SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Ground Water Report”

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 703 records · Page 39Linked to original sources

USGS1973

Water resources data for Missouri, water year 1972

Water resources data for the 1972 water year for Missouri including records of streamflow or lake storage at gaging stations, partial-record stations, and selected springs, and records of water-quality data on the chemical and physical characteristics of surface and ground water, are given in this report. In Part 1, records are included for 157 gaging stations of which 150 are streamflow discharge stations, and 7 are lake stations; also are included records for 104 crest-stage partial-record stations. Locations of gaging stations are shown in Figure 1. In Part 2, data on the quality of surface water (chemical, temperature, and sediment) were collected from designated sampling sites at predetermined intervals such as weekly, monthly, or less frequently, and at some sites data were recorded on punched paper tape at 30-, or 60-minute intervals. Records are given for 84 sampling stations of which 25 are partial-record stations and 5 are miscellaneous sites. Locations of water-quality stations are shown in Figure 2. A few pertinent stations (not included above) in bordering States are also included in this report. The records were collected and computed by the Water Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Survey under the direction of Anthony Homyk, district chief. These data represent that portion of the National Water Data System collected by the U.S. Geological Survey and cooperating State and Federal agencies in Missouri.

Missouri↗

USGS2000

Interaction between ground water and surface water in the northern Everglades and relation to water budget and mercury cycling; study methods and appendixes

The data presented in this report are products of an investigation that quantified interactions between ground water and surface water at several study sites in the northern Everglades. Goals included identifying the major geologic controls and human alterations that affect interactions between ground water and surface water, and determining how those interactions affect mercury contamination. The primary study area was the 3,815-acre Everglades Nutrient Removal (ENR), a wetland constructed in the early 1990s as a prototype Stormwater Treatment Area (STA), to determine the effectiveness in removing excess nutrients from agricultural drainage. In order to ensure that results from ENR are broadly informative, work was also conducted in Water Conservation Area-2A (WCA-2A), a 105,000-acre basin surrounded by levees. In the past 50 years, WCA-2A has experienced extensive re- engineering of water flow, alterations in the pattern of water-level fluctuations and timing of fire frequency, as well as substantial ecological changes. The most visible ecological alteration is the change in dominance over the past 30 years from a sawgrass wetland to cattail wetland in the northeastern part of WCA-2A. The drastic change in vegetation in WCA-2A resulted at least in part from inputs of excess phosphorus from agricultural drainage. Substantial data collection programs were already in progress in both ENR and WCA- 2A when the present work began. The South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) constructed the ENR project in 1994 to determine the effectiveness of constructed wetlands for water treatment. Measurements of surface water flow and water quality were made frequently in ENR between 1994 and 1998. Fewer ground water data were collected at ENR, and almost all of it was collected from shallow wells emplaced on perimeter levees. In contrast to the short-term nature of data collection in ENR, hydrologic and chemical data were collected over a much longer period in WCA-2A (since at least the mid- 1970s), but the number of sites and data- collection frequency is much less. Very little prior ground water data were available in WCA-2A. Given the availability of prior information, the present study emphasized the collection of ground water field data, particularly in the interior wetland areas of ENR and WCA- 2A. New wells were emplaced to permit the geologic, hydraulic, and chemical sampling that was needed to characterize interactions between surface water and ground water. In particular, lithology and hydraulic properties of the Surficial aquifer were determined, ground water flow paths and velocities were delineated, hydrologic fluxes between surface water and ground water were measured, and water budgets and surface- subsurface fluxes of mercury were determined. The purpose of this report is to compile under one cover all of the data collected in this investigation. In addition, the report contains a detailed description of the study methods and information about study sites, borehole drilling, well construction, seepage meter installation, and hydraulic and geochemical chemical sampling. Data interpretations are the subject of a companion report.

Florida↗

USGS1969

Water resources data for Indiana, 1968

The surface-water records for the 1968 water year for gaging stations, partial-record stations, and miscellaneous sties within the State of Indiana are given in this report. For convenience there are also included records for a few pertinent gaging stations in bordering States. Water-resources investigations of the U.S. Geological Survey include the collection of water quality data on the chemical and physical characteristics of surface- and ground-water supplies of the Nation. These data for the 1968 water year for the quality of surface water in Indiana are presented in this report.

Indiana↗

USGS1980

Ground-water data for Georgia, 1979

This report continues a publication format that annually presents both water-level and water-quality data. In this format the information is presented in two-page units: the left page presents a text which summarizes the information for an area or subject and the right page consists of one or more illustrations. Daily mean water-level fluctuations and trends are shown in hydrographs for the previous year and fluctuations of the monthly mean water level for the previous 10 years in selected observation wells in Georgia. The selected wells best illustrate the effects of changes in recharge and discharge in the various ground-water reservoirs in the State A short narrative explains fluctuations and trends in each hydrograph. Monitoring ground-water levels is essential to the understanding of storage changes and other changes in a ground-water reservoir or aquifer. Fluctuations and long-term trends in water levels occur as a result of recharge to and discharge from the reservoir. Varying rates of recharge occur chiefly as a result of varying rates of precipitation, evapotranspiration, and surface-water infiltration into the ground-water reservoir. Discharge occurs as natural flow from the aquifer to streams and springs, direct ground-water evapotranspiration, and as manmade withdrawal from wells. Ground-water levels have been monitored in Georgia for at least a hundred years. Most of the data gathered were used in area 1 reconnaissance studies, and published, usually as tables, with a few graphs of water-level trends. These data had limited value, especially considering the time lag between data collection and publication. With the advent of continuously monitoring recorders and computer processing of data, this information can now be presented to the user in an understandable and timely manner.

Georgia↗

USGS1995

Water-resources data network evaluation for Monterey County, California; Phase 2, northern and coastal areas of Monterey County

This report presents an evaluation of water- resources data-collection networks in the northern and coastal areas of Monterey County, California. This evaluation was done by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Monterey County Flood Control and Water Conservation District to evaluate precipitation, surface water, and ground water monitoring networks. This report describes existing monitoring networks in the study areas and areas where possible additional data-collection is needed. During this study, 106 precipitation-quantity gages were identified, of which 84 were active; however, no precipitation-quality gages were identified in the study areas. The precipitaion-quantity gages were concentrated in the Monterey Peninsula and the northern part of the county. If the number of gages in these areas were reduced, coverage would still be adequate to meet most objectives; however, additional gages could improve coverage in the Tularcitos Creek basin and in the coastal areas south of Carmel to the county boundary. If collection of precipitation data were expanded to include monitoring precipitation quality, this expanded monitoring also could include monitoring precipitation for acid rain and pesticides. Eleven continuous streamflow-gaging stations were identified during this study, of which seven were active. To meet the objectives of the streamflow networks outlined in this report, the seven active stations would need to be continued, four stations would need to be reactivated, and an additional six streamflow-gaging stations would need to be added. Eleven stations that routinely were sampled for chemical constituents were identified in the study areas. Surface water in the lower Big Sur River basin was sampled annually for total coli- form and fecal coliform bacteria, and the Big Sur River was sampled monthly at 16 stations for these bacteria. Routine sampling for chemical constituents also was done in the Big Sur River basin. The Monterey County Flood Control and Water Conservation District maintained three networks in the study areas to measure ground-water levels: (1) the summer network, (2) the monthly network, and (3) the annual autumn network. The California American Water Company also did some ground-water-level monitoring in these areas. Well coverage for ground-water monitoring was dense in the seawater-intrusion area north of Moss Landing (possibly because of multiple overlying aquifers), but sparse in other parts of the study areas. During the study, 44 sections were identified as not monitored for ground-water levels. In an ideal ground-water-level network, wells would be evenly spaced, except where local conditions or correlations of wells make monitoring unnecessary. A total of 384 wells that monitor ground-water levels and/or ground-water quality were identified during this study. The Monterey County Flood Control and Water Conservation District sampled ground-water quality monthly during the irrigation season to monitor seawater intrusion. Once each year (during the summer), the wells in this network were monitored for chlorides, specific conductance, and nitrates. Additional samples were collected from each well once every 5 years for complete mineral analysis. The California Department of Health Services, the California American Water Company, the U.S. Army Health Service at Ford Ord, and the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District also monitored ground-water quality in wells in the study areas. Well coverage for the ground-water- quality networks was dense in the seawater- intrusion area north of Moss Landing, but sparse in the rest of the study areas. During this study, 54 sections were identified as not monitored for water quality.

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗

USGS2002

Mapped minerals at Questa, New Mexico, using airborne visible-infrared imaging spectrometer (AVIRIS) data – Preliminary report for: First quarterly report of the U.S. Geological Survey investigation of baseline and pre-mining ground-water quality in the Red River Valley Basin, New Mexico, November 13, 2001

This preliminary study for the First Quarterly Report has spectrally mapped hydrothermally altered minerals useful in assisting in assessment of water quality of the Red River. Airborne Visible-Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS) data was analyzed to characterize mined and unmined ground at Questa, New Mexico. AVIRIS data covers the Red River drainage north of the river, from between the town of Questa on the west, to east of the town of Red River. The data was calibrated and analyzed using U.S. Geological Survey custom software and spectral mineral library. AVIRIS data was tested for spectral features that matched similar features in the spectral mineral library. Goodness-of-fit and band-depth were calculated for each comparison of spectral features and used to identify surface mineralogy. Mineral distribution, mineral associations, and AVIRIS pixel spectra were examined. Mineral maps show the distribution of iron hydroxides, iron sulfates, clays, micas, carbonates, and other minerals. Initial results show a system of alteration suites that overprint each other. Quartz-sericite-pyrite (QSP) alteration grading out to propylitic alteration (epidote and calcite) was identified at the Questa Mine (molybdenum porphyry) and a similar alteration pattern was mapped at the landslide ("scar") areas. Supergene weathering overprints the altered rock, as shown by jarosite, kaolinite, and gypsum. In the spectral analysis, hydrothermally altered ground appears to be more extensive at the unmined Goat Hill Gulch and the mined ground, than the ?scars? to the east. Though the "scars" have similar overall altered mineral suites, there are differences between the "scars" in sericite, kaolinite, jarosite, gypsum, and calcite abundance. Fieldwork has verified the results at the central unmined "scar" areas.

New Mexico↗

USGS1963

Water levels in observation wells in Santa Barbara County, California, in 1962

Investigation of the ground-water resources of Santa Barbara County was continued during 1962 by the U. S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Santa Barbara County Water Agency. Monthly water-level measurements were made in 201 wells, in 9 of which automatic water-level recorders were operated. Earlier measurements, covering the period 1941 through 1955, have been published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers (19)43-1957); those for 1:56 through 1961 have been released locally in duplicated form (Muir and Merritt, 1957; Evenson 1950; Miller, 1959; Muir, Merritt, and Miller, 1960; Merritt, 1961; and Muir, 1962). LaRocque, Jr., and others (1950) contains tabulated descriptions of 2,246 wells in existence in 1942 in the several ground-water basins of the county. The same publication also contains many water-level measurements made prior to 1942 by the city of Santa Barbara, Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District, San Joaquin Power Division of the Pacific Gas and Electric Co., Union Sugar Co., Union Oil Co., and other organizations and individuals. Comprehensive reports on the geology and and ground-water resources of the Santa. Ynez River basin (Upson and Thomasson, 1951, and Wilson, 1959), the south-coast basin (Upson, 1951), the Santa Maria Valley area (Worts, 1951), and the Cuyvma Valley (Upson and Worts, 1951) have been published as Water-Supply Papers 1107, 1467, 1108, 1000, and 1110-B, respectively. A similar report on the San Antonio Creek Valley is in preparation. A report on stream runoff and ground-water storage capacity of the Santa Ynez River Valley (Troxell and Wilson, 1952) was released to the open file in October 1952. In addition to the water-level measurements made by the Geological Survey in 1962, measurements made by the Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District are included in this report. Not included in this report are miscellaneous measurements made by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation in wells along the middle reach of the Santa Ynez River between Cachuma Dam and Rucker Crossing.

California↗

USGS2006

Availability of Ground-Water Data for California, Water Year 2005

The U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources, in cooperation with Federal, State, and local agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the ground-water resources of California each water year (October 1-September 30). These data constitute a valuable database for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the State. This Fact Sheet serves as an index to ground-water data for water year 2005. The 2-page report contains a map of California showing the number of wells (by county) with available water-level and water-quality data for water year 2005 (fig. 2) and instructions for obtaining this and other ground-water information contained in the databases of the U.S. Geological Survey, California Water Science Center. From 1985 to 1993, data were published in the annual report 'Water Resources Data for California, Volume 5. Ground-Water Data'; prior to 1985, the data were published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2007

Availability of Ground-Water Data for California, Water Year 2006

Introduction The U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources, in cooperation with Federal, State, and local agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the ground-water resources of California each water year (October 1-September 30). These data constitute a valuable database for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the State. This Fact Sheet serves as an index to ground-water data for water year 2006. The 2-page report contains a map of California showing the number of wells (by county) with available water-level and water-quality data for water year 2006 (fig. 2) and instructions for obtaining this and other ground-water information contained in the databases of the U.S. Geological Survey, California Water Science Center. From 1985 to 1993, data were published in the annual report 'Water Resources Data for California, Volume 5. Ground-Water Data'; prior to 1985, the data were published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2009

Simulation of the Regional Ground-Water-Flow System and Ground-Water/Surface-Water Interaction in the Rock River Basin, Wisconsin

A regional, two-dimensional, areal ground-water-flow model was developed to simulate the ground-water-flow system and ground-water/surface-water interaction in the Rock River Basin. The model was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Rock River Coalition. The objectives of the regional model were to improve understanding of the ground-water-flow system and to develop a tool suitable for evaluating the effects of potential regional water-management programs. The computer code GFLOW was used because of the ease with which the model can simulate ground-water/surface-water interactions, provide a framework for simulating regional ground-water-flow systems, and be refined in a stepwise fashion to incorporate new data and simulate ground-water-flow patterns at multiple scales. The ground-water-flow model described in this report simulates the major hydrogeologic features of the modeled area, including bedrock and surficial aquifers, ground-water/surface-water interactions, and ground-water withdrawals from high-capacity wells. The steady-state model treats the ground-water-flow system as a single layer with hydraulic conductivity and base elevation zones that reflect the distribution of lithologic groups above the Precambrian bedrock and a regionally significant confining unit, the Maquoketa Formation. In the eastern part of the Basin where the shale-rich Maquoketa Formation is present, deep ground-water flow in the sandstone aquifer below the Maquoketa Formation was not simulated directly, but flow into this aquifer was incorporated into the GFLOW model from previous work in southeastern Wisconsin. Recharge was constrained primarily by stream base-flow estimates and was applied uniformly within zones guided by regional infiltration estimates for soils. The model includes average ground-water withdrawals from 1997 to 2006 for municipal wells and from 1997 to 2005 for high-capacity irrigation, industrial, and commercial wells. In addition, the model routes tributary base flow through the river network to the Rock River. The parameter-estimation code PEST was linked to the GFLOW model to select the combination of parameter values best able to match more than 8,000 water-level measurements and base-flow estimates at 9 streamgages. Results from the calibrated GFLOW model show simulated (1) ground-water-flow directions, (2) ground-water/surface-water interactions, as depicted in a map of gaining and losing river and lake sections, (3) ground-water contributing areas for selected tributary rivers, and (4) areas of relatively local ground water captured by rivers. Ground-water flow patterns are controlled primarily by river geometries, with most river sections gaining water from the ground-water-flow system; losing sections are most common on the downgradient shore of lakes and reservoirs or near major pumping centers. Ground-water contributing areas to tributary rivers generally coincide with surface watersheds; however the locations of ground-water divides are controlled by the water table, whereas surface-water divides are controlled by surface topography. Finally, areas of relatively local ground water captured by rivers generally extend upgradient from rivers but are modified by the regional flow pattern, such that these areas tend to shift toward regional ground-water divides for relatively small rivers. It is important to recognize the limitations of this regional-scale model. Heterogeneities in subsurface properties and in recharge rates are considered only at a very broad scale (miles to tens of miles). No account is taken of vertical variations in properties or pumping rates, and no provision is made to account for stacked ground-water-flow systems that have different flow patterns at different depths. Small-scale flow systems (hundreds to thousands of feet) associated with minor water bodies are not considered; as a result, the model is not currently designed for simulating site-specifi

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2008

Availability of Ground-Water Data for California, Water Year 2007

The U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources, in cooperation with Federal, State, and local agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the ground-water resources of California each water year (October 1-September 30). These data constitute a valuable database for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the State. This Fact Sheet serves as an index to ground-water data for water year 2007. The 2-page report contains a map of California showing the number of wells (by county) with available water-level and water-quality data for water year 2007 (fig. 2) and instructions for obtaining this and other ground-water information contained in the databases of the U.S. Geological Survey, California Water Science Center. From 1985 to 1993, data were published in the annual report 'Water Resources Data for California, Volume 5. Ground-Water Data'; prior to 1985, the data were published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS1965

Geology and ground water in Russian River Valley areas and in Round, Laytonville, and Little Lake Valleys, Sonoma and Mendocino Counties, California

This report describes the occurrence, availability, and quality of ground water in seven valley areas along the course of the Russian River in Sonoma and Mendocino Counties, Calif., and in three valleys in the upper drainage reach of the Eel River in Mendocino County. Except for the westward-trending lower Russian River valley, the remaining valley areas along the Russian River (Healdsburg, Alexander, Cloverdale, Sanel, Ukiah, and Potter Valleys) lie in northwest-trending structurally controlled depressions formed in marine rocks of Jurassic and Cretaceous age. The principal aquifer in all the valleys is the alluvium of Recent age, which includes highly permeable channel deposits of gravel and sand. Water for domestic, irrigation, industrial, and other uses is developed by (1) direct diversion from the Russian River and its tributaries, (2) withdrawal of ground water and river water from shallow wells near the river, and (3) withdrawals of ground water from wells in alluvial deposits at varying distances from the river. Surface water in the Russian River and most tributaries is of good chemical quality. The water is a calcium magnesium bicarbonate type and contains 75,200 parts per million of dissolved solids. Ground water is also of good chemical quality throughout most of the drainage basin, but the concentration of dissolved solids (100-300 parts per million) is somewhat higher than that in the surface water. Round, Laytonville, and Little Lake Valleys are in central and northern Mendocino County in the drainage basin of the northwestward flowing Eel River. In Round Valley the alluvium of Recent age yields water of good chemical quality in large quantities. Yields are lower and the chemical quality poorer in Laytonville Valley. Ground water in Little Lake Valley is relatively undeveloped. Selected descriptions of wells, drillers' logs, chemical analyses, and hydrographs showing water-level fluctuations are included in the report. Accompanying maps show the distribution of water-bearing formations and the location of wells.

Water Supply Paper↗

USGS1994

Water quality of the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint and Ocmulgee River Basins related to flooding from Tropical Storm Alberto; pesticides in urban and agricultural watersheds; and nitrate and pesticides in ground water, Georgia, Alabama, and Florida

This report presents preliminary water-quality information from three studies that are part of the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) River basin and the adjacent Ocmulgee River basin. During the period July 3-7, 1994, heavy rainfall from tropical storm Alberto caused record flooding on the Ocmulgee and Flint Rivers and several of their tributaries. Much of the nitrogen load transported during the flooding was as organic nitrogen generally derived from organic detritus, rather than nitrate derived from other sources, such as fertilizer. More than half the mean annual loads of total phosphorus and organic nitrogen were trans- ported in the Flint and Ocmulgee Rivers during the flood. Fourteen herbicides, five insecticides, and one fungicide were detected in floodwaters of the Ocmulgee, Flint, and Apalachicola Rivers. In a second study, water samples were collected at nearly weekly intervals from March 1993 through April 1994 from one urban and two agricultural watersheds in the ACF River basin, and analyzed for 84 commonly used pesticides. More pesticides were detected and at generally higher concentrations in water from the urban watershed than the agricultural water- sheds, and a greater number of pesticides were persistent throughout much of the year in the urban watershed. Simazine exceeded U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) drinking-water standards in one of 57 samples from the urban watershed. In a third study, 38 wells were installed in surficial aquifers adjacent to and downgradient of farm fields within agricultural areas in the southern ACF River basin. Even though regional aquifers are generally used for irrigation and domestic- and public-water supplies, degradation of water quality in the surficial aquifers serves as an early warning of potential contamination of regional aquifers. Nitrate concentrations were less than 3 mg/L as N (indicating minimal effect of human activities) in water from about two-thirds of the wells. Water from the remaining wells had elevated nitrate con- centrations, probably the result of human activity. Nitrate concentrations in two of these wells exceeded EPA drinking-water standards. Water samples from eight wells had pesticide concentrations above method detection limits. With the exception of two samples for shallow ground-water wells and one surface-water sample from the urban watershed, concentrations of nitrate nitrogen and detected pesticides were below EPA standards and guidelines for drinking water. However, concentrations of the insecticides chlorpyrifos, carbaryl, and diazinon in the surface-water samples approached or exceeded guidelines for protection of aquatic life.

Alabama, Florida, Georgia↗

USGS2007

Changes in Water Levels and Storage in the High Plains Aquifer, Predevelopment to 2005

The High Plains aquifer underlies 111.4 million acres (174,000 square miles) in parts of eight States-Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming. The area overlying the High Plains aquifer is one of the major agricultural regions in the world. Water-level declines began in parts of the High Plains aquifer soon after the beginning of extensive ground-water irrigation. By 1980, water levels in the High Plains aquifer in parts of Texas, Oklahoma, and southwestern Kansas had declined more than 100 feet (Luckey and others, 1981). In response to these water-level declines, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with numerous Federal, State, and local water-resources agencies, began monitoring more than 7,000 wells in 1988 to assess annual water-level change in the aquifer. A report by the USGS, 'Water-Level Changes in the High Plains Aquifer, Predevelopment to 2005 and 2003 to 2005' (McGuire, 2007), shows the areas of substantial water-level changes in the aquifer from the time prior to substantial ground-water irrigation development (predevelopment or about 1950) to 2005 (fig. 1). In parts of the area, farmers began using ground water for irrigation extensively in the 1930s and 1940s. Estimated irrigated acreage in the area overlying the High Plains aquifer increased rapidly from 1940 to 1980 and changed slightly from 1980 to 2002: 1949-2.1 million acres, 1980-13.7 million acres, 1997-13.9 million acres, 2002-12.7 million acres. Irrigated acres in 2002 were 12 percent of the aquifer area, not including the areas with little or no saturated thickness (McGuire, 2007). Ground-water withdrawals for irrigation and other uses are compiled and reported by the USGS and agencies in each State about every 5 years. Ground-water withdrawals from the High Plains aquifer for irrigation increased from 4 to 19 million acre-feet from 1949 to 1974. Ground-water withdrawals for irrigation in 1980, 1985, 1990, and 1995 were from 4 to 18 percent less than withdrawals for irrigation in 1974. Ground-water withdrawals from the aquifer for irrigation in 2000 were 21 million acre-feet (McGuire, 2007). Water-level changes in the aquifer result from an imbalance between discharge and recharge. Discharge is primarily ground-water withdrawals for irrigation. Discharge also includes evapotranspiration, where the water table is near the land surface, and seepage to streams and springs, where the water table intersects with the land surface. Recharge is primarily from precipitation. Other sources of recharge are irrigation return flow and seepage from streams, canals, and reservoirs. Water-level declines may result in increased costs for ground-water withdrawals because of increased pumping lift and decreased well yields (Taylor and Alley, 2001). Water-level declines also can affect ground-water availability, surface-water flow, and near-stream (riparian) habitat areas (Alley and others, 1999).

Fact Sheet↗

USGS1963

Ground-water data: Beaver, Escalante, Cedar City, and Parowan Valleys; parts of Washington, Iron, Beaver, and Millard Counties, Utah

This report is intended to serve two purposes: (1) to make available to the public basic ground-water data useful in planning and studying development of water resources, and (2) to supplement an interpretive report that will be published later. Records were collected during the period 1935-62 by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Utah State Engineer as part of the investigation of ground-water conditions in the Beaver, Escalante, Cedar City, and Parowan Walleys. This report will include records collected subsequent to data published in earlier reports listed in the bibliography. The interpretive material will be published in a companion report by George W. Sandberg. This report is most useful in predicting conditions likely to be found in areas that are being considered as well sites. The person considering the new well can spot the proposed site on plate 1 and examine the records of nearby wells as shown in the tables and figure 2. From table 1 he can note such things as diameter, depth, water level, yield, use of water, and depth to aquifers in wells in the vicinity, and from the well logs in table 3 he can note the type of material that yields water to the wells. Table 2 gives several years record of yields and pumping levels of irrigation wells, and in table 4 are the chemical analyses of water from wells and springs. Figure 2 shows the historic fluctuations and trends of water levels in the four valleys. If the reader decides from his examination that conditions are favorable, he can place an application to drill a well with the State Engineer. During the past several years, however, the State Engineer has rejected new applications to appropriate water in major portions of Beaver Valley, Milford and Beryl-Enterprise districts in Escalante Valley, and Cedar City Valley. Anyone seeking to initiate a new ground-water right in any of these areas should obtain information from the State Engineer's Office in either Salt Lake City or Cedar City to determine the likelihood of approval of the required application. The report is also useful when planning large-scale developments of water supply. This and other uses of the report will be helped by use of the interpretive report upon its release.

Utah↗

USGS1996

Summary of hydrogeologic controls on ground-water flow at the Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada

The underground testing of nuclear devices has generated substantial volumes of radioactive and other chemical contaminants below ground at the Nevada Test Site (NTS). Many of the more radioactive contaminants are highly toxic and are known to persist in the environment for thousands of years. In response to concerns about potential health hazards, the U.S. Department of Energy, under its Environmental Restoration Program, has made NTS the subject of a long-term investigation. Efforts supported through the U.S. Department of Energy program will assess whether byproducts of underground testing pose a potential hazard to the health and safety of the public and, if necessary, will evaluate and implement steps to remediate any of the identified dangers. Test-generated contaminants have been introduced over large areas and at variable depths above and below the water table throughout NTS. Evaluating the risks associated with these byproducts of underground testing presupposes a knowledge of the source, transport, and potential receptors of these contaminants. Ground-water flow is the primary mechanism by which contaminants can be transported significant distances away from the initial point of injection. Flow paths between contaminant sources and potential receptors are separated by remote areas that span tens of miles. The diversity and structural complexity of the rocks along these flow paths complicates the hydrology of the region. Although the hydrology has been studied in some detail, much still remains uncertain about flow rates and directions through the fractured-rock aquifers that transmit water great distances across this arid region. Unique to the hydrology of NTS are the effects of underground testing, which severely alter local rock characteristics and affect hydrologic conditions throughout the region. Any assessment of the risk must rely in part on the current understanding of ground-water flow, and the assessment will be only as good as the understanding itself. This report summarizes what is known and inferred about ground-water flow throughout the NTS region. The report identifies and updates what is known about some of the major controls on ground-water flow, highlights some of the uncertainties in the current understanding, and prioritizes some of the technical needs as related to the Environmental Restoration Program. An apparent deficiency in the current understanding is a lack of knowledge about flow directions and rates away from major areas of testing. Efforts are necessary to delineate areas of downgradient flow and to identify factors that constrain and control flow within these areas. These efforts also should identify the areas most critical to gaining detailed understanding and to establishing long-term monitoring sites necessary for effective remediation.

Nevada↗

USGS2001

Water Resources Data, North Dakota, Water Year 2000. Volume 2. Ground Water

This edition of the annual hydrologic data report of North Dakota is one of a series of annual reports that document hydrologic data collected from the U.S. Geological Survey's collection networks in each State, Puerto Rico, and the Trust Territories. These records of streamflow, ground-water levels, and quality of water provide the hydrologic information needed by Federal, State, local agencies, and the private sector for developing and managing land and water resources in North Dakota.

Water Data Report↗

USGS2000

Water Resources Data, North Dakota, Water Year 1998. Volume 2. Ground Water

Water Data Report↗