Identifying and quantifying the hidden sources of

recharge and pollutants that deteriorate the

water ecology along the lower Jordan River

Eilon Adar, Shai Arnon

&

Sylvie Massoth

Zuckerberg Institute for Water Research

Ben Gurion University of the Negev

Sede Boqer Campus. Israel 84990

Vienna. April, 13, 2015

Lebanon

Jordan

Syria

Israel

Water Balance: In fluxes and Out fluxes from the Jordan River

Israel:National water carrier

350 MCM

+

80 MCM

Inflows: Upper Jordan river

700 MCM

Jordan

Israel

Inflows: ~700 MCM

Evaporation: 280-300 MCM

The Jordan River basin is a transboundary basin shared by:

Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Palestinian Authority and Israel.

Yarmuk River

450 MCM

Jordan:

Salt springs carrier

20 MCM

Sea of

Galilee

Dead

Sea

480

Yarmouk River ~450Wadi Arab ~28

Zarka River ~65

~1,300

Historical flow rates (MCM/Y)

Western streams ~200

Limited hydrological and chemical information on the active water

sources contributing to the Jordan basin, limits our understanding of

the Lower Jordan River aquatic processes.

Sewage+ Brines

30

Amman waste water 30-40

Irrigation from east60-70 MCM

King Talal dam

Irrigation from west~30 MCM

D. dam

Adasiya D.

King Abdullah Canal (~150)

30

30-200 MCM

35

Sea of

Galilee

Dead Sea Current flow rates (MCM/Y)

From Perennial River to Dry Stream and Puddles - Massive withdrawal of water

from the Upper Jordan Valley dried the lower Jordan River.

Limited UJR discharge, wastewater effluents and agriculture return flowshave degraded the Jordan River water quality and severely damaged theJordan River ecosystem

Without input from the fresh sources, most of the Lower Jordan stream

relies on hidden natural sources, effluents and return flows from

irrigation.

OBJECTIVE

• Identify and quantify the hidden active water fluxes and

pollutants along the lower Jordan River.

for ecological

evaluation,

Lower Jordan River Basin

Sea of

Galilee

Dead Sea

North

South

Central

Each Source of water is

characterized by a unique

hydro-chemical and isotopic composition

(designated by different color)

Lower Jordan River

Cl and So4 concentration variation along the river

May

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Distance from Alumot in km

Con

cent

rati

on i

n m

g/lit

er

Cl_north So4_north Cl_centre So4_centre Cl_south So4_south

North SouthCentral

Conceptual framework of the mixing-cell modeling

VI

VII

VIII

0.30-0.43

0.03-0.04

Flux in-betweencells

Recharge from errat ic f loods

Rateof pumping

Evaporat ion from open lagoons

Outf lux

Pm

0.44-1.57

0.018-0.023

0.67-0.87

1.47-1.59

8.35-8.7

1.46-2.6Leakage from the chalk aquitard

Seepage from springs

Rechargeby contaminated eff luents

Recharge from upper riverbed

sections or tributaries

0.113

0.102

7.501.29-1.98

3.47-5.18

1.2-1.46

3.67-4.47

1.84-2.25

0.0

X

1.35-1.42

0.018

0.6-0.7

1.75-2.3

Fluxes (in 106 m3/year) Within the Shallow

Alluvial DepositsAlong the Riverbed

Gravel quarry

(Lagoon)

0.02.18

0.0

2.23

0.0

10.0

0.0

0.0

Pm

Yoav Spring

Zealim Spring

0.

0X

V

IV III

II

0.11-0.15

I

0.36-0.47

Legend

Gvulot Horizontal well

Zealim Horizontal well

Data processing

mixing-cell model (MCM)

Water Balance Expression

011 1

)1(

n

J

j

nj

R

r

I

i

inrn WQQSnn n

All potential sources are identified

nn

J

j

nj

R

r

I

i

inrn WQQSnn n

11 1

)2(

Leakage from the clay & marls formations

Wn

Mass Balance Expression

nk

I

i

J

j

nnjnkinink

r

rnrnk WQCQCSCnR

1 11

)3(

rnrkQC

inkC

inkC

nkC

Every source is designated by a unique hydro-chemical composition

River input

Cell

JR-67 –Yarmouk River

JR-70

JR-69

JR-68

JR-68 A

JR-64

Cell-65

JR-62

JR-54

B1

B4

B6

Bore hole

Modeling (north)

River input

Cell

JR-67 –Yarmouk River

JR-70

JR-69

JR-68

JR-66

JR-64

Cell-65

JR-62

JR-54

Cell-63

JR-57

JR-53

B1

B4

B6

Bore hole

May 2000 – Upper Jordan

River

ResultsSources of water to the upper Jordan River (Cell #1) at Alumot dam

Cell Source winter 00-01 summer 01

%Cell inflow % diff. %Cell inflow % diff.

Cell_1 Alumot Bridge 2.56% 2.54% Cell_0 Outlet of Sea of Galilee 14.4 * ***

W.Surf.Inflow_121 Bitaniya 12.1 5.0 W.Surf.Inflow_122 Saline carrier 73.4 95.0

95

Relative fluxes vs. real fluxes

ResultsImpact of agriculture (Cell #3)

ResultsJordan River and Yarmuk confluence (Cell #4)

Cell Source winter 00-01 summer 01

% of Cell inflow

% diff.% of Cell

inflow% diff.

Cell_4 Gesher 1.60% 3.32%Cell_3 77.3 97.2

W.Surf.Inflow_125Yarmuok River -

Naharayim 22.7 2.93

ResultsImpact of fish ponds (Cell #10)

Sampling stations (south)

JR-53 -Jordan River Input

River input

Cell

Source

Cell-1

Cell-2

Cell-3

Cell-4

Cell-5

Farber et al. 2004

Modeling (south)

May 2000

River input

Cell

S-spring (Sukot)

JR-53

JR-49

JR-47

JR-42

JR-45

JR-51

Results: Jericho – lower Section

Achievements!

A clearer understanding of the active water resources contributing to

the perennial stream of the Jordan River

Water quality deteriorates along the LJR due to anthropogenic

activities (mainly due to discharge wastewater and agriculture return

flow), and from natural saline water bodies.

Identification the portion of freshwater versus contaminated sources

that contribute to the current poor eco-hydrology of the LJR.

Although the relative contribution from shallow groundwater to the

perennial stream is relatively low in winter time, this inflow component

is the major source for nutrients, fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides

into the Jordan River.

In the northern LJR basin, the main sources of marginal water flowing into

the Jordan River are wastewater and agricultural return flow.

In the south, the contribution of saline shallow groundwater increases as

compared to the wastewater and agricultural return flow.

We hope that the ability to define firm hydrological flow pattern of active sources and accurate water fluxes into the Lower Jordan River will help to assess, reclaim, revive and reconstruct the aquatic eco-hydrology of the river.

For FREE COPY of the MCMsf or MCMusf Code send an e-mail to:

eilon@bgu.ac.il

Thank You !!!eilon@bgu.ac.il

Almost no flux measurements are available in the Lower

Jordan River

A Comprehensive unified cross-borders hydro-chemical

database for the Jordan River Basin was constructed and

used to quantify the different water discharges and their

qualities along the entire lower Jordan River.

The multi-cells Mixing Cells Modeling (MCM) optimization

approach is suggested as a tool for identifying and

quantifying known and hidden sources of fluxes into

streams and rivers.

Summary

Modeling the spatial and temporal dynamics of the Jordan River

Water quality was done by the MCMsf approach for 2 sampling

campaigns

The model we used assumes steady state conditions but MCMusf

version of the model can also deal with non-steady (transient)

conditions

Summary

29

44

42

24

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

Seaof Galilee

1Alumot

Dam

4

22

23

26

30

31

39

43

Yarmouk

Shifa

W. Ziqlab

W. El-A

rab

34

38

#

KA

CK

ing A

bdulla

h C

anal

(KA

C)

km0

51

01

52

02

5

Jordan

Isra

el

Palestinian

Authority

Low

er J

ord

an R

iver

Syria

Lebanon

Sea of

Galilee

Dea

d S

ea

Yarmouk

N

25 km

Upper

Jord

an R

iver

320N

35

0E

Issashar

W. Teibeh

Arab

Dam

Yavniel

Salin

e

Carr

ier

Tavor

Nimrod

28

Harod 41

40

45

P46

36

P

P

P

P

P

Dgania

Weir

Bitania

WW

TP2

P

27

#

8

20

18

21

19

Tributary Sampling site

River Sampling site

Legend

Site #

Bridge Crossing

P Pumping station

Groundwater sampling site

Dam/Wier

32

35

37

Sheich-

Hussein Br.

25

32 33

H

Naharaim

Hydrometric st.

#

3

#

5

6

#

9

#

7

10

11

12

1314

1516

17P

Sampling stations (north)

Farber et al. 2004