WISCONSIN GEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY SURVEY The 2016 Groundwater Flow Model for Dane County, Wisconsin Bulletin 110 • 2016 Michael J. Parsen Kenneth R. Bradbury Randall J. Hunt Daniel T. Feinstein Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey Kenneth R. Bradbury, Director and State Geologist WGNHS staff Research associates William G. Batten, geologist Jean M. Bahr, University of Evan R. Larson, University of Eric C. Carson, geologist Wisconsin–Madison Wisconsin–Platteville Peter M. Chase, geotechnician Mark A. Borchardt, USDA– John A. Luczaj, University of Agricultural Research Station Wisconsin–Green Bay Linda G. Deith, editor Philip E. Brown, University of J. Brian Mahoney, University of Anna C. Fehling, hydrogeologist Wisconsin–Madison Wisconsin–Eau Claire Madeline B. Gotkowitz, hydrogeologist Charles W. Byers, University of Shaun Marcott, University of Brad T. Gottschalk, archivist Wisconsin–Madison (emeritus) Wisconsin–Madison Grace E. Graham, hydrogeologist William F. Cannon, U.S. Geological Survey Joseph A. Mason, University David J. Hart, hydrogeologist Michael Cardiff, University of of Wisconsin–Madison Irene D. Lippelt, Wisconsin–Madison Daniel J. Masterpole, Chippewa water resources specialist William S. Cordua, University Co. Land Conservation Dept. Sushmita S. Lotlikar, of Wisconsin–River Falls David M. Mickelson, University of administrative manager Robert H. Dott, Jr., University of Wisconsin–Madison (emeritus) Stephen M. Mauel, GIS specialist Wisconsin–Madison (emeritus) Donald G. Mikulic, M. Carol McCartney, outreach manager Charles P. Dunning, Illinois State Geological Survey Michael J. Parsen, hydrogeologist U.S. Geological Survey William N. Mode, University of Wisconsin–Oshkosh Jill E. Pongetti, office manager Daniel T. Feinstein, U.S. Geological Survey Maureen A. Muldoon, University J. Elmo Rawling III, geologist Michael N. Fienen, of Wisconsin–Oshkosh Caroline M.R. Rose, GIS specialist U.S. Geological Survey Beth L. Parker, University of Guelph Kathy Campbell Roushar, GIS specialist Timothy J. Grundl, University of Robert E. Pearson, Peter R. Schoephoester, GIS specialist Wisconsin–Milwaukee Wisconsin Dept. of Transportation Aaron N. Smetana, system administrator Nelson R. Ham, St. Norbert College Kenneth W. Potter, University Val L. Stanley, geologist Paul R. Hanson, of Wisconsin–Madison Esther K. Stewart, geologist University of Nebraska–Lincoln Todd W. Rayne, Hamilton College Carolyn M. Streiff, geophysicist Karen G. Havholm, University Daniel D. Reid, of Wisconsin–Eau Claire Wisconsin Dept. of Transportation Jay Zambito, geologist Randy J. Hunt, U.S. Geological Survey Randall J. Schaetzl, and approximately 15 graduate and Michigan State University undergraduate student workers John L. Isbell, University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee Allan F. Schneider, University of Emeritus staff Mark D. Johnson, Wisconsin–Parkside (emeritus) University of Gothenburg Madeline E. Schreiber, Virginia Tech John W. Attig, geologist Joanne L. Kluessendorf, Susan K. Swanson, Beloit College Bruce A. Brown, geologist Weis Earth Science Museum Kent M. Syverson, University Thomas J. Evans, geologist George J. Kraft, Central Wisconsin of Wisconsin–Eau Claire Ronald G. Hennings, hydrogeologist Groundwater Center Lucas Zoet, University of Frederick W. Madison, soil scientist Wisconsin–Madison Stanley A. Nichols, biologist Deborah L. Patterson, GIS specialist Roger M. Peters, subsurface geologist James M. Robertson, geologist The Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey also maintains collaborative relationships with a number of local, state, regional, and federal agencies and organizations regarding educational outreach and a broad range of natural resource issues. Bulletin 110 n 2016 The 2016 Groundwater Flow Model for Dane County, Wisconsin Michael J. Parsen Kenneth R. Bradbury Randall J. Hunt Daniel T. Feinstein Suggested citation: Parsen, M.J., Bradbury, K.R., Hunt, R.J., and Feinstein, D.T., 2016, The 2016 groundwater flow model for Dane County, Wisconsin: Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey Bulletin 110, 56 p. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Published by and available from: Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey 3817 Mineral Point Road n Madison, Wisconsin 53705-5100 608.263.7389 n www.WisconsinGeologicalSurvey.org Kenneth R. Bradbury, Director and State Geologist ISSN: 0375-8265 ISBN: 978-0-88169-992-0 Cover photos Front, title page: Aerial photo of Madison, © Jeff Miller / UW–Madison Back: Pheasant Branch Conservancy, © Dick Lathrop Inside back: Lake Wingra, © Linda Deith Contents Abstract . 1 Conceptualization of the Steady-state model calibration . 30 groundwater system . 16 Steady-state calibration Introduction . 2 targets . 30 Scope . 2 Three-dimensional model Steady-state calibration construction and simulation parameters . 32 Setting. 4 of the groundwater flow system 18 Steady-state calibration Objectives. 4 results. 34 Model grid . 18 Important features Transient model calibration . 39 Model construction . 18 of the new model . 4 Transient calibration targets . 39 Hydrostratigraphic units. 18 Model distribution and use . 5 Transient stress periods . 40 Layering approach and Acknowledgments . 5 treatment of pinchouts . 18 Transient calibration parameters . 41 Unlithified materials. 22 Study methods . 6 Transient calibration results . 41 Bedrock units . 22 Review of previous studies . 6 Bedding-plane fractures . 23 Model results . 44 Location and identification High-conductivity zone Model solution and numerical of public and private wells . 6 near Fish and Crystal Lakes . 23 mass balance . 44 Geophysical logging . 6 Boundary conditions. 23 Comparison of 2010 and Water-use survey and Streams . 23 predevelopment simulations . 44 data compilation . 6 Lakes . 24 Water levels and drawdown . 44 Stream and spring flow Springs . 24 Mass balance and flow to measurements . 7 Specified-head boundaries. 24 surface water. 48 Recharge estimation . 7 No-flow boundaries . 24 Demonstration of transient Hydrostratigraphy . 8 model response . 50 Sources and sinks of water . 24 Numerical simulation methods. 8 Recharge . 24 Model limitations . 52 Wastewater treatment Overview . 52 Geology, hydrostratigraphy, discharges . 26 and hydrology of Dane County . 9 Groundwater withdrawals . 26 Limitations related to Quaternary geology and discretization . 52 hydrostratigraphy . 9 Hydraulic properties of the Limitations related to Bedrock geology and groundwater flow system . 27 model stability . 53 hydrostratigraphy . 9 Hydraulic conductivity and Limitations related to a lack of Bedding-plane fractures . 12 storage . 27 hydrogeologic knowledge . 53 Fish and Crystal Lakes. 53 Surface-water features. 12 Parameterization of unlithified Lakes and wetlands . 13 material properties. 27 Parameter uncertainty . 53 Rivers and streams. 14 Parameterization of bedrock Streamflow and lake level along the Yahara River . 53 Springs . 14 properties . 29 Wetland drainage . 54 Water use and wastewater Parameterization of streambed discharge . 15 and lakebed properties . 29 Summary . 54 Model calibration . 30 Literature cited . 55 Calibration strategy . 30 The 2016 Groundwater Flow Model for Dane County, Wisconsin 25. Comparison of changes in streamflow between predevelopment and 2010 conditions . 51 26. Transient drawdown simulation for a hypothetical well near Story Creek in southern Dane County . 51 27. Detailed results for the hypothetical well showing drawdown for the creek, spring, and pumped well. 52 Spring Harbor Spring Tables 1. Hydraulic properties of hydro- Sue Swanson stratigraphic units used in the Figures model . 28 2. Conversion between map units 1. Location and extent of the 14. Histograms of hydraulic defined by Clayton and Attig Dane County model . 3 conductivity for the Wonewoc (1997) and hydrogeologic (layer 9) and Mount Simon 2. Bedrock stratigraphy and materials in model layers 1 and 2. 29 corresponding layers in the 1996 (layer 12) aquifers. 36 3. Steady-state calibration and 2016 groundwater models. 10 15. Steady-state flow calibration target list. 30 3. Thickness and extent of the results . 37 4. Simulated lakes and calibrated Eau Claire aquitard . 11 16. Calibrated transmissivity leakance values. 38 4. Major hydrologic features distribution for layer 9 5. Steady-state mass balance in Dane County. 13 (Wonewoc aquifer) . 38 summary. 44 5. Conceptual model of the 17. Precipitation, water levels, 6. Simulated predevelopment and groundwater system . 17 and pumping during the 2012 calibration period . 39 2010 streamflows at selected 6. Extents and elevations for sites in Dane County . 49 key model layer surfaces . 19 18. Locations of all transient calibration targets . 40 7. Simulated predevelopment and 7. Model layer thicknesses 2010 spring flows at principal 19. Transient calibration results for key model layers . 20 springs in Dane County . 50 for selected well targets. 42 8. Hydrostratigraphic cross sections across Dane County . 21 20. Transient calibration results Appendices for selected flow and lake-level 9. Distribution of unlithified targets . 43 Appendices are provided in an Excel file. materials and near-surface rock in model layers 1 and 2 . 22 21. Simulated steady-state results 1. Example geophysical log under predevelopment 2. Wastewater treatment plant 10. Location of all steady-state conditions (no pumping) . 45 calibration targets . 25 discharges included in the model 22. Simulated steady-state results