Search USGSSearch

USGS · 70179114

Hydrology and simulation of ground-water flow in Juab Valley, Juab County, Utah.

Abstract

Plans to import water to Juab Valley, Utah, primarily for irrigation, are part of the Central Utah Project. A better understanding of the hydrology of the valley is needed to help manage the water resources and to develop conjunctive-use plans. The saturated unconsolidated basin-fill deposits form the ground-water system in Juab Valley. Recharge is by seepage from streams, unconsumed irrigation water, and distribution systems; infiltration of precipitation; and subsurface inflow from consolidated rocks that surround the valley. Discharge is by wells, springs, seeps, evapotranspiration, and subsurface outflow to consolidated rocks. Ground-water pumpage is used to supplement surface water for irrigation in most of the valley and has altered the direction of groundwater flow from that of pre-ground-water development time in areas near and in Nephi and Levan. Greater-than-average precipitation during 1980-87 corresponds with a rise in water levels measured in most wells in the valley and the highest water level measured in some wells. Less-than average precipitation during 1988-91 corresponds with a decline in water levels measured during 1988-93 in most wells. Geochemical analyses indicate that the sources of dissolved ions in water sampled from the southern part of the valley are the Arapien Shale, evaporite deposits that occur in the unconsolidated basin-fill deposits, and possibly residual sea water that has undergone evaporation in unconsolidated basin-fill deposits in selected areas. Water discharging from a spring at Burriston Ponds is a mixture of about 70 percent ground water from a hypothesized flow path that extends downgradient from where Salt Creek enters Juab Valley and 30 percent from a hypothesized flow path from the base of the southern Wasatch Range. The ground-water system of Juab Valley was simulated by using the U.S. Geological Survey modular, three-dimensional, finite-difference, ground-water flow model. The numerical model was calibrated to simulate the steady-state conditions of 1949, multi-year transient-state conditions during 1949-92, and seasonal transient-state conditions during 1992-94. Calibration parameters were adjusted until model-computed water levels reasonably matched measured water levels. Parameters important to the calibration process include horizontal hydraulic conductivity, transmissivity, and the spatial distribution and amount of recharge from subsurface inflow and seepage from ephemeral streams to the east side of Juab Valley.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 39.3° to 40° latitude; -112.1° to -111.7° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Susan A. Thiros, Bernard J. Stolp, Heidi K. Hadley, Judy I. Steiger. 1996. Hydrology and simulation of ground-water flow in Juab Valley, Juab County, Utah.. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70179114

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Hydrology and simulation of ground-water flow in Kamas Valley, Summit County, Utah

Kamas Valley, Utah, is located about 50 miles east of Salt Lake City and is undergoing residential development. The increasing number of wells and septic systems raised concerns of water managers and prompted this hydrologic study. About 350,000 acre-feet per year of surface water flows through Kamas Valley in the Weber River, Beaver Creek, and Provo River, which originate in the Uinta Mountains east of the study area. The ground-water system in this area consists of water in unconsolidated deposits and consolidated rock; water budgets indicate very little interaction between consolidated rock and unconsolidated deposits. Most recharge to consolidated rock occurs at higher altitudes in the mountains and discharges to streams and springs upgradient of Kamas Valley. About 38,000 acre-feet per year of water flows through the unconsolidated deposits in Kamas Valley. Most recharge is from irrigation and seepage from major streams; most discharge is to Beaver Creek in the middle part of the valley. Long-term water-level fluctuations range from about 3 to 17 feet. Seasonal fluctuations exceed 50 feet. Transmissivity varies over four orders of magnitude in both the unconsolidated deposits and consolidated rock and is typically 1,000 to 10,000 feet squared per day in unconsolidated deposits and 100 feet squared per day in consolidated rock as determined from specific capacity. Water samples collected from wells, streams, and springs had nitrate plus nitrite concentrations (as N) substantially less than 10 mg/L. Total and fecal coliform bacteria were detected in some surface-water samples and probably originate from livestock. Septic systems do not appear to be degrading water quality. A numerical ground-water flow model developed to test the conceptual understanding of the ground-water system adequately simulates water levels and flow in the unconsolidated deposits. Analyses of model fit and sensitivity were used to refine the conceptual and numerical models.

Utah