Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · sir20125128

Surface-water salinity in the Gunnison River Basin, Colorado, water years 1989 through 2007

Abstract

Elevated levels of dissolved solids in water (salinity) can result in numerous and costly issues for agricultural, industrial, and municipal water users. The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-320) authorized planning and construction of salinity-control projects in the Colorado River Basin. One of the first projects was the Lower Gunnison Unit, a project to mitigate salinity in the Lower Gunnison and Uncompahgre River Basins. In cooperation with the Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), the U.S. Geological Survey conducted a study to quantify changes in salinity in the Gunnison River Basin. Trends in salinity concentration and load during the period water years (WY) 1989 through 2004 (1989-2004) were determined for 15 selected streamflow-gaging stations in the Gunnison River Basin. Additionally, trends in salinity concentration and load during the period WY1989 through 2007 (1989-2007) were determined for 5 of the 15 sites for which sufficient data were available. Trend results also were used to identify regions in the Lower Gunnison River Basin (downstream from the Gunnison Tunnel) where the largest changes in salinity loads occur. Additional sources of salinity, including residential development (urbanization), changes in land cover, and natural sources, were estimated within the context of the trend results. The trend results and salinity loads estimated from trends testing also were compared to USBR and Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) estimates of off-farm and on-farm salinity reduction from salinity-control projects in the basin. Finally, salinity from six additional sites in basins that are not affected by irrigated agriculture or urbanization was monitored from WY 2008 to 2010 to quantify what portion of salinity may be from nonagricultural or natural sources. In the Upper Gunnison area, which refers to Gunnison River Basin above the site located on the Gunnison River below the Gunnison Tunnel, estimated mean annual salinity load was 110,000 tons during WY 1989-2004. Analysis of both study periods (WY 1989-2004 and WY 1989-2007) showed an initial decrease in salinity load with a minimum in 1997. The net change over either study period was only significant during WY 1989-2007. Salinity load significantly decreased at the Gunnison River near Delta by 179,000 tons during WY 1989-2004. Just downstream, the Uncompahgre River enters the Gunnison River where there also was a highly significant decrease in salinity load of 55,500 tons. The site that is located at the mouth of the study area is the Gunnison River near Grand Junction where the decrease was the largest. Salinity loads decreased by 247,000 tons during WY 1989-2004 at this site though the decrease attenuated by 2007 and the net change was a decrease of 207,000 tons. The trend results presented in this study indicate that the effect of urbanization on salinity loads is difficult to discern from the effects of irrigated agriculture and that natural sources contribute a fraction of the total salinity load for the entire basin. Based on the calculated yields and geology, 23-63 percent of the estimated annual salinity load was from natural sources at the Gunnison River near Grand Junction during WY 1989-2007. The largest changes in salinity load occurred at the Gunnison River near Grand Junction as well as the two sites located in Delta: the Gunnison River at Delta and the Uncompahgre River at Delta. Those three sites, especially the two sites at Delta, were the most affected by irrigated agriculture, which was observed in the estimated mean annual loads. Irrigated acreage, especially acreage underlain by Mancos Shale, is the target of salinity-control projects intended to decrease salinity loads. The NRCS and the USBR have done the majority of salinity control work in the Lower Gunnison area of the Gunnison River Basin, and the focus has been in the Uncompahgre River Basin and in portions of the Lower Gunnison River Basin (downstream from the Gunnison Tunnel). According to the estimates from the USBR and NRCS, salinity-control projects may be responsible for a reduction of 117,300 tons of salinity as of 2004 and 142,000 tons as of 2007 at the Gunnison River near Grand Junction, Colo. (streamflow-gaging station 09152500). USBR and NRCS estimates account for all but 130,000 tons in 2004 and 65,000 tons in 2007 of salinity load reduction. The additional reduction could be a reduction in natural salt loading to the streams because of land-cover changes during the study period. It is possible also that the USBR and NRCS have underestimated changes in salinity loads as a result of the implementation of salinity-control projects.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 37.5° to 39.5° latitude; -109.5° to -106.5° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Keelin R. Schaffrath. 2012. Surface-water salinity in the Gunnison River Basin, Colorado, water years 1989 through 2007. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20125128

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Analysis of groundwater geochemistry in the Lansing, Michigan, area

Groundwater resources in the Lansing, Michigan, area are protected by a wellhead protection plan, but previous studies have indicated that groundwater in this area may be susceptible to surface contamination. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Lansing Board of Water & Light, analyzed geochemical and aquifer characteristics to assess the potential for contamination of groundwater resources. Recharge age categories were determined from tritium concentrations for some wells, and by using ternary diagrams and principal component analysis for other wells. These age classifications, combined with hydrogeologic and geochemical data, were analyzed by using statistical methods to identify trends that may indicate areas of increased groundwater susceptibility. Wells with modern recharge tended to have higher sodium, chloride, and chloride:bromide ratios than did wells with mixed recharge, suggesting greater surface connectivity and potential influence from anthropogenic sources such as road salt. In contrast, wells in the mixed age category exhibited more stable geochemistry and lower constituent concentrations. Classification and regression tree models identified aquifer geometry—particularly the thickness of the uppermost bedrock unit and presence of confining layers—as key predictors of recharge age and geochemical indicators. The trends identified from these analyses could help to reveal locations in the Lansing area that are among the most susceptible to contamination.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

Evaluating the number of realizations (train-test splits) necessary to ensure robust estimates of conventional hydrothermal resource favorability using Monte Carlo cross-validation, the Great Basin, Western USA

Supervised machine learning approaches used to produce favorability maps in resource assessments commonly partition an input dataset into training and testing subsets (that is, through train-test splits). However, if a single split is not representative of underlying resource conditions, the resulting favorability map may be biased, particularly with sparse or heterogeneous datasets. To mitigate the potential for unrepresentative favorability maps, recent works by U.S. Geological Survey researchers have used Monte Carlo cross-validation to implement a large number ( n) of randomized train-test splits to produce n realizations. The realizations are then aggregated using cell-wise median predictions to produce the resulting final favorability map, recognizing that the median will remove extreme values that might have been estimated from a comparatively few unrepresentative realizations. Theoretically, the median prediction at every cell converges to a single estimate as n approaches infinity, and the question addressed herein is: How many realizations are necessary to get a robust estimate (that is, an estimate unaffected by additional realizations)? Therefore, convergence metrics are described to identify the number of train-test splits and realizations needed to make a reliable map using the data and supervised machine learning workflow for conventional hydrothermal resource assessment of the Great Basin of the Western United States. For this study, robust prediction occurs with n approximately equal to 600 realizations, and smaller ensembles (for example, n is approximately equal to 200 or even 100) may be suitable during preliminary or exploratory analyses. Although the resulting threshold numbers will vary depending on the data and modeling approach used, the convergence metrics proposed and applied herein are applicable to other supervised machine learning studies that use Monte Carlo cross-validation.

California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah↗

Groundwater budget for the Portneuf River Basin, southeastern Idaho

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Idaho Department of Water Resources, developed the first groundwater budget for the upper Portneuf River Basin in southeastern Idaho, a tributary of the Snake River. A groundwater budget for the Portneuf River Basin supports water resource and administrative management decisions within the basin and for downstream users of the eastern Snake River Plain aquifer. The analysis quantifies inflows, outflows, and residuals for an aquifer system defined by the Idaho Department of Water Resources under three recent precipitation conditions: an average year (2016), a dry year (2021), and a wet year (2023). The budget was calculated for the basin and for two subbasins delineated by the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Portneuf River at Topaz, Idaho (13073000): the above Topaz subbasin, which includes the Portneuf-Gem valley, and the below Topaz subbasin, which includes Marsh Valley. Aquifer inflows include mountain-front recharge; areal recharge; recharge from applied water, including recharge from irrigation, canal seepage, and effluent returns; groundwater flow into the basin; and reservoir seepage. Outflows include groundwater pumping for agricultural, municipal, and domestic uses; subsurface outflow through the Portneuf gap; and discharge to streams as base flow. Estimated annual inflows for the full basin ranged from 116,880 acre-feet in 2021 to 154,880 acre-feet in 2023, and outflows ranged from 132,190 acre-feet in 2016 to 158,490 acre-feet in 2023. Basinwide residuals, the change in storage plus uncertainty, were −2,410 acre-feet in 2016, −18,410 acre-feet in 2021, and −3,610 acre-feet in 2023, and each subbasin had a mixture of negative and positive residuals. These basinwide results, interpreted as change in storage plus water-budget uncertainty, indicate minor net losses that increase with dry conditions, consistent with well depth-to-water measurements indicating gradual multi-decadal declines. Patterns in subbasin residuals are driven by irrigation practices and surface-water management; for example, the above Topaz subbasin relies more on groundwater for irrigation, resulting in more negative residuals during dry years. In contrast, the below Topaz subbasin depends more on surface water, producing positive residuals during dry years because of irrigation losses and canal seepage. The analyses for both subbasins indicate decades-long groundwater declines, which agree with the overall negative residuals calculated. The largest sources of uncertainty include climate inputs (precipitation and evapotranspiration) and poorly constrained components such as groundwater inflow and tributary stream infiltration. These findings provide insight into how climatic variables and irrigation practices affect groundwater inflows and outflows within the Portneuf River Basin.

Idaho↗