Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “New Mexico Geology”

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.

At least 577 records · Page 32Linked to original sources
USGS1984

Maps showing distribution of dissolved solids and dominant chemical type in ground water, Basin and Range Province, New Mexico

This map report is one of a series of geologic and hydrologic maps of States in the Basin and Range Province. These map reports contain information on ground-water hydrology, ground-water quality, surface distribution of selected rock types, data on tectonic conditions, areal geophysical data, Pleistocene lakes and marshes and natural resources. This information is the basis for a summary report that characterizes the Basin and Range Province. The geologic and hydrologic characterization will be used to evaluate the Province for prospective regions for further study relative to isolation of high-level radioactive waste. (Bedinger, Sargent and Reed, 1984).

New Mexico↗
USGS2018

Estimating metal concentrations with regression analysis and water-quality surrogates at nine sites on the Animas and San Juan Rivers, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah

The purpose of this report is to evaluate the use of site-specific regression models to estimate metal concentrations at nine U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging stations on the Animas and San Juan Rivers in Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah. Downstream users could use these regression models to determine if metal concentrations are elevated and pose a risk to water supplies, agriculture, and recreation. Multiple linear-regression models were developed by relating metal concentrations in discrete water-quality samples to continuously monitored streamflow and surrogate parameters (specific conductance, pH, turbidity, and water temperature) collected at the U.S. Geological Survey stations. Models were developed for dissolved and total concentrations of aluminum, arsenic, cadmium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, and zinc using water-quality samples collected from 2005 to 2017 by several Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies using different collection methods and analytical laboratories. Model performance varied but, in general, models for dissolved metals did not perform as well as those for total metals. Dissolved metals generally were correlated to specific conductance or streamflow and total metals generally were better correlated with turbidity. Explanatory variables in the models reflected hydrologic and geochemical processes within the basin. A larger number of regression models were statistically significant for the most upstream sites, where metal concentrations were elevated by drainage from abandoned mines and mineralized bedrock. Models generally did not perform as well at downstream sites, especially for dissolved metals, which occurred at lower concentrations than at the upstream sites. In the lower reaches of the rivers, the input of more alkaline water from tributaries and groundwater reduced metal solubility and diluted metal concentrations. The number and distribution of samples in the calibration datasets also may have been a factor in model development. At some sites on the San Juan River, calibration datasets were more limited and did not represent the full range of observed hydrologic and water-quality conditions, especially during storm events in summer and fall. Recommendations for model use are given based on estimates of model precision, biases, and adequacy of the calibration datasets in terms of the number of samples and representativeness of the observed range of streamflow and water-quality conditions.

Colorado, New Mexico, Utah↗
USGS2015

Hydrologic data from wells at or in the vicinity of the San Juan coal mine, San Juan County, New Mexico

In 2010, in cooperation with the Mining and Minerals Division (MMD) of the State of New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) initiated a 4-year assessment of hydrologic conditions at the San Juan coal mine (SJCM), located about 14 miles west-northwest of the city of Farmington, San Juan County, New Mexico. The mine produces coal for power generation at the adjacent San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) and stores coal-combustion byproducts from the SJGS in mined-out surface-mining pits. The purpose of the hydrologic assessment is to identify groundwater flow paths away from SJCM coal-combustion-byproduct storage sites that might allow metals that may be leached from coal-combustion byproducts to eventually reach wells or streams after regional dewatering ceases and groundwater recovers to predevelopment levels. The hydrologic assessment, undertaken between 2010 and 2013, included compilation of existing data. The purpose of this report is to present data that were acquired and compiled by the USGS for the SJCM hydrologic assessment.

New Mexico↗
USGS1977

Water resources data for New Mexico, water year 1976

Water resources data for the 1976 water year for New Mexico consist of records of discharge and water quality of streams; stage, contents and water quality of lakes and reservoirs; and water levels and water quality in wells and springs. This report contains discharge records for 212 gaging stations; stage and contents for 24 lakes and reservoirs; water quality for 67 gaging stations, 19 partial-record stations, 1 reservoir, 8 springs and 205 wells; and water levels for 98 observation wells. Also included are 155 crest-stage partial-record stations and 3 low-flow partialrecord stations. Additional water data were collected at various sites, not part of the systematic data collection program, and are published as miscellaneous measurements. These data represent that part of the National Water Data System operated by the U.S. Geological Survey and cooperating State and Federal agencies in New Mexico.

New Mexico↗
USGS1979

Water resources data for New Mexico, water year 1978

Water resources data for the 1978 water year for New Mexico consist of records of discharge and water quality of streams; stage, contents and water quality of lakes and reservoirs; and water levels and water quality in wells and springs. This report contains discharge records for 229 gaging stations; stage and contents for 24 lakes and reservoirs; water quality for 89 gaging stations, 15 partial-record stations, 2 reservoir, 3 springs and 99 wells; and water levels for 96 observation wells. Also included are 144 crest-stage partial-record stations and 2 low-flow partial-record stations. Additional water data were collected at various sites, not part of the systematic data collection program, and are published as miscellaneous measurements. These data represent that part of the National Water Data System operated by the U. S. Geological Survey and cooperating State and Federal agencies in New Mexico.

New Mexico↗
USGS2013

Seepage investigations of the Rio Grande from below Leasburg Dam, Leasburg, New Mexico, to above American Dam, El Paso, Texas, 2006-13

Seepage investigations were conducted annually by the U.S. Geological Survey from 1988 to 1998 and from 2004 to 2013 along a 64-mile reach of the Rio Grande from below Leasburg Dam, Leasburg, New Mexico, to above American Dam, El Paso, Texas, as part of the Mesilla Basin monitoring program. Results of studies conducted from 2006 to 2013 are presented in this report. Seepage investigations were conducted over a period of 1–2 days in February of each year, during low-flow conditions in the non-irrigation season. During the seepage investigations, discharge was measured at as many as 24 sites along the Rio Grande and as many as 20 inflow sites within the study reach. Net seepage gain or loss was computed for each subreach by subtracting the discharge measured at the upstream location from the discharge measured at the closest downstream location along the river and then subtracting any inflow to the river within the subreach. An estimated gain or loss was determined to be significant when it exceeded the cumulative measurement uncertainty associated with the net seepage computation. Study reaches during 2006 to 2013 ranged from 20.2 to 64 miles in length, and seepage losses ranged from 8.2 ± 3.1 to 47.9 ± 8.2 cubic feet per second.

New Mexico;Texas↗
USGS1988

Mineral resource potential map of the Pecos Wilderness, Santa Fe, San Miguel, Mora, Rio Arriba, and Taos Counties, New Mexico

The Pecos Wilderness covers approximately 348 sq mi in the Santa Fe and Carson National Forests, north-central New Mexico. The area investigated includes the wilderness and approximately 150 sq mi of adjacent territory. The additional area covers several RARE II Road less Areas that were classified by the U.S. Forest Service in 1979 as Proposed Wilderness and Further Planning Areas, but were not incorporated in the Pecos Wilderness by the New Mexico Wilderness Bill. For the purpose of this report the entire area is called the study area. The study area is at the southern end of the Sangre de Cristo Range. It is characterized by an axial line of alpine peaks that rise to more than 13,000 ft, flanked on the west and north by heavily wooded ridges and canyons that drain to the Rio Grande Valley, and on the southeast by a high dissected plateau of meadows and forest. The plateau is dissected by deep canyons of the Pecos River and its tributaries, and is bounded on the east by a scarp of about 3,000 ft. Partly forested ranch land lies below the base of the scarp to the east, and beyond that is prai-rie of the Great Plains. This map is based on geologic and geochemical studies and mine and prospect investigations that were done principally in 1977 and 1979-80 (U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Bureau of Mines, and New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, 1980; Lane, 1980; Moench and Robertson, 1980; Moench, Robertson, and Sutley, 1980; Moench and Erickson, 1980; Moench, Grambling, and Robertson, 1988; Moench, Sutley, and Erickson, 1988; Erickson, Sutley, and Moench, 1986). An aeromagnetic survey covering almost all of the Pecos Wilderness was flown in 1970. The resulting aeromagnetic map was published by Moench and others (1980) and interpreted in that report by Lindreth Cordell. Cordell found no correlation between magnetic features and geologic terraines having mineral resource potential.

New Mexico↗
USGS2012

Base flow (1966-2009) and streamflow gain and loss (2010) of the Brazos River from the New Mexico-Texas State line to Waco, Texas

During 2010–11, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Texas Water Development Board, used hydrograph separation to quantify historical base flow at 11 USGS streamflow-gaging stations between water years 1966–2009 and streamflow gains and losses from two sets of synoptic measurements of streamflow and specific conductance (the first in June 2010, followed by another set in October 2010) in the upper Brazos River Basin from the New Mexico–Texas State line to Waco, Texas. The following subbasins compose the study area: Salt Fork Brazos River Basin, Double Mountain Fork Brazos River Basin, Clear Fork Brazos River Basin, North Bosque River Basin, and the Brazos River Basin (main stem) (including its tributaries). Base-flow analysis was done using historical streamflow data from 11 USGS streamflow-gaging stations in the upper Brazos River Basin to compute yearly base-flow indexes (base flow divided by total streamflow) for each station. The base-flow index was used to indicate the fraction of flow consisting of base flow on an annual basis for the period of record evaluated at each streamflow-gaging station. At nine stations there were long-term streamflow data from water years 1966–2009 (October 1965 through September 2009); at two stations slightly shorter periods of record (water years 1967–2009 and 1969–2009) were available. The median base-flow indexes were 0.16 and 0.15 at USGS streamflow-gaging stations 08082000 Salt Fork Brazos River near Aspermont, Tex., and 08080500 Double Mountain Fork Brazos River near Aspermont, Tex., respectively. The amount of the total streamflow consisting of base flow was larger at sites in the Clear Fork Brazos River Basin compared to sites in the Salt Fork Brazos River Basin or Double Mountain Fork Brazos River Basin; at USGS streamflow-gaging stations 08084000 Clear Fork Brazos River at Nugent, Tex., and at 08085500 Clear Fork Brazos River at Fort Griffin, Tex., the median base-flow indexes were 0.28 and 0.23, respectively. The largest median base-flow index for any station was 0.35 at USGS streamflow-gaging station 08091500 Paluxy River at Glen Rose, Tex. The second largest base-flow index was 0.30 at USGS streamflow-gaging station 08095000 North Bosque River near Clifton, Tex. Median base-flow indexes on the main stem of the Brazos River upstream from Possum Kingdom Lake were 0.22 at USGS streamflow-gaging station 08082500 Brazos River at Seymour, Tex., and 0.24 at USGS streamflow-gaging station 08088000 Brazos River near South Bend, Tex. The base-flow indexes for stations between Possum Kingdom Lake and Lake Granbury were 0.19 and 0.27 at USGS streamflow-gaging stations 08089000 Brazos River near Palo Pinto, Tex., and 08090800 Brazos River near Dennis, Tex., respectively. A median base-flow index of 0.19 was also measured at USGS streamflow-gaging station 08091000 Brazos River near Glen Rose, Tex., located between Lake Granbury and Lake Whitney. A Mann-Kendall trend analysis test was performed on annual base-flow index values from each of the 11 streamflow records that were analyzed. Upward trends in base-flow index values indicating increasing flows during the study period were found for USGS streamflow-gaging stations 08080500 Double Mountain Fork Brazos River near Aspermont, Tex., 08089000 Brazos River near Palo Pinto, Tex., and 08090800 Brazos River near Dennis, Tex. Flows at these three streamflow-gaging stations are regulated by reservoir releases, and additional analyses are needed before these streamflow trends can be characterized as indicative of changes in base flow over time. Streamflow was measured at 66 sites from June 6–9, 2010, and at 68 sites from October 16–19, 2010, to identify reaches in the upper Brazos River Basin that were gaining or losing streamflow. Gaining reaches were identified in each of the five subbasins. The gaining reach in the Salt Fork Brazos River Basin began at USGS streamflow-gaging station 08080940 Salt Fork Brazos River at State Highway 208 near Clairemont, Tex. (site SF–6), upstream from where Duck Creek flows into the Salt Fork Brazos River and continued downstream past USGS streamflow-gaging station 08082000 Salt Fork Brazos River near Aspermont, Tex. (site SF–9), to the outlet of the basin. In the Double Mountain Fork Brazos River Basin, a gaining reach from near Post, Tex., downstream to the outlet of the basin was identified. Two gaining reaches were identified in the Clear Fork Brazos River Basin—one from near Roby, Tex., downstream to near Noodle, Tex., and second from Hawley, Tex., downstream to Nugent, Tex. Most of the North Bosque River was characterized as gaining streamflow. Streamflow gains were identified in the main stem of the Brazos River from where the Brazos River main stem forms at the confluence of the Salt Fork Brazos River and Double Mountain Fork Brazos River near Knox City, Tex., downstream to near Seymour, Tex.

New Mexico, Texas↗
USGS2016

Seepage investigation of the Rio Grande from below Leasburg Dam, Leasburg, New Mexico, to above American Dam, El Paso, Texas, 2014

Seepage investigations have been conducted annually by the U.S. Geological Survey from 1988 to 1998 and from 2004 to the present (2014) along a 64-mile reach of the Rio Grande from below Leasburg Dam, Leasburg, New Mexico, to above American Dam, El Paso, Texas, as part of the Mesilla Basin monitoring program. Results of the investigation conducted in 2014 are presented in this report. The 2014 seepage investigation was conducted on February 11, 2014, during the low-flow conditions of the non-irrigation season. During the 2014 investigation, discharge was measured at 23 sites along the main-stem Rio Grande and 19 inflow sites within the study reach. Because of extended drought conditions affecting the basin, many sites along the Rio Grande (17 main-stem and 9 inflow) were observed to be dry in February 2014. Water-quality samples were collected during the seepage investigation at sites with flowing water as part of a long-term monitoring effort in the region. Net seepage gain or loss was computed for each subreach (the interval between two adjacent measurement locations along the river) by subtracting the discharge measured at the upstream location from the discharge measured at the closest downstream location along the river and then subtracting any inflow to the river within the subreach. An estimated gain or loss was determined to be meaningful when it exceeded the cumulative measurement uncertainty associated with the net seepage computation. The cumulative seepage loss in the 64-mile study reach in 2014 was 16.0 plus or minus 2.9 cubic feet per second.

New Mexico, Texas↗
USGS2016

Seepage investigation of the Rio Grande from below Leasburg Dam, Leasburg, New Mexico, to above American Dam, El Paso, Texas, 2015

Seepage investigations have been conducted annually by the U.S. Geological Survey from 1988 to 1998 and from 2004 to the present (2015) along a 64-mile reach of the Rio Grande from below Leasburg Dam, Leasburg, New Mexico, to above American Dam, El Paso, Texas, as part of the Mesilla Basin monitoring program. Results of the investigation conducted in 2015 are presented in this report. The 2015 seepage investigation was conducted on February 10, 2015, during the low-flow conditions of the non-irrigation season. During the 2015 investigation, discharge was measured at 23 sites along the main-stem Rio Grande and 19 inflow sites within the study reach. Because of extended drought conditions affecting the basin, many sites along the Rio Grande (17 main-stem and 10 inflow) were observed to be dry in February 2015. Net seepage gain or loss was computed for each subreach (the interval between two adjacent measurement locations along the river) by subtracting the discharge measured at the upstream location from the discharge measured at the closest downstream location along the river and then subtracting any inflow to the river within the subreach. An estimated gain or loss was determined to be meaningful when it exceeded the cumulative measurement uncertainty associated with the net seepage computation. The cumulative seepage loss in the 64-mile study reach in 2015 was 17.3 plus or minus 2.6 cubic feet per second. Gaining and losing reaches identified in this investigation generally correspond to seepage patterns observed in previous investigations conducted during dry years, with the gaining reaches occurring primarily at the southern (downstream) end of the basin.

Rio Grande↗