Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) for the Preservation
209
The IWRM approach portrayed in following paragraphs can be implemented
by acceptance of all or some of the components of the full-scale solution shown
schematically in Fig. 5. This figure illustrates some of the possible major
components of the regional management program, including:
• Improving the quality of the treated effluents of Hutchinson-Nickerson by
diverting industrial wastewater of high salinity to a dedicated wastewater
treatment plant and diverting these effluents directly into the Arkansas
River. Wastewater recycling should be implemented in some industrial
plants, based on engineering and economic feasibility criteria.
• Injection of treated wastewater along the Arkansas River corridor of GMD2
to create a local barrier to salt penetration beneath the river, with or without
modification of the irrigation regime.
• Use of treated wastewater, directly or after mixing with comparatively fresh
water, to replace groundwater extraction for irrigation or industrial use in the
Hutchinson-Nickerson corridor. Treated effluent use by local consumers
(especially industrial and agricultural) could reduce the gradient enabling
northward flow of saline water.
• Use of treated wastewater for augmentation of the freshwater supply
available to the wildlife refuge, mitigating the effects of streamflow
reduction by groundwater pumping.
• Injection of treated wastewater into the deep aquifer of northern Stafford
County to replace a similar amount of saltwater extracted. Extracted salt
water could be discharged to the Rattlesnake Creek, if necessary with
dilution by some portion of the wastewater to a quality suitable for
enhancing the wildlife refuge.
The last option (or component) outlined above is by far the most elaborate, but
it promises the greatest benefits. By pumping salt water from the deep aquifer in
primary salt-water intrusion areas and injecting wastewater to replace it, the
salinity of the aquifer water will be reduced over time even if irrigation pumping
continues at present levels. By managing the relative volumes of groundwater and
wastewater discharged to Rattlesnake Creek as a function of flow and salinity, the
water supply to the wildlife refuge could be increased while keeping it within
acceptable salinity limits. Enhancing salt extraction and stream discharge in the
Stafford County area will also protect and improve the quality of the groundwater
flowing eastward into the region of concern for the municipal supplies (Quinodoz
and Buddemeier 1997).
As a result of agricultural practices, much of the fresh groundwater in northern
Stafford County exceeds the drinking water standard for nitrate concentration.
Injection of treated wastewater there, or its direct diversion to the Quivira National
Wildlife Refuge, will thus not result in a net degradation of present water or
environmental quality in this regard (Rubin et al. 2000).
209
The IWRM approach portrayed in following paragraphs can be implemented
by acceptance of all or some of the components of the full-scale solution shown
schematically in Fig. 5. This figure illustrates some of the possible major
components of the regional management program, including:
• Improving the quality of the treated effluents of Hutchinson-Nickerson by
diverting industrial wastewater of high salinity to a dedicated wastewater
treatment plant and diverting these effluents directly into the Arkansas
River. Wastewater recycling should be implemented in some industrial
plants, based on engineering and economic feasibility criteria.
• Injection of treated wastewater along the Arkansas River corridor of GMD2
to create a local barrier to salt penetration beneath the river, with or without
modification of the irrigation regime.
• Use of treated wastewater, directly or after mixing with comparatively fresh
water, to replace groundwater extraction for irrigation or industrial use in the
Hutchinson-Nickerson corridor. Treated effluent use by local consumers
(especially industrial and agricultural) could reduce the gradient enabling
northward flow of saline water.
• Use of treated wastewater for augmentation of the freshwater supply
available to the wildlife refuge, mitigating the effects of streamflow
reduction by groundwater pumping.
• Injection of treated wastewater into the deep aquifer of northern Stafford
County to replace a similar amount of saltwater extracted. Extracted salt
water could be discharged to the Rattlesnake Creek, if necessary with
dilution by some portion of the wastewater to a quality suitable for
enhancing the wildlife refuge.
The last option (or component) outlined above is by far the most elaborate, but
it promises the greatest benefits. By pumping salt water from the deep aquifer in
primary salt-water intrusion areas and injecting wastewater to replace it, the
salinity of the aquifer water will be reduced over time even if irrigation pumping
continues at present levels. By managing the relative volumes of groundwater and
wastewater discharged to Rattlesnake Creek as a function of flow and salinity, the
water supply to the wildlife refuge could be increased while keeping it within
acceptable salinity limits. Enhancing salt extraction and stream discharge in the
Stafford County area will also protect and improve the quality of the groundwater
flowing eastward into the region of concern for the municipal supplies (Quinodoz
and Buddemeier 1997).
As a result of agricultural practices, much of the fresh groundwater in northern
Stafford County exceeds the drinking water standard for nitrate concentration.
Injection of treated wastewater there, or its direct diversion to the Quivira National
Wildlife Refuge, will thus not result in a net degradation of present water or
environmental quality in this regard (Rubin et al. 2000).