Achieving the District’s Groundwater Conservation Management Goals

Groundwater Conservation Districts in Texas are required to establish goals in a comprehensive 50-year management plan and adopt rules to ensure those goals are met. An important part of the management plan is the adoption of Desired Future Conditions (DFCs) for the district’s groundwater resources.

DFCs are the desired, quantified conditions of groundwater resources (such as water levels, water quality, spring flows, or volumes) at a specified time in the future. A DFC is a management goal that captures the philosophy and policies addressing how an aquifer will be managed.

On December 15, 2008, the North Plains Groundwater Conservation District recommended that the Joint Planning Committee of Groundwater Management Area 1 adopt DFCs for the Ogallala aquifer in the counties that comprise the district.  The Joint Planning Committee considered two DFCs, one for the eastern counties and one for the western counties. Two DFC’s were proposed because they reflected the stakeholder’s desires, and because the uses or conditions of the aquifer within the district differ substantially from one geographic area to another. The DFCs were adopted in 2009 and continue to be a vital tool in managing groundwater in the northern Panhandle.

Using the District’s adopted DFCs, the Texas Water Development Board runs a Groundwater Availability Model (GAM) to determine how much water may be pumped each year and still achieve the DFCs. The amount of water the model predicts to be available, while still meeting the DFCs, is called the modeled available groundwater (MAG).

Comparing the results of the model run with the reported production, the district is in line to achieve it’s 50-year DFC’s goal of having 50% of the groundwater resource available in the eastern four counties and 40% of the groundwater resource available in the western four counties.

The figures below illustrate that the district has pumped below the MAG since 2010, producing 21% below the MAG from 2010-2015. While the western counties have produced 2 percent more than the MAG during the period, the eastern counties have produced 56 percent less than the MAG.

The following tables show groundwater production compared to the MAG from the Ogallala, Rita Blanca and Dockum aquifers.

District Production Average

County

Average Annual Production 2010-2015

Estimated MAG Average 2010-2015

Annual Average MAG Above or Below Production

MAG Percent Above or Below Production

Dallam

356,522

395,608

39,086

10%

Hansford

190,993

279,009

88,016

32%

Hartley

435,606

414,284

-21,322

-5%

Hutchinson

64,890

60,575

-4,315

-7%

Lipscomb

45,349

288,831

243,482

84%

Moore

213,252

196,684

-16,568

-8%

Ochiltree

94,629

263,716

169,087

64%

Sherman

329,426

317,830

-11,595

-4%

Total

1,730,666

2,202,951

472,284

21%

 

County

2015 Production

2015 Estimated MAG

 2015 Above or Below Production

MAG Percent Above or Below Production

Dallam

296,975

378,541

81,566

22%

Hansford

148,730

273,430

124,700

46%

Hartley

332,693

396,622

63,929

16%

Hutchinson

57,632

59,845

2,212

4%

Lipscomb

39,383

287,152

247,769

86%

Moore

156,600

189,578

32,977

17%

Ochiltree

77,342

257,969

180,627

70%

Sherman

251,647

311,796

60,149

19%

Total

1,361,002

2,154,930

793,928

37%

 

County

Average Annual Production 2010-2015

Estimated MAG Average 2010-2015

MAG  Above or Below Production

MAG Percent Above or Below Production

Dallam

356,522

395,608

39,086

10%

Hartley

435,606

414,284

-21,322

-5%

Moore

213,252

196,684

-16,568

-8%

Sherman

329,426

317,830

-11,595

-4%

Total

1,334,805

1,310,820

-23,986

-2%

 

2015 West Production Comparison

County

2015 Production

2015 Estimated MAG

2015 MAG  Above/below Production

Dallam

296,975

378,541

81,566

Hartley

332,693

396,622

63,929

Moore

156,600

189,578

32,977

Sherman

251,647

311,796

60,149

Total

1,037,915

1,276,535

238,620

 

East – Production Average

 County

Average Annual Production 2010-2015

Estimated MAG Average 2010-2015

MAG  Above or Below Production

MAG Percent Above or Below Production

Hansford

190,993

279,009

88,016

32%

Hutchinson

64,890

60,575

-4,315

-7%

Lipscomb

45,349

288,831

243,482

84%

Ochiltree

94,629

263,716

169,087

64%

Total

395,861

892,131

496,270

56%

 

2015 East Production Comparison

County

2015 Production

2015 Estimated MAG

2015 MAG  Above/below Production

MAG Percent Above or Below Production

Hansford

148,730

273,430

124,700

46%

Hutchinson

57,632

59,845

2,212

4%

Lipscomb

39,383

287,152

247,769

86%

Ochiltree

77,342

257,969

180,627

70%

Total

323,087

878,395

555,308

63%

 

gw-production2015-line-graph