Hydrology and water quality of the Beaver Dam Wash area, Washington County, Utah, Lincoln County, Nevada, and Mohave County, Arizona
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Water-Resources Investigations Report↗
Geology topics
G. E. Pyper
Publications and source records attributed to G. E. Pyper.
Review of water demand and water utilization studies for the Provo River drainage basin, and review of a study of the effects of the proposed Jordanelle Reservoir on seepage to underground mines, Bonneville unit of the central Utah project
Problem: Questions have been raised concerning the adequacy of available water to fulfill the needs of storage, exchanges, diversions, and instream flows, pursuant to existing water rights in the Provo River drainage basin part of the Bonneville Unit. Also, concern has been expressed about the potential for seepage of water from Jordanelle Reservoir to underground mines. The Utah Congressional Delegation requested that the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) review the results of analyses performed by and for the USBR. Purpose and Scope: The purpose of this report is to present the results of the USGS review of (1) the hydrologic data, techniques, and model used by the USBR in their hydrologic analyses of the Provo River drainage basin and (2) the results of a study of the potential for seepage from the Jordanelle Reservoir to nearby underground mines. The USGS reviewed USBR-supplied water demands, water utilization studies, and models of seepage from Jordanelle Reservoir. The USBR estimated that about 90 percent of the water supply for Jordanelle Reservoir will be water from Strawberry Reservoir exchanged for water from the Provo River stored in Utah Lake. If the Utah State Engineer allows the USBR to claim an estimated 19,700 acre-feet of return flows from the CUP, only about 77 percent of the supply would be derived from exchange of existing water rights in Utah Lake. The USGS assumed that planned importations of water from the Uinta Basin will be available and deliverable to fulfill the proposed exchanges. Water rights and demands are important for determining water availability. The USGS did not conduct an independent review of water rights and demands. The USSR and Utah Division of Water Rights use different methods in some areas for determining stress on the system based on past records. The USSR used "historical observed diversions" and the Utah Division of Water Rights use "diversion entitlements", which may not be equal to the historical diversions. The USGS based its review upon water demands used by the USSR. The Utah Division of Water Rights has responsibility for granting and enforcing water rights, and the final decisions on how the rights will be adjudicated lies with the Utah Division of Water Rights and with the courts. The USGS review did not consider the draft water distribution plan for the Utah Lake drainage basin proposed by the Utah State Engineer (written commun., October 15,1991). This plan, when finalized, may have an effect on water availability to the CUP.
Utah↗
Quality and quantity of runoff and atmospheric deposition in urban areas of Salt Lake County, Utah, 1980-81
Water of good quality from mountain streams is degraded as it moves through urban areas to the Jordan River in Salt Lake County, Utah. The impact of urban runoff and atmospheric deposition on the quality of water in those streams and in storm conduits and canals functioning as storm drains was evaluated using data collected during 1980-81. Atmospheric-wetfall loads for an average storm were as much as 10 pounds per acre for total solids, but the dissolved trace metals were generally present in insignificant quantities. Wetfall-deposition loads generally were greater than storm-runoff loads, indicating that a large quantity of the wetfall load remained as soil deposits. Acid rain fell in more than one-half of the storms sampled, most commonly in September and October. Dustfall concentrations reflected the composition of local soils, particularly with regard to iron, manganese, and chromium; but concentrations of cadmium, copper, lead, zinc, and chloride were considerably enriched. Monthly loads of dryfall solids reached a maximum of 62 pounds per acre in the Little Cottonwood Creek urban basin, but were of the same magnitude as total storm loads for a heavy rainfall. Urban runoff represented about 38 percent of the discharge in three canals. The water in the canals was poorer in quality than the water in the mountain streams. The impact of the canal discharges to the streams is slight, however, owing to their ' relatively small amounts. ' Concentrations of sediment, suspended solids, suspended trace metals, phosphorus, and oxygen-demanding substances were much greater during storm runoff than under base-flow conditions. This report contains data for basin and storm characteristics and water-quality information for atmospheric deposition and urban runoff. (USGS)
Utah↗
Surface-water and climatological data, Salt Lake County, Utah, water year 1980
This report presents streamflow, water-quality, precipitation, and storm-runoff data collected in Salt Lake County, Utah, during the 1980 water year and certain water-quality data for the 1979 water year which were included for comparative purposes. Surface-water data consist of daily mean values of flow at 33 sites on natural streams, canals, and conduits. Water-quality data consist of chemical, biologic, and sediment analyses at 30 sites. Precipitation data consist of daily and monthly total at nine sites. Storm-runoff data consist of 5 and 15-minute interval discharge data for storms of July 1-2, August 19, and August 25, 1980, for most surface-water sites.
Utah↗
Extension of streamflow records in Utah
This report provides long-term data on streamflow at selected short-term gaging stations in Utah. The records of streamflow at the short-term or secondary gaging stations are extended on the basis of a graphical correlation with concurrent records at long-term or primary gaging stations. The data presented consist of records of runoff at the short-term stations summarized on a monthly and yearly basis; these data include the actual short-term records and the correlative estimates of runoff. Methods and information are included to enable the reader to make further extensions of runoff records. The standard error of estimate for correlations used is 30 percent or less, and the coefficient of correlation is at least 0.8. Streamflow information is thereby obtained that is believed to be more representative of the long-term runoff than is an actual short-term record. This study shows that the optimum period of concurrent record needed in Utah for a reliable correlation is about 15-20 years. Extensions of record for low-flow and flood-frequency studies usually cannot be obtained from correlations. Much of this information could be collected economically by converting short-term stream-gaging stations to partial-record stations after a satisfactory correlation with a long-term station has been obtained.
Utah↗