Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

Russell W. Plume

Publications and source records attributed to Russell W. Plume.

12 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2015

Evaluating connection of aquifers to springs and streams, Great Basin National Park and vicinity, Nevada

Federal agencies that oversee land management for much of the Snake Range in eastern Nevada, including the management of Great Basin National Park by the National Park Service, need to understand the potential extent of adverse effects to federally managed lands from nearby groundwater development. As a result, this study was developed (1) to attain a better understanding of aquifers controlling groundwater flow on the eastern side of the southern part of the Snake Range and their connection with aquifers in the valleys, (2) to evaluate the relation between surface water and groundwater along the piedmont slopes, (3) to evaluate sources for Big Springs and Rowland Spring, and (4) to assess groundwater flow from southern Spring Valley into northern Hamlin Valley. The study focused on two areas—the first, a northern area along the east side of Great Basin National Park that included Baker, Lehman, and Snake Creeks, and a second southern area that is the potential source area for Big Springs. Data collected specifically for this study included the following: (1) geologic field mapping; (2) drilling, testing, and water quality sampling from 7 test wells; (3) measuring discharge and water chemistry of selected creeks and springs; (4) measuring streambed hydraulic gradients and seepage rates from 18 shallow piezometers installed into the creeks; and (5) monitoring stream temperature along selected reaches to identify places of groundwater inflow. The Snake Range was formed by a generally normal-faulted uplift, where late Proterozoic and Cambrian siliciclastic rocks and metamorphic rocks are present at the highest altitudes and younger Paleozoic carbonate rocks are exposed along the flanks. The consolidated rocks are intruded by Jurassic to Tertiary age plutons, which are most common between the Lehman and Snake Creek drainage basins. Older Cenozoic rocks, including Oligocene volcanic rocks and Miocene sedimentary rocks, crop out locally and fill the basins that underlie Snake, Spring, and Hamlin Valleys. Younger Tertiary and Quaternary sedimentary (basin-fill) deposits overlie the older Cenozoic rocks. The rocks and deposits can be divided into three distinct aquifers. These aquifers include (1) basin-fill aquifers that consist of the permeable parts of the Cenozoic basin fill and some fractured or jointed Cenozoic volcanic rocks, (2) an upper carbonate-rock aquifer that consists of upper Paleozoic carbonate rocks overlying a regionally extensive middle Paleozoic siliciclastic confining unit, and (3) a lower carbonate-rock aquifer that consists of lower Paleozoic carbonate rocks. Secondary openings created by faults, shear zones, fractures, and, in the carbonate rocks, karst solution features, largely determine the water-transmitting properties of the volcanic- and carbonate-rock aquifers. The basin-fill aquifers are composed of a wide variety of rock types and have highly variable hydraulic properties. The three aquifers are stratigraphically and structurally heterogeneous, causing large variations in the ability to store and transmit water. The aquifers are separated by confining units in some areas and are in contact with each other in other areas, yet function as a single, composite aquifer system. Basin-fill aquifers most often overlie or adjoin the lower and upper carbonate-rock aquifers. Baker, Lehman and Snake Creek drainage basins were divided into five hydrologic zones on the basis of climate, geology, and topography. The five zones, from highest to lowest altitudes, are the mountain-upland, karst-limestone, upper-piedmont, lower-piedmont, and valley-lowland zones. The primary hydrologic connection between the mountain-upland and the valley-lowland zones is streamflow. Much of the streamflow from the mountain-upland zone is generated above tree line. Groundwater flow increases in the karst-limestone zone because of increased permeability caused by dissolution, which results in increased streamflow losses. Most of the increased groundwater flow is to springs near faults that form the boundary with the upper-piedmont zone. Thus, groundwater flow from the karst-limestone zone to the upper-piedmont zone was only 10 percent of the combined flow of streams and springs that exit the karst-limestone zone. About 60 percent of the water flowing from Rowland Spring in the Lehman Creek drainage basin was from streamflow losses along Baker Creek. The remaining flow from Rowland Spring comes from local recharge in the karst-limestone zone. In the upper-piedmont zone, the water table by Baker, Lehman and Snake Creeks was near the water level in the creeks for several hundred feet downstream from the karst-limestone zone. Water levels in piezometers along Snake Creek downstream from its confluence with Spring Creek were far below the streambed, indicating gravity drainage beneath this section of the creek. Estimated vertical hydraulic conductivity along a 3-mile reach of Snake Creek downstream of this confluence was 0.5 foot per day, which was an order of magnitude less than that estimated for Baker and Lehman Creeks. The low vertical hydraulic conductivity in the streambed along the lower reaches of Snake Creek results from chemical precipitation of calcite caused by off-gassing of carbon dioxide derived from springs at the end of the karst-limestone zone. The younger alluvial deposits thicken rapidly across faults that form the upper boundary of the lower-piedmont zone. The absence of springs or groundwater flow to the creeks upstream of these faults indicates they are not a complete barrier to groundwater flow. The water table was shallow in the valley-lowland zone in the Baker and Lehman Creek drainage basins, whereas the water table was more than 50 feet below land surface in the Snake Creek drainage basin. In contrast to thick basin fill in the valley-lowland zone in the Baker and Lehman Creek drainage basins, fractured and karst limestone underlie basin fill at relatively shallow depths in Snake Creek drainage basin. The underlying limestone acts as a drain for groundwater in the basin fill beneath Snake Creek. A groundwater divide in southern Spring Valley south of Baking Powder Flat separates groundwater flow to the flat from southeastward flow into northern Hamlin Valley. Groundwater flow from southern Spring Valley south of the groundwater divide into northern Hamlin Valley was estimated to range from 6,000 to 11,000 acre-feet per year. This groundwater does not flow to Big Springs in southern Snake Valley; rather, the source of water to Big Springs is groundwater recharge in the Big Spring Wash drainage basin and in nearby smaller drainage basins at the south end of the Snake Range. Groundwater flow from southern Spring Valley continues through the western side of Hamlin Valley before being directed northeast toward the south end of Snake Valley. This flow is constrained by southward-flowing groundwater from Big Spring Wash and northward-flowing groundwater beneath central Hamlin Valley. The redirection to the northeast corresponds to a narrowing of the width of flow in southern Snake Valley caused by a constriction formed by a steeply dipping middle Paleozoic siliciclastic confining unit exposed in the flanks of the mountains and hills on the east side of southern Snake Valley and shallowly buried beneath basin fill in the valley. The narrowing of groundwater flow could be responsible for the large area where groundwater flows to springs or is lost to evapotranspiration between Big Springs in Nevada and Pruess Lake in Utah.

Nevada↗
USGS2013

Properties of basin-fill deposits, a 1971–2000 water budget, and surface-water-groundwater interactions in the upper Humboldt River basin, northeastern Nevada

This study was done in cooperation with Elko County, Nevada in response to concerns over growing demand for water within the county and increasing external demands that are occurring statewide. The upper Humboldt River basin encompasses 4,360 square miles in northeastern Nevada and includes the headwaters area of the Humboldt River. Nearly all of the mean annual flow of the Humboldt River originates in this area. Basin-fill deposits function as the principal aquifers in the upper Humboldt River basin. Over much of the basin lowlands, the upper 200 feet of basin fill consists of clay, silt, sand, and gravel deposited in a lake of middle to late Pliocene age. Fine-grained lacustrine sediments compose from 30 to more than 70 percent of the deposits. Mean values of transmissivity are less than 1,000 feet squared per day. Total inflow to the upper Humboldt River basin, about 3,330,000 acre-feet per year, is entirely from annual precipitation. Total outflow from the basin, about 3,330,000 acre-feet per year, occurs as evapotranspiration, streamflow, subsurface flow, and pumpage. The uncertainty of these values of inflow and outflow is estimated to be 25 percent. Baseflow of the Humboldt River is minimal upstream of the Elko Hills and in downstream reaches almost all baseflow comes from tributary inflow of the North Fork and South Fork Humboldt Rivers. However, the baseflow of these two tributaries comes from groundwater discharge to their respective channels in canyons incised in volcanic rocks along the North Fork and in carbonate rocks along the South Fork. Water levels in the shallow water-table aquifer along the Humboldt River flood plain fluctuate with changes in stage of the river. During high rising river stage in spring and early summer, streamflow enters the aquifer as bank storage. As stage begins to decline in early to mid-summer groundwater in bank storage begins discharging back into the river channel and this continues through late summer. In years of below average flow some reaches of the river are dry in late summer. Flood plain deposits are more permeable than adjacent and underlying fine-grained sediments of the Pliocene lake and the two aquifers are poorly connected.

Nevada↗
USGS2011

Regional potentiometric-surface map of the Great Basin carbonate and alluvial aquifer system in Snake Valley and surrounding areas, Juab, Millard, and Beaver Counties, Utah, and White Pine and Lincoln Counties, Nevada

Water-level measurements from 190 wells were used to develop a potentiometric-surface map of the east-central portion of the regional Great Basin carbonate and alluvial aquifer system in and around Snake Valley, eastern Nevada and western Utah. The map area covers approximately 9,000 square miles in Juab, Millard, and Beaver Counties, Utah, and White Pine and Lincoln Counties, Nevada. Recent (2007-2010) drilling by the Utah Geological Survey and U.S. Geological Survey has provided new data for areas where water-level measurements were previously unavailable. New water-level data were used to refine mapping of the pathways of intrabasin and interbasin groundwater flow. At 20 of these locations, nested observation wells provide vertical hydraulic gradient data and information related to the degree of connection between basin-fill aquifers and consolidated-rock aquifers. Multiple-year water-level hydrographs are also presented for 32 wells to illustrate the aquifer system's response to interannual climate variations and well withdrawals.

Utah, Nevada↗
USGS2011

Potential effects of groundwater pumping on water levels, phreatophytes, and spring discharges in Spring and Snake Valleys, White Pine County, Nevada, and adjacent areas in Nevada and Utah

Assessing hydrologic effects of developing groundwater supplies in Snake Valley required numerical, groundwater-flow models to estimate the timing and magnitude of capture from streams, springs, wetlands, and phreatophytes. Estimating general water-table decline also required groundwater simulation. The hydraulic conductivity of basin fill and transmissivity of basement-rock distributions in Spring and Snake Valleys were refined by calibrating a steady state, three-dimensional, MODFLOW model of the carbonate-rock province to predevelopment conditions. Hydraulic properties and boundary conditions were defined primarily from the Regional Aquifer-System Analysis (RASA) model except in Spring and Snake Valleys. This locally refined model was referred to as the Great Basin National Park calibration (GBNP-C) model. Groundwater discharges from phreatophyte areas and springs in Spring and Snake Valleys were simulated as specified discharges in the GBNP-C model. These discharges equaled mapped rates and measured discharges, respectively. Recharge, hydraulic conductivity, and transmissivity were distributed throughout Spring and Snake Valleys with pilot points and interpolated to model cells with kriging in geologically similar areas. Transmissivity of the basement rocks was estimated because thickness is correlated poorly with transmissivity. Transmissivity estimates were constrained by aquifer-test results in basin-fill and carbonate-rock aquifers. Recharge, hydraulic conductivity, and transmissivity distributions of the GBNP-C model were estimated by minimizing a weighted composite, sum-of-squares objective function that included measurement and Tikhonov regularization observations. Tikhonov regularization observations were equations that defined preferred relations between the pilot points. Measured water levels, water levels that were simulated with RASA, depth-to-water beneath distributed groundwater and spring discharges, land-surface altitudes, spring discharge at Fish Springs, and changes in discharge on selected creek reaches were measurement observations. The effects of uncertain distributed groundwater-discharge estimates in Spring and Snake Valleys on transmissivity estimates were bounded with alternative models. Annual distributed groundwater discharges from Spring and Snake Valleys in the alternative models totaled 151,000 and 227,000 acre-feet, respectively and represented 20 percent differences from the 187,000 acre-feet per year that discharges from the GBNP-C model. Transmissivity estimates in the basin fill between Baker and Big Springs changed less than 50 percent between the two alternative models. Potential effects of pumping from Snake Valley were estimated with the Great Basin National Park predictive (GBNP-P) model, which is a transient groundwater-flow model. The hydraulic conductivity of basin fill and transmissivity of basement rock were the GBNP-C model distributions. Specific yields were defined from aquifer tests. Captures of distributed groundwater and spring discharges were simulated in the GBNP-P model using a combination of well and drain packages in MODFLOW. Simulated groundwater captures could not exceed measured groundwater-discharge rates. Four groundwater-development scenarios were investigated where total annual withdrawals ranged from 10,000 to 50,000 acre-feet during a 200-year pumping period. Four additional scenarios also were simulated that added the effects of existing pumping in Snake Valley. Potential groundwater pumping locations were limited to nine proposed points of diversion. Results are presented as maps of groundwater capture and drawdown, time series of drawdowns and discharges from selected wells, and time series of discharge reductions from selected springs and control volumes. Simulated drawdown propagation was attenuated where groundwater discharge could be captured. General patterns of groundwater capture and water-table declines were similar for all scenarios. Simulated drawdowns greater than 1 ft propagated outside of Spring and Snake Valleys after 200 years of pumping in all scenarios.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2009

Hydrogeology of the Lake Tahoe Basin, California and Nevada

Ground water in the Lake Tahoe basin is the primary source of domestic and municipal water supply and an important source of inflow to Lake Tahoe. Over the past 30-40 years, Federal, State, and local agencies, and research institutions have collected hydrologic data to quantify the ground-water resources in the Lake Tahoe basin. These data are dispersed among the various agencies and institutions that collected the data and generally are not available in a format suitable for basin-wide assessments. To successfully and efficiently manage the ground-water resources throughout the Lake Tahoe basin, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) compiled and evaluated the pertinent geologic, geophysical, and hydrologic data, and built a geodatabase incorporating the consolidated and standardized data for the Lake Tahoe basin that is relevant for examining the extent and characteristics of the hydrogeologic units that comprise the aquifers.

California, Nevada↗
USGS2009

Hydrogeologic Framework and Occurrence and Movement of Ground Water in the Upper Humboldt River Basin, Northeastern Nevada

The upper Humboldt River basin encompasses 4,364 square miles in northeastern Nevada, and it comprises the headwaters area of the Humboldt River. Nearly all flow of the river originates in this area. The upper Humboldt River basin consists of several structural basins, in places greater than 5,000 feet deep, in which basin-fill deposits of Tertiary and Quaternary age and volcanic rocks of Tertiary age have accumulated. The bedrock of each structural basin and adjacent mountains is composed of carbonate and clastic sedimentary rocks of Paleozoic age and crystalline rocks of Paleozoic, Mesozoic and Cenozoic age. The permeability of bedrock generally is very low except for carbonate rocks, which can be very permeable where circulating ground water has widened fractures through geologic time. The principal aquifers in the upper Humboldt River basin occur within the water-bearing strata of the extensive older basin-fill deposits and the thinner, younger basin-fill deposits that underlie stream flood plains. Ground water in these aquifers moves from recharge areas along mountain fronts to discharge areas along stream flood plains, the largest of which is the Humboldt River flood plain. The river gains flow from ground-water seepage to its channel from a few miles west of Wells, Nevada, to the west boundary of the study area. Water levels in the upper Humboldt River basin fluctuate annually in response to the spring snowmelt and to the distribution of streamflow diverted for irrigation of crops and meadows. Water levels also have responded to extended periods (several years) of above or below average precipitation. As a result of infiltration from the South Fork Reservoir during the past 20 years, ground-water levels in basin-fill deposits have risen over an area as much as one mile beyond the reservoir and possibly even farther away in Paleozoic bedrock.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2006

Hydrogeologic Framework and Ground Water in Basin-Fill Deposits of the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada

The Diamond Valley flow system, an area of about 3,120 square miles in central Nevada, consists of five hydrographic areas: Monitor, Antelope, Kobeh, and Diamond Valleys and Stevens Basin. Although these five areas are in a remote part of Nevada, local government officials and citizens are concerned that the water resources of the flow system eventually could be further developed for irrigation or mining purposes or potentially for municipal use outside the study area. In order to better understand the flow system, the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with Eureka, Lander, and Nye Counties and the Nevada Division of Water Resources, is conducting a multi-phase study of the flow system. The principal aquifers of the Diamond Valley flow system are in basin-fill deposits that occupy structural basins comprised of carbonate rocks, siliciclastic sedimentary rocks, igneous intrusive rocks, and volcanic rocks. Carbonate rocks also function as aquifers, but their extent and interconnections with basin-fill aquifers are poorly understood. Ground-water flow in southern Monitor Valley is from the valley margins toward the valley axis and then northward to a large area of discharge by evapotranspiration (ET) that is formed south of a group of unnamed hills near the center of the valley. Ground-water flow from northern Monitor Valley, Antelope Valley, and northern and western parts of Kobeh Valley converges to an area of ground-water discharge by ET in central and eastern Kobeh Valley. Prior to irrigation development in the 1960s, ground-water flow in Diamond Valley was from valley margins toward the valley axis and then northward to a large discharge area at the north end of the valley. Stevens Basin is a small upland basin with internal drainage and is not connected with other parts of the flow system. After 40 years of irrigation pumping, a large area of ground-water decline has developed in southern Diamond Valley around the irrigated area. In this part of Diamond Valley, flow is from valley margins toward the irrigated area. In northern Diamond Valley, flow appears to remain generally northward to the large discharge area. Subsurface flow through mountain ranges has been identified from Garden Valley (outside the study area) through the Sulphur Springs Range to Diamond Valley and from southeastern Antelope Valley through the Fish Creek Range to Little Smoky Valley (outside the study area). In both cases, the flow is probably through carbonate rocks. Ground-water levels in the Diamond Valley flow system have changed during the past 40 years. These changes are the result of pumpage for irrigation, municipal, domestic, and mining uses, mostly in southern Diamond Valley, and annual and longer-term variations in precipitation in undeveloped parts of the study area. A large area of ground-water decline that underlies an area about 10 miles wide and 20 miles long has developed in the basin-fill aquifer of southern Diamond Valley. Water levels beneath the main part of the irrigated area have declined as much as 90 feet. In undeveloped parts of the study area, annual water-level fluctuations generally have been no more than a few feet.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2005

Changes in ground-water levels in the Carlin Trend area, north-central Nevada, 1989-2003

Ground-water pumpage in support of gold mining activities, including mine dewatering, has resulted in water-level declines and rises in different parts of the Carlin Trend area in north-central Nevada. Total annual pumpage at the Gold Quarry, Carlin, Genesis, and Betze Mines has ranged from about 5,000 acre-feet in 1989 to almost 130,000 acre-feet in 1994 and 1998. Excess water from the mines is stored in the TS Ranch and Maggie Creek Reservoirs. Aquifers in the Carlin Trend area are comprised of carbonate rocks of Cambrian to Permian age and basin-fill deposits and interbedded volcanic rocks of Tertiary and Quaternary age. Since 1992, water levels in carbonate-rock aquifers near the Gold Quarry Mine have declined as much as 680 feet below an elongate area 12 miles long and 6 miles wide northwest and southeast from the mine. Since 1990, water levels have declined by more than 1,600 feet in the deepest part of the cone of depression at the Betze Mine. The area encompassed by the main part of the cone, which is 7 miles long by 4 miles wide, did not change much during 1993-2003, although its depth had doubled. Near both mines, the cones of depression are bounded by faults acting as barriers to ground-water flow. Water levels in the volcanic rocks of northern Boulder Flat began to rise soon after the TS Ranch Reservoir began filling in 1990 because of infiltration. Since 1990, the net water-level rise around the reservoir has been 50 feet or more over an area of about 2 square miles, and 20 feet or more over an area of about 60 square miles. Since 1992, water levels in basin-fill deposits in Boulder Flat have risen 5 feet or more over an estimated area of 20 square miles as a result of (1) use of water from the Betze Mine as a substitute for irrigation pumpage, (2) water from the TS Ranch Reservoir infiltrating volcanic rocks and then flowing southward into adjacent basin-fill deposits, (3) secondary recharge of water from the mine for irrigating about 10,000 acres, and (4) discharge from three new springs in northeastern Boulder Flat. Water-level declines in carbonate rocks near the Gold Quarry Mine have not affected water levels in overlying basin-fill deposits. Declines were no more than a few feet north and west of the mine because older basin-fill deposits at the base of the Carlin Formation consist of fine-grained poorly permeable sediments. Water levels rose 5 feet to more than 20 feet over an area of 6-7 square miles around the Maggie Creek Reservoir in response to infiltration. A few miles farther south, water levels rose as much as 5 feet over an area of 3 square miles as a combined result of the infiltration of irrigation water and flow of Maggie Creek into permeable volcanic rocks in the stream channel. An area of 1,900 acres about 10 miles north of Battle Mountain in the Clovers Area has been pumped for irrigation since the early 1970's. Since 1989, water levels have declined 5-15 feet over an area of 15 square miles.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2003

Ground-water use, locations of production wells, and areas irrigated using ground water in 1998, middle Humboldt River basin, north-central Nevada

In 1998, ground water was being pumped from about 420 production wells in the middle Humboldt River Basin for a variety of uses. Principal uses were for agriculture, industry, mining, municipal, and power plant purposes. This report presents a compilation of the number and types of production wells, areas irrigated by ground water, and ground-water use in 14 hydrographic areas of the middle Humboldt River Basin in 1998. Annual pumping records for production wells usually are reported to the Nevada Division of Water Resources. However, operators of irrigation wells are not consistently required to report annual pumpage. Daily power-consumption and pump-discharge rates measured at 20 wells during the 1998 irrigation season and total power use at each well were used to estimate the amount of water, in feet of depth, applied to 20 alfalfa fields. These fields include about 10 percent of the total area, 36,700 acres, irrigated with ground water in the middle Humboldt River Basin. In 1998 an average of 2.0 feet of water was applied to 14 fields irrigated using center-pivot sprinkler systems, and an average of 2.6 feet of water was applied to 6 fields irrigated using wheel-line sprinkler systems. A similar approach was used to estimate the amount of water pumped at three wells using pumps powered by diesel engines. The two fields served by these three wells received 3.9 feet of water by flood irrigation during the 1998 irrigation season. The amount of water applied to the fields irrigated by center-pivot and wheel-line irrigation systems during the 1998 irrigation season was less than what would have been applied during a typical irrigation season because late winter and spring precipitation exceeded long-term monthly averages by as much as four times. As a result, the health of crops was affected by over-saturated soils, and most irrigation wells were only used sporadically in the first part of the irrigation season. Power consumption at 19 of the 20 wells in the 1994-97 irrigation seasons was 110 to 235 percent of the power consumption in the 1998 irrigation season. If the amount of water applied to fields during the 1998 irrigation season were adjusted to account for these differences in power consumption, the average amount of water applied to a field during a typical season using center-pivot and wheel-line sprinkler systems would be 3.1 feet and 3.7 feet, respectively. Total ground water pumped in the middle Humboldt River Basin during 1998 was about 298,000 acre-feet. This pumpage was distributed as follows: 78 percent for mining, 19 percent for irrigation, and 3 percent for industrial, municipal, and power plants combined. Mining pumpage is by far the largest source of ground-water use because several large gold mines have extended below local ground-water levels and the area around each mine must be dewatered in order to maintain a dry and workable mine. Total mining pumpage in 1998 was 233,000 acre-feet, of this total, 23,600 acre-feet was for consumptive use and 209,000 acre-feet was for dewatering eight mines. Excess water from the mines being dewatered was distributed as follows: 74,500 acre-feet was returned to aquifers by infiltration; 33,100 acre-feet was used for irrigation and for consumptive use at two mines and a power plant; 96,700 acre-feet was released to the Humboldt River or one of its tributaries; and 5,260 acre-feet was lost to evaporation.

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗
USGS1999

Hydrogeologic framework and ground-water levels, 1982 and 1996, middle Humboldt River basin, north-central Nevada

The Humboldt River Basin encompasses an area of nearly 17,000 mi 2 in north-central Nevada; it is the only major river basin that begins and ends entirely within the State (fig. 1). The study area for this report is the middle Humboldt River Basin, which consists of 14 hydrographic areas that encompass 7,400 mi 2 (fig. 1 and table 1). The principal tributaries to the Humboldt River in the study area are Pine Creek, Rock Creek, and Reese River.

Nevada↗
USGS1988

Hydrogeology of the Great Basin region of Nevada, Utah, and adjacent states

This atlas is a product of the Great Basin Regional Aquifer-System Analysis (RASA), a study that began in 1981. The study is part of a U.S. Geological Survey program for evaluating regional aquifer systems nationwide. A regional aquifer system is defined as “an areally extensive set of aquifers which are linked in some way, such as hydraulically or economically” (Harrill and others, 1983, p. 2). The purpose of the Great Basin RASA is to evaluate aquifer system in the Great Basin by developing a better understanding of recharge and discharge processes, delineating individual ground-water flow systems, and developing mathematical models of representative flow systems. Harrill and others (1983) provide a more complete background of both the national RASA program and the Great Basin RASA. The purpose of this atlas is to delineate and describe the major hydrogeologic units in the Great Basin region and to identify those units that (1) constitute regional aquifers or (2) act as barriers to the movement of ground water. The scope of this atlas, however, is limited to a brief geologic overview of the Great Basin: lithology and areal extent of units, major structural features, and influence of tectonic events. In addition, the water-bearing characteristics of each unit are briefly summarized. This atlas is Chapter A of the three-part Hydrologic Atlas series. Chapter B shows ground-water levels in the Great Basin region, and Chapter C shows inferred directions of ground-water flow and individual flow systems.

Nevada, Utah↗