Hardware Ranch

Hardware Ranch is a wildlife management area which was developed to aid in feeding the Elk that come down from higher elevations for the winter to feed. The usual habitat and feeding area for the elk in the winter was Cache Valley but due to the development of the area it became necessary to provide other areas where the elk could survive the winters. Hay is grown on the Ranch to feed the elk. Studies are also conducted on the Ranch to better understand these animals and enhance the ability to help them thrive.

Education is also provided to the public about the elk and the surrounding area. A program has been set up for schools and the general public that visit the Ranch. There are different programs that are available. Displays and other educational tools are also set up at the visitor center for all public to view and learn about the ranch and the animals that populate it.

Marni Lee, assistant manager in charge of education at Hardware Ranch, had requested maps of the Ranch which would provide three services. The first is to help in the ongoing educational program at the ranch for all who visit. The second is for information about the area which would be helpful to those running the Ranch. The last service is that of good advertisement for the ranch and what it has to offer. ArcGIS is the most powerful tool available to provide these services but is not available to those at Hardware Ranch.

This report is a joint effort and written in conjunction with two other reports written by Wade Goodridge and Ryan Christensen. These services will be accomplished through a joint effort of all three projects.

Objectives

The objective of this project is to gather general information about the watershed that feeds the Blacksmith Fork River which runs through the main area of Hardware Ranch. Maps are to be created for the education program at the Ranch that illustrate these findings and can be used to educate the public about the information.

The other objectives were focused on gaining experience in creating meaningful maps in ArcGIS starting from the base level up. The intention was to get data not only from the internet but to gain the experience of gathering data personally and bringing that data into GIS correctly.

Data Gathered

Data for the area was found in many different places. Topographical maps and the DEM data were found through the Utah AGRC website¹

Land ownership maps and NHD HUC12 watershed boundary maps for the Bear River region were taken from the Bear River Information websight².

NHD data and feature class files were taken from the Horizon-Systems website³.

Stream gauge data was pulled from the USGS website⁴.

Precipitation data was pulled from NRCS website through snotel⁵.

GPS surveying equipment was used to take actual data on the Hardware Ranch meadow.

Once all the data was gathered it could then be brought into GIS and analyzed.

Hardware Ranch Boundary

To start to create the necessary maps it was necessary to define the Hardware Ranch boundaries within GIS. This was done using the land ownership shape file. This shape file was placed over the topographical map of the area. The ownership polygons showed an area which outlined Hardware Ranch and this was confirmed by the management at the Ranch to be the correct boundaries. This boundary was exported to its own shape file for easy use in GIS.

Figure 1: Hardware Ranch Boundaries.

Map Creation

Elevation Map

With the appropriate boundary assigned for hardware ranch the appropriate DEM files could be added to the map that would correspond to Hardware Ranch. The highest and lowest elevations in the Hardware Ranch boundaries were found and the symbology boundaries were changed to match these points so a more descriptive map of Hardware Ranch could be created and is shown in Figure 2. This creates a map that expresses the elevation changes better within the Ranch Boundaries themselves. The highest Elevation within the Hardware Ranch boundaries was found to be about 7,095 ft and the lowest elevation.

Figure 2: Hardware Ranch Elevation MAp

This Elevation Raster was also used to verify the GPS data collected in the field. There were some discrepancies in these elevations and the GPS data. It was discovered that there were some of the points taken by GPS that hadn’t come in right. Those points that had come in right were within plus or minus 2 meters. The elevations from the elevation raster were used on all analysis of the irrigation ditch by Ryan Christensen based off of this finding.

Watershed Map

NHD HUC12 watershed boundaries within the Bear River Basin were pulled into GIS to determine what watersheds contribute to the Hardware Ranch area. Once the contributing areas were determined the streams and rivers were brought in using NHDflowlines for the area. The flowlines that were contained within the boundary of the watersheds were selected and a shape file was created containing just those streams and rivers. NHD data was then joined with the flow lines to help to create and to enhance the use of the map for analysis and possible display at hardware ranch which is shown in Figure 3. Within this particular watershed there is 149 miles of streams and rivers. The drainage area of the watershed is 153 square miles.

Figure 3: Hardware Ranch Watershed Map. The Watershed which contributes to Hardware Ranch Area.

Spring Map

Another map that is valuable information for Hardware Ranch is this map of the springs located within the watershed. Data could not be found which described the flow from these springs but the author will continue searching to provide that data. This map will also be given in the form of a topographical map which management can use to better locate the springs in the area. It is too large of an area to present in this format. They will be able to search the map with Mapwindow.

Figure 4: Springs located within the watershed.

Data Analysis

Mean Annual Flow

Finding the mean annual flow is an easy task when there is a stream gauge on the river. USGS has put together data from years back for stream flow. The data for the stream gauge located on the Blacksmith Fork River is shown in Table 1. It gives the data for the flow in the river from 1915 to 2005 although there were some years left out of the data. The mean annual flow calculated from these flows is about 126 cfs. The difficulty lies in the fact that this stream gauge is fed by more than just the drainage area that covers Hardware Ranch. The Drainage area for the stream gauge is listed as about 263 square miles and as reported above the drainage area for Hardware Ranch is about 153 square miles. It can be seen clearly on the map that there is another major river that is a tributary to the Blacksmith Fork River but is not included in the Hardware Ranch boundary.

Table 1: USGS Mean Annual Flow Data for Blacksmith Fork River⁴.

USGS DATA
Year	Mean Annual Flow	Year	Mean Annual Flow	Year	Mean Annual Flow
	cfs		cfs		cfs
1915	93.9	1945	99.3	1974	175.1
1916	164.6	1946	172.7	1975	161.1
1917	205.1	1947	112.6	1976	144.6
1919	102.3	1948	139.8	1977	70.7
1920	151.3	1949	136	1978	119
1921	212.9	1950	192.7	1979	108.6
1922	194.7	1951	189.1	1980	149.1
1923	190	1952	203.6	1981	85.5
1924	128	1953	125.7	1982	179.6
1925	119.3	1954	96.4	1983	212.3
1926	92.7	1955	96.2	1984	294.7
1927	121.7	1956	149.5	1985	196
1928	125.4	1957	141.1	1986	268.2
1929	122.3	1958	134.1	1987	122.1
1930	92	1959	95.2	1988	79.9
1931	59.7	1960	92.3	1989	82.5
1932	141.2	1961	60.7	1990	59.6
1933	103.2	1962	117	1991	67.4
1934	58.2	1963	88.6	1992	54.2
1935	72.2	1964	101.6	1993	118
1936	151.8	1965	156.9	1994	88.1
1937	120.2	1966	113.7	1995	123.2
1938	121.9	1967	139.5	1996	139.1
1939	87.1	1968	117.6	2001	73
1940	62.6	1969	131.7	2002	68.1
1941	53	1970	111.3	2003	65.1
1942	62.3	1971	223.1	2004	57.2
1943	117.1	1972	236.3	2005	122.3
1944	83.5	1973	148.6
				average	125.8

The NHD data which was joined to the NHDflowlines include calculations for mean annual flow for each stream segment. There are two methods used for these calculations called MAFLOWU and MAFLOWV. MAVFLOWU is calculated using the Unit Runoff Method which incorporates mainly the catchment area estimates along with unit runoff estimates for the catchments involved. MAFLOWV uses the Vogel Method to compute mean annual flow. This method incorporates the drainage area, precipitation, and temperature data from the given area. It is not possible however to use the Vogel method on every stream segment and therefore some streams in the system are left without values. (USGS NHDPUS_User Guide 2006)

Often times these values aren’t as accurate as was desired for this study. MAFLOWU predicted a mean annual flow of 50 cfs and MAFLOWV predicted 157 cfs. As is shown in table 1 the mean annual flow for this stream gauge is about 126 cfs. The Vogel method seems to be a little more accurate in this case. The mean annual flow calculated for the stream segment leaving the Hardware Ranch watershed boundaries give values of 32 and 114 cfs from the Unit Runoff Method and Vogel Method respectively. For the tributary entering the river downstream of Hardware Ranch these values are 16.5 and 60 cfs. Either method calculates that 66% of the flow come from the Blacksmith Fork River running from Hardware Ranch and 34% to the tributary. The total drainage areas for both the Hardware Ranch Watershed and the tributary which feed the gauge were calculated and the percentages of these areas are about 60% to Hardware Ranch and 40% to the tributary.

Because each of the methods used to estimate mean annual flow take more than drainage area into account, for example temperature, precipitation and runoff data, it was decided to 66% of the flow feeding the USGS stream gauge to Hardware Ranch runoff. Using this assumption predicts the mean annual runoff from the Hardware Ranch area to be about 82 cfs.

Precipitation

Precipitation data was taken from a Snotel station at Bug Lake. Bug Lake is located very close to the Hardware Ranch Watershed as shown in Figure 5. At an elevation of about 7,950 feet, it is assumed that the precipitation recorded here will be similar to the precipitation within the Hardware Ranch Watershed. Snotel began recording precipitation data at Bug Lake in 1979 and is still currently collecting data. Yearly precipitation data was taken from Snotel and interesting facts noted about the area as they were compared to the runoff that occurred in the streams due to this precipitation. For the years that both precipitation data and stream flow data were available, the stream flow data was converted to inches of water per year based on the drainage area for which the USGS stream gauge collects data. It could then be determined how much of the precipitation contributes to actual stream flow and how much either evaporates, infiltrates into the soil, or is used in evapotranspiration processes. This comparison for the years available is shown in Table 2. the relationship of percentage precipitation contributing to runoff and total runoff that year is presented in figure 6.

Figure 5: SNOTEL precipitation data site at Bug Lake and its relation to Hardware Ranch Watershed.

Table 2: Relation of precipitation data to stream flow data. Streamflow data taken from USGS⁴ and Precipitation Data was taken from SNOTEL on NRCS website⁵.

USGS DATA			SNOTEL DATA
Blacksmith Fork River			BUG LAKE
		Precipitation			Percent
	Mean Annual Flow	Contributing to River Flow	Precipitation	Difference	Contributing to River Flow
Year	cfs	in/year	in/year	in/year	%
1979	108.6	14.5	28.0	13.5	51.8%
1980	149.1	19.9	35.1	15.2	56.8%
1981	85.5	11.4	20.6	9.2	55.5%
1982	179.6	24.0	47.5	23.5	50.5%
1983	212.3	28.4	36.5	8.1	77.8%
1984	294.7	39.4	39.1	-0.3	100.8%
1985	196.0	26.2	29.9	3.7	87.6%
1986	268.2	35.9	44.5	8.6	80.6%
1987	122.1	16.3	22.9	6.6	71.3%
1988	79.9	10.7	22.2	11.5	48.1%
1989	82.5	11.0	27.3	16.3	40.4%
1990	59.6	8.0	22.2	14.2	35.9%
1991	67.4	9.0	30.8	21.8	29.3%
1993	118.0	15.8	35.4	19.6	44.6%
1994	88.1	11.8	22.3	10.5	52.8%
1995	123.2	16.5	37.4	20.9	44.0%
1996	139.1	18.6	31.7	13.1	58.7%
2001	73.0	9.8	19.3	9.5	50.6%
2002	68.1	9.1	24.2	15.1	37.6%
2003	65.1	8.7	23.8	15.1	36.6%
2004	57.2	7.6	27.1	19.5	28.2%
2005	122.3	16.3	33.1	16.8	49.4%
average	125.8	16.8	30.0	13.2	56.0%

Utah’s climate is one that fluctuates from years of drought to flooding. On average the precipitation in this area is 30 inches per year. The table shows that on average 56% of the precipitation acts as runoff in the streams and rivers. This value excludes the data in 1984 which shows that all precipitation that fell that year contributed to the runoff. This situation was considered unlikely. 46% of the flow then, either contributes to evaporation, evapotranspiration, or infiltration to groundwater. There were no calculations performed to try to quantify where the water is going, but it is the opinion (which is in no way an expert opinion) of the author that because of the seasons of drought the soil becomes dry and the groundwater resources are depleted. It appears that after there is a period of drought the amount of precipitation that contributes to runoff is depleted and slowly rise as more precipitation is received within the watershed. The relationship of percentage precipitation contributing to runoff and total runoff that year is presented in Figure 7. In a report on the drought in Utah that recently occurred in Utah Wilkowske et al. 2003 explain this process. The aquifers are generally filled with the precipitation from the higher elevations in the mountains. When the precipitation is below average these aquifers don’t receive the recharge they usually do. Because of the higher temperatures and the lacking moisture the soil dries up on the surface. As a result, more water from the precipitation is used to recharge the aquifer and the overland flow is decreased. Until the recharge returns to normal conditions the flow in the streams will be depleated. (Wilkowske et al. 2003)

Figure 6: Relationship of % Precipitation contributing to runoff to actual Mean Annual Flow in the year.

Flow in stream through Elk Meadow

Hardware Ranch had a desire to know what flows they might expect in a small channel that runs close to the Elk Meadow (see Figure 7). This channel does not have water running year round but does have flow in the spring runoff season. The contributing precipitation is due mostly to the snow melt runoff. The flow will be calculated with the average values that have been found for the area. GIS was used to estimate the flows that Hardware Ranch might see in this channel. Using Arc Hydro tools the streams in the area were delineated by a Flow accumulation Grid. To be able to see the stream in GIS to get the accumulating cell data, the symbology had to be adjusted to allow for smaller grid accumulation values Using an identity tool the drainage area of this spring was determined to be 0.73 square miles. If it is also assumed that 56% of the annual precipitation contributes to the runoff in the channel then 16.8 in/year of precipitation makes up the stream flow for this channel. This would result in a mean annual flow of 0.9 cfs which would flow through the stream. Those at Hardware Ranch must take into consideration this stream is seasonal and doesn’t always have water flowing through it. The water would flow during the runoff months which are roughly from April to the end of June.

Figure 7: Stream which runs through Elk Meadow and the flow accumulation grid delineation of that stream.

Education

With these maps and the information provided Hardware Ranch can now use these materials for the education of those that visit. Hydrology is obviously not the center of attention at the ranch. The animals have that role, but learning about the surrounding watershed is something that can supplement the educational experience already provided. Not all of this information will be used in public education but will be able to aid those that make the ranch function. The ranch is attempting at the moment to create wetlands in the meadow to provide habitat and water the animals. This information could be useful in this endeavor.

Ideas have been given to Mrs. Lee on how to use this some of the information to aide in the education of the children. These ideas were presented to her and she can use them as she desires. This ideas can be viewed on a couple of slides in a powerpoint presentation used to present this project. She will better equipped than I to decide what will benefit the children and public the most. She has the freedom to use all this information to help in the education process in whatever way she sees fit.

Further Research

Much more information could be provided to Hardware Ranch that would be helpful to them. In Depth studies on the hydrology in the area could provide them with valuable information. Temperature data would be very useful in interpreting the data they have received through this project. Soil types and land use data would help in the research to how much water is taken in by the soil and used by the plant life in the area. All this information could also be useful to the studies that are performed on the Elk. It would be interesting to map the migration patterns of the Elk and other animals in the area in GIS and analyze the behavior of the animals.

Conclusions

Maps were provided of the watershed of the area for display and information. Information on the rivers and streams in the area was gathered and presented to the Ranch Managers.

The drainage area of the watershed was calculated to be 153 mi².

The length of rivers and streams in the watershed were calculated to be 149 miles.

The mean annual flow out of the watershed which encompasses Hardware Ranch was estimated to be about 82 cfs.

Mean annual precipitation in the area was given to be about 30 inches/year.

On average 56% of this precipitation contributed to the runoff in the rivers.

The Mean annual flow of the stream running by the meadow was estimated to be 0.9 cfs.

References

1. Utah Automated Geographic Reference Center, http://agrc.its.state.ut.us/., October 30, 2006

2. Bear River Watershed Information System. http://www.bearriverinfo.org/, October 30, 2006

3. Horizon-Systems Company, http://www.horizon-systems.com/nhdplus/, November 3, 2006

4. USGS National Water Information System http://water.usgs.gov/usa/nwis/, November 16, 2006

5. SNOTEL, http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/, November 16, 2006

Chris D. Wilkowske, Chris D., Allen, David V., and Phillips Jeff V., Drought Conditions in Utah During 1999-2002: A Historical Perspective, http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-037-03/, Dec 5, 2006.

USGS, NHDPlus User Guide, http://www.horizon-systems.com/nhdplus/data/NHDPLUS_UserGuide.pdf , Dec 5, 2006.