Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · ofr172

Ground water in the Gila River Basin and adjacent areas, Arizona: a summary

Abstract

This report is a resume' of the principal facts collected by the Geological Survey in the period 1890-1952 about the ground-water resources of the Gila River basin and certain other areas in Arizona. Since 1939 the Geological Survey has been making ground-water investigations on a continuing basis in cooperation with the State of Arizona. Since 1940 the cooperating agency has been the State Land Department. The occurrence of ground water in fifteen areas that form a part of the Gila River drainage basin is described in this report. The areas are denoted by the name of a town or geographic feature, and are as follows: Duncan, Safford, San Simon, Upper San Pedro, Lower San Pedro, Aravaipa Creek, Upper Santa Cruz, Lower Santa Cruz, Salt River Valley, Rainbow ValleyWaterman Wash, McMullen Valley, Harquahala Plain, Gila Bend, Palomas Plain, and Wellton-Mohawk. Data also are presented for several areas not in the Gila River system, including Ranegras Plain and the Willcox and Douglas basins. A summary of the data is given following the ground-water discussion in each area. A series of maps accompany the report, including an index map and maps of the principal areas of ground-water development. The mar,z, show the geology, the location of most of the irrigation wells and irrigated lands, and, where data were available, contours of the water table, depth to the water table, and changes in its position over a period of years. Ground water occurs in the region primarily in alluvial fill consisting of gravel, sand, silt, and clay which was deposited in structural troughs between mountain ranges. Ground water stored in these alluvial basins is derived from many sources. The principal sources are infiltration from runoff along the mountain fronts and seepage from irrigation water applied to cultivated lands. Of great interest in Arizona at the present time is the rate of depletion of ground-water reserves by withdrawals from storage. Use of ground water in Arizona increased by more than 50 percent in the 6-year period 1'46-51, from 2,400,000 acre-feet in 1946 to 3,750,000 acre-feet in 1951. The areas of greatest withdrawal are in Pinal and Maricopa Counties, in the southcentral part of the State. Maps and hydrographs accompanying this report show that the water table is declining in the heavily pumped areas, indicating that ground water is being withdrawn in excess of replenishment. The rate of decline has been as much as 10 feet per year in the most intensively pumped areas, and has been greatest during the past few years. In an effort to compensate for decreased well yields resulting from the decline of the water table in some areas, many deep wells have been drilled within the past few years. The deep aquifers do not represent a new source of water; their water is a part of the common supply of the structural basins in which they lie. The aquifers tapped by these deep wells generally yield less water per foot of drawdown than the shallower aquifers. The water in the deeper aquifers is variable in quality, ranging from water too high in dissolved solids to be usable for irrigation to water lower in concentration than that in the overlying aquifers. The quality of the ground waters in most of the region is considered suitable for irrigation. In local areas, however, the ground waters are naturally unsuitable for irrigation and, in other areas, the concentration of dissolved solids has increased sufficiently to make the waters harmful to some crops. The problem of salt balance is becoming increasingly important, not only in the Salt River Valley area, but also in other parts of the Gila River Basin. A discussion of the salt-balance problem is given in Part II of this report. It should be emphasized that ground waters in each of the individual areas in the Gila River drainage system are interrelated with ground waters in adjacent areas upstream and downstream. The connection is tenuous between some areas, but in central Arizona the ground waters in the different areas are closely related. Although subsurface barriers to ground-water movement exist in places, they are not everywhere fully effective. The ground-water--surface-water interrelationship is important in some areas. Those basins occupied by perennial streams, or by streams having large influent seepage losses, have not shown large, perennial declines of water levels in wells. Effluent seepage of ground water contributes to stream flow in the lower reaches of several basins.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 32.6315° to 33.3923° latitude; -114.5581° to -108.2049° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Leonard Cameron Halpenny. 1952. Ground water in the Gila River Basin and adjacent areas, Arizona: a summary. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr172

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona