Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Compilation of Alberta
Groundwater Information from
Existing Maps and Data
Sources
T.G. Lemay1 and S. Guha2
1Energy Resources Conservation Board
Alberta Geological Survey
2Alberta Environment
June 2009
©Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Alberta, 2009
ISBN 978-0-7785-6969-5
The Energy Resources Conservation Board/Alberta Geological Survey (ERCB/AGS) and its employees
and contractors make no warranty, guarantee or representation, express or implied, or assume any legal
liability regarding the correctness, accuracy, completeness or reliability of this publication. Any digital
data and software supplied with this publication are subject to the licence conditions. The data are
supplied on the understanding that they are for the sole use of the licensee, and will not be redistributed in
any form, in whole or in part, to third parties. Any references to proprietary software in the
documentation, and/or any use of proprietary data formats in this release, do not constitute endorsement
by the ERCB/AGS of any manufacturer's product.
When using information from this publication in other publications or presentations, due acknowledgment
should be given to the ERCB/AGS. The following reference format is recommended:
Lemay, T.G. and Guha, S. (2009): Compilation of Alberta groundwater information from existing maps
and data sources; Energy Resources Conservation Board, ERCB/AGS Open File Report 2009-02,
43 p.
Author address:
S. Guha
Alberta Environment
10th Floor Oxbridge Place
9820 – 106th Street
Edmonton, Alberta T5K 2J6
(780) 643-1863
E-mail: Sangeeta.Guha@gov.ab.ca
Tables
Table 1. Summary of water-well information by major river basin. ..........................................................16
Table 2. Summary of the number of water wells (20 years old or younger) by proposed use and major
river basin. ...................................................................................................................................17
Table 3. Forecast of groundwater use in cubic decametres (dam3) by type of use for the Athabasca River
basin under a medium water-use scenario (from AMEC, 2007, Table 11-37, p. 478). ...............17
Table 4. Simplified Alberta Environment (AENV) proposed use categories. ............................................ 18
Table 5. Estimated breakdown of water use by agricultural sectors for the Athabasca River Basin (from
AMEC, 2007, Table 11-35, p. 476). ............................................................................................18
Table 6. Modified forecast of groundwater use in dam3 and igpa by type of use for the Athabasca River
basin under a medium water-use scenario for 2010.....................................................................19
Figures
Figure 1. Area covered by the Alberta Research Council (ARC) hydrogeological mapping program,
1968–1983. ....................................................................................................................................2
Figure 2. Mosaic of compiled scanned images of the Alberta Research Council hydrogeology maps. .......3
Figure 3. Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration hydrogeology map GIS material..............................5
Figure 4. Compilation of water-well yields. Abbreviation: igpm, imperial gallons per minute. ..................6
During 2007, AGS and Alberta Environment staff gathered the available digital datasets, PDF files and
hard-copy maps from the internal and external sources listed above to create an initial view of the extent
and nature of groundwater resources in Alberta. This report provides details on the data used, the
limitations of the data and any assumptions made during the creation of the products.
Since its inception, AGS has focused on mapping many aspects of the geology of Alberta. One of the
types of maps that AGS created during the 1970s and 1980s was a series of hydrogeological maps based
on the concept of a 20-year safe yield for a well. These maps were intended to provide general details on
the groundwater conditions in an area but no specifics that could be used for planning purposes. Through
a recent digitization and data-processing project, AGS now has versions of these maps in a digital format,
and they are managed by a geodatabase. In addition, AGS is currently mapping the geology of the
bedrock, the near surface and the drift. This type of information can be used to infer the hydrogeology of
an area based on the material properties of the mapped rocks and sediments.
Other organizations have also mapped groundwater resources and generated hydrogeological maps. For
example, the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration (PFRA) created a number of hydrogeological
maps at the county scale in Alberta. Some of these maps have also been distributed in a digital form.
This report describes the compilation of existing and newly created digital information and its
applicability to mapping groundwater resources, as well as the processes adopted by AGS to build a
preliminary picture of the groundwater resources of Alberta. The first section discusses the work done by
AGS to recreate the paper hydrogeological maps in digital form. The second section discusses the use of
existing digital data to create maps of potential near-surface, confined-drift and confined-bedrock
aquifers. The third section examines the geographic distribution of water use in Alberta, based on
estimates of use from Government of Alberta documents.
The areas of the province that have been mapped are shown in Figure 1, and a mosaic of the maps
themselves is shown in Figure 2. The maps were designed to provide general information on the average
expected yield of groundwater from a well and were based on either the geology or properties of the rocks
and sediments, or on available pump or aquifer-test information. The maps were not intended to be used
for groundwater inventory work, nor for groundwater management. However, the information presented
in the maps can be used as a starting point in creating a groundwater inventory.
By combining both sources of information, AGS was able to compile the ARC hydrogeology maps into a
new AGS map. The scanned images were used as a basis for the digitization of groundwater-yield
polygons where PFRA did not digitize the original ARC hydrogeology maps. The scanned images were
also used to check the PFRA digitized linework. Where digitization errors were encountered, AGS either
corrected or redigitized the PFRA linework. Digitization errors were defined as differences of 100 m or
more between the position of the PFRA linework elements and the georeferenced hydrogeology map
image. The 100 m value was chosen because we felt that an error of less than this magnitude would not
significantly reduce the usefulness of the digital version of the regional map. Information on the
georeferencing and digitization processes is provided in Appendix 1.
The groundwater-yield polygons represent a range of estimates of the average yield that a well located
within the polygon could expect to produce at over time. The maps also contain information on the
geology and therefore the age of the sediments within the extent of the polygons. All of this information
was captured so that hydrogeology maps similar to those of the original ARC series could be created and
it would be possible to create additional maps based on the aquifer age and geology.
After attributes were assigned to the vector polygons, they were edited to ensure that neighbouring
polygons properly shared common edges.
The second is a map of aquifer type (Figure 5), based on the type of geological sediment identified as
being representative of the aquifer present within the polygon. Geological sediments were classified into
one of four types: surface, drift, bedrock and multiple. Where the material appears to be related to
surficial deposits (defined as surficial in the original ARC maps), the polygon is classified as a surface
aquifer. Where the material appears to be related to glacial drift (defined as Quaternary) below the
surface, the polygon is classified as a drift aquifer. Where the material appears to be related to bedrock
sediments below the surface, the polygon is classified as a bedrock aquifer. Where the types of materials
appear to represent a combination of surface/drift/bedrock types, the polygon is classified as a multiple
aquifer type.
The first type of initiative is surficial mapping work (Westgate, 1968; Roed, 1970; Bayrock, 1971,
1972a–d Berg and McPherson, 1972; Bayrock and Reimchen, 1974, 1980; Boydell et al., 1974;
Andriashek and Fenton, 1979; Fenton and Andriashek, 1983; Moran, 1986a–d; Fox et al., 1987; Shetsen,
1981, 1987, 1990; Andriashek, 2001a; Campbell et al., 2002a–e; Paulen et al., 2003, 2004a, b, 2005a, b,
2006a–c, 2007; Fenton et al., 2003a–c; Paulen, 2004a–d; Kowalchuk et al., 2006; Plouffe et al., 2006,
2007; Trommelen et al., 2006; Paulen and Plouffe, 2007a, b; Plouffe and Paulen, 2007).
The second type involves the assessment of aggregate resources (Edwards et al., 2003a–g, 2004a–s,
2007a–c; Budney et al., 2004a–d; Edwards and Budney, 2004a–e, 2007a–d). The GIS files for these
various maps were queried to select the coarse-grained materials (if saturated, these might constitute
unconfined surface aquifers) and display them as zones of hydrogeological interest. The compilation map
in Figure 7 shows the distribution of these materials.
Sediments within buried valleys are not always coarse grained, as fine-grained clay and till can also be
found. This can lead to an overestimate of the extent of possible drift aquifers based on the extent and
geometry of buried valleys. Conversely, coarse-grained deposits are also found in terraces associated with
buried valleys and, except where specifically mapped, information on the extent of other terrace aquifers
may be underestimated based on the extent of buried valleys. Therefore, inferences about water content
should not be made based solely on the extent of buried valleys.
Since the Paskapoo and Scollard formations are not common targets for oil and gas exploration,
geophysical logging of these two formations is not common, but oil and gas exploration boreholes do
penetrate these formations to target deeper reservoirs of oil and/or gas. Because the Paskapoo Formation
and, to a lesser extent, the Scollard Formation are common targets for water-well installations, regulations
exist to protect these formations from the potential impacts of drilling of oil and/or gas wells. The
measures taken to protect these formations typically include the installation of casing and the use of
cement. Geophysical logging of these formations through the casing is less reliable. Some logging is done
prior to casing installation, but the limited number of geophysical logs collected in this manner means that
the number of candidate wells for determining the extent of coarser grained sediments within Paskapoo
With the creation of the maps discussed above comes the opportunity to examine groundwater use at a
variety of scales. Specifically, a preliminary assessment of groundwater use can be undertaken with
respect to the groundwater-yield polygons and to townships.
The AMEC (2007) report forecasted groundwater use by type of use and major river basin for low,
medium and high water-use scenarios in cubic decametres (dam3). Estimates were provided for the years
2005, 2010, 2020 and 2025. This type of information, combined with the number of water wells, can be
used to estimate groundwater use that is site specific or regional in scale. The medium water-use scenario
was chosen because it represented a reasonable starting point for examining water-use data. The year
2010 values were chosen because 2010 is closest to the present. An example of the information provided
in the AMEC (2007) report is provided in Table 3.
A comparison of Tables 2 and 3 shows differences in descriptions of proposed use. To reconcile the two
tables, AGS chose to first simplify proposed uses in the AENV database (Table 4).
The Commercial, Petroleum, Industrial and Other types of use in Table 3 do not have an equivalent
category in Table 4. In order to standardize these values, these four types of use were assigned to the
Industrial category. The use values were then summed to provide a single value of industrial use.
The Agricultural use category in Table 3 is not separated into irrigation and stock water use. However, an
estimate of this breakdown was provided in the AMEC (2007) report for each major basin and is
summarized for the Athabasca River basin in Table 5.
An estimate of groundwater use for the different agricultural sectors was made using these numbers and
the following calculations:
The estimated-use value in Table 5 represents combined surface-water and groundwater use. The
distinction between stock-watering use and irrigation use for groundwater may therefore not be the same
as for the total water use. Alberta Geological Survey recognizes that the use of groundwater for irrigation
could be overestimated, causing an underestimate of use for stock watering, or vice versa. In the absence
of other information, the ratio was used as shown above.
Table 3. Forecast of groundwater use in cubic decametres (dam3) by type of use for the Athabasca River basin under a
medium water-use scenario (from AMEC, 2007, Table 11-37, p. 478).
Table 5. Estimated breakdown of water use by agricultural sectors for the Athabasca River Basin (from AMEC, 2007,
Table 11-35, p. 476).
As shown in Table 3, the AMEC (2007) report did not provide estimates of domestic use. However,
estimates of use can be obtained from other sources of information. Environment Canada (2004) indicated
that, on average, each Canadian uses 335 L/d. According to Statistics Canada (2006), the average family
size for Alberta is three people. This would indicate that each family uses approximately 1000 L/d. If the
assumption is made that each domestic well serves one family, then the use of each domestic well can be
estimated to be 1000 L/d. Since the estimated domestic-use value was not presented in the AMEC (2007)
report, one must be calculated. Multiplying the number of domestic wells present within the basin by the
use value can provide this. For the Athabasca River basin, the domestic use of groundwater can be
determined using the following calculation:
Domestic groundwater use = 1000 L/d/domestic well H 4726 domestic wells = 4 726 000 L/d
The final step in the process was to standardize the units of measure for groundwater use. The yield units
for the original ARC hydrogeology maps are imperial gallons per minute (igpm). The use units from the
AMEC (2007) report are dam3 per year (dam3/a). The domestic water-use values from Environment
Canada (2005) are L/d. Alberta Geological Survey chose to standardize the units to those used in the
original ARC maps, but converted them to imperial gallons per year (igpa). The following conversion
factors were used to standardize units:
Table 6. Modified forecast of groundwater use in dam3 and igpa by type of use for the Athabasca River basin under a
medium water-use scenario for 2010.
Water Source Type of Use Original 2010 Converted 2010 Number of Use per Water
Estimate (dam3) Estimate (igpa) Wells Well (igpa)
Groundwater Domestic 1,734 381,340,940 4,726 80,690
Stock 3,838 844,241,022 2,754 306,551
Irrigation 996 219,089,124 26 8,426,505
Municipal 1,731 380,766,339 110 3,461,512
Industrial 48,673 10,706,551,140 3,507 3,052,909
Total 56,972 12,532,073,870 11,123 1,126,681
5 Conclusions
The compilation in digital form of previous hydrogeological maps, as well as the assembly of already-
available digital geological datasets, provides an opportunity to assess a number of hydrogeologically
significant features and characteristics of the province. The compiled hydrogeological maps are the first
regional overview of the groundwater potential of Alberta. The compilation of geological materials of
hydrogeological significance at the Earth’s surface and in the subsurface generates a regional picture of
geological units to be further evaluated in terms of groundwater flow supply and groundwater protection.
The examination of estimates of groundwater use, compared to the expected yield of geological materials,
shows that there could be areas where groundwater use exceeds the capacity of the units, which will have
an impact on other elements of the hydrological cycle, such as lakes, rivers or wetlands. The examination
of groundwater use in relation to geographic locations shows that its use for various activities is heavier in
certain areas of the province than others. These areas of concentrated use can help establish priority areas
for closer examination of issues related to specific types of uses.