SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “General Interest Publication”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 253 records · Page 14Linked to original sources

USGS2014

Groundwater-quality data in seven GAMA study units: results from initial sampling, 2004-2005, and resampling, 2007-2008, of wells: California GAMA Program Priority Basin Project

The Priority Basin Project (PBP) of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program was developed in response to the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Act of 2001 and is being conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The GAMA-PBP began sampling, primarily public supply wells in May 2004. By the end of February 2006, seven (of what would eventually be 35) study units had been sampled over a wide area of the State. Selected wells in these first seven study units were resampled for water quality from August 2007 to November 2008 as part of an assessment of temporal trends in water quality by the GAMA-PBP. The initial sampling was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of the quality of raw groundwater used for public water supplies within the seven study units. In the 7 study units, 462 wells were selected by using a spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method to provide statistical representation of the study area. Wells selected this way are referred to as grid wells or status wells. Approximately 3 years after the initial sampling, 55 of these previously sampled status wells (approximately 10 percent in each study unit) were randomly selected for resampling. The seven resampled study units, the total number of status wells sampled for each study unit, and the number of these wells resampled for trends are as follows, in chronological order of sampling: San Diego Drainages (53 status wells, 7 trend wells), North San Francisco Bay (84, 10), Northern San Joaquin Basin (51, 5), Southern Sacramento Valley (67, 7), San Fernando–San Gabriel (35, 6), Monterey Bay and Salinas Valley Basins (91, 11), and Southeast San Joaquin Valley (83, 9). The groundwater samples were analyzed for a large number of synthetic organic constituents (volatile organic compounds [VOCs], pesticides, and pesticide degradates), constituents of special interest (perchlorate, N-nitrosodimethylamine [NDMA], and 1,2,3-trichloropropane [1,2,3-TCP]), and naturally-occurring inorganic constituents (nutrients, major and minor ions, and trace elements). Naturally-occurring isotopes (tritium, carbon-14, and stable isotopes of hydrogen and oxygen in water) also were measured to help identify processes affecting groundwater quality and the sources and ages of the sampled groundwater. Nearly 300 constituents and water-quality indicators were investigated. Quality-control samples (blanks, replicates, and samples for matrix spikes) were collected at 24 percent of the 55 status wells resampled for trends, and the results for these samples were used to evaluate the quality of the data for the groundwater samples. Field blanks rarely contained detectable concentrations of any constituent, suggesting that contamination was not a noticeable source of bias in the data for the groundwater samples. Differences between replicate samples were mostly within acceptable ranges, indicating acceptably low variability in analytical results. Matrix-spike recoveries were within the acceptable range (70 to 130 percent) for 75 percent of the compounds for which matrix spikes were collected. This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of water delivered to consumers. After withdrawal, groundwater typically is treated, disinfected, and blended with other waters to maintain acceptable water quality. The benchmarks used in this report apply to treated water that is served to the consumer, not to untreated groundwater. To provide some context for the results, however, concentrations of constituents measured in these groundwater samples were compared with benchmarks established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and California Department of Public Health (CDPH). Comparisons between data collected for this study and benchmarks for drinking water are for illustrative purposes only and are not indicative of compliance or non-compliance with those benchmarks. Most constituents that were detected in groundwater samples from the trend wells were found at concentrations less than drinking-water benchmarks. Four VOCs—trichloroethene, tetrachloroethene, 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane, and methyl tert-butyl ether—were detected in one or more wells at concentrations greater than their health-based benchmarks, and six VOCs were detected in at least 10 percent of the samples during initial sampling or resampling of the trend wells. No pesticides were detected at concentrations near or greater than their health-based benchmarks. Three pesticide constituents—atrazine, deethylatrazine, and simazine—were detected in more than 10 percent of the trend-well samples during both sampling periods. Perchlorate, a constituent of special interest, was detected more frequently, and at greater concentrations during resampling than during initial sampling, but this may be due to a change in analytical method between the sampling periods, rather than to a change in groundwater quality. Another constituent of special interest, 1,2,3-TCP, was also detected more frequently during resampling than during initial sampling, but this pattern also may not reflect a change in groundwater quality. Samples from several of the wells where 1,2,3-TCP was detected by low-concentration-level analysis during resampling were not analyzed for 1,2,3-TCP using a low-level method during initial sampling. Most detections of nutrients and trace elements in samples from trend wells were less than health-based benchmarks during both sampling periods. Exceptions include nitrate, arsenic, boron, and vanadium, all detected at concentrations greater than their health-based benchmarks in at least one well during both sampling periods, and molybdenum, detected at concentrations greater than its health-based benchmark during resampling only. The isotopic ratios of oxygen and hydrogen in water and tritium and carbon-14 activities generally changed little between sampling periods, suggesting that the predominant sources and ages of groundwater in most trend wells were consistent between the sampling periods.

California↗

USGS2010

The principal rare earth elements deposits of the United States: A summary of domestic deposits and a global perspective

The rare earth elements (REE) are fifteen elements with atomic numbers 57 through 71, from lanthanum to lutetium ('lanthanides'), plus yttrium (39), which is chemically similar to the lanthanide elements and thus typically included with the rare earth elements. Although industrial demand for these elements is relatively small in tonnage terms, they are essential for a diverse and expanding array of high-technology applications. REE-containing magnets, metal alloys for batteries and light-weight structures, and phosphors are essential for many current and emerging alternative energy technologies, such as electric vehicles, energy-efficient lighting, and wind power. REE are also critical for a number of key defense systems and other advanced materials. Section 843 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, Public Law 111-84, directs the Comptroller General to complete a report on REE materials in the defense supply chain. The Office of Industrial Policy, in collaboration with other U.S. Government agencies, has initiated (in addition to this report) a detailed study of REE. This latter study will assess the Department of Defense's use of REE, as well as the status and security of domestic and global supply chains. That study will also address vulnerabilities in the supply chain and recommend ways to mitigate any potential risks of supply disruption. To help conduct this study, the Office of Industrial Policy asked the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to report on domestic REE reserves and resources in a global context. To this end, the enclosed report is the initial USGS contribution to assessing and summarizing the domestic REE resources in a global perspective. In 2009, the Mineral Resources Program of the USGS organized a new project under the title Minerals at Risk and For Emerging Technologies in order to evaluate mineral resource and supply issues of rare metals that are of increasing importance to the national economy. Leaders and members of this project, with the assistance of the USGS National Minerals Information Center, prepared the enclosed USGS report on domestic REE resources. The USGS Mineral Resources Program has investigated domestic and selected foreign REE resources for many decades, and this report summarizes what has been learned from this research. The USGS National Minerals Information Center (formerly Minerals Information Team) has monitored global production, trade, and resources for an equally long period and is the principal source of statistics used in this report. The objective of this study is to provide a nontechnical overview of domestic reserves and resources of REE and possibilities for utilizing those resources. At the present time, the United States obtains its REE raw materials from foreign sources, almost exclusively from China. Import dependence upon a single country raises serious issues of supply security. In a global context, domestic REE resources are modest and of uncertain value; hence, available resources in traditional trading partners (such as Canada and Australia) are of great interest for diversifying sources of supply. This report restates basic geologic facts about REE relevant to assessing security of supply, followed by a review of current United States consumption and imports of REE, current knowledge of domestic resources, and possibilities for future domestic production. Further detail follows in a deposit-by-deposit review of the most significant domestic REE deposits (see index map). Necessary steps to develop domestic resources are discussed in a separate section, leading into a review of current domestic exploration and a discussion of the value of a future national mineral resource assessment of REE. The report also includes an overview of known global REE resources and discusses the reliability of alternative foreign sources of REE.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2010

Groundwater-quality data in the South Coast Range-Coastal study unit, 2008: Results from the California GAMA Program

Groundwater quality in the approximately 766-square-mile South Coast Range–Coastal (SCRC) study unit was investigated from May to December 2008, as part of the Priority Basins Project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The GAMA Priority Basins Project was developed in response to legislative mandates (Supplemental Report of the 1999 Budget Act 1999-00 Fiscal Year; and, the Groundwater Quality Monitoring Act of 2001 [Sections 10780-10782.3 of the California Water Code, Assembly Bill 599]) to assess and monitor the quality of groundwater in California, and is being conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The SCRC study unit was the 25th study unit to be sampled as part of the GAMA Priority Basins Project. The SCRC study unit was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of untreated groundwater quality in the primary aquifer systems and to facilitate statistically consistent comparisons of untreated groundwater quality throughout California. The primary aquifer systems (hereinafter referred to as primary aquifers) were defined as that part of the aquifer corresponding to the perforation interval of wells listed in the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) database for the SCRC study unit. The quality of groundwater in shallow or deep water-bearing zones may differ from the quality of groundwater in the primary aquifers; shallow groundwater may be more vulnerable to surficial contamination. In the SCRC study unit, groundwater samples were collected from 70 wells in two study areas (Basins and Uplands) in Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties. Fifty-five of the wells were selected using a spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method to provide statistical representation of the study unit (grid wells), and 15 wells were selected to aid in evaluation of specific water-quality issues (understanding wells). In addition to the 70 wells sampled, 3 surface-water samples were collected in streams near 2 of the sampled wells in order to better comprehend the interaction between groundwater and surface water in the area. The groundwater samples were analyzed for organic constituents (volatile organic compounds [VOC], pesticides and pesticide degradates, polar pesticides and metabolites, and pharmaceutical compounds), constituents of special interest (perchlorate, N-nitrosodimethylamine [NDMA], and 1,2,3-TCP), naturally occurring inorganic constituents (trace elements, nutrients, dissolved organic carbon [DOC], major and minor ions, silica, total dissolved solids [TDS], and alkalinity), and radioactive constituents (gross alpha and gross beta radioactivity). Naturally occurring isotopes (stable isotopes of hydrogen and oxygen in water, stable isotopes of nitrogen and oxygen in dissolved nitrate, stable isotopes of sulfur in dissolved sulfate, stable isotopes of carbon in dissolved inorganic carbon, activities of tritium, and carbon-14 abundance), and dissolved gases (including noble gases) also were measured to help identify the sources and ages of the sampled groundwater. In total, 298 constituents and field water-quality indicators were investigated. Three types of quality-control samples (blanks, replicates, and matrix-spikes) were collected at approximately 3 to 12 percent of the wells in the SCRC study unit, and the results for these samples were used to evaluate the quality of the data for the groundwater samples. Field blanks rarely contained detectable concentrations of any constituent, suggesting that contamination from sample collection procedures was not a significant source of bias in the data for the groundwater samples. Differences between replicate samples generally were less than 10 percent relative and/or standard deviation, indicating acceptable analytical reproducibility. Matrix-spike recoveries were within the acceptable range (70 to 130 percent) for approximately 84 percent of the compounds. This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of drinking water delivered to consumers; after withdrawal from the ground, untreated groundwater typically is treated, disinfected, and/or blended with other waters to maintain water quality. Regulatory thresholds apply to water that is served to the consumer, not to untreated groundwater. However, to provide some context for the results, concentrations of constituents measured in the untreated groundwater were compared with regulatory and non-regulatory health-based thresholds established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and CDPH, and to non-regulatory thresholds established for aesthetic concerns by CDPH. Comparisons between data collected for this study and thresholds for drinking water are for illustrative purposes only and are not indicative of compliance or noncompliance with those thresholds. Most organic and inorganic constituents that were detected in groundwater samples from the 55 grid wells in the SCRC study unit were detected at concentrations less than drinking-water thresholds. In addition, all detections of organic constituents in SCRC grid well samples were less than health-based thresholds. In total, VOCs were detected in 33 percent of the 55 grid wells sampled and pesticides and pesticide degradates were detected in 27 percent of grid wells sampled in the SCRC study unit. In the Basins study area, VOCs and pesticides and pesticide degradates were detected in approximately 33 percent of the 39 grid wells. In the Uplands study area, VOCs were detected in approximately 31 percent and pesticides and pesticide degradates were detected in approximately 13 percent of the 16 grid wells. Trace elements and minor ions were sampled for at 32 grid wells and nutrients at 33 grid wells in the SCRC study unit, and most detections were less than health-based thresholds. Exceptions in the Basins study area include one detection of arsenic greater than the USEPA maximum contaminant level (MCL-US) of 10 µg/L and three detections of nitrite plus nitrate, as nitrogen (NO2-+NO3-) greater than the MCL-US of 10 mg/L. Exceptions in the Uplands study area include two detections of arsenic greater than the MCL-US and eight detections of molybdenum greater than the USEPA lifetime health advisory level (HAL-US) of 40 µg/L. All detections of major and minor ions and gross alpha and gross beta radioactivity from the SCRC grid wells were less than health-based thresholds. Results for trace elements, major ions, and TDS with non-enforceable thresholds set for aesthetic concerns from 16 Basins study area grid wells showed that iron concentrations greater than the CDPH secondary maximum contaminant level (SMCL-CA) of 300 µg/L were detected in grid wells. Manganese concentrations greater than the SMCL-CA of 50 µg/L were detected in six grid wells. Chloride concentrations greater than the recommended SMCL-CA threshold of 250 mg/L were detected in one grid well. Sulfate concentrations greater than the recommended SMCL-CA threshold of 250 mg/L were measured in 12 grid wells and 3 of these wells also were greater than the upper SMCL-CA threshold of 500 mg/L. TDS concentrations greater than the SMCL-CA recommended threshold of 500 mg/L were measured in 14 of the 16 Basins study area grid wells and concentrations in 5 of these wells also were greater than the SMCL-CA upper threshold of 1,000 mg/L. In the Uplands study area, iron concentrations greater than the SMCL-CA were detected in 2 of 16 grid wells and manganese concentrations greater than the SMCL-CA were detected in 3 grid wells. TDS and sulfate concentrations greater than the recommended SMCL-CA thresholds were detected in 11 and 2 grid wells, respectively, but none of these concentrations were greater than the SMCL-CA upper thresholds.

California↗

USGS2008

Ground-water quality data in the Central Sierra study unit, 2006— Results from the California GAMA Program

Ground-water quality in the approximately 950 square kilometer (370 square mile) Central Sierra study unit (CENSIE) was investigated in May 2006 as part of the Priority Basin Assessment project of the Groundwater Ambient Monitoring and Assessment (GAMA) Program. The GAMA Priority Basin Assessment project was developed in response to the Ground-Water Quality Monitoring Act of 2001, and is being conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). This study was designed to provide a spatially unbiased assessment of the quality of raw ground water used for drinking-water supplies within CENSIE, and to facilitate statistically consistent comparisons of ground-water quality throughout California. Samples were collected from thirty wells in Madera County. Twenty-seven of the wells were selected using a spatially distributed, randomized grid-based method to provide statistical representation of the study area (grid wells), and three were selected to aid in evaluation of specific water-quality issues (understanding wells). Ground-water samples were analyzed for a large number of synthetic organic constituents (volatile organic compounds [VOCs], gasoline oxygenates and degradates, pesticides and pesticide degradates), constituents of special interest (N-nitrosodimethylamine, perchlorate, and 1,2,3-trichloropropane), naturally occurring inorganic constituents [nutrients, major and minor ions, and trace elements], radioactive constituents, and microbial indicators. Naturally occurring isotopes [tritium, and carbon-14, and stable isotopes of hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon], and dissolved noble gases also were measured to help identify the sources and ages of the sampled ground water. In total, over 250 constituents and water-quality indicators were investigated. Quality-control samples (blanks, replicates, and samples for matrix spikes) were collected at approximately one-sixth of the wells, and the results for these samples were used to evaluate the quality of the data for the ground-water samples. Results from field blanks indicated contamination was not a noticeable source of bias in the data for ground-water samples. Differences between replicate samples were within acceptable ranges, indicating acceptably low variability. Matrix spike recoveries were within acceptable ranges for most constituents. This study did not attempt to evaluate the quality of water delivered to consumers; after withdrawal from the ground, water typically is treated, disinfected, or blended with other waters to maintain water quality. Regulatory thresholds apply to water that is served to the consumer, not to raw ground water. However, to provide some context for the results, concentrations of constituents measured in the raw ground water were compared with health-based thresholds established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and California Department of Public Health (CDPH), and thresholds established for aesthetic concerns (Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels, SMCL-CA) by CDPH. Therefore, any comparisons of the results of this study to drinking-water standards only is for illustrative purposes and is not indicative of compliance or non-compliance to those standards. Most constituents that were detected in ground-water samples were found at concentrations below drinking-water standards or thresholds. Six constituents? fluoride, arsenic, molybdenum, uranium, gross-alpha radioactivity, and radon-222?were detected at concentrations higher than thresholds set for health-based regulatory purposes. Three additional constituents?pH, iron and manganese?were detected at concentrations above thresholds set for aesthetic concerns. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and pesticides, were detected in less than one-third of the samples and generally at less than one one-hundredth of a health-based threshold.

California↗

USGS2014

Simulation of the effects of rainfall and groundwater use on historical lake water levels, groundwater levels, and spring flows in central Florida

The urbanization of central Florida has progressed substantially in recent decades, and the total population in Lake, Orange, Osceola, Polk, and Seminole Counties more than quadrupled from 1960 to 2010. The Floridan aquifer system is the primary source of water for potable, industrial, and agricultural purposes in central Florida. Despite increases in groundwater withdrawals to meet the demand of population growth, recharge derived by infiltration of rainfall in the well-drained karst terrain of central Florida is the largest component of the long-term water balance of the Floridan aquifer system. To complement existing physics-based groundwater flow models, artificial neural networks and other data-mining techniques were used to simulate historical lake water level, groundwater level, and spring flow at sites throughout the area. Historical data were examined using descriptive statistics, cluster analysis, and other exploratory analysis techniques to assess their suitability for more intensive data-mining analysis. Linear trend analyses of meteorological data collected by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration at 21 sites indicate 67 percent of sites exhibited upward trends in air temperature over at least a 45-year period of record, whereas 76 percent exhibited downward trends in rainfall over at least a 95-year period of record. Likewise, linear trend analyses of hydrologic response data, which have varied periods of record ranging in length from 10 to 79 years, indicate that water levels in lakes (307 sites) were about evenly split between upward and downward trends, whereas water levels in 69 percent of wells (out of 455 sites) and flows in 68 percent of springs (out of 19 sites) exhibited downward trends. Total groundwater use in the study area increased from about 250 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) in 1958 to about 590 Mgal/d in 1980 and remained relatively stable from 1981 to 2008, with a minimum of 559 Mgal/d in 1994 and a maximum of 773 Mgal/d in 2000. The change in groundwater-use trend in the early 1980s and the following period of relatively slight trend is attributable to the concomitant effects of increasing public-supply withdrawals and decreasing use of water by the phosphate industry and agriculture. On the basis of available historical data and exploratory analyses, empirical lake water-level, groundwater-level, and spring-flow models were developed for 22 lakes, 23 wells, and 6 springs. Input time series consisting of various frequencies and frequency-band components of daily rainfall (1942 to 2008) and monthly total groundwater use (1957 to 2008) resulted in hybrid signal-decomposition artificial neural network models. The final models explained much of the variability in observed hydrologic data, with 43 of the 51 sites having coefficients of determination exceeding 0.6, and the models matched the magnitude of the observed data reasonably well, such that models for 32 of the 51 sites had root-mean-square errors less than 10 percent of the measured range of the data. The Central Florida Artificial Neural Network Decision Support System was developed to integrate historical databases and the 102 site-specific artificial neural network models, model controls, and model output into a spreadsheet application with a graphical user interface that allows the user to simulate scenarios of interest. Overall, the data-mining analyses indicate that the Floridan aquifer system in central Florida is a highly conductive, dynamic, open system that is strongly influenced by external forcing. The most important external forcing appears to be rainfall, which explains much of the multiyear cyclic variability and long-term downward trends observed in lake water levels, groundwater levels, and spring flows. For most sites, groundwater use explains less of the observed variability in water levels and flows than rainfall. Relative groundwater-use impacts are greater during droughts, however, and long-term trends in water levels and flows were identified that are consistent with historical groundwater-use patterns. The sensitivity of the hydrologic system to rainfall is expected, owing to the well-drained karst terrain and relatively thin confinement of the Floridan aquifer system in much of central Florida. These characteristics facilitate the relatively rapid transmission of infiltrating water from rainfall to the water table and contribute to downward leakage of water to the Floridan aquifer system. The areally distributed nature of rainfall, as opposed to the site-specific nature of groundwater use, and the generally high transmissivity and low storativity properties of the semiconfined Floridan aquifer system contribute to the prevalence of water-level and flow patterns that mimic rainfall patterns. In general, the data-mining analyses demonstrate that the hydrologic system in central Florida is affected by groundwater use differently during wet periods, when little or no system storage is available (high water levels), compared to dry periods, when there is excess system storage (low water levels). Thus, by driving the overall behavior of the system, rainfall indirectly influences the degree to which groundwater use will effect persistent trends in water levels and flows, with groundwater-use impacts more prevalent during periods of low water levels and spring flows caused by low rainfall and less prevalent during periods of high water levels and spring flows caused by high rainfall. Differences in the magnitudes of rainfall and groundwater use during wet and dry periods also are important determinants of hydrologic response. An important implication of the data-mining analyses is that rainfall variability at subannual to multidecadal timescales must be considered in combination with groundwater use to provide robust system-response predictions that enhance sustainable resource management in an open karst aquifer system. The data-driven approach was limited, however, by the confounding effects of correlation between rainfall and groundwater use, the quality and completeness of the historical databases, and the spatial variations in groundwater use. The data-mining analyses indicate that available historical data when used alone do not contain sufficient information to definitively quantify the related individual effects of rainfall and groundwater use on hydrologic response. The knowledge gained from data-driven modeling and the results from physics-based modeling, when compared and used in combination, can yield a more comprehensive assessment and a more robust understanding of the hydrologic system than either of the approaches used separately.

Florida↗

USGS2014

Barcodes are a useful tool for labeling and tracking ecological samples

Barcodes are used to label and track just about everything these days. Look around your office, in your medicine cabinet, at the package you just received in the mail, or on the shelves of any shop in town, and you will immediately grasp the ubiquity of their use. Interestingly, railroads and supermarkets were the early pioneers of barcode development: the former needing a way to track railway car location and ownership on a national scale, the latter needing a way to track a diverse array of products and to decrease checkout times (Nelson 1997). Barcodes first came to use in the sciences via the field of medicine, and the medical literature contains hundreds of publications describing how this technology has reduced errors in patient specimen identification and handling, where error mitigation is crucial. In short, barcodes have been adopted by many industries, and in many fields they are now synonymous with asset tracking. In spite of their potential to efficiently organize “assets” (i.e., samples) and minimize human error, the use of barcodes has yet to gain widespread application in ecology. In an age where students take notes on laptops instead of paper, and where “text messaging” involves a smartphone rather than a ball‐point pen, why do otherwise tech‐savvy ecologists persist in hand‐labeling samples? Why do we repeatedly transcribe long and unique identifiers at each step in the process of sample analysis, thereby wasting time and creating opportunities for transcription errors and data loss? Why are most sample storage areas only successfully navigable by the lab manager who personally shelved the samples? In the case of our large ecology lab—and, we suspect, in many others as well—the answer to these questions was perpetually, “bar‐coding won't be worth the trouble.” Recently, however, we realized this was no longer a sufficient answer when we started a new research project that involved collecting an additional thousands of samples each year; we decided to embrace the tangible benefits of an electronic labeling system, and implemented barcoding in our lab. To be clear, the use of barcoding in ecology is not completely novel, and there have been early adopters of this technology. For example, the Cedar Creek Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) site has been using barcodes since at least the mid‐1990s to track the large number of samples collected in their long‐term experimental grasslands (T. A. Kennedy, personal observation ). Overall, however, Cedar Creek is an outlier: in informal e‐mail surveys of LTER sites, only two of eight respondents used barcodes for sample identification or tracking, and even then their use was generally limited to certain samples or certain stages of sample analysis. Our objective in this article is to use our lab as a case study to highlight the potential of barcodes to simplify numerous aspects of sample collection and processing.

Arizona↗

USGS1914

The Glacier National Park: A popular guide to its geology and scenery

The Glacier National Park includes that part of the Front Range of the Rocky Mountains lying just south of the Canadian line, in Teton and Flathead counties, Mont. It is bounded on the west by Flathead River (locally called North Fork), on the south by the Middle Fork of Flathead River and the Great Northern Railway, and on the east by the Blackfeet Indian Reservation. Although this part of the Rocky Mountains has been known since Lewis and Clark crossed the continent in 1805-6, the region later made a park appears not to have been visited by white men until 1853, when Cut Bank Pass was crossed by A. W. Tinkham, one of the Government engineers engaged in exploring a route for the Pacific railroad. Tinkham, who was encamped in the Bitterroot Valley, was ordered to examine Marias Pass, but in traversing Middle Fork of Flathead River along the line of the present railroad he was evidently misled by the large size of the valley of Nyack Creek and ascended that instead of keeping to the right up the main stream. He reported the pass impracticable for railroad construction, and so this region dropped out of public attention for a long time. The next explorers to enter the region were a group of surveyors who, under the direction of American and British commissioners, established the international boundary line along the forty-ninth parallel from the Pacific coast to the main summit of the Rocky Mountains. This party reached the area now included in the park in the summer of 1861, and the stone monument shown in Plate I, B, which they erected on the Continental Divide west of Waterton Lake, still marks a point on the boundary between the United States and Canada. The land on the west side of the range formed a part of the public domain which, until the erection of the park, was open to settlement, but the land on the east originally belonged to the Blackfeet Indians and the white men had no rights upon it. About 1890 copper ore was found near the heads of Quartz and Mineral creeks, and a great boom for this region followed. Many prospectors drifted in, expecting to reap rich rewards from the discovery of mineral deposits and the general development of the region. Several of the main trails were built about this time, and considerable money was spent in prospecting, in opening mines, and in providing machinery to handle the large output of copper ore that was expected. The copper-bearing veins were found to extend through the range to the east side, but prospecting in that part of the mountains was not possible, for the land was included in the Indian reservation. This situation produced a growing discontent among the prospectors, who began to have a strong feeling that the Government should come to their relief by acquiring the coveted land and placing it at their disposal. The urgent demand of the prospectors and promoters was felt in Congress, and a bill was passed providing for the purchase from the Indians of this supposed mineral land for $1,500,000. In accordance with this act, a treaty with the Blackfeet Indians was signed at Browning, Mont., September 26, 1895, and approved by the Senate on June 10, 1896, by which the west line of the reservation was removed from the Continental Divide and was fixed along the eastern points of the spurs of the mountain range, as shown on the accompanying map, and the land so acquired was thrown open to mineral entry only. Under the stimulus of the new territory acquired, active prospecting was carried on for a time, but copper ore was found only in small quantities, and gradually the prospectors and miners drifted away to newer or more promising fields, and the region reverted to its original condition. For a long time it was visited only by hunters in search of big game and by summer visitors who, in order to escape the heat of the plains, were willing to undergo the privations and discomforts of the rude hotels then to be found in the region. Although these mountains had ceased to interest prospectors in search of mineral wealth, they still possessed a fascination for the lovers of natural scenery and almost everyone who visited the region was impressed with its alpine beauty. Again it was brought to the attention of Congress, which was urged to secure it for the use of the people by setting it aside as a national park. On May 11, 1910, President Taft signed the bill creating the Glacier National Park, and this most interesting and beautiful region thus became a permanent playground for the American people.

Bulletin↗

USGS2013

Estimating evapotranspiration and groundwater flow from water-table fluctuations for a general wetland scenario

The use of diurnal water-table fluctuation methods to calculate evapotranspiration (ET) and groundwater flow is of increasing interest in ecohydrological studies. Most studies of this type, however, have been located in riparian wetlands of semi-arid regions where groundwater levels are consistently below topographic surface elevations and precipitation events are infrequent. Current methodologies preclude application to a wider variety of wetland systems. In this study, we extended a method for estimating sub-daily ET and groundwater flow rates from water-level fluctuations to fit highly dynamic, non-riparian wetland scenarios. Modifications included (1) varying the specific yield to account for periodic flooded conditions and (2) relating empirically derived ET to estimated potential ET for days when precipitation events masked the diurnal signal. To demonstrate the utility of this method, we estimated ET and groundwater fluxes over two growing seasons (2006–2007) in 15 wetlands within a ridge-and-swale wetland complex of the Laurentian Great Lakes under flooded and non-flooded conditions. Mean daily ET rates for the sites ranged from 4.0 mm d−1 to 6.6 mm d−1. Shallow groundwater discharge rates resulting from evaporative demand ranged from 2.5 mm d−1 to 4.3 mm d−1. This study helps to expand our understanding of the evapotranspirative demand of plants under various hydrologic and climate conditions. Published 2013. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Ecohydrology↗

USGS2021

Discharge and dissolved-solids characteristics of Blacks Fork above Smiths Fork, Wyoming, April 2018 through September 2019

The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum was formed in 1973 to coordinate salinity control efforts among the States in the Colorado River Basin, including Wyoming. The Colorado River Salinity Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–320) authorized “the construction, operation, and maintenance of certain works in the Colorado River Basin to control the salinity of water delivered to users in the United States and Mexico.” Water-quality standards for salinity in the lower Colorado River Basin were adopted in 1975. To help meet these standards, the Bureau of Reclamation, Natural Resource Conservation Service, and States within the Colorado River Basin have implemented salinity control projects that focus on reducing salt loading associated with irrigated agriculture by improving water delivery systems and water management practices. The term salinity is synonymous with dissolved solids in this report. The Bureau of Reclamation, in conjunction with the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum, was interested in determining the contribution of dissolved solids from Blacks Fork above Smiths Fork to the Colorado River and initiated a study of Blacks Fork above Smiths Fork in 2018. In early 2018, the U.S. Geological Survey installed a streamgage at the most downstream location on the Blacks Fork, upstream from the convergence with Smiths Fork, to characterize the stream. The Blacks Fork above Smiths Fork, near Lyman, Wyoming, streamgage (U.S. Geological Survey identifier 09219200) was operated from April 4, 2018, through September 30, 2019, collecting continuous stream stage and specific-conductance data, from which continuous discharge, dissolved-solids concentrations, and dissolved-solids loads were calculated. Seven sites were selected on Blacks Fork and a tributary to describe a snapshot of the discharge and dissolved-solids characteristics. These sites were sampled during July, August, and September 2018 and June, July, August, and September 2019 report. Discharge at the Blacks Fork above Smiths Fork, near Lyman, Wyo., streamgage (09219200) from April through September in 2018 was lower and less variable than during the same period in 2019. The mean daily (mean of the daily means) discharge during those 6 months in 2018 (15.1 cubic feet per second [ft 3 /s]) was about one-tenth of the discharge during the same period in 2019 (152 ft 3 /s). The cumulative monthly discharge during April through September in 2018 was 5,360 acre-feet, about one-tenth of the discharge during the same period in 2019 which was 54,700 acre-feet. Similar differences in discharge between the 2018 and 2019 periods also are noted at other Blacks Fork streamgages in the area. Continuous specific conductance data and the statistical relation between specific conductance and dissolved-solids concentrations were used to calculate the daily mean dissolved-solids concentrations. Dissolved solids often have an inverse relation with discharge because higher discharges typically have a diluting effect that lowers the dissolved-solids concentrations. In general, when discharges at the Blacks Fork above Smiths Fork streamgage (09219200) are higher, dissolved-solids concentrations are generally lower. However, the high dissolved-solids concentrations that are measured during high discharges indicate that the system has natural variability and the dissolved-solids concentrations are determined by more factors than just discharge. The mean daily dissolved-solids concentration during April through September 2018 was 1,630 milligrams per liter and during the same period in 2019 was 1,100 milligrams per liter. Dissolved-solids loads were calculated as the product of the discharge and dissolved-solids concentration. The daily mean dissolved-solids loads during 2018 were typically lower than during 2019. This result is primarily because the discharge was much lower in 2018 than in 2019. Therefore, although the daily mean dissolved-solids concentrations tended to be higher in 2018, the substantially higher discharges in 2019 had more of an effect on the dissolved-solids loads than the dissolved-solids concentrations. The cumulative dissolved-solids load at the Blacks Fork above Smiths Fork, near Lyman, Wyo., streamgage (09219200) during the 18-month study was 81,200 tons, with a mean daily load of 149 tons per day. During the 6-month period from April through September 2018, the cumulative dissolved-solids load at the streamgage was estimated to be 8,740 tons and, during the same 6 months in 2019, the cumulative dissolved-solids load was estimated to be 60,900 tons. During the fall and winter between the two periods, the cumulative dissolved-solids load was 11,600 tons. Discharge and dissolved-solids concentrations from samples collected during the synoptic sampling events were highly variable among most sites during most synoptic sampling events and also highly variable at most sites among different sampling events. The two sites upstream from the tributary input from Threemile Creek had lower dissolved-solids concentrations than sites including and downstream from the tributary. Sites including and downstream from the tributary had similar values and variability of dissolved-solids loads, with the exception of the farthest downstream site at the Blacks Fork above Smiths Fork, near Lyman, Wyo., streamgage (09219200) that tended to have larger dissolved-solids loads and higher variability among synoptic sampling events.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS1960

Wetland and water supply

The Geological Survey has received numerous inquiries about the effects of proposed changes in the wetland environment. The nature of the inquiries suggests a general confusion in the public mind as to wetland values and an increasing concern by the public with the need for facts as a basis for sound decisions when public action is required. Perhaps the largest gap in our knowledge is in regard to the role played by the wetland in the natural water scheme. Specialists in such fields as agriculture and conservation have studied the wetland in relation to its special uses and values for farming and as a habitat for fish and wildlife. However, except as studied incidentally by these specialists, the role of the wetland with respect to water has been largely neglected. This facet of the wetland problem is of direct concern to the Geological Survey. We commonly speak of water in terms of its place in the hydrologic environment---as, for example, surface water or ground water. These terms imply that water can be neatly pigeonholed. With respect to the wetland environment nothing can be further from the truth. In fact, one objective of this discussion is to demonstrate that for the wetland environment surface water, ground water, and soil water cannot be separated realistically, but are closely interrelated and must be studied together. It should be noted that this statement holds true for the hydrologic environment in general, and that the wetland environment is by no means unique in this respect. Our second and principal objective is to identify some of the problems that must be studied in order to clarify the role of the wetland in relation to water supply. We have chosen to approach these objectives by briefly describing one area for which we have some information, and by using this example to point out some of the problems that need study. First, however, let us define what we, as geohydrologists, mean by wetland and briefly consider wetland classifications. For our purpose wetlands are land areas that are covered with shallow water or subjected to intermittent flooding and subsequent slow drainage, and which generally are characterized by an accumulation of organic matter hereafter termed swamp deposits.' These wetlands may be classified in a number of different ways depending on the purpose of the classifier. For example, the Fish and Wildlife Service classifies wetlands into 20 different types based on water quality (fresh or salty), drainage, and vegetation. At the risk of some oversimplification we might consider 4 types of wetland from the standpoint of hydrology: (1) fresh-water swamps in which the swamp deposits are underlain by glacial till or bedrock; (2)fresh-water swamps in which the swamp deposits are underlain by marine or lacustrine clay and silt; (3) fresh-water swamps in which the swamp deposits are underlain by glacial outwash or alluvium consisting mostly of sand or sand and gravel; and (4) salt .marshes and salt meadows. The three fresh-water types of wetland are of interest with respect to water supply, and of these, the type in which swamp deposits are underlain by glacial outwash is of particular interest in New England. In the Ipswich River basin above the Geological Survey gaging station at South Middleton, Mass., is an area of 44 square miles which forms the headwaters section of the basin. The relief of the area is low. About half the area consists of hills mostly underlain by bedrock but mantled by a thin layer of glacial till. The other half consists Of lowlands---including swamps, low terraces and plains---underlain by glacial outwash, Swampland, used hereafter as a synonym for wetland, forms about a fourth of the area. Some of the swamps occupy depressions in the till blanket and are situated at somewhat higher levels than the lowlands. The largest swamps, however, border the Ipswich River and its tributaries. Here the swamp deposits, which consist of muck and peat mixed with s

Circular↗

USGS2015

Groundwater quality in Geauga County, Ohio: status, including detection frequency of methane in water wells, 2009, and changes during 1978-2009

Domestic wells that are not safeguarded by regular water-quality testing provide drinking water for 79 percent of the residents of Geauga County, in northeastern Ohio. Since 1978, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has worked cooperatively with the Board of Commissioners and Geauga County Planning Commission to monitor the quality of groundwater in four commonly used aquifers in county—the glacial deposits, the Pottsville Formation, the Cuyahoga Group, and the Berea Sandstone. A 33-percent growth in population from 1980 to 2009 increased the potential for humans to influence groundwater resources by withdrawing more groundwater, disposing of more human waste near the land surface, treating an expanded network of township roads with deicing salt, and likely using more solvents, pesticides, and other chemicals on the land surface than were used in preceding decades. To describe the status of groundwater quality in 2009 and its suitability for drinking, USGS personnel collected samples of water prior to treatment from 16 wells (mostly domestic) during June 9–19. The samples were analyzed for 92 properties and constituents, 41 of which had human-health benchmarks to which analytical results could be compared to evaluate suitability for drinking. Four of these benchmarks were exceeded at the following frequencies: arsenic (2 of 16 wells, 12.5 percent), total coliform bacteria (2 of 16 wells, 12.5 percent), fecal coliform bacteria (1 of 14 wells, 7 percent), and sodium (6 of 16 wells, 38 percent). No domestic wells sampled in 2009 exceeded the health-based benchmark of 300 micrograms per liter (µg/L) for manganese, although 5 of 65 wells (8 percent) sampled since 1978 have. Analyses from domestic wells were augmented with water-quality data from seven public-supply well fields that were obtained from the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. These public-supply data were typically collected between 2000 and 2010 and represent water samples that were collected prior to treatment or that were treated by a method that does not effectively remove the constituents of interest. Similar to the domestic-well data, these data indicated that some samples from public-supply wells have also exceeded health-based benchmarks for arsenic and sodium, along with occasional exceedances of health-based benchmarks for cadmium and lead. Concentrations of nitrate, pesticides, and volatile organic compounds in ground-water samples from domestic and (or) public-supply wells were either considerably less than the human-health benchmarks for these constituents or were not detected. Water-quality data collected in 2009 were also compared to aesthetically based benchmarks developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, called Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs). Iron and manganese most frequently exceeded SMCLs (in samples from 10 of 16 domestic wells and in untreated water from 3 of 4 public-supply well fields). To evaluate the frequency of methane detection in water wells in the county, the USGS sampled 16 wells across the county and screened the samples for combustible gas within the headspace (the air above the water in a closed container). Water from three (19 percent) of the wells contained detectable combustible gas (0.10 to 0.40 percent by volume). All three detections were from wells tapping the Cuyahoga Group or the Berea Sandstone, and all detections were less than the lower explosive limit of 5 percent by volume—the concentration at which methane in air can be flammable if an ignition source is present. Analyses of dissolved gas composition in water from these three wells showed methane concentrations ranging from 0.007 to 1.8 milligrams per liter (mg/L). The primary effect of human activities on groundwater quality found during this study is the input of salinity, or chloride, near land surface. On the basis of ratios of chloride to bromide, the main sources of chloride are road salt and septic leachate rather than oil-field brines (either spilled at land surface or sprayed on roads for dust control). The correlation of chloride concentration to distance of well from road for 31 wells in the county sampled by the U.S. Geological Survey in 1999 suggests that road salt is the dominant source of chloride. The majority of constituents exceeding health-based and aesthetically based benchmarks in groundwater were those that are naturally present in aquifer rocks and sediments rather than constituents introduced by human activities. Concentrations of such natural contaminants are controlled by geochemical processes in the subsurface, particularly by oxidation-reduction (redox) reactions. The categorization of redox conditions based on the water quality of 116 samples collected from 65 wells in Geauga County during 1978 through 2009 indicates that most groundwater samples were strongly reducing (60 percent) or oxic (18 percent). Oxic waters were found only in the Pottsville Formation and Berea Sandstone and were generally associated with nitrate at concentrations of 0.38 to 6.0 mg/L. Strongly reducing waters occurred in all four commonly used aquifers and were associated with the following naturally occurring contaminants: (1) arsenic and manganese at concentrations exceeding the health-based benchmarks (10 µg/L and 300 µg/L, respectively) in some samples, (2) iron and manganese at concentrations exceeding the aesthetically based standards (300 µg/L and 50 µg/L, respectively) in most samples, and (3) total sulfides (consisting of hydrogen sulfide gas with its characteristic rotten-egg odor and [or] iron sulfide minerals that appear as finely disseminated particulates in water). Because of the association of redox conditions with specific contaminants, attempts were made to further document spatially where oxic and strongly reducing conditions occur so that contaminant occurrence can be better anticipated by planners and well owners. Within the Pottsville Formation, wells tapping strongly reducing groundwater tended to have a greater thickness of overlying low-permeability (recharge-inhibiting) material such as clay and shale than other wells tapping oxic or nitrate-reducing groundwater. In the Berea Sandstone, oxic conditions were found at well locations where either depth to groundwater was shallow (less than 45 feet [ft] below land surface) or the measured water level was within the open interval (uncased portion) of the well, whereas strongly reducing groundwater was found at well locations where depths to water were greater than 60 ft below land surface and measured water levels were 15 ft or more above the open interval of the well. To evaluate whether constituent concentrations consistently increased or decreased over time, the strength of the association between sampling year (time) and constituent concentration was statistically evaluated for 116 water-quality samples collected by the USGS in 1978, 1980, 1986, 1999, and 2009 from a total of 65 wells across the county (generally domestic wells or wells serving small businesses or churches). Results indicate that many of the constituents that have been analyzed for decades exhibited no consistent temporal trends at a statistically significant level (p-value less than 0.05); fluctuations in concentrations of these constituents represent natural variation in groundwater quality. Dissolved oxygen, calcium, and sulfate concentrations and chloride:bromide ratios increased over time in one or more aquifers, while pH and concentrations of bromide and dissolved organic carbon decreased over time. Detections of total coliform bacteria and nitrate did not become more frequent from 1986 to 2009, even though potential sources of these constituents, such as number of septic systems (linked to population) and percent developed land in the county, increased during this period.

Geauga County↗

USGS2001

River and Reservoir Operations Model, Truckee River basin, California and Nevada, 1998

The demand for all uses of water in the Truckee River Basin, California and Nevada, commonly is greater than can be supplied. Storage reservoirs in the system have a maximum effective total capacity equivalent to less than two years of average river flows, so longer-term droughts can result in substantial water-supply shortages for irrigation and municipal users and may stress fish and wildlife ecosystems. Title II of Public Law (P.L.) 101-618, the Truckee?Carson?Pyramid Lake Water Rights Settlement Act of 1990, provides a foundation for negotiating and developing operating criteria, known as the Truckee River Operating Agreement (TROA), to balance interstate and interbasin allocation of water rights among the many interests competing for water from the Truckee River. In addition to TROA, the Truckee River Water Quality Settlement Agreement (WQSA), signed in 1996, provides for acquisition of water rights to resolve water-quality problems during low flows along the Truckee River in Nevada. Efficient execution of many of the planning, management, or environmental assessment requirements of TROA and WQSA will require detailed water-resources data coupled with sound analytical tools. Analytical modeling tools constructed and evaluated with such data could help assess effects of alternative operational scenarios related to reservoir and river operations, water-rights transfers, and changes in irrigation practices. The Truckee?Carson Program of the U.S. Geological Survey, to support U.S. Department of the Interior implementation of P.L. 101-618, is developing a modeling system to support efficient water-resources planning, management, and allocation. The daily operations model documented herein is a part of the modeling system that includes a database management program, a graphical user interface program, and a program with modules that simulate river/reservoir operations and a variety of hydrologic processes. The operations module is capable of simulating lake/ reservoir and river operations including diversion of Truckee River water to the Truckee Canal for transport to the Carson River Basin. In addition to the operations and streamflow-routing modules, the modeling system is structured to allow integration of other modules, such as water-quality and precipitation-runoff modules. The USGS Truckee River Basin operations model was designed to provide simulations that allow comparison of the effects of alternative management practices or allocations on streamflow or reservoir storages in the Truckee River Basin over long periods of time. Because the model was not intended to reproduce historical streamflow or reservoir storage values, a traditional calibration that includes statistical comparisons of observed and simulated values would be problematic with this model and database. This report describes a chronology and background of decrees, agreements, and laws that affect Truckee River operational practices; the construction of the Truckee River daily operations model; the simulation of Truckee River Basin operations, both current and proposed under the draft TROA and WQSA; and suggested model improvements and limitations. The daily operations model uses Hydrological Simulation Program?FORTRAN (HSPF) to simulate flow-routing and reservoir and river operations. The operations model simulates reservoir and river operations that govern streamflow in the Truckee River from Lake Tahoe to Pyramid Lake, including diversions through the Truckee Canal to Lahontan Reservoir in the Carson River Basin. A general overview is provided of daily operations and their simulation. Supplemental information that documents the extremely complex operating rules simulated by the model is available.

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗

USGS2016

Aeromagnetic map of northwest Utah and adjacent parts of Nevada and Idaho

Two aeromagnetic surveys were flown to promote further understanding of the geology and structure in northwest Utah and adjacent parts of Nevada and Idaho by serving as a basis for geophysical interpretations and by supporting geological mapping, water and mineral resource investigations, and other topical studies. Although this area is in general sparsely populated, (except for cities and towns along the Wasatch Front such as Ogden and Brigham City), it encompasses metamorphic core complexes in the Grouse Creek and Raft River Mountains (figure 1) of interest to earth scientists studying Cenozoic extension. The region was shaken in 1909 and 1934 by M6+ earthquakes east of the Hansel Mountains (Doser, 1989; Arabasz and others, 1994); damage from the 1934 earthquake occurred as far east as Logan, Utah (http:// www.seis.utah.edu/lqthreat/nehrp_htm/1934hans/n1934ha1. shtml#urbse). The presence of Quaternary shield volcanoes and bimodal Pleistocene volcanism in Curlew Valley (Miller and others, 1995; Felger and others, 2016) as well as relatively high temperature gradients encountered in the Indian Cove drillhole in the north arm of Great Salt Lake (Blackett and others, 2014) may indicate some potential for geothermal energy development in the area (Miller and others, 1995). The area also hosts four significant mining districts, in the northern Pilot Range, the Goose Creek Mountains in the northwest corner of the map, the southern end of the Promontory Mountains, and the southwest part of the Raft River Mountains, although production notably waned after World War II (Doelling, 1980). Other prospects of interest include those in the southern Grouse Creek Mountains, Silver Island, and the northern Newfoundland Mountains. Large areas of northwest Utah are covered by young, surficial deposits or by Great Salt Lake or are down-dropped into deep Cenozoic basins, making extrapolation of bedrock geology from widely spaced exposures difficult or tenuous (figure 1). Local spatial variations in the Earth's magnetic field (evident as anomalies on aeromagnetic maps) reflect the distribution of magnetic minerals, primarily magnetite, in the underlying rocks. In many cases the volume content of magnetic minerals can be related to rock type, and abrupt spatial changes in the amount of magnetic minerals commonly mark lithologic or structural boundaries. Magnetic data reflect magnetization variations within the crust and are well suited for mapping the distribution of mafic igneous rocks, although felsic igneous rocks, some mineralized zones, and other rock types also can produce measurable magnetic anomalies. For these reasons, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and Utah Geological Survey (UGS) contracted for the collection of aeromagnetic data in this area.

Idaho, Nevada, Utah↗

USGS2018

Assessment of water resources and the potential effects from oil and gas development in the Bureau of Land Management Tri-County planning area, Sierra, Doña Ana, and Otero Counties, New Mexico

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Bureau of Land Management, conducted a study to assess the water resources and potential effects on the water resources from oil and gas development in the Tri-County planning area, Sierra, Doña Ana, and Otero Counties, New Mexico. Publicly available data were used to assess these resources and effects and to identify data gaps in the Tri-County planning area. The Tri-County planning area includes approximately 9.3 million acres and is within the eastern extent of the Basin and Range Province, which consists of mountain ranges and low elevation basins. Three specific areas of interest within the Tri-County planning area are the Jornada del Muerto, Tularosa Basin, and Otero Mesa, which is adjacent to the Salt Basin. Surface-water resources are limited in the Tri-County planning area, with the Rio Grande as the main perennial river flowing from north to south through Sierra and Doña Ana Counties. The Tularosa Creek is an important surface-water resource in the Tularosa Basin. The Sacramento River, which flows southeast out of the Sacramento Mountains, is an important source of recharge to aquifers in the Salt Basin. Groundwater resources vary in aquifer type, depth to water, and water quality. For example, the Jornada del Muerto, Tularosa Basin, and Salt Basin each have shallow and deep aquifer systems, and water can range from freshwater, with less than 1,000 milligrams per liter (mg/L) of total dissolved solids, to brine, with greater than 35,000 mg/L of total dissolved solids. Water quality in the Tri-County planning area is affected by the dissolution of salt deposits and evaporation which are common in arid regions such as southern New Mexico. The potential for oil and gas development exists in several areas within the Tri-County area. As many as 81 new conventional wells and 25 coalbed natural gas wells could be developed by 2035. Conventional oil and gas well construction in the Tri-County planning area is expected to require 1.53 acre-feet (acre-ft) (500,000 gallons) of water per well, similar to requirements in the nearby Permian Basin of New Mexico, while construction of unconventional wells is expected to require 7.3 acre-ft of water per well. Produced waters in the Permian Basin have high total dissolved solids, in the brackish to brine range. Data gaps identified in this study include the limited detailed data on surface-water resources, the lack of groundwater data in areas of interest, and the lack of water chemistry data related to oil and gas development issues. Surface waters in the Tri-County planning area are sparse; some streams are perennial, and most are ephemeral. A more detailed study of the ephemeral channels and their interaction with groundwater could provide a better understanding of the importance of these surface-water resources. Groundwater data used in this study are from the USGS National Water Information System, which does not have continuous water-level depth data at many of the sites in the Tri-County planning area. On Otero Mesa, no recurrent groundwater-level data are available at any one site. The water-quality data compiled in this study provide a good overview of the general chemistry of groundwater in the Tri-County planning area. To fully understand the groundwater resources, it would be helpful to have more wells in specific areas of interest for groundwater-level and water-quality measurements.

New Mexico↗

USGS1999

Water Resources Data for Massachusetts and Rhode Island, 1998

INTRODUCTION The Water Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with State agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the water resources of Massachusetts and Rhode Island each water year. These data, accumulated during many water years, constitute a valuable data base for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the States. To make these data readily available to interested parties outside the Geological Survey, the data are published annually in this report series entitled 'Water Resources Data-Massachusetts and Rhode Island.' Hydrologic data are also available through the Massachusetts-Rhode Island District Home Page on the world-wide web (http://ma.water.usgs.gov). Historical data and real-time data (for sites equipped with satellite gageheight telemeter) are also available. The home page also contains a link to the U.S. Geological Survey National Home Page where streamflow data from locations throughout the United States can be retrieved. This report series includes records of stage, discharge, and water quality of streams; contents of lakes and reservoirs; and water levels of ground-water wells. This volume contains discharge records at 93 gaging stations; monthend contents of 4 lakes and reservoirs; water quality at 22 gaging stations; and water levels for 139 observation wells. Locations of these sites are shown in figures 1 and 2. Miscellaneous hydrologic data were collected at various sites that were not involved in the systematic data-collection program and are published as miscellaneous discharge measurements. The data in this report represent that part of the National Water Data System operated by the U.S. Geological Survey and cooperating State and Federal agencies in Massachusetts and Rhode Island. This series of annual reports for Massachusetts and Rhode Island began with the 1961 water year with a report that contained only data relating to the quantities of surface water. For the 1964 water year, a similar report was introduced that contained only data relating to water quality. Beginning with the 1975 water year, the report format was changed to present, in one volume, data on quantities of surface water, quality of surface and ground water, and ground-water levels. Prior to introduction of this series and for several water years concurrent with it, water-resources data for Massachusetts and Rhode Island were published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers. Data on stream discharge and stage and on lake or reservoir contents and stage, through September 1960, were published annually under the title 'Surface-Water Supply of the United States, Parts 1A and 1B.' For the 1961 through 1970 water years, the data were published in two 5-year reports. Data on chemical quality, temperature, and suspended sediment for the 1941 through 1970 water years were published annually under the title 'Quality of Surface Waters of the United States,' and water levels for the 1939 through 1974 water years were published under the title 'Ground-Water Levels in the United States.' The above mentioned Water-Supply Papers may be consulted in the libraries of the principal cities of the United States and may be purchased from U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services, Box 25286, Denver Federal Center, Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225-0286. Publications similar to this report are published annually by the Geological Survey for all States. These official Survey reports have an identification number consisting of the two-letter State abbreviation, the last two digits of the water year, and the volume number. For example, this volume is identified as 'U.S. Geological Survey Water-Data Report MARI-98-1.' For archiving and general distribution, the reports for 1971-74 water years also are identified as water-data reports. These water-data reports are for sale in paper copy or in microfiche by the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Comme

Water Data Report↗

USGS2023

Hydrogeology, land-surface subsidence, and documentation of the Gulf Coast Land Subsidence and Groundwater-Flow (GULF) model, southeast Texas, 1897–2018

Executive Summary As a part of the Texas Water Development Board groundwater availability modeling program, the U.S. Geological Survey developed the Gulf Coast Land Subsidence and Groundwater-Flow model (hereinafter, the “GULF model”) and ensemble to simulate groundwater flow and land-surface subsidence in the northern part of the Gulf Coast aquifer system (the study area) in Texas from predevelopment (1897) through 2018. Since the publication of a previous groundwater model for the greater Houston area in 2012, there have been changes to the distribution of groundwater withdrawals and advances in modeling tools. To reflect these changes and to simulate more recent conditions, the GULF model was developed in cooperation with the Harris-Galveston and Fort Bend Subsidence Districts to provide an updated Groundwater Availability Model. Since the early 1900s, most of the groundwater withdrawals in the study area have been from three of the hydrogeologic units that compose the Gulf Coast aquifer system—the Chicot, Evangeline, and Jasper aquifers and, more recently, from the Catahoula confining unit. Withdrawals from these hydrogeologic units are used for municipal supply, commercial and industrial use, and irrigation purposes. Withdrawals of large quantities of groundwater in the greater Houston area have caused widespread groundwater-level declines in the Chicot, Evangeline, and Jasper aquifers of more than 300 feet (ft). Early development of the aquifer system, which began before 1900, resulted in nearly 50 percent of the eventual historical groundwater-level minimums having been reached as early as 1946 in some areas. These groundwater-level declines led to more than 9 ft of land-surface subsidence—historically in central and southeastern Harris County and Galveston County, but more recently in northern, northwestern, and western Harris County, Montgomery County, and northern Fort Bend County—from depressurization and compaction of clay and silt layers interbedded in the aquifer sediments. In a generalized conceptual model of the Gulf Coast aquifer system, water enters the groundwater system in topographically high outcrops of the hydrogeologic units in the northwestern part of the aquifer system. Groundwater that does not discharge to streams flows to intermediate and deep zones of the aquifer system southeastward of the outcrop areas where it is discharged by wells and by upward leakage in topographically low areas near the coast. The uppermost parts of the aquifer system, which include outcrop areas, are under water-table (unconfined) conditions where the groundwater is not confined under pressure. As depth increases in the aquifer system and interbedded clay and silt layers accumulate, water-table conditions evolve into confined conditions where the groundwater is under pressure. Groundwater flow and land-surface subsidence in the GULF model and ensemble were simulated by using MODFLOW 6 with the Skeletal Storage, Compaction, and Subsidence package. The model consists of six layers, one for each of the five hydrogeologic units in the northern part of the Gulf Coast aquifer system and a surficial top layer that includes part of each hydrogeologic unit. Transient groundwater flow was simulated during 1897–2018 by using a combination of multiyear, annual, and monthly stress periods. An initial steady-state stress period was configured to represent predevelopment mean annual inflows and outflows. The subsidence package used in the GULF model and ensemble uses a head-based subsidence formulation that simulates the delayed drainage response from clay and silt sediment to changes in groundwater levels. The GULF model and ensemble were history matched to groundwater-level observations at selected wells, land-surface subsidence at benchmarks, aquifer compaction at borehole extensometers, and vertical displacement from Global Positioning System stations. A Bayesian framework was used to represent uncertainty in modeled parameters and simulated outputs of interest. History matching and uncertainty quantification were performed by using a Monte Carlo approach enabled through iterative ensemble smoother software to produce an ensemble of models fit to historical data. The iterative ensemble smoother substantially reduced the computational demand of parameter estimation by approximating the first-order relation between model inputs and outputs, thereby allowing 183,207 adjustable parameters to be used for history matching at a relatively low computational and time cost. The history-matched parameter values are within the ranges of previously published values and agree with the current understanding of the spatial and temporal patterns of parameter uncertainty for the Gulf Coast aquifer system. A good agreement between the observed (or estimated) and simulated groundwater levels, land-surface subsidence, compaction, and vertical displacement was obtained across the modeled area based on qualitative and quantitative comparisons. Ensemble mean annual groundwater-flow rates to the Chicot, Evangeline, Jasper aquifers and Catahoula confining unit were 0.0–0.49 inch (in.), 0.09–0.33 in., 0.01–0.07 in., and 0.01–0.05 in., respectively. GULF model mean annual groundwater-flow rates to the Chicot, Evangeline, and Jasper aquifers and Catahoula confining unit were 0.31 in., 0.19 in., 0.03 in., and 0.03 in., respectively. The GULF-model-simulated recharge to the outcrop area was the largest inflow (75 percent), and recharge to other areas was 25 percent of the model inflow. The simulated outflows included (1) net surface-water/groundwater exchange with study area streams (50 percent), (2) groundwater use (49 percent), and (3) net surface-water/groundwater exchange with the Gulf of Mexico (1 percent). The sum of the simulated values of the outflows (1,041,973 acre-feet per year [acre-ft/yr]) and the elastic expansion of the fine-grained sediment and numerical solver error (339 acre-ft/yr) minus the inflows (654,172 acre-ft/yr) represents the reduction of storage from the Gulf Coast aquifer system (388,140 acre-ft/yr). Most of the storage depletion is caused by the long-term groundwater-level declines that have resulted primarily in inelastic compaction. The GULF model was used to estimate Jasper aquifer compaction at selected benchmarks in Montgomery County and northern Harris County, which are the primary locations of Jasper aquifer groundwater use. Simulated Jasper aquifer compaction in northern Harris County was between 0.2 and 0.5 ft, or between about 5 and 16 percent of simulated subsidence at the benchmark locations. Simulated Jasper aquifer compaction in Montgomery County was between 0.8 and 1.2 ft, or between about 33 and 57 percent of simulated subsidence at the benchmark locations.

Texas↗

USGS1981

Waterfowl and their wintering grounds in Mexico, 1937-64

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been interested in migratory birds, especially waterfowl, in Mexico for many years, An early period of cooperation in waterfowl administration was culminated in 1937 with the final ratification of the Convention Between the United States and the United Mexican States for the Protection of Migratory Birds and Game Mammals, usually referred to as the Migratory Bird Treat. Management of waterfowl on this continent is primarily carried out by hunting regulations. Current information on the status of each species must be obtained each year to serve as a basis for any needed modifications in the regulations. In the United States and Canada, wildlife biologists of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Canadian Wildlife Service annually make the surveys to obtain this basic information. But the Government of Mexico has made no comparable surveys. Mexicans are not interested in hunting waterfowl to the extent that citizens of the United States and Canada are. As a consequence, Mexico's Department of Game emphasizes activities other than waterfowl management. Waterfowl, especially ducks, winter in or migrate through Mexico in large numbers, so it is obvious that and continental surveys of the winter population should include Mexico. Some general investigations of waterfowl distribution there were made in 1926 and earlier by E. A. Goldman. He was familiar with much of Mexico because he and E. W. Nelson studied mammals and biota there for many years. In the 1930's, because of the greater emphasis on waterfowl conservation and management, more detailed surveys were made of the continental breeding and wintering populations. One of these activities was designated as the midwinter, or January, inventory. In the early 1940's the senior author, who had been the Central Flyaway Biologist since 1937, recommended that the waterfowl wintering grounds in Mexico be included in the coverage of the midwinter waterfowl inventory. This was arranged in 1947, and the first aerial coverage, which only included coastal localities, was made in January-February of that year. The information obtained confirmed the value and advisability of including the Mexican wintering grounds in the annual survey; beginning in 1951 the wintering grounds in the Mexican highlands also were included. The surveys of Mexico were continued, except in 1957, through 1965; after 1965 they were greatly reduced. Ground reconnaissance and surveys had begun in Mexico with the preliminary work of Goldman in 1926, but quantitative studies were not started until 1937. The ground surveys continued at intervals in various parts of the Republic until 1960. Ground surveys are invaluable for such purposes as securing ecological information, specimens of birds and plants, and historical data about the areas from local residents, but the only satisfactory method of obtaining accurate quantitative information on waterfowl populations and their distribution is by airplane. Consequently, the major emphasis since 1947 has been on the annual aerial surveys. Ground studies were made much less frequently and were carried out mainly to obtain correlative information on the waterfowl foods available, the ecology of habitats, and for liaison with wildlife officials and biologists in Mexico. An important reason for the surveys of the waterfowl wintering grounds in Mexico was to determine their adequacy for the population of birds using them, and their potential to accommodate additional waterfowl if the wintering grounds in the United States became inadequate and larger flights entered Mexico. Other advantages included providing accurate information to hunters and other interested persons in the United States regarding the waterfowl shooting in Mexico, and determining the current status of these birds and their habitats in that country. Some of these findings were previously summarized by us (Saunders and Saunders 1949; Saunders 1964).

Resource Publication↗

USGS2000

Water Resources Data Massachusetts and Rhode Island Water Year 1999

INTRODUCTION The Water Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with State agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the water resources of Massachusetts and Rhode Island each water year. These data, accumulated during many water years, constitute a valuable data base for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the States. To make these data readily available to interested parties outside the Geological Survey, the data are published annually in this report series entitled 'Water Resources Data-Massachusetts and Rhode Island.' Hydrologic data are also available through the Massachusetts-Rhode Island District Home Page on the world-wide web (http://ma.water.usgs.gov). Historical data and real-time data (for sites equipped with satellite gage-height telemeter) are also available. The home page also contains a link to the U.S. Geological Survey National Home Page where streamflow data from locations throughout the United States can be retrieved. This report series includes records of stage, discharge, and water quality of streams; contents of lakes and reservoirs; water levels of ground-water wells; and water quality of ground-water wells. This volume contains discharge records at 90 gaging stations; stage records at 2 gaging stations; monthend contents of 4 lakes and reservoirs; water quality at 31 gaging stations; water quality at 27 observation wells; and water levels for 139 observation wells. Locations of these sites are shown in figures 1 and 2. Short-term water-quality data were collected at 21 gaging stations and 27 observation wells and are shown in figure 3. Miscellaneous hydrologic data were collected at various sites that were not involved in the systematic data-collection program and are published as miscellaneous discharge measurements. The data in this report represent that part of the National Water Data System operated by the U.S. Geological Survey and cooperating State and Federal agencies in Massachusetts and Rhode Island. This series of annual reports for Massachusetts and Rhode Island began with the 1961 water year with a report that contained only data relating to the quantities of surface water. For the 1964 water year, a similar report was introduced that contained only data relating to water quality. Beginning with the 1975 water year, the report format was changed to present, in one volume, data on quantities of surface water, quality of surface and ground water, and ground-water levels. Prior to introduction of this series and for several water years concurrent with it, water-resources data for Massachusetts and Rhode Island were published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers. Data on stream discharge and stage and on lake or reservoir contents and stage, through September 1960, were published annually under the title 'Surface-Water Supply of the United States, Parts 1A and 1B.' For the 1961 through 1970 water years, the data were published in two 5-year reports. Data on chemical quality, temperature, and suspended sediment for the 1941 through 1970 water years were published annually under the title 'Quality of Surface Waters of the United States,' and water levels for the 1939 through 1974 water years were published under the title 'Ground-Water Levels in the United States.' The above mentioned Water-Supply Papers may be consulted in the libraries of the principal cities of the United States and may be purchased from U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services, Box 25286, Denver Federal Center, Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225-0286. Publications similar to this report are published annually by the Geological Survey for all States. These official Survey reports have an identification number consisting of the two-letter State abbreviation, the last two digits of the water year, and the volume number. For example, this volume is identified as 'U.S. Geological Survey Water-Data Report MARI-98-1.' For archiving and general d

Water Data Report↗