Ground-water discharge determined from estimates of evapotranspiration, Death Valley regional flow system, Nevada and California

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | July 1st, 2001

Ground-water flow to Death Valley, as inferred from the chemistry and geohydrology of selected springs in Death Valley National Park, California and Nevada

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | July 1st, 2001

Ground-Water Hydrology of the Upper Klamath Basin, Oregon and California

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | April 15th, 2010

The upper Klamath Basin spans the California-Oregon border from the flank of the Cascade Range eastward to the Basin and Range Province, and encompasses the Klamath River

The upper Klamath Basin spans the California-Oregon border from the flank of the Cascade Range eastward to the Basin and Range Province, and encompasses the Klamath River drainage basin above Iron Gate Dam. Most of the basin is semiarid, but the Cascade Range and uplands in the interior and eastern parts of the basin receive on average more than 30 inches of precipitation per year. The basin has several perennial streams with mean annual discharges of hundreds of cubic feet per second, and the Klamath River at Iron Gate Dam, which represents drainage from the entire upper basin, has a mean annual discharge of about 2,100 cubic feet per second. The basin once contained three large lakes: Upper and Lower Klamath Lakes and Tule Lake, each of which covered areas of 100 to 150 square miles, including extensive marginal wetlands. Lower Klamath Lake and Tule Lake have been mostly drained, and the former lake beds are now cultivated. Upper Klamath Lake remains, and is an important source of irrigation water. Much of the wetland surrounding Upper Klamath Lake has been diked and drained, although efforts are underway to restore large areas. Upper Klamath Lake and the remaining parts of Lower Klamath and Tule Lakes provide important wildlife habitat, and parts of each are included in the Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuges Complex. The upper Klamath Basin has a substantial regional ground-water flow system. The late Tertiary to Quaternary volcanic rocks that underlie the region are generally permeable, with transmissivity estimates ranging from 1,000 to 100,000 feet squared per day, and compose a system of variously interconnected aquifers. Interbedded with the volcanic rocks are late Tertiary sedimentary rocks composed primarily of fine-grained lake sediments and basin-filling deposits. These sedimentary deposits have generally low permeability, are not good aquifers, and probably restrict ground-water movement in some areas. The regional ground-water system is underlain and bounded on the east and west by older Tertiary volcanic and sedimentary rocks that have generally low permeability. Eight regional-scale hydrogeologic units are defined in the upper Klamath Basin on the basis of surficial geology and subsurface data. Ground water flows from recharge areas in the Cascade Range and upland areas in the basin interior and eastern margins toward stream valleys and interior subbasins. Ground water discharges to streams throughout the basin, and most streams have some component of ground water (baseflow). Some streams, however, are predominantly ground-water fed and have relatively constant flows throughout the year. Large amounts of ground water discharge in the Wood River subbasin, the lower Williamson River area, and along the margin of the Cascade Range. Much of the inflow to Upper Klamath Lake can be attributed to ground-water discharge to streams and major spring complexes within a dozen or so miles from the lake. This large component of ground water buffers the lake somewhat from climate cycles. There are also ground-water discharge areas in the eastern parts of the basin, for example in the upper Williamson and Sprague River subbasins and in the Lost River subbasin at Bonanza Springs. Irrigated agriculture is an integral part of the economy of the upper Klamath Basin. Although estimates vary somewhat, roughly 500,000 acres are irrigated in the upper Klamath Basin, about 190,000 acres of which are part of the Bureau of Reclamation Klamath Project. Most of this land is irrigated with surface water. Ground water has been used for many decades to irrigate areas where surface water is not available, for example outside of irrigation districts and stream valleys. Ground water has also been used as a supplemental source of water in areas where surface water supplies are limited and during droughts. Ground water use for irrigation has increased in recent years due to drought and shifts in surface-water allocation from irrigation to instream uses. The shifts in surface-water allocation have resulted from efforts to improve habitat for fish listed under the Federal Endangered Species Act. The ground-water system in the upper Klamath Basin responds to external stresses such as climate cycles, pumping, lake stage variations, and canal operation. This response is manifest as fluctuations in hydraulic head (as represented by fluctuations in the water-table surface) and variations in ground-water discharge to springs. Basinwide, decadal-scale climate cycles are the largest factor controlling head and discharge fluctuations. Climate-driven water-table fluctuations of more than 12 feet have been observed near the Range, and decadal-scale fluctuations of 5 feet are common throughout the basin. Ground-water discharge to springs and streams varies basinwide in response to decadal-scale climate cycles. The response of the ground-water system to pumping is generally largest in areas where pumping occurs. Annual drawdown and recovery cycles of 1 to 10 feet are common in pumping areas. Long-term drawdown effects, where the water table has reached or is attempting to reach a new level in equilibrium with the pumping, are apparent in parts of the basin. Since 2001, ground-water use in the upper Klamath Basin has increased by about 50 percent. Much of this increase has occurred in the area in and around the Bureau of Reclamation Klamath Project, roughly tripling ground-water pumping in that area. This focused increase in pumping has resulted in ground-water level declines in the pumped aquifer in excess of 10 to 15 feet over a large part of the Project between 2001 and 2004. If pumping rates of recent years are continued, the aquifer could achieve a new equilibrium; however, the final configuration of the water table (depth to water) and the spatial and temporal distribution of the resulting effects to streams are unknown. Historical water-level data suggest that the water table should recover from recent declines if pumping is reduced to pre-2001 rates.

Ground-Water Resources of Honey Lake Valley, Lassen County, California, and Washoe County, Nevada

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | December 15th, 1990

Honey Lake Valley is a 2,200-square-mile, northwest-trending, topographically closed basin about 35 miles northwest of Reno, Nevada. Unconsolidated basin-fill deposits on

Honey Lake Valley is a 2,200-square-mile, northwest-trending, topographically closed basin about 35 miles northwest of Reno, Nevada. Unconsolidated basin-fill deposits on the valley floor and fractured volcanic rocks in the northern and eastern uplands are the principal aquifers. Ground water in the Nevada part of the basin is being considered as a potential source of public supply to the Reno area. This report describes the ground-water resources of the basin and the potential hydrologic effects of ground-water development in its eastern part. During an average year, about 1.1 million acre-feet of precipitation falls on the 1,700-square-mile study area within the valley, and an estimated 86,000 acre-feet enters the study area as streamflow in the Susan River and Long Valley Creek. Almost 90 percent of this water runs off, evaporates, or is transpired by plants before it can infiltrate and become ground-water recharge; this includes about 130,000 acre-feet per year that reaches Honey Lake as surface-water inflow. About 130,000 acre-feet recharges the aquifer system annually, about 40 percent by direct infiltration of precipitation over the study area and about 60 percent by infiltration of streamflow and irrigation water. Balancing this is an equal amount of ground-water discharge, of which about 65 percent evaporates from the water table or is transpired by phreatophytes, about 30 percent is withdrawn from wells, and about 5 percent leaves the basin as subsurface outflow to the east. A ground-water flow model of the eastern part of the study area, where withdrawals for public supply have been proposed, was used to evaluate components of the water budget and to estimate the long-term hydrologic effects of hypothetical increased development. Results of the evaluation indicate conditions under which a new equilibrium would be established if 15,000 acre-feet of water were withdrawn from the Fish Springs Ranch area annually. The model indicates that, as a result of such an increase in pumpage, water levels would decline more than 100 feet from present (1988) levels in the vicinity of the pumping, and as much as 40 feet at the California-Nevada State line. Evapotranspiration and subsurface outflow to the east would each be reduced by about 60 percent, but hydrologic effects would be minimal at the western boundary of the flow-model area (just east of Honey Lake). Within the modeled area, the simulation indicates that the increased withdrawals would cause the net flow of ground water eastward across the State line to increase from about 700 acre-feet per year to about 2,300 acre-feet per year.

Ground-Water Resources of Honey Lake Valley, Lassen County, California, and Washoe County, Nevada

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | January 8th, 1990

Honey Lake Valley is a 2,200-square-mile, northwest-trending, topographically closed basin about 35 miles northwest of Reno, Nevada. Unconsolidated basin-fill deposits o

Honey Lake Valley is a 2,200-square-mile, northwest-trending, topographically closed basin about 35 miles northwest of Reno, Nevada. Unconsolidated basin-fill deposits on the valley floor and fractured volcanic rocks in the northern and eastern uplands are the principal aquifers. Ground water in the Nevada part of the basin is being considered as a potential source of public supply to the Reno area. This report describes the ground-water resources of the basin and the potential hydrologic effects of ground-water development in its eastern part. During an average year, about 1.1 million acre-feet of precipitation falls on the 1,700-square-mile study area within the valley, and an estimated 86,000 acre-feet enters the study area as streamflow in the Susan River and Long Valley Creek. Almost 90 percent of this water runs off, evaporates, or is transpired by plants before it can infiltrate and become ground-water recharge; this includes about 130,000 acre-feet per year that reaches Honey Lake as surface-water inflow. About 130,000 acre-feet recharges the aquifer system annually, about 40 percent by direct infiltration of precipitation over the study area and about 60 percent by infiltration of streamflow and irrigation water. Balancing this is an equal amount of ground-water discharge, of which about 65 percent evaporates from the water table or is transpired by phreatophytes, about 30 percent is withdrawn from wells, and about 5 percent leaves the basin as subsurface outflow to the east. A ground-water flow model of the eastern part of the study area, where withdrawals for public supply have been proposed, was used to evaluate components of the water budget and to estimate the long-term hydrologic effects of hypothetical increased development. Results of the evaluation indicate conditions under which a new equilibrium would be established if 15,000 acre-feet of water were withdrawn from the Fish Springs Ranch area annually. The model indicates that, as a result of such an increase in pumpage, water levels would decline more than 100 feet from present (1988) levels in the vicinity of the pumping, and as much as 40 feet at the California-Nevada State line. Evapotranspiration and subsurface outflow to the east would each be reduced by about 60 percent, but hydrologic effects would be minimal at the western boundary of the flow-model area (just east of Honey Lake). Within the modeled area, the simulation indicates that the increased withdrawals would cause the net flow of ground water eastward across the State line to increase from about 700 acre-feet per year to about 2,300 acre-feet per year.

Ground-water storage depletion in Pahrump Valley, Nevada-California, 1962-1975

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | July 1st, 1982

Hydrogeology of Lower Amargosa Valley and Groundwater Discharge to the Amargosa Wild and Scenic River, Inyo and San Bernardino Counties, California, and Adjacent Areas in Nye and Clark Counties, Nevada

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | February 7th, 2019

In 2009, Congress designated certain reaches of the Amargosa River in Inyo County, California between the town of Shoshone and Dumont Dunes as a Wild and Scenic River. As

In 2009, Congress designated certain reaches of the Amargosa River in Inyo County, California between the town of Shoshone and Dumont Dunes as a Wild and Scenic River. As part of the management of the Amargosa Wild and Scenic River, the Bureau of Land Management cooperated with the U.S. Geological Survey to assess the surface and groundwater resources of the Tecopa basin. Groundwater is the primary source of water to the perennial reaches of the Amargosa River. The U.S. Geological Survey studied the surface and groundwater systems in the basin, and assessed the sources and volume of groundwater discharging into the perennial reaches of the Amargosa Wild and Scenic River. The springs within the Tecopa basin (and the greater Lower Amargosa Valley Hydrographic Area) can be generally grouped by spring type and geographic location. There are four types of groundwater discharge points in the Tecopa basin—regional carbonate-rock springs and seeps, Tecopa Hills springs and seeps, thermal springs and seeps, and Amargosa Canyon hillslope springs and seeps. Results of chemical analysis indicate that water from all of these springs in the Lower Amargosa Valley and particularly in the Tecopa basin, is sourced in the carbonate-rock aquifer, with a local component of recharge. Groundwater is recharged in the Spring Mountains and moves through and around the Nopah and Resting Spring Ranges and into the Tecopa basin. A small (less than 1 cubic foot per second [ft3/s] or 500 acre‑feet per year) component of flow from the Amargosa Desert moves through the river channel alluvium and basin fill from the north. The location and type of spring appear to be controlled by the geology and geologic structure of the Lower Amargosa Valley. The regional springs (such as Shoshone and Borax Springs) and associated seeps tend to occur along the west side of the basin whereas other carbonate-rock aquifer springs discharge from adjacent mountain ranges, such as the Resting Spring Range, and as a result of low-permeability barriers, such as the Tecopa Hills. The thermal springs and seeps discharge from an area near the town of Tecopa, California. The Amargosa Canyon hillslope springs and seeps discharge directly into the river. Salt-crusted soils adjacent to the river indicate additional areas of diffuse discharge where groundwater is being evaporated. Perennial flow in the main channel of the Amargosa River appears to originate in an area of thermal springs near Tecopa. Persistent groundwater-fed pools begin to appear along the river channel just to the south of the Tecopa Hills. Flow between these pools is evident, but difficult to measure. During the synoptic seepage measurement survey in February 2014, flow in the Amargosa River at the Tecopa streamgage (U.S. Geological Survey site 10251300, Amargosa River at Tecopa, California) was approximately 1 ft3/s. Just to the south of the Tecopa streamgage, a line of cooler water springs (the Amargosa Canyon hillslope springs) emerges east of the river channel and continues for approximately 1 mile along the Amargosa Canyon wall. At the end of the spring reach, the flow in the river increased to just over 4 ft3/s. Flow then decreased to approximately 3 ft3/s at the confluence of Willow Creek, approximately 3.5 miles downstream. Downstream from the confluence of Willow Creek, the river consistently loses water and was dry just north of Dumont Dunes during the February 2014 synoptic seepage measurement survey.

Hydrologic and hydrochemical framework, south-central Great Basin, Nevada-California, with special reference to the Nevada Test Site

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | July 1st, 1975

Intensely fractured Precambrian and Paleozoic carbonate and clastic rocks and block-faulted Cenozoic volcanic and sedimentary strata in the Nevada Test Site are divided

Intensely fractured Precambrian and Paleozoic carbonate and clastic rocks and block-faulted Cenozoic volcanic and sedimentary strata in the Nevada Test Site are divided into 10 hydrogeologic units. Three of these the lower clastic aquitard, the lower carbonate aquifer, and the tuff aquitard control the regional movement of ground water. The coefficients of fracture transmissibility of these rocks are, respectively, less than 1,000, 1,000 to 900,000, and less than 200 gallons per day per foot; interstitial permeability is negligible. Solution caverns are locally present in the carbonate aquifer, but regional movement of water is controlled by variations in fracture transmissibility and by structural juxtaposition of the aquifer and the lower clastic aquitard. Water circulates freely to depths of at least 1,500 feet beneath the top of the aquifer and up to 4,200 feet below land surface. Synthesis of hydrogeologic, hydrochemical, and isotopic data suggests that an area of at least 4,500 square miles (including 10 intermontane valleys) is hydraulically integrated into one ground-water basin, the Ash Meadows basin, by interbasin movement of ground water through the widespread carbonate aquifer. Discharge from this basin a minimum of about 17,000 acre-feet annually occurs along a fault-controlled spring line at Ash Meadows in east-central Amargosa Desert. Intrabasin movement of water between Cenozoic aquifers and the lower carbonate aquifer is controlled by the tuff aquitard, the basal Cenozoic hydrogeologic unit. Such movement significantly influences the chemistry of water in the carbonate aquifer. Ground-water velocity through the tuff aquitard in Yucca Flat is less than 1 foot per year. Velocity through the lower carbonate aquifer ranges from an estimated 0.02 to 200 feet per day, depending upon geographic position within the flow system. Within the Nevada Test Site, ground water moves southward and southwestward toward Ash Meadows.

Hydrologic Components for Model Development, Chapter C of Death Valley Regional Ground-Water Flow System, Nevada and California—Hydrogeologic Framework and Transient Ground-Water Flow Model

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | July 1st, 2004

Integrated Surface and Groundwater Modeling of Martis Valley, California, for Assessment of Potential Climate Change Impacts on Basin-Scale Water Resources

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | April 15th, 2015

This study develops a modeling framework to better understand surface and groundwater interactions in the Martis Valley Basin. Prior to the current study there were no ph

This study develops a modeling framework to better understand surface and groundwater interactions in the Martis Valley Basin. Prior to the current study there were no physical or statistical models of the Martis Valley Basin that could be used for long term water resource planning in the Basin. Currently, groundwater is the primary source for municipal and industrial water supply in Martis Valley, and surface water from the surrounding watersheds are partly stored in Donner, Prosser reservoirs and allowed to runoff into the Truckee River. This study presents the development, calibration, and verification of the physically based surface and groundwater GSFLOW model for Martis Valley. The model was calibrated for the historical 1981-2011 observed period. Various observations were used to calibrate the model during different periods, which helped verify the model’s ability to capture the dynamics of the hydrologic system. The model was calibrated to multiple fluxes and states in the hydrological system including streamflow, snow water equivalent, groundwater heads, and wetland and spring locations. In addition to comparing fluxes to multiple observations, consistency at internal gauges was also verified apart from simulating fluxes at the outlet. For future projections of hydrology, the GSFLOW model was forced with five future climate scenarios provided by CH2M HILL. Future simulations of snow water equivalent indicate reductions for all scenarios due to increasing temperatures. Groundwater recharge and its contribution to streamflow also decrease in the future for the warmer drier and hotter drier scenarios. The reduction in snowpack and earlier melt complicates the seasonally dependent nature of water resources and when combined, these results will likely add further stress to long term water availability in the Martis Valley Basin and the downstream consumers of the waters generated in the Basin.