Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Report - University of California Water Resources Center”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2009

Availability of Groundwater Data for California, Water Year 2008

The U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources, in cooperation with Federal, State, and local agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the groundwater resources of California each water year (October 1-September 30). These data constitute a valuable database for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the State. This Fact Sheet serves as an index to groundwater data for water year 2008. The 2-page report contains a map of California showing the number of wells (by county) with available water-level and water-quality data for water year 2008 (fig. 1) and instructions for obtaining this and other groundwater information contained in the databases of the U.S. Geological Survey, California Water Science Center. From 1985 to 1993, data were published in the annual report 'Water Resources Data for California, Volume 5. Ground-Water Data'; prior to 1985, the data were published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2010

Availability of Groundwater Data for California, Water Year 2009

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Federal, State, and local agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the groundwater resources of California each water year (October 1-September 30). These data constitute a valuable database for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the State. This Fact Sheet serves as an index to groundwater data for Water Year 2009. The 2 page report contains a map of California showing the number of wells (by county) with available water-level and water-quality data for Water Year 2009 (fig. 1) and instructions for obtaining this and other groundwater information contained in the databases of the U.S. Geological Survey, California Water Science Center. From 1985 to 1993, data were published in the annual report 'Water Resources Data for California, Volume 5. Ground-Water Data'; prior to 1985, the data were published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2006

Availability of Ground-Water Data for California, Water Year 2005

The U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources, in cooperation with Federal, State, and local agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the ground-water resources of California each water year (October 1-September 30). These data constitute a valuable database for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the State. This Fact Sheet serves as an index to ground-water data for water year 2005. The 2-page report contains a map of California showing the number of wells (by county) with available water-level and water-quality data for water year 2005 (fig. 2) and instructions for obtaining this and other ground-water information contained in the databases of the U.S. Geological Survey, California Water Science Center. From 1985 to 1993, data were published in the annual report 'Water Resources Data for California, Volume 5. Ground-Water Data'; prior to 1985, the data were published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2007

Availability of Ground-Water Data for California, Water Year 2006

Introduction The U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources, in cooperation with Federal, State, and local agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the ground-water resources of California each water year (October 1-September 30). These data constitute a valuable database for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the State. This Fact Sheet serves as an index to ground-water data for water year 2006. The 2-page report contains a map of California showing the number of wells (by county) with available water-level and water-quality data for water year 2006 (fig. 2) and instructions for obtaining this and other ground-water information contained in the databases of the U.S. Geological Survey, California Water Science Center. From 1985 to 1993, data were published in the annual report 'Water Resources Data for California, Volume 5. Ground-Water Data'; prior to 1985, the data were published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2008

Availability of Ground-Water Data for California, Water Year 2007

The U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources, in cooperation with Federal, State, and local agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the ground-water resources of California each water year (October 1-September 30). These data constitute a valuable database for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the State. This Fact Sheet serves as an index to ground-water data for water year 2007. The 2-page report contains a map of California showing the number of wells (by county) with available water-level and water-quality data for water year 2007 (fig. 2) and instructions for obtaining this and other ground-water information contained in the databases of the U.S. Geological Survey, California Water Science Center. From 1985 to 1993, data were published in the annual report 'Water Resources Data for California, Volume 5. Ground-Water Data'; prior to 1985, the data were published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2011

Availability of groundwater data for California, water year 2010

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Federal, State, and local agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the groundwater resources of California each water year (October 1-September 30). These data constitute a valuable database for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the State. This Fact Sheet serves as an index to groundwater data for Water Year 2010. It contains a map of California showing the number of wells (by county) with available water-level or water-quality data for Water Year 2010 (fig. 1) and instructions for obtaining this and other groundwater information contained in the databases of the U.S. Geological Survey, California Water Science Center. From 1985 to 1993, data were published in the annual report "Water Resources Data for California, Volume 5. Ground-Water Data"; prior to 1985, the data were published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers.

California↗
USGS2026

Colocating artificial intelligence data centers with energy infrastructure on Federal public lands—A science synthesis and spatial analysis to inform decision making

Executive Summary Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming industries and economies, creating an urgent need to strategically plan for the energy and infrastructure required to support increasing AI use. U.S. Federal agencies and bureaus have been directed to explore ways to accelerate permitting, development, and deployment of energy resources and AI technologies, including encouraging the colocation of energy infrastructure and data centers. To inform these initiatives, this report synthesizes relevant scientific information and presents a spatial analysis of existing energy infrastructure and data centers on or near U.S. Federal public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The purpose of this science synthesis and spatial analysis is to provide the BLM with foundational information for considering potential colocation of data centers with energy infrastructure on Federal public lands to support evidence-based decisions. Additionally, this report provides insight into current (2025) and potential future energy demands by providing projections of a range of potential future environmental conditions relevant to maintaining industry-recommended cooling temperature standards necessary for efficient data center operations. As a part of this effort, a rapid response literature review was conducted of the best available science on the topic of data center development and energy infrastructure in July–August 2025, supplemented by additional resources recommended by U.S. Federal agency and bureau subject matter experts (hereafter experts; including the U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratory of the Rockies) and peer reviewers. To better understand current conditions relevant to AI data center development, a spatial analysis was conducted across Alaska and 11 States in the Western United States, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming, all of which contain extensive BLM-managed surface lands (hereafter referred to as “BLM lands”) that could be considered for the colocation of energy infrastructure and AI data centers. This effort identified BLM lands within 10 miles of existing transmission lines, consistent with methods used in previous BLM programmatic environmental impact statements. This report describes the types of data centers operating within the United States, which vary in ownership, size, technology, and proximity to end users. This report then outlines the primary considerations of data center development, including reliable energy supply, natural resources (such as water availability to support cooling requirements), and relevant policy and regulatory considerations. Energy supply considerations are pivotal for data center operation. Between 2014 and 2018, data centers in the United States accounted for nearly 2 percent of the Nation’s total electricity consumption, and data center energy consumption is projected to increase from 2 to 6.7–12 percent of total U.S. electricity use by 2028. These energy requirements necessitate careful consideration of energy supply when considering potentially suitable locations for data center development. Experts anticipate that an increase in renewable energy generation will likely support most potential future power demand needs, including for data centers, followed by increases in natural gas, nuclear, and geothermal energy production. Additional capacity in the form of battery storage will likely not generate electricity, but may improve the reliability and flexibility of supply, helping to ensure that growing data center loads can be met. However, the U.S. Department of Energy estimates that the United States will need, on average, 57 percent more energy transmission infrastructure by 2035 to account for the growing power demand introduced by development such as data centers. Cooling server equipment in data centers requires large amounts of electricity and water, and this demand can be exacerbated by hot and humid conditions. Energy efficient water-based cooling technologies may reduce electricity consumption onsite but require more water consumption. This additional water demand has the potential to increase water stress and competition with other users. As such, developing data centers will likely need a thorough assessment of current and potential future water availability, as well as consideration of how water demand may change across other sectors. Data center development involves policy and regulatory considerations, as projects must undergo environmental review and authorization processes that can take 18–24 months. Coordinating these environmental reviews and authorizations with other energy development projects, such as building new transmission lines, may cause additional delays. Recent efforts by the U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Department of the Interior aim to expedite environmental reviews and authorizations and improve coordination across agencies. The spatial analysis identified 771 existing AI data centers and more than 3,300 power plants. The spatial analysis found that 6 percent of AI data centers and 22 percent of power plants in the Western United States were on or within 1 mile of BLM lands, and California had the largest number of facilities. Most existing AI data centers were near high-voltage transmission lines and close to power plants, supporting efficient energy delivery. More than 90,000,000 acres of BLM lands were within 10 miles of existing high-voltage transmission lines, representing 38 percent of BLM lands in the study area. Available transmission infrastructure and the overlap with BLM lands varied by State, and Alaska had limited overlap compared to the rest of the Western United States. To operate most efficiently, data center temperatures must be at or below 80.6 degrees Fahrenheit. This analysis of future temperature and precipitation projections indicated increasing cooling demands for data centers, particularly in Arizona, California, and Nevada, where rising temperatures are expected to increase energy and operational costs while potentially stressing current regional electrical grid infrastructure. This report highlights relevant energy supply, natural resources, and regulatory considerations for data center development on BLM lands. This report does not provide a comprehensive ecological, regulatory, land suitability, or permitting analysis. The factors described here are contextual considerations only and are not intended to identify, rank, quantify, or recommend optimal areas for data center colocation. This spatial analysis focused solely on energy considerations relevant to data centers and did not consider water availability, critical habitats, BLM National Conservation Lands, areas of cultural or historical significance, and other sensitive resources. These topics are recognized as critical but were not within the scope of this science synthesis and spatial analysis.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2014

Subsidence (2004-2009) in and near lakebeds of the Mojave River and Morongo groundwater basins, southwest Mojave Desert, California

Subsidence, in the vicinity of dry lakebeds, within the Mojave River and Morongo groundwater basins of the southwest Mojave Desert has been measured by Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR). The investigation has focused on determining the location, extent, and magnitude of changes in land-surface elevation. In addition, the relation of changes in land-surface elevation to changes in groundwater levels and lithology was explored. This report is the third in a series of reports investigating land-surface elevation changes in the Mojave and Morongo Groundwater Basins, California. The first report, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4015 by Sneed and others (2003), describes historical subsidence and groundwater-level changes in the southwest Mojave Desert from 1969 to 1999. The second report, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 07-5097, an online interactive report and map, by Sneed and Brandt (2007), describes subsidence and groundwater-level changes in the southwest Mojave Desert from 1999 to 2004. The purpose of this report is to document an updated assessment of subsidence in these lakebeds and selected neighboring areas from 2004 to 2009 as measured by InSAR methods. In addition, continuous Global Positioning System (GPS)(2005-10), groundwater level (1951-2010), and lithologic data, if available, were used to characterize compaction mechanisms in these areas. The USGS California Water Science Center’s interactive website for the Mojave River and Morongo groundwater basins was created to centralize information pertaining to land subsidence and water levels and to allow readers to access available data and related reports online. An interactive map of land subsidence and water levels in the Mojave River and Morongo groundwater basins displays InSAR interferograms, subsidence areas, subsidence contours, hydrographs, well information, and water-level contours. Background information, including a basic description of the mechanics of land subsidence and InSAR, as well as a description of the study area, is presented within the Mojave Water Resources Interactive Map and report.

California↗
USGS2006

Structure and Velocities of the Northeastern Santa Cruz Mountains and the Western Santa Clara Valley, California, from the SCSI-LR Seismic Survey

Introduction: The Santa Clara Valley is located in the southern San Francisco Bay area of California and generally includes the area south of the San Francisco Bay between the Santa Cruz Mountains on the southwest and the Diablo Ranges on the northeast. The area has a population of approximately 1.7 million including the city of San Jose, numerous smaller cities, and much of the high-technology manufacturing and research area commonly referred to as the Silicon Valley. Major active strands of the San Andreas Fault system bound the Santa Clara Valley, including the San Andreas fault to the southwest and the Hayward and Calaveras faults to the northeast; related faults likely underlie the alluvium of the valley. This report focuses on subsurface structures of the western Santa Clara Valley and the northeastern Santa Cruz Mountains and their potential effects on earthquake hazards and ground-water resource management in the area. Earthquake hazards and ground-water resources in the Santa Clara Valley are important considerations to California and the Nation because of the valley's preeminence as a major technical and industrial center, proximity to major earthquakes faults, and large population. To assess the earthquake hazards of the Santa Clara Valley better, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has undertaken a program to evaluate potential earthquake sources and potential effects of strong ground shaking within the valley. As part of that program, and to better assess water resources of the valley, the USGS and the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) began conducting collaborative studies to characterize the faults, stratigraphy, and structures beneath the alluvial cover of the Santa Clara Valley in the year 2000. Such geologic features are important to both agencies because they directly influence the availability and management of groundwater resources in the valley, and they affect the severity and distribution of strong shaking from local or regional earthquakes sources. As one component of these joint studies, the U. S. Geological Survey acquired more than 28 km of combined seismic reflection/refraction data from the Santa Cruz Mountains to the central Santa Clara Valley in December 2000. The seismic investigation included both high-resolution (~5-m shot and sensor spacing) and relatively lower-resolution (~50-m sensor) seismic surveys from the central Santa Cruz Mountains to the central part of the valley. Collectively, we refer to these seismic investigations as the 2000 western Santa Clara Seismic Investigations (SCSI).

Open-File Report↗
USGS2009

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Western Region; Santa Barbara Channel Coastal and Ocean Science

USGS coastal and ocean science in the Western United States and the Pacific integrates scientific expertise in geology, water resources, biology, and geography. Operating from 10 major science centers in the Western Region, the USGS is addressing a broad geographic and thematic range of important coastal and marine issues. In California, the Santa Barbara Channel represents one area of focus.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2021

Precipitation-runoff processes in the Merced River Basin, Central California, with prospects for streamflow predictability, water years 1952–2013

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), has constructed a new spatially detailed Precipitation-Runoff Modeling System (PRMS) model for the Merced River Basin, California, which is a tributary of the San Joaquin River in California. Operated through an Object User Interface (OUI) with Ensemble Streamflow Prediction (ESP) and daily climate distribution preprocessing functionality, the model is calibrated primarily to simulate (and eventually, forecast) year-to-year variations of inflows to Lake McClure during the critical April–July snowmelt season. The model is intended to become part of a suite of methods used by DWR for estimating daily streamflow from the Merced River Basin, especially during the snowmelt season. This study describes the results of the application of an analysis tool that simulates responses to climate and land-use variations at a higher spatial resolution than previously available to DWR. A geographic information system was used to delineate the model domain, that is, areas draining to a single outlet at U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging station 11270900, Merced River below Merced Falls Dam, near Snell, CA (also known as California Data Exchange Center station MRC), and subdrainage areas, including four draining to internal gages used as calibration targets. Using this delineation, three contiguous subbasins were recognized and, along with the model domain and nested calibration targets, are the simulation units evaluated in this report. An auto-calibration tool, LUCA (Let Us CAlibrate), was used for each calibration node, from headwaters to basin outlet, and then parameters were manually adjusted to complete the calibration. The main objective was to match April–July snowmelt seasonal discharge values of simulated streamflow to observed (measured or reconstructed) discharge values. Calibration or validation periods used site-specific streamflows—mostly from October 1, 1988, through September 30, 2013—but differed according to the period-of-record available for the measurements collected at internal gages or reconstructed flows for the single outlet. The accuracy of the Merced PRMS streamflow simulations varied seasonally, as compared to observed values. Based on statistical results, the Merced PRMS model satisfactorily simulated snowmelt seasonal streamflows. April–July calibrations for all areas had small negative bias (not greater than 7 percent) and low relative error (less than 8 percent). Less satisfactory performance for other seasons was attributed to several factors: (1) high uncertainty in low or zero flows in summer and fall, (2) lack of accounting for basin withdrawals and anthropogenic water use, (3) unavailability and (or) inaccuracy of observed (measured) meteorological input data, and (4) uncertainty in reconstructed streamflow data. With some additional refinement, the Merced PRMS model may be used for forecasting seasonal and longer-term streamflow variations; evaluating forecasted and past climate and land cover changes; providing water-resource managers with a consistent and documented method for estimating streamflow at ungaged sites within the basin; and aiding environmental studies, hydraulic design, water management, and water-quality projects in the Merced River Basin.

California↗
USGS2009

Science for Stewardship of California's Water Resources

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is the primary Federal agency responsible for scientific evaluation of the natural resources of the United States, including its water. To meet the demands of a growing California, the U.S. Geological Survey's California Water Science Center provides essential science to help Federal, State, and local water agencies evaluate and manage California's critical water resources; adapt to a changing climate; assess, predict, and mitigate natural hazards, such as mudslides and debris flows; and protect the health of rivers, forests, wetlands, and other habitats. The following are some of the ways the USGS is working with other agencies to protect California's water resources and assure that Californians have safe and reliable water supplies for now and in the future.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS1984

Bouguer gravity anomaly map of the Twentynine Palms Marine Corps Base and vicinity, California

A gravity study of the Twentynine Palms Marine Corps Base and vicinity, California, based on 495 gravity measurements, has been completed. The resulting contour map of the area shows that the ground-water basin ranges in depth from less than a foot at the edges of the basin to about 10,500 feet at the center of a gravity low near Deadman Lake. This study will aid in later studies to determine quantities of water in storage beneath the Marine Corps Base. (USGS)

Water-Resources Investigations Report↗
USGS2019

Summary of hydrologic testing, wellbore-flow data, and expanded water-level and water-quality data, 2011–15, Fort Irwin National Training Center, San Bernardino County, California

In view of the U.S. Army’s historical reliance and plans to increase demands on groundwater to supply its operations at Fort Irwin National Training Center (NTC), California, coupled with the continuing water-level declines in some developed groundwater basins as a result of pumping, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the U.S. Army, evaluated the water resources, including water quality and potential groundwater supply, of undeveloped basins in the NTC. Previous work in the three developed groundwater basins—Langford, Bicycle, and Irwin—provided information to support water-resources management of those basins. During 2009–12, the USGS installed 41 wells at the NTC; 34 wells were at 14 single- or multiple-well monitoring sites, and 7 wells were long-screen test wells. The majority of the wells were installed in previously undeveloped or minimally developed groundwater basins (Cronise, Red Pass, the Central Corridor area, Superior, Goldstone, and Nelson Basins). During 2012–15, the USGS tested hydrologic properties at 32 wells in 8 basins to help characterize the aquifer system. This report presents data and analyses from core samples; slug tests and single-well aquifer tests; coupled measurements of wellbore flow, water levels, and water-quality constituents; and results from two-dimensional numerical modeling. This information provides a basis for developing and constraining basin-scale hydrogeologic framework and groundwater-flow models to further evaluate water resources in each groundwater basin. Core samples were tested for vertical saturated hydraulic conductivity, physical properties, and particle-size distribution. Vertical saturated hydraulic conductivities of the cores ranged from less than 0.00001 to 18.13 feet per day, and porosities ranged from 0.15 to 0.56. These physical properties and particle-size analyses indicate the high degree of heterogeneity of the hydrogeologic deposits penetrated by the boreholes. Horizontal hydraulic conductivities estimated from slug tests in 22 monitoring wells in 6 basins (Cronise, Central Corridor area, Goldstone, Langford, Bicycle, and Nelson Basins) ranged from less than 0.1 to 40 feet per day. Results of the aquifer tests at six test wells in the Goldstone, Nelson, and Superior Basins indicate hydraulic conductivities ranged from 0.37 to 66 feet per day; associated transmissivity values ranged from 130 to 28,000 feet squared per day. Wellbore-flow data, collected from the six test wells under unpumped and pumped conditions, generally showed downward movement of water. Flow data collected under unpumped conditions indicate groundwater entered the well through the upper part of the screened interval and exited to aquifer zones in the lower part of the screened interval at rates ranging from 1 to 3 gallons per minute. Flow data collected under pumping conditions show increased flow downward in the test wells, indicating higher yields from deeper aquifers. Water levels, measured periodically between 2011 and 2015, remained stable during this period in the majority of the wells measured since 2011, except at two monitoring sites in developed basins (Bicycle and Langford). Vertical hydraulic gradients were generally low throughout the NTC, but ranged from –0.0003 to 0.27 during the summer of 2015. Multiple-well monitoring sites in Bicycle, Central Corridor area, Cronise, Goldstone, Nelson, and Superior Basins, had downward vertical gradients. Groundwater in wells in Nelson and Superior Basins, and wells BLA5, CCT1, and GOLD2 #2, was characterized as sodium-bicarbonate water, whereas groundwater from the remaining wells in Goldstone Basin was characterized as sodium-chloride water and Cronise Basin, and well LL04 was characterized by sodium-sulfate water. Total dissolved solids (TDS) ranged from 285 to 13,400 milligrams per liter (mg/L) TDS and chloride concentrations ranged from 19 to 1,030 mg/L chloride, with lowest concentrations of each in groundwater from Superior and Nelson Basins and highest concentrations in Cronise Basin. Nitrate plus nitrite as nitrogen ranged from less than 0.040 mg/L in groundwater from Cronise and Goldstone Basins to about 20 mg/L in Nelson Basin. Groundwater from wells in Nelson Basin was isotopically light, whereas groundwater samples from wells CRTH1, CRTH2, and LL04 were isotopically heavier and plotted along an evaporative trend line. No measurable tritium was detected in groundwater from 13 wells sampled in 2015, indicating that groundwater was recharged prior to 1952. Measured carbon-14 ( 14 C) activities in groundwater from four wells sampled in 2015 ranged from about 7.9 to 23.5 percent modern carbon and had apparent (uncorrected) ages of 11,970–20,980 years. Arsenic concentrations were above the maximum contaminant level of 10 micrograms per liter in groundwater from all wells, except those in Goldstone Basin and the two deepest wells in Langford Basin (LL04); likewise, fluoride concentrations were above the California maximum contaminant level of 2 mg/L in groundwater from most wells, except those in Goldstone and Superior Basins, the middle well in Langford Basin, middle and deep wells in two locations in Cronise Basin, and two wells in Nelson Basin. Wellbore flow was simulated for each well by using an integrated-flow analysis tool, AnalyzeHOLE, to evaluate aquifer properties and heterogeneity. Horizontal layers in the model (hydrogeologic units) were defined by lithostratigraphic‐geophysical units, interpreted from lithologic and geophysical logs for each well, and were adjusted during calibration. The saturated hydraulic conductivities derived from the calibrated simulations ranged from less than 0.01 to 60 feet per day in Nelson, Goldstone, and Superior Basins.

California↗
USGS2020

Hydrologic monitoring networks in the Death Valley Regional Flow System, Nye County, Nevada and Inyo County, California

Introduction Water is an important resource in the arid southwest region of the United States where there is a limited supply of surface water and groundwater. In the Death Valley regional groundwater flow system (DVRFS) in southern Nevada and eastern California, groundwater is the main source of supply for agricultural, commercial, and domestic water needs. For over four decades, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Nevada Water Science Center (NVWSC) has assisted environmental programs with the collection of hydrologic information within the DVRFS. Three hydrologic networks, managed in cooperation with local (Nye County, Nev., and Inyo County, Calif.) and federal (Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, U.S. Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration) agencies, are used to actively monitor wells and springs in the region.

California, Nevada↗
USGS2026

Arizona Water Science Center activities at Lees Ferry, Arizona

Introduction In 1921, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) established a streamgage on the Colorado River at Lees Ferry, Arizona, to monitor the river’s flow and level as it enters Grand Canyon. The following year, the seven States encompassing the Colorado River Basin (Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming) negotiated the 1922 Colorado River Compact to regulate distribution of the river’s waters between them. The compact divided the basin into two regions—the Upper Basin and the Lower Basin—and established the dividing point between them about one mile downstream from Lees Ferry, just below the confluence of the Colorado and Paria Rivers. The Colorado River at Lees Ferry streamgage (USGS station 09380000) is one of the most important streamgages in the United States because it is used to measure how much water passes from the Upper Basin to the Lower Basin through Glen Canyon Dam. The dam, constructed between 1956 and 1966, generates hydropower and stores water in Lake Powell reservoir, which is used to provide Upper and Lower Basin states with the water allotted to them by the compact. Lower Basin states depend on releases from the dam to receive their allotments. The Lees Ferry streamgage, located less than 16 miles downstream from Glen Canyon Dam, produces publicly available, real-time water data that allows the Colorado River’s streamflow below the dam to be monitored. Most years, the Colorado River runs dry before reaching its historical terminus at the Gulf of California in Mexico, so measuring and monitoring the river at Lees Ferry is critical for the Lower Basin ecosystems, agricultural resources, and municipal industries that rely on the river’s every drop. Additionally, Grand Canyon river guides and recreationalists depend on water level data from the Lees Ferry streamgage to determine when to run rapids and camp on sandbars. Streamflow and water-quality data collected at Lees Ferry are also important for monitoring the health of the Colorado River’s aquatic life because some species, including fish and macroinvertebrates, require certain water conditions to survive, reproduce, and spawn. The Arizona Water Science Center is responsible for maintaining and collecting water data from the Lees Ferry streamgage. The Arizona Water Science Center is a branch of the USGS dedicated to providing high quality, impartial water data to resource managers and the public for their use in understanding and managing critical water resources in Arizona and the Southwest.

Arizona↗