a regional hydrology station. In 1996, the station Lyons Creek at the International Boundary was suspended as an international gauging station but is still operated by WSD.
6.3
Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
6.2 PROCEDURE FOR THE DIVISION OF NATURAL FLOW
6.2.1 Division Periods
6.2.1.1 Flows from March 1 to October 31 From March 1 to October 31, provisional computations of the natural flow at the International Bounday are made twice-monthly (15th and end of month) to determine the natural flows, shares, and deliveries during the period. Examples of all the water-division computations and forms are shown in section 6.8.
This simple idea of division periods is complicated by the fact that a diversion or a release does not produce an instantaneous change in the flow at the boundary. For instance, water released from Cypress Lake requires an average of 9 days to travel the 290 kilometres (180 miles) along the Frenchman River to the International Boundary, a release from Eastend Reservoir requires 7 days to reach the boundary, and a release from Newton Lake requires 3 days to reach the boundary. To account for this travel time, the entire river length is divided into several segments and the dates of the division periods lagged proportionally.
Cypress Lake can be used as a storage reservoir and potentially for inter-basin transfer of water between Battle Creek and Frenchman River. To account for inter-basin transfers between the two basins, and because of different travel times from Cypress Lake to the international boundary on Battle Creek (3 days) and the Frenchman River (9 days), the division periods on Battle Creek have been adjusted. The result is that division periods do not start and end on the first or last day of the month. The number of days in the beginning and ending periods have also been adjusted in each basin so that there are the same number of division periods in each.
6.2.1.2 Flows Outside the March 1 to October 31 Period In general, natural-flow computations are not made outside of the March 1 to October 31 period because the flows and changes in reservoir storage are minimal and no irrigation diversions are made. However, conditions may give rise to significant usage or natural flows outside of the normal irrigation period and apportionment may be required.
6.4 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
6.2.2 Reservoirs
In the computation of natural flows, the quantity of water added to or depleted from a reservoir, for a given time period, is defined as the amount by which the flow volume in the source stream has been altered by the reservoir operations during that period. In periods when the quantity of water being diverted from a source stream to a specific reservoir exceeds a release from the reservoir to the same stream, the water usage is considered to be positive (+). When a release from the reservoir to the source stream exceeds the diversion from the source stream upstream to the reservoir, a negative (-) water usage occurs as the operation of the reservoir has increased the downstream flow.
The most straightforward method of determining the quantity of water used by a reservoir is to actually measure the inflow and outflow volumes. This is normally accomplished by establishing hydrometric gauging stations, where data are collected and processed to determine these volumes. However in many instances this method is not practical, such as with smaller reservoirs where operation and maintenance costs, in addition to costs associated with processing of the hydrometric data, are not warranted.
When all diversions into and out of a reservoir are to the same source stream, rather than actually measuring the reservoir inflow and reservoir outflow, the amount of water added to or depleted from the reservoir is calculated using what is known as the Storage Change/Evaporative Loss method. With this method, the amount of water added to or depleted from a reservoir for a given time period is calculated by determining the net change in the reservoir contents during that period and then accounting for the effects of precipitation and evaporation on the water body during that period. If applicable, it would also be necessary to account for any other additions/withdrawals, such as pumping, which are not tied directly to or from the source stream and its tributaries.
The overall premise or assumption associated with the Storage Change/Evaporative Loss method is that for a given period any change in storage which occurs in the reservoir contents, which is not accounted for by the factors of evaporation, precipitation, or other additions/withdrawals occurring during that period, has occurred as a result of water having been either stored by or released from the reservoir.
It is important to note that evaporative losses and other water usages from a reservoir during a given period do not necessarily result in a stream flow depletion during that same period. In order for flow to be depleted from a stream, flow must be present in the stream from which to divert. As an example, the evaporative losses and other usages from reservoirs which occur
6.5 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
during periods of no inflow will not result in an actual water diversion (+) until there is once again inflow. Often this may not occur until the following spring, when stream flow is again diverted into the available reservoir storage which was created as a result of the earlier losses and usage.
The following sections, 6.2.2.1 to 6.2.2.3, provide more information on the theory and computational detail of the procedures used in this method.
6.2.2.1 Storage Changes Any water diverted to or captured by a reservoir constitutes a positive usage (+), which reduces the downstream flow. Any water released from the same reservoir to the source stream constitutes a negative usage (-), which increases the downstream flow. The difference between the diversions (+) and releases (-) constitutes the net water use. The storage change during a division period is computed as the difference in reservoir contents between 00:00 hours (local time) of the first day of the division period and 23:59 hours of the last day of the period.
6.2.2.2 Evaporative Losses Storage of water in a reservoir increases the open surface area, with the result that:
1. Evaporation is increased. 2. Captured precipitation is increased.
The combined effect of these two factors is referred to as “Net Reservoir Evaporation”.
Prior to 2002, the net reservoir evaporation was calculated from the following equation using both Class „A‟ pan-derived evaporation data and precipitation data.
Reservoir Area Net pan at mean elevation X Evaporation (depth) X 0.70 Net Reservoir for period for period Evaporation Loss (dam2) (mm) in period = ______(dam3) 10,000 mm/dam
Where the following equation was used to determine net pan evaporation, or the depth of water lost to evaporation from a Class „A‟ evaporation pan.
Pan Evaporation = Water Added – Water Removed + Precipitation
A pan coefficient of 0.7 was then applied to the net pan evaporation to estimate gross reservoir evaporation. This factor is applied to account for the difference in heat balance characteristics between a Class „A‟ evaporation pan and a typical shallow lake or reservoir on an annual basis.
6.6 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
In 2002, the following equation format was adopted as a more technically correct method of calculating the net reservoir evaporation.
Net Reservoir Evaporation (depth) = (0.7 * Pan Evaporation) – Precipitation
Beginning in 2004, the calculations for several of the reservoirs located at higher altitudes also incorporated an additional elevation adjustment factor of 0.853 applied to the pan evaporation. This factor is based on work by Hopkinson (1999) which analyzed evaporation rates at higher altitudes. Hopkinson‟s study initially recommended an elevation adjustment factor of 0.884. However, the factor was later investigated and revised to 0.853 by the Eastern Tributaries Technical Working Group (ETTWG) in 2003. The following elevation adjusted net reservoir evaporation equation was then applied to the following locations:
Net Reservoir Evaporation (depth) = ( 0.853 * 0.7 * Pan EvaporationA) – PrecipitationEB
where:
Pan EvaporationA = EvapA + PrecipA where EvapA & PrecipA are recorded at Altawan.
PrecipitationEB is recorded at Eagle Butte.
11AB091 Michel Reservoir 11AB092 Greasewood Reservoir 11AB094 Bare Creek Reservoir 11AB099 Mitchell Reservoir 11AB104 Massy Reservoir
In 2007, a similar investigation was conducted by the ETTWG to determine the appropriate elevation adjustment factor to use in the net evaporation computations at Reesor Reservoir. The ETTWG study recommended the use of an elevation adjustment factor of 0.789 and unadjusted Eagle Butte precipitation to calculate net evaporation for Reesor Reservoir (11AB090) as follows;
Net Reservoir Evaporation (depth) = ( 0.789 * 0.7 * Pan EvaporationA) – PrecipitationEB
where:
Pan EvaporationA = EvapA + PrecipA where EvapA & PrecipA are recorded at Altawan.
PrecipitationEB is recorded at Eagle Butte.
6.7 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
In 2009, the pan derived Net Evaporation component in the Net Reservoir Evaporation equation was replaced by the following discrete version of Penman‟s equation: Qn Ea E where: E = daily evaporation (mm) from a water surface Δ = rate of change of vapor pressure at the air temperature Qn = net radiation in evaporation units (mm) γ = Psychrometric constant Ea = bulk aerodynamic estimate of evaporation
A detailed description of each variable in the above equation is available in section 6.8.4 of this manual or in Appendix III of the paper: Comparison of Pan Derived Gross Evaporation at Altawan, Saskatchewan by W. Hyde and J. Woodward (2006).
Net Reservoir evaporative loss (or volume) is now calculated as follows:
Mean Reservoir Area Net at mean elevation X Evaporation (depth) Net Reservoir for period for period Evaporation Loss (dam2) (mm) in period = ______(dam3) 10,000 mm/dam where: Mean reservoir area is calculated as the area corresponding to the simple arithmetic mean of the elevations at the start and end of the period, not the true mean.
Net Evaporation (depth) for the period is calculated as follows;
Net Evaporation (depth) = Σ( (Ea*ElvAdjb)-Precipc) of days in period for period (mm) 1,000
where:
Ea = Data from appropriate climate station location are used,
ElvAdjb = Appropriate elevation adjustment applied,
Precipc = Precipitation data from appropriate climate station applied.
For each of the individual reservoirs, calculations of evaporation are made using data deemed most likely to have similar conditions to that of the reservoir. Daily records are taken and summarized approximately every 15 days to coincide with appropriate apportionment periods. Evaporation data are collected at two automated meteorological station locations (Altawan and Val
6.8 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
Marie). Precipitation data are collected at three automated meteorological sites (Altawan, Val Marie, and Eagle Butte (beginning in 2004)) and data from the location closest in proximity, which are considered the most similar, are used in the calculations for each of the reservoirs.
Following is a list of the major reservoirs in the Frenchman River, Battle Creek, and Lodge Creek basins used in the flow apportionment calculations and the precipitation and evaporation stations associated with each.
Frenchman River Basin
11AC055 Eastend Reservoir 11AC056 Huff Lake 11AC063 Newton Lake
Evaporation data from Val Marie. Precipitation data from Val Marie.
Battle Creek Basin
11AB095 Adams Lake
Evaporation data from Altawan. Precipitation data from Altawan.
Lodge Creek Basin
11AB089 Altawan Reservoir 11AB097 Cressday Reservoir 11AB098 Jaydot Reservoir
Evaporation data from Altawan. Precipitation data from Altawan.
Lodge Creek Basin
11AB091 Michel Reservoir 11AB092 Greasewood Reservoir 11AB094 Bare Creek Reservoir 11AB099 Mitchell Reservoir 11AB104 Massy Reservoir
Evaporation data from Altawan. Precipitation data from Eagle Butte.
6.9 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
Battle Creek Basin
11AB090 Reesor Reservoir
Evaporation data from Altawan. Precipitation data from Eagle Butte.
Note: The diversion at Middle Creek Reservoir, another major reservoir in the Lodge Creek basin, is not used in flow apportionment computations. See Section 6.7.1 for additional information concerning special computations involving Middle Creek Reservoir.
6.2.2.3 Net Reservoir Depletions The depletion (or diversion) for a given period is calculated by determining the change in the reservoir contents during that period using the Storage Change/Evaporative Loss method (section 6.2.2.1) and accounting for the effects of precipitation and evaporation (section 6.2.2.2) as well as any other additions/withdrawals that are not directly tied to or from the source stream and its tributaries, should they occur. The resulting net reservoir depletion is described as:
Net Reservoir = Change Reservoir + Net Reservoir Depletion Storage Over Period Evaporation Loss
The following form is currently used to compute and report reservoir storage changes, net reservoir evaporation and net reservoir depletions:
STORAGE FACTORS AND EVAPORATION LOSSES
MICHEL RESERVOIR 2005 11AB091
PERIOD PERIOD ELEVATION AT MEAN STORAGE AT CHANGE IN Net MEAN Reservoir Reservoir DATE Start End ELEVATON Start End STORAGE Reservoir Reservoir EVAP. DEPLETION of Period of Period of Period of Period Evaporation AREA LOSSES (m) (m) (m) (dam3) (dam3) (dam3) (m) (dam2) (dam3) (dam3)
1 Feb 25 - Mar 11 304.574 304.730 304.652 938 974 36 0.000 2412 0 36 2 Mar 12 - 27 304.730 304.797 304.764 974 987 13 0.000 2452 0 13 3 Mar 28 - Apr 11 304.797 304.877 304.837 987 1005 18 0.000 2478 0 18 4 Apr 12 - 26 304.877 304.857 304.867 1005 1001 -4 0.031 2489 8 4 5 Apr 27 - May 11 304.857 304.809 304.833 1001 990 -11 0.051 2477 13 2 6 May 12 - 27 304.809 304.771 304.790 990 983 -7 0.043 2461 11 4 7 May 28 - Jun 11 304.771 304.861 304.816 983 1003 20 -0.064 2471 -16 4 8 Jun 12 - 26 304.861 304.819 304.840 1003 992 -11 0.033 2479 8 -3 9 Jun 27 - Jul 11 304.819 304.771 304.795 992 983 -9 0.038 2463 9 0 10 Jul 12 - 27 304.771 304.670 304.721 983 960 -23 0.085 2436 21 -2 11 Jul 28 - Aug 11 304.670 304.606 304.638 960 945 -15 0.071 2406 17 2 12 Aug 12 - 27 304.606 303.730 304.168 945 750 -195 0.053 2238 12 -183 13 Aug 28 - Sep 11 303.730 301.686 302.708 750 383 -367 0.039 1726 7 -360 14 Sep 12 - 26 301.686 299.650 300.668 383 165 -218 0.031 1106 3 -215 15 Sep 27 - Oct 11 299.650 299.060 299.355 165 124 -41 0.018 716 1 -40 16 Oct 12 - 27 299.060 299.022 299.041 124 122 -2 -0.025 632 -2 -4
6.10 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
6.2.2.4 Reservoir Contents The daily water levels published by WSD for those reservoirs with data loggers are “as recorded”. Wind and seiche effects are not considered as was historically done with digitized graphical chart record.
6.2.2.5 Monthend Contents Table At the end of each month during the irrigation season, a table is produced which illustrates the monthend contents of Altawan Reservoir, Cypress Lake, Eastend Reservoir, Huff Lake and Newton Lake. The contents of each reservoir are determined from the recorded midnight water level and the corresponding volume from stage- capacity curve for the reservoir.
Example of monthend contents table:
MONTH-END CONTENTS OF MAJOR RESERVOIRS IN LODGE, BATTLE AND FRENCHMAN BASINS FOR 2005 QUANTITIES IN CUBIC DECAMETRES Combined Usable Percent of Altawan Cypress Eastend Huff Newton Storage Live Storage Reservoir Lake Reservoir Lake Lake (a) (a/b*100) FEBRUARY 4,492 18,052 601 3,898 14,830 23,796 19 MARCH 5,162 19,576 2,203 3,910 12,793 24,043 20 APRIL 6,475 23,557 2,732 3,810 12,398 25,390 21 MAY 4,719 18,952 984 1,655 9,621 16,954 14 JUNE 5,462 24,891 2,321 3,950 12,197 23,905 19 JULY 5,162 22,417 1,812 3,020 9,029 18,998 15 AUGUST 4,238 20,593 1,409 697 5,686 12,005 10 SEPTEMBER 4,082 19,926 600 2,004 5,157 11,818 10 OCTOBER 4,007 19,768 585 2,824 4,356 11,747 10 Full Supply 6,710 128,100 2,090 3,700 12,270 Level
Dead Storage 0 30,031 0 25 0
Total storage at FSL = 152 870 Total dead storage = 30 056 Total available live storage (b) = 152 870 - 30 056 = 122 814
NOTE: Cypress Lake contents below dead storage figure and therefore not included in the combined usable storage figures.
6.11 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
6.2.2.6 Stage-Capacity Tables Stage-capacity tables for the major reservoirs used in the apportionment calculations (Altawan Reservoir, Cypress Lake, Eastend Reservoir, Huff Lake, and Newton Lake) are calculated by the AESB based upon estimated flood-elevation areas derived from digitized aerial photogrammetric and field survey topographic maps.
Changes to any of the stage-capacity tables need to be well documented and approved by the Accredited Officers prior to use in the apportionment calculations.
6.12 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
6.2.3 Minor Diversions
Because it is impractical to monitor all minor diversions such as small irrigation projects, stockwatering ponds, and domestic usages, minor- diversion information is provided by Alberta Environment and Parks(AEP) and Saskatchewan‟s Water Security Agency (WSA) in the form of water-rights-license usage reports. This information is provided twice during the apportionment season. Minor usages are estimated when reports are not available.
A number of the larger minor diversions are monitored to determine usage and to check water-use returns. For instance, the usage in the Stokke- Buchanan Irrigation Project is computed from the difference in flow corrected for channel loss between Middle Creek near Govenlock (llAB108) and Middle Creek above Lodge Creek (llAB008).
At the end of June, reports are received from AENV and WSA on actual reported water usage from the minor projects in each basin in their respective jurisdictions. The interim division reports are updated based on these reports. Minor diversions are estimated for the interim division reports for the remainder of the year based on the actual reported use for the first part of the year. At year-end, reports are again received from AENV and WSA on minor project usage. The year-end reports update the information reported in June, and also include any water use from July to October.
Adams Lake has traditionally been considered a minor diversion. Because the usage of Adams Lake is generally small compared to other reservoirs and because it is located high in the Battle Creek basin, it is only included in the minor diversion computations if its combined depletion with Reesor Reservoir would have exceeded channel losses. Otherwise usage is considered to be zero.
At times, there have been more frequent reports on minor-diversion use, particularly when there is a deficit. The provincial agencies have often made an extra effort to provide more current data on minor-diversion use.
The potential exists for minor diversions to be accounted for twice. This happens when WSA reports a licensed usage that is also monitored by Environment Canada. These include Shepherd Ditch and Gaff Ditch.
Prior to 2004, minor diversions in the Lodge Creek basin were accounted for at the International Boundary. In 2004, minor diversions were accounted for in the area of the basin where they occurred and channel losses were applied accordingly to the combined sum of minor diversions and storage depletions. This procedural change was based on a report by M. Seneka (2002) that was accepted by the Field Representatives of the Accredited Officers in 2004. 6.13 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
6.2.4 Domestic Projects
A domestic project is defined as a small reservoir which is used for household and/or stockwatering purposes. Estimates of minor diversions have always been included in the natural-flow computations; however, it was not until the extremely dry years of 1961 and 1962 that a move was made to include the numerous domestic project usages in the natural-flow computations.
From 1966 to 1970, index domestic projects (stockwatering reservoirs) were monitored in the Frenchman River and Battle Creek basins in an effort to arrive at a method for estimating the total domestic-project usage.
In an interim report (Spitzer, 1971), it was recommended that further monitoring of domestic-project usage be discontinued and that no attempt be made to include the usage figures in natural-flow computations; however, at the January 29, 1972, meeting of the Field Representatives, it was agreed that domestic-project usage figures be included in the computations but that no further monitoring of index domestic projects be conducted. Rather, total minor diversions would be used to estimate domestic project usage based on the statistical relation between the two.
Domestic-project usage estimates for each basin are as follows:
Frenchman River Domestic-project usage is estimated to be 45 percent of minor diversions.
Battle Creek Domestic-project usage is estimated to be a varying percentage of minor diversions as shown in graph on next page (not including Adams Lake). (Note that Licence #86 and #110 are usages in Shepherd Ditch. These should not be included in total as Shepherd Ditch is accounted for separately.)
Lodge Creek Domestic-project usage is a very small percent of the natural flow; therefore, no estimate is made for domestic usage.
6.14 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
Battle Creek Domestic Projects Usage as a Percentage of Minor Diversions
6.15 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
6.2.5 Channel Losses
Channel losses are applied to flow depletion and return flows and are used in the calculation of the net depletion at the International Boundary. The general channel-loss equation (Eq.1) as shown below consists of a constant loss factor and a variable loss factor.
L = KD + P(|Q| - KD) (1)
where: L = gross channel loss for the period (dam3) K = constant loss factor (dam3/day) D = number of days in the period (l5 or 16 days) P = variable loss factor (unitless) Q = depleted flow volume in the period (dam3).
The channel-loss volume (L) from a point in the basin to the International Boundary is equal to the constant loss volume during the period (KD) plus the variable loss amount (P(|Q|-KD)) which is a function of season. The constant loss value (KD) reflects the estimated volume of water lost to seepage and evaporation that result from having a live channel. The variable loss volume (P(|Q|-KD)) is applied to flows in excess of the constant loss volume (|Q|-KD) and accounts for estimated seasonal changes in evaporation and evapotranspiration that vary throughout the year.
The variable channel-loss factors were originally derived for apportionment periods of 10 days. When the periods were extented from 10 days to 15 or 16 days, the variable loss values were adjusted for periods that encompassed two factors by using a time-weighted average. These values are included in the tables in section 6.2.5.1, 6.2.5.2, and 6.2.5.3.
To facilitate computations, the channel losses are typically applied to the entire period and not the specific days of flow, diversion, storage, or release. However, because the periods have been extended from 10 to 15 or 16 days (1993), efforts are made to identify periods where flow depletions have occurred over partial periods and to adjust the channel-loss application accordingly.
6.16 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
6.2.5.1 Frenchman River Basin Channel-Loss Factors The channel- loss factors for the Frenchman River are as follows:
Cypress Lake Area (i.e., Belanger Cr, East Outflow) Constant Loss Factor K = 14.7 dam3/day (6 cfs-day/day)
PERIOD VARIABLE LOSS FACTOR P Prior to Mar 22 0.12 Mar 23 to Apr 6 0.14 Apr 7 to May 6 0.18 May 7 to May 22 0.30 May 23 to Jun 6 0.36 Jun 7 to Aug 22 0.48 Aug 23 to Sep 6 0.42 Sep 7 to Sep 21 0.30 Sep 22 to Oct 6 0.26 Oct 7 to Oct 22 0.18
Eastend Area (i.e., Eastend Reservoir, Eastend Canal) Constant Loss Factor K = 12.3 dam3/day (5 cfs-day/day)
PERIOD VARIABLE LOSS FACTOR P Prior to Mar 24 0.10 Mar 25 to Apr 8 0.12 Apr 9 to Apr 23 0.15 Apr 24 to May 8 0.18 May 9 to May 24 0.25 May 25 to Jun 8 0.30 Jun 9 to Aug 24 0.40 Aug 25 to Sep 8 0.35 Sep 9 to Sep 23 0.25 Sep 24 to Oct 8 0.22 Oct 9 to Oct 24 0.15
Val Marie Area (i.e., Huff Lake, Newton Lake, Huff Lake Gravity Canal, Huff Lake Pumping Canal, Newton Lake Main Canal) Constant Loss Factor K = 4.92 dam3/day (2 cfs-day/day)
PERIOD VARIABLE LOSS FACTOR P Prior to Mar 28 0.04 Mar 29 to Apr 27 0.06 Apr 28 to May 28 0.10 May 29 to Aug 28 0.16 Aug 29 to Sep 27 0.10 Sep 28 to Oct 28 0.06
6.17 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
The channel-loss function for the Frenchman River was developed in 1961 based on the report by Collier (1960) and on hydrometric records for the period 1940-60. The channel-loss function was further substantiated in a report by Cuthbert and Langley (1974), which examined hydrometric records for the period 1951-70. The variable loss factors (P) were redistributed in 1993 after the period change from 10 to 15 or 16 days occurred.
6.2.5.2 Battle Creek Basin Channel-Loss Factors Because of the large ground-water contribution in the Battle Creek basin, the variable loss factor is considered to be 0 percent. The loss constants (K) are as follows:
Reesor Lake Area = 14.7 dam3/day (6 cfs-day/day) Gaff Ditch Area= 9.76 dam3/day (4 cfs-day/day) Cypress Lake Area= 7.34 dam3/day (3 cfs-day/day) (i.e., West Inflow Canal, West Inflow Canal Drain, West Outflow Canal, Vidora Ditch) Consul Area= 4.92 dam3/day (2 cfs-day/day) (i.e., Richardson Ditch, McKinnon Ditch) Nashlyn Area= 2.42 dam3/day (1 cfs-day/day) (i.e., Nashlyn Canal)
The channel-loss function for Battle Creek is based on intensive channel-loss studies (McFarlane, 1924; McGavin, 1925) carried out during the period 1922-24 and verified by records obtained in the 1960s. Channel losses were not included on Battle Creek until 1971, when agreement was reached on the values to be used.
6.2.5.3 Lodge Creek Basin Channel-Loss Factors The channel-loss factors for Lodge Creek are as follows:
Upper Lodge and Bare Creek Reservoir Area (includes Michel Reservoir, Greasewood Reservoir, and Massy Reservoir) Constant Loss Factor K = 7.34 dam3/day (3 cfs-day/day)
PERIOD VARIABLE LOSS FACTOR P Prior to Mar 27 0.06 Mar 28 to Apr 26 0.09 Apr 27 to May 27 0.15 May 28 to Aug 27 0.24 Aug 28 to Sep 26 0.15 Sep 27 to Oct 27 0.09
6.18 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
Cressday, Mitchell, and Middle Creek Reservoir Area Constant Loss Factor K = 4.92 dam3/day (2 cfs-day/day)
PERIOD VARIABLE LOSS FACTOR P Prior to Mar 28 0.04 Mar 29 to Apr 27 0.06 Apr 28 to May 28 0.10 May 29 to Aug 28 0.16 Aug 29 to Sep 27 0.10 Sep 28 to Oct 28 0.06
Jaydot and Altawan Reservoir Area (including Spangler Ditch) Constant Loss Factor K = 2.42 dam3/day (l cfs-day/day)
PERIOD VARIABLE LOSS FACTOR P Prior to Mar 29 0.02 Mar 30 to Apr 28 0.03 Apr 29 to May 29 0.05 May 30 to Aug 29 0.08 Aug 30 to Sep 28 0.05 Sep 29 to Oct 29 0.03
Middle Creek near Govenlock (11AB108) to Middle Creek above Lodge Creek (11AB008) Constant Loss Factor K = 1.21 dam3/day (0.5 cfs-day/day)
PERIOD VARIABLE LOSS FACTOR P Prior to Mar 29 0.01 Mar 30 to Apr 28 0.02 Apr 29 to May 29 0.03 May 30 to Aug 29 0.04 Aug 30 to Sep 28 0.03 Sep 29 to Oct 29 0.02
Middle Creek above Lodge Creek (11AB008) to Lodge Creek below McRae Creek at International Boundary (11AB083) Constant Loss Factor K = 1.21 dam3/day (0.5 cfs-day/day)
PERIOD VARIABLE LOSS FACTOR P Prior to Mar 30 0.01 Mar 31 to Apr 29 0.02 Apr 30 to May 30 0.03 May 31 to Aug 30 0.04 Aug 31 to Sep 29 0.03 Sep 30 to Oct 30 0.02
6.19 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
Channel losses were first applied to Lodge Creek in 1963 (International Joint Commission, issued annually). The channel-loss function for Lodge Creek was based on the results of the channel-loss studies conducted in the Frenchman River basin according to Stermitz (Frank Stermitz, Montana District Engineer, U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., Feb. 12, 1964). The Lodge Creek channel-loss functions were based on those used for Val Marie area of the Frenchman River basin, prorated with mileage and season of the year.
6.20 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
6.2.6 Return Flows
Return flow is defined as the volume of water diverted to irrigation projects which eventually returns to the main channel. The amount of water diverted for use in the major irrigation projects is measured and the surface-water return flow from the project is either measured or estimated as a percentage of the volume diverted. For the most part, return flows from minor diversions typically are imperceptible and as such are not considered in the accounting. Exceptions to this rule are listed in sections 6.5.6 and 6.6.1.
In the case of diversion from Battle Creek, a lag time is applied between the time of diversion and the time the return flow enters the channel. For the Frenchman River it is assumed that the diversion and subsequent return flow occur within the same 15- or 16-day period. For Lodge Creek, return flows from major projects are measured. In all basins, return-flow estimates may be modified if conditions warrant.
6.2.6.1 Frenchman River Basin Return Flows
Diversion Return Flow Eastend Canal 25 percent of water diverted Huff Lake Gravity Canal 25 percent of water diverted Newton Lake Main Canal 25 percent of water diverted Val Marie Pumps 1 and 2 (see section 6.5.6)
The return flow estimates were developed by Johnson (1975). At the January 27, 1976 meeting of the Field Representatives, it was agreed that a return flow estimate of 25 percent of water diverted would normally be used.
6.2.6.2 Battle Creek Basin Return Flows
Diversion Lag Time (Days) Return Flow Gaff Ditch 0 35 percent of water diverted * Vidora Ditch 4 25 percent of water diverted ** Richardson Ditch 2 25 percent of water diverted ** McKinnon Ditch 2 25 percent of water diverted ** Nashlyn Canal 2 25 percent of water diverted ** Shepherd Ditch (see section 6.6.1)
*The 35 percent return-flow estimate was developed by Johnson (January, 1977) and was first used for the 1977 natural-flow computations.
** Adjusted if record from stations Battle Creek near Consul or Battle Creek below Nashlyn Project indicate unusual return-flow conditions. See section 6.6.3 for examples of the Consul and Nashlyn return-flow calculation.
6.21 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Procedure for the Division of Natural Flow
6.2.6.3 Lodge Creek Basin Return Flows The return flows for diversions from Lodge Creek are measured. Diversions and return flow stations are as follows:
Diversion Return Flow Measured At Bedford Outlet Walburger Coulee (see section 6.7.1.3) Spangler Ditch Squaw Coulee (see section 6.7.3)
6.22 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Water Division
6.3 WATER DIVISION
6.3.1 Shares
According to the 1921 Order of the IJC, the natural flow of the eastern tributaries is to be divided equally between Canada and the United States.
6.3.2 Surplus and Deficit Deliveries
The Order does not specify an accounting procedure for surplus or deficit deliveries in any given period. As a result, the procedure that has evolved is that deficit deliveries carry over from one period to another, are cumulative, and must be made up by subsequent surplus deliveries. Surplus deliveries do not carry over from one period to another, are not cumulative, and cannot be used to make up future deficits.
A Letter of Intent modifiying the accounting procedures for surplus and deficit deliveries was adopted by the Accredited Officers in 2007. These modifications are described in detail on pages B.7 to B.10 in Appendix B.
If the United States receives less than 50 percent of the natural flow during a period, the difference between 50 percent of the natural flow and the actual amount received is a deficit in delivery. The United States is entitled to request that a deficit be refunded in the next period or, conversely, Canada is entitled to refund a deficit in the next period; however, experience in the 1980s has shown that it is often beneficial to both countries for Canada to store more than its share during early spring runoff, thereby creating a deficit in deliveries to the United States. The deficit can then be refunded during the irrigation periods after spring runoff. This method of operation benefits Canada by maintaining a higher head on the inlets to the irrigation canals, and allows the use of irrigation return flows to make up a portion of the deficit. It also benefits the United States by reducing the flood hazard in spring and provides the potential of higher flow volumes for the post-spring-runoff irrigation for more beneficial use of the waters.
This method of operation does result in some problems for Canada in that channel losses are lower in spring than in summer. Therefore, for a given quantity of water stored in the spring, a greater quantity of water must be delivered in summer. Recognizing this, the Canadian Federal water- management agency Agri-Environment Services Branch (AESB) and Saskatchewan’s Water Security Agency (WSA) generally make releases from reservoirs when channels are primed and channel losses are at a minimum.
6.23 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Water Division
Currently no specific guidelines or procedures have been established for carrying over a deficit from one year to the next.
6.3.3 Artificial Deficits
A problem with the fixed division periods occurs when a substantial rainfall event or reservoir release overlaps a division period. For these types of events and because average times of travel are used to lag division periods, an artificial deficit may occur. For example, in 1978 a 75-mm rainfall occurred between September 10 and 12, overlapping the division period for Cypress Lake diversions. Using the recorded data and the standard division periods, a surplus occurred for the September 5-14 period and an equivalent artificial deficit was created for the September 15-24 period. This problem was discussed at the January 31, 1979, meeting of the Field Representatives and it was agreed that the flows for the two periods would be combined. It was further agreed that anomalies of this nature will be resolved by the Field Representatives for both countries on an ad hoc basis.
6.3.4 Letter of Intent
In 2007, the Accredited Officers for the St. Mary and Milk Rivers developed, through a collaborative effort involving several Federal, provincial, and state agencies, a responsive apportionment procedure for the exchange of international waters in the Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River. The new Letter of Intent apportionment procedure will provide for more beneficial use of the waters of the Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River by both countries through increased flexibility in the storage and release of water. The procedure will also provide a better understanding of the apportionment process to the water managers and water users in the basins.
The Letter of Intent is shown in Appendix B.
6.24 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Field Procedures
6.4 FIELD PROCEDURES
6.4.1 Field Schedules
The USGS is responsible for monitoring the boundary sites, while the remainder of the stations are the responsibility of WSD. Where possible, WSD will conduct three visits during the March to October season to the International Border stations and, during that same time period, the USGS will conduct one or more visits to the international stations within Canada, preferably when irrigation is occurring.
6.4.2 Border-Crossing Privileges
Servicing hydrometric gauging stations along the International Boundary often requires the crossing of the boundary at uncontrolled points. Special border- crossing privileges have been granted by United States and Canadian governments to the USGS and WSD for servicing the boundary stations. These privileges require that the hydrometric personnel follow special check-in procedures with Canada Customs, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Refer to Appendix D for details on the procedures.
6.4.3 AAFC Pasture Access
Servicing of hydrometric gauging stations in the eastern tributaries occasionally requires access to Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) pastures. A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) has been signed between Environment Canada and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, authorizing access to AAFC lands for water monitoring purposes. The MoU lists a number of conditions to be met while on AAFC lands. USGS personnel are subject to the same conditions and privileges as Environment Canada personnel.
A copy of the Memorandum of Understanding is available in Appendix M.
6.25 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Frenchman River Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
6.5 FRENCHMAN RIVER BASIN SPECIAL COMPUTATION AND FIELD PROCEDURES
6.5.1 Cypress Lake – 11AC037
As shown in Figure 6.5.1.1, Cypress Lake is fed by numerous small coulees and two principal tributaries, Sucker Creek and Oxarat Creek. Prior to 1938 the lake was the low point in a closed drainage system that likely would overflow intermittently into the Frenchman River. In 1938 dams with controlling structures were placed at the east and west ends of the lake, isolating the lake from the two major tributaries. The control structures allow for the diversion of water into or out of the lake. Diversion canals carry water during the runoff periods from Battle Creek into the west end and from Belanger Creek into the east end of the reservoir. Outlet canals are also provided at either end of the reservoir to release water to Battle Creek on the west or to Frenchman River on the east as deemed appropriate by Saskatchewan’s Water Security Agency (WSA).
Figures 6.5.1.2 and 6.5.1.3 show the canal system at the west and east ends of Cypress Lake.
6.5.2 Belanger Creek Diversion to Cypress Lake – 11AC064
The purpose of this station is to quantify the diversion from Belanger Creek to Cypress Lake and area. There are several drains along this canal that are used to flood hayfields adjacent to the canal. One of the drains is located between the gauge and the diversion headworks. Measurements should be made below this drain whenever possible. During high water, measurements may have to be made at the highway bridge (about 500 metres (1,600 feet) downstream). If so, any diversion between the gauge and the bridge must be added to the measurement in order to arrive at a total flow passing the gauge.
6.5.3 Cypress Lake East Outflow Canal – 11AC060
This station measures return flow from irrigation projects directly to the east of Cypress Lake and releases from Cypress Lake. Water is held on the irrigation projects, as a rule, until late May to about mid-June and then released. It is important to obtain measurements during this release because the stage-discharge relationship is poorly defined and often there is backwater from Belanger Creek.
In the mid-1980s the irrigator constructed drainage ditches through the irrigation projects parallel to the East Outflow Canal and draining to Belanger Creek. The purpose of the ditches is to drain the low portions of the irrigated area.
6.26 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Frenchman River Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
6.27 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Frenchman River Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
6.28 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Frenchman River Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
6.29 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Frenchman River Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
The ditches are to be operated such that the majority of the irrigated area is drained into the East Outflow Canal with only the lower areas being drained directly into Belanger Creek; however, it is possible that all the irrigated area can be drained via the new ditches. WSA officials have asked the irrigator to avoid this if possible as any flow down the new ditches bypasses the East Outflow Canal station and Canada does not receive any credit for the return flow.
6.5.4 Eastend Canal near Eastend - 11AC052
The stage-discharge relationship is influenced by check structures downstream. Discharge measurements are essential to determine shift corrections.
6.5.5 Val Marie Pump No. 1 - 11AC068
Due to the small quantity of water diverted at this station, the Field Representatives decided at the February 2, 1983, International Records Conference to treat Val Marie Pump No. 1 as a minor diversion. The 25- percent return-flow factor should still be applied to the diversion.
This station has an H-flume to measure the discharge and metering is not necessary as long as the flume is not affected by backwater (which has never occurred in the station's history). The outside gauge plate is fastened directly to the H-flume with 0.000 m = 0 flow. No level checks are required. To set the data logger when there is no flow, pour water into the well to bring it up to the zero flow point. At this point the gauge height = 0.000 m. Read the gauge height at the piezometer tube when there is flow. Clean out float well when necessary to prevent piezometer from plugging.
6.5.6 Val Marie Pump No. 2
Due to the small quantity of water diverted at this station, the Field Representatives decided at the January 28, 1981, International Records Conference to treat Val Marie Pump No. 2 as a minor diversion. The 25- percent return-flow factor should still be applied to the diversion.
This pump is used to pump water from the Frenchman River about midway between Huff Lake and Newton Lake. The pump is equipped with a Saskatchewan Power Corporation (SPC) watt-hour meter to record the power consumption. Records are obtained by relating the kilowatt hours (kwh) used by the pump to an established consumption figure for the pump.
6.30 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Frenchman River Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
The kwh meter should be read prior to and after each diversion. Read the first five dials on the meter to obtain a five-digit number. An example of the method of calculation follows.
SPC meter reading on Apr. 1, 1986 = 01865 kwh SPC meter reading on Oct. 9, 1986 = 02862 kwh Total power used = 997 kwh
The formula to compute the diversion is: Total power / conversion factor = amount of water diverted
The conversion factor developed from historical records is: 25 kwh of power per 1 dam3 of water diverted or pumped.
Therefore: 997 kwh / 25kwh/dam3 = 40 dam3
A return flow factor of 25 percent is then applied to this diversion.
Therefore: 40 dam3 x 0.25 = 10 dam3 The actual diversion = 40 dam3 - 10 dam3 = 30 dam3
6.5.7 Huff Lake Pumping Canal - 11AC066
Beginning in 2011, use of the index-velocity method to determine discharge was adopted in order to overcome the computational problems associated with variable backwater conditions.
The following steps are used to compute flows in the canals using the index- velocity method:
1. Install Sontek UpLooker hydroacoustic velocity meter in center of canal prior to the beginning of each irrigation season.
2. Check to ensure that standard cross section area has not changed.
3. Record stage and index velocity associated with each discharge measurement made during the season in order to verify the index-velocity rating.
4. Discharge is computed from the equation Q=VA, where V (velocity) is computed from the application of the index-velocity rating to the index velocity (Vi) and area (A) using the average recorded stage (S).
6.31 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Frenchman River Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
Prior to 2011, experience had shown that a pump-discharge rating provided more accurate data than a canal stage-discharge rating; therefore, the data logger on the canal was used only to determine the number of pumps (one or two) operating and the hours of operation. A record of Huff Lake elevations, pump operations, and discharge measurements were also required to compute daily discharges since the pumps could be operated individually or simultaneously and because pump discharge varies with the reservoir elevation.
The following procedure was used to compute daily discharges:
1. Based on the discharge measurements, plot a reservoir elevation versus discharge curve for one-pump operation and a similar curve for two-pump operation.
2. From the reservoir elevation-discharge curves, make the corresponding rating table.
3. Determine the shift of each measurement from the curve. Note that this shift is a discharge shift and not a stage shift.
4. On a daily basis determine the number of hours of one-pump and two- pump operation and the mean reservoir elevation for each period of steady flow. Using the mean reservoir elevation, determine the discharge from the rating table for each period. Apply the appropriate shift correction to this discharge. The shift for one-pump operation is assumed to be half the shift for two-pump operation.
5. Compute the daily discharge based on the discharge for each steady flow period and the number of hours in each period. The time of operation is rounded to the nearest whole hour.
An example of the table used to tabulate these computations for both the interim and final reports is found on the following page.
6.32 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Frenchman River Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
6.33 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Frenchman River Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
6.5.8 Huff Lake Gravity Canal – 11AC065 and Newton Lake Main Canal –11AC054
Weed growth and the manipulation of checkboards in the canals downstream from the stations cause highly variable backwater conditions which make it extremely difficult to compute the discharge using a conventional stage-discharge relationship. Beginning in 2010, use of the index-velocity method to determine discharge was adopted in order to overcome the computational problems associated with varying backwater conditions.
Prior to 2010, the submerged orifice equation was used to compute the discharge. The submerged orifice equation and associated computational procedures used to determine discharge are described below:
Q = CA * (2gh)1/2
where Q = discharge (m3/s) C = coefficient of contraction (unitless) A = area of the gate opening (m2) g = acceleration due to gravity (9.8 m/s2) and h = differential head between the water surfaces of the reservoir and canal (m).
Automatic recorders on the canal and reservoir record their respective elevations which are then used to determine the differential head, h. An automatic recorder is installed to record changes in gate opening. Field measurements of the gate opening are taken by measuring from the top of the collar on the large horizontal gear to the bottom edge of the stop piece at the top of the threaded stem. The discharge in the canal is measured on a regular basis to develop a relationship between the gate opening and the combined factor CA.
The following seven steps are followed to compute flows on the canals:
1. Record gate opening, reservoir elevation and canal elevation corresponding to each discharge measurement.
2. Based on the above information, compute CA for each measurement from the formula.
3. Plot gate opening versus CA for each measurement and draw a smooth curve.
4. From the gate opening vs CA curve, make a gate-opening vs CA table.
6.34 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Frenchman River Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
5. Determine the shift of the measurement from the gate opening versus CA curve.
6. On a daily basis determine the canal elevation and reservoir elevation for each gate setting and the number of hours at each setting. Apply the shift correction to the gate opening to obtain the effective gate opening and use this value and the gate opening vs CA curve to determine CA.
7. Compute the discharge at each gate setting and the daily discharge based on the number of hours at each setting.
An example of this procedure follows.
EXAMPLE: Huff Lake Gravity Canal Q = CA * (2gh)1/2 Q = 0.879 (measurement) H = reservoir elevation-canal elevation = 815.638-813.556 0.879 = CA *(2 x9.8 x2.082)1/2 therefore CA = 0.879 ÷ 6.388 = 0.138
From table of gate opening vs CA Gate opening (G.O.) (measured) = 0.399 Gate opening (from table) = 0.189 Therefore shift to gate opening = -0.210 If G.O. (measured) > G.O. (table), shift is negative. If G.O. (measured) < G.O. (table), shift is positive.
The shift to gate opening is then applied to the gate openings determined from the chart record producing effective gate openings. Values of CA are then determined from the table for each effective gate opening.
The table below is used to tabulate these computations for the interim reports. For the final computations an automated computer procedure is used which generates an annual listing and output in standard record format. Instructions for the computer procedure are found in section 6.8.
6.35 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Frenchman River Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
6.36 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Battle Creek Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
6.6 BATTLE CREEK BASIN SPECIAL COMPUTATION AND FIELD PROCEDURES
6.6.1 Shepherd Ditch near Consul – 11AB020
This is a conventional stage-discharge station. The flows recorded at the station are included as an annual volume in the minor diversions for the Battle Creek basin. A 25-percent return-flow factor should be applied to the diversion.
6.6.2 McKinnon Ditch near Consul –11AB044
A rancher diverts from McKinnon Ditch upstream from the gauge using a tractor-driven pump. The diversions must be added to the flows recorded at the McKinnon Ditch gauge. The diversions are usually very small (about 0.06 to 0.24 m3/s) and the rancher usually diverts for only 1 or 2 days. The diversions should be metered but this is not always possible due to the short time of operation. If measurements cannot be made, the AESB office in Consul will have pumping rates and duration data. The exact times of pump startup and shutdown can be determined from the stage record at the McKinnon Ditch station.
6.6.3 Return Flow from Consul and Nashlyn Projects
Three stations are operated on Battle Creek to determine return flows from the Consul and Nashlyn irrigation projects as follows:
- Battle Creek below Wilson's Weir (11AB118) and Battle Creek near Consul (11AB096) for the Consul projects, and
- Battle Creek near Consul (llAB096) and Battle Creek below Nashlyn Project (11AB101) for the Nashlyn projects.
The difference between flows at the upstream and the downstream station (with the appropriate time lag applied) is considered to be the return flow from each project. This method must be used with caution and careful judgment. Rainstorm events between the upstream and downstream stations can result in calculated return flows that are erroneously inflated. In such an event, irrigation return flows must be estimated. An examination of return flows from previous years can be used to arrive at a reasonable return-flow estimate. A tipping bucket rain gauge located at the Battle Creek at Consul gauge also aids in separating return flows from rainfall events.
On the following pages are blank forms used in computing return flow for these projects and examples of the computations made in 1985 and 1986.
6.37 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Battle Creek Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
6.38 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Battle Creek Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
6.39 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Battle Creek Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
Example 1: 1985 RETURN FLOWS
1. DETERMINATION OF RETURN FLOW FOR CONSUL PROJECTS (computations are on page 6.37)
The following basic assumptions were made: a) Travel (lag) time from Battle Creek below Wilson's Weir (11AB118) to Battle Creek near Consul (11AB096) is 1 day. b) Travel time for return flow from Vidora Ditch is 4 days. c) Travel time for return flow from Richardson Ditch is 2 days. d) Travel time for return flow from McKinnon Ditch is 2 days.
Summary The return-flow calculations for 1985 indicate a return flow of 17.5 percent for the irrigation period, which appears to be reasonable, since the spring snow cover was well below normal, and the soil-moisture content at the beginning of the irrigation season would indicate a lower-than-normal return flow. It was recommended that a return-flow factor of 17 percent be used rather than the normal 25 percent.
2. DETERMINATION OF RETURN FLOW FOR NASHLYN PROJECT (computations are on page 6.38)
The following basic assumptions were made: a) Travel (lag) time from Battle Creek near Consul (llAB096) to Battle Creek below Nashlyn Project (llAB101) is 1 day. b) Travel time for return flow from Nashlyn Canal is 2 days.
The return-flow calculations indicate a return-flow factor of 3.3 percent. It was recommended that 4 percent be used rather than the normal 25 percent.
Note that the period from April 2 to April 11 was included because no water was stored in the small reservoir below the Nashlyn Canal gauge as is the normal case.
6.40 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Battle Creek Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
6.41 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Battle Creek Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
6.42 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Battle Creek Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
Example 2: 1986 RETURN FLOWS
1. DETERMINATION OF RETURN FLOW FOR CONSUL PROJECTS (computations on page 6.40)
The following basic assumptions were made: a) Travel (lag) time from Battle Creek below Wilson's Weir (l1AB118) to Battle Creek near Consul (l1AB096) is 1 day. b) Travel time for return flow from Vidora Ditch is 4 days. c) Travel time for return flow from Richardson Ditch is 2 days. d) Travel time for return flow from McKinnon Ditch is 2 days.
Summary In 1986, significant flows were diverted down the Cypress Lake West Inflow Canal Drain during the periods May 13 to May 23, and May 24 to June 2. These flows had to be added to the flows at Wilson's Weir for these periods. Normally the flows from the drain are insignificant.
The return-flow calculations for 1986 indicate a return flow of 24.4 percent for the irrigation period. This appears to be reasonable because spring rains and spring runoff resulted in near-normal soil moisture content. It was recommended that the normal return-flow factor of 25 percent be used.
2. DETERMINATION OF RETURN FLOW FOR NASHLYN PROJECT (computations are on page 6.41)
The following basic assumptions were made: a) Travel (lag) time from Battle Creek near Consul (l1AB096) to Battle Creek below Nashlyn Project (11AB101) is 1 day. b) Travel time for return flow from Nashlyn Canal is 2 days.
Summary Conventional return-flow calculations resulted in unreasonable return flows of 102 percent. The AESB indicated that return flows for the Nashlyn Project appeared to be normal. The AESB had noted, however, that several farmers had impounded runoff water in backflood projects and had released this water at various times. This additional water entered Battle Creek at several locations along with runoff from several snowstorms during March and April. These additional local inflows resulted in the unreasonable return-flow percentage. As the AESB indicated that return flows appeared to be normal, it was recommended that the normal return-flow factor of 25 percent be used for 1986.
6.43 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Battle Creek Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
6.44 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Battle Creek Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
6.45 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Lodge Creek Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
6.7 LODGE CREEK BASIN SPECIAL COMPUTATION AND FIELD PROCEDURES
6.7.1 Middle Creek Reservoir - 11AB080 (discontinued in 1995)
In 1982 a change in the computation procedure for Middle Creek was adopted as recommended by Herrington (1982). In the former procedure, evaporation from Middle Creek Reservoir was charged to Canada; however, the computed evaporation losses did not agree with the recorded reservoir storage changes during periods of negligible inflow and outflow. The procedure was replaced by a water-balance approach using the inflow to Middle Creek Reservoir recorded at Middle Creek near Saskatchewan Boundary (11AB009), and outflow recorded at Middle Creek below Middle Creek Reservoir (11AB001) and Walburger Coulee below Diversions (11AB086). With this procedure in place, water levels of Middle Creek Reservoir were no longer needed for apportionment purposes and station 11AB080 was discontinued in 1995.
There may be natural local inflow in the Middle Creek Reservoir area which is not recorded at the Middle Creek near Saskatchewan Boundary station (e.g., from a localized rainstorm). The runoff from that event must be subtracted from the recorded flow at the outflow stations to determine return flow and man-made release from the Middle Creek Reservoir area. The natural local inflow is estimated by examining the hydrometric and meteorologic records.
6.7.1.1 Middle Creek Reservoir Bedford Outlet - 11AB114 There is no gauge at this station but the AESB personnel operating the reservoir notify WSD when the gates are to be opened.
When releases are made, discharge measurements must be taken. Since gate settings are normally not changed during a release, the daily discharges can be interpolated between measurements.
Prior to about 1970, water was normally released through this outlet once a year to provide water for a Ducks Unlimited project and/or to irrigate the hayfields in the Bedford Slough. Water was also occasionally diverted to projects located on Walburger Coulee for irrigation and sometimes water was released through the outlet to replenish the water supply in Altawan Reservoir. In recent years these operations have not taken place as the Province of Saskatchewan is reluctant to release water that may flow back into Alberta. If releases from Bedford Outlet are made, they are charged against Canada and the return flow, if any, is measured at the Walburger Coulee gauge. During spring runoff and following rainfall events, flow at the Walburger Coulee gauge is affected by natural runoff. This natural runoff must be estimated and subtracted from the recorded flow to determine the return flow from Middle Creek Reservoir releases.
6.46 2/23/2017 Eastern Tributaries Lodge Creek Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
6.7.1.2 Middle Creek Reservoir Flood Spillway – 11AB115 There is no gauge at this station and the discharge is determined from a reservoir elevation-discharge relation. Because the reservoir seldom spills it is very important that discharge measurements be obtained when it does. Since the Middle Creek Reservoir station has been discontinued, special attention needs to be given to this site when this occurs. Reservoir levels must be obtained during spillage; therefore, a temporary station needs to be activated at this site when water levels are high.
Prior to 2013, the net depletion for Middle Creek Reservoir was calculated in the Lodge Creek natural flow apportionment spreadsheet as follows:
Reservoir – Bedford – Flood – Irrigation + Minor - Channel Loss = Middle Creek Reservoir Inflow Outlet Spillway Return Q Diversions to USA Bdy Net Depletion
This model essentially gave Canada a credit for storing water in the Ducks Unlimited and Simms Lake Projects and did not accurately reflect how depletions should be assessed in the Middle Creek area.
The apportionment spreadsheet treated all flow entering Middle Creek Reservoir as a depletion (see column 22) and provided an opportunity for Canada to receive a credit if any Middle Creek water was returned to Lodge Creek downstream from Middle Creek Reservoir (column 23) as return flow or through Walburger Coulee (column 40). Subtracting Bedford Outlet diversions and Flood Spillway overflows incorrectly treated those diverted flows as a credit, and resulted in a change in the procedure of international flow apportionment.
In 2013, the procedures were revised to redefine the net depletion of Middle Creek Reservoir as follows:
Reservoir – Irrigation + Minor - Channel Loss = Middle Creek Reservoir Inflow Return Q Diversions to USA Bdy Net Depletion
This revision resulted in the removal of Middle Creek Flood Spillway (22) and Bedford Outlet (23) columns.
6.7.1.3 Walburger Coulee below Diversions – 11AB086 For reasons discussed previously, return flows at this station have been minimal. At the January 31, 1979 meeting of the Field Representatives, suspension of this station was recommended by the Field Representatives and later approved by the Accredited Officers. The well and shelter were left on the site so the station can be re-activated on short notice, if necessary. There has been some discussion of completely discontinuing the station, but, because there is the possibility the station may have to be re-activated, the station is in suspended status. If the station was ever re-activated there would have to be an intensive measurement program to verify or redefine the stage-discharge relation.
6.47 2/23/2017 Eastern Tributaries Lodge Creek Basin Special Computation and Field Procedures
In 1997, WSD conducted an aerial survey of the Middle Creek area to see if any return flows from Middle Creek Reservoir Flood Spillway were reaching Walburger Coulee. It was determined that the release water was captured in storage prior to entering Walburger Coulee and therefore never reached Lodge Creek. The survey revealed that the control structures for diversion to Walburger Coulee had been destroyed and were inoperable. Only under extreme circumstances will flow from Middle Creek Reservoir make it to this point.
In 2012, the USGS and WSD conducted a field survey that confirmed all Middle Creek Reservoir Flood Spillway flows were captured in storage by either the New Orleans Ducks Unlimited project, Sims Lake prior to entering Walburger Slough and therefore never reached Lodge Creek.
6.7.2 Stokke-Buchanan Irrigation Projects Usage
In the early 1960s, Ken Clarke, a WSD hydrometric technician, developed a procedure to estimate the usage by the Stokke-Buchanan irrigation projects on Middle Creek. The usage was computed on a separate form titled “Water Use - Stokke-Buchanan Projects” and the total use for the season was included as a minor diversion in the Lodge Creek division. A channel loss-function of a constant 3 dam3/day was used in the calculation. (Ken Clarke, Water Survey Division, oral commun., circa 1978).
In 1985 significant expansion was made to the projects to the point where they were “major” rather than “minor” diversions. At the January 28, 1986, meeting of the Field Representatives, it was agreed to include the usage as a major diversion in the Lodge Creek division. New methodology for estimating the usage was developed in the months following the meeting.
6.7.3 Squaw Coulee near Willow Creek - 11AB103
This station is used to determine the return flow from the Spangler Ditch irrigation area. If rain occurs during irrigation, natural local inflows must be estimated and separated from return flow. A tipping bucket rain gauge is available and used at this station to separate rainfall events from return flows.
6.48 2/23/2017 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms
6.8 OTHER COMPUTATION PROCEDURES AND FORMS
6.8.1 Lodge Creek Basin
6.8.1.1 Lodge Creek Natural Flow Computation Spreadsheets (6 pages)
The WSD has developed a Microsoft Excel 97 spreadsheet program to compute Lodge Creek natural flow. An example of the program output is shown on the following pages.
6.49 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 Net epletion D Bare Creek Page 1 of 6 4 0 3 8 2 -4 -8 -4 -8 -2 -3 -6 -12 573 -12 -16 177 676 -143 -103 9 Loss to Channel Boundary International 9 9 6 6 9 9 % of remainder 8 - 9 15 15 24 24 24 24 24 24 15 15 + 7.34 dam3/day 4 3 2 8 0 -4 -8 -2 -3 -6 -4 -8 -12 -16 -246 8 Observed Bare Creek 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 76 853 7 Net 5 - 6 Depletion Reservoir Upper Lodge Depletion 2 0 1 6 -1 -7 -7 -1 14 28 68 48 -89 -85 214 106 561 119 118 6 Loss to Channel Boundary International 9 9 6 6 9 9 15 15 24 24 24 24 24 24 15 15 +% of remainder 7.34 dam3/day 6 1 2 0 -1 -1 -7 -7 14 -89 -85 2006 Table 10 5 Reservoirs 1+2+3+4 Upper Lodge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 48 25 28 56 68 105 194 All quantitiesAll in cubic decametres nor Total Mi (Upper Lodge (Upper Incl. Bare Cr.) 0 8 7 2 -3 -1 -1 -17 328 320 3 4 8 6 2 1 0 3 0 9 3 1 7 5 -1 -5 -2 -6 -1 -1 -3 2081 36 93 149 NATURAL FLOW OF LODGE CREEK AT THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY THE FLOW INTERNATIONAL OF AT LODGE CREEK NATURAL -51 -38 -50 -35 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Depletion Depletion Depletion Reservoir Reservoir Reservoir Observed Observed Observed Reported Area Period Michel Greasewood Massy Diversions Depletion Upper Lodge Feb 25-Mar 11 Apr 12 - 26 Aug 12 -Aug 27 Sep 12 -Sep 26 Aug 28-SepAug 11 Mar 12 - 27 Mar 28-Apr 11 May 28-Jun 11 May Total Oct 12 - 27 Jul 28-Aug 11 Jul 12 - 27 Jun 27-Jul 11 Jun 12 - 26 May 12 - 27 May Sep 27-OctSep 11 Apr 27-May 11 Apr 27-May 15-Feb-07 1 4 2 3 7 9 8 6 5 12 14 13 16 11 10 15 Period
6.50 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms 21 Net Jaydot 19 - 20 Depletion Page 2 of 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 0 0 20 Loss to Channel Boundary International 8 8 8 8 8 8 5 5 3 3 2 5 2 3 3 5 2.42 dam3/day +% of remainder 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 Depletion Observed Area Period Mar 14 - 29 Feb 27-Mar 13 13 Apr 29-May 30-Jun 13 May 30-SepAug 13 Mar 30-Apr 13 Aug 14 -Aug 29 Jul 14 - 29 Jul 30-Aug 13 May 14 - 29 May Oct 14 - 29 Jun 29-Jul 13 Jun 14 - 28 Sep 14 -Sep 28 29-OctSep 13 Apr 14 - 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 Net Jaydot Jaydot 16 - 17 Mitchell Depletion Reservoir Reservoir 1 0 -7 -7 -6 -5 -4 -7 57 192 54 79 77 83 115 -21 -18 -14 -21 -29 -21 17 Loss to Channel Boundary International 4 6 4 6 6 6 16 16 16 16 16 10 10 10 16 10 4.92 dam3/day +% of remainder -5 -7 -7 -6 -4 -7 54 -21 -18 -14 -21 -29 -21 198 156 249 2006 Total 14 + 15 14 + Depletion Table 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 eported All quantitiesAll in cubic decametres -5 -7 -7 -6 -4 -7 54 -21 -18 -14 -21 -29 -21 198 Observed R 0 -25 249 13 14 15 16 Net Mitchell 11 - 12 Cressday Depletion Diversions Reservoir Depletion Reservoir Minor Mitchell NATURAL FLOW OF LODGE CREEK AT THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY THE FLOW INTERNATIONAL OF AT LODGE CREEK NATURAL 7 1 0 11 0 0 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 100 00 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 83 140 156 12 -97 -165 12 Loss to Channel Boundary International 4 4 6 6 6 6 16 16 16 16 16 10 10 10 10 16 4.92 dam3/day +% of remainder 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 12 -18 223 -262 Depletion Observed and Area ressday Period 11 Mitchell Cressday 15-Feb-07 C Reservoir Reservoir Mar 29-Apr 12 29-SepAug 12 Aug 13 -Aug 28 Jul 29-Aug 12 Jul 13 - 28 Jun 28-Jul 12 Jun 13 - 27 Mar 13 - 28 13 - 28 May 13 -Sep 27 28-OctSep 12 Oct 13 - 28 Apr 13 - 27 Apr 28-May 12 Apr 28-May 29-Jun 12 May Feb 26-Mar 12
6.51 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 389 2792 2301 8172 4038 17699 27 Net Depletion Middle Creek 6 7 17 15 31 55 75 52 13 -25 -47 148 606 334 982 332 2600 26 Loss to Channel Boundary International 6 6 6 6 4 4 10 10 16 16 16 16 16 16 10 10 4.92 dam3/day +% remainder of 26 25 - 6 7 17 31 55 52 15 81 13 -47 -25 537 4370 3398 2635 9154 24 25 Gross Depletion 22-23+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 24 20299 24 2011 Minor Diversions (Middle Cr.) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 68 12 43 123 All in decametres quantities cubic 23 rrigation I Reservoir Creek Below Middle Creek Return Middle 7 17 21 31 55 52 15 81 18 18 13 537 4346 3398 2635 9154 20398 22 Inflow Creek Middle Observed Observed Reported Area Period Reservoir Reservoir Middle Creek Oct 28 13 - Aug 28 13 - Jul 29-Aug 12 Jul 13 - 28 Jul 13 - Feb 26-Mar 12 Apr 27 13 - Mar 29-Apr 12 Sep 28-Oct 12 Jun 28-Jul 12 28-Jul Jun Jun 13 - 27 13 - Jun May 12 29-Jun May 28 13 - Apr 28-May 12 Sep 27 13 - Aug 29-Sep 12 Mar 28 13 -
6.52 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53 -16 -114 -219 -642 -836 -138 -1912 34 Net Stokke - Depletion Buchanan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2 -4 20 -23 -27 -45 -20 -35 -21 -157 33 Loss to Channel Boundary International 2 2 4 4 3 4 3 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 1.21 dam3/day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2 -4 72 -36 -137 -246 -687 -871 -159 -2069 32 30 - 3130 - +% remainder of 33 32 - Projects Stokke - Buchanan Water Use 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 273 450 436 31 Observed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 136 791 1037 414 277 6625 8694 1695 2382 1082 1010 2221 3092 30 Middle Middle 28 - 29 28 - Flow At Flow At Apparent Measured 2011 Period All in decametres quantities cubic To MiddleTo Lodge Creek Lodge Creek Lodge Creek Creek Above Creek Above Creek Above Aug 30 15 - Jul 31-Aug 14 Aug 31-Sep 14 Sep 30-Oct 14 Sep 29 15 - Feb 28-Mar 14 Oct 30 15 - Jul 15 - 30 Jul 15 - Jun 30-Jul 14 30-Jul Jun Jun 15 - 29 15 - Jun May 14 31-Jun May 30 15 - Apr 30-May 14 Apr 29 15 - Mar 31-Apr 14 Mar 30 15 - 0 1 0 6 0 2 14 20 24 51 89 32 52 63 24 18 395 29 Loss to Channel Lodge Creek Middle Above Cr 4 2 4 3 2 4 3 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 1.21 dam3/day +% remainder of 2 0 6 0 0 1 14 28 18 446 160 842 301 7020 1784 1134 2284 28 Near Creek Observed Near Period Middle Govenlock Govenlock Middle Creek Feb 27-Mar 13 May 29 14 - Oct 29 14 - Aug 30-Sep 13 Sep 29-Oct 13 Sep 28 14 - Jul 14 - 29 Jul 14 - Jun 29-Jul 13 29-Jul Jun Jun 14 - 28 14 - Jun May 13 30-Jun Mar 30-Apr 13 Mar 29 14 - Apr 29-May 13 Apr 28 14 - Aug 29 14 - Jul 30-Aug 13
6.53 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 50 52 33 38 -21 700 731 636 -646 -179 42 Net Altawan Depletion 6 -1 -2 76 59 56 41 36 41 38 38 -22 -70 -52 -41 -15 -37 41 Loss to Channel Boundary International 2 2 3 3 5 5 8 8 8 8 8 8 5 5 3 3 2.42 dam3/day +% remainder of 41 40 - 6 -1 -2 44 93 91 71 76 -37 -22 -15 -62 790 776 692 -716 -231 40 Gross 35+36-37-38+39 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 66 60 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 Coulee Diversions Depletion 2011 -Walburger Minor Return Flow From Bedford 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 All in decametres quantities cubic Ditch From Spangler Return Flow -Squaw Coulee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 40 557 515 36 Ditch -1 -2 44 93 90 71 76 -37 -22 -34 -15 785 153 632 -716 -577 -234 35 Depletion Observed Observed Observed Observed Reported Area Period Altawan Altawan Reservoir Reservoir Spangler Mar 30-Apr 13 Oct 29 14 - Feb 27-Mar 13 Apr 28 14 - Apr 29-May 13 Mar 29 14 - Jun 29-Jul 13 29-Jul Jun Jul 30-Aug 13 Aug 29 14 - May 29 14 - 28 14 - Jun Aug 30-Sep 13 May 13 30-Jun Jul 14 - 29 Jul 14 - Sep 28 14 - Sep 29-Oct 13
6.54 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 -2 -4 -19 -19 -19 -19 48 To Date To Deficit(-) 0 0 2 4 2 -1 -4 -18 101 290 998 4727 6399 3053 3078 31156 12525 47 To U.S.A. To Excess Flow Excess 1 1 2 0 4 2 4 19 102 234 5278 8322 1168 5389 48279 17354 10399 Of 46 U.S.A. Share U.S.A. 1 1 3 0 8 8 4 39 203 468 2336 96554 10556 16644 34707 20799 10777 45 43+ 44 50% 45 of 46 44 - Sum 47 of Natural Flow Of 2011 Lodge Creek Natural Flow 1 1 1 1 2 8 0 4 203 524 2166 8442 79435 10005 14721 29879 13477 All in decametres quantities cubic 44 National At Inter- Boundary Lodge Creek 0 0 2 0 0 8 0 38 -21 -56 170 551 1923 4828 7322 2335 17100 43 Net Canada +27+34+42 Observed Depletion In 7+10+13+18+21 Period At Inter- National Boundary pr 16 - 30 16 - pr Oct 15 1 - Oct 31 16 - Sep 15 1 - Sep 30 16 - Aug 31 16 - Aug 15 1 - Jul 16 - 31 Jul 16 - A Jun 16 - 30 16 - Jun 15 Jul 1 - Apr 15 1 - Jun 1 - 15 1 - Jun Mar 15 1 - Mar 31 16 - May 15 1 - May 31 16 -
6.55 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms
6.8.2 Battle Creek Basin
6.8.2.1 Battle Creek Natural Flow Computation Spreadsheets (5 pages)
The WSD has developed a Microsoft Excel 97 spreadsheet program to compute Battle Creek natural flow. An example of the program output is shown on the following pages.
6.56 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Net Gaff 6 - 7 Ditch Depletion Page 5 1 of 0 3 2 1 1 1 2 1 5 To 10 11 Boundary International Channel Loss 9.76 dam3/day Gaff 4 - 5 Ditch Gross Depletion 74 76 76 108 109 109 Area eported R Gaff Ditch Minor Use Flow Return 35% 6 of 0 0 0 0 3 1 00 00 0 2 0 1 2 1 1 1 20 1 0 2 1 3 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 5 5 2 1 6 7 8 9 46 16 299 329 146 183 Gaff 374 131 487 730 146 584 341 119 311 532 146 386 776 272 333 837 156 681 269 94 271 446 146 299 Ditch 1813 635 1897 3075 942 2133 Measured aff tch rea G A Di Period Feb 26-Mar 21 Apr 20 6 - Mar 22-Apr5 Apr 21-May 5 May 21 6 - May 5 22-Jun Sep 20 6 - Oct 21 6 - Oct 22-27 Aug 22-Sep 5 Sep 21-Oct 5 Total Jul 22-Aug 5 Aug 21 6 - Jun 6 - 20 6 - Jun Jul 6 - 21 Jul 6 - Jun 21-Jul 5 21-Jul Jun 2008 TABLE 12 TABLE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -6 0 Net 3 - 4 -596 Upper Depletion Battle Creek Battle All quantities in cubic decametres 7 6 -4 To 90 26 29 62 17 11 24 29 13 15 -10 -221 -221 -591 Boundary Channel Loss 14.7 dam3/day 7 6 -4 11 29 15 -10 -226 -811 1 + 2 Gross NATURAL FLOW OF BATTLE CREEK AT THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY INTERNATIONAL THE AT CREEK BATTLE OF FLOW NATURAL Depletion International Reesor Lake e 4 9 -5 -3 -4 -1 49 26 14 17 21 24 12 14 13 -11 us Lake Minor Reesor 3 3 8 1 3 1 2 3 4 5 -6 -3 -1 32 58 90 16 13 29 37 25 62 11 20 11 -23 -221 -925 203 -722 -126 -808 Lake Observed Reported Depletion Area 12-Feb-10 Period Reesor Reesor Lake Feb 24-Mar 19 Mar 20-Apr 3 Apr 18 4 - Apr 19-May 3 May 19 4 - Sep 18 4 - Sep 19-Oct 3 Oct 4-Oct 19 Oct 25 20 - May 3 20-Jun Total Aug 19 4 - Aug 20-Sep 3 Jun 4 - 18 4 - Jun Jul 20-Aug 3 Jul 4 -19 Jun 19-Jul 3 19-Jul Jun 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 8 13 14 15 16 11 12 10 Period
6.57 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 39 71 89 56 798 Net 608 669 792 394 Lake Cypre ss Page 5 2 of Depletion 1 0 11 70 44 To Inter- To Channel Loss 7.34 dam3/day 22 21 - 11 70 44 779 110 902 110 181 110 504 110 199 110 100 44 115 115 Lake Boundary Gross Depletion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Use Area 11 70 44 891 17 908 110 137 12 149 110 127 30 157 117 694 24 718 110 779 902 181 504 199 100 115 Total Cypress 4 755 82 4 837 1 283 3 555 Cypress 16+17-18 Reported 19+20 Flow Diversion 25% 17 of (4 day(4 lag) 1 0 4 0 2 0 2 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ditch Vidora Return Lake Minor Cypress National 2008 TABLE 12 TABLE 11 890 133 Net 902 504 199 100 115 12-15 Measured Lake Area To CypressTo All quantities in cubic decametres 57 125 21 181 174 692 484 774 Area Lake Diversion 13 + 14 Release 0 0 0 0 25 25 70 Drain West Cypress Inflow NATURAL FLOW OF BATTLE CREEK AT THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY INTERNATIONAL THE AT CREEK BATTLE OF FLOW NATURAL 2 1 3 1 1 2 0 8 8 0 9 9 0 6 6 0 0 7 7 0 1 1 0 4 4 Outflow Canal 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 95 893 135 182 57 866 174 910 202 21 513 342 178 125 303 39 206 101 119 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1258 484 Canal Canal Inflow 5 840 917 187 1 104 4 736 19 Measured Measured Measured Feb-10 Area Period West West 12- Cypress Lake Apr 21 7- Mar 23-Apr 6 Feb 27-Mar 22 Apr 22-May 6 May 22 7 - May 6 23-Jun Jun 7 -21 Jun Aug 23-Sep 6 Aug 22 7 - Jun 22-Jul 6 22-Jul Jun Jul 23-Aug 6 Sep 21 7 - Jul 7 - 22 Jul 7 - Sep 22-Oct 6 Oct 28 23 - Oct 22 7 - Total 3 2 1 4 5 6 7 8 9 12 11 10 13 14 16 15 Period
6.58 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Net 31 Page 5 3 of 29-30 At Consul 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 To 30 Boundary International Depletion Channel Loss 4.92 dam3/day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 at Consul Gross Depletion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Minor Use Consul Area 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gross 2008 24+25-26 Reported 27+28 TABLE 12 TABLE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 All quantities in cubic decametres 26 27 28 29 Flow Diversion (2 day(2 lag) 25% 24 & of 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NATURAL FLOW OF BATTLE CREEK AT THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY INTERNATIONAL THE AT CREEK BATTLE OF FLOW NATURAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 25 Ditch Ditch Measured Measured Area Period 12-Feb-10 Consul Richardson McKinnon Return Canal Total Oct 24-29 Oct 23 8 - Sep 23-Oct 7 Sep 22 8 - Aug 24-Sep 7 Aug 23 8 - Jul 24-Aug 7 Feb 28-Mar 23 Mar 24-Apr 7 Apr 22 8 - Apr 23-May 7 May 23 8 - May 7 24-Jun 22 8 - Jun 7 23-Jul Jun 23 Jul 8 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 Period
6.59 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 At Net 38 509 563 417 Page 5 4 of 1 489 36-37 Depletion 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 To 36 36 61 37 134 International Channel Loss 2.42 dam3/day 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 At 545 599 477 1 622 Gross Nashlyn Boundary Nashlyn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Area Nashlyn Depletion Minor Use 34 35 36 2008 TABLE 12 TABLE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 588 11 545 477 1 611 11 32-33 Reported 34+35 Canal Gross All quantities in cubic decametres 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 502 397 295 Flow Diversion 45% 32 of (2 day(2 lag) NATURAL FLOW OF BATTLE CREEK AT THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY INTERNATIONAL THE AT CREEK BATTLE OF FLOW NATURAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 33 125 942 772 2 929 1 318 1090 Canal Measured Area 12-Feb-10 Period Nashlyn Nashlyn Return olume release Nashlyn from was Reservoir ___ dam3 and was applied to period #__. V Total ** From hydrograph analysis Jul 9 - 24 Jul 9 - Jul 25-Aug 8 Aug 24 9 - Aug 25-Sep 8 Sep 23 9 - Sep 24-Oct 8 Oct 24 9 - Oct 30 25 - * Jun 24-Jul 8 24-Jul Jun Jun 9 - 23 9 - Jun May 8 25-Jun May 24 9 - Apr 23 9 - Apr 24-May 8 Mar 25-Apr 8 Feb 29-Mar 24 9 8 7 6 5 3 4 2 1 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Period
6.60 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -86 44 -106 -107 -556 -422 -493 -198 -322 -1093 Page 5 5 of To Date To Deficit(-) Sum 43 of 77 19 54 21 31 -71 43 322 156 387 537 134 150 -107 617 -198 -124 -771 Flow 40-42 To The U.S.A. Excess 78 19 87 Of 42 393 156 256 282 110 963 855 836 150 220 385 1239 1175 7 204 50% 41 of Natural Flow U.S.A. Share U.S.A. 38 41 786 312 155 512 564 220 300 174 439 770 2478 1925 1709 1672 2349 Battle 14 402 Natural Flow Of 2008 TABLE 12 TABLE At 38 22 40 715 312 155 310 175 131 989 765 300 118 261 404 1626 1500 7 821 All quantities in cubic decametres International Battle Creek 0 0 0 0 In 71 89 56 39 202 389 Net 720 907 852 417 509 425 1945 6 581 Depletion NATURAL FLOW OF BATTLE CREEK AT THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY INTERNATIONAL THE AT CREEK BATTLE OF FLOW NATURAL 5+11+23+31+38 Measured 39+40 At 12-Feb-10 Period International Jul 10 - 25 Jul 10 - Jun 25-Jul 9 25-Jul Jun Jul 26-Aug 9 Aug 25 10 - Aug 26-Sep 9 Sep 24 10 - May 25 10 - May 9 26-Jun 24 10 - Jun Sep 25-Oct 9 Oct 25 10 - Total Mar 25 1 - Mar 26-Apr 9 Apr 24 10 - Apr 25-May 9 Oct 31 26 - 9 8 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Period Boundary Canada Boundary Creek
6.61 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms
6.8.2.2 Example of 2001 return flow analysis (2 pages)
2001 Battle Creek Return Flows
1. Precipitation:
Supplied by Ira Blakely using daily observations of a rain gauge in the PFRA yard:
June 3 = 0.45 inch June 4 = 0.55 inch June 6 = 1.60 inch
May - no measurable rain, hot and windy
2. Runoff:
Little (likely ice melt) to none as no snow cover. Very dry in fall of 2000.
3. Irrigations:
Consul Projects:
Ira expects you would start to see some return flows approximately 5 days after the start of Richardson, McKinnon and Vidora ditches.
A farmer above the Consul gauge (East of Don Kissel’s) backs up all of the return flows for back flooding of his hay land and then releases it into Battle Creek via a 4 ft culvert (approx. 6 ft of head). Seen on Consul hydrograph starting May 16th.
Four Return Flow calculations were done:
I. May 5 - 31: this period produced a 6.29% return flow
II. May 10 - 31: this period produced a 8.03% return flow
III. May 8 - 23: this period did not work as the Net Flow at Consul exceeded the Actual Flow calculated at Consul producing a negative return flow value
IV. May 11 - June 2: this period was towards the end of all of the canal diversions and before the June rain as well as capturing the release of the captured return flows just above the Consul gauge. This period produced a 10.18% return flow.
Conclusion:
The fourth period scenario produced a 10.18% return flow which appears reasonable based upon the soil moisture conditions from a dry 2000 fall, no 2001 spring runoff and a hot, windy and dry May 2001. Therefore, it is recommended that a return flow factor of 10% be applied to the Consul Projects instead of the default factor of 25%.
6.62 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms
Nashlyn Project:
The project started irrigating from the Nashlyn Reservoir on May 19 and the bottom end of the project was filled first.
Ira expected that we should see the first return flows on May 20.
Four Return Flow calculations were done:
V. April 15 - 30: this period produced a negative expected flow below Nashlyn and a return flow of 52%
VI. May 1 - 15: this period also produced a negative expected flow below Nashlyn and a return flow of 14%
VII. May 1 - June 1: this period also produced a negative expected flow below Nashlyn and a return flow of 114%
VIII.May 15 - 31: this period produced a return flow of 22%
Conclusion:
The return flow calculation from scenario number four of 22% seems reasonable. It captures the return flow from the main irrigation from Nashlyn Reservoir, is before the June rains and also the release of the last of the reservoir contents into Battle Creek.
Therefore, it is recommended that a return flow factor of 22% be applied to the Nashlyn Project instead of the default factor of 25%.
W.D. Hyde 02/01/29
6.63 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms
6.8.3 Frenchman River Basin
6.8.3.1 Frenchman River Natural Flow Computation Spreadsheets (3 pages)
The WSD has developed a Microsoft Excel 97 spreadsheet program to compute Frenchman River natural flow. An example of the program output is shown on the following pages.
6.64 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 At 34 Net 358 132 415 4 - 5 2 794 Page 1 ofPage 4 Depletion Cypress LakeCypress 31 78 10 18 5 - 4 - 1 - 1 - 2 38 32 - - - - 240 389 249 311 National To Inter - Boundary Computed Channel LossChannel 31 78 10 18 4 At - 4 - 1 - 1 - 2 38 32 - - - - 1 - 3 2 + Depletion Cypress LakeCypress 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2006 Use Area TABLE 14 TABLE 2 4 1 1 2 31 33 71 11 43 10 18 86 Canal Outflow Minor Lake East 5 195 626 953 5 522 1 790 3 732 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 Diversion Measured Measured Reported * For Creek Total 15-Feb-07 Period Belanger Cypress Cypress Gross Cypress Jun 7 -21 Apr 7 - 21 435 30 321 726 Oct 7 - 22 Lake Area Mar 7 - 22 Aug 7 -Aug 22 Sep 7 -Sep 21 eriods combined 10 and 11 were to better account conditions. for the dry May 7 - 22May 856 147 38 747 NATURAL FLOW OF FRENCHMAN RIVER AT INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY INTERNATIONAL RIVER FLOW AT OF FRENCHMAN NATURAL Jul 7-Aug 6 Jun 22-Jul 6 Mar 23-Apr 6 3 261 149 357 3 469 675 Sep 22-OctSep 6 Apr 22-May 6Apr 22-May 390 61 52 381 P Feb 20-Mar 6 May 23-Jun 6May 245 42 71 274 Aug 23-SepAug 6 *
6.65 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 At 93 13 Net Page 2ofPage 4 428 156 112 401 338 3 219 1 692 Depletion 152 13 32 12 12 - National At InterAt - Channel LossChannel 152 13 12 175 165 175 165 141 141 113 113 408 252 Gross 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 18 898 339 470 246 11 - 25 32 86 316 204 46 647 309 10 11 Use 249 2 107 415 290 673 272 Area At Minor Eastend Boundary Eastend Eastend Depletion 2006 TABLE 14 TABLE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 27 237 224 799 Flow 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 947 894 7 0 7 302 833 863 1 270 5 144 1 287 760 5 887 2 668 Depletion Canal Observed Measured Computed Reported 7+8-9+10 Computed 11-12 NATURAL FLOW OF FRENCHMAN RIVER AT INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY INTERNATIONAL RIVER FLOW AT OF FRENCHMAN NATURAL * 15-Feb-07 For Eastend Area Total Period Eastend Reservoir Eastend Return Oct 9 - 24 165 Apr 9 - 23 230 Jun 9 - 23 Mar 9 - 24 Sep 9 -Sep 23 141 Aug 9 -Aug 24 113 May 9 - 24May -1 797 3 197 Jul 9-Aug 8 - Jun 24-Jul 8 321 Mar 25-Apr 8 1 858 Sep 24-OctSep 8 175 Apr 24-May 8Apr 24-May 304 106 eriods combined 10 and 11 were to better account conditions. for the dry Feb 22-Mar 8 12 May 25-Jun 8May - Aug 25-SepAug 8 13 P *
6.66 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms 0 0 0 0 At 443 25 Net - 6 884 -1 251 23 - 24 Depletion Val Marie Val Page 3 ofPage 4 24 32 9 391 107 To 24 - - - Boundary Channel LossChannel 24 32 At 550 22 22 - - 324 84 240 122 82 40 470 137 333 551 150 401 - Gross -1 642 - Val Marie Val 0 0 82 152 78 74 Val Use 142 2 123 160 1 963 246 4 442 336 4 106 Marie Depletion 153 38 99 1 576 224 1 352 Canal Return Minor Diversion flow 0 2006 Newton Total Lake Main TABLE 14 TABLE Pumping 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 174 495 1 024 1 693 423 Gravity 32 24 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 719 550 70 - - - - -2 758 2 529 2 111 8 073 12 713 3 178 923 7 699 815 Total Change Huff Lake Huff Lake NATURAL FLOW OF FRENCHMAN RIVER AT INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY INTERNATIONAL RIVER FLOW AT OF FRENCHMAN NATURAL 27 25 562 754 565 - 3 20 22 12 - - 590 324 - - 4 442 4 196 Newton Lake Net In Reservoir 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 2 73 15 246 266 157 - 3 - 5 414 56 470 Net -2 004 - Depletion Depletion Contents Canal Canal Canal Huff Lake Observed Observed 14+15 Measured Measured Measured 17+18+19 Computed Reported 16+20-21+22 Computed * For Area Total Period 15-Feb-07 eriods combined 10 and 11 were to better account conditions. for the dry Val Marie Val Apr 13 - 27 Oct 13 - 28 Jun 13 - 27 Mar 13 - 28 1 285 696 1 981 Sep 13 -Sep 27 Aug 13 -Aug 28 May 13 - 28May -2 271 -2 659 -4 930 1 753 1 046 3 511 6 310 1 578 354 156 86 70 P Jun 28-Jul 12 60 62 122 Jul 13-Aug 12 -1 105 -3 954 -5 059 512 507 3 538 4 557 1 139 Mar 29-Apr 12 - Sep 28-OctSep 12 Apr 28-May 12Apr 28-May 199 1 163 1 362 90 63 Feb 26-Mar 12 - May 29-Jun 12May - Aug 29-SepAug 12 *
6.67 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 32 779 468 231 - - - - -310 -166 To Date Deficit(-) Sum of 31 Page 4 ofPage 4 14 65 1 0 0 779 311 26 31 - - 158 144 533 180 - 1 181 2 036 1 372 5 084 28-30 U.S.A. Excess Flow Excess 0 0 1 0 0 68 27 30 227 749 904 3 144 1 971 1 105 1 076 U.S.A. Share Of To The 50% of 29 Natural Flow 0 0 2 0 0 Of 53 29 453 136 River 2 210 1 499 Natural Flow 2006 TABLE 14 TABLE 3 0 2 0 53 28 213 907 180 River at International Frenchman In 0 0 0 0 443 27 Net Frenchman 240 600 3 343 3 943 592 761 1 048 1 809 765 1 387 2 152 133 - 1 963 4 325 6 288 8 684 12 755 21 439 10 719 1 884 326 -1 251 533 Canada Boundary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 92 13 927 25 075 39 983 19 991 26 Near Reported 6+13+25+26 Measured 27+28 Minor Use International Depletion NATURAL FLOW OF FRENCHMAN RIVER AT INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY INTERNATIONAL RIVER FLOW AT OF FRENCHMAN NATURAL * otal T Period National Boundary At InterAt - Jul 1 - 15 Boundary Apr 1 - 15 92 Oct 1 - 15 Jun 1 - 15 Mar 1 - 15 Sep 1 -Sep 15 May 1 - 15 May 15-Feb-07 Apr 16 - 30 Oct 16 - 31 Jun 16 - 30 Mar 16 - 31 Aug 16 -Aug 31 Sep 16 -Sep 30 May 16 - 31 May eriods combined 10 and 11 were to better account conditions. for the dry Jul 16 - 15 Aug P *
6.68 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms
6.8.3.2 CANAL program documentation (5 pages) CANAL Program
Brian N. Johnson Atmospheric and Hydrologic Sciences Division Environment Canada
February 2001
6.69 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms
Input Files Run the required stations on COMPUMOD to create output files of hourly data for the following: • reservoir elevations • canal elevations • headgate openings and CA values
The following are examples of the hourly data files.
Reservoir Elevations
Interpolated Data for station: 11AC056 NEWTON LAKE
Data from 2000-05-16 to 2000-08-22.
Interval: 1 Hours
Date/Time Water Level WL Comment
2000-05-16 22:00:00 802.415 R 2000-05-16 23:00:00 802.334 R 2000-05-17 00:00:00 802.355 R 2000-05-17 01:00:00 802.349 R 2000-05-17 02:00:00 802.354 R 2000-05-17 03:00:00 802.358 R
Canal Elevations
Interpolated Data for station: 11AC054 NEWTON LAKE MAIN CANAL
Data from 2000-05-15 to 2000-08-23 00:00:00.
Interval: 1 Hours
Date/Time Water Level WL Comment
2000-05-16 22:00:00 799.524 2000-05-16 23:00:00 799.524 2000-05-17 00:00:00 799.663 2000-05-17 01:00:00 799.987 R 2000-05-17 02:00:00 800.030 R 2000-05-17 03:00:00 800.053 R
6.70 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms
Headgate openings and CA values
Interpolated Data for station: 81AC056 NEWTON LAKE MAIN CANAL HEADGATE
Data from 2000-05-15 to 2000-08-23.
Interval: 1 Hours
Corrections have been applied.
Date/Time Water Level WL Comment Discharge Discharge Comment
2000-05-16 22:00:00 0.000 0.007 2000-05-16 23:00:00 0.000 0.007 2000-05-17 00:00:00 0.374 0.245 2000-05-17 01:00:00 0.375 0.246 2000-05-17 02:00:00 0.375 0.246 2000-05-17 03:00:00 0.376 R 0.247
Running CANAL To run the CANAL program, simply enter the names of the input files and output files and click Run CANAL.
6.71 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms
The program will: • compute the hourly and daily flows for the canal • display the daily flows on screen in a table format • create a log text file containing the hourly input data and the computed hourly and daily flows • create a data text file containing the daily discharges in the Updating Correction (UC) record format Output files Log file The entry at the end of each day, i.e. following the 23 hour value, is the mean daily flow.
11AC054 Newton Lake Main Canal 08/02/01
Reservoir Hourly Data D:\Projects\WSC_NaturalFlow\Canal\Z_Distribution\Sample Data\Newton Lake\NewtonLake.txt
Interpolated Data for station: 11AC056 NEWTON LAKE Data from 2000-05-16 to 2000-08-22.
Canal Hourly Data D:\Projects\WSC_NaturalFlow\Canal\Z_Distribution\Sample Data\Newton Lake\MainCanal.txt
Interpolated Data for station: 11AC054 NEWTON LAKE MAIN CANAL Data from 2000-05-15 to 2000-08-23 00:00:00.
Headgate Hourly Data D:\Projects\WSC_NaturalFlow\Canal\Z_Distribution\Sample Data\Newton Lake\Headgate.txt
Interpolated Data for station: 81AC056 NEWTON LAKE MAIN CANAL HEADGATE Data from 2000-05-15 to 2000-08-23.
Year Month Day Hour Reservoir Canal Gate Flow 2000 5 17 0 802.355 799.663 0.245 1.77963790699120 2000 5 17 1 802.349 799.987 0.246 1.67379817277953 2000 5 17 2 802.354 800.03 0.246 1.66027949647042 2000 5 17 3 802.358 800.053 0.247 1.66020016925669 2000 5 17 4 802.389 800.063 0.247 1.66774575592325 2000 5 17 5 802.342 800.068 0.248 1.65567444915962 2000 5 17 6 802.348 800.071 0.248 1.65676622273630 2000 5 17 7 802.395 800.072 0.249 1.68016520937674 2000 5 17 8 802.345 800.073 0.25 1.66829254029384 2000 5 17 9 802.402 800.076 0.25 1.68800177725026 2000 5 17 10 802.358 800.204 0.377 2.44958342858536 2000 5 17 11 802.396 800.231 0.378 2.46234434147621 2000 5 17 12 802.307 800.245 0.379 2.40941481343500 2000 5 17 13 802.311 800.26 0.38 2.40931987083495 2000 5 17 14 802.347 800.267 0.381 2.43267828699148 2000 5 17 15 802.347 800.274 0.381 2.42858138813587 2000 5 17 16 802.344 800.307 0.408 2.57800475034475 2000 5 17 17 802.341 800.324 0.408 2.56531764208649 2000 5 17 18 802.34 800.335 0.408 2.55767516936768 2000 5 17 19 802.336 800.348 0.408 2.54680907552965 2000 5 17 20 802.335 800.354 0.407 2.53609012308317 2000 5 17 21 802.335 800.354 0.407 2.53609012308317 2000 5 17 22 802.334 800.353 0.407 2.53609012308317 2000 5 17 23 802.331 800.353 0.407 2.53416908496655 2000 5 17 2.16
6.72 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms
Data file
11AC054 MAY 15 2000 -9999.99 UC 135 UC 11AC054 MAY 16 2000 -9999.99 UC 136 UC 11AC054 MAY 17 2000 2.16 UC 137 UC 11AC054 MAY 18 2000 2.62 UC 138 UC 11AC054 MAY 19 2000 2.75 UC 139 UC 11AC054 MAY 20 2000 2.72 UC 140 UC 11AC054 MAY 21 2000 2.64 UC 141 UC 11AC054 MAY 22 2000 2.56 UC 142 UC
Getting final data The data file is imported into COMPUMOD and the station is processed in the usual manner. Any Override Corrections (OC) that are required are entered at this point.
6.73 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms
6.8.3 Penman’s Equation
This section contains a detailed description of the discrete version of Penman’s equation that is used to determine evaporative losses.
The discrete version of Penman’s equation currently in use is:
Qn +∆ γEa E = +∆ γ where E = daily evaporation (mm) from a water surface Δ = rate of change of vapor pressure at the air temperature Qn = net radiation in evaporation units (mm) γ = Psychrometric constant Ea = bulk aerodynamic estimate of evaporation
The rate of change of vapor pressure at the air temperature, Δ, can be stated as:
eLm sev =∆ RT 2 where mv = molecular weight of water vapor (18.02 g/mol) Le = Latent heat of vaporization (597.3-.0556T) cal/g where T is in ºC es = vapor pressure at the air temperature (mb) R = universal gas constant (8.3144 erg/mol/ºK) T = Temperature (ºK) or T(ºK) = 273.16+T(ºC)
The psychrometric constant, γ, can be stated as:
ppc γ = eLe where cp = heat capacity of dry air (0.240 cal/g/ºK) p = atmospheric pressure ε = 0.622, the ratio of the molecular weight of water vapor to the molecular weight of dry air.
The atmospheric pressure as a function of elevation and can be calculated using:
p = 1013.25(288 − .0065 el /)( 288) 526.0 where el = elevation (m)
The net radiation in terms of evaporation units is a conversion of the sensed net radiation in MJ/m2 to mm using the following conversion:
95.238 Qn = Rn Le where Qn = net radiation (mm) Rn = measured net radiation (MJ/m2)
6.74 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Other Computation Procedures and Forms
Ea is the bulk aerodynamic evaporation and can be estimated using Meyers equation:
1.10 Ea ee +−= 062139.01)(( u + .1)( 0000328084 el))( 4.30 da 6.7 where Ea = the bulk aerodynamic evaporation in mm/day ea = saturation vapor pressure (mb) ed = vapor pressure (mb) u7.6 = wind velocity at 7.6 m above the ground (km/hr)
Vapor Pressure can be calculated using the following equation. To calculate ea the dewpoint temperature would be used. To calculate ed the actual air temperature would be used:
26.17 T = xe 1011.6 T + )3.237( where e = the vapor pressure in mb T = temperature (ºC)
To determine dew point temperature, the air actual air temperature and relative humidity are measured and dew point temperature is calculated using the following equation:
bf Rh T ),( T = d − fa Rh T ),( where (Td = Dew Point Temperature ( ◌ْ C aT f Rh t),( = + Rh )100/ln( + Tb a = 17.27 b = 237.7 ◌ ْ ◌ْ C Rh = relative humidity (%) (T = air temperature ( ◌ْ ◌ْ C
The wind velocity at the appropriate elevation can be calculated using the following equations:
25.0 6.7 = d .7( 62 duu )/ where u7.6 = wind velocity at 7.6m above the ground (km/hr) ud = measured wind velocity at height d above ground (km/hr) d = distance above ground (m)
6.75 2/18/2010 Eastern Tributaries Information Exchange of Interim Reports
6.9 INFORMATION EXCHANGE OF INTERIM REPORTS
This section provides guidance regarding the electronic exchange of interim reports between Canada and the United States and supplements established procedures provided for the exchange of original field data as provided in Appendix F. Additional guidance concerning exchange of hydrologic information is available in PART II of the Procedural Guide for International Gauging Stations on Boundary Waters between Canada and the United States of America (1985)1.
6.9.1 HYDROMETRIC DATA
Hydrometric data used in the interim Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River natural flow computations are routinely transmitted electronically, along with a cover letter (see example below), to the field hydrographer responsible for joint operation of the gage and their accountable manager(s). An accountable manager is defined as someone who supervises the individuals collecting field data and prepares the natural flow compilations. In Canada, the accountable manager is the District Manager of the Saskatchwan District. In the United States, the International Waters Unit Chief or the Montana Water Science Director are considered the accountable managers.
The accountable managers are to ensure that hydrometric data are checked prior to transmittal and delivered in a timely manner. A confirmation email will be sent upon receipt and approval of all electronically transferred files or delivery of original field notes.
Example of field data exchange cover letter:
Enclosed are the discharge measurement notes and gage inspection notes for the June 5-7, 2012 field activities. Please note the following sensor reset correction:
Battle Creek at International Boundary June 5, 2012 at 1415 GH=0.834 m Q=2.24 cms -0.024 m purging correction at 1355 hours
If you have any questions regarding the data please don't hesitate to call me or
Best regards,
1Huberman, S., Slater, J.E., and Condes, A., 1985, Procedural Guide for International Gauging Stations on Boundary Waters between Canada and the United States of America: Ottawa, Canada, Department of the Environment, Inland Waters Directorate WRB Report IWD-HQ- WRB-PG-85-1; Reston, Va., U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 85-329, 104 p.
6.76 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Information Exchange of Interim Reports
6.9.2 INTERIM REPORTS
Interim natural-flow and water-division reports are routinely transmitted electronically or mailed, along with a cover letter (see example below) to all parties listed in the contact list table (Section 6.9.3).
Interim natural flow computations and water division reports - All interim streamflow and natural flow computations are to be checked prior to being sent for review by the reciprocating accountable office. All interim natural flow computations will be reviewed by the other accountable party before the interim report can be released to other stakeholders listed in the interim reports contact list.
Example of interim reports cover letter:
Enclosed are the tentative Lodge Creek, Battle Creek, and Frenchman River natural flow computations and water division (in dam3) for the period ending June 15, 2012.
Please note a -591 dam3 deficit delivery occurred at Battle Creek during the period.
If you have any questions regarding the data please don't hesitate to call me or
Best regards,
6.77 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Information Exchange of Interim Reports
6.9.3 CONTACT LIST FOR INTERIM REPORTS
Name Frenchman Battle Lodge Reservoir River Creek Creek Month-End Chart & Table Auger, Stephen – AAFC, Val Marie Irrigation Project X X X X Bierback, Mrs. Heather – Middle Creek Users Mail Billings Field Unit Chief – USGS X X X Dailey, Mike – MTDNRC X X X X delaChevrotiere, Carmen – Alberta Environment and X X X X Parks (AEP) Hills, Brian—AEP X X Hunt, David—AEP X X Johnson, Ethan—Envionment and Climate Change X X X X Canada Jordan, Clayton – US Bureau of Reclamation X X X X Mahoney, John--AEP X X X Murphy, Kathleen – Alberta Environment and Parks X X X Kilpatrick, John – USGS X X X Klein, Ray – AAFC X X X X McLaughlin, Glenn – AAFC X X X X Midtlyng, Norm – USGS X X X X Miles, Matt – MTDNRC X X X Ofukany, Dwayne – Environment and Climate Change X X X X Canada Renouf, Mike – Environment and Climate Change X X X X Canada Sabur, Muhammed—AEP X X Selinger, Dan – Environment and Cllimate Change X X X X Canada Spenst, Duncan – Water Security Agency X X X X Tully, Denise – Lodge Creek Users Mail summary Verpy, Larry – AAFC, Eastend Irrigation Project X X X X Wagner, Scott – AAFC, Consul/Nashlyn Irrigation X X X X Project Whiteman, Scott– USGS X X X Wingert, Kevin – Water Security Agency X X X X Woodward, Jeff– Environment and Climate Change X X X X Canada
6.78 2/16/2018 Eastern Tributaries References
6.10 REFERENCES
Cram, H.R., 1931, St. Mary and Milk Rivers apportionment of flow between Canada and the United States—chronological summary 1891-1908: Ottawa, Ontario, Department of the Interior.
Collier, E.P., 1953, Cypress Lake natural overflow study, 1952: Calgary, Alberta, Department of Energy, Mines and Resources.
Collier, E.P., 1960, A suggested new method for computing natural flow of Frenchman River at the International Boundary: Calgary, Alberta, Department of Northern Affairs and Natural Resources.
Cuthbert, D.R., and Langley, E.R., 1974, Frenchman River hydrology study: Ottawa, Ontario, Environment Canada.
Environment Canada, 1988, Hydrometric technician career development program, international gauging stations—lesson package no. 17.
French, M.H., 1928, Interim report on the Northern Tributaries of Milk River in Canada: Calgary, Alberta, Department of the Interior.
Godwin, R.B., 1966, Domestic usage index stations in Battle Creek, Lodge Creek and Frenchman River basins: Department of Mines and Technical Surveys.
Herrington, R., 1982, Middle Creek Reservoir study: Regina, Water Resources Branch, Environment Canada.
Hopkinson, R. F., 1999, Estimation of the influence of elevation and evaporation in southeast Alberta and southwest Saskatchewan: Calgary, Alberta, Environment Canada.
Huberman, S., Slater, J.E., and Condes, A., 1985, Procedural guide for international gauging stations on boundary waters between Canada and the United States of America: Ottawa, Canada, Department of the Environment, Inland Waters Directorate WRB Report IWD-HQ-WRB-PG-85-1; Reston, Va., U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 85-329, 104 p.
Hyde, W. and Woodward, J., 2006, Comparison of Pan Derived and Penman’s Method for Determining Gross Evaporation at Altawan, Saskatchewan: Regina, Saskatchewan, Environment Canada.
International Joint Commission, issued annually, Report to the Joint Commission on the division of the waters of the St. Mary and Milk Rivers, 2 v.
6.79 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries References
Johnson, B.N., 1975, Return flow analysis Frenchman River Basin: Water Survey of Canada, Saskatchewan District.
Johnson, B.N., 1977, Gaff Ditch return flow analysis: Water Survey of Canada, Saskatchewan District.
Johnson, B.N., 1978, Water use development on the Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River: Regina, Saskatchewan, Water Survey of Canada.
Johnson, B.N., 1983, Natural flow program for Frenchman, Battle, and Lodge Basins: Saskatchewan, Water Resources Branch.
McFarlane, W.T., 1924, Carriage losses investigations along Battle Creek, 1923: Calgary, Alberta, Department of the Interior.
McGavin, C.J., 1925, Battle Creek investigations, 1924, Calgary, Alberta, Department of the Interior.
Morton, G.H., 1965, Return flow from Eastend Irrigation Project: Calgary, Alberta, Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources.
Morton, G.H., 1971, Drainage areas of Frenchman River and Battle Creek: Calgary, Alberta, Department of the Environment.
Seneka, M., 2002, Minor irrigation diversions in Lodge and Middle Creek basins, Application of channel loss credits by linking with appropriate major projects: Edmonton, Alberta, Alberta Environment.
Spitzer, M.O., 1972, Water usage by domestic projects in the Frenchman River and Battle Creek drainage basins, 1966 to 1970: Calgary, Alberta, Water Survey of Canada, Interim report, 1971; Final report, 1972.
Yee, B., 1985, Evaluation of present methods of estimating and applying minor diversions: Regina, Saskatchewan, Water Resources Branch.
Yee, B. 1991, Development of alternative method of estimating minor diversions: Regina, Saskatchewan, Water Resources Branch.
6.80 2/12/2013 Eastern Tributaries Other information sources
6.11 OTHER INFORMATION SOURCES
The following WSD Environment Canada, Regina, files contain a myriad of information relevant to the division of water on the eastern tributaries.
5900/3-3-1 Eastern Tributaries of Milk River Apportionment
5900/3-4 St. Mary-Milk River (includes minutes of annual conferences, items related to the annual report to the IJC, and items related to the Procedures Manual).
5900/3-7-3 Apportionment of Alberta-Saskatchewan Streams
1165-36/BLFB Battle-Lodge-Frenchman Basins Study Coordinating Committee
Basin Files 11A, 11AB, and 11AC.
6.81 2/12/2013 APPENDIX A
LISTS OF STATIONS
A.1 2/12/2013
INTERNATIONAL GAUGING STATIONS OPERATED JOINTLY BY THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA ST. MARY AND MILK RIVER DRAINAGE BASINS
WSD USGS Station Station Number Number Station Name
ST. MARY RIVER BASIN 05AE027 05020500 St. Mary River at International Boundary 05AE029 05018500 St. Mary Canal at St. Mary Crossing, near Babb, Montana 05AE036 05015500 Lake Sherburne at Sherburne, Montana
MILK RIVER BASIN 11AA001 06134000 North Milk River near International Boundary 11AA005 06134500 Milk River at Milk River 11AA025 06133000 Milk River at Western Crossing of International Boundary 11AA031 06135000 Milk River at Eastern Crossing of International Boundary 11AA032 06133500 North Fork Milk River above St. Mary Canal, near Browning, Montana
LODGE CREEK TRIBUTARY BASIN 11AB00l 06144395 Middle Creek below Middle Creek Reservoir, near Govenlock 11AB008 06144450 Middle Creek above Lodge Creek, near Govenlock 11AB009 06144350 Middle Creek near Saskatchewan Boundary 11AB060 06144270 Spangler Ditch near Govenlock 11AB083 06145500 Lodge Creek below McRae Creek, at International Boundary 11AB089 06144260 Altawan Reservoir near Govenlock 11AB108 06144440 Middle Creek near Govenlock
BATTLE CREEK TRIBUTARY BASIN 11AB018 06149400 Nashlyn Canal near Consul 11AB027 06149500 Battle Creek at International Boundary 11AB044 06149300 McKinnon Ditch near Consul 11AB058 06149200 Richardson Ditch near Consul 11AB077 06149000 Cypress Lake West Outflow Canal near West Plains 11AB078 06148500 Cypress Lake West Inflow Canal near West Plains 11AB084 06149100 Vidora Ditch near Consul 11AB085 06148700 Cypress Lake West Inflow Canal Drain near Oxarat 11AB102 06147950 Gaff Ditch near Merryflat
A.2 2/12/2013
WSD USGS Station Station Number Number Station Name
FRENCHMAN RIVER TRIBUTARY BASIN 11AC037 06157000 Cypress Lake 11AC041 06164000 Frenchman River at International Boundary 11AC052 06158500 Eastend Canal at Eastend 11AC054 06162500 Newton Lake Main Canal near Val Marie 11AC055 06159000 Eastend Reservoir 11AC056 06163000 Newton Lake 11AC060 06157500 Cypress Lake East Outflow Canal near Vidora 11AC063 06162000 Huff Lake 11AC064 06156500 Belanger Creek Diversion Canal near Vidora 11AC065 06161500 Huff Lake Gravity Canal near Val Marie 11AC066 06161300 Huff Lake Pumping Canal near Val Marie
A.3 2/12/2013
GAUGING STATIONS OPERATED INDEPENDENTLY BY EITHER THE UNITED STATES OR CANADA ST. MARY AND MILK RIVER DRAINAGE BASINS Station Number Station Name Operated by
ST. MARY RIVER BASIN 05014500 Swiftcurrent Creek at Many Glacier, Montana U.S.A. 05016000 Swiftcurrent Creek at Sherburne, Montana U.S.A. 05017500 St. Mary River near Babb, Montana U.S.A. 05018000 St. Mary Canal at intake, near Babb, Montana U.S.A.
MILK RIVER BASIN 06132200 South Fork Milk River near Babb, Montana U.S.A. 11AA028 Bear Creek near International Boundary Canada 11AA029 Miners Coulee near International Boundary Canada 11AA038 Verdigris Coulee near the mouth, near Milk River Canada
LODGE CREEK TRIBUTARY BASIN 11AB082 Lodge Creek at Alberta Boundary Canada 11AB091 Michel Reservoir near Elkwater Canada 11AB092 Greasewood Reservoir near Elkwater Canada 11AB094 Bare Creek Reservoir near Elkwater Canada 11AB097 Cressday Reservoir near Cressday Canada 11AB098 Jaydot Reservoir near Jaydot Canada 11AB099 Mitchell Reservoir near Elkwater Canada 11AB103 Squaw Coulee near Willow Creek Canada 11AB104 Massy Reservoir near Elkwater Canada 11AB114 Middle Creek Reservoir Bedford Outlet Canada 11AB115 Middle Creek Reservoir Flood Spillway Canada
BATTLE CREEK TRIBUTARY BASIN 11AB020 Shepherd Ditch near Consul Canada 11AB075 Lyons Creek at International Boundary Canada 11AB090 Reesor Reservoir near Elkwater Canada 11AB095 Adams Lake Canada 11AB096 Battle Creek near Consul Canada 11AB101 Battle Creek below Nashlyn Project Canada 11AB117 Battle Creek at Alberta Boundary Canada 11AB118 Battle Creek below Wilson's Weir Canada
FRENCHMAN RIVER TRIBUTARY BASIN 11AC025 Denniel Creek near Val Marie Canada 11AC051 Frenchman River below Val Marie Canada 11AC068 Val Marie Pump No. I Canada
A.4 2/12/2013
GAUGING STATIONS OPERATED INDEPENDENTLY BY EITHER THE UNITED STATES OR CANADA ST. MARY AND MILK RIVER DRAINAGE BASINS Station Number Station Name Operated by
ROCK CREEK TRIBUTARY BASIN 06169500 Rock Creek below Horse Creek, near International Boundary U.S.A.
A.5 2/12/2013
APPENDIX B
LETTERS OF INTENT
B.1 02/02/2018
B.2 02/02/2018
B.3 02/02/2018
B.4 02/02/2018
B.5 02/02/2018
1991 Letter of Intent
B.6 02/02/2018
B.7 02/02/2018
B.8 02/02/2018
B.9 02/02/2018
ANNEX “A”
CONTACT LIST REGARDING
LETTER OF INTENT – TO BETTER UTILIZE THE WATERS OF THE EASTERN TRIBUTARIES OF THE MILK RIVER
Name Organization Email Phone
Carmen de la Chevrotiere AEP [email protected] (780) 427-0710 Brian Yee AEP [email protected] (780) 638 3186 Brian Hills AEP [email protected] (403) 381 5990 Muhammed Sabur AEP [email protected] (403) 382-4015 Jeff Woodward (F.R.) ECCC [email protected] (306) 780-3494 Jerry Wagner-Watchel ECCC [email protected] (403) 292-5678 Dan Selinger ECCC [email protected] (306) 780-5588 Matt Miles MT DNRC [email protected] (406) 265-5516 Mike Dailey MT DNRC [email protected] (406) 228-2561 Scott Wagner AAFC [email protected] (306) 299-2040 Stephen Auger AAFC [email protected] (306) 298-2131 Larry Verpy AAFC [email protected] (306) 295-3252 Kevin Wingert WSA [email protected] (306) 778-8335 Duncan Spenst WSA [email protected] (306) 778-8335 Ray Klein AAFC [email protected] (306) 770-4661 John Kilpatrick (F.R.) USGS [email protected] (406) 457-5902 Scott Whiteman USGS [email protected] (406) 457-5911 Clayton Jordan USBR [email protected] (406) 247-7334
Legend
AEP Alberta Environment and Parks ECCC Environment and Climate Change Canada F.R. Field Representative MT DNRC Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation AAFC Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada WSA Water Security Agency USGS United States Geological Survey USBR United States Bureau of Reclamation
B.10 02/02/2018
APPENDIX C
DOCUMENTATION RELATED TO MILK RIVER NATURAL-FLOW COMPUTATIONS
C.1 2/23/2017 Hanson Method
• Background
Prior to 1988, all tentative computations of Milk River natural flows were manually derived using a spreadsheet. This method was very labor intensive but use of a spreadsheet lent itself well to automation. In 1988, Norm Midtlyng (USGS) began writing the NATFLO Fortran 77 (F77) computer program to duplicate the current spreadsheet being used. It was during this development period that Dave Hanson (USGS) decided to investigate the “increment of evaporation” section for inclusion into the new computer program. His hope was to find a reasonable relation between evaporation and canal flow volume in order to simplify the computation procedure and be able to provide real-time natural-flow information for apportionment purposes. Hanson’s approach was to keep it simple. He wanted to use readily available evaporation data from Fort Assinniboine, Montana, to apply evaporation loss to the non- natural flow (canal water) immediately upon entering the main stem of the Milk River, thus avoiding some of the intricacies of the old procedure. The current (2003) Milk River natural flow computation procedure is as follows:
Milk River Natural Flow = NATURAL FLOW at Western Crossing + NET CHANGE between East and West crossings + EVAPOTRANSPIRATION LOSS due to increased flow + CONSUMPTIVE USES in the Milk River basin
This procedure evolved as a mix of new and old methods. Hanson did discover a reasonable relationship between Fort Assinniboine derived canal loss due to evaporation and canal flows. A detailed explanation is given below beginning with the determination of pan evaporation.
• Evaporation Computations
Pan evaporation data from Whiskey Gap and Many Berries, Alberta, had been used for many years to determine the evaporation component of the Milk River natural flow computations. This information is used today to a lesser extent in the MILKNAT program to compute periods where data necessary for the Fred Morton (Water Survey Division) model to work are missing. However, the USGS did not have easy access to this information for use in determining tentative monthly Milk River natural-flow computations and began to utilize readily available pan-evaporation data from the Montana State University Experimental Agricultural Station weather site at Fort Assinniboine, Montana. Pan-evaporation data are collected using a standard Class A pan. Water level in the pan is observed daily and the pan is refilled at regular intervals during each month. A copy of the daily observed pan readings is mailed to the USGS at the end of each month during the irrigation season. The first 15-day observations are usually obtained via a telephone conversation.
C.2 2/23/2017 Computation of daily evaporation from pan readings is performed by the USGS using the following procedure as described on page 5.4 of the 1986 St. Mary-Milk River Procedures Manual:
“The pan evaporation is simply determined by the difference in water level readings from day to day. Water in the pan is regularly supplemented and thus readings are accordingly adjusted. In the event that precipitation occurred between readings, the evaporation is defined as the total precipitation which occurred between the pan readings plus the difference in the pan readings if the water is less than the previous day’s level; or if the water level is higher, then pan evaporation is defined as the precipitation minus the increase in water elevation.”
• Development of Equations
Hanson computed canal flow loss per inch of evaporation (using evaporation data from the IJC report) for what he considered to be an average year (1976), a dry year (1977), and a wet year (1978). A range of daily flows were used from each year. He plotted the loss/inch of evaporation data he computed against St. Mary canal inflow which was derived by subtracting North Fork Milk River above St. Mary Canal, near Browning (NFMA) daily flow from North Milk River at International Boundary (NFMB) daily flow. It was apparent from the plotted points that a relation did exist and Hanson defined these relations by drawing two straight lines through the data points (figure 1). The slope of each line was determined and used to estimate canal-flow loss from evaporation. Hanson later realized he should have used Fort Assinniboine evaporation data with the current procedures but decided to let his original work stand because of the myriad of other imprecisely determined variables (such as minor diversions or domestic use) which were lumped together into one category called consumptive use. The figures used for consumptive use in the NATFLO F77 computer program were derived by Thompson (1986). Gerry Morton (Water Survey Division) later revised the computational procedure by applying more consumptive use earlier in the season during dry years.
• Application of Hanson Equations
The Hanson equations are used to compute evaporation loss (LOSS) by the application of a coefficient (FACT) based upon the flow difference (DIV) between the North Milk River near International Boundary gage (NFMB) and the North Fork Milk River above St. Mary Canal, near Browning, Montana (NFMA) gage.
C.3 2/23/2017 C.4 2/23/2017 The computation process is as follows:
If DIV < 0 then DIV is set to equal 0 in the equations to remove negative values.
Equation Number 1: If DIV < 200 ft3/s, then FACT = (0.40 x DIV) Equation Number 2: If DIV > 200 ft3/s, then FACT = 80 + ((DIV-200)/0.91667) 0.1)
The result is:
Total Evap. Loss = Evap x FACT (Column 8 on printout) (Column 7 on printout)
The original computation procedure utilized a 5-day lag period between the west and east sites. The original F77 program was written to duplicate the original 5-day lag procedure but was later revised to utilize a 4-day lag period. This change was the result of several hydrographic comparisons which determined that a 4-day lag period appeared to generate more “realistic” flow hydrographs. In 1991, the program was revised again when a moving 4-day mean average was used to compute daily mean evaporation.
• COMPARISONS
Computed natural-flow discharge generated by the Hanson method and those by the Canadian MILKNAT F77 computer program for the ten year period, 1988 to 1997, compared very well. The greatest difference between methodologies was 4.9 percent. This occurred in 1988, which was considered a dry year because seasonal flow volume was only 26 percent of the 77-year seasonal average flow. Average natural flows occurred in 1991 (107 percent of 79-year average) and the difference between methods was negligible. In 1995, considered a wet year (flows were 165 percent of the previous 84-year average), the difference was also minimal (<2 percent).
• CONCLUSION
Tentative monthly natural-flow computations using the Hanson method compare favorably with the MILKNAT F77 program which utilizes the Fred Morton-model during average and wet years. It appears that more study needs to be undertaken to assure that favorable results occur in dry years. The Hanson method will continue to be used to generate provisional monthly natural flow apportionment reports.
C.5 2/23/2017
1988 CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING MEAN DAILY WATER-CONSUMPTION ESTIMATES FOR USE DURING DRY YEARS
C.6 2/23/2017 C.7 2/23/2017
C.8 2/23/2017
C.9 2/23/2017
C.10 2/23/2017 C.11 2/23/2017
C.12 2/23/2017
C.13 2/23/2017 C.14 2/23/2017
C.15 2/23/2017 C.16 2/23/2017
C.17 2/23/2017 C.18 2/23/2017
C.19 2/23/2017 C.20 2/23/2017
C.21 2/23/2017 C.22 2/23/2017
C.23 2/23/2017 C.24 2/23/2017 C.25 2/23/2017 USGS – Environment Canada
Milk River Natural Flow
(MILKNAT2010) Computational Spreadsheet User Manual
Prepared by: Norm Midtlyng (USGS), Peter McCarthy (USGS), and Jerry Wagner-Watchel (Environment Canada, WSD)
C.26 2/23/2017
C.1 2/23/2017
C.2 2/23/2017 C.3 2/23/2017
C.4 2/23/2017
C.5 2/23/2017 C.6 2/23/2017 C.7 2/23/2017
C.8 2/23/2017
C.9 2/23/2017
C.10 2/23/2017
C.11 2/23/2017
C.12 2/23/2017
C.13 2/23/2017 C.14 2/23/2017 C.15 2/23/2017
C.16 2/23/2017
C.17 2/23/2017
C.18 2/23/2017
C.19 2/23/2017
C.20 2/23/2017 C.21 2/23/2017 C.22 2/23/2017
C.23 2/23/2017
C.24 2/23/2017
C.25 2/23/2017
C.26 2/23/2017
C.27 2/23/2017 C.28 2/23/2017
C.29 2/23/2017
C.30 2/23/2017
C.31 2/23/2017
C.32 2/23/2017
APPENDIX D
COPIES OF CORRESPONDENCE REGARDING BORDER-CROSSING PRIVILEGES
D.1 2/12/2013
D.2 2/12/2013
D.3 2/12/2013
D.4 2/12/2013
D.5 2/12/2013
D.6 2/12/2013
D.7 2/12/2013
D.8 2/12/2013
D.9 2/12/2013
D.10 2/12/2013
D.11 2/12/2013
D.12 2/12/2013
D.13 2/12/2013
APPENDIX E
LIST OF WATER-MANAGEMENT CONTACTS
E.1 2/10/2017
Montana
Steve Davies Area Manager, Montana Area Office Bureau of Reclamation Billings, MT ph.(406) 247-7298
Clayton Jordan Bureau of Reclamation Billings, MT ph.(406) 247-7334
Vacant Marias/Milk Division Manager Bureau of Reclamation Chester, MT ph.(406) 759-5079
Larry Dolan Montana Department of Natural Resources Helena, MT ph.(406) 444-6627
Mike Dailey Montana Department of Natural Resources Glasgow, MT ph.(406) 228-2561
Matt Miles Montana Department of Natural Resources Havre, MT ph.(406) 265-5516
Bruce Hofeldt Lodge Creek Water Users Association Chinook, MT ph.(406) 357-2486
Gary Unruh Battle Creek Water Users Association Chinook, MT ph.(406) 357-3615
Gus Yeska Frenchman River Water Users Association Saco, MT ph.(406) 648-5483
E.2 2/10/2017
Alberta
Brian Yee Director, Transboundary Waters Secretariat Alberta Environment and Parks Edmonton, AB ph.(780) 638-3186
Carmen de la Chevrotière Transboundary Water Quantity Specialist, Transboundary Waters Secretariat Alberta Environment and Parks Edmonton, AB ph.(780) 427-0710
Kathleen Murphy Approvals Manager, South Saskatchewan Approvals Alberta Environment and Parks Lethbridge, AB ph.(403) 382-4000
Brian Hills Resource Manager, South Saskatchewan Resource Management Alberta Environment and Parks Lethbridge, AB ph. (403) 381-5990
John Mahoney Operations Support Manager, Southern Operations (infrastructure) Alberta Environment and Parks Lethbridge, AB ph. (403) 382 4365
Evan Friesenhan Director, River Engineering and Technical Services Alberta Environment and Parks Edmonton, AB ph. (780) 427 8218
David Hunt Team Lead, Water Approvals Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development Lethbridge, AB ph.(403) 381-5994
Tim Romanow Executive Director Milk River Watershed Council Canada Milk River, AB ph. (403) 647-4342
Terrence Lazarus General Manager St. Mary River Irrigation District Lethbridge, AB ph.(403) 328-4401
E.3 2/10/2017
Saskatchewan
Kevin Wingert Manager, Southwest Regional Services Saskatchewan Water Security Agency Swift Current, SK ph. (306) 778-8335 fax.(306) 778-8271
Duncan Spenst Supervisor, Southwest Regional Services Saskatchewan Water Security Agency Swift Current, SK ph. (306) 778-8335 fax.(306) 778-8271
Larry Verpy Project manager, Eastend Irrigation Projects, AAFC Eastend, SK ph. (306) 295-3252
Scott Wagner Project Manager, Consul Irrigation Projects, AAFC Consul, SK ph. (306) 299-2040
Stephen Auger Project Manager, Val Marie Irrigation Projects, AAFC Val Marie, SK ph.(306) 298-2131
Ray Klein Operations Manager, Water Infrastructure Division, AAFC Swift Current, SK ph. (306) 770-4661 fax.(306) 778-5020
Glenn McLaughlin Major Capital Unit, Water Infrastructure Division, AAFC Regina, SK ph. (306) 523-6758 fax.(306) 778-5020
E.4 2/10/2017 APPENDIX F
EXCHANGE OF FIELD DATA AND REQUIREMENTS FOR PUBLICATION
F.1 2/12/2013 Following are some guidelines regarding the priorities of hydrometric computations, and what data must be exchanged between WSD and the USGS and when it must be done.
COPYING SITE VISIT INFORMATION
The following procedures were outlined in a memo from Gerry Morton, Regional Chief, WSD, Calgary dated 1983-04-18 and have been accepted by the Field Representatives. The procedures were updated in 2012 to include electronic means of delivery (fax or email) and overnight courier services.
1. Checked original notes for any flow measurements at, or visit made to, an international gauging station will be forwarded to the District office responsible for the station, within 2 weeks of obtaining the measurement by electronic means or a mail delivery service (preferably by overnight courier).
2. When the original notes are to be sent to a District office in the other country, a copy of the original notes (front and back sheets) will be retained in the District office of the field officer who made the measurement.
3. A copy of the front sheet for checked measurements will be forwarded to the District office not responsible for the station, within 2 weeks of obtaining the measurement.
4. Original discharge measurements are to be retained by both countries indefinitely.
5. If either country institutes a policy of microfilming measurements and destroying originals, then all discharge measurements are to be returned to the country which made the measurement.
ELECTRONIC EXCHANGE OF SITE VISIT INFORMATION
The following procedures to ensure adequate documentation of electronically transferred data were outlined in a memo from the Field Representatives to the Accredited Officers dated 2012-05-05. The “accountable managers” are those individuals who supervise the field staff responsible for the collection of field data.
1. All checked site visit international gauging station information will be electronically scanned and forwarded to the office responsible for the station, within 2 weeks of obtaining the site visit information. A copy should also be forwarded to the accountable managers of both offices.
2. When the scanned notes are electronically receieved by office in the other country, an acknowledgement of receipt using a standard format will be returned to the originating office by the accountable manager whose office received the data.
F.2 2/12/2013 INTERNATIONAL CATEGORY FLOW STATIONS OPERATED BY THE USGS
All original data (electronic files, charts, measurement, and level notes) should be sent to USGS as soon as practical after data have been retrieved from the field.
USGS will send WSD prints of their computation forms for quality checking.
11AE009 Rock Creek below Horse Creek - non-apportionment - Ft. Peck 11AC041 Frenchman River – Ft. Peck
The final annual listings in SI units for the Frenchman River, Lyons Creek, Battle Creek and Lodge Creek stations are generated by WSD for inclusion in the annual report to the IJC.
INTERNATIONAL CATEGORY FLOW STATIONS OPERATED BY WSD
Prints of all forms (charts, meter and level notes, gauge corrections, discharge measurement summaries, backwater computations, gauge history, stage-discharge curve and table, 4- month/page listing, hydrograph on grid paper, and any special forms used in the computations) are sent to Helena for quality checking. Confirmation of delivery will be by round-trip memos (when a mail delivery service is used) or email. When data have been approved by memo, the final annual (or 12 month/page) listing are sent to appropriate office responsible for publication of the IJC report. Daily discharge for all sites, in card images or .csv format, are then electronically transmitted to the USGS.
Note: final annual listings are to be letter quality prints (in duplicate).
INTERNATIONAL CATEGORY RESERVOIR STATIONS OPERATED BY WSD
Prints of all forms (charts, level notes, gauge corrections, 24-hour and annual listing, evaporation data, and annual storage factors and evaporation loss summary sheets), are sent to Helena for quality checking. When data have been approved by memo, output of daily elevations is obtained for Ottawa.
SEMI-INTERNATIONAL FLOW STATIONS OPERATED BY WSD
These are stations used in the natural-flow computations but are not important enough to warrant "International" classification. The stations are computed as normal WSD stations but, as they do not go to Helena for checking, the stations are second in priority for computing. Helena gets a copy of the final annual listing.
F.3 2/12/2013 SEMI-INTERNATIONAL RESERVOIR STATIONS OPERATED BY WSD
These consist of eight small reservoirs in the upper Battle and upper Lodge Creek basins that are used in the natural-flow computations but do not warrant "International" classification. For the manual stations: Greasewood, Cressday, and Mitchell reservoirs, and Reesor Lake, the final listing and water-level output is obtained from digital loggers. For Adams Lake the final listing and water-level output is estimated based upon elevation interpolation between visits on a work hydrograph.
F.4 2/12/2013 PRIORITIES
The deadline for submission of the St. Mary-Milk Rivers Annual Report to the IJC is mid- March. To meet this deadline all hydrometric records and natural-flow computations must be completed by January 31.
Priorities have been made in the order of computation. International stations used in the natural- flow computations must be computed first and sent to Helena for quality checking. Non-international stations used in the natural-flow computations are computed second. International non-division stations are computed third.
Most correspondence and hydrometric records are now sent by overnight courier. If not, then all International station hydrometric records should be mailed before December 15, as postal service slows down considerably just before Christmas.
Many International stations are irrigation canals and most irrigation ends by August 15. Final computations for the irrigation period can begin in August or early September.
If a new or extended stage-discharge curve is developed for a station, that curve should be sent to Helena for checking as soon as possible.
F.5 2/12/2013 GEOGRAPHICAL LIST OF STATIONS AND ORDER OF PRIORITY FOR COMPUTATION
NOTE: All stations computed by WSD, unless otherwise indicated.
ST MARY RIVER BASIN PRIORITY
05AE027 St. Mary River at International Boundary (USGS) 1 05AE029 St. Mary Canal at St. Mary Crossing, near Babb, Montana 1 05AE036 Lake Sherburne at Sherburne, Montana (USGS) 1
MILK RIVER BASIN
11AA001 North Milk River near International Boundary 1 11AA005 Milk River at Milk River 1 11AA025 Milk River at Western Crossing of International Boundary 1 11AA031 Milk River at Eastern Crossing of International Boundary (USGS) 1 11AA032 North Fork Milk River above St. Mary Canal, near Browning (USGS) 1
LODGE CREEK BASIN
11AB060 Spangler Ditch near Govenlock 1 11AB082 Lodge Creek near Alberta Boundary 3 11AB083 Lodge Creek below McRae Creek, at International Boundary 1 11AB089 Altawan Reservoir near Govenlock 1 11AB091 Michel Reservoir near Elkwater 2 11AB092 Greasewood Reservoir near Elkwater 2 11AB094 Bare Creek Reservoir near Elkwater 2 11AB097 Cressday Reservoir near Cressday 2 11AB098 Jaydot Reservoir near Jaydot 2 11AB103 Squaw Coulee near Willow Creek 2 11AB104 Massy Reservoir near Elkwater 2
Middle Creek Sub-basin
11AB001 Middle Creek below Middle Creek Reservoir, near Govenlock 1 11AB008 Middle Creek above Lodge Creek, near Govenlock 1 11AB009 Middle Creek near Saskatchewan Boundary 1 11AB099 Mitchell Reservoir 2 11AB108 Middle Creek near Govenlock 1 11AB114 Middle Creek Reservoir Bedford Outlet 2 11AB115 Middle Creek Reservoir Flood Spillway 2
F.6 2/12/2013 BATTLE CREEK BASIN PRIORITY
11AB018 Nashlyn Canal near Consul 1 11AB020 Shepherd Ditch near Consul 2 11AB027 Battle Creek at International Boundary 1 11AB044 McKinnon Ditch near Consul 1 11AB058 Richardson Ditch near Consul 1 11AB075 Lyons Creek at International Boundary 2 11AB077 Cypress Lake West Outflow Canal near West Plains 1 11AB078 Cypress Lake West Inflow Canal near West Plains 1 11AB084 Vidora Ditch near Consul 1 11AB085 Cypress Lake West Inflow Canal Drain near Oxarat 1 11AB090 Reesor Reservoir near Elkwater 2 11AB095 Adams Lake 2 11AB096 Battle Creek near Consul 2 11AB101 Battle Creek below Nashlyn Project 2 11AB102 Gaff Ditch near Merryflat 1 11AB117 Battle Creek at Alberta Boundary 3 11AB118 Battle Creek below Wilson's Weir 2
FRENCHMAN RIVER BASIN
11AC037 Cypress Lake (required for contents only) 2 11AC041 Frenchman River at International Boundary (USGS) 1 11AC052 Eastend Canal at Eastend 1 11AC054 Newton Lake Main Canal near Val Marie 1 11AC055 Eastend Reservoir 1 11AC056 Newton Lake 1 11AC060 Cypress Lake East Outflow Canal near Vidora 1 11AC063 Huff Lake 1 11AC064 Belanger Creek Diversion Canal near Vidora to Cypress Lake 1 11AC065 Huff Lake Gravity Canal near Val Marie 1 11AC066 Huff Lake Pumping Canal near Val Marie 1 11AC068 Val Marie Pump No. 1 2
F.7 2/12/2013 Other Basins PRIORITY
11AE003 East Poplar River at International Boundary 2 11AE008 Poplar River at International Boundary (USGS) 3 11AE009 Rock Creek below Horse Creek, near International Boundary (USGS) 3
NOTE: The above three stations are not directly related to the apportionment of the Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River; however, efforts are made to complete the hydrometric computations for the annual International Records meeting of the Field Representatives to facilitate signing of the records.
The following is a check list for the various items required for the natural flow computations, report to the IJC, and requirements of the USGS.
F.8 2/12/2013
APPENDIX G
PREPARATION OF ANNUAL REPORT TO THE IJC
G. 1 1/23/2013 The following is a summary of the activities required for preparation of the annual report to the IJC:
OCTOBER
1. Send five copies of the letter of transmittal (see example on page G.4) for signature to the Accredited Officer of the United States. One copy will be used for publication purposes and remaining original copies will be included in reports to IJC (two for each country).
2. Send letters to Water Rights Branch, Environment and Sustainable Resource Development Alberta, and Water Security Agency Saskatchewan requesting minor diversion usage information.
3. Send memo/letter to USGS, Helena, and WSD, Regina and Calgary, requesting map and distribution list changes.
NOVEMBER
4. After the signature of the Accredited Officer for the United States is received, send the five letters to the Accredited Officer of Her Majesty for signature.
5. Revise map as necessary. The map is in AutoCad format and is stored in the computer of the AutoCad operator at Inland Waters Directorate, Regina.
6. Revise distribution list as necessary.
DECEMBER
7. Initial revision of the report narrative (WITHOUT the numbers). Discuss revisions with appropriate Canadian or American counterpart. Submit agreed upon revisions to the office preparing the IJC Report.
8. Update the month-end reservoir contents (Appendix B, Table 16 and the chart - IJC Report, Figure 3).
G. 2 1/23/2013
JANUARY
9. Prepare Field Representatives signing copies of joint review and approval of records cover letters for the St. Mary-Milk Rivers (see example on page G.5) and Eastern Tributaries (see example on page G.6) and all annual listings for International gauging stations.
10. Compute natural flows (Appendix A - Tables 6, 8, 10, 12, 14)
11. Update all natural-flow summary tables (IJC Report - Tables 1, 2, 3, 4, 5; Appendix A - Tables – 7, 9, 11, 13, 15).
12. Update all natural-flow summary bar charts (IJC Report - Figures 1, 2, 4, 5, 6)
13. Revise report narrative and include the numbers.
14. Obtain printer-ready records at the annual meeting of the Field Representatives.
FEBRUARY
15. Final editing and revision of the report narrative (with the numbers).
16. Send the final draft of the report to the Field Representatives by fax or courier for review and comment.
17. Assemble printer-ready manuscripts. Number all pages.
18. Give printer-ready manuscripts to printer.
19. Receive and check printed volumes for errors.
20. Correct errors.
MARCH
21. Prepare cover letter, package, and distribute reports before March 15.
G. 3 1/23/2013 April 2011
International Joint Commission
Ottawa, Ontario, and Washington, D.C.
Commissioners:
In compliance with the provisions of Article VI of the Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 and Clause VIII(c) of your Order of October 4, 1921, directing the division of the waters of the St. Mary and Milk Rivers between the United States and Canada, we are transmitting herewith a report on the operations during the irrigation season ended October 31, 2010.
Respectfully submitted,
______
Accredited Officer of Her Majesty
______
Accredited Officer of the United States
G. 4 1/23/2013 International Gauging Stations Joint Review and Approval of Records
Pursuant to Article V of the International Joint Commission Order of October 4, 1921, the International Gauging Stations listed below have been operated and maintained by the Water Survey of Canada and the United States Geological Survey on a joint basis.
It is hereby certified that the annexed records have been computed in accordance with standard procedures of each country and jointly reviewed and approved on this 17th day of February, 2011.
St. Mary River at International Boundary 05AE027 Lake Sherburne at Sherburne, Montana 05AE036 St. Mary Canal at St. Mary Crossing 05AE029
Milk River at Eastern Crossing of International Boundary 11AA031 Milk River at Western Crossing of International Boundary 11AA025 North Fork Milk River above St. Mary Canal, near Browning, Montana 11AA032 North Milk River near International Boundary 11AA001 Milk River at Milk River, Alberta 11AA005
______Field Representative for the United States Field Representative for Canada
G. 5 1/23/2013 International Gauging Stations Joint Review and Approval of Records
Pursuant to Article V of the International Joint Commission Order of October 4, 1921, the International Gauging Stations listed below have been operated and maintained by the Water Survey of Canada and the United States Geological Survey on a joint basis.
It is hereby certified that the annexed records have been computed in accordance with standard procedures of each country and jointly reviewed and approved on this 17th day of February, 2011.
Lodge Creek Below McRae Creek at International Boundary 11AB083 Middle Creek near Saskatchewan Boundary 11AB009 Middle Creek below Middle Creek Reservoir 11AB001 Middle Creek above Lodge Creek 11AB008 Middle Creek near Govenlock 11AB108 Altawan Reservoir near Govenlock 11AB089 Spangler Ditch near Govenlock 11AB060
Battle Creek at International Boundary 11AB027 Gaff Ditch near Merryflat 11AB102 Cypress Lake West Inflow Canal 11AB078 Cypress Lake West Inflow Canal Drain 11AB085 Cypress Lake West Outflow Canal 11AB077 Vidora Ditch near Consul 11AB084 Richardson Ditch near Consul 11AB058 McKinnon Ditch near Consul 11AB044 Nashlyn Canal near Consul 11AB018
Frenchman River at International Boundary 11AC041 Belanger Creek Diversion to Cypress Lake 11AC064 Cypress Lake 11AC037 Cypress Lake East Outflow Canal 11AC060 Eastend Reservoir 11AC055 Eastend Canal near Eastend 11AC052 Huff Lake 11AC063 Huff Lake Gravity Canal 11AC065 Huff Lake Pumping Canal 11AC066 Newton Lake 11AC056 Newton Lake Main Canal 11AC054
------Field Representative for the United States Field Representative for Canada
G. 6 1/23/2013 PUBLICATION DATA FOR ANNUAL REPORT TO THE IJC––ST MARY RIVER
Computation Units
All original data in the St. Mary River basin are being collected in Imperial (English) units of measure, except for the St. Mary Canal which is collected in SI units. Provisional computations and interim reports are made in Imperial units. For the IJC Report, which has been published in SI (metric) units since 1979, the data files for Lake Sherburne and St. Mary River are converted to SI units from which the natural flows, shares, and the division are recomputed.
Tables 1 and 1A of IJC Report
Table 1 is a summary of water-division data taken directly from the final monthly division tables (Table 6, Appendix A, of the IJC Report). Table 1A is the Imperial version of Table 1, and is simply the SI values in Table 1 multiplied by 0.8107. Examples of Tables 1 and 1A are shown on the following pages.
Tables 6 and 7 of IJC Report
Table 6 consists of the Field Representatives signature page showing approved monthly SI water division sheets for the St. Mary River at International Boundary. Table 7 is the historical summary of the St. Mary River at International Boundary that needs to be updated each year using form INT-3. The average at the end of the summary is recomputed each year, with all but the current year data included in the average. Both of these tables are part of Appendix A of the IJC Report. Examples of Table 6 signature page and Table 7 are shown following the examples of Table 1 and 1A. Averages in Table 7 are computed using unrounded data, then the computed averages are rounded using USGS publication standards.
G. 7 1/23/2013 Table 1: Summary of St. Mary River Division for 2010* Quantities in Cubic Decametres
DIVISION PERIOD NATURAL CANADA’S RECEIVED RECEIVED BY CANADA AT FLOW SHARE BY ABOVE BELOW INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY CANADA SHARE SHARE MAR 1 - MAR 15 4,245 2,122 3,425 1,303
MAR 16 - MAR 31 5,425 2,713 4,155 1,442
APR 1 - APR 15 8,171 6,128 3,527 2,601
APR 16 - APR 30 27,102 18,466 11,548 6,918
MAY 1 - MAY 15 34,067 23,141 24,484 1,343
MAY 16 - MAY 31 79,386 46,209 56,860 10,651
JUNE 1 - JUNE 15 106,504 59,362 81,350 21,988
JUNE 16 – JUNE 30 166,896 89,558 140,873 51,315
JULY 1 - JULY 15 93,322 52,770 87,660 34,890
JULY 16 – JULY 31 49,460 31,247 33,569 2,322
AUG 1 - AUG 15 32,274 22,246 23,380 1,134
AUG 16 - AUG 31 25,273 18,309 19,188 879
SEP 1 - SEP 15 18,904 14,178 23,473 9,295
SEP 16 - SEP 30 45,636 28,885 46,472 17,587
OCT 1 - OCT 15 23,812 17,453 19,534 2,081
OCT 16 - OCT 31 13,862 10,399 11,137 738
TOTAL 734,339 443,186 590,635
* This is a summary of data from Table 6, Appendix A.
G. 8 1/23/2013 Table 1A: Summary of St. Mary River Division for 2010* Quantities in Acre-Feet
DIVISION PERIOD NATURAL CANADA’S RECEIVED RECEIVED BY CANADA AT FLOW SHARE BY ABOVE BELOW INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY CANADA SHARE SHARE MAR 1 - MAR 15 3,441 1,720 2,777 1,056
MAR 16 - MAR 31 4,398 2,199 3,368 1,169
APR 1 - APR 15 6,624 4,968 2,859 2,109
APR 16 - APR 30 21,972 14,970 9,362 5,608
MAY 1 - MAY 15 27,618 18,760 19,849 1,089
MAY 16 - MAY 31 64,358 37,462 46,096 8,635
JUNE 1 - JUNE 15 86,343 48,125 65,951 17,826
JUNE 16 – JUNE 30 135,303 72,605 114,206 41,601
JULY 1 - JULY 15 75,656 42,781 71,066 28,285
JULY 16 – JULY 31 40,097 25,332 27,214 1,882
AUG 1 - AUG 15 26,165 18,035 18,954 919
AUG 16 - AUG 31 20,489 14,843 15,556 713
SEP 1 - SEP 15 15,325 11,494 19,030 7,535
SEP 16 - SEP 30 36,997 23,417 37,675 14,258
OCT 1 - OCT 15 19,304 14,149 15,836 1,687
OCT 16 - OCT 31 11,238 8,430 9,029 598
TOTAL 595,330 359,291 478,829 * All values are conversions of data from Table 1. Totals and shares may not add or subtract exactly as a result of rounding.
G. 9 1/23/2013 Table 6 (Continued) NATURAL FLOW AND WATER DIVISION OF ST. MARY RIVER AT INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY OCTOBER 2010 (QUANTITIES IN CUBIC DECAMETRES) CHANGE IN CONTENTS DIVERTED TOTAL USED ST.MARY RIVER NATURAL FLOW SHARES OF NATURAL FLOW FLOW IN EXCESS OF BY BY AT AT OR DEFICIT (-) DAY LAKE SHERBURNE ST. MARY UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL OF (WITH 1 DAY LAG) CANAL BOUNDARY BOUNDARY UNITED STATES CANADA CANADIAN SHARE
1 440 0 440 1 737 2 177 681 1 496 241 2 411 0 411 1 664 2 075 630 1 445 219 3 313 0 313 1 590 1 903 544 1 359 231 4 301 0 301 1 517 1 818 502 1 316 201 5 357 0 357 1 443 1 800 493 1 307 136
6 274 0 274 1 365 1 639 412 1 227 138 7 259 0 259 1 311 1 570 392 1 178 133 8 232 0 232 1 258 1 490 372 1 118 140 9 303 0 303 1 194 1 497 374 1 123 71 10 159 0 159 1 145 1 304 326 978 167
11 203 0 203 1 111 1 314 328 986 125 12 382 0 382 1 111 1 493 373 1 120 -9 13 174 0 174 1 084 1 258 314 944 140 14 250 0 250 1 030 1 280 320 960 70 15 220 0 220 974 1 194 298 896 78
G.10
S.TOTAL 4 278 0 4 278 19 534 23 812 6 359 17 453 2 081
MEAN 285 0.0 285 1 302 1 587 424 1 164 139
16 296 0 296 905 1 201 300 901 4 17 235 0 235 869 1 104 276 828 41 18 223 0 223 844 1 067 267 800 44 19 223 0 223 827 1 050 262 788 39 20 103 0 103 790 893 223 670 120
21 149 0 149 734 883 221 662 72 22 179 0 179 687 866 216 650 37 23 117 0 117 651 768 192 576 75 24 149 0 149 634 783 196 587 47 25 149 0 149 626 775 194 581 45
26 225 0 225 617 842 210 632 -15 27 164 0 164 614 778 194 584 30
1/21 28 181 0 181 599 780 195 585 14 29 105 0 105 585 690 172 518 67 30 166 0 166 587 753 188 565 22 /2013 31 61 0 61 568 629 157 472 96
S.TOTAL 2 725 0 2 725 11 137 13 862 3 463 10 399 738 MEAN 170 0.0 170 696 866 216 650 46.1
TOTAL 7 003 0 7 003 30 671 37 674 9 822 27 852 2 819 MEAN 226 0.0 226 989 1 215 317 898 90.9
NATURAL FLOW OF ST. MARY RIVER
APPROVED BY: ______FOR THE UNITED STATES FOR CANADA
G. 10 1/23/2013 Table 7: HISTORICAL SUMMARY OF COMPUTED NATRUAL FLOW ST. MARY AT INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY (VALUES IN CUBIC DECAMETRES)
Computed Natural Flow Share April to October Non - Period Irrigation Irrigation Season Season United Canada (Nov to Mar) (Apr to Oct) States
1902 - 1903 71,500 1,033,000 434,300 599,100 1903 - 1904 118,900 684,800 270,100 414,700 1904 - 1905 48,260 569,700 212,400 357,300 1905 - 1906 63,640 630,700 236,000 394,700 1906 - 1907 153,100 969,500 402,800 566,700 1907 - 1908 77,020 1,123,000 485,500 637,800 1908 - 1909 80,520 968,900 408,500 560,300 1909 - 1910 108,200 679,700 257,700 422,000
1910 - 1911 120,100 802,800 318,700 484,200 1911 - 1912 72,890 623,900 234,600 389,300 1912 - 1913 85,860 849,600 346,400 503,200 1913 - 1914 72,240 654,100 245,200 409,000 1914 - 1915 103,600 654,100 243,400 410,800 1915 - 1916 135,400 973,300 405,600 567,700 1916 - 1917 72,560 807,400 330,300 477,000 1917 - 1918 112,600 631,300 239,900 391,400 1918 - 1919 61,290 476,500 175,900 300,600 1919 - 1920 75,270 715,400 280,700 434,700
1920 - 1921 88,960 784,700 315,400 469,300 1921 - 1922 79,750 698,000 281,800 416,200 1922 - 1923 58,210 719,400 283,500 435,900 1923 - 1924 63,410 641,600 250,900 390,700 1924 - 1925 96,980 889,000 364,500 524,500 1925 - 1926 60,690 458,700 152,700 306,000 1926 - 1927 92,310 1,154,000 495,100 658,700 1927 - 1928 138,300 905,900 373,400 532,400 1928 - 1929 81,460 527,300 200,300 327,000 1929 - 1930 64,600 660,600 258,100 402,500
1930 - 1931 47,930 461,400 165,500 295,900 1931 - 1932 103,300 636,300 249,700 386,500 1932 - 1933 83,250 793,400 322,000 471,500 1933 - 1934 207,600 775,900 318,000 458,000 1934 - 1935 168,500 576,700 221,500 355,300 1935 - 1936 37,010 511,700 194,400 317,300 1936 - 1937 41,960 617,600 246,800 370,800 1937 - 1938 80,500 705,500 284,000 421,600 1938 - 1939 73,220 497,100 184,700 312,400 1939 - 1940 46,650 449,100 157,700 291,400
Continued ...
G. 11 1/23/2013 Table 7 (continued): HISTORICAL SUMMARY OF COMPUTED NATURAL FLOW ST. MARY RIVER AT INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY (VALUES IN CUBIC DECAMETRES)
Computed Natural Flow Share April to October Non - Period Irrigation Irrigation Season Season United Canada (Nov to Mar) (Apr to Oct) States
1940 - 1941 40,510 413,000 135,500 277,500 1941 - 1942 116,300 660,700 255,000 405,700 1942 - 1943 78,160 833,600 343,100 490,500 1943 - 1944 44,830 392,400 131,800 260,600 1944 - 1945 57,320 623,800 246,800 377,000 1945 - 1946 94,750 660,600 255,200 405,400 1946 - 1947 107,100 770,900 303,300 467,600 1947 - 1948 88,050 894,300 378,600 515,700 1948 - 1949 43,690 563,300 210,000 353,200 1949 - 1950 118,600 945,800 395,700 550,200
1950 - 1951 174,400 1,092,000 459,300 632,600 1951 - 1952 102,200 637,800 246,800 391,000 1952 - 1953 77,150 970,700 414,800 556,000 1953 - 1954 77,240 981,700 410,300 571,400 1954 - 1955 97,770 727,400 293,100 434,300 1955 - 1956 109,800 804,700 326,700 478,000 1956 - 1957 73,220 672,600 272,900 399,700 1957 - 1958 72,180 654,600 254,200 400,400 1958 - 1959 115,300 881,600 355,200 526,400 1959 - 1960 117,700 595,700 227,300 368,400
1960 - 1961 72,160 699,100 276,000 423,100 1961 - 1962 74,860 611,000 230,000 381,000 1962 - 1963 122,700 629,900 248,000 381,800 1963 - 1964 54,720 942,300 396,500 545,800 1964 - 1965 83,860 828,000 333,900 494,100 1965 - 1966 87,680 712,100 279,600 432,500 1966 - 1967 81,470 840,500 354,000 486,500 1967 - 1968 116,600 720,900 281,200 439,700 1968 - 1969 97,360 669,700 262,000 407,700 1969 - 1970 66,380 738,700 305,600 433,100
1970 - 1971 83,120 850,900 351,400 499,500 1971 - 1972 106,600 928,700 382,500 546,100 1972 - 1973 67,390 501,800 189,000 312,800 1973 - 1974 130,500 849,900 353,700 496,200 1974 - 1975 50,050 1,024,000 437,100 586,600 1975 - 1976 148,600 716,600 282,600 434,000 1976 - 1977 46,900 406,500 131,300 275,200 1977 1978 72,760 766,600 303,500 463,200 1978 - 1979 75,210 611,700 240,200 371,500 1979 1980 45,120 680,000 264,900 415,100
Continued ...
G. 12 1/23/2013 Table 7 (continued): HISTORICAL SUMMARY OF COMPUTED NATURAL FLOW ST. MARY RIVER AT INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY (VALUES IN CUBIC DECAMETRES)
Computed Natural Flow Share April to October Non - Period Irrigation Irrigation Season Season United Canada (Nov to Mar) (Apr to Oct) States
1980 - 1981 134,200 674,700 270,700 404,000 1981 - 1982 57,200 685,900 274,300 411,600 1982 - 1983 60,010 517,900 193,800 324,100 1983 - 1984 83,050 534,200 195,800 338,400 1984 - 1985 50,470 670,800 254,800 416,000 1985 - 1986 165,000 589,500 216,000 373,500 1986 - 1987 86,590 600,800 228,200 372,600 1987 - 1988 39,370 496,000 182,200 313,800 1988 - 1989 80,730 775,300 308,400 466,900 1989 - 1990 196,800 738,300 289,800 448,500
1990 - 1991 138,000 905,000 381,000 524,000 1991 - 1992 59,160 478,300 164,400 313,900 1992 - 1993 75,110 629,700 235,100 394,600 1993 - 1994 79,800 534,500 202,300 332,200 1994 - 1995 92,460 877,700 365,200 512,600 1995 - 1996 234,500 781,800 314,300 467,500 1996 - 1997 94,070 917,200 378,000 539,100 1997 - 1998 62,430 631,900 252,300 379,500 1998 - 1999 60,620 698,100 274,500 423,600 1999 - 2000 157,900 548,300 203,700 344,500
2000 - 2001 32,490 417,900 156,300 261,700 2001 - 2002 69,030 981,100 419,600 561,500 2002 - 2003 69,690 534,000 201,500 332,500 2003 - 2004 61,950 639,400 239,500 399,900 2004 - 2005 119,800 591,500 222,900 368,700 2005 - 2006 106,200 657,300 263,100 394,200 2006 - 2007 233,900 501,700 183,900 317,800 2007 - 2008 69,840 796,000 331,400 464,600 2008 - 2009 56,750 547,900 207,600 340,300 2009 - 2010 74,750 724,700 286,300 438,400
2010 - 2011 105,800 936,600 394,800 541,800
AVERAGE 1903 - 2010 90,180 708,300 281,100 427,100
G. 13 1/23/2013 PUBLICATION DATA FOR ANNUAL REPORT TO THE IJC–– MILK RIVER
Computation Units
Two streamflow stations used in the computations of Milk River natural flow are located in the United States, and daily streamflows are computed in Imperial units. When finalized, these records are converted to SI units and are used to compute natural flow. The remainder of the streamflow stations are located in Canada and are operated and computed in SI units. However, the DCPs on most Milk River gauges operate in Imperial units, are retrievable by the United States, and are used to compute provisional natural flows in Imperial units.
Tables 2 and 2A of IJC Report
Table 2 is a summary of water-division data taken directly from the final monthly division tables (Table 8, Appendix A, of the IJC Report). Table 2A is the Imperial version of Table 2, and is simply the SI values in Table 2 multiplied by 0.8107. Examples of Table 2 and Table 2A are shown on the following pages.
Tables 8 and 9 of IJC Report
Table 8 consists of the Field Representatives signature page showing approved monthly SI water division sheets for the Milk River at Eastern Crossing of International Boundary. Table 9 is the historical summary of the natural flow and water division of the Milk River at Eastern Crossing of International Boundary. Both of these tables are part of Appendix A of the IJC Report. Examples of Table 8 signature page and Table 9 are shown following the examples of Table 2 and 2A. Averages in Table 9 are computed using unrounded data, then the computed averages are rounded using USGS publication standards.
G. 14 1/23/2013 Table 2: Summary of Milk River Division for 2010* Quantities in Cubic Decametres
DIVISION PERIOD NATURAL U.S.A. RECEIVED RECEIVED BY U.S.A. AT FLOW SHARE BY ABOVE BELOW INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY U.S.A. SHARE SHARE MAR 1 - MAR 15 3,787 1,893 3,787 1,893
MAR 16 - MAR 31 12,877 6,438 12,877 6,438
APR 1 - APR 15 8,776 6,582 8,776 2,194
APR 16 - APR 30 14,251 10,688 14,251 3,563
MAY 1 - MAY 15 24,667 17,396 24,667 7,271
MAY 16 - MAY 31 32,977 22,342 31,996 9,654
JUNE 1 - JUNE 15 28,573 19,616 27,615 7,999
JUNE 16 – JUNE 30 69,719 40,632 69,356 28,724
JULY 1 - JULY 15 23,541 17,015 22,880 5,866
JULY 16 – JULY 31 15,269 11,452 14,564 3,112
AUG 1 - AUG 15 7,761 5,821 7,217 1,396
AUG 16 - AUG 31 11,678 8,759 11,098 2,339
SEP 1 - SEP 15 7,064 5,298 6,702 1,403
SEP 16 - SEP 30 7,521 5,641 7,521 1,880
OCT 1 - OCT 15 4,842 3,631 4,842 1,211
OCT 16 - OCT 31 4,765 3,574 4,765 1,191
TOTAL 278,068 186,778 272,912
* This is a summary of data from Table 8, Appendix A.
G. 15 1/23/2013 Table 2A: Summary of Milk River Division for 2010* Quantities in Acre-Feet
DIVISION PERIOD NATURAL U.S.A. RECEIVED RECEIVED BY U.S.A. AT FLOW SHARE BY INTERNATIONAL ABOVE BELOW BOUNDARY U.S.A. SHARE SHARE MAR 1 - MAR 15 3,070 1,535 3,070 1,535
MAR 16 - MAR 31 10,439 5,220 10,439 5,220
APR 1 - APR 15 7,114 5,336 7,114 1,779
APR 16 - APR 30 11,553 8,665 11,553 2,888
MAY 1 - MAY 15 19,997 14,103 19,997 5,894
MAY 16 - MAY 31 26,734 18,113 25,939 7,826
JUNE 1 - JUNE 15 23,164 15,902 22,387 6,485
JUNE 16 - JUNE 30 56,521 32,940 56,227 23,286
JULY 1 - JULY 15 19,085 13,794 18,549 4,755
JULY 16 - JULY 31 12,379 9,284 11,807 2,523
AUG 1 - AUG 15 6,292 4,719 5,851 1,132
AUG 16 - AUG 31 9,468 7,101 8,997 1,896
SEP 1 - SEP 15 5,727 4,295 5,433 1,138
SEP 16 - SEP 30 6,097 4,573 6,097 1,524
OCT 1 - OCT 15 3,925 2,944 3,925 981
OCT 16 - OCT 31 3,863 2,897 3,863 966
TOTAL 225,430 151,421 221,250
* All values are conversions of data from Table 2. Totals and shares may not add or subtract exactly as a result of rounding.
G. 16 1/23/2013 Table 8 (Continued) Summary of Daily Net Change, Natural Flow, Evaporative and Net Consumptive Uses of Milk River at Eastern Crossing of International Boundary October, 2010
Total Consumptive Use Share
Excess / U.S. Loss Change
Incremental Incremental U.S. Canada U.S. Canada Natural Flow at Natural Flow at East to West Net Eastern Eastern Crossing Western Crossing Excess / Deficit to Evaporative Evaporative Trans. Deficit to U.S.
C9,T2 C10,T2 C8,T4 C3,T3 C8,T3 (9-6) Cumulative Date at Eastern Crossing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Accumulated deficit including carry over from previous division period #N/A Note: Eligible June 01 to September 15 accumulated carry over is 4900 dam3 (2000 cfs-days). Oct 01 265.6 - 2.9 0.0 0.0 394.0 295.5 98.5 98.5 98.5 Oct 02 236.2 - 3.0 0.0 0.0 374.1 280.6 93.5 93.5 192.0 Oct 03 219.8 - 2.5 0.0 0.0 349.9 262.4 87.5 87.5 279.5 Oct 04 207.9 - 1.8 0.0 0.0 340.4 255.3 85.1 85.1 364.6 Oct 05 196.2 - 1.9 0.0 0.0 320.5 240.4 80.1 80.1 444.7 Oct 06 197.9 - 2.5 0.0 0.0 318.0 238.5 79.5 79.5 524.2 Oct 07 206.9 - 2.4 0.0 0.0 308.4 231.3 77.1 77.1 601.3 Oct 08 198.1 - 2.3 0.0 0.0 303.3 227.4 75.8 75.8 677.2 Oct 09 196.7 - 2.5 0.0 0.0 303.3 227.4 75.8 75.8 753.0 Oct 10 213.0 - 0.8 0.0 0.0 300.7 225.5 75.2 75.2 828.1 Oct 11 210.3 - 1.9 0.0 0.0 308.4 231.3 77.1 77.1 905.3 Oct 12 215.6 - 1.6 0.0 0.0 311.0 233.3 77.8 77.8 983.0 Oct 13 203.0 - 5.3 0.0 0.0 303.3 227.4 75.8 75.8 1058.8 Oct 14 196.9 - 6.0 0.0 0.0 303.3 227.4 75.8 75.8 1134.6 Oct 15 187.1 - 6.0 0.0 0.0 303.3 227.4 75.8 75.8 1210.5 15 day Total 3151.1 0.0 43.5 0.0 0.0 4841.9 3631.4 1210.5 1210.5 Accumulated deficit including carry over from previous division period #N/A Note: Eligible June 01 to September 15 accumulated carry over is 4900 dam3 (2000 cfs-days). Oct 16 195.2 - 1.4 0.0 0.0 298.9 224.2 74.7 74.7 74.7 Oct 17 188.2 - 1.8 0.0 0.0 298.9 224.2 74.7 74.7 149.5 Oct 18 184.4 - 2.4 0.0 0.0 303.3 227.4 75.8 75.8 225.3 Oct 19 180.5 - 2.7 0.0 0.0 303.3 227.4 75.8 75.8 301.1 Oct 20 179.5 - 2.6 0.0 0.0 300.7 225.5 75.2 75.2 376.3 Oct 21 177.1 - 2.2 0.0 0.0 296.4 222.3 74.1 74.1 450.4 Oct 22 175.8 - 1.2 0.0 0.0 291.2 218.4 72.8 72.8 523.2 Oct 23 178.7 - 0.6 0.0 0.0 291.2 218.4 72.8 72.8 595.9 Oct 24 184.0 - 0.3 0.0 0.0 288.6 216.4 72.1 72.1 668.1 Oct 25 194.4 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 296.4 222.3 74.1 74.1 742.2 Oct 26 187.8 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 305.9 229.4 76.5 76.5 818.6 Oct 27 180.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 311.0 233.3 77.8 77.8 896.4 Oct 28 177.5 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 293.8 220.3 73.4 73.4 969.8 Oct 29 184.2 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 284.3 213.2 71.1 71.1 1040.9 Oct 30 188.4 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 300.7 225.5 75.2 75.2 1116.1 Oct 31 203.9 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 300.7 225.5 75.2 75.2 1191.2 16 day Total 2959.6 0.0 15.2 0.0 0.0 4765.0 3573.7 1191.2 1191.2 Accumulated deficit including carry over from previous division period #N/A Note: Eligible June 01 to September 15 accumulated carry over is 4900 dam3 (2000 cfs-days).
Oct Totals 6110.7 0.0 58.7 0.0 0.0 9606.8 7205.1 2401.7 2401.7
All figures in cubic decametres. Five day lag period is applied between west and east to determine natural flow at Eastern Crossing. Grey areas indicate natural flow equal to the recorded flow at the gauge (11AA031) Milk River at Eastern Crossing.
Approved by: ______For Canada ______For The United States
G. 17 1/23/2013 Table 9: HISTORICAL SUMMARY OF MARCH – OCTOBER COMPUTED NATURAL FLOW MILK RIVER AT EASTERN CROSSING OF INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY (VALUES IN CUBIC DECAMETRES)
COMPUTED UNITED COMPUTED UNITED YEAR NATURAL STATES CANADIAN YEAR NATURAL STATES CANADIAN FLOW SHARE SHARE FLOW SHARE SHARE
1941 31,230 21,500 9,730 1912 140,600 93,500 47,060 1942 105,500 75,880 29,610 1913 156,000 109,700 46,310 1943 143,500 98,570 44,880 1914 85,080 59,420 25,650 1944 27,940 19,940 8,000 1915 172,100 121,300 50,770 1945 53,840 36,160 17,680
1916 279,900 187,800 92,050 1946 51,470 35,060 16,410 1917 270,300 174,300 96,000 1947 203,600 128,600 75,020 1918 79,710 55,670 24,040 1948 253,700 167,800 85,970 1919 33,800 24,100 9,700 1949 69,920 49,710 20,200 1920 212,700 135,200 77,520 1950 149,100 106,100 42,960
1921 70,180 50,360 19,820 1951 342,400 226,300 116,000 1922 107,500 76,500 31,040 1952 249,000 154,300 94,720 1923 101,400 72,610 28,800 1953 316,700 200,200 116,600 1924 89,170 63,320 25,850 1954 181,800* 127,200 54,610 1925 148,900 100,700 48,240 1955 197,300 133,700* 63,580
1926 30,240 21,220 9,020 1956 138,900 97,270 41,600 1927 449,200 280,800 168,400 1957 129,300 88,470 40,810 1928 273,000 177,700 95,300 1958 139,200 89,690 49,550 1929 183,400 122,800 60,570 1959 159,600 105,100 54,490 1930 131,000 87,900 43,070 1960 121,300 76,290 45,010
1931 36,720 25,050 11,670 1961 46,770 32,760 14,010 1932 94,350 64,710 29,650 1962 72,190 48,500 23,690 1933 117,200 80,590 36,580 1963 34,260 23,630 10,630 1934 116,700 79,580 37,080 1964 154,100 104,300 49,750 1935 97,570 64,590 32,980 1965 283,600 181,200 102,500*
1936 79,920 50,220 29,700 1966 146,500 98,500 48,020 1937 111,600 78,980 32,660 1967 309,000 193,200 115,800 1938 133,200 89,640 43,520 1968 139,200 96,540 42,690 1939 50,110 33,540 16,560 1969 236,000 147,000 88,930 1940 69,710 46,390 23,320 1970 121,300 84,790 36,460
Continued… * Revised
Note: The totals of the United States and Canadian shares may not agree with the computed natural flows as all figures have been rounded for this summary. The table is a direct conversion from English to SI units. Totals prior to 1985 may not concur in some cases.
G. 18 1/23/2013 Table 9 (continued): HISTORICAL SUMMARY OF MARCH – OCTOBER COMPUTED NATURAL FLOW MILK RIVER AT EASTERN CROSSING OF INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY (VALUES IN CUBIC DECAMETRES)
COMPUTED UNITED COMPUTED UNITED YEAR NATURAL STATES CANADIAN YEAR NATURAL STATES CANADIAN FLOW SHARE SHARE FLOW SHARE SHARE
1971 127,900 91,280 36,650 1996 200,300 124,800 75,500 1972 228,700 148,500 80,260 1997 173,800 113,500 60,280 1973 44,490 29,600 14,890 1998 75,030* 53,920* 21,100* 1974 116,700 82,190 34,530 1999 76,810 54,810 22,000 1975 324,200 206,100 118,100 2000 35,390 24,320 11,070
1976 117,800 80,360 37,400 2001 21,730 15,100 6,630 1977 37,180 25,800 11,380 2002 235,400 145,600 89,820* 1978 273,900 173,200 100,700 2003 97,260 63,670 33,600 1979 248,200 152,600 95,570 2004 61,960 42,350 19,620 1980 99,420 69,480 29,940 2005 73,300 51,190 22,110
1981 113,300 79,170 34,170 2006 83,750 58,480 25,270 1982 164,500 109,300 55,150 2007 75,980 48,600 27,380 1983 46,550 32,650 13,910 2008 108,700 77,000 31,660 1984 26,550 17,490 9,060 2009 79,840 56,010 23,830 1985 58,800 41,680 17,110* 2010 278,100 186,800 91,290
1986 88,070 58,850 29,220 2011 358,700 227,400 131,200 1987 58,300 40,890 17,410 1988 35,930 25,010 10,920 AVERAGE 1989 116,800* 78,520 38,320 1912 – 2010 135,600 90,200 45,350 1990 121,000 82,250 38,730
1991 148,100 105,200 42,840 1992 38,900 26,910 11,990 1993 160,300 109,500 50,770 1994 188,000 115,400 72,590 1995 229,300 155,200 74,110
* Revised
Note: The totals of the United States and Canadian shares may not agree with the computed natural flows as all figures have been rounded for this summary. The table is a direct conversion from English to SI units. Totals prior to 1985 may not concur in some cases.
G. 19 1/23/2013 PUBLICATION DATA FOR ANNUAL REPORT TO THE IJC–– EASTERN TRIBUTARIES OF THE MILK RIVER
Computation Units
All hydrometric stations are operated and computed in SI units.
Figure 3 of IJC Report
Figure 3 is a summary of monthend reservoir contents taken directly from Table 16, Appendix B of the IJC Report. Previous year monthend contents and a moving ten-year monthend contents mean are also included in the figure. An example of this figure is shown on the next page.
G. 20 1/23/2013 Figure 3. Reservoirs in Lodge Creek, Battle Creek, and Frenchman River Basins Month-End Contents: 2009, 2010, and 2000-2009 Mean
Altawan Reservoir
8,000 6,486
7,000 Full Supply Volume 5,675
6,000 4,864
5,000 4,054
4,000 3,243
3,000 2,432 Quantities in Acre-Feet in Quantities Quantities in Cubic Decametres Cubic in Quantities 2,000 1,621
1,000 811
0 0 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
2009 2010 10 Year Mean Volumes (2000-2009)
Cypress Lake Eastend Reservoir
3,500 2,837 160,000 129,712
140,000 113,498 3,000 2,432 Full Supply Volume
120,000 97,284 2,500 2,027
Full Supply Volume 100,000 81,070 2,000 1,621
80,000 64,856
1,500 1,216 60,000 48,642 Acre-Feet in Quantities Quantities in Cubic Decametres Cubic in Quantities
1,000 811 Acre-Feet in Quantities 40,000 Dead Storage Volume 32,428 3
(30,000 dam ) Decametres Cubic in Quantities
20,000 16,214 500 405
0 0 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct 0 0 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
2009 2010 10 Year Mean Volumes (2000-2009) 2009 2010 10 Year Mean Volumes (2000-2009)
Huff Lake Newton Lake
5,000 4,054 16,000 12,971
14,000 11,350
Full Supply Volume 4,000 Full Supply Volume 3,243 12,000 9,728
10,000 8,107 3,000 2,432
8,000 6,486
2,000 1,621 6,000 4,864 Quantities in Acre-Feet in Quantities Quantities in Acre-Feet in Quantities Quantities in Cubic Decametres Cubic in Quantities Quantities in Cubic Decametres Cubic in Quantities
4,000 3,243 1,000 811
2,000 1,621
Dead Storage Volume (25 dam3)
0 0 0 0 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
2009 2010 10 Year Mean Volumes (2000-2009) 2009 2010 10 Year Mean Volumes (2000-2009)
G. 21 1/23/2013 PUBLICATION DATA FOR ANNUAL REPORT TO THE IJC–– LODGE CREEK
Computation Units
All hydrometric stations are operated and computed in SI units.
Tables 3 and 3A of IJC Report
Table 3 is a summary of water-division data taken directly from the final monthly division tables (Table 10, Appendix A, of the IJC Report). Table 3A is the Imperial version of Table 3, and is simply the SI values in Table 3 multiplied by 0.8107. Examples of Table 3 and Table 3A are shown on the following pages.
Tables 10 and 11 of IJC Report
Table 10 consists of the Field Representatives signature page showing approved monthly SI water-division sheets for Lodge Creek at International Boundary. Table 11 is the historical summary of the natural flow and water division of Lodge Creek at International Boundary. Both of these tables are part of Appendix A of the IJC Report. Examples of Table 10 signature page and Table 11 are shown following the examples of Table 3 and 3A. Averages in Table 11 are computed using unrounded data, then the computed averages are rounded using USGS publication standards.
G. 22 1/23/2013 Table 3: Summary of Lodge Creek Division for 2010* Quantities in Cubic Decametres
DIVISION PERIOD NATURAL U.S.A. RECEIVED RECEIVED BY U.S.A. AT FLOW SHARE BY ABOVE BELOW INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY U.S.A. SHARE SHARE
MAR 1 - MAR 15 0 0 0
MAR 16 – MAR 31 458 229 0 229
APR 1 - APR 15 1,124 562 0 562
APR 16 - APR 30 3,121 1,560 0 1,560
MAY 1 - MAY 15 8,012 4,006 1,008 2,998
MAY 16 - MAY 31 7,580 3,790 5,185 1,395
JUNE 1 - JUNE 15 3,175 1,587 2,521 934
JUNE 16 - JUNE 30 17,281 8,641 13,393 4,752
JULY 1 - JULY 15 693 346 754 408
JULY 16 – JULY 31 133 66 93 27
AUG 1 - AUG 15 19 10 19 9
AUG 16 - AUG 31 14 7 5 2
SEP 1 - SEP 15 2 1 2 1
SEP 16 - SEP 30 1 1 1
OCT 1 - OCT 15 5 2 0 2
OCT 16 - OCT 31 0 0 0
TOTAL 41,617 20,808 22,981
* This is a summary of data from Table 10, Appendix A. Totals and shares may not add or subtract exactly as a result of rounding.
G. 23 1/23/2013 Table 3A: Summary of Lodge Creek Division for 2010* Quantities in Acre-Feet
DIVISION PERIOD NATURAL U.S.A. RECEIVED RECEIVED BY U.S.A. AT FLOW SHARE BY ABOVE BELOW INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY U.S.A. SHARE SHARE MAR 1 - MAR 15 0 0 0
MAR 16 - MAR 31 371 186 0 186
APR 1 - APR 15 911 456 0 456
APR 16 - APR 30 2,530 1,265 0 1,265
MAY 1 - MAY 15 6,495 3,248 817 2,430
MAY 16 - MAY 31 6,145 3,073 4,203 1,131
JUNE 1 - JUNE 15 2,574 1,287 2,044 757
JUNE 16 - JUNE 30 14,010 7,005 10,858 3,853
JULY 1 - JULY 15 562 281 611 331
JULY 16 - JULY 31 108 54 75 22
AUG 1 - AUG 15 15 8 15 8
AUG 16 - AUG 31 11 6 4 2
SEP 1 - SEP 15 2 1 2 1
SEP 16 - SEP 30 1 1 1
OCT 1 - OCT 15 4 2 0 2
OCT 16 - OCT 31 0 0 0
TOTAL 33,739 16,869 18,631
* All values are conversions of data from Table 3. Totals and shares may not add or subtract exactly as a result of rounding.
G. 24 1/23/2013 Table 10 (continued): NATURAL FLOW OF LODGE CREEK AT THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY FOR THE YEAR 2010
45 46 47 48 49 50 Net Period Depletion In Lodge Creek Natural U.S.A. Share At International Canada At International Flow Of Of Excess Flow Deficit(-) Boundary Boundary Lodge Creek Natural Flow To U.S.A. To Date
7 + 10 + 13 + 18 +21 + 29 + 36 + 44 Observed 45+ 46 50% of 47 46 - 48 Sum of 49
Mar 1 - 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mar 16 - 31 458 0 458 229 -229 -229
Apr 1 - 15 1124 0 1124 562 -562 -791 Apr 16 - 30 3121 0 3121 1560 -1560 -2351
May 1 - 15 7004 1008 8012 4006 -2998 -5349 May 16 - 31 G.25 2395 5185 7580 3790 1395 -3954
Jun 1 - 15 654 2521 3175 1587 934 -3020 Jun 16 - 30 3888 13393 17281 8641 4752 0
Jul 1 - 15 -61 754 693 346 408 0 Jul 16 - 31 40 93 133 66 27 0
Aug 1 - 15 0 19 19 10 9 0 Aug 16 - 31 9 5 14 7 -2 -2
Sep 1 - 15 0 2 2 1 1 -1
1 Sep 16 - 30
/21 0 1 1 1 0 -1
/2013 Oct 1 - 15 5 0 5 2 -2 -3
Oct 16 - 31 0 0 0 0 0 -3 ------Total 18636 22981 41617 20808 2173 -3
All values are derived from data as published in Appendix B. Approved by: ______For Canada All quantities in cubic decametres. Totals may not add or subtract exactly as a result of rounding. ______For the United States
G. 25 1/23/2013 Table 11: HISTORICAL SUMMARY OF MARCH TO OCTOBER COMPUTED NATURAL AND RECORDED FLOW LODGE CREEK AT THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY (VALUES IN CUBIC DECAMETRES)
COMPUTED CANADIAN COMPUTED CANADIAN NATURAL & U.S.A. RECORDED NATURAL & U.S.A. RECORDED YEAR FLOW SHARES FLOW YEAR FLOW SHARES FLOW
1950 17,900 8,950 14,410 1951 62,950 31,475 48,760 1986 93,870 46,935 75,060 1952 161,600 80,800 147,200 1987 31,280 15,640 20,670 1953 38,240 19,120 27,240 1988 2,990 1,495 1,370 1954 13,050 6,525 7,620 1989 4,160 2,080 1,920 1955 97,070 48,535 75,390 1990 29,750 14,875 16,030
1956 21,180 10,590 15,770 1991 13,870 6,935 7,670 1957 32,770 16,385 24,500 1992 398 199 0 1958 48,180 24,090 42,090 1993 46,180 23,090 26,690 1959 21,220 10,610 14,300 1994 28,150 14,075 18,190 1960 39,590 19,795 29,510 1995 3,760 1,880 2,360
1961 2,200 1,100 1,030 1996 68,440 34,220 53,370 1962 25,640 12,820 18,840 1997 45,860 22,930 33,500 1963 14,080 7,040 7,500 1998 3,390 1,695 1,620 1964 9,790 4,895 5,130 1999 6,910 3,455 3,720 1965 95,340 47,670 68,060 2000 174 87 0
1966 44,230 22,115 30,180 2001 139 70 0 1967 90,360 45,180 73,260 2002 12,590 6,295 6,100 1968 4,910 2,455 2,650 2003 21,330 10,665 12,660 1969 36,900 18,450 20,850 2004 9,630 4,815 5,440 1970 29,050 14,525 16,160 2005 6,860 3,430 3,310
1971 26,290 13,145 13,080 2006 11,010 5,505 5,140 1972 27,380 13,690 13,580 2007 6,930 3,465 3,930 1973 2,080 1,040 1,060 2008 2,230 1,115 1,100 1974 26,980 13,490 14,560 2009 4,640 2,320 2,210 1975 48,000 24,000 34,540 2010 41,620 20,810 22,980
1976 29,480 14,740 22,320 2011 89,490 44,745 79,850 1977 1,240 620 891 1978 37,240 18,620 22,350 AVERAGE 1979 47,020 23,510 30,390 1950-2010 28,150 14,075 19,750 1980 2,140 1,070 712
1981 1,260 630 407 1982 38,800 19,400 22,420 1983 4,660 2,330 2,480 1984 937 469 600 1985 21,270 10,635 9,960
G. 26 1/23/2013 PUBLICATION DATA FOR ANNUAL REPORT TO THE IJC–– BATTLE CREEK
Computation Units
All hydrometric stations are operated and computed in SI units.
Tables 4 and 4A of IJC Report
Table 4 is a summary of water division data taken directly from the final monthly division tables (Table 12, Appendix A, of the IJC Report). Table 4A is the Imperial version of Table 4, and is simply the SI values in Table 4 multiplied by 0.8107. Examples of Table 4 and Table 4A are shown on the following pages.
Tables 12 and 13 of IJC Report
Table 12 is the Field Representatives signature page showing approved monthly SI water division sheets for Battle Creek at International Boundary. Table 13 is the historical summary of the natural flow and water division of Battle Creek at International Boundary. Both of these tables are part of Appendix A of the IJC Report. Examples of Table 12 signature page and Table 13 are shown following the examples of Table 4 and 4A. Averages in Table 13 are computed using unrounded data, then the computed averages are rounded using USGS publication standards.
G. 27 1/23/2013 Table 4: Summary of Battle Creek Division for 2010* Quantities in Cubic Decametres
DIVISION PERIOD NATURAL U.S.A. RECEIVED RECEIVED BY U.S.A. AT FLOW SHARE BY ABOVE BELOW INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY U.S.A. SHARE SHARE 482 MAR 1 - MAR 25 241 123 118 MAR 26 - APR 9 2,527 1,264 514 750 APR 10 - APR 24 2,597 1,299 958 341 APR 25 – MAY 9 4,572 2,286 2,045 241 MAY 10 - MAY 25 7,498 3,749 3,105 644 MAY 26 - JUNE 9 7,793 3,897 4,723 826 JUNE 10 - JUNE 24 11,234 5,617 3,813 1,804 JUNE 25 - JULY 9 9,889 4,945 1,870 3,075 JULY 10 - JULY 25 3,799 1,900 904 996 JULY 26 – AUG 9 2,264 1,132 1,775 643 AUG 10 - AUG 25 3,933 1,967 1,509 458 AUG 26 - SEP 9 2,183 1,092 1,934 842 SEP 10 - SEP 24 2,622 1,311 1,931 620 SEP 25 - OCT 9 2,211 1,106 672 434 OCT 10 - OCT 25 2,037 1,019 1,160 141 OCT 26 - OCT 31 662 331 288 43 NOV 1 – NOV 19 1,602 801 765 36 TOTAL 67,905 33,957 28,089
* This is a summary of data from Table 12, Appendix A. Totals and shares may not add or subtract exactly as a result of rounding.
G. 28 1/23/2013 Table 4A: Summary of Battle Creek Division for 2010* Quantities in Acre-Feet
DIVISION PERIOD NATURAL U.S.A. RECEIVED RECEIVED BY U.S.A. AT FLOW SHARE BY ABOVE BELOW INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY U.S.A. SHARE SHARE 391 MAR 1 – MAR 25 195 100 96 MAR 26 – APR 9 2,049 1,025 417 608 APR 10 - APR 24 2,105 1,053 777 276 APR 25 – MAY 9 3,707 1,853 1,658 195 MAY 10 - MAY 25 6,079 3,039 2,517 522 MAY 26 - JUNE 9 6,318 3,159 3,829 670 JUNE 10 - JUNE 24 9,107 4,554 3,091 1,463 JUNE 25 - JULY 9 8,017 4,009 1,516 2,493 JULY 10 - JULY 25 3,080 1,540 733 807 JULY 26 - AUG 9 1,835 918 1,439 521 AUG 10 – AUG 25 3,188 1,595 1,223 371 AUG 26 - SEP 9 1,770 885 1,568 683 SEP 10 - SEP 24 2,126 1,063 1,565 503 SEP 25 - OCT 9 1,792 897 545 352 OCT 10 - OCT 25 1,651 826 940 114 OCT 26 - OCT 31 537 268 233 35 NOV 1 – NOV 19 1,299 649 620 29 TOTAL 55,051 27,529 22,772
* All values are conversions of data from Table 4. Totals and shares may not add or subtract exactly as a result of rounding.
G. 29 1/23/2013 Table 12 (continued): NATURAL FLOW OF BATTLE CREEK AT THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY FOR THE YEAR 2010 39 40 41 42 43 44 Period Net Battle Creek Natural Excess At Depletion At Flow Of U.S.A. Share Flow International In International Battle Of To The Deficit(-) Boundary Canada Boundary Creek Natural Flow U.S.A. To Date Actual Adjusted Actual Adjusted
5+11+23+31+38 Measured 39+40 50% of 41 40-42 Sum of 43 Mar 1 - 25 359 123 482 241 -118 -118 Mar 26-Apr 9 2013 514 2527 1264 -750 -868 Apr 10 - 24 1639 958 2597 1299 -341 -1209 Apr 25-May 9 2527 2045 4572 2286 -241 -1450 May 10 - 25 4393 3105 7498 3749 -644 -2094 May 26-Jun 9 3070 4723 7793 3897 826 -1268 G.30 Jun 10 - 24 7421 7421 3813 11234 5617 -1804 -3072 -1268 * Jun 25-Jul 9 8019 8019 1870 9889 4945 -3075 -6147 -1268 * Jul 10 - 25 2895 2895 904 3799 1900 -996 -7143 -1268 * Jul 26-Aug 9 489 1775 2264 1132 643 -6500 -625 Aug 10 - 25 2424 1509 3933 1967 -458 -6958 -1083 Aug 26-Sep 9 249 1934 2183 1092 842 -6116 -241 Sep 10 - 24 691 0 1931 2622 1311 620 -5496 0 ** Sep 25-Oct 9 1539 0 672 2211 1106 -434 -5930 -245 ** Oct 10 - 25 877 0 1160 2037 1019 141 -5789 -64 ** Oct 26 - 31 374 0 288 662 331 -43 -5832 -107 ** Nov 1 - 19 837 0 765 1602 801 -36 -5868 -143 ** Total
1/21/2013 39 816 35 498 28 089 67 905 33 957 -5 868 -5 868 - 143 * The deficit incurred by Canada prior to period 7 was carried forward at the State of Montana's request for flood protection during periods 7, 8, and 9. ** The deficit incurred by Canada was adjusted at the State of Montana's request for a minimum 25 ft3/s (0.71 m3/s) delivery at the international boundary. The state of Montana requested all flow in excess of 25 ft3/s during periods 13 through 17 be diverted to Cypress Lake. When computed natural flows were
less than 50 ft3/s (1.42 m3/s) an equal sharing arrangement was used. Refer to "Letter of Intent".
All values are derived from data as published in Appendix B. Approved by: ______For Canada All quantities in cubic decametres. Totals may not add or subtract exactly as a result of rounding. ______For the United States
G. 30 1/23/2013 Table 13: HISTORICAL SUMMARY OF MARCH TO OCTOBER COMPUTED NATURAL AND RECORDED FLOW BATTLE CREEK AT INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY (VALUES IN CUBIC DECAMETRES)
COMPUTED CANADIAN COMPUTED CANADIAN NATURAL & U.S.A. RECORDED NATURAL & U.S.A. RECORDED YEAR FLOW SHARES FLOW YEAR FLOW SHARES FLOW
1940 45,030 22,515 32,100 1980 9,960 4,980 5,860 1941 31,280 15,640 20,860 1981 8,900 4,450 5,610 1942 27,500 13,750 13,490 1982 36,120 18,060 21,940 1943 40,710 20,355 27,960 1983 18,560 9,280 9,660 1944 12,990 6,495 9,470 1984 5,490 2,745 2,820
1945 11,010 5,505 9,970 1985 20,790 10,395 10,530 1946 12,820 6,410 8,590 1986 75,180 37,590 49,540 1947 13,900 6,950 8,540 1987 36,420 18,210 18,460 1948 23,100 11,550 9,670 1988 9,940 4,970 4,650 1949 1,650 825 2,160 1989 8,590 4,295 5,080
1950 23,800 11,900 12,730 1990 19,360 9,680 10,720 1951 35,910 17,955 20,440 1991 19,380 * 9,690 9,930 1952 138,400 69,200 127,800 ** 1992 7,490 3,745 4,820 1953 46,580 23,290 34,760 ** 1993 34,490 17,245 17,840 1954 40,930 20,465 31,520 ** 1994 34,430 17,215 18,260
1955 110,700 55,350 117,600 1995 17,730 8,865 9,310 1956 31,590 15,795 24,890 1996 79,430 39,715 38,140 1957 33,910 16,955 22,990 1997 62,990 31,495 43,580 1958 34,290 17,145 25,040 1998 12,110 6,055 6,300 1959 22,340 11,170 14,680 1999 11,380 5,690 6,890
1960 34,520 17,260 19,350 *** 2000 5,670 2,835 2,950 1961 6,970 3,485 5,510 2001 4,480 2,240 1,720 1962 9,090 4,545 6,010 2002 23,660 11,830 12,620 1963 9,920 4,960 5,790 2003 27,280 13,640 15,640 1964 13,100 6,550 6,670 2004 25,790 12,895 17,180
1965 67,350 33,675 33,950 ** 2005 17,800 8,900 9,480 1966 45,850 22,925 24,860 2006 11,710 5,855 4,980 1967 80,440 40,220 67,670 2007 15,830 7,915 9,640 1968 20,090 10,045 12,830 2008 14,400 7,200 7,820 1969 35,440 17,720 21,590 2009 11,720 5,860 5,840
1970 38,260 19,130 22,570 ** 2010 66,300 33,150 27,320 1971 23,770 11,885 15,420 2011 103,000 51,500 85,700 1972 27,440 13,720 17,210 1973 11,810 5,905 6,170 Average 1974 23,720 11,860 15,300 1940-2010 29,720 14,860 19,330
1975 54,440 27,220 32,440 1976 34,520 17,260 21,210 1977 5,840 2,920 3,330 1978 28,520 14,260 16,690 1979 47,520 23,760 27,640
* Revised. ** For comparison purposes, totals for Mar 1 to Oct 31 are shown. Additional periods are not included. *** Between 2000 and 2002, the values for 2000 were reported as 5 700, 2 850, and 2 990 and in 2003 the values were erroneously reported as 5 670, 2 830, and 2 950. The values for the year 2000 currently shown in the above table are correct.
G. 31 1/23/2013 PUBLICATION DATA FOR ANNUAL REPORT TO THE IJC–– FRENCHMAN RIVER
Computation Units
All hydrometric stations are operated and computed in SI units.
Tables 5 and 5A of IJC Report
Table 5 is a summary of water division data taken directly from the final monthly division tables (table 14, Appendix A, of the IJC Report). Table 5A is the Imperial version of Table 5, and is simply the SI values in Table 5 multiplied by 0.8107. Examples of Table 5 and Table 5A are shown on the following pages.
Tables 14 and 15 of IJC Report
Table 14 consists of the Field Representatives signature page showing approved monthly SI water division sheets for the Frenchman River at International Boundary. Table 15 is the historical summary of the natural flow and water division of the Frenchman River at International Boundary. Both of these tables are part of Appendix A of the IJC Report. Examples of Table 14 signature page and Table 15 are shown following the examples of Table 5 and 5A. Averages in Table 15 are computed using unrounded data, then the computed averages are rounded using USGS publication standards.
G. 32 1/23/2013 Table 5: Summary of Frenchman River Division for 2010* Quantities in Cubic Decametres
110
DIVISION PERIOD NATURAL U.S.A. RECEIVED RECEIVED BY U.S.A. AT FLOW SHARE BY ABOVE BELOW INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY U.S.A. SHARE SHARE 134 MAR 1 - MAR 15 67 37 30
MAR 16 - MAR 31 3,094 1,547 891 656
APR 1 - APR 15 9,264 4,632 1,417 3,215
APR 16 - APR 30 4,391 2,195 37 2,158
MAY 1 - MAY 15 10,349 5,174 10,295 5,121
MAY 16 - MAY 31 10,977 5,488 3,921 1,567
JUNE 1 - JUNE 15 7,367 3,684 2,954 730
JUNE 16 - JUNE 30 10,463 5,231 7,697 2,466
JULY 1 - JULY 15 3,112 1,556 1,623 67
JULY 16 - JULY 31 1,072 536 603 67
AUG 1 - AUG 15 1,242 621 1,649 1,028
AUG 16 - AUG 31 1,443 721 495 226
SEP 1 - SEP 15 3,577 1,789 2,223 434
SEP 16 - SEP 30 1,502 751 382 369
OCT 1 - OCT 15 1,560 780 1,484 704
OCT 16 --- OCT 31 1,479 739 1,751 1,012
NOV 1 --- NOV 30 2,501 1,250 1,624 374
TOTAL 73,525 36,761 39,083
* This is a summary of data from Table 14, Appendix A. Totals and shares may not add or subtract exactly as a result of rounding.
G. 33 1/23/2013 Table 5A: Summary of Frenchman River Division for 2010* Quantities in Acre-Feet
DIVISION PERIOD NATURAL U.S.A. RECEIVED RECEIVED BY U.S.A. AT FLOW SHARE BY ABOVE BELOW INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY U.S.A. SHARE SHARE
MAR 1 - MAR 15 109 54 30 24
MAR 16 - MAR 31 2,508 1,254 722 532
APR 1 - APR 15 7,510 3,755 1,149 2,606
APR 16 - APR 30 3,56 0 1,779 30 1,749
MAY 1 - MAY 15 8,390 4,195 8,346 4,152
MAY 16 - MAY 31 8,899 4,449 3,179 1,270
JUNE 1 - JUNE 15 5,972 2,987 2,395 592
JUNE 16 - JUNE 30 8,48 2 4,241 6,240 1,999
JULY 1 - JULY 15 2,52 3 1,261 1,316 54
JULY 16 - JULY 31 869 435 489 54
AUG 1 - AUG 15 1,007 503 1,337 833
AUG 16 - AUG 31 1,17 0 585 401 183
SEP 1 - SEP 15 2,90 0 1,450 1,802 352
SEP 16 - SEP 30 1,218 609 310 299
OCT 1 - OCT 15 1,265 632 1,203 571
OCT 16 --- OCT 31 1,199 599 1,420 820
NOV 1 --- NOV 30 2,028 1,013 1,317 303
TOTAL 59,607 29,802 31,685
* All values are conversions of data from Table 5. Totals and shares may not add or subtract exactly as a result of rounding.
G. 34 1/23/2013 Table 14 (continued): NATURAL FLOW OF FRENCHMAN RIVER AT THE INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY FOR THE YEAR 2010 G.35 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
Near Net Frenchman Natural Flow Period International Depletion River at Of U.S.A. Excess Flow At International Boundary In International Frenchman Share Of To The Deficit(-) Boundary Minor Use Canada Boundary River Natural Flow U.S.A. To Date
Reported 6+13+25+26 Measured 27+28 50% of 29 28-29 Sum of 31 Mar 1 – 15 0 97 37 134 67 - 30 -30 Mar 16 – 31 0 2 203 891 3 094 1 547 - 656 -686 Apr 1 - 15 0 7 847 1 417 9 264 4 632 -3 215 -3901 Apr 16 - 30 0 4 354 37 4 391 2 195 -2 158 -6059 May 1 - 15 0 54 10 295 10 349 5 174 5 121 -938 May 16 - 31 0 7 056 3 921 10 977 5 488 -1 567 -2505 Jun 1 - 15 0 4 413 2 954 7 367 3 684 - 730 -3235 Jun 16 - 30 0 2 766 7 697 10 463 5 231 2 466 -769 Jul 1 - 15 0 1 489 1 623 3 112 1 556 67 -702 Jul 16 - 31 0 469 603 1 072 536 67 -635 Aug 1 - 15 0 - 407 1 649 1 242 621 1 028 0 Aug 16 - 31 0 948 495 1 443 721 - 226 -226 Sep 1 - 15 0 1 354 2 223 3 577 1 789 434 0 Sep 16 - 30 0 1 120 382 1 502 751 - 369 -369 Oct 1 - 15 0 76 1 484 1 560 780 704 0 Oct 16 - 31 0 - 272 1 751 1 479 739 1 012 0 Nov 1 - 30 0 877 1 624 2 501 1 250 374 0
Total 0 34 442 39 083 73 525 36 761 2 322 0
1/21/3013 All values are derived from data as published in Appendix B. Approved by: ______For Canada All quantities in cubic decameters ______For the United States
G. 35 1/23/2013 Table 15: HISTORICAL SUMMARY OF MARCH TO OCTOBER COMPUTED NATURAL AND RECORDED FLOW FRENCHMAN RIVER AT INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY (VALUES IN CUBIC DECAMETRES)
COMPUTED CANADIAN COMPUTED CANADIAN NATURAL & U.S.A. RECORDED NATURAL & U.S.A. RECORDED YEAR FLOW SHARES FLOW YEAR FLOW SHARES FLOW
1940 101,400 50,700 84,120 1980 33,440 16,720 17,780 1941 71,120 35,560 57,560 1981 18,140 9,070 8,310 1942 72,190 36,095 52,210 1982 114,700 57,350 82,530 1943 164,700 82,350 147,000 1983 44,230 22,115 22,990 1944 69,630 34,815 50,560 1984 11,920 5,960 5,640
1945 42,630 21,315 28,440 1985 42,500 21,250 22,180 1946 39,800 19,900 26,460 1986 107,000 53,500 74,060 1947 65,090 32,545 43,190 1987 79,590 39,795 59,520 1948 48,950 24,475 31,000 1988 13,510 6,755 6,050 1949 17,680 8,840 8,000 1989 22,760 11,380 12,020
1950 93,280 46,640 73,590 1990 34,430 17,215 19,950 1951 137,500 68,750 110,900 1991 101,500 50,750 72,100 1952 445,200 222,600 433,500 1992 11,100 5,550 5,980 1953 92,360 46,180 71,990 1993 77,310 38,655 49,220 1954 109,700 54,850 92,480 1994 97,860 48,930 76,410
1955 230,300 115,150 210,300 1995 25,130 12,565 12,340 1956 59,650 29,825 41,950 1996 168,900 84,450 134,200 1957 48,050 24,025 32,710 1997 192,000 96,000 166,700 1958 79,380 39,690 64,280 1998 19,530 9,765 9,500 1959 64,040 32,020 41,230 1999 83,560 41,780 59,260
1960 94,050 47,025 75,440 2000 29,260 14,630 14,950 1961 23,060 11,530 11,490 2001 11,810 5,905 6,380 1962 78,090 39,045 48,240 2002 59,740 29,870 37,940 1963 57,730 28,865 41,790 * 2003 65,540 32,770 56,210 1964 25,050 12,525 13,300 2004 71,660 35,830 48,180
1965 132,100 66,050 95,070 * 2005 38,840 19,420 27,790 1966 91,180 45,590 66,470 2006 40,040 20,020 25,080 1967 130,900 65,450 107,600 2007 58,470 29,235 32,280 1968 49,720 24,860 27,010 * 2008 26,050 13,025 12,660 1969 97,920 48,960 71,540 2009 33,850 16,925 17,140
1970 133,400 66,700 102,500 ** 2010 71,020 35,510 37,460 1971 57,120 28,560 39,360 2011 241,800 120,900 223,000 1972 45,900 22,950 24,990 1973 27,470 13,735 14,720 AVERAGE 1974 104,100 52,050 75,610 1940-2010 75,740 37,870 56,490
1975 92,000 46,000 60,720 1976 90,690 45,345 73,980 1977 12,730 6,365 8,270 1978 67,920 33,960 41,310 1979 108,500 54,250 77,360
* Period 16 extended to include Nov. 1-5 data. ** For comparison purposes, totals for Mar 1 to Oct 31 are shown. Additional periods are not included.
G. 36 1/23/2013
APPENDIX H
DISTRIBUTION LIST - ANNUAL REPORT TO THE IJC
H.1 DISTRIBUTION LIST: IJC-ST. MARY AND MILK RIVER REPORT Last revised February 2018
Canada Name Agency/Title Contact
Camille Mageau International Joint 234 Laurier Avenue West, Commission 22nd Floor Ottawa, Ontario Canada. K1P 6K6 613 995-0113 613 993-5583 (fax) [email protected] Dr. Alain Pietroniro Accredited Officer for 11 Innovation Blvd Canada Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Director, Water Survey Canada S7N 3H5 Canada 306-975-4394 Environment Canada [email protected] NHRC
Jeff Woodward Field Representative of the 300 - 2365 Albert Street Canadian Accredited Officer Regina, Saskatchewan Environment and Climate Canada. S4P 4K1 Change Canada 306-780-5338 [email protected]
Malcolm Conly Reginal Chief – North & 11 Innovation Blvd. West Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Hydrological Operations & S7N 3H5 Engineering Services 306-975-4833 National Hydrological 306-222-8659 (cell) Services – Water Survey of [email protected] Canada National Hydrology Research Centre
Dwayne Ofukany Head of Operations – 300 - 2365 Albert Street Saskatchewan District Regina, Saskatchewan Water Survey of Canada Canada. S4P 4K1 Prairie and Northern Region 306-780-3494 Environment and Climate 306-780-5350 (fax) Change Canada [email protected]
Dave Moncur Head of Operations, Alberta Harry Hays Building, Room District 854 Water Survey of Canada 220 4th Avenue, SE Prairie and Northern Region Calgary, Alberta Environment and Climate Canada. T2G 4X3 Change Canada 403-292-5307 403-292-5314 (fax) [email protected]
H.2 Morna Hussey Alberta District Manager Harry Hays Building, Room Water Survey of Canada 854 North and West Region 220 – 4 Avenue SE Environment and Climate Calgary, Alberta Change Canada Canada. T2G 4X3 [email protected]
David Hunt Team Lead Water Approvals Provincial Building Alberta Environment and 200 - 5th Avenue South Parks Lethbridge, Alberta Canada T1J 4C7 (403) 381-5994 david.hunt.gov.ab.ca
Carmen delaChevrotière Transboundary Water 11th Floor Oxbridge Place Quantity Specialist 9820 – 106 St. Transboundary Secretariat Edmonton, AB T5K 2J6 Alberta Environment and carmen.delachevrotiere@gov Parks .ab.ca
Mike Renouf Executive Director 2365 Albert Street, Room 300 Transboundary Waters Unit Regina, Saskatchewan Canada. S4P 4K1 306-780-7004 306-780-5311 (fax) [email protected]
Kevin Wingert Manager, Southwest Regional E.I. Wood Building Services 306-350 Cheadle Street, West Saskatchewan Water Security Swift Current, Saskatchewan Agency Canada. S9H 4G3 306-778-8335 306-778-8271 (fax) [email protected] John Fahlman Vice President, Technical Victoria Place Services 400-111 Fairford Street, East Saskatchewan Water Security Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Agency Canada. S6H 7X9 306-694-3954 306-694-3944 (fax) [email protected] Ray Klein Water Infrastructure Division Box 1088 Agri-Environment Services Swift Current, Saskatchewan Branch Canada. S9H 3X3 Agriculture & Agri-Food 306-770-4661 Canada 306-773-5020 (fax) [email protected] Scott Wagner Project Manager PO Box 39 Consul Irrigation Project Consul, Saskatchewan Agri-Environment Services Canada S0N 0P0 Branch 306-299-2040 Agriculture & Agri-Food [email protected] Canada
H.3 Larry Verpy Infrastructure Manager P.O. Box 146 Agri-Environment Services Eastend, Saskatchewan Branch Canada S0L 0T0 Agriculture and Agri-Food [email protected] Canada
Stephen Auger Val Marie Irrigation Project Box 118 Agri-Environment Services Val Marie, Saskatchewan Branch Canada S0N 2T0 Agriculture and Agri-Food 306-298-2131 Canada [email protected]
Perry Ludwig Planning Engineer P.O. Box 1088 Agri-Environment Services Swift Current, Saskatchewan Branch Canada S9H 3X3 Agriculture and Agri-Food perry.ludwig@ agr.gc.ca Canada
Jean Jones Administrator Site 2, Box 7 Vidora Irrigation District Consul, Saskatchewan Canada, S0N 0P0
Denise Tully Secretary Site 2, Box 7 Lodge Creek Water Users Consul, Saskatchewan Association Canada S0N 0P0
Dr. Geneviève Béchard Director General 351 St-Joseph Blvd Weather and Environmental Gatineau, Quebec Monitoring K1A OH3 [email protected]
Ms. Irene LeGatt Acting Superintendent P.O. Box 150 Saskatchewan South Field Unit Val Marie, Saskatchewan Parks Canada Canada S0N 2T0
H.4 United States
Name Agency/Title Contact
Dr. Charles A. Lawson Secretary, United States Section 2401 Pennsylvania Ave, NW International Joint Commission Fourth Floor Washington, DC 20440 202-736-9008 202-736-9015 (fax) [email protected] Robert Mason Extreme Hydrological Events 409 National Center Coordinator and Delaware River 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive Master Reston, VA 20192 United States Geological Survey 703-648-5215 703-648-7031 (fax) [email protected] John M. Kilpatrick Director, Wyoming-Montana Water3162 Bozeman Avenue Science Center Helena, MT 59601 United States Geological Survey [email protected]
Dr. Richard Ferrero Accredited Officer for the 909 First Avenue, Suite 800 United States Seattle, WA 98104 USA Northwest Regional Director 206-220-4600 USGS Northwest Area [email protected]
Paul Azevedo Administrator P.O. Box 201601 Water Resources Division Helena, Montana 59620-1601 Montana Dept of Natural 406-444-6606 Resources and Conservation 406-444-0533 (fax) [email protected] Brenda Burman Commissioner 1849 C Street NW Bureau of Reclamation Washington, D.C. 20240-0001 [email protected]
Michael Black Regional Director P.O. Box 36900 Great Plains Regional Office Billings, Montana 59107-6900 Bureau of Reclamation 406-247-7600 [email protected]
Steven Davies Montana Area Manager P.O. Box 30137 Bureau of Reclamation Billings, Montana 59107-0137 406-247-7307 [email protected]
Clayton Jordan Montana Area Office P.O. Box 30137 Bureau of Reclamation Billings, MT 59107-0137 [email protected]
Larry Dolan Hydrologist, Water Management 1424 9th Ave. Bureau P.O. Box 201601 Montana Department of Natural Helena, MT 59620-1601 Resources and Conservation [email protected]
H.5 Matt Miles Havre Water Resources 210 6th Ave. Regional Office P.O. Box 1828 Montana Department of Havre, MT 59501-1828 Natural Resources and [email protected] Conservation Mike Dailey Hydrologist, Water 222 Sixth Street South Management Bureau P.O. Box 1269 Montana Department of Glasgow, MT 59230-1269 Natural Resources and [email protected] Conservation
Bureau of Indian Affairs Water Resources 2021 4th Avenue North Billings, Montana 59101-1362 406-247-7998
Arne Wick Reserved Water Rights 1424 9th Avenue Compact Commission Helena, Montana 59620 (RWRCC) 406-444-6841 MTDNRC [email protected]
H.6
APPENDIX I
DISTRIBUTION LIST – PROCEDURES MANUAL
I.1 DISTRIBUTION LIST: St. Mary-Milk Rivers Procedures Manual Last revised February 2018
Canada Name Agency/Title Contact/Email
Camille Mageau International Joint 234 Laurier Avenue West, Commission 22nd Floor Ottawa, Ontario Canada. K1P 6K6 613 995-0113 613 993-5583 (fax) [email protected] Dr. Alain Pietroniro Accredited Officer for 11 Innovation Blvd Canada Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Director, Water Survey Canada S7N 3H5 Canada 306-975-4394 Environment Canada [email protected] NHRC
Jeff Woodward Field Representative of the 300 - 2365 Albert Street Canadian Accredited Officer Regina, Saskatchewan Environment and Climate Canada. S4P 4K1 Change Canada 306-780-5338 [email protected]
Dwayne Ofukany Head of Operations – 300 - 2365 Albert Street Saskatchewan District Regina, Saskatchewan Water Survey of Canada Canada. S4P 4K1 Prairie and Northern Region 306-780-3494 Environment and Climate 306-780-5350 (fax) Change Canada [email protected]
Dave Moncur Head of Operations, Alberta Harry Hays Building, Room District 854 Water Survey of Canada 220 4th Avenue, SE Prairie and Northern Region Calgary, Alberta Environment and Climate Canada. T2G 4X3 Change Canada 403-292-5307 403-292-5314 (fax) [email protected] Morna Hussey Alberta District Manager Harry Hays Building, Room Water Survey of Canada 854 North and West Region 220 – 4 Avenue SE Environment and Climate Calgary, Alberta Change Canada Canada. T2G 4X3 [email protected]
Carmen delaChevrotière Transboundary Water 11th Floor Oxbridge Place Quantity Specialist 9820 – 106 St. Transboundary Secretariat Edmonton, AB T5K 2J6 Alberta Environment and carmen.delachevrotiere@gov Parks .ab.ca
I.2 Muhammed Sabur Hydrologist Provincial Building, South Saskatchewan Region Second Floor Alberta Environment and 200 - 5 Avenue S. Parks Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada T1J 4L1 [email protected] a Kevin Wingert Manager, Southwest Regional E.I. Wood Building Services 306-350 Cheadle Street, West Saskatchewan Water Security Swift Current, Saskatchewan Agency Canada. S9H 4G3 306-778-8335 306-778-8271 (fax) [email protected] Duncan Spenst Supervisor, Southwest Regional E.I. Wood Building Services 306-350 Cheadle Street, West Saskatchewan Water Security Swift Current, Saskatchewan Agency Canada. S9H 4G3 306-778-8263 306-778-8271 (fax) [email protected] John Fahlman Vice President, Technical Victoria Place Services 400-111 Fairford Street, East Saskatchewan Water Security Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Agency Canada. S6H 7X9 306-694-3954 306-694-3944 (fax) [email protected]
I.3 United States
Name Agency/Title Contact
Dr. Charles A. Lawson Secretary, United States Section 2401 Pennsylvania Ave, NW International Joint Commission Fourth Floor Washington, DC 20440 202-736-9008 202-736-9015 (fax) [email protected] Robert Mason Extreme Hydrological Events 409 National Center Coordinator and Delaware River 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive Master Reston, VA 20192 United States Geological Survey 703-648-5215 703-648-7031 (fax) [email protected] John M. Kilpatrick Director, Wyoming-Montana Water3162 Bozeman Avenue Science Center Helena, MT 59601 United States Geological Survey [email protected]
Dr. Richard Ferrero Accredited Officer for the United 909 First Avenue, Suite 800 States Seattle, WA 98104 USA Northwest Regional Director 206-220-4600 USGS Northwest Area [email protected]
Michael Black Regional Director P.O. Box 36900 Great Plains Regional Office Billings, Montana 59107-6900 Bureau of Reclamation 406-247-7600 [email protected]
Steven Davies Montana Area Manager P.O. Box 30137 Bureau of Reclamation Billings, Montana 59107-0137 406-247-7307 [email protected]
Clayton Jordan Montana Area Office P.O. Box 30137 Bureau of Reclamation Billings, MT 59107-0137 [email protected]
Larry Dolan Hydrologist, Water Management 1424 9th Ave. Bureau P.O. Box 201601 Montana Department of Natural Helena, MT 59620-1601 Resources and Conservation [email protected]
Matt Miles Havre Water Resources 210 6th Ave. Regional Office P.O. Box 1828 Montana Department of Havre, MT 59501-1828 Natural Resources and [email protected] Conservation Mike Dailey Hydrologist, Water 222 Sixth Street South Management Bureau P.O. Box 1269 Montana Department of Glasgow, MT 59230-1269 Natural Resources and [email protected] Conservation
I.4
APPENDIX J
PUBLICATION SPECIFICATIONS
J.1 2/12/2013
Annual Report to IJC
General print specifications for the annual IJC report are as follows;
Main Report
General: Approximately 35 sheets of paper, printed on both sides, one color map insert, comb binding, holes need to be drilled for binding
Total copies: Varies (see Appendix H)
Copies with original signature pages inserted: 4
Comb binding: white, 3/8” width, tabs ¼” in width
Trim size: 8-1/2 x 11 inches
Front Cover: 80 lb, white, matte-coated, CMYK color Back Cover: 80 lb, white, matte-coated, no color
Report body: 60 lb., white, offset book, B/W & CMYK color
Color map: Provided by WSD
Appendices
General: Approximately 58 sheets of paper, mixed print (single and double-sided), comb binding, holes need to be drilled for binding
Total copies: Varies (see Appendix H)
Copies with original signature pages inserted: 4
Comb binding: white, 1/2” width, tabs ¼” in width
Trim size: 8-1/2 x 11 inches
Front Cover: 80 lb, white, matte-coated, CMYK color Back Cover: 80 lb, white, matte-coated, no color
Report body: 60 lb., white, offset book, B/W & CMYK color
J.2 2/12/2013
The following section pertains to the publication standards involved in the preparation of the annual report to the International Commission (IJC) on the Division of the Waters of the St. Mary and Milk Rivers.
The only publication standards for the annual report to the IJC currently in use are outlined in the following section on significant figures and rounding rules.
The proposed significant figures and rounding rules shown on pages J.11 and J.12 were adopted by the Field Representatives to the Accredited Officers during the 2012 International Records Meeting in Helena, MT.
J.3 2/12/2013
Significant Figures and Rounding Limits in the Computation and Reporting of St. Mary-Milk Rivers Flow Apportionment
The significant figure rounding rules used in the natural flow apportionment computations and annual St. Mary-Milk Rivers flow apportionment report to the International Joint Commission (IJC) are inconsistent. For example, in the annual St. Mary-Milk Rivers flow apportionment report, natural flow data are shown rounded to three significant figures in the narrative text while the same data are shown as unrounded flow figures (to the nearest reported unit) in the report tables. This issue was first brought to the attention of the Field Representatives to the Accredited Officers during the 2009 International Records meeting in Great Falls, Montana. Subsequent discussions about whether to standardize and/or document the current rounding rules used in the annual IJC report publication formed the basis for this report.
This report addresses the presentation of flow apportionment data in the annual St. Mary-Milk Rivers flow apportionment report to the International Joint Commission and seeks to provide consistency through the implementation of a new set of rules governing the usage of significant figures and rounding limits.
Background
No specific significant figure rounding rules are provided in the 1985 version of the “Procedural Guide for International Gauging Stations on Boundary Waters between Canada and the United States of America” concerning the publication of data in the annual IJC report. The only reference on the use of significant figures appears in the “Publication of Furnished Records” section. Here the guide states that “The listing of station results in computerized format may be published in surface water reports according to accepted rules of significant figures, format and similar publication requirements of each country”.
Current Significant Figures and Rounding Rules
An inventory of the rounding business rules used in the computation, reporting, and tracking of historical natural flow data in the St. Mary and Milk River basins was completed. The results of the inventory are summarized in the following sections.
Daily Value Computations
United States Geological Survey (USGS) computations- The following rounding rules as described by Novak (1985) are used when reporting daily discharge in all USGS publications (which includes primary computation forms).
J.4 2/12/2013
Significant figures and rounding limits for daily discharge Range of discharge (in ft3/s) Significant Figures Rounding Limits <0.10 1 hundredths 0.10 – 0.99 2 hundredths 1.0 – 9.9 2 tenths 10.0 – 99 2 units 100 and above 3 variable
Computer-generated tables of daily discharge will show sums of the daily values for complete months unrounded.
Water Survey of Canada (WSC) computations – The following rounding rules as described in the Inland Waters Directorate (1980) manual on hydrometric data computation are used when reporting daily discharge in all WSC publications (which includes primary computation forms).
Significant figures and rounding limits for daily discharge Range of discharge (in m3/s) Significant Figures Rounding Limits <0.005 1 0.005-0.99 2 hundredths 1.0 – 9.9 2 tenths 10.0 – 99 2 units 100 and above 3 variable
Natural Flow Computations
St. Mary River Final Computations
The St. Mary River final natural flow computations reported in the annual IJC report are computed by the USGS using a Fortran 77 computer program. The rounding rules used in the program are as follows;
Input data – All reservoir storage or daily mean discharge data are entered in cfs-days. Entered data are stored to nearest 0.1 cfs-day. St. Mary Canal data are converted from m3/s to ft3/s prior to data entry.
Computations – Natural flow computations are made on a daily basis using daily value data stored to nearest 0.1 cfs-days. Computed flow values used to determine each countries share of the natural flow during the April 1 to October 31 irrigation season are truncated to a whole number (using AINT function) and decimal remainder’s are rounded up or down to nearest even number. During the non-irrigation season the 50/50 shares are computed using a similar routine except that alternate rounding is used to ensure fairness.
Output tables – All output data are rounded to the nearest integer.
J.5 2/12/2013
St. Mary River Interim Computations
Interim natural flow computations are performed during the irrigation season by USGS and WSC. The USGS uses same Fortran 77 algorithms described in previous section and WSC (Calgary office) uses a Microsoft (MS) Excel spreadsheet (StMary_div.xls) for the interim computations. The rounding arrays in spreadsheet are very similar to those used in the Fortran program with the only exception being the use of the MS Excel INT function to truncate data.
Milk River Final Computations
The Milk River natural flow computations reported in the annual IJC report are performed by a MS Excel computer program written and administered by WSC. The rounding rules used in the program are as follows;
Input data – All input values reflect a daily mean value and are entered using units of measurement associated with the recorded or reported field data. All input data are converted to dam3 using the appropriate conversion factor and are rounded to nearest 0.1 dam3 with hidden precision.
Computations - Natural flow computations are made on a daily basis using stored daily value data. Each computed daily value may contain some hidden precision and totals may not exactly equal the sum of the displayed values.
Output tables – All data are reported to the nearest 0.1 dam3.
Milk River Interim Computations
Interim natural flow computations are performed during the irrigation season using a MS Excel spreadsheet (IJCBeta2.25) written by the USGS.
Input data – Same rules as described above for final computations. The conversion factors used in this program are show in the following table.
Conversions Length 1 in = 25.40000000 mm 1 in = 2.54000000 cm 1 ft = 0.30480000 m 1 ft = 0.03048000 dam Volume 1 ft3 = 0.02831685 m3 1 ft3 = 0.00002832 dam3 1 acre-ft = 1.23348184 dam3 1 cfs-day = 2.44657555 dam3-day Rate 1 cfs = 0.02831685 cms
J.6 2/12/2013
Other 1 cfs/in = 0.09632187 dam3/mm 1 acre-ft = 43,560.00000000 ft3 1cfs-day = 86,400.00000000 ft3 1 cfs-day = 1.98347107 acre-ft 1 dam = 10.00000000 m 1 dam3 = 1,000.00000000 m
Computations – Same as final computations except that all values are rounded to the nearest 0.1 dam3 after each computation.
Output tables – All data are reported to the nearest 0.1 dam3.
Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River (Lodge Creek, Battle Creek, and Frenchman River)
The Lodge Creek, Battle Creek, and Frenchman River natural flow computations reported in the annual IJC report are determined using MS Excel spreadsheets specific for each basin. Final and interim computations are made using the same spreadsheet for each basin. The rounding rules used in each spreadsheet are the same. The rounding rules are as follows;
Input data – All input values reflect a daily mean value and are entered using units of measurement associated with the recorded or reported field data. All input data are converted to dam3 using the appropriate conversion factor and are rounded to nearest 1 dam3 with hidden precision.
Computations - Natural flow computations are made on a daily basis using stored daily value data. Each computed daily value may contain some hidden precision and totals may not exactly equal the sum of the displayed values.
Output tables – All data are reported to the nearest 1 dam3.
Historical Summaries
The rounding rules implemented in computations of the historical natural flow also vary. For example, St. Mary and Milk River long-term averages are computed based upon unrounded values while Lodge Creek, Battle Creek, and Frenchman River long-term averages are computed based upon values rounded to three significant figures.
J.7 2/12/2013
St. Mary and Milk River Historical Summary Tables
The St. Mary and Milk River natural flow computations have three separate historical summary tables (natural flow, Canadian share, United States share) associated with each basin. Each table lists the monthly mean discharge for each month during the irrigation season along with seasonal and annual runoff data (see example below).
The monthly mean discharge and annual runoff data are taken directly from the final metric natural flow computations (which have been rounded to the nearest 1 DAM3).
Example of St. Mary River historical summary table of natural flow Worksheet for Historical Summary of NATURAL FLOW of St Mary River at International Boundary
Runoff in DAM
Monthly Mean Discharge in DAM During Irrigation Season Non-Irrigation Irrigation For Year
Season Season April May June July August September October Nov. to Mar. Apr. to Oct. Nov. to Oct.
1991-92 1398 4083 4013 2395 1170 1125 1455 59163 478291 537454 1902-03 to 1991-92 128395 480389 719406 387327 166898 119064 109841 7988122 64484380 72472502 Ave. 90 Yrs. 1427 5338 7993 4304 1854 1323 1220 88757 716493 805250
The historical summary tables are reported in the Appendix A of the annual report as follows;
St. Mary River - Table 2 Milk River – Table 4
J.8 2/12/2013
Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River Historical Summary Tables
The Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River basins use one historical summary table for each basin. Each table lists the March to October computed natural flow, the Canadian and United States shares of the computed natural flow, and recorded flow at the boundary.
The Eastern Tributaries of the Milk River historical summary tables are presented in the Appendix A of the annual report as follows;
Lodge Creek – Table 11 Battle Creek – Table 13 Frenchman River – Table 15
Example of Lodge Creek historical summary table
TABLE 11
HISTORICAL SUMMARY OF MARCH TO OCTOBER COMPUTED NATURAL AND RECORDED FLOW LODGE CREEK AT INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY
(cubic decametres)
COMPUTED CANADIAN & RECORDED YEAR NATURAL FLOW U.S.A. SHARES FLOW
1950 17,900 8,950 16,600 1951 63,000 31,500 50,200 1952 161,000 80,500 147,000 1953 38,200 19,100 27,200 1954 13,000 6,500 7,620
. . . .
. . . . 2009 4,640 2,320 2,210 2010 41,300 20,650 23,000
Average 27,900 14,000 19,800 1950-2009
All values are obtained from the natural flow computations spreadsheet and have been rounded to three significant figures (no hidden precision).
J.9 2/12/2013
Annual Report
Main report - Discharge data are rounded to three significant figures in the narrative text. Discharge volumes are unrounded values and reported to the nearest integer in tables associated with the narrative text.
Appendix A - All natural flow computations data are shown as computed. All data in historical summary tables are rounded to three significant figures.
Appendix B – All data are rounded to accepted rules of significant figures each country uses for publication purposes.
J.10 2/12/2013
Proposed Significant Figures and Rounding Rules
The following rounding rules are recommended for use in the computation, reporting, and historical summary tables of all the St. Mary and Milk River basins. These rounding rules, if accepted by the Field Representatives to the Accredited Officers, will also be documented in the St. Mary-Milk River procedures manual.
Daily Value Computations
No change is recommended. Flow data furnished by reporting agencies will be subject to the “accepted rules of significant figures, format and similar publication requirements of each country” as specified in the “Procedural Guide for International Gauging Stations on Boundary Waters between Canada and the United States of America”.
Natural flow computations
No changes are recommended at this time. Issues with precision are relatively minor.
Historical Summaries
No changes required in the computation of the St. Mary and Milk River historical summaries.
It is recommended that the Lodge Creek, Battle Creek, and Frenchman River historical summaries implement the same rounding rules (nearest 1 DAM3) used in the St. Mary and Milk River historical summaries.
Annual Report
Main report – It is recommended that the following rounding rules be used in narrative text of the annual IJC report.
Significant figures and rounding limits for monthly and yearly means and average discharges Range of discharge Significant Figures Rounding Limits (in m3/s or ft3/s) <0.010 1 thousandths 0.01 – 0.099 2 thousandths 0.10 – 0.99 2 hundredths 1.0 – 9.99 3 hundredths 10.0 – 99.9 3 tenths 100 - 9,999 3 units 10,000 and above 4 variable
J.11 2/12/2013
Significant figures and rounding limits for monthly and yearly runoff Range of discharge Significant Figures Rounding Limits (in DAM3 or acre-feet) <0.10 1 hundredths 0.1 – 0.9 1 tenths 1.0 – 9.9 2 tenths 10.0 – 99 2 units 100 - 999 3 units 1,000 – 9,999 3 variable 10,000 and above 4 variable
All tables in the main report will continue to report data to the nearest DAM3 (or acre- foot).
Appendix A - All natural flow computations data are shown as computed. All data in historical summary tables are rounded using the rounding rules outlined above.
Appendix B – All data are rounded to accepted rules of significant figures each country uses for publication purposes.
Cited References Huberman, S., Slater, J.E., and Condes, A., 1985, Procedural guide for international gauging stations on boundary waters between Canada and the United States of America: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 85-329, 105 p.
Inland Waters Directorate, 1980, Manual of hydrometric data computation and publication procedures: Fifth Edition, Environment Canada, Inland Waters Directorate, Water Resources Branch, 51 p.
Novak, C.E., 1985, WRD data reports preparation guide: U.S. Geological Survey Open- File Report 85-480, 199 p.
J.12 2/12/2013
Procedures Manual
Beginning in 2013 the St. Mary-Milk Rivers procedures manual will be published in Adobe Acrobat Portable Document Format (PDF), a univeral file format that preserves the fonts, images, and layout of source documents.
J.13 2/12/2013
APPENDIX K
CONVERSION FACTORS
K.1 1/23/2013 FACTORS FOR CONVERSION BETWEEN INCH-POUND UNITS AND INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM (SI) UNITS
The following list of often-used conversions of measure gives the relationship between imperial (yard/pound) units and the International System of Units (SI) (metric), and includes other convenient equivalents of measure.*
1 inch = 2.54 cm (centimetres) 1 centimetre = 0.393 700 8 in. (inches)
1 foot = 0.304 8 m (metres) 1 metre = 3.280 840 ft. (feet)
1 yard = 0.914 4 m (metres) 1 metre = 1.093 613 yd. (yards)
1 statute mile = 1.609 344 km (kilometres) 1 kilometre = 0.621 371 2 mi (miles)
1 square mile = 2.589 988 km2 (square kilometres) 1 square kilometre = 0.386 102 2 mi.2 (square miles)
1 hectare = 10 000 m2 (square metres) 1 square kilometre = 100 ha (hectares)
1 acre = 0.404 685 6 ha (hectares) 1 hectare = 2.471 054 ac. (acres)
1 acre-foot = 1.233 5 dam3 (cubic decametres) 1 cubic decametre = 0.810 701 2 ac.-ft. (acre-feet)
1 cubic foot per second = 0.028 317 m3/s (cubic metre per second) 1 cubic metre per second = 35.315 cfs (cubic feet per second)
* Applicable listings conform to the Canadian Metric Practice Guide CAN3-Z234.1-79
K.2 1/23/2013
APPENDIX L
MAPS
1. St. Mary and Milk River Drainage Basins 2. Lodge Creek Basin in Canada 3. Battle Creek Basin in Canada 4. Frenchman River Basin in Canada 5. Schematic Map of St. Mary River Basin 6. Schematic Map of Milk River Basin 7. Schematic Map of Lodge Creek Basin in Canada 8. Schematic Map of Battle Creek Basin in Canada 9. Schematic Map of Frenchman River in Canada
APPENDIX M
MEMORANDA
L.1 2/24/2005 Agriculture and Environment Canada Agri-food Canada Water Survey Division
Memorandum of Understanding (Authorizing Access to AAFC Lands for Water Monitoring)
Whereas the Water Survey Division of Environment Canada (WSD) is charged with the monitoring and apportioning of international waters and many of the monitoring stations reside on Crown land with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (PFRA) being the principle custodian of the land.
And Whereas Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada desires to cooperate with Environment Canada in performing their duties.
Therefore, the personnel of Water Survey Division of Environment Canada are granted permission to access the monitoring sites (attached as Schedule “A”) for the purpose of monitoring the water, but shall be subject to the following conditions.
1) Identification shall be made available to Agriculture and Agri-Food employees, if requested. 2) WSD personnel shall endeavor to contact the appropriate Pasture/Project Manager prior to each visit. A list of contacts is attached as Schedule “B”. 3) Access to the property is for the sole purpose of monitoring waters. 4) WSD personnel shall endeavor to stay on defined trails. 5) WSD employees shall close livestock gates if they were found in a closed position. 6) Fire protection measures will be taken as directed by the Pasture Manager. 7) Environment Canada may be held responsible for soil damage, trail damage and/or the injury or loss of livestock, if the damage and/or loss was the result of WSD operations and/or negligence. 8) Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada shall be consulted on construction projects. 9) Materials and garbage shall be removed after completion of all projects. 10) This Memorandum of Understanding may be terminated with advance notification given by either party.
The monitoring of international waters is a joint activity between Canada and the United States. Where it is desirable or mandated that the United States Geological Survey (USGS) personnel require access to monitoring sites, they shall be granted the same privileges as Environment Canada personnel, subject to the same conditions stated.
Signed on behalf of the Minister of Environment this _____ day of ______, A.D. 20__.
Signed on behalf of the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food this _____ day of ______A.D. 20__.
______Don H. Sweet Russell Boals Manager, Real Property Section Manager, Water Survey Division Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada PNR, Environment Canada
L.2 2/24/2005