A view of hydroinformatics in the United States

The 4th International Conference on Hydroinformatics, hosted by the Iowa Institute of Hydraulic Research, is the first time the conference has been held in the United States (July 2000). To coincide with the conference, papers in this issue of the Journal have been selected to highlight some activities related to hydroinformatics in the United States. In selecting the papers for publication, it has been very interesting to contrast the evolution of hydroinformatics in the US with other countries and in particular with Europe. There is a range of precise definitions for hydroinformatics. Adopting the broadest definition as being the merging of the traditional fields of computational hydraulics with information technology for managing aquatic resources, the critical need for this field is evident. For example, a hydraulic model may be the best possible simulation tool for flood risk assessment. However, if this model cannot be integrated with other assessment tools to respond to broader ecosystem and social questions, it is unlikely that the flood risk model will be adopted. Typical complex questions associated with a proposed flood management project might include: (1) altered rates of sedimentation and dredging, (2) geomorphic changes to the channel and wetlands, (3) timing, quantity and depth of flows throughout the year (hydroperiod), (4) influences on water quality during different seasons, (5) effects on the aquatic, terrestrial and avian ecosystem (particularly any rare or endangered species), (6) reduced navigation, (7) changes to infiltration and evaporation losses, (8) increases or decreases to property values, (9) land use planning issues (for example, will development occur on flood-prone lands following implementation of a ‘flood protection’ project, and (10) altered public access, recreation and aesthetics. In many countries, any one of these issues could potentially stall or cancel a project or management plan. The flood simulation model must be able to integrate with GIS and a range of other models whilst ensuring the model functions remain transparent, defensible and flexible. If the model cannot provide this capability, then a simpler conceptual type of model will likely be used. Recognizing a critical need for this level of complex simulation (for example, Abbott 1991; Imberger 1997), interdisciplinary groups began to emerge that expanded beyond computational hydraulics and reached out to other disciplines. In many countries, this shift has been institutionalized and directed by governmental agencies. Examples are Delft Hydraulics in the Netherlands, Danish Hydraulics Institute (recently merged with VKI) in Denmark, HR Wallingford in the UK, the German National Research Center for Information Technology, LHF in France and the Center for Water Resources in Perth, Australia. The advantages of these centers are that there is some institutional stability, strategically allocated resources and continuity of personnel. In the US, there is no direct counterpart to these large centers and many simulation tools have started with individuals in research institutions. For example, FLUVIAL-12 was developed by Dr. Howard Chang at San Diego State University and is used extensively to simulate the dynamic and mobile river systems in southern California. Although technically sound, access to the codes by the general environmental management profession is limited and in another region, an entirely different model might be used. The great advantage of this distributed approach is that innovation and individual ideas are less likely to be stifled, but suffer from the lack of a critical mass of personnel and resources to support the codes widely. Obviously, notable exceptions exist including the growth of GIS tools such as ArcInfo and ArcView developed by the Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc (Redlands, California) and the widespread use of the MODFLOW code through the United States Geological Survey (USGS). As a further example, probably the most frequently used hydraulic models in the world (the HEC suite of programs) are generated and supported through the Hydrologic Engineering Center (US Army Corps of Engineers) in Davis, California with only about 30 full-time employees. Most technical support, ancillary processing software and training is provided by enterprising third party commercial groups. When major codes are 149 © IWA Publishing 2000 Journal of Hydroinformatics | 02.3 | 2000