2016 Annual Report of Hydrogeologic Conditions, Water Requirements, Supplies and Disposition Santa Maria Valley Management Area

City of Santa Maria | April 13th, 2017

This annual report of conditions in the Santa Maria Valley Management Area, for calendar year 2016, has been prepared to meet the reporting conditions of the June 30, 20

This annual report of conditions in the Santa Maria Valley Management Area, for calendar year 2016, has been prepared to meet the reporting conditions of the June 30, 2005, Stipulation entered by the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Clara, in the Santa Maria Valley Groundwater Basin litigation. The Stipulation divided the overall Santa Maria Valley Groundwater Basin into three management areas, the largest of which overlies the main Santa Maria Valley (the Santa Maria Valley Management Area, or SMVMA) and is the subject of this report. The other two management areas, the Nipomo Mesa Management Area (NMMA) and the Northern Cities Management Area, are addressed in separate annual reports prepared by others. The Stipulation, approved and implemented in 2008, specifies that monitoring shall be sufficient to determine groundwater conditions, land and water uses, sources of water supply, and the disposition of all water supplies in the Basin. Annual Reports for the SMVMA are to summarize the results of the monitoring and include an analysis of the relationship between projected water demand and supply. The Stipulation was preserved in the California Court of Appeal (Sixth Appellate District) Decision of November 21, 2012, and in the Superior Court of the State of California (County of Santa Clara) Final Judgment of April 23, 2014. Thus, the Physical Solution criteria for monitoring and managing groundwater in the basin remain. In accordance with the Stipulation, this report on the SMVMA provides a description of the physical setting and briefly describes previous studies conducted in the groundwater basin, including the long-term monitoring program developed for the SMVMA. As reported herein, the Twitchell Management Authority (TMA) commissioned the preparation of a monitoring program for the SMVMA in 2008, and its complete implementation is expected to provide the data with which to fully assess future conditions. This report describes hydrogeologic conditions in the management area historically and through 2016, including groundwater conditions, Twitchell Reservoir operations, and hydrologic and climatic conditions. As with all previous annual reports (commencing in 2008), the water requirements and supplies for agricultural and municipal uses are accounted, as are the components of water disposition in the SMVMA. Conclusions drawn regarding water resource conditions are discussed, including any finding of severe water shortage, which is concluded to not be the case through 2016. Finally, recommendations are provided with regard to the intra-basin transfer of water from the SMVMA to the NMMA, possible enhancement of groundwater recharge, expanded assessment of water resource conditions, and continued implementation of the monitoring program for the SMVMA. Janny Choi from Stanford University's Water in the West discusses the Santa Maria stipulation in the 2014 paper Before the Well Runs Dry: Improving the Linkage Between Groundwater and Land Use Planning.

A geohydrologic reconnaissance of the Saratoga Spring area, Death Valley National Monument, California

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | March 1st, 1966

A three-dimensional numerical model of predevelopment conditions in the Death Valley regional ground-water flow system, Nevada and California

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | July 1st, 2002

An Estimated Potentiometric Surface of the Death Valley Region, Nevada and California, Developed Using Geographic Information System and Automated Interpolation Techniques

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | July 1st, 1998

Appraisal of the water resources of Death Valley, California–Nevada

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | December 1st, 1977

Bulletin 118: California's Groundwater Update 2020 (draft)

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | March 1st, 2021

Groundwater is a precious and limited resource that is used in meeting the needs of California’s large and small urban areas, rural groundwater users, irrigated agricul

Groundwater is a precious and limited resource that is used in meeting the needs of California’s large and small urban areas, rural groundwater users, irrigated agriculture, and the environment. Since the last California’s Groundwater (CalGW) Update in 2003, there has been significant changes to land use, water use, water application practices, and water allocations. In addition, the effects of climate change have affected California’s reliance on groundwater. It is expected that there will be additional changes in land use, water use, adjustments in water allocations, and that climate change will continue to affect the environment, thus elevating the importance of the reporting in CalGW Updates.  According to the last comprehensive report, California’s Groundwater Update 2003 (CalGW Update 2003), California’s reliance on groundwater was approximately 30 percent during a wet-to-average precipitation water year and approximately 40 percent during dry periods. Since then, the percentage of groundwater reliance has increased to between 30 and 40 percent during above normal to-wet years and to as much as 58 percent during dry periods (California Department of Water Resources 2018).

Bulletin No. 3 Water Resources of Tulare County and Their Utilization

State of California (California) | August 29th, 1922

Death Valley

Scientific American | August 22nd, 1903

Judging from the many high sensation stories and frequent references to Death Valley, there is evidently a popular interest in that dreaded locality, which is in part e

Judging from the many high sensation stories and frequent references to Death Valley, there is evidently a popular interest in that dreaded locality, which is in part explicable by the name it bears. The stories published are, as a rule, of little value, and give no idea of the climate, topography, fauna, and flora of a more absolute and arid desert than the Sahara. Our great deserts of the southwest have been but little written about by geographers and travelers, and it is only recently that accurate official reports upon them have been made. Capt. Clarence E . Dutton, in his report on the Grand Canon, gave a description of the deserts of northern Arizona. Captain Gaillard, of the Mexican Boundary Commission, has given us, in a popular magazine, probably the best article that has as yet been written on an American desert. He was well qualified to write, because he traversed the entire region from the Rio Grande to the Pacific, erecting monument s to mark the boundary between Mexico and the United States. Mr. W.J. McGee, Chief of the Bureau of American Ethnology, who recently made the journey through Southern Arizona and Mexico, to study the Seri Indians, who live on the Isle of Tiburon in the Gulf of California, has given us a fine description of the desert in his report and in separate articles in the Journal of Geography. A valuable article on the American Desert, by Robert T. Hill, has just appeared.

Death Valley regional ground-water flow system, Nevada and California—Hydrogeologic framework and transient ground-water flow model

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | July 1st, 2010

A numerical three-dimensional (3D) transient groundwater flow model of the Death Valley region was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey for the U.S. Department of Ener

A numerical three-dimensional (3D) transient groundwater flow model of the Death Valley region was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey for the U.S. Department of Energy programs at the Nevada Test Site and at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Decades of study of aspects of the groundwater flow system and previous less extensive groundwater flow models were incorporated and reevaluated together with new data to provide greater detail for the complex, digital model. A 3D digital hydrogeologic framework model (HFM) was developed from digital elevation models, geologic maps, borehole information, geologic and hydrogeologic cross sections, and other 3D models to represent the geometry of the hydrogeologic units (HGUs). Structural features, such as faults and fractures, that affect groundwater flow also were added. The HFM represents Precambrian and Paleozoic crystalline and sedimentary rocks, Mesozoic sedimentary rocks, Mesozoic to Cenozoic intrusive rocks, Cenozoic volcanic tuffs and lavas, and late Cenozoic sedimentary deposits of the Death Valley regional groundwater flow system (DVRFS) region in 27 HGUs. Information from a series of investigations was compiled to conceptualize and quantify hydrologic components of the groundwater flow system within the DVRFS model domain and to provide hydraulic-property and head-observation data used in the calibration of the transient-flow model. These studies reevaluated natural groundwater discharge occurring through evapotranspiration (ET) and spring flow; the history of groundwater pumping from 1913 through 1998; groundwater recharge simulated as net infiltration; model boundary inflows and outflows based on regional hydraulic gradients and water budgets of surrounding areas; hydraulic conductivity and its relation to depth; and water levels appropriate for regional simulation of prepumped and pumped conditions within the DVRFS model domain. Simulation results appropriate for the regional extent and scale of the model were provided by acquiring additional data, by reevaluating existing data using current technology and concepts, and by refining earlier interpretations to reflect the current understanding of the regional groundwater flow system. Groundwater flow in the Death Valley region is composed of several interconnected, complex groundwater flow systems. Groundwater flow occurs in three subregions in relatively shallow and localized flow paths that are superimposed on deeper, regional flow paths. Regional groundwater flow is predominantly through a thick Paleozoic carbonate rock sequence affected by complex geologic structures from regional faulting and fracturing that can enhance or impede flow. Spring flow and ET are the dominant natural groundwater discharge processes. Groundwater also is withdrawn for agricultural, commercial, and domestic uses. Groundwater flow in the DVRFS was simulated using MODFLOW-2000, the U.S. Geological Survey 3D finitedifference modular groundwater flow modeling code that incorporates a nonlinear least-squares regression technique to estimate aquifer parameters. The DVRFS model has 16 layers of defined thickness, a finite-difference grid consisting of 194 rows and 160 columns, and uniform cells 1,500 meters (m) on each side. Prepumping conditions (before 1913) were used as the initial conditions for the transient-state calibration. The model uses annual stress periods with discrete recharge and discharge components. Recharge occurs mostly from infiltration of precipitation and runoff on high mountain ranges and from a small amount of underflow from adjacent basins. Discharge occurs primarily through ET and spring discharge (both simulated as drains) and water withdrawal by pumping and, to a lesser amount, by underflow to adjacent basins simulated by constant-head boundaries. All parameter values estimated by the regression are reasonable and within the range of expected values. The simulated hydraulic heads of the final calibrated transient model generally fit observed heads reasonably well (residuals with absolute values less than 10 meters) with two exceptions: in most areas of nearly flat hydraulic gradient the fit is considered moderate (residuals with absolute values of 10 to 20 meters), and in areas of steep hydraulic gradient along the Eleana Range and western part of Yucca Flat, southern part of the Owlshead Mountains, southern part of the Bullfrog Hills, and the north-northwestern part of the model domain (residuals with absolute values greater than 20 meters). Groundwater discharge residuals are fairly random, with as many areas where simulated flows are less than observed flows as areas where simulated flows are greater. The highest unweighted groundwater discharge residuals occur at Death Valley, Sarcobatus Flat (northeastern area), Tecopa, and early observations at Manse Spring in Pahrump Valley. High weighted-discharge residuals were computed in Indian Springs Valley and parts of Death Valley. Most of these inaccuracies in head and discharge can be attributed to insufficient representation of the hydrogeology in the HFM and(or) discharge estimates, misrepresentation of water levels, and(or) model error associated with grid-cell size. The model represents the large and complex groundwater flow system of the Death Valley region at a greater degree of refinement and accuracy than has been possible previously. The representation of detail provided by the 3D digital hydrogeologic framework model and the numerical groundwater flow model enabled greater spatial accuracy in every model parameter. The lithostratigraphy and structural effects of the hydrogeologic framework; recharge estimates from simulated net infiltration; discharge estimates from ET, spring flow, and pumping; and boundary inflow and outflow estimates all were reevaluated, some additional data were collected, and accuracy was improved. Uncertainty in the results of the flow model simulations can be reduced by improving on the quality, interpretation, and representation of the water-level and discharge observations used to calibrate the model and improving on the representation of the HGU geometries, the spatial variability of HGU material properties, the flow model physical framework, and the hydrologic conditions.

Delineation of ground‐water flow systems in the southern Great Basin using aqueous rare earth element distributions

National Ground Water Association (NGWA) | January 1st, 1997

The rare earth element (REE) signature of ground waters from both felsic volcanic rocks on the Nevada Test Site and from the regional Paleozoic carbonate aquifer of south

The rare earth element (REE) signature of ground waters from both felsic volcanic rocks on the Nevada Test Site and from the regional Paleozoic carbonate aquifer of southern Nevada resemble the REE signature of the rocks through which they flow. Moreover, the REE signatures of Ash Meadows ground waters are similar to those of springs in the Furnace Creek region of Death Valley but different from shallow ground waters from predominantly tuffaceous alluvial deposits in the Amargosa Desert, perched ground waters from felsic volcanic rocks, and ground waters that have only flowed through the regional Paleozoic carbonate aquifer. The similar REE patterns of Ash Meadows and Furnace Creek ground waters support previous investigations that suggested ground waters discharging from the Furnace Creek springs are similar to the ground waters emerging from the Ash Meadows springs. The REE patterns indicate that the contribution of ground water from the Amargosa Desert to the Furnace Creek springs is of minor importance. Our REE analyses along with previous stable isotope, ground‐water potentiometric surface relationships, and geologic structure analyses support ground‐water flow from east to west in the fractured and faulted carbonate rocks beneath Ash Meadows, the Amargosa Desert, and the southern end of the Funeral Mountains. Our observations are contrary to some previous investigations that identified shallow ground waters from the central and northwestern Amargosa Desert as a substantial component of the ground water that discharges from the Furnace Creek springs.