Evaluation of the Hydrologic System and Selected Water-Management Alternatives in the Owens Valley, California

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | May 9th, 2000

The Owens Valley, a long, narrow valley along the east side of the Sierra Nevada in east-central California, is the main source of water for the city of Los Angeles. The

The Owens Valley, a long, narrow valley along the east side of the Sierra Nevada in east-central California, is the main source of water for the city of Los Angeles. The city diverts most of the surface water in the valley into the Owens River–Los Angeles Aqueduct system, which transports the water more than 200 miles south to areas of distribution and use. Additionally, ground water is pumped or flows from wells to supplement the surface-water diversions to the river–aqueduct system. Pumpage from wells needed to supplement water export has increased since 1970, when a second aqueduct was put into service, and local residents have expressed concerns that the increased pumping may have a detrimental effect on the environment and the native vegetation (indigenous alkaline scrub and meadow plant communities) in the valley. Native vegetation on the valley floor depends on soil moisture derived from precipitation and from the unconfined part of a multilayered ground-water system. This report, which describes the evaluation of the hydrologic system and selected water-management alternatives, is one in a series designed to identify the effects that ground-water pumping has on native vegetation and evaluate alternative strategies to mitigate any adverse effects caused by pumping. The hydrologic system of the Owens Valley can be conceptualized as having three parts: (1) an unsaturated zone affected by precipitation andevapotranspiration; (2) a surface-water system composed of the Owens River, the Los Angeles Aqueduct, tributary streams, canals, ditches, and ponds; and (3) a saturated ground-water system contained in the valley fill. Analysis of the hydrologic system was aided by development of a ground-water flow model of the “aquifer system,” which is defined as the most active part of the ground-water system and which includes nearly all of the Owens Valley except for the area surrounding the Owens Lake. The model was calibrated and verified for water years 1963–88 and used to evaluate general concepts of the hydrologic system and the effects of past water-management practices. The model also was used to evaluate the likely effects of selected water-management alternatives designed to lessen the adverse effects of ground-water pumping on native vegetation. Results of the model simulations confirm that a major change in the hydrologic system was caused by the additional export of water from the valley beginning in 1970. Average ground-water pumpage increased by a factor of five, discharge from springs decreased almost to zero, reaches of the Owens River that previously had gained water from the aquifer system began losing water, and total evapotranspiration by native plants decreased by about 35 percent. Water-management practices as of 1988 were defined and evaluated using the model. Simulation results indicate that increased ground-water pumpage since 1985 for enhancement and mitigation projects within the Owens Valley has further stressed the aquifer system and resulted in declines of the water table and reduced evapotranspiration. Most of the water-table declines are beneath the western alluvial fans and in the immediate vicinity of production wells. The water-table altitude beneath the valley floor has remained relatively constant over time because of hydrologic buffers, such as evapotranspiration, springs, and permanent surface-water features. These buffers adjust the quantity of water exchanged with the aquifer system and effectively minimize variations in water-table altitude. The widespread presence of hydrologic buffers is the primary reason the water-table altitude beneath the valley floor has remained relatively constant since 1970 despite major changes in the type and location of ground-water discharge. Evaluation of selected water-management alternatives indicates that long-term variations in average runoff to the Owens Valley of as much as 10 percent will not have a significant effect on the water-table altitude. However, reductions in pumpage to an average annual value of about 75,000 acre-ft/yr are needed to maintain the water table at the same altitude as observed during water year 1984. A 9-year transient simulation of dry, average, and wet conditions indicates that the aquifer system takes several years to recover from increased pumping during a drought, even when followed by average and above-average runoff and recharge. Increasing recharge from selected tributary streams by additional diversion of high flows onto the alluvial fans, increasing artificial recharge near well fields, and allocating more pumpage to the Bishop area may be useful in mitigating the adverse effects on native vegetation caused by drought and short-term increases in pumpage. Analysis of the optimal use of the existing well fields to minimize drawdown of the water table indicates no significant lessening of adverse effects on native vegetation at any of the well fields at the end of a 1-year simulation. Some improvement might result from pumping from a few high-capacity wells in a small area, such as the Thibaut–Sawmill well field; pumping from the upper elevations of alluvial fans, such as the Bishop well field; or pumping in an area surrounded by irrigated lands, such as the Big Pine well field. Use of these water-management techniques would provide some flexibility in management from one year to another, but would not solve the basic problem that increased ground-water pumpage causes decreases in evapotranspiration and in the biomass of native vegetation. Furthermore, the highly transmissive and narrow aquifer system will transmit the effects of pumping to other more sensitive areas of the valley within a couple of years. Other possible changes in water management that might be useful in minimizing the short-term effects of pumping on native vegetation include sealing well perforations in the unconfined part of the aquifer system; rotating pumpage among well fields; continuing or renewing use of unlined surface-water features such as canals and ditches; developing recharge and extraction facilities in deeper volcanic deposits near Big Pine or in alluvial fan deposits along the east side of the valley; installing additional wells along the west side of the Owens Lake; and conjunctively using other ground-water basins between the Owens Valley and Los Angeles to store exported water for subsequent extraction and use during droughts.

Evaluation of the Source and Transport of High Nitrate Concentrations in Ground Water, Warren Subbasin, California

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | December 13th, 2003

From early 1995 through 2001, nitrate (NO3) concentrations in ground water in the Warren subbasin, California, increased from a background concentration of 10 milligrams

From early 1995 through 2001, nitrate (NO3) concentrations in ground water in the Warren subbasin, California, increased from a background concentration of 10 milligrams per liter (mg/L) to more than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) water-quality maximum contaminant level of 44 mg/L (10 mg/L as nitrogen). This increase coincided with an artificial ground-water recharge program implemented by the local water district, Hi-Desert Water District (HDWD), to reverse ground-water level declines of as much as 300 ft. Major findings on ground-water quality from this study are the following: •Septage from septic tanks was the primary source of NO3 to the ground-water system. •Rising ground-water levels, resulting from the artificial-recharge program, entrained high-NO3 septage stored in the unsaturated zone. •The potential for ground-water contamination should be evaluated before beginning an artificial- recharge program in an area that uses septic tanks.

Evapotranspiration Rate Measurements of Vegetation Typical of Ground-Water Discharge Areas in the Basin and Range Carbonate-Rock Aquifer System, White Pine County, Nevada and Adjacent Areas in Nevada and Utah, September 2005–August 2006

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | July 1st, 2007

Executive Order N-4-23

State of California | March 10th, 2023

Factors Affecting Public-Supply-Well Vulnerability to Contamination: Understanding Observed Water Quality and Anticipating Future Water Quality

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | May 14th, 2013

As part of the U.S. Geological Survey National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program, a study was conducted from 2001 to 2011 to shed light on factors that affect the

As part of the U.S. Geological Survey National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program, a study was conducted from 2001 to 2011 to shed light on factors that affect the vulnerability of water from public-supply wells to contamination (referred to hereafter as “public-supply-well vulnerability”). The study was designed as a follow-up to earlier NAWQA studies that found mixtures of contaminants at low concentrations in groundwater near the water table in urban areas across the Nation and, less frequently, in deeper groundwater typically used for public supply. Beside the factors affecting public-supply-well vulnerability to contamination, this circular describes measures that can be used to determine which factor (or factors) plays a dominant role at an individual public-supply well. Case-study examples are used throughout to show how such information can be used to improve water quality. In general, the vulnerability of the water from public-supply wells to contamination is a function of contaminant input within the area that contributes water to a well, the mobility and persistence of a contaminant once released to the groundwater, and the ease of groundwater and contaminant movement from the point of recharge to the open interval of a well. The following measures described in this circular are particularly useful for indicating which contaminants in an aquifer might reach an individual public-supply well and when, how, and at what concentration they might arrive: Sources of recharge—Information on the sources of recharge for a well provides insight into contaminants that might enter the aquifer with the recharge water and potentially reach the well. Geochemical conditions—Information on the geochemical conditions encountered by groundwater traveling to a well provides insight into contaminants that might persist in the water all the way to the well. Groundwater-age mixtures—Information on the ages of the different waters that mix in a well provides insight into the time lag between contaminant input at the water table and contaminant arrival at the well. It also provides insight into the potential for in-well dilution of contaminated water by unaffected groundwater of a different age that simultaneously enters the well. Preferential flow pathways—pathways that provide little resistance to flow—can influence how all other factors affect public-supply-well vulnerability to contamination. For example, preferential flow pathways can influence whether a contaminant source is physically linked to a well, whether contaminant concentrations are substantially altered before contaminated groundwater reaches a well, and whether contaminated groundwater can arrive at a well within a timeframe of concern to the well owner. Methods for recognizing the influence of preferential flow pathways on the quality of water from a public-supply well are presented in this circular and can provide opportunities to prevent or mitigate the deterioration of a water supply. Knowing what water-quality variables to measure, what spatial and temporal scales on which to measure them, and how to interpret the resulting data makes it possible for samples from public-supply wells to provide a broad window into a well’s past and present water quality—and possibly future water quality. Such insight can enable resource managers to prioritize actions for sustaining a high-quality groundwater source of drinking water.

Farmers Water District Groundwater Sustainability Plan Delta-Mendota Subbasin

Farmers Water District | January 1st, 2020

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) was signed into law in 2014 for the purpose of protecting California’s groundwater resources. SGMA requires all high

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) was signed into law in 2014 for the purpose of protecting California’s groundwater resources. SGMA requires all high and medium priority basins to develop Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSP) to prevent overdraft and achieve sustainability in the utilization of groundwater resources. The Delta-Mendota Subbasin (Basin 5-022.07 in the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) Bulletin 118) (Subbasin) is a high priority Subbasin that has been assigned a critical overdraft designation by DWR. The Subbasin consists of 23 Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSA) who together created six individual GSA groups, each preparing a GSP in a coordinated manner as required by SGMA. Farmers Water District elected to form a GSA on June 14, 2016 in order to represent the interest of local landowners in the District in the development of a GSP with FWD designated as a Management Area in GSP. This GSP includes a description of groundwater conditions and basin settings of the Subbasin that is common to all six of the GSPs developed for the Delta-Mendota Subbasin in addition to describing the hydrogeologic conditions and management practices in the area of FWD. It also contains the steps that will be taken to achieve sustainability over the next 20 years by preventing undesirable results by monitoring for the following sustainability indicators as defined by SGMA: • Chronic Lowering of Groundwater Levels • Reduction in Groundwater Storage • Degraded Water Quality • Subsidence • Depletion of Interconnected Surface Water • Seawater Intrusion All but seawater intrusion applies to FWD, and each applicable sustainability indicator will be addressed in this GSP and is integrated into the Subbasin-wide and FWD monitoring program. Measurable objectives and minimum thresholds have been set for each sustainability indicator based on projected hydrologic conditions through the use of a numerical groundwater flow model. This GSP, in coordination with the five other GSPs for the Subbasin, will be implemented and result in the sustainable use of groundwater resources for all beneficial users in FWD and the Subbasin.

Farmers Water District Revised Groundwater Sustainability Plan Delta- Mendota Subbasin

Farmers Water District | July 18th, 2022

This work product is the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the Farmers Water District Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA). This GSP is one of six (6) individ

This work product is the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the Farmers Water District Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA). This GSP is one of six (6) individual GSPs being prepared for the Delta-Mendota Subbasin (DMS, Subbasin).

Faulting caused by groundwater level declines, San Joaquin Valley, California

Water Resources Research, American Geophysical Union | December 18th, 1980

Approximately 230 mm of aseismic vertical offset of the land surface across the Pond-Poso Creek fault in the San Joaquin Valley, California, probably is related to

Approximately 230 mm of aseismic vertical offset of the land surface across the Pond-Poso Creek fault in the San Joaquin Valley, California, probably is related to groundwater withdrawal for crop irrigation. The scarp is approximately 3.4 km long and occurs in an area where the land subsided more than 1.5 m from 1926 to 1970. Modern faulting postdates the beginning of water level declines and associated subsidence. Movement detected by precise leveling surveys from February 1977 to March 1979 was seasonal, occurring during periods of water level decline. Fault offset was greater in the year with the lower seasonal low water level. The modern movement probably is caused by localized differential compaction induced by differential water level declines across the preexisting fault.

Federal Reserved Water Rights and Groundwater: Quantity, Quality, and Pore Space

Congressional Research Service (CRS) | February 8th, 2018

Tribal rights to groundwater have not been legally established to the same extent as rights to other natural resources (e.g., surface water, timber, minerals). A March 2

Tribal rights to groundwater have not been legally established to the same extent as rights to other natural resources (e.g., surface water, timber, minerals). A March 2017 decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the rights of a California Indian tribe (the Agua Caliente band of Cahuilla Indians) to groundwater beneath the tribe's reservation in the Coachella Valley. In November 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the decision; the case now proceeds to other phases that may partially shape this ruling's significance. This is the first case in which an appellate court has held that a tribe's "reserved" rights under the Winters doctrine apply to groundwater. Pursuant to Winters, when Congress reserves land for a reservation, it also reserves a right to water necessary to accomplish the purposes for which the reservation was created. For decades, tribal reserved rights for surface water have been established and have required settlements between the federal government (as authorized by Congress), tribes, and nonfederal users. Thus, some have raised concerns about the implications of interpreting Winters rights to include groundwater. This Insight explores three aspects of groundwater relevant to Agua Caliente: quantity, quality, and "pore space." The legal outcome may affect how groundwater is allocated among tribal and nontribal interests and may influence groundwater allocations at other federal reservations. The Supreme Court has not declared outright that groundwater is subject to the Winters doctrine, but declining to review the Ninth Circuit decision essentially upheld phase one of the three-phase case: a federally reserved right to the groundwater resource for the tribe. Phase two will address whether the tribe has the right to receive groundwater of a certain quality from the aquifer and whether it owns the pore space beneath tribal lands. Phase three will determine the quantity of groundwater to which the tribe is entitled, pursuant to its reserved rights. The outcome of phases two and three could have implications for expanding the scope of federal preemption of state water law. It also could affect how much groundwater is available for nontribal water agencies and water districts and those entities' ability to store water in an aquifer beneath federally reserved lands. Congress has authority over federal water law and could influence this legal framework.

Fillmore Basin Groundwater Sustainability Plan

Fillmore and Piru Basins Groundwater Sustainability Agency | December 16th, 2021

The Fillmore Basin (the Basin) is managed (along with the upslope Piru Basin) by the Fillmore and Piru Basins Groundwater Sustainability Agency (the Agency). The Basin is

The Fillmore Basin (the Basin) is managed (along with the upslope Piru Basin) by the Fillmore and Piru Basins Groundwater Sustainability Agency (the Agency). The Basin is planned to remain sustainable over the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) implementation and sustainability period based on the current understanding of historical, current (2019), and projected (2022 through 2072) groundwater conditions in relation to the sustainability indicators specified in SGMA. A sustainability indicator refers to any of the effects caused by groundwater conditions occurring throughout the basin that, when significant and unreasonable, cause undesirable results. The Agency, with consideration of feedback from active stakeholder engagement, has identified and planned for the prevention of significant and unreasonable undesirable results.