Search USGS⌕ Search

Geology topics

Sandra J. Owen-Joyce

Publications and source records attributed to Sandra J. Owen-Joyce.

25 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
USGS1989

Field conditions at the Maricopa Agricultural Center, Pinal County, Arizona, September 28, 1989

Field conditions were documented during the Landsat and SPOT satellite overpasses of the Maricopa Agricultural Center, Pinal County, Arizona, on September 28, 1989. Crop types were mapped and photographed for each demonstration farm field, and irrigation, cultivation, and orientation of rows are described. Field and photographic descriptions are presented in tabular and graphic form. (USGS)

Open-File Report↗
USGS1988

Field conditions at the Maricopa Agricultural Center, Maricopa County, Arizona, June 13, 1988

Field conditions were documented during the Landsat satellite overpass of the Maricopa Agricultural Center, Maricopa County, Arizona, on June 13, 1988. Crop types were mapped and photographed for each demonstration farm field. Field conditions described include irrigation, cultivation, and orientation of rows. Field and photographic descriptions are presented in tabular form. (USGS)

Open-File Report↗
USGS1988

Estimates of consumptive use and ground-water return flow using water budgets in Parker Valley, Arizona and California, 1981-84

Annual water budgets were used to estimate consumptive use by vegetation and groundwater return flow in Parker Valley, Arizona and California. Consumptive use by vegetation was estimated to be 482,800 acre-ft in 1981, 432,000 acre-ft in 1982, 413,500 acre-ft in 1983, and 420,900 acre-ft in 1984 on the Arizona side of the Colorado River, and 45,400 acre-ft in 1984 on the California side of the river. Groundwater return flow from the area north of Tyson Wash in Arizona was estimated to be 0 acre-ft in 1981, 1983, and 1984 and 1,900 acre-ft in 1982. Water budget estimates of consumptive use by vegetation were compared to estimates of evapotranspiration. Estimates of evapotranspiration were from 1% less to 9% higher than estimates of consumptive use by vegetation in the area north of Tyson Wash. The percentage differences in the two estimates were within the measurement errors of the two major measured components in the water budget regardless of differences in year-to-year conditions. Estimates of consumptive use of Colorado River water calculated as measured diversions minus return flows were consistently lower than estimates of consumptive use by vegetation. Estimates of consumptive use of Colorado River water were from 18 to 37% lower than estimates of consumptive use by vegetation variations in tributary inflow, river stage, and induced seepage from the river to replace groundwater transpired by phreatophytes are not accounted for in the calculation. (USGS)

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗
USGS1987

Estimates of consumptive use and ground-water return flow using water budgets in Palo Verde Valley, California

Palo Verde Valley, California, is an agricultural area in the flood plain of the Colorado River where irrigation water is diverted from the river and groundwater is discharged to a network of drainage ditches and (or) the river. Consumptive use by vegetation and groundwater return flow were calculated using water budgets. Consumptive use by vegetation was 484,000 acre-ft in 1981, 453,600 acre-ft in 1982, 364,400 acre-ft in 1983, and 374,300 acre-ft in 1984. The consumptive-use estimates are most sensitive to two measured components of the water budget, the diversion at Palo Verde Dam and the discharge from drainage ditches to the river. Groundwater return flow was 31,700 acre-ft in 1981, 24,000 acre-ft in 1982, 2,500 acre-ft in 1983, and 7 ,900 acre-ft in 1984. The return-flow estimates are most sensitive to discharge from drainage ditches; various irrigation requirements and crop areas, particularly alfalfa; the diversion at Palo Verde Dam; and the estimate of consumptive use. During increasing flows in the river, the estimate of groundwater return flow is sensitive also to change in groundwater storage. Change in groundwater storage was estimated to be -5,700 acre-ft in 1981, -12,600 acre-ft in 1982, 5,200 acre-ft in 1983, and 11 ,600 acre-ft in 1984. Changes in storage can be a significant component in the water budget used to estimate groundwater return flow but is negligible in the water budget used to estimate consumptive use. Change in storage was 1 to 3% of annual consumptive use. Change in storage for the area drained by the river ranged from 7 to 96% of annual groundwater return flow during the 4 years studied. Consumptive use calculated as diversions minus return flows was consistently lower than consumptive use calculated in a water budget. Water-budget estimates of consumptive use account for variations in precipitation, tributary inflow, river stage, and groundwater storage. The calculations for diversions minus return flows do not account for these components, which can be large enough to affect the estimates of consumptive use. (Author 's abstract)

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗
USGS1987

Comparison of estimates of evapotranspiration and consumptive use in Palo Verde Valley, California

Estimates of evapotranspiration and consumptive use by vegetation in Palo Verde Valley, California, were compared for calendar years 1981 to 1984. Vegetation types were classified, and the areas covered by each type were computed from Landsat satellite digital-image analysis. Evapotranspiration was calculated by multiplying the area of each vegetation type by a corresponding water use rate adjusted for year-to-year variations in climate. The vegetation classification slightly underestimates the total vegetated area when compared to crop reports, because not all multiple cropping could be identified. The accuracy of evapotranspiration calculated from vegetation classification depends primarily on the correct classification of alfalfa and cotton because alfalfa and cotton have larger acreages and use more water/acre than the other crops in the valley. Consumptive use was calculated using a water budget for each of the 4 years. Estimates of evapotranspiration and consumptive use by vegetation, respectively, were: (1) 439,400 and 483,500 acre-ft in 1981, (2) 430,700 and 452,700 acre-ft in 1982, (3) 402,000 and 364,400 acre-ft in 1983, and (4) 406,700 and 373,800 acre-ft in 1984. Evapotranspiration estimates were lower than consumptive use estimates in 1981 and 1982 and higher in 1983 and 1984. Both estimates were lower in 1983 and 1984 than in 1981 and 1982. Yearly differences in estimates correspond most closely to significant changes in stage of the lower Colorado River caused by flood control releases in 1983 and 1984 and to changes in cropping practices. (Author 's abstract)

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗
USGS1987

Estimates of average annual tributary inflow to the lower Colorado River, Hoover Dam to Mexico

Estimates of tributary inflow by basin or area and by surface water or groundwater are presented in this report and itemized by subreaches in tabular form. Total estimated average annual tributary inflow to the Colorado River between Hoover Dam and Mexico, excluding the measured tributaries, is 96,000 acre-ft or about 1% of the 7.5 million acre-ft/yr of Colorado River water apportioned to the States in the lower Colorado River basin. About 62% of the tributary inflow originates in Arizona, 30% in California, and 8% in Nevada. Tributary inflow is a small component in the water budget for the river. Most of the quantities of unmeasured tributary inflow were estimated in previous studies and were based on mean annual precipitation for 1931-60. Because mean annual precipitation for 1951-80 did not differ significantly from that of 1931-60, these tributary inflow estimates are assumed to be valid for use in 1984. Measured average annual runoff per unit drainage area on the Bill Williams River has remained the same. Surface water inflow from unmeasured tributaries is infrequent and is not captured in surface reservoirs in any of the States; it flows to the Colorado River gaging stations. Estimates of groundwater inflow to the Colorad River valley. Average annual runoff can be used in a water budget; although in wet years, runoff may be large enough to affect the calculation of consumptive use and to be estimated from hydrographs for the Colorado River valley are based on groundwater recharge estimates in the bordering areas, which have not significantly changed through time. In most areas adjacent to the Colorado River valley, groundwater pumpage is small and pumping has not significantly affected the quantity of groundwater discharged to the Colorado River valley. In some areas where groundwater pumpage exceeds the quantity of groundwater discharge and water levels have declined, the quantity of discharge probably has decreased and groundwater inflow to the Colorado River valley will eventually be reduced if not stopped completely. Groundwater discharged at springs below Hoover Dam is unused and flows directly to the Colorado River. (Lantz-PTT)

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗