Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Utah Geological Association Publications”

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

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

22 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
USGS1986

Program for monitoring the chemical quality of ground water in Utah – Summary of data collected through 1984

The U.S. Geological Survey formally started a program for monitoring ground-water quality in Utah during 1957 in cooperation with the State of Utah. Most observation wells in the monitoring network are privately owned. Initially, the network consisted of fewer than 50 wells; by 1984, however, it had expanded to include more than 200 wells. Chemical analyses are available for water from some of the wells from as early as 1927, long before those wells were formally added to the network. The monitoring program was initiated to detect any changes in chemical quality that might be associated with the withdrawal of water from wells. Dissolved-solids concentrations in water samples collected from the observation wells through 1984 ranged from 92 to 19,000 milligrams per liter. An observation well in the Uinta Basin yielded the sample with the smallest dissolved-solids concentration, and another well in the Uinta Basin yielded the sample with the largest dissolved-solids concentration. There was a progressive increase in salinity of water produced by several of the observation wells in Pahvant Valley and in the Milford and Beryl-Enterprise areas. The increases in salinity occurred during 1950-84, coinciding with the decline of water levels due to pumping for irrigation. Water-quality changes related either to ground-water withdrawals or ground-water recharge also were detected in several other areas, including Curlew Valley, Cedar City Valley, Northern Utah Valley, the lower Bear River valley, and the Sevier Desert. Water produced from wells in Goshen Valley and the upper Fremont River valley had short term increases in chloride, sulfate, and dissolved-solids concentrations, indicating possible local contamination of the ground water. Also, since the late 1950's, dissolved-solids concentrations have increased in water produced by a well completed in the principal aquifer in Salt Lake Valley downgradient from areas where extensive use has been made of road salt.

Utah↗
USGS2014

U.S. Geological Survey Science for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative - 2013 Annual Report

This is the sixth report produced by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) for the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative (WLCI) to detail annual activities conducted by USGS for addressing specific management needs identified by WLCI partners. In FY2013, there were 25 ongoing and new projects conducted by the USGS. These projects fall into 8 major categories: (1) synthesizing and analyzing existing data to describe (model and map) current conditions on the landscape; (2) developing models for projecting past and future landscape conditions; (3) monitoring indicators of ecosystem conditions and the effectiveness of on-the-ground habitat projects; (4) conducting research to elucidate the mechanisms underlying wildlife and habitat responses to changing land uses; (5) managing and making accessible the large number of databases, maps, and other products being developed; (6) helping to integrate WLCI outcomes with future habitat enhancement and research projects; (7) coordinating efforts among WLCI partners; and (8) providing support to WLCI decision-makers and assisting with overall evaluation of the WLCI program. The two new projects initiated in FY2013 address (1) important agricultural lands in southwestern Wyoming, and (2) the influence of energy development on native fish communities. The remaining activities entailed our ongoing efforts to compile data, model landscape conditions, monitor trends in habitat conditions, conduct studies of wildlife responses to energy development, and upgrade Web-based products in support of both individual and overall WLCI efforts. Milestone FY2013 accomplishments included completing the development of a WLCI inventory and monitoring framework and the associated monitoring strategies, protocols, and analytics; and initial development of an Interagency Inventory and Monitoring Database, which will be accessible through the Monitoring page of the WLCI Web site at http://www.wlci.gov/monitoring. We also completed the initial phase of the mountain shrub-mapping project in the Big Piney-La Barge mule deer winter range. Finally, a 3-year survey of pygmy rabbits in four major gas-field areas was completed and used to validate the pygmy rabbit habitat model/map developed earlier in the project. Important products that became available for use by WLCI partners included publication of USGS Data Series report (http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/800/pdf/ds800.pdf) that compiles our WLCI land cover and land use data, which depict current and historical patterns of sage-grouse habitat in relation to energy development and will be used to pose “what-if” scenarios to evaluate possible outcomes of alternative land-use strategies and practices on habitat and wildlife. Another important FY2013 product was a journal article (http://aapgbull.geoscienceworld.org/content/97/6/899.full) that describes the Mowry Shale and Frontier formation, which harbors coalbed methane and shale gas resources in Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah, for use in future scenario-building work. We also produced maps and databases that depict the structure and condition of aspen stands in the Little Mountain Ecosystem, and then presented this information to the Bureau of Land Management, Wyoming Game and Fish Department, and other interested entities for supporting aspen-management objectives.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2005

Hydrology and simulation of ground-water flow in Cedar Valley, Iron County, Utah

Cedar Valley, located in the eastern part of Iron County in southwestern Utah, is experiencing rapid population growth. Cedar Valley traditionally has supported agriculture, but the growing population needs a larger share of the available water resources. Water withdrawn from the unconsolidated basin fill is the primary source for public supply and is a major source of water for irrigation. Water managers are concerned about increasing demands on the water supply and need hydrologic information to manage this limited water resource and minimize flow of water unsuitable for domestic use toward present and future public-supply sources. Surface water in the study area is derived primarily from snowmelt at higher altitudes east of the study area or from occasional large thunderstorms during the summer. Coal Creek, a perennial stream with an average annual discharge of 24,200 acre-feet per year, is the largest stream in Cedar Valley. Typically, all of the water in Coal Creek is diverted for irrigation during the summer months. All surface water is consumed within the basin by irrigated crops, evapotranspiration, or recharge to the ground-water system. Ground water in Cedar Valley generally moves from primary recharge areas along the eastern margin of the basin where Coal Creek enters, to areas of discharge or subsurface outflow. Recharge to the unconsolidated basin-fill aquifer is by seepage of unconsumed irrigation water, streams, direct precipitation on the unconsolidated basin fill, and subsurface inflow from consolidated rock and Parowan Valley and is estimated to be about 42,000 acre-feet per year. Stable-isotope data indicate that recharge is primarily from winter precipitation. The chloride mass-balance method indicates that recharge may be less than 42,000 acre-feet per year, but is considered a rough approximation because of limited chloride concentration data for precipitation and Coal Creek. Continued declining water levels indicate that recharge is not sufficient to meet demand. Water levels in many areas are at or close to historic lows. In 2000, withdrawal from wells was estimated to be 36,000 acre-feet per year. About 4,000 acre-feet per year are estimated to discharge to evapotranspiration or as subsurface outflow. Prior to large-scale ground-water development, ground-water discharge by evapotranspiration and discharge to springs was much larger. Ground water along the eastern margin of the valley between Cedar City and Enoch is unsuitable for domestic use because of high dissolved-solids and nitrate concentrations. The predominant ions of Ca and SO4 in this area indicate dissolution of gypsum in the Markagunt Plateau to the east. Data collected during this study were compared to historic data; there is no evidence to indicate deterioration in ground-water quality. The spatial distribution of ground water with high nitrate concentration does not appear to be migrating beyond its previously known extent. No single source can be identified as the cause for elevated nitrate concentrations in ground water. Low nitrogen-15 values north of Cedar City indicate a natural geologic source. Higher nitrogen-15 values toward the center of the basin and associated hydrologic data indicate probable recharge from waste-water effluent. Excess dissolved nitrogen gas and low nitrate concentrations in shallow ground water indicate that denitrification is occurring in some areas. A computer ground-water flow model was developed to simulate flow in the unconsolidated basin fill. The method of determining recharge from irrigation was changed during the calibration process to incorporate more areal and temporal variability. In general, the model accurately simulates water levels and water-level fluctuations and can be considered an adequate tool to help determine the valley-wide effects on water levels of additional ground-water withdrawals and changes in water use. The model was used to simulated water-level changes caused by projecting current withdrawal rates, increased withdrawal rates, and a 10-year drought. Water levels declined 20 to 275 feet in the southern and central parts of the valley and less than 20 feet north of Enoch

Utah↗
USGS2023

Integrated science strategy for assessing and monitoring water availability and migratory birds for terminal lakes across the Great Basin, United States

Executive Summary In 2022, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) established the Saline Lake Ecosystems Integrated Water Availability Assessment (IWAAs) to monitor and assess the hydrology of terminal lakes in the Great Basin and the migratory birds and other wildlife dependent on those habitats. Scientists from across the USGS (with specialties in water quantity, water quality, limnology, avian biology, data science, landscape ecology, and science communication) formed the Saline Lake Ecosystems IWAAs Team. The team has developed this regional strategic science plan to guide data collection and assessment activities at terminal lakes in the Great Basin. The U.S. Congress requested the USGS to establish the Saline Lake Ecosystems IWAAs in response to historically low water levels at terminal lakes and associated wetlands across the Great Basin. Not all Great Basin terminal lakes have high salinity; however, all terminal lakes occur in endorheic, closed, basins with no surface-water outflow. Low lake levels across the Great Basin are the result of increased water use for agriculture and municipalities, drought conditions, and a warming climate. Great Basin terminal lake water extents have decreased by as much as 90 percent over the last 150 years, and terminal lake wetlands have decreased in area by as much as 47 percent since 1984. Lake elevations and wetland areas are primarily supported by freshwater inputs from snowmelt feeding upgradient rivers, streams, and springs. These freshwater inputs have been severely reduced because of continued and increased surface-water diversions and surface-water capture through groundwater pumping for agriculture, mining, and public supply as well as unprecedented drought conditions and warming temperatures related to climate change. Water quality, specifically salinity, is highly variable for terminal lakes of the Great Basin, and this variability is a result of the balance between freshwater inflow and evaporation. Variability of salinity at each of the terminal lakes can be affected by lake morphology, hydrogeologic features of the basin, annual variability in weather patterns, and changes in upgradient water use. Hypersaline terminal lakes provide abundant food resources such as brine shrimp and brine flies that support nesting and migrating birds. The density and composition of invertebrates are closely tied to lake salinity. Increased salinity can exceed the tolerance of invertebrates, severely limiting their biomass. In contrast, decreased salinity can lead to altered invertebrate community composition, reducing the abundance of optimal avian prey resources. Great Basin terminal lake ecosystems, including open-water and adjacent aquatic and terrestrial environments, provide resources necessary to sustain many animal populations throughout the year. Although a variety of taxa use terminal lakes, these ecosystems are of acute importance for the millions of migratory waterbirds (for example, shorebirds, wading birds, and waterfowl) dependent on the network of terminal lakes and their associated wetlands. Migratory birds transiting the Pacific and Central Flyways use Great Basin terminal lake ecosystems throughout the year to feed, nest, and transit between wintering and breeding ranges. As such, successful conservation of birds and their habitats requires coordinated management of water and habitats across the Great Basin network of terminal lakes and wetlands. The linkages between water availability and ecosystem vulnerability of terminal lakes in the Great Basin are not well understood. The vulnerability of terminal lakes is related to the factors driving change and adaptive capacity of the lake ecosystem. Saline lake ecosystems are vulnerable when changes in water quantity affect ecosystem function. Water quantity affects salinity, which affects food webs and habitat; these linkages can be investigated with water-quality and food web monitoring. Water quantity also affects inundated habitat, which can be quantified through remote sensing. It is necessary to quantify hydroclimatic and water use controls on water availability to terminal lakes to assess the response of the ecosystems. Remotely sensed data can provide a broad-scale and long-term synoptic view of terminal lake hydrologic characteristics, but ground observations are required to interpret changes in water quality and ecological functions. Some terminal lake basins have ongoing monitoring and modeling efforts within the Great Basin (for example, Great Salt Lake, Carson River Basin), yet most monitoring locations are hydrologically upgradient and too far away from lake inflows to provide an accurate assessment of hydrological trends for the lake ecosystems. Other terminal lakes have no long-term hydrological monitoring in their respective watersheds (for example, Lake Abert). Ecological data collection in the Great Basin is also insufficient to understand how many birds exist on the landscape, how birds use the mosaic of terminal-lake habitats as an interconnected system, and how Great Basin terminal lakes are linked to the larger continental system of the Pacific and Central Flyways. Across agencies and organizations, tracking bird movement, abundance, and diversity is inconsistent, with some lakes having once- or twice-a-year bird survey efforts and a few locations having more intensive ecological data-gathering efforts (for example, Great Salt Lake, Lake Abert). Bridging hydrological and ecological information gaps will improve understanding of the trends in water supply and water quality, habitat availability and usage, and impacts on vulnerable waterbird species, all of which would be used by managers in coordinated conservation of this unique network of terminal-lake habitats. The terminal lakes of the Great Basin are part of the Basin and Range physiographic province that extends from the Colorado Plateau on the east to the Sierra Nevada on the west, and from the Snake River Plain on the north to the Garlock fault and the Mojave block on the south. The Great Basin is larger than 650,000 square kilometers and encompasses most of the State of Nevada but also extends to western Utah, eastern California, southeastern Idaho, southwestern Wyoming, and southeastern Oregon. The climate is arid to semiarid with a hydrologic regime that is snowmelt dominated, providing as much as 75 percent of total annual runoff for the region. Terminal lakes of the Great Basin occupy the lowest areas of closed (endorheic) drainage basins, such that lake levels and water quality respond rapidly to surface-water inflow. Terminal lakes provide local and regional economic value to the States in the Great Basin, including mineral extraction, aquaculture, public works, and recreational uses. As an example, assessments of Great Salt Lake’s ecological health and economic impact find hemispheric importance for the former and regional importance for the latter. Great Salt Lake creates about 7,000 jobs and $2 billion of economic output per year, most of which would be lost with further declines in lake level. The objectives of this Science Strategy are threefold: (1) to identify how changing water availability affects the quality, diversity, and abundance of habitats supporting continental waterbird populations; (2) to highlight the scientific monitoring and assessment needs of Great Basin terminal lakes; and (3) to support coordinated management and conservation actions to benefit those ecosystems, migratory birds, and other wildlife. There are long-term hydrological, ecological, and societal challenges associated with terminal lakes ecosystems in the Great Basin. This Science Strategy benefits partners by providing a conceptual model, nested at different spatial extents, that identifies key scientific information needs to inform coordinated implementation of management and conservation plans within and among hydrologic basins to address these complex challenges.

California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Wyoming↗