Simulated effects of pumping in the Death Valley Regional Groundwater Flow System, Nevada and California—Selected management scenarios projected to 2120

Nora C. Nelson; Tracie R. Jackson

doi:10.3133/sir20205103

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20205103

Simulated effects of pumping in the Death Valley Regional Groundwater Flow System, Nevada and California—Selected management scenarios projected to 2120

Nora C. Nelson·Tracie R. Jackson

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Declining water levels and reduced natural discharge at springs, seeps, and phreatophyte areas primarily are the result of decades of groundwater development in the Death Valley regional flow system, in Nevada and California. A calibrated groundwater-flow model was used to simulate potential future effects of groundwater pumping on water levels and natural groundwater discharge in the study area. Effects of climate change on future groundwater pumping were not considered and were beyond the scope of the study. Four groundwater-pumping scenarios were developed by stakeholders to predict and compare (1) the extent of regional water-level declines; (2) drawdown at Devils Hole; and (3) reductions in natural discharge at select discharge areas, including the Amargosa Wild and Scenic River, the Ash Meadows discharge area, the Furnace Creek area, and Stump Spring. Scenarios were simulated from 1913 to 2120, with historical pumping occurring from 1913 to 2010, historical 2010 pumping rates projected from 2010 to 2020, and scenario pumping beginning in 2020. Pumping scenarios included a base case and scenarios A, B, and C. The base case projected 2010 pumping rates from 2010 to 2120, and scenarios A, B, and C projected base case pumping plus additional pumping at various locations from 2020 to 2120. By 2020, historical (1913–2020) pumping resulted in the propagation of simulated drawdown of 1 foot (ft) or more westward from Pahrump Valley to areas north of Shoshone in the Pahrump to Death Valley South (PDVS) groundwater basin and the merging of simulated 1-ft drawdown contours between the Alkali Flat–Furnace Creek Ranch (AFFCR) and Ash Meadows groundwater basins. In the base case scenario, extent and magnitude of simulated drawdown continued to increase in the Ash Meadows and AFFCR groundwater basins from 2020 to 2120. In the base case, the magnitude of simulated drawdown continued to increase in western Pahrump Valley from 2020 to 2120, whereas simulated water levels rose in eastern Pahrump Valley from 2020 to 2070 and then stabilized from 2070 to 2120. Scenarios A and B primarily affected the PDVS and AFFCR groundwater basins by increasing the magnitude of drawdown in 2120, compared to the base case. In scenario C, drawdown propagated throughout a high-transmissivity part of the carbonate aquifer known as the megachannel, greatly affecting water levels in the Ash Meadows discharge area. Scenario C resulted in an additional 10–100 ft of drawdown (compared to the base case) throughout the southeastern part of the Ash Meadows groundwater basin by 2120. Simulated drawdowns in Devils Hole in 2120 were 3.2, 3.4, 3.8, and 25.4 ft for the base case and scenarios A, B, and C, respectively. The federally mandated minimum water level for Devils Hole is 2.7 ft below a reference point. In 2020, the simulated water level in Devils Hole was above the minimum water level, at 1.7 ft below the reference. Simulated water levels in Devils Hole fell below the federally mandated water level by 2078, 2073, 2058, and 2025 for the base case and scenarios A, B, and C, respectively, assuming a hypothetical recharge scenario of constant natural recharge. Simulated reductions in predevelopment (natural) discharge at select discharge areas ranged from 3 to 38 percent by 2120 for all scenarios. Amargosa Wild and Scenic River was the least affected discharge area with simulated capture rates ranging from 3 to 4 percent of predevelopment discharge by 2120. Ash Meadows discharge area was greatly affected by groundwater pumping in scenario C with a simulated capture rate of 38 percent, compared to simulated capture rates of 8, 8, and 9 percent for the base case, scenario A, and scenario B, respectively, in 2120. Simulated capture rates in the Furnace Creek area ranged from 10 to 11 percent for all scenarios in 2120. Simulated capture rates at Stump Spring ranged from 32 to 36 percent for all scenarios in 2120.

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations Report Report

Source-reported bounding extent: 33.62376800118811° to 38.62545397209084° latitude; -117.3779296875° to -114.08203125° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Nora C. Nelson, Tracie R. Jackson. 2020-10-21. Simulated effects of pumping in the Death Valley Regional Groundwater Flow System, Nevada and California—Selected management scenarios projected to 2120. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20205103

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Baseline water-quality inventory and summary for the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park, New Jersey

The Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park (PAGR), established in 2011 in the City of Paterson, New Jersey, contains many cultural, historical, and natural resources. Because of the PAGR’s young age and limited resources, a long record of natural resource data is not available for use to guide future park management and planning decisions. A detailed natural resource inventory was identified as an immediate need in the “Foundation Document—Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park,” given the history of extensive industrial activity throughout the PAGR and the Passaic River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service and the Urban Waters Federal Partnership for the Lower Passaic River, inventoried water-quality monitoring efforts and compiled historical water-quality data from secondary data sources to define baseline conditions in the PAGR and the surrounding study area. This report documents the methods used to harmonize water-quality data aggregated from multiple sources for the PAGR study area. Procedures implemented during data harmonization include compiling data from multiple sources, assessing the dataset for completeness, addressing metadata concerns, and creating a consistent and quality-assured dataset for future analysis. The harmonized dataset contains 14 aggregated surface-water sites, 1,103 individual sampling days, and 32,000 water-quality records throughout the period of record defined for this study (1952–2021). Summary statistics and comparison to water-quality criteria are provided for focus parameters that can support PAGR management, including field properties, suspended material, total dissolved solids, specific conductance, chloride, sulfate, Escherichia coli, nutrients, contaminants of concern related to fish consumption advisories, and litter and floatable debris. A spatial data gap was identified for the recreational area near the base of the Great Falls and immediately downstream from a known combined sewer overflow discharge location. Analytic data gaps were identified for continuous streamflow and water-quality parameters, floatable debris characterization, and harmful algal blooms identification. Continuous collection of contaminants of concern was identified as a temporal data gap, as these parameters were not consistently collected within the study area. The water-quality data synthesis and summary presented in this report can assist PAGR staff in understanding the complex baseline water resources within the study area and can serve as a baseline to design future water-quality monitoring efforts and evaluate changes in water quality over time. The harmonized dataset, as well as future New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Harbor Discharge Group monitoring data and assessments, can also be used to examine the status and trends in surface-water quality, support compliance with the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and further investigate changes to park water resources that can affect ecological and human health.

New Jersey↗

USGS2026

Slip tendency and dilation tendency of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report presents the results of slip tendency and dilation tendency analysis of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, in the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This effort was undertaken as part of two studies: the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office-funded Innovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project, which is a multidisciplinary, multi-institution effort to develop new methodologies and best practices to accelerate the discovery of new, commercially viable hydrothermal resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Resources Investigations Project. The goal of this work is to identify faults and fault segments that are appropriately oriented to be stress-loaded for slip or to dilate under the ambient stress conditions. Both conditions may make such faults more likely to host permeability and fluid flow relative to other faults in the region. Slip tendency and dilation tendency were calculated for all fault segments in the study area from the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database. Results demonstrate that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency are common in the Great Basin region. The areas containing many high slip tendency and dilation tendency fault segments are associated with high strain rates. These areas also host a relatively high proportion of the known hydrothermal systems. This indicates that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency in areas with high strain-rate are potentially most prospective for hosting hydrothermal systems. The database published in coordination with this report contains the slip tendency and dilation tendency results data, including the fault geometry and stress data used to calculate these quantities, for both the Great Basin study area and the smaller INGENIOUS study area.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, ↗

USGS2026

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York, and coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York, and nearby coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater emergence flooding. Groundwater emergence fooding refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As a part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the coastal areas of Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Partnership, formerly called the Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 grid cells that were 900 meters by 900 meters (approximately 3,000 feet by 3,000 feet), for the purpose of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard score was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percentage of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A scenario with a higher sea-level position was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard score was reviewed in conjunction with the National Land Cover Database to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk of potential groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface waterbodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, in the scenario with higher sea-level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated for some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea-level condition and the higher sea-level position scenario.

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗