Hydrogeologic framework and groundwater conditions of the Ararat Basin in Armenia

Joshua F. Valder; Janet M. Carter; Colton J. Medler; Ryan F. Thompson; Mark T. Anderson

doi:10.3133/sir20175163

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20175163

Hydrogeologic framework and groundwater conditions of the Ararat Basin in Armenia

Joshua F. Valder·Janet M. Carter·Colton J. Medler·Ryan F. Thompson·Mark T. Anderson

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Armenia is a landlocked country located in the mountainous Caucasus region between Asia and Europe. It shares borders with the countries of Georgia on the north, Azerbaijan on the east, Iran on the south, and Turkey and Azerbaijan on the west. The Ararat Basin is a transboundary basin in Armenia and Turkey. The Ararat Basin (or Ararat Valley) is an intermountain depression that contains the Aras River and its tributaries, which also form the border between Armenia and Turkey and divide the basin into northern and southern regions. The Ararat Basin also contains Armenia’s largest agricultural and fish farming zone that is supplied by high-quality water from wells completed in the artesian aquifers that underlie the basin. Groundwater constitutes about 40 percent of all water use, and groundwater provides 96 percent of the water used for drinking purposes in Armenia. Since 2000, groundwater withdrawals and consumption in the Ararat Basin of Armenia have increased because of the growth of aquaculture and other uses. Increased groundwater withdrawals caused decreased springflow, reduced well discharges, falling water levels, and a reduction of the number of flowing artesian wells in the southern part of Ararat Basin in Armenia. In 2016, the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) began a cooperative study in Armenia to share science and field techniques to increase the country’s capabilities for groundwater study and modeling. The purpose of this report is to describe the hydrogeologic framework and groundwater conditions of the Ararat Basin in Armenia based on data collected in 2016 and previous hydrogeologic studies. The study area includes the Ararat Basin in Armenia. This report was completed through a partnership with USAID/Armenia in the implementation of its Science, Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships effort through the Advanced Science and Partnerships for Integrated Resource Development program and associated partners, including the Government of Armenia, Armenia’s Hydrogeological Monitoring Center, and the USAID Global Development Lab and its GeoCenter. The hydrogeologic framework of the Ararat Basin includes several basin-fill stratigraphic units consisting of interbedded dense clays, gravels, sands, volcanic basalts, and andesite deposits. Previously published cross sections and well lithologic logs were used to map nine general hydrogeologic units. Hydrogeologic units were mapped based on lithology and water-bearing potential. Water-level data measured in the water-bearing hydrogeologic units 2, 4, 6, and 8 in 2016 were used to create potentiometric surface maps. In hydrogeologic unit 2, the estimated direction of groundwater flow is from the west to north in the western part of the basin (away from the Aras River) and from north to south (toward the Aras River) in the eastern part of the basin. In hydrogeologic unit 4, the direction of groundwater flow is generally from west to east and north to south (toward the Aras River) except in the western part of the basin where groundwater flow is toward the north or northwest. Hydrogeologic unit 6 has the same general pattern of groundwater flow as unit 4. Hydrogeologic unit 8 is the deepest of the water-bearing units and is confined in the basin. Groundwater flow generally is from the south to north (away from the Aras River) in the western part of the basin and from west to east and north to south (toward the Aras River) elsewhere in the basin. In addition to water levels, personnel from Armenia’s Hydrogeological Monitoring Center also measured specific conductance at 540 wells and temperature at 2,470 wells in the Ararat Basin using U.S. Geological Survey protocols in 2016. The minimum specific conductance was 377 microsiemens per centimeter (μS/cm), the maximum value was 4,000 μS/cm, and the mean was 998 μS/cm. The maximum water temperature was 24.2 degrees Celsius. An analysis between water temperature and well depth indicated no relation; however, spatially, most wells with cooler water temperatures were within the 2016 pressure boundary or in the western part of the basin. Wells with generally warmer water temperatures were in the eastern part of the basin. Samples were collected from four groundwater sites and one surface-water site by the U.S. Geological Survey in 2016. The stable-isotope values were similar for all five sites, indicating similar recharge sources for the sampled wells. The Hrazdan River sample was consistent with the groundwater samples, indicating the river could serve as a source of recharge to the Ararat artesian aquifer.

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations Report Report

Source-reported bounding extent: 39.75° to 40.25° latitude; 43.75° to 44.8° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Joshua F. Valder, Janet M. Carter, Colton J. Medler, Ryan F. Thompson, Mark T. Anderson. 2018-01-17. Hydrogeologic framework and groundwater conditions of the Ararat Basin in Armenia. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20175163

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Monitoring recreation on federally managed lands and waters—Aspects of visitor use

Federally managed public lands and waters receive around 1 billion recreational visits each year. Data on these visitors can aid in guiding policy decisions, managing resources effectively, and communicating the economic contributions of lands and waters. This report explores the methods used by agencies to collect data on aspects of recreational visitor use to Federal lands and waters (apart from visitation numbers, which are the focus of a companion publication). Aspects of recreational visitor use include visitor demographics, recreational activity participation, visitor satisfaction, visitor attitudes and experiences, trip characteristics, and economic contributions. We review practices used to understand aspects of visitor use across seven Federal agencies, revealing similarities such as the use of visitor intercept surveys and coverage of similar topic areas, and differences in how survey programs are operationalized and how specific questions on visitor surveys are worded. We also evaluate emerging technologies, such as geolocated social media and mobile device location data, for their potential to aid in understanding aspects of visitor use. This report concludes with potential opportunities to enhance data collection and coordination, ensuring cost-effective data collection and informed decision making.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2026

Evaluation of best management practices at an edge-of-field site in the Eagle Creek watershed, Ohio, 2012–20

In 2010, the U.S. Geological Survey worked in partnership with the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and the Natural Resources Conservation Service to identify farm fields in priority watersheds—watersheds critically important to Great Lake health. Intensive best management practices were implemented in five States to test the efficacy of best management practices, also referred to as agricultural conservation practices, to reduce sediment and nutrient runoff on agricultural fields. These fields were chosen as representatives of the priority watersheds because their farming practices and geographical conditions were common among farms in those watersheds. A farm site located near Findlay, Ohio, in the Eagle Creek watershed used two conservation practices, cover crop (Natural Resources Conservation Service practice standard 340) and variable rate technology (VRT; Natural Resources Conservation Service practice standard 590), which represent common practices in the Maumee priority watershed. This study monitored surface runoff and subsurface tile runoff at the Eagle Creek watershed site. The effects of cover crop and VRT nutrient application on sediment and nutrient runoff were assessed from October 2012 to September 2020. Cover crops were applied in fall of 2016, 2017, and 2018, coinciding with VRT applications. The following parameters were analyzed as part of the study: runoff discharge; peak discharge; and concentrations and loads of total phosphorus, particulate phosphorus, dissolved reactive phosphorus, and suspended sediment. High peak runoff events disproportionally affected nutrient concentrations and loads in runoff. A threshold of the 85th percentile of the peak discharge was chosen to assess the effect of cover crop and VRT nutrient application on nutrient mitigation at each gage. Runoff events below the 85th percentile were considered small, and runoff events over the 85th percentile were considered large. Concentrations from collected water-quality samples were used for the analysis; estimated concentrations were excluded from the statistical evaluation. All surface runoff parameters during small runoff events, except surface runoff volume, were significantly lower in the period with cover crops and VRT implementation. Contrarily, subsurface runoff parameters during small events were not statistically different between the periods with and without cover crops and VRT implementation. Surface and subsurface parameters during large events were also not statistically different between the periods with and without cover crops and VRT implementation. These results indicate cover crops and VRT may improve water quality during small runoff events, but additional best management practices that mitigate large runoff events may lead to greater water-quality improvement given the contribution of large events to overall losses.

Ohio↗

USGS2026

Continuous monitoring and temporal variability of fluorescence of dissolved organic matter in karst groundwater of the Edwards aquifer, south-central Texas, 2019–24

Widespread urbanization on the Edwards aquifer recharge zone in south-central Texas has prompted the development of new approaches and tools for evaluating the current and future status of water quality in the San Antonio and Barton Springs segments of the Edwards aquifer. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the San Antonio Water System and the City of Austin, applied continuous monitoring of fluorescence of dissolved organic matter (fDOM) to characterize the sources and transport of dissolved organic matter and associated constituents in the Edwards aquifer. Continuous fDOM time-series data were adjusted using empirically derived temperature, turbidity, and inner-filter-effect correction factors prior to analysis and interpretation. Fully corrected fDOM time-series data from the study sites were evaluated for short- and long-term temporal variability in fDOM in the context of the hydrologic and climatic conditions that occurred during the 5-year study period to understand vulnerability of the aquifer to potential contaminants in recharge. Study results indicate that fDOM is an effective proxy for dissolved organic carbon that, in turn, is indicative of the influx of recent surface water and associated contaminants, and thus, aquifer vulnerability to those contaminants. Although other continuously monitored water-quality parameters provide insights into changes in water quality in response to varying hydrologic conditions, the quantitative relation between fDOM and dissolved organic carbon directly indicates the timing and magnitude of pulses of organic constituents derived from the land surface, whereas other water-quality parameters do not.

Texas↗