Unsupported Browser

We've detected an older browser version that will not give you the best experience while using The Atlas. Please consider revisitng this site after downloading one of the alternatives below.

Local districts across great lakes manage water quality & flooding risks in cost-effective co-op

The City of London

London, ON, Canada

Ontario law establishes 36 Conservation Authorities (CAs) to manage natural resources & environmental health on a per watershed basis. About 20 CAs have formed 2 hubs that manage the full spectrum of data, provide access to IT innovations & data from other CAs, and support regional coordination.

Topics Covered

Stormwater Management
Water Supply & Drought
Ecosystem Degradation
Water Quality
Process Improvement

Cost

Initial: 24.7 Thousand USD

O&M: 4 Thousand USD

Funding

General Fund/Existing Public Funds

Grants

Project Status

Operational since 2017

Gov Champion

Water District

Problem Addressed

The 36 Conservation Authorities within Ontario needed a way to view the watershed holistically by combining all of their water data. 

Ontario law establishes 36 Conservation Authorities (CAs) to manage natural resources & environmental health on a per watershed basis.

All CA are tasked with similar responsibilities but each one varies in size and resources.

By agreement, large and small hub members transparently share data collected by each monitoring network as well as an IT solution that equally facilitates efficient data management and advanced analyses.

Stream flow and meteorological observations collected by all members are critical for flood forecasting, warning, and evacuation, if necessary.

Some conduct water sampling more frequently. Others perform ecological assessments of living organisms within specific water-courses.

Hub members can combine information on water levels, land erosion and sediment transport, lab analyses, and the presence of particular species. The holistic view of a single watershed deepens understanding of its health and impacts, which may be caused by human activities, mitigation by restoration, or nutrient reduction initiatives.

Solutions Used

Using a centralized database, CA staff can now reliably access and analyze quality information from any CA to get a holistic view of the watershed.

Using a centralized database & analytics platform ensures long-term record-keeping and secure storage of data sets.

The full spectrum of data spans a wide variety of formats and frequency:

* continuous data from approx. 2000 stations in daily, hourly, 15- and 5-minute increments

* discrete water quality sampling events and meta data to support QAPP

* geospatial (GIS) data

* satellite / remote sensing imagery (meteorological forecasts)

Significant automation of data quality-control, processing, and reporting tasks enables time-savings among the personnel at each member CA. CA staff can reliably access quality information via web services. Each approved users can select information from a particular CA and parameters of interest, in order to display and analyze via graphs, tables, and maps.

Alternatively, Districts with staff with GIS skills can work with the data within arcGIS software by Esri.

Outcomes

1

Small districts receive data from beyond their jurisdiction. Network expansion & task automation yield more lead time for flood forecasting, warning, and evacuation, if necessary.

2

Specific water quality sampling & biological surveys performed by some members can provide insights to members who desire a holistic view of a watershed to assess its environmental health.

3

Ag & urban development cumulative impact calculations, data visualization layouts, report templates, and more are easily shared among members.

Lessons Learned

1

Supported by a 3rd party, the platform minimizes knowledge loss due to turnover. A peer-based user group fosters best data practices and arranges ongoing training with KISTERS.

2

On occasion, as requests for consulting or new features arise, members collectively prioritize their goal(s) and implement cost-sharing.

3

Much equity exists within hubs yet identification of a dedicated CA to lead or perform system administration duties (and/or project management) is extremely beneficial.

Something Unique

Hub members have many commonalities yet each retains different initiatives & needs for territory in its care. One CA can choose to apply models to data to predict flooding & respond with green infrastructure plans. Another district may integrate multiple data sets and apply more stringent QA/QC rules.

Who Should Consider

Districts who want to collaborate on climate resilience and share quality data for decisions. Within hubs, agreements about data standardization & sharing were already reached before IT selection & deployment.

Last Updated

Mar 25th, 2022
More Local Gov Case Studies from The Atlas Database
The Atlas case study database features examples of city projects – including both earth-moving projects and installed technologies – from around the world. You will not find proposed projects, or links to research studies and planning documents. There are 500+ member submitted case studies to browse - see related case studies to this one below:
Browse All Case Studies