Development of a Catchment Contaminant Cycle Model End-User Survey: Preliminary Results

2. Development of a Catchment Contaminant Cycle ModelEnd-User Survey: Preliminary Results Lachlan Newham 28 October 2003

3. Presentation Outline • LWA project description • Survey format and delivery • Preliminary results • Implications for model development

4. LWA Project Description • Models required to assist end-users identify sources, pathways, interactions and impacts of contaminants • Project aim - development of a contaminant cycle model, readily accessible to, and understandable by, end-users for application in large catchments • Collaborative project - CSIRO Land and Water, CRC Catchment Hydrology and iCAM, Australian National University • Builds on existing modelling approaches e.g. EMSS, CatchMODS and SedNet

5. Project Description • Case studies in Murrumbidgee and Brisbane River catchments • Involvement of end-users in the model development process is key to its success and subsequent adoption • End-user consultation activities • Build on previous experience in development of associated water quality models • Catchment manager workshops in case study catchments • End-user survey

6. End-User Survey • Attempt to gain end-user input from large audience • On-line survey • Ease of collection and data analysis • Questions such as: • How models are used by decision makers • Which pollutants should be modelled • Which types of management interventions should be included • Which ecological and habitat values indicators are of interest • How results are communicated

8. Preliminary Results: Background • 175 fully completed responses • 200 substantially complete responses • 67% primarily use models in their work • 49% for water quality improvement

9. Preliminary Results: Contaminants • Low relative importance for bedload sediment (16%) and thermal pollution (13%) • Heavy metals suggested by many respondents as important

10. Preliminary Results: Management Interventions • Evaporation basins (6%) and groundwater pumping (15%) considered or little importance for inclusion in contaminant cycle models

11. Preliminary Results: Ecological Indicators • Water birds (13%)

12. Preliminary Results: Technical Detail • Preference for models running at daily or greater time intervals • Preference for representative climate driving sequences, little interest in stochastic sequences

13. Preliminary Results: Communicating Results • Preference for results to be expressed in lumped measures e.g. annual total loads • Preference for results to be available for subcatchment and stream reach units

14. Implications • Important additional information has been captured in the survey… • Important to include as much knowledge gained from survey results into contaminant cycle model • Fundamental structure of proposed model is supported by results of survey

15. Future Contaminant Cycle Model • Features of resulting contaminant cycle model • Simulation of suspended sediment, nutrients and salt • Node-link structure • Operate at daily time intervals to incorporate qualitative ecological response • Scenario based incorporating land use change, flow regulation, point source loading and riparian zone management options • http://www.adsurveys.com.au/csiro/index.cfm?SID=43