Hydrogeological Report on Water Well Monitoring in

Transcription

HYDROGEOLOGICAL
REPORT ON WATER
WELL MONITORING IN
ABORIGINAL LANDS
TO MAY 2002
DWLBC
Report
2002/26
Document1
Page 1 of 1
Hydrogeological report on
water well monitoring in Aboriginal
lands to May 2002
A.R. (Sandy) Dodds and Lloyd Sampson
Groundwater Assessment
Resource Assessment Division
Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation
August 2002
Report DWLBC 2002/26
Government
of South Australia
Resource Assessment Division
25 Grenfell Street Adelaide
GPO Box 2834, Adelaide SA 5001
Telephone
National
(08) 8463 6954
International
+61 8 8463 6954
Fax
National
(08) 8463 6999
International
+61 8 8463 6999
Website
www.dwlbc.sa.gov.au
Disclaimer
Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation and its employees do not
warrant or make any representation regarding the use, or results of the use, of the
information contained herein as regards to its correctness, accuracy, reliability, currency
or otherwise. The Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation and its
employees expressly disclaims all liability or responsibility to any person using the
information or advice.
© Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation 2002
This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968
(Cwlth), no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from
the Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation. Requests and inquiries
concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Director, Resource
Assessment Division, Department of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation, GPO
Box 2834, Adelaide SA 5001.
Dodds, A. R. and Sampson, L. D., 2002. Hydrogeological report on water well monitoring
in Aboriginal lands to May 2002. South Australia. Department of Water, Land and
Biodiversity Conservation. Report, DWLBC 2002/26.
Foreword
South Australia’s natural resources are fundamental to the economic and social wellbeing
of the State. One of the State’s most precious natural resources, water is a basic
requirement of all living organisms and is one of the essential elements ensuring
biological diversity of life at all levels. In pristine or undeveloped situations, the condition of
water resources reflects the equilibrium between rainfall, vegetation and other physical
parameters. Development of these resources changes the natural balance and may cause
degradation. If degradation is small, and the resource retains its utility, the community
may assess these changes as being acceptable. However, significant stress will impact
on the ability of a resource to continue to meet the needs of users and the environment.
Understanding the cause and effect relationship between the various stresses imposed on
the natural resources is paramount to developing effective management strategies.
Reports of investigations into the availability and quality of water supplies throughout the
State aim to build upon the existing knowledge base enabling the community to make
informed decisions concerning the future management of the natural resources thus
ensuring conservation of biological diversity.
Bryan Harris
Director, Knowledge and Information Division
Hydrogeological report on water well monitoring in
Aboriginal lands to May 2002
I
CONTENTS
FOREWORD...................................................................................................................... I
ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................... 2
PRESENTATION OF DATA.............................................................................................. 4
ANALYSIS OF LOGGING DATA....................................................................................... 5
Pitjantjatjara lands ........................................................................................................ 5
1.
INDULKANA .......................................................................................................................... 5
IMB-19................................................................................................................... 5
IMB-19A .............................................................................................................. 10
IMB-25................................................................................................................. 10
IMB-26................................................................................................................. 14
IMB-27................................................................................................................. 14
IR-1...................................................................................................................... 14
IR-2...................................................................................................................... 17
2.
MIMILI .................................................................................................................................. 20
M-1 ...................................................................................................................... 20
M-3 ...................................................................................................................... 20
3.
FREGON.............................................................................................................................. 27
FRG-1.................................................................................................................. 27
FRG-7.................................................................................................................. 27
FRG-14................................................................................................................ 33
FRG-E4 ............................................................................................................... 33
4.
KENMORE PARK ................................................................................................................ 36
KP-6 .................................................................................................................... 36
KP-7 .................................................................................................................... 41
KP-98 .................................................................................................................. 41
5.
PUKATJA ............................................................................................................................. 47
E-01..................................................................................................................... 47
E-12..................................................................................................................... 47
E-42..................................................................................................................... 50
E-44..................................................................................................................... 50
II
Contents
E-45..................................................................................................................... 50
E-97B .................................................................................................................. 55
E-97L................................................................................................................... 55
Recharge ............................................................................................................. 55
Summary ............................................................................................................. 55
6.
AMATA................................................................................................................................. 59
A-17..................................................................................................................... 59
A-26..................................................................................................................... 59
A-109................................................................................................................... 66
7.
KALKA.................................................................................................................................. 68
KA-1 .................................................................................................................... 68
KA-2 .................................................................................................................... 68
KA-3 .................................................................................................................... 68
8.
PIPALYATJARA................................................................................................................... 76
PIP-95 ................................................................................................................. 76
PIP-96 ................................................................................................................. 76
Aboriginal Lands Trust lands ...................................................................................... 83
9.
NEPABUNNA....................................................................................................................... 83
N-101................................................................................................................... 83
N-149................................................................................................................... 87
N-149................................................................................................................... 92
10. YALATA ............................................................................................................................... 95
YT-2..................................................................................................................... 95
YT-3..................................................................................................................... 99
11. OAK VALLEY..................................................................................................................... 102
OV-7 .................................................................................................................. 102
OV-8 .................................................................................................................. 107
OV-9 .................................................................................................................. 110
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................. 113
GLOSSARY .................................................................................................................. 115
SI UNITS COMMONLY USED WITHIN TEXT............................................................... 116
ABBREVIATIONS COMMONLY USED WITHIN TEXT ................................................. 116
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 117
III
Contents
List of Tables
Table 1.
Table 2.
Table 3.
Table 4.
Table 5.
Table 6.
Table 7.
Table 8.
Table 9.
Table 10.
Water production at Indulkana, 1998–2002..................................................... 5
Water production at Mimili, 1998–2002 ......................................................... 20
Water production at Fregon, 1998–2002....................................................... 27
Water production at Kenmore Park, 1998–2002 ........................................... 36
Water production at Pukatja, 1998–2002 ...................................................... 47
Water production at Amata, 1998–2001........................................................ 59
Water production at Kalka, 1998–2001 ......................................................... 68
Water production at Pipalyatjara, 1998–2001................................................ 76
Water production at Nepabunna, 1998–2002................................................ 83
Water production at Yalata, 1998–2001 ........................................................ 95
List of Figures
Figure I
Figure 1.1
Figure 1.2
Figure 1.3
Figure 1.4
Figure 1.5
Figure 1.6
Figure 1.7
Figure 1.8
Figure 1.9
Figure 1.10
Figure 2.1
Figure 2.2
Figure 2.3
Figure 2.4
Figure 2.5
Figure 3.1
Figure 3.2
Figure 3.3
Figure 3.4
Figure 3.5
Figure 3.6
Figure 3.7
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.2
Figure 4.3
Figure 4.4
Figure 4.5
Figure 4.6
Water well monitoring in Aboriginal lands — Locality plan ............................ 3
Indulkana, wells ............................................................................................ 6
Community water production at Indulkana .................................................... 7
Daily Summary, Indulkana IMB 19................................................................ 8
Recharge Event, Indulkana IMB 19 .............................................................. 9
Daily Summary, Indulkana IMB 19A ........................................................... 11
Effect of continuous pumping, Indulkana IMB 19A...................................... 12
Daily Summary, Indulkana IMB 25.............................................................. 13
Daily Summary, Indulkana IMB 27.............................................................. 15
Daily Summary, Indulkana IR 1 .................................................................. 16
Daily Summary, Indulkana IR 2 .................................................................. 18
Mimili, wells ................................................................................................ 21
Community water production at Mimili ........................................................ 22
Daily Summary, Mimili M 1 ......................................................................... 23
Daily Summary, Mimili M 3 ......................................................................... 24
Effect of continuous pumping, Mimili M 3.................................................... 26
Fregon, wells .............................................................................................. 28
Community water production at Fregon ...................................................... 29
Daily Summary, Fregon FRG 1................................................................... 30
Effect of continuous pumping and slow recovery, Fregon FRG 1................ 31
Daily Summary, Fregon FRG 7................................................................... 32
Daily Summary, Fregon FRG 14................................................................. 34
Daily Summary, Fregon FRG E4 ................................................................ 35
Kenmore Park, wells................................................................................... 37
Community water production at Kenmore Park........................................... 38
Daily Summary, Kenmore Park KP 6 .......................................................... 39
Effect of continuous pumping and slow recovery, Kenmore Park KP 6 ....... 40
Daily Summary, Kenmore Park KP 7 .......................................................... 42
Effect of continuous pumping, December 2000, Kenmore Park KP 7 ......... 43
IV
Contents
Figure 4.7
Figure 4.8
Figure 4.9
Figure 5.1
Figure 5.2
Figure 5.3
Figure 5.4
Figure 5.5
Figure 5.6
Figure 5.7
Figure 5.8
Figure 5.9
Figure 6.1
Figure 6.2
Figure 6.3
Figure 6.4
Figure 6.5
Figure 6.6
Figure 6.7
Figure 7.1
Figure 7.2
Figure 7.3
Figure 7.4
Figure 7.5
Figure 7.6
Figure 8.1
Figure 8.2
Figure 8.3
Figure 8.4
Figure 8.5
Figure 9.1
Figure 9.2
Figure 9.3
Figure 9.4
Figure 9.5
Figure 9.6
Figure 9.7
Figure 9.8
Figure 10.1
Figure 10.2
Figure 10.3
Figure 10.4
Figure 11.1
Effect of continuous pumping, Dec 2000-Jan 2001, Kenmore Park KP 7.... 44
Daily Summary, Kenmore Park KP 98 ........................................................ 45
Effect of continuous pumping, Kenmore Park KP 98................................... 46
Pukatja, wells.............................................................................................. 48
Community water production at Pukatja...................................................... 49
Daily Summary, Pukatja E 12 ..................................................................... 51
Daily Summary, Pukatja E 97B................................................................... 56
Effect of recharge Dec. 2001 and Feb. 2002, Pukatja E 97B ...................... 57
Daily Summary, Pukatja E 97 L .................................................................. 58
Amata, wells ............................................................................................... 60
Community water production at Amata ....................................................... 61
Daily Summary, Amata A 17....................................................................... 62
Effect of recharge event in February 2000, Amata A 17.............................. 63
Daily Summary, Amata A 26....................................................................... 64
Effect of continuouis pumping, Amata A 26 ................................................ 65
Daily Summary, Amata A 109..................................................................... 67
Kalka and Pipalyatjara, wells ...................................................................... 69
Community water production at Kalka ........................................................ 70
Daily Summary, Kalka KA 1........................................................................ 71
Effect of continuous pumping and slow recovery, Kalka KA 3..................... 75
Community water production at Pipalyatjara............................................... 77
Daily Summary, Pipalyatjara PIP 95 ........................................................... 78
Effect of sustained pumping, Pipalyatjara PIP 95........................................ 79
Daily Summary, Pipalyatjara PIP 96 ........................................................... 80
Effect of sustained pumping, Pipalyatjara PIP 96........................................ 82
Nepabunna, wells ....................................................................................... 84
Community water production at Nepabunna ............................................... 85
Daily Summary, Nepabunna N 101............................................................. 86
Effect of sustained pumping and slow recovery, Nepabunna N 101............ 88
Effect of slow and variable recovery, Nepabunna N 101............................. 89
Effect of apparent flowback, January 2000, Nepabunna N 101................... 90
Daily Summary, Nepabunna N 149............................................................. 91
Effect of slow recovery, Nepabunna N 149 ................................................. 93
Yalata, wells ............................................................................................... 96
Community water production at Yalata ....................................................... 97
Daily Summary, Yalata YT 2....................................................................... 98
Daily Summary, Yalata YT 3..................................................................... 100
Oak Valley, wells ...................................................................................... 103
V
Contents
Figure 11.2
Figure 11.3
Figure 11.4
Figure 11.5
Figure 11.6
Figure 11.7
Figure 11.8
Community water production at Oak Valley .............................................. 104
Daily Summary, Oak Valley OV-7 ............................................................. 105
Detailed daily SWL variation, Oak Valley OV-7......................................... 106
List of Appendices
APPENDIX A Operations report on water well monitoring in Aboriginal lands for the
period October 2001 to April/May 2002....................................................... 118
APPENDIX B Water wells and equipment in Aboriginal lands ...................................... 124
VI
ABSTRACT
Water well monitoring data from wells on Aboriginal lands (Pitjantjatjara, Yalata,
Nepabunna and Oak Valley) are summarised for the period April 2001 to May 2002. This
report also shows plots and analysis of all data for each well since monitoring began.
In the Pitjantjatjara lands aquifers at all communities except Kalka, Mimili and Fregon
showed significant recharge and water levels have recovered to, or are above, the levels
recorded at the time of drilling. The three exceptions are probably extensive aquifers that
have generally been free from signs of depletion. The only community for which there is
any short term (5-10 years) concern is Indulkana. Whilst there was recharge to the older
wells, the community now relies on the Indulkana Range wells for a larger portion of its
water supply. The aquifer in which these wells is completed was not recharged and water
levels are declining.
At Nepabunna supplies are still marginal and the heavy pumping regime has made
monitoring insensitive to small but possibly significant changes. Modification of the
monitoring is required, preferably with separate monitoring wells.
The Yalata aquifer is unaffected by pumping, but the groundwater level appears to be
declining by natural drainage. No recharge is observed.
Oak Valley supplies have held up remarkably well, but are still regarded as fragile.
Stringent water management is essential if the additional costs of importing water are to
be avoided.
1
INTRODUCTION
This report comprises analysis of the standing water level (SWL), well production and
rainfall data for monitored wells on Aboriginal lands (Pitjantjatjara, Yalata, Nepabunna,
and Oak Valley) up to May 2002. It includes all data from the start of monitoring, but the
reader is referred to an earlier report that contain the results of geophysical logging of the
wells and background well information (Dodds and Sampson, 2000). Other reports contain
discussions of specific downloads of data and equipment problems (Dodds and Sampson,
1999a, b, 2001; Sampson and Dodds, 2000). Publications that might assist with
understanding the hydrogeology, in particular those concerning the search for water
resources for particular communities, are listed in the Bibliography.
The program to monitor water supplies in the Aboriginal lands is run by the Resource
Assessment Division of the Department of Water Land and Biodiversity Conservation
under the auspices of the Department of State Aboriginal Affairs, which supplies funding
and guidance. Areas undergoing well monitoring are located in Figure I.
2
129°
130°
131°
132°
133°
26°
Kalka
Pipalyatjara
U%
U%
U%
Amata
26°
NORTHERN TERRITORY
Pukatja U%
U%
Fregon
WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Mimili
S
#
Marla
ANANGU PITJANTJATJARA
LAND
28°
28°
27°
IndulkanaU%
27°
U%
0
50
100 Kilometres
Datum GDA 94 Projection - Equidistant Conic
129°
130°
Anangu Pitjantjatjara Lands
131°
Marla
S
#
S
#
132°
Oodnadatta
Moomba
S
#
133°
S
#
Coober Pedy
Maralinga Tjarutja Lands
Leigh
Creek
Olympic Dam
S
#
S
#
S
#
Tarcoola
Nepabunna
Yalata
Ceduna
S
#
S
#
Port Augusta
S
#
Port Lincoln
S
#
ADELAIDE
Victor
Harbor
0
200
PIRSA Publishing Sevices AV:200213-001
Figure I
400 Kilometres
Mount Gambier
S
#
Water well monitoring
in Aboriginal Lands
LOCALITY MAP
PRESENTATION OF DATA
The basic data comprises hourly readings of the pump rate (L/s), the standing water level
(SWL in metres) and, for one well in each community, the rainfall (mm). To compact this
large mass of data, the daily maximum and minimum SWL, the daily water production (kL)
and the daily rainfall are calculated. The minimum and maximum SWL and water
production parameters are plotted on one graph and the daily rainfall, recorded at a well
near the same community, is plotted on the second graph. The minimum SWL maps the
non-pumping water level unless the well was pumped for 24 hours a day. The maximum
SWL maps the pumping water level unless the well was not pumped in that 24-hour
period. The two curves coincide in the two exception cases mentioned above apart from a
gap indicating random variations in the measured water level. Use of the term ‘SWL’
generally refers to the non-pumping water level.
Where necessary to demonstrate some aspect of a well’s performance the basic hourly
data are plotted for an interval of a few days or weeks.
The table of water production data presented for each community is the accumulated flow
(kL) recorded by the flow meter whereas the daily and monthly production figures are a
summation of the hourly flow readings as recorded by the data logger. A data integrity
check is made, for each bore, by comparing the accumulated flow with the summation of
hourly flow values. Differences can occur where a pump operates on an intermittent basis
for short durations. Where a large difference occurs, the daily and monthly figures are
used to indicate the trend in pumping regimes rather than the absolute values.
4
ANALYSIS OF LOGGING DATA
Pitjantjatjara lands
1. INDULKANA
Water Production
The water production plot (Fig. 1.2) and Table 1 show the dominance of the new
Indulkana Range Wells, IR-1 and IR-2, in supplying Indulkana’s water since early in the
year 2000. Water usage overall in the summer months has nearly doubled since these
two wells came on line.
Table 1.
Well
Water production at Indulkana, 1998–2002
Unit
number
Production (kL)
Oct. 1998 – Apr.–Oct. Oct. 1999 – Apr.–Oct. Oct. 2000 – Apr. –Nov.
Apr. 1999
IMB-19
1999
Apr. 2000
2000
Apr. 2001
2001
Nov. 2001
– May 2002
5544-101
954.1
990.9
2 096.2
125.2
192.7
286.0
132.5
IMB-19A 5544-132
1 828.7
2 159.0
3 340.0
512.4
879.7
436.3
158.2
IMB-25
5544-157
6 039.0
3 367.0
1 347.0
1.5
0.1
0
0
IMB-26
5544-158
1 145.6
2 816.0
0.8
0.3
0.1
0
0
IMB-27
5544-159
1 528.7
787.8
111.3
0.2
0.0
0
0
IR-1
5544-172
–
–
5 565.6
–
12 433.0
7 835.3
18 704.0
IR-2
5544-169
–
–
4 863.1
4 970.6
5 246.8
2 910.3
4 566.7
11 496.1
10 120.7
17 324.0
5 610.2*
18 752.4
11 467.9
23 561.4
Total
* Not including IR 1 which had a faulty flow meter.
Wells
IMB-19
Good rainfall over the last two and a half years has produced results that reinforce the
conclusions of the last two reports – that the well is close to a point of recharge to the
aquifer.
The SWL has risen to 14.6 m (May 2002), higher than when the well was drilled in 1977
(15.6 m) and considerably higher than the low of 17.5 m in 1997 (Fig. 1.3). Each rainfall
event of 20 mm or more (eight since July 1998) has resulted in an immediate and large
rise in water level (ranging from 2 to 12 m), followed by a gradual decline over the next
few weeks (Fig. 1.4). In most cases there has been a net rise in water level.
Although there has been a marked decrease in the amount of water extracted from this
well since early 2000, when the Indulkana Range wells came on stream, we consider that
this does not account for the long-term rise in SWL. The evidence is clear enough that
recharge to the aquifer is occurring at a point close to this well, if not through the well
itself. This recharge causes a mounding of the waters in the aquifer in the area of the well
that gradually dissipates over the succeeding weeks.
5
327500
330000
332500
335000
Anangu
Pitjantjatjara
Lands
7017500
7017500
#
Study Area
#S Marla
#S Oodnadatta
S
Moomba #
Coober
#S Pedy
Roxby Downs
#S
Leigh
Creek
#
S
#S
Tarcoola
Ceduna
#
S
#
Indulkana #S#
#
#
#
##
#
In
du
Port
#S Augusta
Port Lincoln #
S
lk
an
#S ADELAIDE
a
Creek
Mount Gambier
#
#
#
7015000
7015000
#
#
IMB 19
S IMB 27 #
#
159
##
S
#
##
S
IR 2
169
S
#
IR 1
101#
#
#
# IMB #26
158#
172
#
#
#S
#
S IMB
#
19A
#
132
S
#
# #
#
#
157
#
#
#
#
#
#
#
159
#
#
#
IMB 27
Inyinyintan Homeland
IMB 25
#
#
S
# #
#
#
#S
Monitored well
with rain gauge
Monitored wells
Well name
Well number, prefix by
5544 to obtain unit number
Other wells
#
$
Mount Chandler
7012500
7012500
0
0.5
1
1.5 Kilometres
Datum GDA 94 Projection UTM MGA Zone 53
#
#
in Aboriginal lands
Indulkana
Ininti #S
327500
PIRSA Publishing Services AV:200213-002
Figure 1.1
330000
332500
WELLS
335000
Indulkana Monthly Water Production
7000
6000
IR 1 and
IR 2 installed
5000
IR 2
Kilolitres
IR 1
IMB 27
4000
IMB 26
IMB 25
Data for IMB 25 only
IMB 19A
3000
IMB 19
2000
1000
0
Feb-95
Aug-95
Feb-96
Aug-96
Feb-97
Aug-97
Figure 1.2 Community water production at Indulkana
Feb-98
Aug-98
Feb-99
Aug-99
Feb-00
Aug-00
Feb-01
Aug-01
Feb-02
0.3 MEAN PUMP RATE (L/s)
7
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
Daily Summary
Indulkana IMB19 (5544-101)
Raingauge (5544-101)
5
200
Recharge events
10
Recovery from heavy
pumping plus possible
recharge
Recovery
from heavy
pumping +
recharge
15
150
25
30
100
35
40
Heavy pumping at
variable rates
50
45
50
0.4
55
1/12/1997
0.5
0.2
0.35
0.11
0.37
0
1/06/1998
1/12/1998
1/06/1999
1/12/1999
1/06/2000
1/12/2000
1/06/2001
1/12/2001
1/06/1998
1/12/1998
1/06/1999
1/12/1999
1/06/2000
1/12/2000
1/06/2001
1/12/2001
Daily Rainfall (mm)
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1/12/1997
Figure 1.3 Daily Summary, Indulkana IMB 19
Daily Production (kL)
Corrected SWL (m)
20
e
21 b-0
-F 2
e
22 b-0
-F 2
e
23 b-0
-F 2
e
24 b-0
-F 2
e
25 b-0
-F 2
eb
-0
26
-F 2
eb
-0
27
-F 2
eb
-0
28
-F 2
eb
1- -02
M
ar
2- -02
M
ar
3- -02
M
ar
4- -02
M
ar
5- -02
M
ar
6- -02
M
ar
7- -02
M
ar
8- -02
M
ar
9- -02
M
a
10 r-0
-M 2
a
11 r-0
-M 2
a
12 r-02
-M
a
13 r-0
-M 2
a
14 r-0
-M 2
a
15 r-0
-M 2
a
16 r-0
-M 2
a
17 r-0
-M 2
a
18 r-0
-M 2
a
19 r-0
-M 2
a
20 r-0
-M 2
ar
-0
2
20
-F
SWL (m)
5
8
10
7
15
SWL rise
Figure 1.4 Recharge Event, Indulkana IMB 19
SWL decline
20
5
25
4
30
3
35
2
40
1
45
0
Pump Rate (L/s)
Indulkana IMB 19
Recharge event on 23 February 2002
6
Analysis of logging data
The pump rate for this well has ranged from 0.1 L/s to 0.5 L/s, with proportional
drawdowns of 6 m to 30 m. The latter drawdown dropped the pumping SWL to nearly
50 m, which is getting close to the water cut at 55 m and could cause problems if
sustained for extended periods. The current pumping rate of 0.37 L/s results in an
acceptible pumping SWL of about 35 m.
It is also evident that the total water withdrawal per day is important. The well was
stressed in March 1998, when being pumped at 0.3 L/s for long periods, and again in
January and February 2000 when the pump rate was 0.35 L/s. After such spells the well
took much longer to recover to its pre-pumping SWL. Daily pumping rates of over
20 kL/day (0.37 L/s for 15 hours a day) clearly stress the well, while the current rate of
5 kL/day (0.37 L/s for 3.5 hours a day) does not.
This well should yield at least 5 kL/day indefinitely, barring extended droughts of over 10
years. Higher daily pumping rates should be restricted to a day or two duration. The water
quality, which deteriorated to 1110 mg/L TDS by 1997, was quite variable over the 197797 period (see RB 2000/27). It is probable that this variation correlates with recharge, and
that the water extracted now is of much lower salinity than in 1997. This would be worth
checking.
IMB-19A
The SWL has now risen steadily over the past four years from 28 m to above 25 m, which
is the highest level recorded to date (Fig. 1.5). While there are no immediate obvious
responses to potential recharge events, as was seen for well IMB-19, the steadily rising
SWL probably results primarily from recharge. Some of the SWL rise, particularly that
before the year 2000, may result from lower pumping regimes that put less stress on the
aquifer.
The pumping rate was 0.6 L/s (sometimes 0.7-0.9 L/s) in the early years with pumping
sometimes sustained for up to 24 hours a day (50 kL/day). Such rates caused a
drawdown in the pumpimg SWL to 63 m, about that of the water cut, and probably
stressed the aquifer (Fig. 1.6). Whether the times of slow SWL recovery shown on the plot
(3 days) result from this is uncertain. The regime since the start of the year 2001 of
pumping at 0.5 L/s for a few hours each day (5-10 kL/day) is certainly less stressful on the
aquifer and, combined with steady recharge, has resulted in the rise in SWL to its current
level of 24.5 m.
IMB-25
The well has not been pumped since early 2000. The SWL has risen steadily since then,
reaching a level of 8.7 m in May 2002, compared with 11.7 m in February 2000 (Fig. 1.7).
This 3 m rise may partly result from long-term recovery from pumping, but we consider
that there is a significant contribution from recharge. The water level now is above that at
the time of drilling the well in 1987 (9.7 m), and considerably higher than the lowest
reading recorded (13.7 m in 1997).
While there is some unreliable SWL data, as indicated in Figure 1.7, most of the data is
good. It shows the depressing effect of heavy pumping in February 1998 and 1999, and
the subsequent recovery in the following winters, especially July 1999, when the demand
on the well eased. Superimposed on these effects is the gradual rise in SWL from 1997 to
10
0.5 MEAN PUMP RATE (L/s)
Daily Summary
Indulkana IMB19A (5544-132)
15
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
200
Slow recovery after periods of
heavy pumping
Failed SWL probe
25
Corrected SWL (m)
45
100
55
65
0.6-0.7
Failed SWL probe
0.5
50
75
85
95
1/12/97
Failed
Datalogger
Failed
Datalogger
0
1/06/98
1/12/98
1/06/99
1/12/99
1/06/00
1/12/00
1/06/01
1/12/01
1/06/1998
1/12/1998
1/06/1999
1/12/1999
1/06/2000
1/12/2000
1/06/2001
1/12/2001
Daily Rainfall (mm)
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1/12/1997
Figure 1.5 Daily Summary, Indulkana IMB 19A
150
35
20
-M
ar
-9
8
21
-M
ar
-9
8
22
-M
ar
-9
8
23
-M
ar
-9
8
24
-M
ar
-9
8
25
-M
ar
-9
8
26
-M
ar
-9
8
27
-M
ar
-9
8
28
-M
ar
-9
8
29
-M
ar
-9
8
30
-M
ar
-9
8
31
-M
ar
-9
8
1Ap
r98
2Ap
r98
3Ap
r98
4Ap
r98
5Ap
r98
6Ap
r98
7Ap
r98
8Ap
r98
SWL (metres)
30
35
Figure 1.6 Effect of continuous pumping, Indulkana IMB 19A
Recovery
phase
40
6
45
5
50
4
55
3
60
2
65
1
70
0
Pump Rate (L/s)
Indulkana IMB 19A
Effect of continuous pumping
8
7
Daily Summary
5
WATER PRODUCTION
MIN DAILY SWL
MAX DAILY SWL
200
Data not calibrated
and thus suspect
Heavy Pumping
10
Corrected SWL (m)
15
100
20
SWL probe
failure
Logger failure
25
50
SWL probe failure
30
Pump removed
35
1/02/1995
0
1/08/1995
1/02/1996
1/08/1996
1/02/1997
1/08/1997
1/02/1998
1/08/1998
1/02/1999
1/08/1999
1/02/2000
1/08/1995
1/02/1996
1/08/1996
1/02/1997
1/08/1997
1/02/1998
1/08/1998
1/02/1999
1/08/1999
1/02/2000
1/08/2000
1/02/2001
1/08/2001
1/02/2002
Daily Rainfall (mm)
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1/02/1995
1/08/2000
1/02/2001
1/08/2001
1/02/2002
150
the present. It seems likely that the rainfall events do not have any immediate or dramatic
effect on water levels in the aquifer and that the evidence points to a gradual recharge of
the aquifer over months and years.
IMB-26
No longer monitored.
IMB-27
Now that the well is no longer pumped, the SWL monitoring shows clear signs of
recharge. These are similar to those for IMB-19 except that the rise in SWL at the time of
the recharge event is less abrupt and the subsequent drop in level is gentler (Fig. 1.8). All
this points to the well being near a point of recharge for the aquifer, but lacks the
probability of direct recharge through the well itself.
This well has always been slow to recover from pumping, so an accurate non-pumping
SWL was impossible to achieve before the year 2000. The SWL was 17.5 m at the time of
drilling the well in 1987, and appeared to be much the same from estimates in 1998 and
1999. A major rise in SWL of over 5 m occurred between October 1999 and April 2000,
unfortunately at a time when equipment failure caused a gap in the hourly data.
Knowledge of the hourly changes during this rise might have been helpful in
understanding the recharge mechanism.
The current level of 8.9 m is much higher than at any time in the past. We have no way of
knowing why the rains of the past 2-3 years have had such a marked effect on this aquifer
as compared to the aquifers at IMB-19 and 19A. Perhaps there is a small secondary
aquifer that produces this elevated SWL. It also points to the discrete nature of these
fractured rock aquifers, and the dangers of treating them as an integral system.
IR-1
There are major errors in the flow rate throughout 2002, resulting in grossly exaggerated
Daily Production figures. Similar problems occurred in 2000-2001, symptomatic of a
known problem that has proved difficult to correct.
This well is the main water supplier to Indulkana, and as such has been heavily pumped.
As a result the SWL has dropped steadily from 37.5 m at the time of drilling (late 1998) to
40.4 m in May 2002 (Fig. 1.9). During one period of about a month, in July 2001, the well
was rested, and over the 7-month period from March to November 2001 the well was
pumped at about one-third of the normal rate. The combined effect was that the SWL
recovered to 39.0 m (0.8 m recovery). All in all, it seems fairly clear that the water in the
aquifer is being coned downwards by the current level of pumping (best estimate
36 kL/day). This amount of drop is not drastic, but does limit the potential output of the
well. The non-pumping SWL is 22.6 m above the water cut at 63-72 m, but the pumping
SWL at the current pump rate of 1.4 L/s is 16 m lower, giving a margin of only 6 m. The
characteristics can be expected to change within 6 years, probably for the worse, when
the pumping SWL goes below the water cut. The most optimistic estimate of well life is 15
years. We are still uncertain about whether this aquifer is being recharged and, as there
are no signs of recharge, we have assumed none. This is one uncertainty, which could
lengthen the life of the well if the assumption is incorrect. A second assumption is that the
14
Daily Summary
5
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
200
10
Slow recovery after extended
periods of pumping
Recharge
15
150
25
30
100
35
SWL probe
failure
40
50
SWL probe failure
45
50
Bore no longer pumped
55
1/12/1997
0
1/06/1998
1/12/1998
1/06/1999
1/12/1999
1/06/2000
1/12/2000
1/06/2001
1/12/2001
1/06/1998
1/12/1998
1/06/1999
1/12/1999
1/06/2000
1/12/2000
1/06/2001
1/12/2001
Daily Rainfall (mm)
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1/12/1997
Corrected SWL (m)
20
Daily Summary
Indulkana IR1 (5544-172)
WATER PRODUCTION
MIN DAILY SWL
MAX DAILY SWL
30
1000
SWL recovery due to
decreased pump rates
900
40
800
45
700
50
600
55
500
60
No valid SWL or yield
data for this period
400
SWL errors
65
300
Erroroneous yield data
70
200
75
100
80
1/10/1999
0
1/04/2000
1/10/2000
1/04/2001
1/10/2001
1/04/2002
1/10/2001
1/04/2002
Daily Rainfall (mm)
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1/10/1999
1/04/2000
Figure 1.9 Daily Summary, Indulkana IR 1
1/10/2000
1/04/2001
Corrected SWL (m)
35
rate of SWL decline will remain constant, whereas it could increase or decrease. Changes
in the pumping rate would also vary the life estimate of the well.
IR-2
Much of the data is again defective, particularly since early September 2001 (Fig. 1.10).
The upward spikes in the non-pumping SWL between March and June 2001 result from a
malfunctioning non-return valve which allows water from the pipeline to flow back into the
well on cessation of pumping (flowback). The general response of the well to pumping can
still be observed, however.
This well has also contributed significantly to the water supply. The non-pumping SWL
has dropped from 55 m at the time of drilling in 1998 to 56.6 m in May 2002 (1.6 m). With
the water cut at 69-75 m and a rate of decline of 0.6 m/year the life of the well is 15 years,
based on the same assumptions as for well IR-1 above. Pumping rates are uncertain
because of monitoring errors.
Recharge
The water levels in both wells IR-1 and IR-2 have declined as a result of water extraction
(Figs 1.9 and 1.10). Moreover, there is no indication of recharge in either well, in spite of
substantial rains and strong recharge indications in most of the other wells in this area. It
is therefore possible that the water in these aquifers is not of recent origin and may not be
replaced. In that case the wells have a life of about 6-15 years, assuming no change in
the pump rates or in the rate of SWL decline for other reasons. Continued monitoring
should clarify this situation.
The other wells all showed clear signs of recharge from four rainfall events and all SWLs
have risen to levels comparable to or above those at the time of drilling the wells. The life
of these wells is extended indefinitely, but still may be limited by droughts of over 10
years.
Conclusions
The monitoring of Indulkana’s wells over the past two years has changed the prognosis
considerably. While recharge of the older wells has lengthened their potential life, the
decline in SWL in the Indulkana Range wells IR-1 and IR-2 has limited their potential.
The evidence of active recharge to the aquifers supplying all IMB wells (those in the
valleys) is unassailable. The sustainability of this supply is only limited by the possibility of
an extended drought of over 10 years, and probably more, at the recommended pumping
rates. These 5 wells should be capable of supplying 2 300 kL/month between them. We
suggest that the quality of water from these wells, particularly IMB-25, be retested, as the
recharge may have improved the water quality.
The SWL in IR-1 and IR-2 has declined slowly but steadily as a result of pumping, hence
the life limits of 6 and 15 years. The main concern is the absence of evidence of recharge
over years when rainfall has been considerable. It is possible that the water in this aquifer
is ancient, and is not recharged in the current climatic regime, in which case the life limits
are absolute with possible adjustments only for changes in the rate of SWL decline.
17
Daily Summary
Indulkana IR2 (5544-169)
50
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
1000
Overshoot due to flowback
in flow line
Defective
SWL data
900
55
60
800
65
700
70
600
75
500
80
400
85
300
SWL probe failure
200
90
SWL probe failure
100
95
100
1/10/99
0
1/04/00
1/10/00
1/04/01
1/10/01
1/04/02
1/04/2000
1/10/2000
1/04/2001
1/10/2001
1/04/2002
Daily Rainfall (mm)
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1/10/1999
Figure 1.10 Daily Summary, Indulkana IR 2
Corrected SWL (m)
Failed logger channel
However, rain in the AP lands tends to be very local, and it is still possible that recharge to
the Indulkana Range aquifer will take place under the right circumstances. Monitoring has
also commenced of IR-3, which is not equipped and will hopefully give a more sensitive
indication of water level changes.
19
2. MIMILI
Water Production
Both wells, M-1 and M-3, contributed significantly to the community production of up to
3 500 kL/month. The average production is ~2 500 kL/month (Fig. 2.2).
Table 2.
Well
Water production at Mimili, 1998–2002
Unit
Number
Production (kL)
Oct. 1998 – Apr.–Oct. Oct. 1999 – Apr.–Oct. Oct. 2000 – Apr.-Nov.
Apr. 1999
1999
Apr. 2000
2000
Apr. 2001
2001
Nov. 2001
– Apr. 2002
M-1
5443-25
11 502.0
6 481.0
7 451.0
6 591.9
8 952.7
4 152.7
7 603.7
M-3
5443-28
8 126.0
3 319.0
6 390.0
6 304.0
6 556.0
*6 281.0
9 245.4
19 628.0
9 800.0
13 841.0
12 895.9
15 508.7
*10,433.7
16 849.1
Total
* M3 suffered a lightning strike, losing possibly 3 months data.
Wells
M-1
The well has been pumped on most days over the past year and since 1998. The
pumping rate has been lowered over the past year from 1.3 L/s to 1.0 L/s, but the average
daily production has been maintained by extra pumping hours.
A number of problems with water flowback (April 1998 and April 2000 to April 2001) make
the SWL graph rather untidy (Fig. 2.3). However, this does not conceal the fact that the
level has not varied much over the past four years and is still only slightly lower, at 15.6 m,
than it was at time of drilling in 1978 (14.7 m). The water cuts were mostly below 29 m,
giving 14 m of head (9 m from the pumping SWL) and little danger of losing production.
Monitoring results over the past year, in particular, indicate that the current pumping rate
is sustainable indefinitely.
This well was pumped at 0.9 L/s continuously for four days in January 2002 without any
decline in SWL. It appears that this pumping rate could be used for a matter of weeks in
case of need.
M-3
Only manual SWL data is of much value before July 1997.
The water level in this well takes at least four hours to return to its non-pumping level after
pumping ceases, so that comparable non-pumping SWLs requires that the well has been
rested for at least this time. The earliest reliable non-pumping SWL is 11.1 m in November
1996. In May 2002 the level was 11.0 m and has varied little in between these dates (Fig.
2.4). There is therefore no sign of aquifer depletion, either by pumping or by natural
drainage. The only sign of stress is the slowness of recovery after pumping, a feature
which sometimes becomes more marked if pumping is continuous over a matter of days.
20
260000
265000
270000
275000
$ Artoonanna Hill
Mimili #S
7010000
M1 #S
25
#
#
#S Marla
#S Oodnadatta
Roxby Downs
#S
#S
Tarcoola
## #
#
Ceduna
#S
#
#
#
Moomba #S
Coober
#S Pedy
7010000
#
Study Area
Anangu
Pitjantjatjara
Lands
#
Leigh
Creek
#S
Port
#S Augusta
#
#
# #
# #
#
Port Lincoln #S
#
ADELAIDE #S
M3
7005000
7005000
35
Mount Gambier
#
#S
M1
#
25
7000000
7000000
S
#
0
#
Mount Etitinna $
Other wells
1
2
6995000
6995000
#
$ Thingoona Hill
265000
3
4
5 Kilometres
#
Figure 2.1
#
Wanmarra
#
#
260000
Monitored well
with rain gauge
Monitored wells
Well name
S
#
Antara
#S
270000
275000
in Aboriginal lands
Mimili
WELLS
Mimili Monthly Water Production
4500
4000
M3
M3 data lost due
to lightening
strike
M1
3500
3000
Kilolitres
Data available for M3 only
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
Figure 2.2 Community water production at Mimili
01
ec
D
Ju
n01
00
ec
D
Ju
n00
99
ec
D
Ju
n99
98
ec
D
Ju
n98
97
ec
D
Ju
n97
96
ec
D
Ju
n96
95
ec
D
Ju
n95
0
Daily Summary
Mimili M1 (5443-25)
Raingauge (5443-28)
1.3
PUMP RATE (L/s)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
10
600
Flowback
Flowback
500
Corrected SWL (m)
400
20
300
Data logger failure
200
1.3
25
1.0
Data logger failure
100
Flowmeter
failure
30
1/01/1998
0
1/07/1998
1/01/1999
1/07/1998
1/01/1999
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
1/07/2001
1/01/2002
Daily Rainfall (mm)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1/01/1998
Figure 2.3 Daily Summary, Mimili M 1
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
1/07/2001
1/01/2002
15
Daily Summary
Mimili M3 (5443-28)
Raingauge (5443-28)
1.1
PUMP RATE (L/s)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
0
700
Corrected SWL (m)
Logger struck by
lightening
Flowback
10
600
20
500
30
400
SWL data suspect
40
300
Erroroneous
SWL values
50
200
1.2
0.56
1.3
0.7
1.1
1.1
60
70
1/06/95
100
0
1/12/95
1/06/96
1/12/96
1/06/97
1/12/97
1/06/98
1/12/98
1/06/99
1/12/99
1/06/00
1/12/00
1/06/01
1/12/01
1/12/1995
1/06/1996
1/12/1996
1/06/1997
1/12/1997
1/06/1998
1/12/1998
1/06/1999
1/12/1999
1/06/2000
1/12/2000
1/06/2001
1/12/2001
Daily Rainfall (mm)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1/06/1995
Figure 2.4 Daily Summary, Mimili M 3
Error - closer to
11.1m
Flowback
At current pumping rates of 1.1 L/s the SWL drops 14 m to about 25 m. The water cuts
are below 40 m, so the prognosis is favourable.
The well was pumped at 1.1 L/s continuously for 6 days in January 2002 (Fig. 2.5) with a
further drop in SWL of only 0.2 m. On this occasion the SWL still recovered to 11.1 m in
about four hours. With 14 m of head this pumping rate could therefore be sustained for
several weeks without worry.
Recharge
There have not been any major rainfall events recorded since 1998, but some periods,
including the last year, have been missed due to instrument malfunction. There is no
indication that recharge of the aquifer(s) has taken place.
Conclusions
The SWL in both wells is being maintained, and there is no evident danger of either well
drying up, now or in the foreseeable future. The two wells jointly can produce 180 kL/day
for an indefinite period. It appears that lack of capacity is the major concern, and it is
expected that new wells drilled this year will provide a backup supply in the event of
equipment problems in a well or of extra demand.
The short-term (several weeks) capacity of M-1 and M-3 is 2.0 L/s, or 5 000 kL/month.
Recent tests on two new wells (M2002C and M2002E, Fig. 2.1) indicate a short-term
capacity of 2.4 L/s, or a further 6 000 kL/month. While such rates would not be sustainable
indefinitely they should be sufficient to provide extra supplies for extreme conditions or
extra demand.
25
Mimili M3
Effect of continuous pumping
8
10
Recovery
phase
12
14
7
16
6
18
5
SWL (metres)
22
24
4
26
28
3
30
32
2
34
36
1
38
0
Figure 2.5 Effect of continuous pumping, Mimili M3
an
-0
2
29
-J
an
-0
2
28
-J
an
-0
2
27
-J
an
-0
2
26
-J
an
-0
2
25
-J
an
-0
2
24
-J
an
-0
2
23
-J
an
-0
2
22
-J
an
-0
2
21
-J
20
-J
an
-0
2
40
Pump Rate (L/s)
20
3. FREGON
Water production
All four wells have been used extensively, and the rotation policy is good for assessing the
aquifer characteristics. Water usage for the summer of 01-02 was lower than for the same
season in previous years (Fig. 3.2).
Table 3.
Well
Water production at Fregon, 1998–2002
Unit
Number
Production (kL)
Apr. 1999
1999
Apr. 2000
2000
Apr. 2001
2001
Nov. 2001
– Apr. 2002
FRG-1
5344-09
8 583.0
11 676.0
5 139.0
2 515.0
6 075.0
607.6
3 728.0
FRG-7
5344-31
14 178.0
4 845.9
8 600.9
4 237.5
15 250.0
5 011.9
12 562.0
FRG-14
5344-47
18 325.0
7 430.9
13 199.0
22 752.0
13 903.0
11 570.2
9 114.1
FRG-E4
5344-19
7 528.9
9 803.7
5 841.2
4.3
0.8
10 264.1
4 758.6
48 616.9
33 756.5
32 780.1
29 508.8
35 228.8
27 453.8
30 162.7
Total
Wells
FRG-1
The well was pumped quite heavily in February 2002, but was otherwise little used in the
last year. This has been the general pattern since 1995, with the well being used primarily
to supply 150 kL/day to fulfil the extra demand during the summer months (Fig. 3.3).
The SWL has remained at about 10 m since 1995 (earlier levels are not known) and only
declines temporarily during periods of steady pumping (Fig. 3.4). However, the water level
is slow to recover from such extensive periods of pumping, taking several weeks to regain
its non-pumping SWL. It would be wise to limit such usage and to maximise the recovery
periods.
It seems likely that there will be no long-term changes in SWL (up or down) unless the
well is used continuously for many months, and possibly not even then. A long-term
drought (15-30 years) might also cause a drop in SWL.
FRG-7
The well was used extensively from mid February onwards, pumping about 200 kL/day.
While the latest SWL (11 m) is about 1 m lower than in 1998, this is probably temporary,
resulting from the extensive withdrawals and the lack of recovery time (Fig. 3.5). The well
takes at least 6 hours to recover, and has not been rested for that time since April 2002.
Overall the non-pumping SWL has a range of 9.93 m to 10.69 m and does not appear to
have a long-term trend. The current SWL would be expected to recover to about 10.2 m if
the well were rested for a day or so. The current pump rate of 2.3 L/s appears sustainable,
having been used continuously for the last month without any increase in drawdown.
27
203000
204000
205000
206000
207000
7038000
7038000
Anangu
Pitjantjatjara
Lands
#S
Marla
#S
Oodnadatta
Moomba #S
Coober
#S Pedy
Roxby Downs
Offic
#S
Leigh
Creek
#S
#S
Tarcoola
er
#
Study Area
Ceduna
FRG E4 #S
#S
19
#S FRG 7
31
7037000
Port Lincoln #S
7037000
#
#
# FRG 14
47
#S
Port
Augusta
#S
ADELAIDE
Mount Gambier
#
#S
Monitored well
with rain gauge
#S
Monitored wells
FRG 7 Well name
31
#
S
#
#
Fregon
7036000
FRG 1
#
7036000
#S
09
#
#
Other wells
Cree
k
0
0.5
1 Kilometres
#
#
#
#
203000
Figure 3.1
204000
205000
206000
207000
7035000
7035000
in Aboriginal lands
Fergon
WELLS
Fregon Monthly Water Production
12000
10000
FRG E4
8000
Kilolitres
FRG 7
FRG 14
Data for FRG-1 only
FRG 1
6000
4000
2000
0
Feb-95
Aug-95
Feb-96
Aug-96
Feb-97
Aug-97
Figure 3.2 Community water production at Fregon
Feb-98
Aug-98
Feb-99
Aug-99
Feb-00
Aug-00
Feb-01
Aug-01
Feb-02
Daily Summary
Fregon FRG1 (5344-9)
Raingauge (5344-47)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
7
600
unexplained and
unverified SWL
high
9
500
Logger failure
11
400
13
300
15
200
Logger failure
Logger failure
Daily Rainfall (mm)
17
100
19
1/01/95
1/07/95
1/01/96
1/07/96
1/01/97
1/07/97
1/01/98
1/07/98
1/01/99
1/07/99
1/01/00
1/07/00
1/01/01
1/07/01
1/01/02
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1/01/1995
1/07/1995
1/01/1996
1/07/1996
1/01/1997
1/07/1997
1/01/1998
1/07/1998
1/01/1999
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
1/07/2001
1/01/2002
0
Figure 3.3 Daily Summary, Fregon FRG 1
Corrected SWL (m)
Failed SWL
probe
10
10
11
9
12
8
13
7
6
14
Recovery phase
19
1
20
0
25
-M
ar
-
18
-M
ar
-
10
-M
ar
-
3M
ar
-
23
-F
16
-F
8F
1F
Figure 3.4 Effect of continuous pumping and slow recovery, Fregon FRG 1
02
2
02
18
02
3
02
17
eb
-0
2
4
eb
-0
2
16
eb
-0
2
5
eb
-0
2
15
Pump Rate (L/s)
SWL (metres)
Fregon FRG 1
Effect of continuous pumping and slow recovery
Daily Summary
Raingauge (5344-47)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
5
600
Corrected SWL (m)
Daily Rainfall (mm)
15
500
25
400
Failed SWL
probe
35
300
45
200
55
100
65
1/01/98
1/07/98
1/01/99
1/07/99
1/01/00
1/07/00
1/01/01
1/07/01
1/01/02
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1/01/1998
1/07/1998
1/01/1999
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
1/07/2001
1/01/2002
0
Failed SWL
probe
Failed SWL
probe
FRG-14
The well was used continuously from November 2001 through January 2002, but has
been unused since. The SWL at 10.3 m has not changed since 1987, when the well was
drilled, other than minor oscillations between 10.2 m and 11.0 m (Fig. 3.6). The yield of
over 200 kL/day is provided without stress to the well, even for prolonged periods.
FRG-E4
The SWL unit was defective from November 2001 onwards and the data logger from
March 2002, so there is little new data to talk about. There are also blocks of defective
data in March-April 1998 and February-March 2001, and a problem with flowback
elevating the non-pumping SWL by 0.7 m before January 2000 (Fig. 3.7). Variations in
non-pumping SWL between 9.9 m and 10.1 m appear random, and may be influenced by
other factors such as pumping of another well.
Over the four years of monitoring the true non-pumping SWL has ranged from 9.91 m to
10.33 m and lacks any long-term trend. Thus the well appears capable of supplying
100 kL/day indefinitely without stress.
Recharge
There is no evidence of recharge but nor has the rainfall ever exceeded 50 mm in a day,
which appears to be the basic requirement for recharge in the Musgrave Block. It is likely
that the water in these aquifers comes from the Musgrave Ranges via Ernabella Creek,
and that local recharge is minimal. In this case recharge effects will be diffused by
distance and probably will not be obvious.
Conclusions
All four wells have very similar characteristics and are probably tapping the same aquifer.
This aquifer is extensive and has a very time-consistent water level. While there is a
certain amount of down-coning when a well is pumped continuously for several months,
this is recovered within a month or two on resting that well. Water sustainability does not
appear to be a problem in the Fregon area.
Two additional production wells have recently been drilled some 3 km north of Fregon.
These produce rather better water than the current production wells at good yields, but
have not yet been pump tested because of problems with anthopological clearance.
33
Daily Summary
Raingauge (5344-47)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
5
600
15
500
Corrected SWL (m)
Daily Rainfall (mm)
400
35
300
Failed SWL probe
45
200
55
100
65
1/01/98
1/07/98
1/01/99
1/07/99
1/01/00
1/07/00
1/01/01
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1/01/1998
1/07/1998
1/01/1999
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
0
1/07/01
1/07/2001
1/01/02
1/01/2002
Failed
SWL probe
25
Daily Summary
Fregon FRG E4 (5344-19)
Raingauge (5344-47)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
5
600
10
500
15
400
20
300
30
Daily Rainfall (mm)
Failed SWL
probe
25
200
Failed SWL
probe
35
1/01/98
1/07/98
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1/01/1998
1/07/1998
100
0
1/01/99
1/01/1999
Figure 3.7 Daily Summary, Fregon FRG E4
1/07/99
1/07/1999
1/01/00
1/01/2000
1/07/00
1/07/2000
1/01/01
1/01/2001
1/07/01
1/07/2001
1/01/02
1/01/2002
Corrected SWL (m)
Flowback
4. KENMORE PARK
Water Production
Much the same as in previous years. Monitoring of well KP-6 failed early in April, so
consumption figures for April and May are incomplete (Fig. 4.2). Again the bulk of supply
came from KP-6, with a minor, but increasing, contribution from KP-98 (this well was
called KP-94B).
Table 4.
Well
Water production at Kenmore Park, 1998–2002
Unit
Number
Production (kL)
Apr. 1999
1999
Apr. 2000
2000
Apr. 2001
2001
Nov. 2001
– Apr. 2002
KP-6
5345-67
10 529.0
4 767.0
6 405.0
1 773.0
7 458.0
*5 114.9
*6 128.6
KP-7
5345-68
978.1
798.6
584.6
3 413.0
1 246.6
1 334.0
1 156.0
KP-98
5345-98
275.0
112.0
556.0
1 253.0
1 458.0
495.9
595.2
11 782.1
5 677.6
7 545.6
7 439.0
10 162.6
6 944.8
7 879.8
Total
Note: production for KP 98 was derived from the hours pumped, assuming a rate of 0.5 L/s, to Nov 2001.
* KP-6 flow meter failed. Figures taken from hourly pump rate.
Wells
KP-6
Data gathered since April 1998, when the submersible transducer was replaced by a
surface unit, is more reliable than earlier data (Fig. 4.3). The latter contained numerous
shifts that have been corrected as far as possible, but variations in SWL during 1997 and
earlier are less reliable than those from 1998 onwards.
The well was pumped fairly continuously throughout the current period, but was
unstressed and even gained somewhat in SWL.
Since October 2000 the pumping regime has been much more sustainable. When the
hours of pumping were decreased in the winter of 2001 the SWL gradually rose by a
metre or more, and the level of 8.7 m in February 2002 is as high as has been recorded
for nearly four years. For this well it is clear that the SWL is slow to recover, and that
reduced pumping caused some of this recovery. However it is likely that there is a
recharge contribution which should help to lift the SWL when pumping hours are reduced
this winter. The true non-pumping SWL has not been reached this year because of the
slow recovery and extensive pumping times (Fig. 4.4).
Other than the water level at time of drilling (6 m), which may not have stabilized, the nonpumping SWL was shallowest in 1995 (8.2 m). The SWL dropped (with some oscillations)
over the next three years, reaching a low of 10.96 m in 1998 before rising again to the
present figure.
We have no record of the level of water cuts in this well, but the casing is slotted from 1224 m so it is probable that the water cut is as high as 12 m, which is 1.5 m below the
36
7090000
242500
245000
247500
7090000
240000
Study Area
Anangu
Pitjantjatjara
Lands
#S
Marla
#S
Oodnadatta
Moomba #S
Coober
#S Pedy
#
S
#
#
Roxby Downs
#
#S
98
7087500
7087500
#S
#
#
#S
Port Lincoln #S
68
S
#
KP 6
#
#S
#
KP 6
S
#
7085000
67
7085000
Inyarini Homeland
(Kenmore Park)
#S
ADELAIDE
#
#
#
0
1
2 Kilometres
in Aboriginal lands
Kenmore Park
240000
Figure 4.1
242500
245000
247500
#S
Monitored well
with rain gauge
Monitored wells
Well name
Other wells
#
67
#
Port
Augusta
Mount Gambier
#
KP 7 #
S
#
Ceduna
#
#
Leigh
Creek
#S
Tarcoola
KP 94B
WELLS
Kenmore Park Monthly Water Production
4000
3500
Data for KP 6 only available
3000
No data for
KP 6
Kilolitres
2500
KP 7
KP 6
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Feb-95 Aug-95 Feb-96 Aug-96 Feb-97 Aug-97 Feb-98 Aug-98 Feb-99 Aug-99 Feb-00 Aug-00 Feb-01 Aug-01 Feb-02
Figure 4.2 Community water production at Kenmore Park
KP 94B
Daily Summary
Kenmore Park KP6 (5345-67)
Raingauge (5345-68)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
600
5
550
500
10
400
Corrected SWL (m)
15
350
300
20
Failed SWL
probe
25
250
200
Logger failure
150
100
30
Logger
failure
35
1/01/1995
50
0
1/07/1995
1/01/1996
1/07/1996
1/01/1997
1/07/1997
1/01/1998
1/07/1998
1/01/1999
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
1/07/2001
1/01/2002
1/07/1995
1/01/1996
1/07/1996
1/01/1997
1/07/1997
1/01/1998
1/07/1998
1/01/1999
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
1/07/2001
1/01/2002
Daily Rainfall (mm)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1/01/1995
Figure 4.3 Daily Summary, Kenmore Park KP 6
450
Kenmore Park KP 6
5
10
6
9
7
1
15
0
6M
ar
-
26
-F
19
-F
11
-F
4F
27
-J
20
-J
12
-J
5J
ec
28
-D
21
-D
ec
-
01
ec
13
-D
ec
-
Figure 4.4 Effect of continuous pumping and slow recovery, Kenmore Park KP 6
02
14
eb
-0
2
2
eb
-0
2
13
eb
-0
2
3
eb
-0
2
12
an
-0
2
4
an
-0
2
11
an
-0
2
5
an
-0
2
10
01
6
01
9
01
SWL (metres)
8
6D
8
Slow
recovery
Pump Rate (L/s)
7
current pumping SWL. While the current pumping regime appears sustainable, care
should be taken not to increase the pump rate and to rest the well whenever possible.
KP-7
The SWL monitor failed in late December, so that hourly levels are not available.
Otherwise, apart from a period in late 2000 and early 2001, the SWL data for this well is
very good (Fig. 4.5).
The non-pumping SWL dropped slowly but steadily through 1998 and 1999 from 10.8 m to
a low of 11.31 m. Since then the SWL has risen, again slowly, to a level of 8.9 m in May
2002 (manual measurement). The volume of water pumped from the well has increased
(see Table 4). A major rainfall event occurred in January 2000 and others occurred in the
summer of 2001-2002. It is clear that recharge to the aquifer is occurring and that the
long-term sustainability of the well has improved.
The current SWL of 8.9 m is the highest on record for this well, although we have no
knowledge prior to 1997.
The well was pumped continuously for 5 days at 0.7 L/s in December 2000, without undue
drawdown (Fig. 4.6). A similar trial for 17 days in December 1997 at 1.4-1.2 L/s (Fig. 4.7)
resulted in a much greater and continuing drawdown that, apparently, affected the well’s
performance for years to come. It is apparent that the former pump rate (0.7 L/s) is much
more sustainable, probably for several weeks if needed, yielding 60 kL/day.
KP-98
This well has only been monitored since November 2001 and has not been pumped
heavily (Fig. 4.8). The most extended pumping was on April 21-22, when the well was
pumped for 12 hours at 0.5 L/s (Fig. 4.9). This caused a drop in SWL of 0.7 m at start of
pumping, but minimal further decline over the 12 hours, indicating that the rate could be
continued for much longer times. More extensive use of this well would allow KP-6 to be
rested and to recover.
There are clear indications of recharge in this well, with a steady rise in SWL of 2.15 m
over the 6-month period from 6.92 m to 4.77 m. When the well was drilled in 1994 the
SWL was 7.2 m, and dropped to a low of 11.66 m in 1999 (manual measurements).
Clearly the SWL is quite dynamic, with significant recharge having occurred since 1999.
Whether the decline in water level resulted from water withdrawal or natural drainage is
not indicated by the existing data, but it is probable that a considerable proportion is
natural drainage considering the low production from this well.
Recharge
Recharge has clearly taken place in the aquifers at all three wells, although the indications
at KP-6 are somewhat hidden by the heavy pumping regime.
Conclusions
While there are no immediate concerns, the sustainability of KP-6 would be enhanced by
sharing the load with KP-98 that, on current records, could sustain a much heavier
pumping regime. We suggest that KP-98 be pumped for 24 hours at least once a week,
which would test the sustainability of this well and allow KP-6 to be rested.
41
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
10
300
15
250
20
200
150
25
SWL probe
failure
100
30
Logger
failure
50
35
40
16/12/97
0
16/06/98
16/12/98
16/06/99
16/12/99
16/06/00
16/12/00
16/06/01
16/12/01
16/06/1998
16/12/1998
16/06/1999
16/12/1999
16/06/2000
16/12/2000
16/06/2001
16/12/2001
Daily Rainfall (mm)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
16/12/1997
Corrected SWL (m)
Daily Summary
Raingauge (5345-68)
Kenmore Park KP 7
10
5
12
4.5
Slow
recovery
2
24
1.5
26
1
28
0.5
30
0
00
ec
11
-D
9D
ec
-
00
ec
7D
ec
5D
ec
3D
ec
1D
ov
29
-N
Figure 4.6 Effect of continuous pumping. December 2000, Kenmore Park KP 7
Pump Rate (L/s)
22
00
2.5
00
20
00
3
00
18
00
3.5
ov
27
-N
4
16
00
SWL (metres)
14
2.5
22
2
24
1.5
26
1
28
0.5
30
0
9J
7J
5J
3J
1J
ec
30
-D
ec
28
-D
ec
26
-D
ec
24
-D
ec
22
-D
ec
20
-D
Figure 4.7 Effect of continuous pumping, Dec 2000-Jan 2001, Kenmore Park KP 7
Pump Rate (L/s)
20
an
-9
8
3
an
-9
8
18
an
-9
8
3.5
an
-9
8
16
an
-9
8
4
97
14
97
4.5
97
12
97
5
97
10
97
SWL (metres)
Kenmore Park KP 7
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
4
60
5
50
6
40
7
30
8
20
9
10
10
1/11/01
0
1/12/01
1/01/02
1/02/02
1/03/02
1/04/02
1/05/02
1/12/2001
1/01/2002
1/02/2002
1/03/2002
1/04/2002
1/05/2002
Daily Rainfall (mm)
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1/11/2001
Corrected SWL (m)
Daily Summary
Raingauge (5345-68)
Kenmore Park KP 98
5
4
4.5
4.5
4
5
2.5
6.5
2
7
1.5
7.5
1
8
0.5
8.5
0
Figure 4.9 Effect of continuous pumping, Kenmore Park KP 98
02
26
-A
pr
-
02
24
-A
pr
-
02
22
-A
pr
-
02
9
20
-A
pr
-
SWL (metres)
3
6
Pump Rate (L/s)
3.5
5.5
5. PUKATJA
Water Production
Water came mainly from four wells, E-12, E-45, E97B and E-97L (Fig. 5.2). The monthly
water production plot omits E-97L for the last 6 months as the logger had failed, but the
accumulated flow figure in the table below is correct. Overall the water consumption is
marginally higher than earlier years.
Table 5.
Well
Water production at Pukatja, 1998–2002
Unit
Number
Production (kL)
Apr. 1999
E-01
5345-06
1999
–
Apr. 2000
–
–
2000
Apr. 2001
2001
Nov. 2001
– Apr. 2002
–
–
–
–
*
16 829.2
18 020.0
E-12
5345-12
18 280.0
16 193.0
4 801.9
16 802.3
10 746.0
E-42
5345-33
638.4
1 563.2
2 395.0
2 726.7
1 839.9
3 362.2
1 000.2
E-44
5345-85
–
7.2
0.2
0.1
3.0
520.2
2 277.2
E-45
5345-84
9 802
8 205.0
9 346.3
10 579.0
6 294.0
8 385.0
11 385.0
–
‡
19 310.0
6 899.6
1 913.9
30 126.0
8 399.1
17 493.0
–
‡
7 200.5
9 680.5
7 009.9
2 985.1
18 282.4
11 109.0
28 720.4
52 478.9
31 123.5
39 031.9
51 994.0
55 778.1
61 284.4
E-97B
E-97L
Total
5345-114
5345-124
*
The production of E 12 was derived from the pumping hours, assuming a rate of 1.1 L/s.
‡
Monitoring equipment was not installed.
Wells
E-01
The water level is this well, which is no longer pumped or monitored (other than manual
SWL measurements), has risen to it’s highest level on record (3.95 m), the rise mostly
occurring in the last year. It has evidently benefited from recharge in 2001 and 2002. The
lowest SWL (8.86 m) was reached in October 1999, the level having dropped 0.7 m after
pumping ceased in early 1998.
The well was pumped continuously through the summer of 1997-98 at rates of 0.5-0.1 L/s,
with the rate being decreased over a period of weeks, presumably to prevent the well
forking. It appears that the well can be used for prolonged periods, but only at rates of
about 0.2 L/s or 17 kL/day.
E-12
The well has again been pumped very heavily, and still maintains it’s sustainability. The
SWL unit failed in late December 2001, but the trend is clear. The non-pumping SWL in
May 2002 was 3.7 m (manual measurement), which is the highest on record by 4.4 m.
This figure is probably conservative, as the well is never rested for long enough for it to
fully recover to a non-pumping rate (at least a week is required).
47
205000
210000
215000
220000
7095000
7095000
Anangu
Pitjantjatjara
Lands
#
Study Area
#S Marla
#S Oodnadatta
Moomba #S
Coober
#S Pedy
Roxby Downs
#
Aeroplane Bore Homeland #S
Racecourse Bore Homeland
E 44
85 S
##
S
E 45
#
84
#
###
Ceduna
# 33
E 12 #S
12
#S
Port Lincoln #S
#
#
#
06 #
Mount Gambier
#
#
#
#S
#
E 12
#
12
Cre
ek
#
# ##
##
#S ADELAIDE
E 1#
7090000
Pukatja Homeland (Ernabella) #S
Port
#
#S #
#
Leigh
Creek
#S
#S Augusta
#
#
#
#
E 42
7090000
#
#S
###
#S
#S
Tarcoola
#
#S
Monitored well
with rain gauge
Monitored wells
Well name
Other wells
##
7085000
E 97B
Turkey Bore
Homeland
#
E 97L
S#
124 #
S
#
114
#
#
S# ## #
# #
#
#
7085000
#
0
S Tjutjunpiri Homeland
#
#
na
ba
$ Mount Warrabillinna
Er
205000
Figure 5.1
210000
215000
2
3 Kilometres
in Aboriginal lands
Pukatja
#
lla
#
1
220000
WELLS
Pukatja Monthly Water Production
20000
18000
16000
14000
E 97L
E 97B
E 45
E 44
E 42
E 12
E1
Kilolitres
12000
10000
Data available for E 45 only
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
Feb-95
Aug-95
Feb-96
Aug-96
Feb-97
Aug-97
Feb-98
Aug-98
Feb-99
Month & Year
Figure 5.2 Community water production at Pukatja
Aug-99
Feb-00
Aug-00
Feb-01
Aug-01
Feb-02
From 1971 to March 2000 the non-pumping SWL was consistently between 8.1 m and
8.4 m (Fig. 5.3). Neither continuous pumping (100 kL/day) nor natural drainage caused
any decline in this level. It seems probable that recharge started with the rains of February
2000, with a clear rise in SWL to above 8 m when the well was rested in June 2000. While
it will be interesting to see what happens to the SWL once recharge has ceased, past
history indicates that the base level of about 8 m is unlikely to be affected other than by an
extended period of drought.
Thus the well shows no sign of stress over the three and a half years of monitoring, and
the aquifer has shown clear indications of recharge over the past year.
E-42
The final SWL of 4.43 m is easily the highest on record – the previous peak being 9.3 m
in1997. The SWL data between December and May indicates copious recharge from both
rainfall events in January and March, with the subsequent declines caused by natural
drainage (Fig. 5.4). Continuous pumping during August, September and December 2001
resulted in negligible drawdown, unlike similar periods of pumping in 1998 and 1999 which
resulted in drawdowns of 2 to 10 metres. Recharge from 5 rainfall events in the last two
and a half years has stabilized this aquifer and should permit its use for more extensive
pumping, at least until the SWL drops to 10 m again. Even then the aquifer may be more
able to cope with higher withdrawals, as evidenced by the difference in drawdown
between November 1999 to February 2000 (over 2 m) and April to May 2000 (0.5 m). In
both of these periods the non-pumping SWL was about 10 m.
This well was originally rated at a yield of 5 L/s in 1981. In recent years, since monitoring
started, it has been pumped at 0.2-0.4 L/s, presumably because higher yields could not be
sustained. While it would be unwise to revert to the maximum pump rate, it is possible that
higher rates of, perhaps, 1-2 L/s could now be sustained.
E-44
This well was pumped at 0.2 L/s for extensive periods in 2002 with minimal drawdown
(Fig. 5.5). Meanwhile recharge has occurred steadily since June 2001 and dramatically
since the rains in December 2001 and February 2002. The water level, which is still rising,
has now reached 5.8 m which is within 3.2 m of the level at the time of drilling in 1989 and
well above the level of ~12 m which has persisted since 1987, when monitoring began.
This well is now back to its state of 1989, and could probably yield 10 L/s again. However,
such a yield would be short-lived. The well should be used primarily as a backup, and for
emergency supplies, but could be used on a regular basis so long as the pump rate was
kept low, say 1 L/s.
E-45
The SWL monitor failed on 5 November 2001, only a few days after the download, so only
pump rates are available for the rest of the period (Fig. 5.6). This is unfortunate because
the SWL rose by 6 m in this interval to 5.9 m (from manual measurement in May 2002)
and it would have been instructive to see the graph of this rise. The aquifer has benefited
from five recharge events over the past two and a half years, but this was by far the
biggest rise. The water level is now above the stabilized level at the time the well was
drilled in 1989 (9.2 m).
50
1.2 PUMP RATE L/s
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
4
400
6
360
8
320
10
280
12
240
14
200
16
1.7
SWL probe
failure
1.1
1.1
160
1.2
120
18
80
20
Logger
failure
Flowmeter failure
40
22
24
1/10/1998
0
1/04/1999
1/10/1999
1/04/2000
1/10/2000
1/04/2001
1/10/2001
1/04/2002
1/04/1999
1/10/1999
1/04/2000
1/10/2000
1/04/2001
1/10/2001
1/04/2002
Daily Rainfall (mm)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1/10/1998
Figure 5.3 Daily Summary, Pukatja E 12
Corrected SWL (m)
Daily Summary
Pukatja E12 (5345-12)
Raingauge (5345-33)
0.35 PUMP RATE L/S
Daily Summary
Pukatja E42 (5345-33)
Raingauge (5345-33)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
200
0
10
120
Corrected SWL (m)
160
SWL probe
failure
80
15
20
25
1/12/97
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.2-0.15
0.1
6
0.2
0.37
0.35
40
Flowmeter
failure
0
1/06/98
1/12/98
1/06/99
1/12/99
1/06/00
1/12/00
1/06/01
1/12/01
1/06/1998
1/12/1998
1/06/1999
1/12/1999
1/06/2000
1/12/2000
1/06/2001
1/12/2001
Daily Rainfall (mm)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1/12/1997
Recharge
5
Daily Summary
Pukatja E44 (5345-85)
Raingauge (5345-33)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
4
160
6
140
8
120
10
100
12
80
14
60
16
40
Battery failure
18
20
Pump removed
20
1/12/97
0
1/06/98
1/12/98
1/06/99
1/12/99
1/06/00
1/12/00
1/06/01
1/12/01
1/06/1998
1/12/1998
1/06/1999
1/12/1999
1/06/2000
1/12/2000
1/06/2001
1/12/2001
Daily Rainfall (mm)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1/12/1997
Corrected SWL (m)
SWL data is very noisy
Daily Summary
Pukatja E45 (5345-84)
Raingauge (5345-33)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
600
5
doubtful data
Recharge
540
10
480
Corrected SWL (m)
360
300
20
SWL probe failure
240
25
180
120
30
Logger
failure
35
1/01/95
60
0
1/07/95
1/01/96
1/07/96
1/01/97
1/07/97
1/01/98
1/07/98
1/01/99
1/07/99
1/01/00
1/07/00
1/01/01
1/07/01
1/01/02
1/07/1995
1/01/1996
1/07/1996
1/01/1997
1/07/1997
1/01/1998
1/07/1998
1/01/1999
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
1/07/2001
1/01/2002
Daily Rainfall (mm)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1/01/1995
420
15
E-45 has contributed a steady 65 kL/day to Pukatja’s water supply for the last 3 years
without any sign of stress, although the SWL was declining gradually before the recent
recharge events. Before 1998 pumping at higher levels caused considerable stress to this
well, but it appears that the recent regime of pumping 0.75 L/s continuously is sustainable.
Higher pumping rates should be avoided other than possibly for short periods.
E-97B
The SWL data for this well has many errors, but general patterns can still be seen (Fig.
5.7). The pump rate has been consistently high (3.0-3.5 L/s) and has been carried
reasonably well. The recharge events in February 2000, December 2001 and February
2002 show a prompt effect on the SWL of a rise for about 3 weeks and then a decline,
both rise and fall occurring whether the well is being pumped or not (Fig. 5.8). The
envelope of pumping and non-pumping SWLs clearly shows this. After reaching a peak of
7.4 m in March, the final SWL was 9.2 m - 4.3 m higher than that when the well was drilled
in 1997.
This well has been a major contributor to the water supply and does not appear to be
stressed by current pumping levels. It also clearly gets recharge when rains are
sufficiently heavy. It is probable that long term changes in water level are unrelated to
pumping, and depend solely on recharge and natural drainage. The pumping rate should
not be increased, as this may stress the aquifer in the short term. However, the daily
hours of pumping could probably be increased without any damage to water supplies in
either the short or long term.
E-97L
The logging unit failed in early December 2001, so there is no record of the well’s
response to the subsequent recharge events. However, it is clear that there was recharge
as the water level in May 2002 was 11.6 m, 3.4 m higher than in December and 2.7 m
higher than in 1997. Like E-97B, this well sustains long term pumping at the current rate of
1.4 L/s, but this rate should not be increased (Fig. 5.9).
Recharge
The rainfall events of December 2001 and February 2002 had a much more dramatic
effect on the water levels in the aquifers than earlier events (e.g. February 2000) of equal
magnitude. It is uncertain whether this is caused by earlier rains having saturated the
subsurface, by the precise area in which the rain fell, or some other cause. Whatever the
mechanism, all wells benefited substantially from these recharge events. It appears that
all wells, including those north of the community which were getting fragile, are now
restored to their productivity at the time of drilling.
Summary
The water supply for Pukatja has improved markedly, firstly by the inclusion of the two
wells at Pupalyatjara (E-97B and E-97L) and secondly by the recharge of the older wells
closer to the community. All wells appear to be unstressed by current production levels
and, generally, seem capable of increases in the duration of pumping, though not in the
pump rate.
55
Daily Summary
Pukatja E97B (5345-114)
Raingauge (5345-33)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
700
5
Recharge
SWL probe
failure
10
Recharge
Logger
failure
600
Slow
Slow
recovery
recovery
15
20
400
25
300
30
200
35
45
1/01/99
SWL probe
failure
Logger
failure
40
100
0
1/07/99
1/01/00
1/07/00
1/01/01
1/07/01
1/01/02
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
1/07/2001
1/01/2002
Daily Rainfall (mm)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1/01/1999
Figure 5.7 Daily Summary, Pukatja E 97B
Corrected SWL (m)
500
Pukatja E 97B
Effect of recharge events in December 2001 and February 2002
20
6
decline
18
8
20
6
22
4
24
2
26
0
24
-A
pr
-
4Ap
r-
15
-M
ar
-
23
-F
3F
14
-J
01
ec
25
-D
Figure 5.8 Effect of recharge Dec. 2001 and Feb. 2002, Pukatja E 97B
02
10
02
16
02
12
eb
-0
2
14
eb
-0
2
14
an
-0
2
12
Pump Rate (L/s)
18
16
ec
5D
recharge
decline
10
01
SWL (metres)
8
recharge
Daily Summary
Pukatja E97L (5345-124)
Raingauge (5345-33)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
500
10
450
12
14
400
16
350
18
300
20
250
Recharge
200
22
24
150
Flowmeter
failure
100
26
SWL probe
failure
50
28
30
1/01/99
0
1/07/99
1/01/00
1/07/00
1/01/01
1/07/01
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
1/07/2001
Daily Rainfall (mm)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1/01/1999
Figure 5.9 Daily Summary, Pukatja E 97L
Corrected SWL (m)
noisy SWL data
6. AMATA
Water production
All four wells have contributed significantly at various times (Fig. 6.2). However, well A-15
was decommissioned after a failed attempt to clean it out, and was replaced by A-109
drilled a few metres away. The latter well appears as good a supplier as, if not better than,
its predecessor.
Table 6.
Well
Water production at Amata, 1998–2001
Unit
Number
Production (kL)
Apr. 1999
1999
Apr. 2000
2000
Apr. 2001
2001
Nov. 2001
– Apr. 2002
A-15
5145-55
16 300.0
12 853.0
14 251.0
–
2 097.0
2 036.0
–
A-17
5145-84
9 685.1
8 150.7
7 647.0
11 030.0
13 887.0
5 487.2
**8 796.2
A-26
5145-19
1 361.2
–
8 602.2
10 400.0
11 688.0
4 878.7
2 660.7
A-109
5145-109
2 197.0
12 589.0
14 598.9
24 045.9
Total
27 346.3 21 003.6*
30 500.0 21 430.0
†
27 672.0
* A 26 value is missing from total.
† A 15 value is missing from total.
** this output figure is taken from integration of hourly pump rates, as the accumulated flow figure was incorrect.
Wells
A-17
This well has been pumped gently over the past year, with an average yield of about
50 kL/day. The SWL has risen steadily over the period, as it has since the major recharge
event in February 2000 (Figs 6.3 and 6.4). A further lesser recharge event occurred in late
February 2002, again causing an immediate jump in SWL on top of the steady rise.
The non-pumping SWL is now 8.7 m compared to 14.7 m three years ago and
comparable to the level of 7.9 m in 1990, the earliest record available.
The well has never been stressed, even when pumped at over 100 kL/day for several
weeks (January 2001).
A-26
The well was pumped gently until A-109 was brought on line, after which it was pumped
continuously for short periods (a week or so) and rested in between (Fig. 6.5). This routine
is good for analysis as it: (a) shows how well the aquifer stands up to extended pumping
and (b) allows a non-pumping level to be achieved.
The well was pumped for 12 days continuously at 1.1 L/s, resulting in an initial 4 metre
drawdown but minimal further decline in SWL (Fig. 6.6). This indicates that the well can
sustain pumping for such periods, and probably much longer. However, this test is at a
time when the aquifer has just been recharged and the non-pumping SWL is still rising, so
the results may be rather more encouraging than they would be at less favourable times.
59
712000
713000
714000
715000
716000
Study Area
#
S
#
#
#
A 26
#S Oodnadatta
Coober
#S Pedy
Tarcoola
#
19
#S Marla
7108000
7108000
Anangu
Pitjantjatjara
Lands
Roxby Downs
#S
#S
Ceduna
#S
#
Port Lincoln #S
Moomba #S
Leigh
Creek
#
S
Port
#S Augusta
#S ADELAIDE
#
A 15
55
S
#
7107000
7107000
#
A 17
84
Mount Gambier
#
#
#
#S
A 26
#
A 109 #S
#
109
19
#
7106000
Amata #S
#
7106000
#
#S
Monitored well
with rain gauge
Monitored wells
Well name
Other wells
#
#
#
0
0.5
1 Kilometres
#
#
#
712000
Figure 6.1
713000
7105000
7105000
#
714000
715000
716000
#
in Aboriginal lands
Amata
WELLS
Amata M
onth
ly Water Production
9000
8000
7000
Data for A 15 only
6000
A6
2
A 17
A 15
K
ilolitres
5000
A 109
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Feb-95
Aug-95
Feb-96
Aug-96
Feb-97
Aug-97
Figure 6.2 Community water production at Amata
Feb-98
Aug-98
Feb-99
Aug-99
Feb-00
Aug-00
Feb-01
Aug-01
Feb-02
Daily Summary
Amata A17 (5145-84)
Raingauge (5145-55 and 109)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
400
5
Recharge
7
350
9
300
Failed SWL
probe
250
13
200
15
17
150
Downward spikes are
faulty SWL data
19
100
21
50
23
25
1/01/98
0
1/07/98
1/01/99
1/07/99
1/01/00
1/07/00
1/01/01
1/07/01
1/07/1998
1/01/1999
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
1/07/2001
1/01/02
Daily Rainfall (mm)
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1/01/1998
Figure 6.3 Daily Summary, Amata A 17
1/01/2002
Corrected SWL (m)
11
Amata A 17
Effect of recharge event on 19th February 2000
10
11
0
3M
ar
-
2M
ar
-
1M
ar
-
29
-F
28
-F
27
-F
26
-F
25
-F
24
-F
23
-F
22
-F
21
-F
20
-F
19
-F
Figure 6.4 Effect of recharge event in February 2000, Amata A 17
00
16
00
1
00
15.5
eb
-0
0
2
eb
-0
0
15
eb
-0
0
3
eb
-0
0
14.5
eb
-0
0
4
eb
-0
0
5
14
eb
-0
0
13.5
eb
-0
0
6
eb
-0
0
13
eb
-0
0
7
eb
-0
0
12.5
eb
-0
0
8
Pump Rate (L/s)
9
recharge
12
18
-F
SWL (metres)
11.5
Daily Summary
Amata A26 (5145-19)
Raingauge (5145-55 and 109)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
300
10
Recharge
15
Failed SWL
probe
250
200
25
150
30
100
35
50
40
1/01/98
0
1/07/98
1/01/99
1/07/99
1/01/00
1/07/00
1/01/01
1/07/01
1/01/02
1/07/1998
1/01/1999
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
1/07/2001
1/01/2002
Daily Rainfall (mm)
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1/01/1998
Corrected SWL (m)
Logger
failure
20
3
15
2.5
16
2
17
1.5
18
1
19
0.5
20
0
25
-M
ar
-
18
-M
ar
-
10
-M
ar
-
3M
ar
-
23
-F
16
-F
8F
1F
Figure 6.6 Effect of continuous pumping, Amata A 26
Pump Rate (L/s)
14
02
3.5
02
4
13
02
12
02
4.5
eb
-0
2
11
eb
-0
2
5
eb
-0
2
10
eb
-0
2
SWL (metres)
Amata A 17
Effect of continuous pumping for 12 days
Like A-17, this well shows a steady rise in SWL since the recharge event of February
2000 and an accelerated rate of rise after the event of February 2002. The level of 11.2 m
in May 2002 is almost back to the level of 10.6 m of 1966, when the well was drilled.
A-109
The well has been pumped for a few hours most days since it was brought on line in May
2001, although the flow rate was not recorded until September. This rate of extraction –
30 to 130 kL/day – puts no pressure on the well (Fig. 6.7). As in the other wells the SWL
has risen steadily from 9.7 m to 8.6 m over the period, with a slight surge in rise rate after
the rains in February 2002.
Recharge
All wells have shown the effects of recharge continuously since the rains of February
2000, and are close to their all time peak levels. It is evident from a continued rise in SWL
for a year after a recharge event that recharge occurs both close to the wells and many
kilometres away.
Conclusions
The similarity between these wells indicates that they are all tapping the same aquifer. It
would be useful to check potentiometric gradients by obtaining accurate collar elevations
for each well.
All wells appear to be operating comfortably within their potential, with reserves for
emergencies such as increased demand or a breakdown of the equipment in one well.
The water level in the aquifer is almost as high as records show, and is still rising.
66
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
5
350
10
300
15
250
20
200
150
25
Faulty
SWL
data
30
35
100
Flowmeter
disconnected
40
1/08/01
50
0
1/09/01
1/10/01
1/11/01
1/12/01
1/01/02
1/02/02
1/03/02
1/04/02
1/05/02
1/10/2001
1/11/2001
1/12/2001
1/01/2002
1/02/2002
1/03/2002
1/04/2002
1/05/2002
80
Daily Rainfall (mm)
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1/08/2001
1/09/2001
Daily Production (KL/day)
Corrected SWL (m)
Daily Summary
Amata A109 (5145-109)
7. KALKA
Water Production
Water consumption was similar to previous years, with a high consumption month of
2 000 kL in February 2002 (Fig. 7.2). Similar high consumptions occurred in February
1998 and March 1999. As usual the brunt of this demand, two-thirds, was supplied by
KA-3.
Table 7.
Well
Water production at Kalka, 1998–2001
Unit
Number
Production (kL)
Apr. 1999
1999
Apr. 2000
2000
Apr. 2001
2001
Nov. 2001
– Apr. 2002
KA-1
4745-78
928.9
676.3
21.9
342.4
786.6
363.5
1 196.7
KA-2
4745-94
1 733.8
1 216.2
1 214.4
656.5
1 748.1
1 161.3
1 286.2
KA-3
4745-85
6 310.3
4 710.7
4 503.9
2 677.0
5 111.5
5 092.6
5 762.5
8 973.0
6 603.2
5 740.2
3 675.9
7 646.2
6 617.4
8 245.4
Total
Wells
KA-1
This well was pumped at 0.2 L/s and was unstressed, even when pumped continuously
for 60 hours in January 2002 (Fig. 7.3). There are a number of setts in the SWL data, but
overall the non-pumping SWL is probably steady at 27.5 m + 0.1 m, a level it has
maintained since 1998.
KA-2
As for KA-1 the well was unstressed by demands upon it over the past year. The SWL
was steady at 28.2 m, with a drop of about 0.4 m over the past 4 years (Fig. 7.4).
The data for the last year has been very reliable. Before that there were many setts and
drifts in the SWL that have been corrected as far as possible. However, some of the
variations, particularly during the year 2000, are caused by instrument malfunction and
could not be corrected. The general trend over the full period is clear, however, and the
rate of decline indicated above (0.1 m/year) is reliable.
The aquifer extends from 29 m to about 50 m, so this rate of decline is not considered to
be serious, in spite of the absence of indications of recharge.
KA-3
This is still the main water supply for Kalka. The biggest demand was in January 2002, as
with the other two wells. While this stressed well KA-3 in the short term with 80 hours of
continuous pumping causing a drop in SWL to 26.5 m, the well recovered within a day to
68
510000
512500
515000
517500
520000
Study Area
#
Anangu
Pitjantjatjara
Lands
#
#S Marla
KA 1
78
S
#
#
#
#
#
S
##
#
Kalka Aboriginal Community
KA 2 #S #
#
#S
#S
Tarcoola
Ceduna
#S
#
Port Lincoln #S
7110000
7110000
#
#
#
#S
KA 1
96
#
#
# #
#
92
#
$
#S
#S
#
#
#
#
#
0
#
1
2
515000
517500
520000
3 Kilometres
in Aboriginal lands
Kalka and Pipalyatjara
WELLS
$ Wandu Hill
Figure 7.1
Monitored well
with rain gauge
Monitored wells
Well name
#
#
#
Pipalyatjara Aboriginal
Community
#
512500
#S
Other wells
#
#
#
#
78
#
Scarface
#
7105000
7105000
MD 13
PIP 95
95
#
510000
7107500
7107500
#
#
#S ADELAIDE
Mount Gambier
$ Dulgunja Hill
S
#
Port
#S# 85
#
#
Leigh
Creek
#S
#S Augusta
KA 3
94
PIP 96
Moomba #S
Roxby Downs
7112500
7112500
#S Oodnadatta
Coober
#S Pedy
#
Kalka M
onth
ly Water Production
2500
2000
1500
Kilolitres
KA 3
KA 2
KA 1
1000
500
0
Jan-98
Jul-98
Jan-99
Jul-99
Figure 7.2 Community water production at Kalka
Jan-00
Jul-00
Jan-01
Jul-01
Jan-02
Daily Summary
Kalka KA1 (4745-78)
Raingauge (4745-85)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
26
100
26.5
90
27
80
27.5
70
28
60
28.5
50
29
40
29.5
30
30
20
30.5
10
31
1/01/98
0
1/07/98
1/01/99
1/07/99
1/01/00
1/07/00
1/01/01
1/07/01
1/01/02
1/07/1998
1/01/1999
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
1/07/2001
1/01/2002
Daily Rainfall (mm)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1/01/1998
Figure 7.3 Daily Summary, Kalka KA 1
Corrected SWL (m)
unreconcilable sets make all data suspect. SWL close to 27.5m at all times
Daily Summary
Kalka KA2 (4745-94)
Raingauge (4745-85)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
26
100
26.5
90
Corrected SWL (m)
Failed SWL
probe
Faulty SWL probe
SWL probe
disconnected
80
Failed SWL
probe
27.5
70
28
60
28.5
50
29
40
29.5
30
30
20
30.5
10
31
1/01/98
0
1/07/98
1/01/99
1/07/99
1/01/00
1/07/00
1/01/01
1/07/01
1/01/02
1/07/1998
1/01/1999
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
1/07/2001
1/01/2002
Daily Rainfall (mm)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1/01/1998
27
its normal non-pumping level of 20 m (Figs 7.5 and 7.6). However, the SWL has dropped
by about 1 m over the past 4 years. It may be significant that after this period of heavy
demand the drawdown of the well increased by about 1 m, from 4 m to 5 m, although the
pump rate (0.8 L/s) remained the same and the daily duration of pumping decreased (11
hours to 9 hours). This brings the drawdown to within 2 m of the watercut and may reduce
the potential of the well for higher pump rates or extended pumping times.
Figure 7.6 shows the effect of pumping on the SWL clearly. On starting pumping there is
an initial drawdown of 3 meters within an hour or so, followed by a steady but slower drop
in SWL of 0.5-1.0 m/day for as long as the well is pumped. The first hour of recovery on
cessation of pumping brings the SWL to within about 1 m of the non-pumping level, but
the rest of the recovery takes about 8 hours. It is clear that the pumping regime of 9-16
January 2002 (pumping 8-10 hours per day) is sustainable, but that of 17-21 January
(pumping 24 hours a day) is not.
Overall the data for this well is of good quality. There was some data contamination from
water flowing back into the well from the distribution system in late 1999 and 2000, and
some intermittent equipment failure in the heavy pumping period between December 2000
and March 2001. The only trends to be seen are the steady drop in non-pumping SWL
over the four years of monitoring and the increased drawdown for lower pump rates.
Periods of withdrawal exceeding 60 kL/day result in a temporary drop in the SWL that is
recovered in a few weeks once the demand drops off.
Recharge
Rainfall for the latest 6-month period here comprised 358 mm, less than half that
experienced at Pipalyatjara 6 km away on the other side of Dulgunja Hill. This
demonstrates the local nature of rainfall in the Musgrave Block area. The rain fell mostly in
December 2001, and is still sufficient to anticipate some recharge. No recharge can be
seen in the SWL data for any well, in this or any of the monitoring periods. The lack of any
signs of recharge during this favourable period, when both Amata and Pipalyatjara wells
showed dramatic rises in SWL, is disturbing.
Summary
While there was no drop in aquifer water level in any of the wells over the past year, KA-2
and KA-3 have both shown a decline since 1998. The increased drawdown in KA-3 since
January 2002 is also a concern, as is the lack of evidence of recharge.
It might be wise to commence the basic infrastructure for getting KA-137 into production,
before the possible extra stresses of summer 2002-3.
73
0.7
Daily Summary
Kalka KA3 (4745-85)
Raingauge (4745-85)
PUMP RATE L/s
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
15
200
17
180
Intermittent flowback
Period of continuous
pumping
19
160
21
140
23
120
25
100
0.9
1.0
0.7
Faulty SWL
downspikes
27
0.9
80
29
60
31
40
33
20
35
1/01/1998
0
1/07/1998
1/01/1999
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
1/07/2001
1/07/1998
1/01/1999
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
1/07/2001
1/01/2002
60
Daily Rainfall (mm)
0.9
50
40
30
20
10
0
1/01/1998
1/01/2002
Corrected SWL (m)
Data logger failure
Kalka KA 3
Effect of pumping duration
5
sustainable
not sustainable
4.5
4
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
Figure 7.6 Effect of continuous pumping and slow recovery, Kalka KA 3
an
-0
2
21
-J
an
-0
2
20
-J
an
-0
2
19
-J
an
-0
2
18
-J
an
-0
2
17
-J
an
-0
2
16
-J
an
-0
2
15
-J
an
-0
2
14
-J
an
-0
2
13
-J
an
-0
2
12
-J
an
-0
2
11
-J
an
-0
2
0
Pump Rate (L/s)
3.5
10
-J
9J
an
-0
2
SWL (metres)
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
8. PIPALYATJARA
Water Production
Water consumption for the past year has been quite low, averaging just over
1 000 kL/month and never exceeding 2 000 kL/month (Fig. 8.1). The load is spread evenly
between the two wells.
Table 8.
Well
Water production at Pipalyatjara, 1998–2001
Unit
Number
Production (kL)
Apr. 1999
Apr. 2000
2000
Apr. 2001
2001
PIP-95
4745-95
9 903.0
8 335.3
6 757.0
4 342.8
6 016.7
PIP-96
4745-92
6 564.1
8 475.1
2 840.8
5 009.9
6 339.0
4745-96
–
–
–
–
–
16 467.1
16 810.4
9 597.8
9 352.7
12 355.7
MD-13*
Total
*
1999
#
Nov. 2001
– Apr. 2002
3 638.7
4 944.7
3 535.9
5 163.5
7 174.6
10 108.2
There was no constant level of water production for MD 13 and no volume readings are available. The
well was pumped for 577.61 h in Apr.– Oct. 1999, 8.28 h in Oct. 1999 – Apr. 2000, 32.71 h in Apr. – Oct.
2000 and 333.68 h in Oct. 2000 – Apr. 2001.
# This figure comes from the hourly pump rate, rather than accumulated flow.
Wells
PIP-95
The non-pumping SWL remained at about 17 m until the recharge from the summer rains,
which caused an immediate but gradual rise (Fig. 8.2). In May the SWL had risen to
16.6 m and appears to be still rising. Pumping causes a drawdown in SWL to about
18.5 m, still well above the water cuts at 22-30 m.
The well was pumped at 1.2 L/s continuously for over 8 days in January 2001 (Fig. 8.3).
After the initial (well component) drawdown of 1.6 m the SWL remained constant over this
pumping period. After pumping ceased the well recovered to within 0.1 m of its prepumping level within an hour or two, but took a few days to fully recover. It appears that
the well can be pumped for several weeks at this rate without stress.
The SWL declined very slowly from 16.9 m in 1998 to just below 17 m in 2000. It appears
to be largely unaffected by pumping or natural drainage (0.1 m in two years). This slow
decline makes the 0.4 m rise in 2002 all the more significant. The water supply appears
sustainable indefinitely.
PIP-96
The non-pumping SWL declined slowly but steadily over the four years 1998-2001
inclusive from 20.7 m to 21 m, but recovered 0.5 m following the late 2001 rains (Fig. 8.4).
At last date the SWL was still rising. While the potential drawdown to the top of the water
cut is only 1.0 m, this is probably adequate bearing in mind the steadiness of the SWL and
the thickness of the water cut (14 m).
76
Pipalyatjara M
onth
ly Water Production
7000
6000
5000
PIP 96
K
ilolitres
4000
PIP 95
3000
2000
1000
0
Oct-97
Apr-98
Oct-98
Apr-99
Figure 8.1 Community water production at Pipalyatjara
Oct-99
Apr-00
Oct-00
Apr-01
Oct-01
Apr-02
Daily Summary
Pipalyatjara PIP95 (4745-95)
Raingauge (4745-95)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
14
300
15
270
recharge
Noisy SWL data
240
SWL probe
failure
17
210
18
180
19
150
20
120
21
90
22
60
23
30
24
1/01/98
0
1/07/98
1/01/99
1/07/1998
1/01/1999
1/07/99
1/01/00
1/07/00
1/01/01
1/07/01
1/01/02
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
1/07/2001
1/01/2002
Daily Rainfall (mm)
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1/01/1998
Figure 8.2 Daily Summary, Pipalyatjara PIP 95
Corrected SWL (m)
16
Figure 8.3 Effect of sustained pumping, Pipalyatjara PIP 95
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
15
-J
14
-J
13
-J
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
12
-J
11
-J
00
00
00
00
an
-0
1
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
10
-J
9J
8J
7J
6J
5J
4J
3J
2J
1J
31
-D
30
-D
29
-D
28
-D
SWL (metres
)
16
16.5
17
17.5
18
3
18.5
2.5
19.5
19
2
1.5
20
1
20.5
0.5
21
0
Pump Rate (L/)s
Pipalyatjara PIP 95
fEfect of u
stsained pumping
5
4.5
4
3.5
Daily Summary
Pipalyatjara PIP96 (4745-96)
Raingauge (4745-95)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
20.0
300
Corrected SWL (m)
20.8
240
21.2
210
21.6
180
22.0
150
22.4
120
22.8
90
23.2
60
23.6
30
24.0
1/01/98
0
1/07/98
1/01/99
1/07/99
1/01/00
1/07/00
1/01/01
1/07/01
1/01/02
1/07/1998
1/01/1999
1/07/1999
1/01/2000
1/07/2000
1/01/2001
1/07/2001
1/01/2002
350
Daily Rainfall (mm)
270
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1/01/1998
Figure 8.4 Daily Summary, Pipalyatjara PIP 96
recharge
20.4
The well was pumped at 1.3 L/s continuously for over 8 days in January 2001 (Fig. 8.5).
The initial drawdown was less than that for PIP-95 (0.3 m), but otherwise the response
was similar. PIP-96 can also be pumped for a matter of weeks at this rate without stress
and is more robust than PIP-95.
Recharge
The area received exceptionally heavy rains in late November and December 2001,
amounting to 749 mm for the six-month period. Recharge is evident from the rise in SWL
in both wells.
Summary
The aquifer appears strong and the water supplies sustainable indefinitely at rates of 1.2
and 1.3 L/s (104 and 112 kL/day). It is evident that recharge takes place and probable that
the aquifer is fed by recharge over a considerable area.
81
Figure 8.5 Effect of sustained pumping, Pipalyatjara PIP 96
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
15
-J
14
-J
13
-J
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
an
-0
1
12
-J
11
-J
00
00
00
00
an
-0
1
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
10
-J
9J
8J
7J
6J
5J
4J
3J
2J
1J
31
-D
30
-D
29
-D
28
-D
SWL (metres)
20
20.2
9
20.4
8
20.6
7
20.8
6
21
5
21.2
4
21.4
3
21.6
2
21.8
1
22
0
Pump Rate (L/s)
Pipalyatjara PIP 96
Effect of sustained pumping
10
Aboriginal Lands Trust lands
9. NEPABUNNA
Water Production
Water production has been 20% lower in the last two download periods. There have been
considerable variations in the daily production and in pump rates, suggesting that
maintaining the water supply has been difficult.
Table 9.
Water production at Nepabunna, 1998–2002
Well
Unit
Number
Production (kL)
Apr. 1999
Apr. 2000
2000
Apr. 2001
2001
– Apr. 2002
N-101
6636-101
–
–
6 126.3
5 937.8
3 558.2
8 527.5
5 393.4
N-149
6636-149
–
–
6 846.7
6 682.2
8 447.1
2 103.5
4 621.5
–
–
12 973.0*
12 620.0
12 005.3
10 631.0
10 014.9
Total
*
1999
Nov. 2001
Monitoring equipment was not installed until late November 1999; production figures are for 4 months only.
N-101
Basic Data
Year drilled
Total Depth
Geology
Aquifer
Water Cuts
Yield
SWL
TDS
Casing
1980
64 m
0-64 m
57-60 m
40 m
57 m
58 m
1980
1980
2000
2002
1986
0-20.5 m
Silcrete
Jointed weathered siltstone
0.06 L/s
0.8 L/s
1.7 L/s
1.2 L/s (Pump Test, with 5 years to forking)
38.5 m
41.0 m
47.3 m
1 770 mg/L
152 mm
Most of the data before August 2001 is suspect, with changes in SWL unrelated to
pumping and sometimes random in trend (Fig. 9.3). However, the envelope of the
mimimum SWL correlates reasonably with measured values and the general trend in nonpumping SWL from around 45 m at the start of 2000 to 37 m in April 2001 may be correct.
After August 2001 the data are consistent, but the non-pumping SWL is still impossible to
determine because of the very slow recovery rate in this well and the short intervals
between pumping. The well has not had sufficient time to fully recover since records have
been kept.
83
302000
304000
306000
308000
6618000
6618000
#S Marla
NEPABUNNA MISSION
#S Oodnadatta
#S
Coober Pedy
Roxby Downs
#S
#S
Tarcoola
Ceduna
#S
#S
6616000
##
Leigh
Creek
#S
#
Study
Area
#S Port
Augusta
Port Lincoln
6616000
Moomba
#S
#S ADELAIDE
# #
#S
#
#
149
##
N2
Mount Gambier
#S
Nepabunna %
#
#
N 101 # #S #
#S
101
6614000
#
#
#
#
N2
#
Creek
#
Mo
NEPABUNNA MISSION
Mc
unt
Kin
6614000
#
149
#
lay
0
Monitored well
with rain gauge
Monitored wells
Well name
Other wells
Aboriginal land
1
2 Kilometres
6612000
6612000
NANTAWARRINNA
in Aboriginal lands
Nepabunna
WELLS
PIRSA Publishing Services AV 200213_094
Figure 9.1
302000
304000
306000
308000
Nepabunna Monthly Water Production
4500
4000
3500
3000
Kilolitres
N 149
2500
N 101
No data for
N 101
2000
1500
No data for
N 149
1000
500
0
Dec-99
Mar-00
Jun-00
Sep-00
Dec-00
Figure 9.2 Community water production at Nepabunna
Mar-01
Jun-01
Sep-01
Dec-01
Mar-02
Daily Summary
Nepabunna N101 (6636-101)
questionable data
300
no data
40
250
45
200
50
150
55
100
60
50
Flowmeter
failure
65
1/11/99
0
1/05/00
1/11/00
1/05/01
1/05/2000
1/11/2000
1/05/2001
1/11/01
1/05/02
1/11/2001
1/05/2002
Daily Rainfall (mm)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1/11/1999
Figure 9.3 Daily Summary, Nepabunna N 101
Corrected SWL (m)
35
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
The plots indicate that current pumping regimes are beyond the sustainability of this well.
A pump rate of 0.2 L/s (17 kL/day) could be sustainable indefinitely, but any increase on
this rate will require rest periods to allow the SWL to recover. Continuous pumping at
0.5 L/s results in a drop in SWL of ~0.1 m/day which, based on a current pumping SWL
(May, 2002) of 52 m, would result in forking within 60 days.
Major problems with interpreting the monitoring results are:
•
The well is rarely rested, and then for only a day or two.
•
The SWL recovery rate after pumping is slow, but variable – in Dec ‘01 5 days were
not sufficient (Fig. 9.4), while in late Feb ’00 the well apparently recovered in a few
hours (Fig. 9.5).
•
A combination of the above points means that the non-pumping SWL is rarely if ever
achieved.
•
The pump rate varies from 0.2-1.2 L/s
•
Inexplicable apparent ‘flowbacks’ occurred on 21/12/99 & 24/1/00 (Fig. 9.6).
•
The non-pumping SWL appears to range randomly between 37 m and 45 m
Additional monitoring data should clarify the state of this well and aquifer.
N-149
Basic Data
Year drilled
Total Depth
Geology
1983
120 m
0-2 m
Soil
2-120 m
Wilkawillina Limestone
Water Cuts
82 m
4.5 L/s
100 m
10.5 L/s
120 m
11 L/s
Yield
1983
12 L/s (not pump tested)
SWL
1983
51 m
2000
53 m
2002
53 m
TDS
1983
954 mg/L
1989
1066 mg/L
Casing
0-120 m
150 mm ID PVC
Production Interval Slotted 82-120 m.
The well was pumped almost continuously, but at a declining pump rate (0.6-0.2 L/s), over
the past 6 months (Fig. 9.7). So far as can be ascertained the non-pumping SWL was
constant at 52.5 m, while the pumping SWL rose from 57 m to 54.6 m with the reducing
pump rate.
87
Figure 9.4 Effect of sustained pumping and slow recovery, Nepabunna N 101
25
-D
24
-D
23
-D
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
40
slow recovery
44
4
46
3.5
48
3
50
2.5
52
2
54
1.5
56
1
58
0.5
60
0
Pump Rate (L/s)
slow recovery
22
-D
21
-D
20
-D
19
-D
18
-D
17
-D
16
-D
15
-D
14
-D
13
-D
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
12
-D
11
-D
10
-D
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
ec
-
SWL (metres)
42
9D
8D
7D
6D
5D
Nepabunna N 101
Slow SWL recovery from pumping (more than 5 days)
5
4.5
eb
2- -00
Fe
b
3- -00
Fe
b
4- -00
Fe
b
5- -00
Fe
b
6- -00
Fe
b
7- -00
Fe
b
8- -00
Fe
b
9- -00
Fe
10 b-0
-F 0
e
11 b-0
-F 0
eb
12 -0
-F 0
e
13 b-0
-F 0
e
14 b-0
-F 0
e
15 b-0
-F 0
e
16 b-0
-F 0
e
17 b-0
-F 0
e
18 b-0
-F 0
e
19 b-0
-F 0
e
20 b-0
-F 0
e
21 b-0
-F 0
e
22 b-0
-F 0
e
23 b-0
-F 0
e
24 b-0
-F 0
e
25 b-0
-F 0
e
26 b-0
-F 0
e
27 b-0
-F 0
e
28 b-0
-F 0
e
29 b-0
-F 0
eb
1- -00
M
ar
-0
0
1F
SWL (metres)
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
slow recovery
Figure 9.5 Effect of slow and variable recovery, Nepabunna N 101
quicker recovery (or faulty data)
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Pump Rate (L/s)
Nepabunna N 101
SWL recovery from pumping
5
4.5
4
3.5
5
Apparent
flowback
4.5
4
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
Figure 9.6 Effect of apparent flowback, January 2000, Nepabunna N 101
an
-0
0
26
-J
an
-0
0
0
Pump Rate (L/s)
3.5
25
-J
an
-0
0
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
24
-J
SWL (metres)
Nepabunna N 101
Example of flowback
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
50
300
52
270
54
240
56
210
180
58
Logger battery
failure
Declining
pump rate
60
150
62
120
SWL probe
failure
64
90
66
60
68
30
70
1/11/99
0
1/05/00
1/11/00
1/05/01
1/11/01
1/05/02
1/05/2000
1/11/2000
1/05/2001
1/11/2001
1/05/2002
Daily Rainfall (mm)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1/11/1999
Figure 9.7 Daily Summary, Nepabunna N 149
Corrected SWL (m)
Daily Summary
Nepabunna N149 (6636-149)
N-149
Basic Data
Year drilled
Total Depth
Geology
1983
120 m
0-2 m
Soil
2-120 m
Wilkawillina Limestone
Water Cuts
82 m
4.5 L/s
100 m
10.5 L/s
120 m
11 L/s
Yield
1983
12 L/s (not pump tested)
SWL
1983
51 m
2000
53 m
2002
53 m
TDS
1983
954 mg/L
1989
1066 mg/L
Casing
0-120 m
150 mm ID PVC
Production Interval Slotted 82-120 m.
The well was pumped almost continuously, but at a declining pump rate (0.6-0.2 L/s), over
the past 6 months (Fig. 9.7). So far as can be ascertained the non-pumping SWL was
constant at 52.5 m, while the pumping SWL rose from 57 m to 54.6 m with the reducing
pump rate.
Between August 2000 and November 2001 there was a lot of equipment failure, so
informative data is rather sparse. However, overall the earlier data indicates a similar
picture, with a pump rate varying from 0.9 to 0.2 L/s and the non-pumping SWL remaining
between 52 and 53 metres. There is some uncertainty about the non-pumping SWL
because this well is slow to recover the final metre or so (a week or more) and the well is
never rested this long (Fig. 9.8).
Thus the SWL has remained virtually constant since the well was drilled and there is no
sign of any stress to the aquifer. Most of the water comes from below 80 metres, so the
pumping SWL, which never drops below 60 metres, is 20 metres above the possible
danger levels. The reason for the varying pump rate is not known, since on the evidence
available a pump rate of 0.6 L/s should be sustainable.
Recharge
Although the 55 mm of rainfall recorded at N-149 in January in two hours would be
expected to result in recharge, there is no evidence of this in the water levels. Nor is there
any evidence of recharge at any time since December 1999.
For well N-101 the questionable data prior to late 2001 and the very slow recovery rate
could conceal more subtle recharge indications. It should also be noted that rainfall
measurements are made at well N-149, two kilometres away from well N-101, and may
not apply to the immediate area of the latter.
92
Nepabunna N 2
Example of slow SWL recovery from pumping
5
4.5
4
3
2.5
slow recovery of final metre
2
1.5
1
0.5
Figure 9.8 Effect of slow recovery, Nepabunna N 2
eb
-0
2
1F
an
-0
2
31
-J
an
-0
2
30
-J
an
-0
2
29
-J
an
-0
2
28
-J
an
-0
2
27
-J
an
-0
2
26
-J
an
-0
2
25
-J
an
-0
2
24
-J
an
-0
2
23
-J
an
-0
2
22
-J
an
-0
2
0
Pump Rate (L/s)
3.5
21
-J
20
-J
an
-0
2
SWL (metres)
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
Conclusions
Well N-101 is limited in its output to about 500 kL/month, even in the short to medium
term, although it could, in an emergency, produce more that 17 kL/day for a few days.
Well N-149 can produce more, but the constantly changing pump rate makes assessment
difficult. Probably 0.4-0.6 L/s (1 000 to 1 500 kL/month) is sustainable in the long term and
twice this level for a few weeks. This total production level from both wells of 1 500 to
2 000 kL/month is in line with water production over the past two years. The reasons for
N-149 being pumped so variably should be ascertained, if possible.
The rainfall event in January (55 mm in two hours) did not have any immediate effect on
the SWL in either well. A longer-term slower recharge may have occurred, but would be
hidden by the continuous pumping.
It might be worth considering drilling wells to be used solely for monitoring these aquifers.
This would not be easy as the aquifers are not defined, but would enable a more detailed
analysis of potential water supplies, as well as providing information for further evaluation
of the Aquifer Storage and Recovery scheme that was under consideration recently.
94
10. YALATA
Water Production
Water production is much the same as for the previous summer, but lower than last
winter. As usual, YT-3 provides over 90% of the water. Water production is greater in
winter than in summer, which is unusual (Fig. 10.2).
Table 10. Water production at Yalata, 1998–2001
Well
Unit
Number
Production (kL)
Apr. 1999
1999
Apr. 2000
2000
Apr. 2001
2001
Nov. 2001
– Apr. 2002
YT-2
5235-15
–
–
1 268.9
1 901.0
4 584.3
2 484.5
**1 164.0
YT-3
5235-18
–
–
16 041.0
27 026.0
23 985.0
36 465.0
28 992.0
–
–
17 309.9*
28 927.0
28 569.3
38 949.5
30 156.0
Total
* Monitoring equipment was not installed until late November 1999; production figures are for 4 months only.
** Accumulated flow was not recorded. Production figure is derived from the hourly pump rate.
Wells
YT-2
Basic Data
Year drilled
Total Depth
Geology
1982
72 m
0-6 m
Calcrete
6-38 m
Nullarbor Limestone
38-63 m
Wilson’s Bluff Limestone
63-eoh
Pidinga Formation – quartz sand
Water Cuts
64.5 m
Quartz Sand
Yield
1982
4.2 L/s
SWL
1982
58.5 m
2000
60.0 m
2002
60.4 m
TDS
1982
9 500 mg/L
Casing
0-69 m
150 mm ID PVC
Production Interval Stainless Steel Screen 69-72 m.
The well has only been pumped intermittently in the last period, for a total production of
1164 kL. Even so, the non-pumping SWL has continued to decline and has now dropped
by about 0.4 m over the past two years (Fig. 10.3). It is not a result of pumping this well.
This probably indicates that the water level in the aquifer generally has dropped by this
amount (natural drainage), but could result from pumping of YT-3, 500 m away. When
possible water levels in other wells in the area, such as Tallowan-1 (5235-5), should be
checked to confirm the cause. Overall, since 1982, the SWL has declined 1.9 m, or an
average of 0.1 m/year.
95
195000
200000
205000
6520000
6520000
#S Marla
#S
Oodnadatta
Moomba #S
Coober
#S Pedy
Roxby Downs
Study Area
#
YALATA ABORIGINAL RESERVE
Yalata
Aboriginal
Reserve
#S
Leigh
Creek
#S
#S
Tarcoola
Ceduna
#S
#S
Port
Augusta
#
6515000
015 #S
S
#
YT 3
018
#
#
Microwave Tower
#
%
#
EYR
Port Lincoln #S
6515000
YT 2
#
#S
Yalata
YT 2
E
015
S
#
#
6510000
HW
6510000
HIG
AY
ADELAIDE
Mount Gambier
#
Yalata
Roadhouse
#S
#
0
Monitored well
with rain gauge
Monitored wells
Well name
Other wells
Aboriginal land
2
4 Kilometres
PIRSA Publishing Services AV:200213_095
Figure 10.1
200000
205000
6505000
6505000
in Aboriginal lands
Yalata
195000
#S
WELLS
a
Ylata Monthly Water Prod
uction
8000
7000
6000
K
ilolitres
5000
T
Y3
T
Y2
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
Nov-99
Figure 0
.12
Feb-00
May-00
Aug-00
Community water production at Yalata
Nov-00
Feb-01
May-01
Aug-01
Nov-01
Feb-02
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
59
400
60
360
61
320
62
280
63
240
64
200
65
160
66
120
67
80
68
40
69
1/11/99
Figure 0
.13
0
1/05/00
Daily Summary, Yalata YT 2
1/11/00
1/05/01
1/11/01
a
Dily Prod
uction (k
L)
o
CrrectedSWL (m)
D
aily Summary
a
Ylata T
Y
2 (5235-5
1)
Raingauge (-)
The non-pumping SWL in August 2002 was 60.44 metres, well above the water cut at
64.5 metres. However, the drawdown for the pumping rate of 1.2 L/s dropped the water
level to 63.2 metres, or within 1.3 metres of the water cut. Thus the water cut will be
reached in about 13 years, after which the rate of decline could well be much faster.
Reducing the pumping rate will not reduce the rate of decline in SWL, but will reduce the
drawdown. Thus the life of the well could be increased if the pumping rate is decreased
when the pumping water level gets close to 64.5 metres. The hours of pumping could be
increased to offset this drop in production.
YT-3
Basic data
Year drilled
Total Depth
Geology
1988
74 m
0-4 m
Calcrete
4-28 m
Nullarbor Limestone
28-58 m
Wilson’s Bluff Limestone
58-eoh
Pidinga Formation – quartz sand
Water Cuts
63 m
Yield
1988
3.5 L/sec
SWL
1988
59.5 m
TDS
1988
9660 mg/L
Casing
0-69 m
152 mm ID FRP
Production Interval Stainless steel screen 69-72 m
The well has been pumped almost continuously over the period, particularly during
January-April 2002 when records indicate that it was being pumped 24 hours a day and 7
days a week at 2.6 L/s (Fig. 10.4). Unfortunately SWL measurements for February and
March 2002 are questionable (is it possible that dewatering occurred during this period –
the water level is below the recorded top of the water cut. During such an extensive period
of pumping de-watering could have occurred), but in the two and a half years up to May
2002 there are indications that the SWL has dropped by perhaps 0.5 m. The drop since
the well was drilled in 1988 is less than 1 metre.
The main problem here is the pumping water level, which is dependent on the pump rate.
Before 2001 the pump rate was less than 2 L/s, which took the pumping water level down
to about 63 metres, or close to the water cut. During 2001-2 the pump rate was increased
to 2.4-2.7 L/s, increasing the drawdown to 64.7 metres. This is below the recorded top of
the water cut, and could result in faster or more erratic declines in water level. To increase
the sustainability of the well it would be better to decrease the pump rate back to 2 L/s and
to increase the pumping hours.
Summary
Both wells seem unstressed at current pumping levels. The decline in water level,
recorded at both bores, is most likely due to regional of the aquifer water table rather than
99
2.65 PUMP RATE L/s
Daily Summary
Yalata YT3 (5235-18)
Raingauge (-)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
800
Corrected SWL (m)
59
SWL probe failure / dewatering of aquifer?
720
60
640
61
560
62
480
63
400
320
64
1.85
2.54
65
2.65
240
66
160
67
80
68
1/11/99
0
1/05/00
Figure 10.4 Daily Summary, Yalata YT 3
1/11/00
1/05/01
1/11/01
58
due to the influence of pumping. This could perhaps be clarified by testing other wells in
the area such as Tallowan-1. An up-to-date download of the loggers in August 2002
shows the same pattern, but no indication of problems with water supply. Spreading the
pumping load more evenly between YT-2 and YT-3 should alleviate the stress on the
aquifer, and this change is recommended. Reducing the pump rate of YT-3 to 2 L/s or less
would also decrease the likelihood of problems with this well. If the reduction of pump
rates for both wells results in insufficient water supply for the community, even when
pumping 24 hours a day, then the choice would seem to lie between improved water
management and drilling additional wells to spread the production load.
We do not have any rainfall data for the Yalata area, so an assessment of recharge is not
possible. All that can be said is that there are no indications of recharge in the SWL data
and that there are indications of an overall decline in SWL as a result of natural drainage.
Only recharge can reverse this decline in SWL, and without such recharge the life of these
wells, and of any other shallow wells that are drilled in the general area, is limited. It
seems probable, at present, that the wells can produce 3 L/s between them, pumping 24
hours per day, for a maximum yield of 260 kL/day. When the pumping SWL gets close to
the water cut, in perhaps 10 years, these pumping rates will have to be decreased.
Continued monitoring is required to refine these estimates.
101
11. OAK VALLEY
Monitoring equipment was installed in November 2001. The hourly pump rate figures are
not accurate because of difficulty with measuring such low flow rates, and should mainly
be used in a qualitative sense, to show whether the pump was working. Based on the
accumulated flow figures total production averaged 8.56 kL/day, with average production
rates for individual wells ranging from 1.17 kL/day (OV-10) to 2.12 kL/day (OV-8).
Total monthly production for Oak Valley ranged from a minimum of 41 kL in Nov 2001 to a
maximum of 112 kL in March 2002 (Fig. 11.2).
Rainfall figures show little precipitation, the maximum daily figure being less than 16 mm
over 2 hours – not enough to generate recharge.
These wells are solar-powered, so only operate on sunny days. The pumps operate
automatically when power is availableand have cutout switches which activate when the
supply tank is full or when the water level in the well drops below a critical level. If a well
stops pumping during daylight hours there is no way of telling which of the three limits
caused it.
All three monitored wells pumped for 10-12 hours on most days. The night-time nonpumping period of 12-14 hours was sufficient to allow the SWL to recover to close to its
full level, with OV-9 recovering most quickly and OV-7 showing the slowest recovery rate.
In all three wells there is little difference between SWL levels in November and those in
April, indicating that the wells are coping satisfactorily, and that the pumping routine
should be sustainable.
OV-7
Basic Data
Year drilled
Total Depth
Geology
1986
33 m
0-9 m
9-33 m
Water Cuts
27-33 m
Yield
1987
SWL
1986
2002
TDS
1987
1997
Casing
0-33 m
Production Interval Slotted ?
Calcrete
Sandstone
0.02 L/s
0.05 L/s
21 m
18.8 m
735 mg/L
617 mg/L
150 mm ID PVC
Average water production was 1.54 kL/day. The non-pumping SWL was constant at
~19 m, with a 10 m drawdown occurring whilst pumping (Fig. 11.3).
A detailed study of the SWL variations during pumping (Fig. 11.4) shows that the
measured SWL drops steadily for 4 hours after pumping commences, but is then constant
at 29.4 m for 8-10 hours while pumping continues. This seems unlikely, and it is more
102
650000
750000
Lake Dey-Dey
#S Marla
#
#
##
####
#
#
SEE
ENLARGEMENT
###
## #
#
Lake Maurice
(Carle-Thulka)
##
#S
Oodnadatta
#
Study
Area
Roxby Downs
MARALINGA TJARUTJA LANDS
#
#S
#S
Mount Gambier
#9
#
#
OV 8
##
##
##
##
#
##
###
#
##### One Tree
Marcoo
# #
S# ##S
### Biak
###
S####S##S #S Kite
Taranaki Breakaway
####
#S# Wewak
###
####
Roadside #S# #
# # ## #
S
##
# ###
9
#S Dobo
0
# #
#
# #
#
#
#
750000
6650000
6650000
Monitored well
with rain gauge
Monitored wells
Well name
Other wells
Aboriginal land
#
#
PIRSA Publishing Services AV:200213_099
#
#
#S
#
##
################## ###
###
$#
#
# Ooldea Hill
#
Figure 11.1
#S
OV 9
7
700000
#
Kitlens
Maralinga #S######## ##
8
6700000
#
##
##
###
##
OV 9
650000
ADELAIDE
#
# ##
OV 7 #
#S
#
ENLARGEMENT
#
Port Lincoln #S
Port
Augusta
#
6700000
#
#S
Ceduna
#
#
Leigh
Creek
#S
#S
Tarcoola
#
#
Moomba #S
Coober
#S Pedy
Maralinga
Tjarutja
Lands
6750000
6750000
####
#
#
700000
#
## #
#
#
#
#
10
20
30
40 Kilometres
in Aboriginal lands
Oak Valley
WELLS
Oak Valley M
onth
ly Water Production
120
100
K
ilolitres
80
OV 9
OV 8
OV 7
60
40
20
0
Nov-01
Dec-01
Jan-02
Feb-02
Figure 11.2 Community water production at Oak Valley
Mar-02
Apr-02
May-02
15
400
17
360
19
320
21
280
23
240
25
200
27
160
29
120
31
80
33
40
35
1/11/01
Daily Rainfall (mm)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
0
1/12/01
1/01/02
1/02/02
1/03/02
1/04/02
1/12/2001
1/01/2002
1/02/2002
1/03/2002
1/04/2002
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1/11/2001
Figure 11.3 Daily Summary, Oak Valley OV 7
Corrected SWL (m)
Daily Summary
Oak Valley OV7 (4939-7)
Raingauge (4939-7)
Oak Valley OV 7
Draw
dow
n effectsof p
ump
ing
5
4.5
4
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
Figure 11.4 Detailed daily SWL variation, Oak Valley OV 7
01
ec
1D
01
30
-N
ov
-
01
29
-N
ov
-
01
28
-N
ov
-
01
27
-N
ov
-
01
26
-N
ov
-
01
ov
25
-N
ov
24
-N
ov
23
-N
01
0
PumpRate (L/m)
3.5
01
SWL (metres
)
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
probable that the sensor is located at this depth. The true SWL would drop lower. As this
information is important to evaluating well performance efforts will be made to lower the
sensor.
It is also significant that the SWL takes more than 12 hours to return to its non-pumping
level after pumping ceases. This accounts for the ripple on the minimum SWL curve in
Figure 11.3, since this level depends on how long the pump was switched off (hours
without sunlight). The non-pumping SWL appears to be about 18.5 m.
OV-8
Basic Data
Year drilled
Total Depth
Geology
1987
31 m
0-2 m
2-31 m
Water Cuts
21 m
24 m
30 m
Yield
1987
SWL
1987
2002
14.4 m
TDS
1987
1997
Casing
0-28 m
Cemented
28-31 m
Production Interval 19-28 m
Sand
Sandstone/Siltstone
0.07 L/s
0.13 L/s
0.2 L/s
0.05 L/s
19 m
833 mg/L
717 mg/L
150 mm ID PVC
Slotted
The pumped aquifer at 21-24 m has a water quality of 800 mg/L TDS. A second aquifer
was encountered at 31 m but was more saline (2500 mg/L) and was plugged off. As we
have no knowledge of the efficiency of the aquitard between these aquifers it is wise to
assume that there is a potential of upwards leakage of more saline water into the good
aquifer if the well is stressed. It is recommended that the quality of the water produced by
this well be checked regularly – at least every download and preferably monthly.
The well produces its quota of 2.12 kL/day. The non-pumping SWL was constant at
~14.5 m, with pumping causing a drawdown of about 6 m (Fig. 11.5). The shape of the
drawdown curve (Fig. 11.6) indicates that the measured pumping SWL is correct and is
0.5 m above the water cut.
107
10
400
12
360
14
320
16
280
18
240
20
200
22
160
24
120
26
80
28
40
30
1/11/01
Daily Rainfall (mm)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
0
1/12/01
1/01/02
1/02/02
1/03/02
1/04/02
1/12/2001
1/01/2002
1/02/2002
1/03/2002
1/04/2002
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1/11/2001
Corrected SWL (m)
Daily Summary
Raingauge (4939-7)
12
20
10
22
8
24
6
26
4
28
2
30
0
ec
1D
ov
30
-N
ov
29
-N
ov
28
-N
ov
27
-N
ov
26
-N
ov
25
-N
ov
24
-N
ov
23
-N
PumpRate (L/m)
18
01
14
01
16
01
16
01
14
01
18
01
12
01
20
01
10
01
SWL (metres
)
Oak Valley OV 8
Draw
dow
n effectsof p
ump
ing
OV-9
Basic Data
Year drilled
Total Depth
Geology
1987
32 m
0-2 m
2-20 m
20-28 m
28-32 m
Water Cuts
20 m
32 m
Yield
1987
SWL
1987
2002
16.4 m
TDS
1987
1997
Casing
0-32 m
Production Interval 20-32 m
Sand
Sandstone
Siltstone
Sandstone
0.02 L/s
0.06 L/s
0.05 L/s
16.3 m
630 mg/L
331 mg/L
150 mm ID PVC
Slotted
Water quality deteriorated with depth during drilling and with time during pump testing, in
both cases ranging from ~300 mg/L to ~600 mg/L TDS.
The non-pumping SWL is steady at about 16.5 m with a drawdown of about 13 m
(Fig. 11.7, see note below).
Like OV-7, the SWL curve shows a flat minimum at about 29.4 m for some 4 hours at the
end of extended pumping (Fig. 11.8). The same cause is suspected and will be remedied
if possible. This plot also shows that the recovery of the SWL after pumping is rather slow,
so that a true non-pumping SWL is only achieved when, for one reason or another, the
well is not pumped for a few days. This slow recovery does not appear to affect the
functionality of the well.
Conclusions
The three monitored wells appear to be settled in a sustainable routine of pumping, with
no sign of stress. There is no indication here of the failure of the wells which, apparently,
occurred after the end of the period in July 2002 (Simon Wurst, DOSAA, pers. Comm.).
It is important to note that the wells are producing as much as they can, without extending
pumping hours by using an external power source (which might overstress the wells).
Thus there is no reserve for extra production to cover breakdown, extra demand, etc.
Such reserves would have to come from other sources, such as shed-tanks or long
distance transport, or be ‘banked’ from this production in additional storage tanks.
110
Daily Summary
Raingauge (4939-7)
TOTAL_PRODUCTION
MIN_CORRECTED_SWL
MAX_CORRECTED_SWL
15
400
360
20
320
Corrected SWL (m)
240
30
200
160
35
120
80
40
40
Daily Rainfall (mm)
45
1/11/01
0
1/12/01
1/01/02
1/02/02
1/03/02
1/04/02
1/12/2001
1/01/2002
1/02/2002
1/03/2002
1/04/2002
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
1/11/2001
280
25
12
26
10
28
8
30
6
32
4
34
2
36
0
ec
1D
ov
30
-N
ov
29
-N
ov
28
-N
ov
27
-N
ov
26
-N
ov
25
-N
ov
24
-N
ov
23
-N
Pump Rate (L/m)
24
01
14
01
22
01
16
01
20
01
18
01
18
01
20
01
16
01
SWL (metres)
Oak Valley OV 9
Drawdown effects of pumping
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Indulkana
The water supply is satisfactory for the medium term.
The wells in the valleys, tapping the Mount Chandler Sandstone aquifer, all showed
evidence of recharge and should be capable of higher production levels than was recently
possible. The water quality may also have improved.
There is no evident recharge for the wells in the Indulkana Range which now provide most
of Indulkana’s supply. Moreover, the water levels have dropped steadily and currently
anticipated life of the wells is reduced to 6 and15 years. A close watch on this situation is
advisable.
Mimili
The two supply wells are coping satisfactorily with the current production, but are not
capable or any increase, even temporarily. Two new wells tested this year should double
the capacity. There are no indications of a finite life for any of these wells.
Fregon
All four wells are stable and the demand is distributed to minimise the stress on each well.
There is no indication of limited life for any well. Two new wells drilled 3 km north of the
community have rather better quality water, but have not been pump tested.
Kenmore Park
The water supply appears satisfactory for current demands, and there is evidence that the
aquifers are being recharged. However, the usage of the wells is not optimal for well
longevity or for well assessment. We advise that the load on KP-6, in particular, be
decreased and that KP-98 is used to make up the deficit in supply.
Pukatja
Recharge has been occurring in all aquifers over the past two years and has restored all
wells to their original state. Production capacity should be satisfactory and the supply
appears to be sustainable.
Amata
Long term recharge has restored all wells. The capacity should now be satisfactory, with
extra yield available for emergencies.
Kalka
The production wells have declining water levels and there is no evidence of recharge.
This community has no reserve capacity for emergencies, such as well failure or extra
demand. We advise that the new well, KA-137, be made operational as soon as possible
in order to provide this reserve.
113
Conclusions and Recommendations
Pipalyatjara
Well supply is satisfactory and sustainable. Recharge has occurred.
Nepabunna
N-101 is stressed at current demands, but there are no signs in the monitoring data of any
strain on the aquifer at N-149. Nevertheless, N-149 is pumped in a way that suggests
difficulty in maintaining the output. The reason for this discrepancy should be ascertained.
Monitoring is insufficient for further analysis and would be improved by additional
observation wells. There is no evidence of recharge, but the water supply appears
sustainable in the medium term.
Yalata
Although the wells are not stressed by current pumping levels the water level is declining,
probably as a result of drainage. There is no evidence of recharge. The life expectancy of
these wells is 10-15 years. Continued close monitoring of these wells is essential to
confidence in the longevity of this water supply. Restricting the pump rates of both wells is
more important than limiting the duration of pumping.
Oak Valley
While the wells appear to be in a sustainable pumping routine, their fragility must be kept
in mind. The lack of any reserve supply requires close management of water usage and,
preferably, maximisation of tank storage as a backup supply.
114
GLOSSARY
Flowback
This term describes a situation where a faulty non-return valve allows water from the
distribution pipes to flow back into the well when the pump switches off, resulting in an
elevated SWL. The water level characteristically takes a few hours to drop back to its
natural non-pumping level.
Non-pumping SWL
The water level in a well when the pump is switched off and after the water level has
stabilized.
Pumping SWL
The water level in a well while pumping. This is a function of the pump rate.
115
SI Units Commonly Used Within Text
Name of unit
Symbol
Definition in terms of
other metric units
Millimetre
Metre
Kilometre
Litre
Kilolitre
Megalitre
Gigalitres
Microgram
Milligram
Gram
Kilogram
mm
m
km
L
kL
ML
GL
µg
mg
g
kg
10-3 m
103 m
10-3 m3
1 m3
103 m3
106 m3
10-6 g
10-3 g
103 g
length
length
length
volume
volume
volume
volume
mass
mass
mass
Mass
Abbreviations Commonly Used Within Text
Abbreviation
SWL
TDS
EC
=
=
=
pH
=
Name
Units of
measure
Standing Water Level
Total Dissolved Solids (milligrams per litre)
Electrical Conductivity (micro Siemens per
centimetre)
Acidity
m
mg/L
µS/cm
116
REFERENCES
Dodds, A.R., Hostetler, S.D. and Jacobson, G., 2001. Community water supplies
in the Anangu Pitjantjatjara lands, South Australia: sustainability of groundwater
resources. Bureau of Rural Sciences, Canberra.
Dodds, A.R. and Sampson, L., 1999a. Hydrogeological report on NW Aboriginal
lands well monitoring – October 1998 to April 1999. South Australian Department
for Water Resources report. South Australia. Department of Primary Industries and
Resources. Report Book, 2000/005.
Dodds, A.R. and Sampson, L., 1999b. Hydrogeological report on NW Aboriginal
lands well monitoring – April to October 1999. South Australian Department for
Water Resources report. South Australia. Department of Primary Industries and
Dodds, A.R. and Sampson, L., 2000. The sustainability of water resources in the
Anangu Pitjantjatjara lands, South Australia. South Australian Department for
Dodds, A.R. and Sampson, L., 2001. Hydrogeological report on water well
monitoring in Aboriginal lands — October 2000 to April 2001. South Australia.
Department for Water Resources. Report, DWR 2001/012.
Sampson, L. and Dodds, A.R., 2000. Hydrogeological report on NW Aboriginal
lands well monitoring, October 1999 to April 2000. South Australian Department
for Water Resources report. South Australia. Department of Primary Industries and
Sampson, L. and Dodds, A.R., 2001. Hydrogeological report on NW Aboriginal
lands well monitoring, April to October 2000. South Australian Department for
117
APPENDIX A
OPERATIONS REPORT ON WATER WELL
MONITORING IN ABORIGINAL LANDS FOR THE PERIOD
OCTOBER 2001 TO APRIL/MAY 2002
AP Lands - Water Supply Bores Download Trip Report
Amata, SWL/Flowrate Summary
Bore SWL Meas'd
SWL Logger
SWL Error
Flowrate (L/sec)
3
Acc. Flow (m )
Rain Gauge (mm)
A-109
8.595
8.614
0.019
2.330
12,589.000
375.20
A-17
8.715
8.705
0.010
1.670
796.290
0.00
A-26
11.215
11.250
0.035
1.070
2,660.740
0.00
A-109
11/05/2002
Data down loaded and checked. Clean water trap and rain gauge. Check battery
volts OK 12.15 under load. Reset flow totaliser, clear logger memory and restart. The flow meter fault reported
by Bruce Hewitson was investigated but no fault was found. The flow rate may need to be checked during the
next trip.
A-17
11/05/2002
Download data logger and check data. Reset flow accumulator, clean water trap
and clear logger memory. There was some difficulty measuring the SWL. Logger restarted.
A-26
11/05/2002
Down load data logger and check. Clean water trap, reset flow totaliser and clear
logger memory. Check battery volts 12.08 under load. Restart logger.
Ernabella, SWL/Flowrate Summary
Bore SWL Meas'd
SWL Logger
SWL Error
Flowrate (L/sec)
3
Acc. Flow (m )
Rain Gauge (mm)
E-01
3.955
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.00
E-12
3.670
3.709
0.039
0.000
18,020.000
0.00
E-42
4.430
4.507
0.077
0.356
1,000.160
348.60
E-44
5.820
5.876
0.044
0.203
2,277.170
0.00
E-45
5.905
6.016
0.111
0.606
11,385.000
0.00
E-97B
9.220
9.299
0.079
3.090
17,493.000
0.00
E-97L
11.645
0.000
0.000
1.410
11,109.000
0.00
E-12
10/05/2002
Down load data and check. 2100P failing due to failed battery, replace battery
charger and battery system. Clean water trap and reset flow totaliser. Restart logger. Flow rate check over
looked.
E-42
10/05/2002
Down load data and check. Clean water trap and rain gauge. Reset flow totaliser
and rain gauge totaliser. Check battery 12.6 volts under load. Replace leaking airline joiner. Clear logger
memory and restart.
E-44
10/05/2002
Down load data and check. Clean water trap, reset flow totaliser and clear logger
memory. Restart logger.
E-45
10/05/2002
Down load data and check, some obvious problems possibly since the lightning
strike on 9/11/01. Replace the 2100P which had internal air leaks. Check battery 12.6 volts. Reset flow
accumulator, clear logger memory. Restart logger.
E-97B
10/05/2002
Data down loaded and checked. Clean water trap, reset flow accumulator. The
battery charger was very hot and the battery voltage down to 11.1 volts these items were removed and
replaced with a new charger and battery system. The data logger memory cleared and then restarted.
118
Appendix A
E97-L
10/05/2002
Unable to communicate with data logger which was removed and replaced with S/N
311203. The battery charger and battery system was replaced due to excessive heat of the existing charger
and low battery volts. Input channels of the data logger were calibrated and the logger restarted.
Fregon, SWL/Flowrate Summary
Bore SWL Meas'd
SWL Logger
SWL Error
Flowrate (L/sec)
3
Acc. Flow (m )
Rain Gauge (mm)
FRG-1
10.090
10.110
0.020
1.780
3,728.000
0.00
FRG-14
10.300
10.295
0.005
2.530
9,114.15
268.60
FRG-7
11.025
11.009
0.016
2.330
12,562.000
0.00
FRG-E4
9.930
9.888
0.042
1.840
4,758.590
0.00
FRG-1
9/05/2002
Down load data, clean water trap, reset flow accumulator, clear memory and restart
9/05/2002
Data down loaded and checked. Clean water trap and raingauge. Reset flow meter
the logger.
FRG-14
accumulator and clear logger memory. Restart logger.
FRG-7
9/05/2002
Down load data and check. Reset flow meter accumulator, clean water trap, clear
logger memory and restart.
FRG-E4
9/05/2002
Some difficulty was encounted communicating with the logger data was down
loaded and checked. Battery voltages were checked and found OK. Water trap cleaned, flow meter
accumulator reset and memory cleared. Logger restarted.
Indulkanna, SWL/Flowrate Summary
Bore SWL Meas'd
SWL Logger
SWL Error
Flowrate (L/sec)
3
Acc. Flow (m )
Rain Gauge (mm)
I-19
14.570
14.484
0.014
0.393
132.501
247.40
I-19A
24.545
24.581
0.036
0.000
158.159
0.00
I-25
8.760
7.733
0.027
0.000
0.000
0.00
I-27
8.870
8.847
0.023
0.000
0.000
0.00
I-R1
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
18,704.000
0.00
I-R2
56.600
56.600
0.000
1.215
4,566.740
0.00
I-R3
51.780
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.00
I-R4
55.760
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.00
I-19
8/05/2002
Down load data, clean water trap and raingauge, clear logger memory and flow
meter accumulator. Battery volts were checked 12.79 volts under load. The logger was then restarted.
I-19A
8/05/2002
Down load data. Replace the 2100P S/N 210367 removed by the ESO replace all
damaged air line connectors. Install new battery charger and upgrade the battery system. Reset the flow
meter accumulator and clear the logger memory, restart logger. The flowmeter was unable to be checked as
the pump was not working. Note the 2100P is now over ranged by 3.09 meters. The down hole air tube needs
to be shortened and a 20 mm conduit should be installed to assist in obtaining SWL measurements.
I-25
8/05/2002
Bore has not been used and the pump has been removed. Data down loaded
memory cleared, battery checked and logger restarted after cleaning water trap. Flow meter could not be
checked.
I-27
8/05/2002
Bore is not used and the pump is not installed. Data was down loaded, memory
cleared and the logger restarted. The 2100P is the old style not modified. The flow meter could not be
checked and should possibly be removed from the site.
I-R1
8/05/2002
Data down loaded. Isolate pump to allow bore to recover. Reset flow accumulator
and check battery volts 11.9V. Water level probe broken off down hole, SWL could not be measured, the
logger was restarted and SWL corrections will need to be adjusted later. Flow rate check was over looked.
119
Appendix A
I-R2
8/05/2002
Data down loaded, water trap cleaned, flow meter accumulator reset and logger
memory cleared. Battery checked 12.45 volts under load. It was found that the data logger channel 3 had
failed and a replacement logger was installed S/N 311170 The new logger input channels were calibrated and
started.
I-R3
8/05/2002
Geo Tech Systems logger was installed at a depth of 53.500 meters. I expect that
there will be a minor variation as the weight of the logger straightens the mounting cable. The logger is set up
to log every hour.
I-R4
8/05/2002
SWL measured to top of casing.
Kalka, SWL/Flowrate Summary
Bore SWL Meas'd
SWL Logger
SWL Error
Flowrate (L/sec)
3
Acc. Flow (m )
Rain Gauge (mm)
KA-1
29.465
27.541
1.924
0.221
1,196.740
0.00
KA-2
0.000
28.189
0.000
0.199
1,286.230
0.00
KA-3
20.100
20.030
0.070
0.893
5,762.510
358.40
KA-1
11/05/2002
Data logger down loaded and data checked. Clean water trap and reset flow
accumulator. Clear logger memory and restart.
KA-2
11/05/2002
Down load logger and check data. Clean water trap and reset flow totaliser. Unable
to measure SWL as water level probe stuck down hole and broken off with 30 meters loss of cable. The logger
was restarted with existing datum. This bore should have the pump removed water level probe cable removed
and a 20 mm conduit installed.
KA-3
11/05/2002
Down load data and check. Clean water trap and rain gauge. Check battery voltage
12.2 volts under load. Reset flow accumulator and clear logger memory. Restart logger.
Kenmore Park, SWL/Flowrate Summary
Bore SWL Meas'd
SWL Logger
SWL Error
Flowrate (L/sec)
3
Acc. Flow (m )
Rain Gauge (mm)
KP-6
8.960
0.000
0.000
0.677
0.000
0.00
KP-7
8.895
8.897
0.000
0.702
1,155.950
295.20
KP-98
4.770
4.853
0.083
0.536
595.240
0.00
KP-6
10/05/2002
Data down loaded and checked, an anomaly between the 2100P and flow meter
data was noted at approximately 1 April. Flow meter was showing FATAL ERROR and was replaced with S/N
A97 79251. Data logger input channel 3 replacement fuse. Due to site faults SWL correction could not be
measured and the accumulated flow could not be obtained.
KP-7
10/05/2002
Down load data and checked, an anomaly found in the SWL data. An air leak was
found in the adaptor fitting between the 1/4" and 5/16" air tubes which was replaced. Clean water trap and rain
gauge, flow meter accumulator reset clear the logger memory. Restart the logger. When the pump is next
removed the down hole air tube should be replaced with 1/4" tube to be standard with other sites.
KP-98
10/05/2002
Data down loaded and checked. Water trap cleaned, flow meter accumulator reset
and logger memory cleared. Battery voltage checked 11.52 volts under load. Logger restarted.
Mimilli, SWL/Flowrate Summary
Bore SWL Meas'd
SWL Logger
SWL Error
Flowrate (L/sec)
3
Acc. Flow (m )
Rain Gauge (mm)
M-1
15.565
15.590
0.025
1.020
7,603.670
0.00
M-3
11.340
11.356
0.016
1.763
9,245.390
0.00
M-1
9/05/2002
Logger was found to be NOT LOGGING and that the logger had stopped at the
time of the radio equipment being installed 18/4/02. Data was able to be down loaded and various checks
made. Flow meter accumulator was reset and the logger memory cleared. The logger was restarted. To
120
Appendix A
prevent this failure occurring again an independent battery charger would be required for the logging
equipment instead of sharing the radio supply.
M-3
9/05/2002
Down load data was inspected and looked OK except that no rainfall had been
recorded. Water trap and rain gauge was cleaned, logger memory cleared and flow meter accumulator was
reset. Rewired connections to the rain gauge and restart the logger. The rain gauge was checked with a 1 mm
test.
Nepabunna, SWL/Flowrate Summary
Bore SWL Meas'd
SWL Logger
SWL Error
Flowrate (L/sec)
3
Acc. Flow (m )
Rain Gauge (mm)
N-101
47.330
47.370
0.040
0.844
5,393.400
0.00
N-149
52.600
52.678
0.078
0.214
4,621.500
85.20
N-101
12/05/2002
Down load data logger and check data. Reset flow accumulator, clean water trap
and clear logger memory. Restart data logger.
N-149
12/05/2002
Data logger down loaded and data checked. Clean rain gauge and water trap.
Check battery voltage 12.15 volts under load. Reset flow totaliser, clear logger memory and restart.
Oak Valley, SWL/Flowrate Summary
Bore SWL Meas'd
SWL Logger
SWL Error
Flowrate (L/sec)
3
Acc. Flow (m )
Rain Gauge (mm)
OV-10
12.120
0.000
0.000
0.000
1,583.000
0.00
OV-2
9.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
1,699.000
0.00
OV-7
18.820
18.797
0.023
0.000
1,466.000
90.40
OV-8
14.420
14.442
0.022
0.000
1,953.000
0.00
OV-9
16.445
16.459
0.014
0.000
0.00
OV-10
10/04/2002
Measure SWL after allowing bore to recover, note accumulated flow.
OV-2
10/04/2002
Measure SWL after allowing the bore to recover, note accumulated flow. Pump
solar panels loose on mounting.
OV-7
10/04/2002
Down load data and check, clean water trap and rain gauge, check battery volts
13.28V, clear memory and restart logger. All systems working OK
OV-8
10/04/2002
Download data and check validity, clean water trap, checked battery volts 13.15v
clear logger memory and restart. All working OK.
OV-9
10/04/2002
Down load data, clean water trap, check battery volts, clear logger memory and
restart. All working OK.
Pipilyatjara, SWL/Flowrate Summary
Bore SWL Meas'd
SWL Logger
SWL Error
Flowrate (L/sec)
3
Acc. Flow (m )
Rain Gauge (mm)
MD-13
12.170
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.00
PMB-95
16.620
16.729
0.109
1.449
4,944.680
749.20
PMB-96
20.505
20.689
0.184
1.464
5,163.520
0.00
MD-13
11/05/2002
SWL measured but hours of use not noted.
PMB-95
11/05/2002
Data down loaded and checked. Clean rain gauge and water trap. Check battery
voltage, reset flow totaliser and clear logger memory. Restart logger.
PMB-96
11/05/2002
Data logger down loaded and data checked. Battery voltage checked, water trap
cleaned and flow accumulator reset. Clear logger memory and restart.
121
Appendix A
Yalata, SWL/Flowrate Summary
Bore SWL Meas'd
SWL Logger
SWL Error
Flowrate (L/sec)
3
Acc. Flow (m )
Rain Gauge (mm)
YMBT-2
60.390
60.378
0.013
1.177
0.000
0.00
YMBT-3
60.245
60.257
0.012
2.680
28,992.000
0.00
YMBT-2
9/04/2002
Down load data, reset flow accumulator, clean water trap, check data, clear
memory, Restart logger after replacing battery charger and 2100P battery to new system
YMBT-3
9/04/2002
Faulty 2100P battery Replace charger and battery to new system Down load data,
clean water trap, check battery volts cleared memory and reset flow accumulator. Restarted data logger.
CONCLUSIONS AND OBSERVATIONS
The down load trips were generally successful in that all sites were down loaded and data
was retrieved for the period November’01 to April/May’02.
The upgraded 2100P Water Level transducers were not installed at I27 and I25 as both
sites were functioning without problems, these sites will be modified as required.
Repairs included :
•
E-12, 2100P battery had failed, requiring replacement of both battery and charger.
•
E-45, 2100P had internal air leaks and is returned to Mindata for repair.
•
E-97B, replace battery charger and change to upgraded battery system.
•
E-97L, replace data logger and return for repair, replace battery charger and change
to upgraded battery system.
•
I-19A, reinstate 2100P and replace battery charger and change to upgraded battery
system.
•
I-R2, replace failed data logger returned for repair.
•
KP-6, Flow meter replaced returned for repair, data logger repaired on site.
•
YMBT-2, replace battery charger and change to upgraded battery system.
•
YNBT-3, replace battery charger and change to upgraded battery system.
The majority of failures again related to battery failures and battery chargers. This will be
addressed by systematically upgrading the battery systems followed by regular battery
replacement.
At the request of Mr. Sandy Dodds a new logger has been installed at IR3 to monitor SWL
only, this is to assist with the study of aquifer characteristics. It was intended that 4 more
loggers would have been installed during the trip, but the bores targeted had been
modified with welded steel covers making the installation impossible.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Kalka bore KA-2, this bore now has 30 plus meters of water level probe cable down the
bore as a result of becoming entangled and stuck. At the time of removal a 20 mm conduit
should be installed in a similar manner to KA-1.
122
Appendix A
The recommendation for action at Indulkanna I-19A has not been attempted and is
repeated below.
At Indulkanna I-19A, it would be greatly appreciated if DOSAA could instruct B. Hewitson
to install a 20 mm conduit in this bore for the purpose of obtaining SWL measurements,
the present situation is very difficult to obtain a reliable measurement. In addition the air
tube used by the 2100P transducer should be reduced in length by 3.5 meters, because in
a recovered state the SWL over pressures the 2100P input. This means that although the
full extent of the draw down may not be seen, a more reliable recovered state can be
recorded.
123
APPENDIX B WATER WELLS AND EQUIPMENT IN ABORIGINAL LANDS
Dates and Locations of Well monitoring equipment - Anangu Pitjantjatjara Lands
Area
Well
Unit
Depth
Latitude
Identification
Number
(metres)
(South)
Longitude
Flowmeter
SWL transducer
Logger
and logger
Format
Comments
Date of Installation
Indulkana
Pukatja
IMB-19
5544-101
68
26.9848
133.2898
Dec-1997
Dec-1997
2
IMB-19A
5544-132
79
26.986
133.2927
Dec-1997
Dec-1997
2
IMB-25
5544-157
30
26.9903
133.293
pre-97
pre-97
2
IMB-26
5544-158
48
26.9863
133.287
Dec-1997
Dec-1997
2
IMB-27
5544-159
40
26.9837
133.2762
Dec-1997
Dec-1997
2
IR-1
5544-172
72
26.988
133.2811
Oct-1999
Oct-1999
2
90.7
26.9892
133.2764
Oct-1999
Oct-1999
2
26.9921
133.2729
2
IR-2
5544-169
IR-3
5544-170
E-01
5345-06
18.3
26.2738
132.1358
Dec-1997
Dec-1997
E-12
5345-12
22.9
26.2725
132.1265
Dec-1997
Oct-1998
2
E-42
5345-33
21
26.2703
132.1257
Dec-1997
Dec-1997
2
E-44
5345-85
16.5
26.2585
132.124
Dec-1997
Dec-1997
2
Mimili
E-45
5345-84
30
26.2593
132.125
pre-97
pre-97
2
5345-114
42.5
26.3291
132.1104
Apr-1998
Apr-1998
2
E97 L
5345-124
31
26.33
132.1031
Apr-1998
Apr-1998
2
5345-67
30
26.3225
132.4393
pre-97
pre-97
2
Dec-1997
Dec-1997
2
KP-7
5345-68
36
26.322
132.4375
KP-98
5345-98
30
26.3007
132.4242
M-1
5443-25
35
27.0235
132.6733
Jan-1998
Jan-1998
2
M-3
5443-28
60
27.1422
132.6925
pre-97
pre-97
2
Not monitored to Apr 2000
Not monitored
E97B
Kenmore Park KP-6
Also raingauge
Raingauge
Transducer replaced 12/97
Raingauge
Pump hours recorded
124
Appendix B
Area
Well
Unit
Depth
Latitude
Identification
Number
(metres)
(South)
Longitude
Flowmeter
SWL transducer
Logger
and logger
Format
Comments
Date of Installation
Fregon
Amata
FRG-01
5344-09
18.6
26.7668
132.0378
pre-97
pre-97
2
FRG-07
5344-31
48
26.7573
132.0387
Jan-1998
Jan-1998
2
FRG-14
5344-47
30
26.7593
132.0402
Jan-1998
Jan-1998
2
FRG-E4
5344-19
35
26.7545
132.036
Jan-1998
Jan-1998
2
A-15
5145-55
35.8
26.1422
131.135
pre-97
pre-97
1
A-17
5145-84
34.5
26.1425
131.1387
Jan-1998
Jan-1998
2
Raingauge
Raingauge. Well ABN and
replaced by A-109
Pipalyatjara
A-26
5145-19
39
26.1343
131.1387
Jan-1998
Jan-1998
2
A-109
5149-109
55
26.146753
131.1375
Nov-2001
Nov-2001
2
Jan-1998
Jan-1998
2
26.1587
129.1698
Jan-1998
NONE
pre-97
pre-97
PIP-95
4745-95
36.8
PIP-MD13
4745-92
43
PIP-96
4745-96
36.8
KA-1
4745-78
40.5
26.1085
129.1507
Jan-1998
Jan-1998
2
KA-2
4745-94
60
26.1167
129.1528
Jan-1998
Jan-1998
2
Raingauge
Rarely used - run for 31 hours
Mar-Oct/98
Kalka
2
KA-3
4745-85
40
26.1182
129.1668
Jan-1998
Jan-1998
2
Nepabunna
N-101
6636-101
64
30.5842
138.9764
Dec-1999
Dec-1999
2
N-149
6636-149
120
30.578
138.9585
Dec-1999
Dec-1999
2
Yalata
YT-2
5235-15
72
31.4564
131.8012
Dec-1999
Dec-1999
2
YT-3
5235-18
73
31.4534
131.8047
Dec-1999
Dec-1999
2
Oak Valley
OV-7
4939-7
33
29.390246
130.47395
Nov-2001
Nov-2001
OV-8
4939-8
31
29.385445
130.48051
Nov-2001
Nov-2001
OV-9
4939-9
32
29.368259
130.48336
Nov-2001
Nov-2001
125
Raingauge
Raingauge
Raingauge

Hydrogeological Report on Water Well Monitoring in

Transcription

Similar documents

Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of

ulstein sx121

multiline ii™ industrial

User Manual

Product Portfolio - Spectrum Consortium

pb_hz_06 Transportwagen.indd

Presented by Tim O`Connell President, Rescue 42, Inc.

2700 series - RAM Spreaders

ievoli coral