Environmental Geology

, Volume 56, Issue 6, pp 1029–1040 | Cite as

Sustainable management of Mogan and Eymir Lakes in Central Turkey

  • Ozlem Yagbasan
  • Hasan YazicigilEmail author
Original Article


Mogan and Eymir Lakes, located 20km south of Ankara in Central Turkey, are important aesthetic, recreational, and ecological resources. Dikilitas and Ikizce reservoirs, constructed on upstream surface waters, are two man-made structures in the basin encompassing an area of 985km2. The purpose of this study is to quantify groundwater components in lakes’ budgets and to assess the potential impacts of upstream reservoirs on lake levels for sustainable management of the system. Available data have been used to develop a conceptual model of the system. A three-dimensional groundwater model, incorporating a lake component, has been developed for the system. The model has been calibrated successfully under transient conditions over a period of 6years using monthly periods. The results show that groundwater inflows and outflows have the lowest contribution to the overall lakes’ budget. The model has been subsequently used to evaluate the impacts of upstream reservoirs. The results show that these reservoirs have a significant effect on lake stages but not on groundwater levels. A trade-off curve between the quantum of water released and the average stage in Lake Mogan has been developed to enhance decision makers’ ability for sustainable management of the system in the long term.


Mogan and Eymir Lakes Sustainability Lake and aquifer interaction Simulation Calibration 



The authors thank Ismail Kucuk from Electrical and Survey Works General Directorate for providing data used in this study. Special thanks are also due to the staff of V. District of the State Hydraulic Works, General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration and Turkish State Meteorological Service. The authors extend their gratitude to the Islem Geographical Information System Company for the valuable support during the preparation of the base maps of the research. The constructive comments of the reviewers are gratefully appreciated.


  1. Anderson MP, Munter JA (1981) Seasonal reversals of groundwater flow around lakes and the relevance to stagnation points and lake budgets. Water Resour Res 17(4):1139–1150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson MP, Hunt RJ, Krohelski JT, Chung K (2002) Using high hydraulic conductivity nodes to simulate seepage lakes. Ground Water 40(2):117–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cheng X, Anderson MP (1993) Numerical simulation of ground-water interaction with lakes allowing for fluctuating lake levels. Ground Water 31(6):929–933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Council GW (1998) A lake package for MODFLOW. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of the International Groundwater Modeling Center, Colorado, USA, pp 675–682Google Scholar
  5. Harbaugh AW, Banta ER, Hill MC, McDonald MG (2000) MODFLOW-2000, the U.S. Geological Survey modular ground-water model: user guide to modularization concepts and the ground-water flow process. U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report, 00-92, USAGoogle Scholar
  6. Hunt RJ, Krohelski JT (1996) The application of an analytic element model to investigate groundwater–lake interactions at Pretty Lake, Wisconsin. J Lakes Reservoir Manage 12(4):487–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hunt RJ, Anderson MP, Kelson VA (1998) Improving a complex finite difference ground-water flow model through the use of an analytic element screening model. Ground Water 36(6):1011–1017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hunt RJ, Lin Y, Krohelski JT, Juckem PF (2000) Simulation of the shallow hydrologic system in the vicinity of Middle Genesee Lake, Wisconsin, using analytic elements and parameter estimation. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report, 00-4136, USAGoogle Scholar
  9. Karnauskas RJ, Anderson MP (1978) Ground-water lake relationships and ground-water quality in the Sand Plain Province of Wisconsin-Nepco Lake. Ground Water 16(4):273–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Krabbenhoft DP, Bowser JC, Anderson MP, Valley WJ (1990a) Estimating the groundwater exchange with lakes, 1. The stable isotope mass balance method. Water Resour Res 26(10):2445–2453Google Scholar
  11. Krabbenhoft DP, Anderson MP, Bowser JC (1990b) Estimating the groundwater exchange with lakes, 2. Calibration of a three-dimensional, solute transport model to a stable isotope plume. Water Resour Res 26(10):2455–2462Google Scholar
  12. Kucuk I, Angı EA (2005) Hydrometeorological characteristics of Mogan and Eymir Lakes Basin. Electrical and Survey Works General Directorate, Ankara, p 161Google Scholar
  13. Lee TM (1996) Hydrologic controls on the groundwater interactions with an acidic lake in karst terrain, Lake Barco, Florida. Water Resour Res 32(4):831–844CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Merritt ML, Konikow LF (2000) Documentation of a computer program to simulate lake–aquifer interaction using the MODFLOW ground-water flow model and MOC3D solute-transport model. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report, 00-4167, p 146Google Scholar
  15. METU (1995) Water resources and environmental management plan for Lakes Mogan and Eymir. Middle East Technical University, Final Rep., project no. 93-03-03-04-01, p 680Google Scholar
  16. Morgan DS (1988) Geohydrology and numerical model analysis of groundwater flow in the Goose Lake Basin, Oregon and California. U.S. Geological Survey Water Resour Investig Rept 87–4199Google Scholar
  17. MTA (1997) Geological map of Ankara 1/100000. General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration, AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  18. Ozaydin V (1997) Water balance of lakes using stable isotope mass balance method. PhD, Middle East Technical University, AnkaraGoogle Scholar
  19. Ozbilgin MM, Dickerman DC (1984) A modification of the finite-difference model for simulation of two-dimensional ground-water flow to include surface–groundwater relationships. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 83-4251, USA, p 98Google Scholar
  20. Rinaldo-Lee MB, Anderson MP (1980) High water levels in ground-water dominant lakes—a case study from Northwestern Wisconsin. Ground Water 18(4):334–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Winter TC (1976) Numerical simulation analysis of the interaction of lakes and groundwater. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1001, USA, p 45Google Scholar
  22. Yagbasan O (2007) Modelling of Mogan and Eymir lakes aquifer system. PhD, Middle East Technical University, AnkaraGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Natural SciencesGazi UniversityAnkaraTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Geological EngineeringMiddle East Technical UniversityAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations