Groundwater hydrology, groundwater and surface-water interactions, water quality, and groundwater-flow simulations for the Wet Mountain Valley alluvial aquifer, Custer and Fremont Counties, Colorado, 2017–19
In 2017, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District, began a study to provide a comprehensive analysis of the Wet Mountain Valley alluvial aquifer, Custer and Fremont Counties, Colorado. The study included collection of data pertaining to groundwater hydrology, groundwater and surface-water interactions, and water quality in the alluvial aquifer. In addition to providing foundational information on the hydrology of the alluvial aquifer, a numerical groundwater-flow model was developed to estimate the potential effects of additional storage of groundwater in the alluvial aquifer. Groundwater-level elevation data from 30 wells were used to estimate groundwater-flow directions in the alluvial aquifer, which were generally from the southwest to northeast, away from the Sangre de Cristo Mountains and towards perennial streams in the center of the valley. Although some seasonal variation was apparent in groundwater-level elevation records, no statistically significant seasonal trends were indicated. Statistically significant long-term trends were indicated in groundwater-level elevation records for 8 of the 30 wells, and of these wells with statistically significant trends, all but 1 indicated a negative trend of groundwater-level elevations. Spatial evaluation of wells with statistically significant negative groundwater-level elevation trends showed many are in areas of denser well drilling for domestic or other uses, indicating increasing groundwater use could potentially be causing groundwater-level elevation declines. There were instances of wells with no statistically significant groundwater-level elevation trends also located in areas of greater density of well completions. Additional investigations may be necessary to more fully characterize the processes responsible for negative groundwater-level elevation trends. Streamflow gain or loss calculations were completed for low flow in 2017–19 and for high flow in 2018 in nine reaches of streams within the study area. Stream reaches of the upper Texas Creek, upper Grape Creek, upper-middle Grape Creek, and Taylor Creek displayed consistent streamflow loss in each period from 2017 to 2019. These stream reaches represent long-term sources of recharge to the alluvial aquifer. Streamflow gain or loss varies through time in other stream reaches (lower Texas Creek, lower-middle Grape Creek, lower Grape Creek below Westcliffe, and lower Grape Creek above DeWeese Reservoir). The temporally variable behavior indicates these stream reaches may be sources of groundwater recharge or areas of groundwater discharge, likely depending on temporal dynamics between the elevation of the water table and the stream. Water-quality samples were collected from 10 groundwater wells and 10 stream sites during September through November 2019. All groundwater and stream samples were analyzed for major and trace elements and stable isotopes of water. A subset of groundwater samples was also analyzed for the environmental tracers sulfur hexafluoride, tritium, and noble gases. Comparison of water-quality results to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency drinking water-quality standards indicated no constituents exceeded primary standards for human health. Spatial evaluation of water quality indicated the concentrations of various constituents are likely controlled by groundwater and surface-water interactions and by spatial variability in bedrock geology underlying the alluvial aquifer. Specifically, streams shown to gain from groundwater had water chemistry constituent compositions similar to groundwater, whereas streams exiting the Sangre de Cristo Mountains tended to have compositions consistent with snowmelt. Groundwater geochemistry appeared to be partially controlled by oxidation-reduction processes and by proximity to igneous rocks in the Wet Mountains. Environmental tracers used to estimate groundwater age indicated all sampled groundwater contained tracers representing modern recharge (approximately less than 65 years old) but mixing of premodern recharge (approximately more than 65 years old) also occurs. Spatial evaluation of environmental tracers indicated large faults may be conduits for upwelling of older groundwater. No trends were observed in groundwater age with well depth, indicating all sampled wells are located within the zone of active groundwater flow. The presence of modern groundwater in wells with statistically significant negative groundwater-level elevation trends indicates groundwater storage depletions may be partially offset by capture of modern recharge. Repeated sampling of groundwater age would be necessary, however, to determine if any trends in groundwater age exist, which may indicate changing groundwater recharge, storage, or discharge. Additional investigations could also consider quantifying groundwater age in deeper wells to more fully define the depth of active groundwater flow. A numerical groundwater-flow model was developed to estimate components of the water budget, simulate groundwater and surface-water interactions, and evaluate the potential effects of aquifer storage and recovery. Simulated groundwater-level elevations from the calibrated groundwater-flow model are similar to the observed pattern of groundwater-level elevations with higher elevations in the western part of the study area along the Sangre de Cristo Mountains. Simulated water-budget components indicate most of the recharge to the alluvial aquifer is derived from streamflow losses, which is consistent with observations of losing streams along the mountain front. The largest groundwater discharge component of the alluvial aquifer was to streams in the center of the valley, where observations of stream gain or loss indicated the predominance of gaining conditions. Comparison of groundwater and surface-water interactions between the calibrated groundwater-flow model for 2000-19 (the base-case model) and a simulation including additional recharge, representing potential aquifer storage and recovery operations, indicated the additional recharge distributed throughout the area had minimal effects on streamflow in the nearby Grape Creek. An analysis of subregional groundwater budgets showed approximately 54 percent of the additional recharge flowed back to nearby Grape Creek, and the other 46 percent was distributed laterally into adjacent cells in the alluvial aquifer. The comparison of simulations and subregional water budget show the additional recharge did not substantially alter groundwater-level elevations or basin wide groundwater storage. Although the analysis of additional recharge provided in the numerical groundwater-flow model considers only one of many possible recharge scenarios, the model provides a useful tool that could be modified for various scenarios to understand potential effects of managed aquifer recharge.