Search

Determination of groundwater recharge is a major challenge in areas where rainfall is generally abundant. Variability and uncertainty are inherent in the estimation of recharge, and several methods are therefore recommended for its estimation at a regional level. In this study, we evaluated several methods for estimating recharge: the web GIS-based automated hydrological analysis tool (WHAT), water table fluctuation (WTF), hydrograph analyses, a recession curve displacement method, graphical separation, and empirical formulas. The annual recharge estimated by combining direct recharge and base-flow varied from 84 mm in 2019 to 66.4 mm in 2020. The mean direct recharge was about 44 mm in 2018 and 57.3 mm in 2019, representing about 4% and 5% of the respective rainfall. In 2020, this direct recharge was 43 mm, or about 6% of rainfall, around 25% lower than in 2019. Base-flow separation methods and recession curve displacement generally gave low results, whereas modified empirical formulas gave results close to those of the WTF method and were considered more consistent and reasonable. The regression curve displacement method implemented in the United States geologic survey (USGS) RORA program was found to be unsuitable for the study area. However, the other methods presented more reasonable results and could be used to estimate groundwater recharge in the study area.