U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Scientific Investigations Report 2010–5053

Prepared in cooperation with the 

Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation: Vermont Geological Survey

Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows 

in Vermont in 2005 and 2020
Cover. Photographs: Production well for small residential development, snowmaking gun at a Vermont ski resort (photograph used 

with permission from Smugglers’ Notch Resort), swimmers at a municipal pool, fish tank at a Vermont State Fish Culture Station, a thirsty 

horse on a Vermont farm (photograph by Ann Chalmers, U.S. Geological Survey)
Estimated Water Withdrawals and 

Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

By Laura Medalie and Marilee A. Horn

Prepared in cooperation with the

Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation:

Vermont Geological Survey

Scientific Investigations Report 2010–5053

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Marcia K. McNutt, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2010

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, 

natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1-888-ASK-USGS

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, 

visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov

Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to 

reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.

Suggested citation:

Medalie, Laura, and Horn, M.A., 2010, Estimated water withdrawals and return flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020: 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2010–5053, 53 p. (Also available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/

sir/2010/5053.)
iii

Contents

Abstract...........................................................................................................................................................1

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................1

Purpose and Scope ..............................................................................................................................2

Previous Investigations and Databases ...........................................................................................2

Water Resources in Vermont..............................................................................................................2

Components of Water Use ..................................................................................................................4

Methods...........................................................................................................................................................4

Domestic Water Withdrawals and Return Flows ............................................................................4

Non-Domestic Water Withdrawals and Return Flows ...................................................................7

Community Water Systems ........................................................................................................9

Non-Community Water Systems ...............................................................................................9

Consumptive Use .......................................................................................................................11

Fish Hatcheries and Snowmaking ..........................................................................................11

Projecting Future Water Use ............................................................................................................13

Quality Assurance of Service Areas ...............................................................................................13

Data Limitations...................................................................................................................................15

Differences from Previous Water-Use Compilations....................................................................15

2005 and 2020 Population............................................................................................................................15

Water Withdrawals and Return Flows Estimated for 2005 and Projected for 2020 ..........................16

Withdrawals by Category..................................................................................................................16

Groundwater........................................................................................................................................19

Surface Water.....................................................................................................................................24

Total Withdrawals and Return Flows...............................................................................................24

Withdrawals by Watershed ..............................................................................................................31

Summary........................................................................................................................................................33

Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................................34

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................34

Appendix A1. Description of the Vermont Water-Use Database........................................................38

Appendix A2. Data Dictionary for Selected Data Elements in the Vermont Water-Use 

Database..........................................................................................................................................40

Appendix B. List of Minor Civil Divisions with 2005 and Projected 2020 Populations, 2005 and 

Projected 2020 Groundwater and Surface-Water Withdrawals, and 2005 Return Flows 

in Vermont........................................................................................................................................42
iv

Figures

1. Map showing Minor Civil Divisions with growth areas in Vermont.....................................3

2. Flowchart showing the components of water use and the conceptual flow of 

water between components.......................................................................................................5

3. Diagram showing conceptual method used to determine the self-supplied population 

for each census block in Vermont .............................................................................................8

4. Map showing population distribution in Vermont by Minor Civil Division in 2005, 

and projected growth in population from 2005 to 2020.........................................................14

5. Pie charts showing water withdrawals in Vermont by category of use and source 

in 2005 ...........................................................................................................................................17

6. Maps showing total water withdrawals by (A) domestic self-supplied users, 

(B) community water systems, and (C) all other users, and percent of total from 

groundwater sources in Vermont, 2005 ..................................................................................18

7. Map showing withdrawals of groundwater in Vermont in 2005 and projected 

percent changes in withdrawals of groundwater from 2005 to 2020.................................20

8. Map showing projected changes in groundwater withdrawals in Vermont from 

2005 to 2020..................................................................................................................................21

9. Maps showing groundwater withdrawals minus return flows to groundwater in 

Vermont in 2005 and projected for 2020..................................................................................22

10. Maps showing census blocks in Dover, Vermont, showing (A) withdrawals of 

groundwater in 2005 and (B) projected withdrawals of groundwater in 2020 .................23

11. Map showing withdrawals of surface water in 2005 and projected percent changes 

in withdrawals of surface water from 2005 to 2020 in Vermont..........................................25

12. Map showing projected changes in withdrawals of surface water from 2005 to 2020 

in Vermont....................................................................................................................................26

13. Map showing total water withdrawals and percent of total from groundwater 

sources in Vermont in 2005 .......................................................................................................27

14. Map showing projected changes in total water withdrawals and projected percent 

changes in total water withdrawals in Vermont from 2005 to 2020....................................28

15. Maps showing total return flows and percent of return flows to groundwater in 

Vermont in (A) 2005 and (B) projected for 2020......................................................................29

16. Maps showing the difference, in million gallons per day, between total water 

withdrawals and return flows in Vermont in (A) 2005 and (B) projected for 2020 ...........30

17. Maps showing major watersheds in Vermont with total water withdrawals and 

percent of total withdrawals from groundwater sources in (A) 2005 and (B) projected 

for 2020 .........................................................................................................................................32

Tables

1. Definitions of water-use categories and other selected terms............................................6

2. Sources of data for the Vermont Water-Use database..........................................................7

3. Organization and examples of types of facilities in the Vermont Water-Use database ...8

4. Water-use coefficients for industrial facilities ......................................................................10

5. Water-withdrawal estimates for commercial facilities, by water-use group and 

subgroup ......................................................................................................................................12

6. Groundwater and surface-water withdrawals estimated for major watersheds in 

Vermont, 2005 and projected for 2020 .....................................................................................31
v

Conversion Factors, Data, and Acronyms

Inch/Pound to SI

Multiply By To obtain

Length

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

yard (yd) 0.9144 meter (m)

Area

square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2)

Volume

gallon (gal) 3.785 liter (L)

gallon (gal) 0.003785 cubic meter (m3)

million gallons (Mgal) 3,785 cubic meter (m3)

Flow rate

gallon per minute (gal/min) 0.06309 liter per second (L/s)

gallon per day (gal/d) 0.003785 cubic meter per day (m3/d)

million gallons per day (Mgal/d) 0.04381 cubic meter per second (m3/s)

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83) 

and to the Vermont State Plane Coordinate System.

LIST OF ACRONYMS

CWS Community Water System

DHCA Department of Housing and Community Affairs

D&B Dun & Bradstreet

E911 Enhanced 911

HUC Hydrologic Unit Code

MCD Minor Civil Division

NTNC Non-Transient Non-Community Water System

PWS Public Water System

RPC Regional Planning Commission

SIC Standard Industrial Classification

TNC Transient Non-Community Water System

USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

VCGI Vermont Center for Geographic Information

VTDEC Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation

VWU Vermont Water-Use

WMD Wastewater Management Division

WSD Water Supply Division
Abstract

In 2005, about 12 percent of total water withdrawals 

(440 million gallons per day (Mgal/d)) in Vermont were from 

groundwater sources (51 Mgal/d), and about 88 percent were 

from surface-water sources (389 Mgal/d). Of total water 

withdrawals, about 78 percent were used for cooling at a 

power plant, 9 percent were withdrawn by public suppliers, 

about 5 percent were withdrawn for domestic use, about 

3 percent were withdrawn for use at fish hatcheries, and 

the remaining 5 percent were divided among commercial/

industrial, irrigation, livestock, and snowmaking uses. 

About 49 percent of the population of Vermont was 

supplied with drinking water by a public supplier, and 

51 percent was self supplied. Some of the Minor Civil 

Divisions (MCDs) that had large self-supplied populations 

were located near the major cities of St. Albans, Burlington, 

Montpelier, Barre, and Rutland, where the cities themselves 

were served largely by public supply, but the surrounding 

areas were not. Most MCDs where withdrawals by community 

water systems totaled more than 1 Mgal/d used predominantly 

surface water, and those where withdrawals by community 

water systems totaled 1 Mgal/d or less used predominantly 

groundwater. 

Withdrawals of groundwater greater than 1 Mgal/d 

were made in Middlebury, Bethel, Hartford, Springfield, 

and Bennington, and withdrawals of surface water greater 

than 2 Mgal/d were made in Grand Isle, Burlington, South 

Burlington, Mendon, Brattleboro, and Vernon. Increases 

in groundwater withdrawals greater than 0.1 Mgal/d are 

projected for 2020 for Fairfax, Hardwick, Middlebury, Sharon, 

Proctor, Springfield, and Manchester. The largest projected 

increases in surface-water withdrawals from 2005 to 2020 are 

located along the center axis of the Green Mountains in the 

ski-area towns of Stowe, Warren, Mendon, Killington, 

and Wilmington.

In 2005, withdrawals were at least 1 Mgal/d greater 

than return flows in South Burlington, Waterford, Orange, 

Mendon, Woodford, and Vernon. Many of these MCDs 

had small populations themselves but provided water to 

community water systems in neighboring towns or cities. 

Wilmington probably will be added to this list by 2020 

because of proposed new withdrawals for snowmaking in 

Dover. About 15 percent of MCDs had greater return flows 

than withdrawals; possible reasons are water importation, 

larger service areas for municipal sewer than for municipal 

water resulting in underestimation of withdrawals, leakage 

into sewer pipes, faulty assumptions in assigning coefficients, 

or other limitations of the study methods.

To store and facilitate retrieval of water-use estimates and 

data for 2005 and projections for 2020, a water-use database 

for Vermont was designed and populated. Data include 

withdrawals and return flows from and to groundwater and 

surface water for all individual facilities and entities that are 

in Vermont drinking water, discharge permit, or other State 

water-use databases, along with estimates for many other 

facilities. Also included are estimates for aggregated domestic 

and livestock withdrawals and return flows by census block. 

Retrievals from the database and summaries presented 

in this report can be used to help identify areas where 

projected growth in Vermont from 2005 to 2020 might affect 

groundwater availability. 

Introduction

For many years, groundwater regulation in Vermont was 

defined by the Vermont Water Supply Rule (Agency of Natural 

Resources—Department of Environmental Conservation, 

2005), the primary purpose of which is to regulate water 

systems in order to provide clean and safe drinking water 

for Vermont’s citizens. With the new millennium, the focus, 

previously on ensuring adequate quality, expanded to include 

quantity. Reports of water shortages from overpumping 

and controversial proposals to withdraw large amounts of 

water for various industries prompted the 2007–08 Vermont 

State Legislature to take a proactive role in protecting the 

groundwater resource. The culmination of this shift resulted 

in Act 199, legislation adopted in June 2008 that declared 

Vermont’s groundwater a public trust and set up a permitting 

process for large water withdrawals. 

Prior to the new law, the 2006 Legislature had passed 

Act 144, which authorized the exploration of statewide 

groundwater-management and protection strategies. Legislators agreed that the effort should start with systematic and 

comprehensive resource characterization. To that end, the 

Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in 

Vermont in 2005 and 2020

By Laura Medalie and Marilee A. Horn
2 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

Vermont Geological Survey began coordinating a statewide 

favorability study to compile, georeference, and combine into 

an interactive mapping product all existing datasets related to 

groundwater. Some of the datasets integrated with bedrock and 

surficial geology are data from water-well logs, aquifer tests, 

interference tests of new wells (done by the Vermont Water 

Supply Division), water-quality analyses, and hazardous waste 

sites. A component of the resource assessment that is not available from any single State database is detailed information on 

groundwater withdrawals. This component is necessary so that 

groundwater-demand scenarios can be developed, impacts of 

projected growth can be assessed, and statewide and regional 

planning can proceed in a fact-based and consistent manner. 

To further these goals, the U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS), in cooperation with the Vermont Geological Survey, 

has drawn upon the USGS water-use program to characterize current (2005) and future (2020) water usage and develop 

the USGS Vermont Water-Use (VWU) database. Although 

groundwater is the focus of the resource assessment, withdrawals and return flows to surface water are included in the 

database because management of either resource is affected by 

their interconnections. To increase its utility for planning, the 

VWU database identifies areas of potential increases in water 

demand in the future.

Purpose and Scope

The objectives of this report were to identify the relative 

amounts of groundwater and surface water used throughout 

Vermont and to identify areas where projected growth in 

the State during 2005–20 might affect groundwater availability (fig. 1). To explore those questions, base-year (2005) 

groundwater and surface-water withdrawals and return flows 

were assessed, projections for population growth as the 

basis for estimating future withdrawals for water resources 

were applied, and data to establish a resource-based priority 

system for planners were obtained. The base year 2005 was 

chosen because a large quantity of water-use data had already 

been compiled by the USGS for 2005 as part of the national 

water-use compilation done every 5 years. The year 2020 was 

selected as the end year for estimating future water withdrawals because that is the year for which population projection 

estimates for the State of Vermont, necessary for estimating 

water withdrawals, were available. 

All data presented in this report are 2005 and 2020 

annual averages, although some information is available in 

the VWU database on a seasonal or monthly basis, as well as 

annual averages for some other years. Although all data have 

a census-block attribute, for figures and discussion in this 

report, census blocks generally are aggregated to Minor Civil 

Divisions1 (MCDs) (fig. 1).

1

A census block is the smallest level of geography designated by the Census 

Bureau. Minor Civil Divisions are official subdivisions of counties—towns 

and cities.

Water-use activities that are accounted for in this report 

include only withdrawals from groundwater or surface water 

transported away from the source. Instream uses, such as for 

hydroelectric power, habitat, waste assimilation, and recreation, are not included.

Previous Investigations and Databases

Water-use data for Vermont have been compiled and 

published every 5 years from 1950 through 2005 as part of 

the USGS National Water-Use Program. Since 1985, data also 

have been compiled for every state by county. Several wateruse reports that are specific to Vermont have been generated 

from this program (U.S. Geological Survey, 1990; Horn and 

Medalie, 1995; Medalie, 1997; and Foster and others, 2000). 

Databases that have been developed by the USGS to 

store and retrieve water-use data include Aggregate WaterUse Data System (AWUDS), Site-Specific Water-Use Data 

System (SWUDS), and New England Water-Use Data System 

(NEWUDS). AWUDS is the USGS national database that 

stores aggregated water-use data by county, hydrologic 

unit, and aquifer. Its primary purpose is to store data used 

in the national summary of water-use data. SWUDS stores 

measurements and estimates of water use by individual 

user, aggregate user, or user-defined geographical area. The 

relational database supports a link-node data structure where 

sites represent nodes or points in a hydrologic network. 

The user can track the movement of water from site to site 

by connecting sites (nodes) to form conveyances (links). 

NEWUDS, developed specifically for New England, is similar 

to SWUDS in that it is a relational database developed to 

track water-use activities between points, such as withdrawals 

to distribution and users to return flows (Tessler, 2002; 

Horn, 2002). In developing the VWU database, the decision 

was made to forego the effort of trying to fit data from this 

project into the SWUDS or NEWUDS models, which have 

exacting requirements, and, instead, to develop a new database 

structured to accommodate the available data.

Water Resources in Vermont

Vermont has about 36,500 kilometers of streams and rivers (NHDflowline, accessed July 29, 2008, at http://www.vcgi.

org/); 1,437 square kilometers of lakes and ponds (NHDWaterbody, accessed August 6, 2008, at http://www.vcgi.org/); 

and 820 lakes and ponds listed in the Vermont Department 

of Environmental Conservation (VTDEC) Lake Inventory 

List (accessed January 7, 2009, at http://www.anr.state.vt.us/

dec/waterq/lakes/docs/lp_lakelist.pdf). Major surface-water 

resources include Lake Champlain, which forms the northwestern border with New York and extends into Canada; Lake 

Memphremagog, along the northern border with Canada; Lake 

Bomoseen in Castleton in Rutland County; Harriman Reservoir in southern Vermont; and the Connecticut River, which 

forms the eastern border with New Hampshire (fig. 1). 
Introduction 3

Figure 1. Minor Civil Divisions with growth areas in Vermont.

Eden

Stowe

Milton

Jay

Derby

Lowell Fairfield

Ira

Troy

Groton

Peru

Orwell

Danville

Ripton

Newbury

Bethel

Dorset

Chester

Swanton

Chittenden

Lewis

Barton

Corinth

Highgate

Rupert

Bolton

Bristol

Barnet

Brighton

Essex

Lincoln

Danby

Cabot

Berlin

Pawlet

Pownal

Averill

Victory

Concord

Calais

Alburgh

Barnard

Winhall

Addison

Dover

Ferrisburg

Stratton Benson

Sutton

Jamaica

Bridport

Fairfax

Glover

Halifax

Underhill

Cambridge

Granville

Norton

Burke

Albany

Georgia

Hartford

Colchester

Rochester

Sharon

Elmore

Charlotte

Warren

Norwich

Lyndon

Johnson

Topsham

Hartland

Thetford

Pittsford

Wolcott

Granby

Plymouth

Ferdinand

Killington

Orange

Walden

Richford

Strafford

Duxbury

Franklin

Grafton

Ludlow

Holland

Guilford

Peacham

Pomfret

Randolph

Roxbury

Poultney

Irasburg

Reading

Woodford

Newark

Kirby

Waterbury

Sheldon

Arlington

Fletcher

Brandon

Weston

Mendon

Springfield

Morristown

Northfield

Royalton

Marlboro

Fayston

Montgomery

Morgan

Castleton

Tunbridge

Shoreham

Berkshire

Hancock

Ryegate

Sandgate

Vershire

Westford

Westfield

Stamford

Shelburne

Wells

Lunenburg

Braintree

Marshfield

Monkton

Canaan

Shrewsbury

Starksboro

Hardwick

Bridgewater

Brookfield

Mount Holly

South

Hero

Waterford

Wheelock

Shaftsbury

Woodstock

Middlesex

Stockbridge

Hinesburg

Wallingford

Woodbury

Bloomfield

Wilmington

Craftsbury

Putney

Belvidere

Worcester

Bakersfield

Guildhall

Sheffield

Townshend

Cavendish

Bennington

Westmore

Westminster

Manchester

Mount 

Tabor

Charleston

Huntington

Bradford

Andover

Rockingham

Lemington

Washington

Readsboro

Cornwall

Salisbury

Richmond

Maidstone

Tinmouth

Panton

Coventry

Newport Town

Fairlee

Clarendon

Brattleboro

Somerset

Vernon

Windham

Barre Town

Waitsfield

Wardsboro

Sudbury

Goshen

Brunswick

Pittsfield

Windsor

Leicester

Plainfield

Whiting

Fair 

Haven

Enosburg

Jericho

Chelsea

Newfane

North Hero

Moretown

Sunderland

St. AlbansTown

Hyde Park

Williston

Glastenbury

Middlebury

New Haven

Grand Isle

Greensboro

Whitingham

Weathersfield

East Haven

Williamstown

Londonderry

St. Johnsbury

Hubbardton

Dummerston

West Haven

Brownington

Searsburg

East

Montpelier

Athens

Rutland

Town

South Burlington

West Fairlee

West 

Windsor

Weybridge

Waterville

Burlington

Averys Gore

Isle La Motte

Stannard

Brookline

West Rutland

Middletown

Springs

Waltham

Proctor

Montpelier

Landgrove

Newport City Warren Gore

Baltimore

Buels Gore Barre City

St.

George

Vergennes

Warners Grant

Winooski

St. Albans City

WINDSOR

ESSEX 

RUTLAND

ADDISON

WINDHAM

ORLEANS 

FRANKLIN

CALEDONIA

WASHINGTON

BENNINGTON

CHITTENDEN

LAMOILLE

GRAND ISLE

ORANGE

G r e

e n M

o

u

n

t a

i

n

s

CANADA

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

Lake

Bomoseen

Harriman Reservoir

Connecticut River

Lake Champlain

73° 72°

45°

44°

43°

Shaded relief generated by Vermont Center for Geographic

Information, 1998, based on U.S. Geological Survey 

1:250,000 scale Digital Elevation Model Dataset, 1998,

Vermont State Plane Coordinate System, North American Datum 1983 

0 10 20 MILES

0 10 20 KILOMETERS

EXPLANATION

Growth areas as defined in town 

 or regional plans

County

Town

Lake 

Memphremagog
4 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

Most domestic wells in Vermont tap water in crystallinerock aquifers, which transmit water along bedding planes, 

fractures, joints, and faults. Yields from these wells vary from 

about 18 gallons per minute (gal/min) at depths less than 

200 feet to about 7 gal/min at depths greater than 800 feet 

(Gale and others, 2009). Close to Vermont’s western border 

with New York, the bedrock aquifer consists of carbonate 

rocks and often produces yields of 10 to 30 gal/min (Olcott, 

1995). Some wells in or near valley bottoms extract water 

from surficial aquifers, which consist primarily of coarsegrained sand and gravel deposits that were left as outwash 

and ice-contact materials by glacial meltwater during multiple 

advances and retreats of continental glaciers. Yields from 

wells connected to surficial aquifers are generally larger than 

from bedrock wells (Dunne and Leopold, 1978); however, 

the availability of unconsolidated surficial aquifer material 

is limited.

Several sources provide information about groundwater 

resources in Vermont. Groundwater from surficial aquifers in 

most major river basins were investigated and mapped in the 

late 1960s and early 1970s at various scales by the USGS, 

in cooperation with the Vermont Agency of Environmental 

Conservation (Hodges, 1966, 1967a–f, 1968a–d; Hodges 

and others, 1976). A statewide surficial geologic map was 

produced at a scale of 1:250,000 in 1970 (Doll, 1970). 

Beginning with 2001, 1:24,000 groundwater-resource maps 

that integrate all available surficial and bedrock data, including 

information from well logs for wells located in valley floors, 

have been posted online by the Vermont Geological Survey 

at http://www.anr.state.vt.us/dec/geo/newmaps.htm as they 

are completed.

Components of Water Use

Withdrawals of groundwater or surface water go either 

directly to users or indirectly to users through a community 

water-system treatment and distribution system (fig. 2; 

table 1). A community water system (CWS) is a public 

water system that supplies water to the same population year 

round. Once transported to the user, water has three potential 

pathways: (1) it can be returned to the local water cycle by 

way of a wastewater collection and treatment system; 

(2) it can be returned to the local water cycle directly as 

return flow to the environment; or (3) it is not returned to the 

local water cycle (consumptive use). Return flows in towns 

with municipal services are through a wastewater collection 

and treatment system; then the treated water usually is piped 

to a stream or occasionally discharged to groundwater. 

For permitting purposes in Vermont, piped outflows to 

surface water are called “direct discharges.” Leach fields or 

sprayfields, whereby water is returned to groundwater, are 

called “indirect discharges.” If there are no municipal services 

for wastewater, return flows are to groundwater through a 

septic system and leach field or sprayfield. Some percentage of 

the volume of water withdrawn is usually used consumptively 

and is not returned to the local water cycle, as it is either 

incorporated into a product or evaporated.

Methods

Several steps were needed to create and populate the 

VWU database: identify and compile data from available 

sources, identify water-use categories for which withdrawals or return flows would be estimated, determine appropriate methods for estimating data when needed, document any 

assumptions, and develop a database structure (appendix A1) 

with a data dictionary (appendix A2) to organize data. 

State, Federal, regional, and other sources of data 

(table 2) were used either to populate the VWU database 

directly with raw data or as the basis for making estimates. 

Data from the U.S. Census Bureau, Massachusetts Institute 

for Social and Economic Research, Vermont Center for 

Geographic Information, and most town and regional plans 

were available online. The rest of the data types listed in 

table 2 were sent to the USGS in response to a request.

Data that were provided in spreadsheet format were 

organized into a Microsoft Access relational database. Data 

that originated as coverages were organized into point and 

polygon datasets within ArcMap file geodatabases (ESRI, 

2009). Tabular data from the Access database were joined 

to the geodata using a common field, such as MCD name, 

census-block identifier, or 8-digit hydrologic identifier 

(Hydrologic Unit Code, or HUC), to perform geographic 

analyses and to generate map displays of the data.

Domestic Water Withdrawals and Return Flows

Domestic withdrawals were determined by multiplying 

the population that was self supplied in every census block 

times a per-capita water-use coefficient of 75 gallons per 

day (gal/d). The per-capita water-use coefficient for Vermont 

was assumed to be the same as the coefficient derived from a 

detailed 2003 water-use study of the New Hampshire seacoast 

region (Horn and others, 2008). It was necessary to estimate 

populations by census block for 2005 because 2005 is a year 

midway between two decennial census years (2000 and 2010) 

when populations by census block are assessed by the U.S. 

Census Bureau. Accordingly, populations by census block in 

2005 were estimated by equation 1 

 

Estimated pop of CB within MCD in 2005 =

pop of CB in 2000 pop o

­ ­

­

y z

( y ) f MCD in 2005

pop of MCD in 2000

­

­

z

z

( )

( )

, (1)

where

pop = population, 

CB-y = sample census block, and 

MCD-z = sample MCD.
Methods 5

Figure 2. The components of water use and the conceptual flow of water between components.

Water withdrawal 

• Groundwater

• Surface water

Wastewater collection

Consumptive use

Self service

Municipal or

 public service 

EXPLANATION

Other

Public (community)

water-system treatment

Public (community)

water-system distribution

Water users 

• Domestic

• Commercial/ Industrial

• Snowmaking

• Fish hatcheries

• Power generation

• Irrigation

• To atmosphere

• Incorporated into product

Return flow

• To groundwater,“Indirect discharge”1

• To surface water,“Direct discharge”1

Wastewater-treatment

facility

1

As defined by the Vermont Wastewater Management Division
6 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

Once populations of census blocks were determined, 

the populations were split into self-supplied populations and 

populations served by a CWS. Digital coverages of service 

areas for CWSs were used to determine that split. Coverages 

were provided electronically for large CWSs by 8 of the 11 

Regional Planning Commissions (RPCs) in Vermont and by 

the towns of St. Johnsbury and Bennington. Coverages of 

service areas for the remaining three RPCs and for most of the 

smaller CWSs that were not provided digitally were estimated 

by one or more of several methods: (1) perusing the town 

plan for a verbal description, (2) using a cluster of (Enhanced) 

E911_sites near a well(s) whose location(s) was provided by 

the Vermont Water Supply Division (WSD), (3) matching the 

name of the CWS for a mobile home park or development 

with the name of a road, or (4) using information from a town 

official. Documentation of the estimation method is recorded 

with the service-area coverages. E911_sites is a point coverage 

where each point (site) depicts an accurate physical location, 

as well as other characteristics, of all buildings that existed at 

the time of data compilation.

Polygon coverages of census blocks and of service areas 

for CWSs were overlain onto the subset of the E911_site 

point coverages categorized as “residential” using ArcMap 

geographic information system software (ESRI, 2009). The 

population of a census block served by a CWS is the total 

census-block population multiplied by the ratio of E911_sites 

within the CWS service area in that census block to total 

E911_sites in the census block. The population of a census 

block that is self supplied was calculated as the difference 

between the total population of the census block and the 

population served by the CWS. In the conceptual example 

shown in figure 3, there are 15 residential E911 sites in census 

block 500 (one site is represented by one dot); one-third of 

those are served by a CWS and two-thirds are self supplied. 

Table 1. Definitions of water-use categories and other selected terms.

[From glossary in Hutson and others, 2004. Examples of water uses listed in the definitions are based on a national compilation and may not all be relevant to 

water use in Vermont or applicable to methods of populating the Vermont Water-Use database]

Water-use category or term Definition

Commercial Water for motels, hotels, restaurants, office buildings, other commercial facilities, and military and 

nonmilitary institutions.

Consumptive use The part of water withdrawn that is evaporated, transpired, incorporated into products or crops, consumed by 

humans or livestock, or otherwise removed from the immediate water environment.

Domestic Water used for all such indoor household purposes as drinking, food preparation, bathing, washing clothes 

and dishes, flushing toilets, and such outdoor purposes as watering lawns and gardens.

Fish hatchery Water used for raising fish for later release and in association with the operation of fish hatcheries or fishing 

preserves.

Industrial Water used for fabrication, processing, washing, and cooling, and includes such industries as chemical and 

allied products, food, bottled water, mining, paper and allied products, petroleum refining, and steel.

Irrigation Water that is applied by an irrigation system to assist in the growing of crops and pastures or to maintain 

vegetative growth in recreational lands such as parks and golf courses.

Livestock Water for livestock watering, feedlots, dairy operations, and other on-farm needs.

Mining Water used for the extraction of naturally occurring minerals including solids, such as coal, sand, gravel, and 

other ores; liquids, such as crude petroleum; and gases, such as natural gas. Also includes uses associated 

with quarrying, milling, and other preparations customarily done at the mine site or as part of a mining 

activity. Does not include water associated with dewatering of the aquifer that is not put to beneficial use.

Public-supply Water withdrawn by public and private water suppliers that furnish water to at least 25 people or have a 

minimum of 15 connections. Public suppliers provide water for a variety of uses, such as domestic, 

commercial, industrial, thermoelectric power, and public water use.

Return flow Water that reaches a groundwater or surface-water source after release from the point of use and thus becomes 

available for further use.

Self-supplied water use Water withdrawn from a groundwater or surface-water source by a user rather than being obtained from a 

public supply.

Snowmaking Water used during the winter at ski areas to increase snow coverage of ski trails.

Thermoelectric-power Water used in the process of generating electricity with steam-driven turbine generators.
Methods 7

If the population of the census block is 75, then 25 people are 

served by a CWS, and 50 people are self supplied. 

Similarly, domestic return flows were determined by multiplying the population not covered by municipal wastewater 

service in every census block by a per-capita return-flow coefficient of 63 gal/d. This coefficient is the difference between 

domestic per-capita coefficients for withdrawals (75 gal/d) 

and consumptive use (12 gal/d) (Horn and others, 2008). The 

same technique of splitting census-block populations into parts 

covered and not covered by water service was used to estimate 

parts covered and not covered by municipal wastewater service. The coverage of municipal wastewater service areas that 

was provided by the RPCs through the Vermont Department of 

Housing and Community Affairs (DHCA) was complete for 8 

of the 11 RPCs. For the remaining RPCs, three sources were 

used to digitize estimated wastewater service areas: (1) maps 

of service areas available online from town- or regional-plan 

maps; (2) descriptions in town plans; or (3) in the absence of 

any other information, service areas were digitized, assuming 

they covered the same area as municipal water-service areas. 

Estimates of withdrawals and return flows for domestic use are 

shown in appendix B.

Non-Domestic Water Withdrawals and 

Return Flows

All facilities (users of water) in the VWU database were 

assigned to one of two categories: public water systems 

(PWS), consisting of all facilities in the WSD database of 

PWSs, or non-PWSs, consisting of all other facilities 

(table 3). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(USEPA) definition of a PWS is “a system for the provision to 

the public of water for human consumption through pipes or 

Table 2. Sources of data for the Vermont Water-Use database.

[VT, Vermont; ANR, Agency of Natural Resources; SIC, Standard Industrial Classification; CB, census block; MCD, Minor Civil Division; VCGI, Vermont 

Center for Geographic Information]

Data type Data source Time period

Tables or spreadsheets

Withdrawals for snowmaking VT ANR, Water Quality Division 2004–2008

Return-flow data for indirect discharges VT ANR, Wastewater Management Division 2007

Populations served for indirect discharges Medalie, 1995 or E911_sites point coverage 1990 or 2008

Return-flow data for direct discharges VT ANR, Wastewater Management Division 1999–2008

Withdrawal volume and intake locations, and populations served by public-water suppliersVT ANR, Water Supply Division 2005

Number of employees and SIC codes for commercial 

and industrial facilities

Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. (2008) 2008

2000 populations by CB U.S. Census Bureau (2001) 2000

2005 population estimates by MCD U.S. Census Bureau (2005) 2005

2020 population estimates by MCD Massachusetts Institute for Social and Economic Research 

(Rayer, 2003)

2020

Projected growth of public-water suppliers VT ANR, Water Supply Division: Priority list of Water Supply 

Load Applicants 2008 and Tim Raymond (Water Supply Division, 2008, oral commun.)

2008

Geospatial data or coverages

Service areas for public-water suppliers Unpublished from Regional Planning Commissions, some town 

officials, or estimates 

2008

Service areas for public-wastewater systems Unpublished from VT Department of Housing & Community 

Affairs, or estimates

2008

(Enhanced) E911_sites point coverage VCGI 2008

CB polygon coverage VCGI 2008

Approximate boundaries of growth areas Unpublished from various town and regional plans 2002–20081

1

Town and regional plans generally were dated within the indicated time period; the time period pertaining to growth areas is unspecified.
8 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

A

B 499 500 501 502

Community watersystem service area

Census blocks and 

census block number

Residential site

A = 5, the number of E911 residential sites for

census block 500 within the service area

B = 10, the number of E911 residential sites for

census block 500 outside of the service area

Table 3. Organization and examples of types of facilities in the Vermont Water-Use database.

[PWS, public water system; WSD, Water Supply Division; CWS, community water systems; TNC, transient noncommunity water systems; NTNC, non-transient non-community water systems; WB, water bottlers; numbers in 

parentheses () indicate the number of each type of facility in the Vermont Water-Use database]

PWS facilities (1,382)—registered with WSD Non-PWS facilities (3,027)—all other facilities

CWS (419)

• Municipal systems

• Mobile home parks

• Condominiums

• Commercial (2,460)

• Industrial (339)

• Mining (10)

• Snowmaking operations (20)

• Fish hatcheries (6)

• Power generation (3)

• Wastewater-treatment facilities (110)

• Institutions or private associations (6)

• Golf courses (72)

• Livestock (1)

TNC (705)

• Hotels/motels/inns

• Restaurants

• Campgrounds

• Stores

NTNC (250)

• Schools

• Hospitals

• Business/industrial facilities

WB (8)

Figure 3. Diagram showing conceptual method used to determine the self-supplied population for each census block in Vermont.
Methods 9

other constructed conveyances, if such system has at least 15 

service connections or regularly serves at least 25 individuals” 

(accessed February 4, 2009, at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/pws/pwsdef2.htm). Facilities in the WSD database of 

PWSs meet the USEPA definition of community (CWS) or 

non-community water systems (including transient and nontransient non-community water systems, TNC and NTNC) 

and are entities such as public-water suppliers, hospitals, 

schools, campgrounds, hotels, restaurants, water bottlers, and 

other businesses. The important distinction between PWS 

and non-PWS facilities is that locations of water-withdrawal 

points (latitude and longitude) of PWSs are known and were 

provided to USGS from the WSD, whereas locations of waterwithdrawal points for non-PWS were not available. Instead, 

non-PWSs were assigned to a census block with no specific 

location within the census block. This distinction of whether 

or not the withdrawal locations are known comes into play 

when designing retrievals of data because of the structure and 

relationships between tables in the Access database, as further 

explained in appendix A1.

Community Water Systems

Seventy-four percent of CWSs, including all that withdrew water from surface-water sources and many that withdrew from groundwater sources, reported water-withdrawal 

data to the WSD in 2005. Of the remaining 26 percent that 

were registered but did not report withdrawals, 40 percent 

purchased water from other public suppliers. For these purchasers, withdrawal locations and volumes are accounted for 

in the VWU database by the CWS that sold the water, reflecting where the impact to the water resource occurs. For CWSs 

without reported withdrawals that did not purchase water, 

withdrawal volumes were estimated as the population served 

(information provided by the WSD for every CWS) multiplied 

by the domestic per-capita water-use coefficient of 75 gallons 

per person per day. Since most of the facilities in this group of 

small CWSs whose withdrawals were estimated were housing 

developments and mobile home parks, the underlying assumption that deliveries to non-domestic users were insignificant 

probably results in minimal underestimation of withdrawals. 

The WSD provided data for total withdrawals made 

by CWSs. Because the VWU database is intended to be a 

tool used to assess the effects of withdrawals on local water 

resources, many of the reported withdrawals had to be split 

between several sources. The default method was to split total 

withdrawals equally between each active non-emergency 

source. However, it became important to determine an accurate split between withdrawals from multiple sources when 

the sources were not close to one another or if there were both 

groundwater and surface-water sources. For a few cases where 

large populations were served and reported sources were in 

more than one MCD, telephone calls were made to individual 

CWS facilities to get accurate information for allocating portions of withdrawals between separate locations and between 

groundwater and surface-water sources.

Non-Community Water Systems

Data on water withdrawals and return flows for all nonCWS facilities, including TNC and NTNC PWS facilities 

and non-PWS facilities (table 3), came from several sources: 

reported withdrawals, reported direct-discharge return flows, 

reported indirect-discharge return flows, and estimates based 

on coefficients. Reported withdrawals were available for 

13 percent of TNC and NTNC facilities included in the 

WSD dataset. 

Eighty percent of non-PWS facilities in the VWU 

database, because they discharge water to surface water, 

have Direct Discharge permits from the Vermont Wastewater 

Management Division (WMD). The WMD has had authority 

delegated by the USEPA to administer their National Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System permit program. Although 

reporting requirements of the WMD Direct Discharge Permit 

Section vary by individual facility on the basis of design 

(maximum) flow and history of violations, most facilities are 

required to report monthly return-flow volumes in addition to 

water-quality and physical characteristics. Typically, monthly 

return flows were reported as daily values averaged for each 

month. Facilities for which only monthly maximum, rather 

than average, values for return flows were available from the 

WMD include 6 landfills (the median 2005 annual value was 

0.008 and the maximum was 0.051 Mgal/d) and 15 industrial 

facilities (the median 2005 annual value was 0.006 and the 

maximum was 0.225 Mgal/d). A field (Basis of water-use 

value, fig. A1) in the Water use table of the VWU database 

tracks these facilities when reported values are maximums. 

Since return flows reported for the single largest water user in 

the State, Entergy Nuclear-Vermont Yankee, were maximum 

daily values for the month, that facility was contacted directly 

to get an accurate average value for the VWU database 

for 2005. 

Return-flow volumes reported to the WMD by each of the 

13 facilities with indirect (leach field) discharges and design 

capacities of at least 50,000 gal/d also were obtained. These 

data include discharges for one municipal-wastewater facility, 

eight ski areas (base lodges, hotels, condominiums, and other 

buildings), and four private communities that were not tied 

into a municipal-wastewater facility. 

Return-flow volumes for eight small (less than 

50,000 gal/d) municipal-wastewater facilities with indirect 

discharges to groundwater were estimated using the domestic 

per-capita coefficient of 63 gal/d plus a water-use estimate of 

900 gal/d for each commercial facility. A commercial component was included in this estimate because most of these small 

wastewater systems with indirect discharges were located 

in mountain resort towns with substantial commercial activity. The estimate used for commercial facilities, which is the 

median for all commercial facilities (1,000 gal/d) less 10 percent consumptive use, was derived by Horn and others (2008, 

table 11). Populations served by the municipal-wastewater 

systems were determined from a 1990 report on wastewater 

(Medalie, 1995) or by counting residences in the E911_sites 
10 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

coverage and multiplying by the average number of people per 

occupied household in Vermont (2.5) (accessed May 8, 2009, 

at http://factfinder.census.gov/home/saff/main.html?_lang=en). 

The E911_sites coverage provided the number of commercial 

facilities when overlain with service areas. 

For the remaining facilities with no reported withdrawal 

or return-flow data, water withdrawals were estimated by 

assigning each facility to an industrial or commercial wateruse group that represents users with similar water-use characteristics. The list of industrial and commercial facilities 

that are included in this category consists of TNC and NTNC 

facilities (referred to in this report as non-community water 

systems, or non-CWSs) from the PWS dataset, as well as 

the Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) dataset. Duplicate entries were 

culled. Facilities located within service areas of municipal 

CWSs were excluded from the VWU database because they 

did not withdraw water. 

Water withdrawals were estimated for industries by 

using a coefficient based on the median number of employees 

(for example, facilities in the food industry use 469 gallons 

per employee per day) and for commercial users by using a 

coefficient based on the type of facility (for example, a very 

small restaurant uses 500 gallons per day). The number of 

employees is a data element included with the D&B dataset. 

For the non-CWS dataset, determination of the appropriate 

water-use group for individual users was attempted initially on 

the basis of the facility name. For facilities without descriptive 

names, the Internet was used to search for information with 

which to categorize the facility. For the D&B dataset, Standard 

Industrial Classification (SIC) codes that were included with 

the purchased data were used to classify facilities into wateruse groups. 

The VWU database has 362 industrial facilities from 

the non-CWS and the D&B datasets that were assigned to 

industrial water-use groups (table 4). Water-use coefficients 

for the industrial water-use groups in table 4 were developed 

by Planning and Management Consultants, Ltd., (1995) on 

the basis of water-meter readings at individual industrial 

Table 4. Water-use coefficients for industrial facilities.

[Employee water-use coefficients are from Planning and Management Consultants, Ltd., 1995; SIC, Standard Industrial 

Classification]

Water-use group Two-digit 

SIC code

Water-use coefficient 

(gallons per employee per day) Number of facilities 

in Vermont Water-Use 

Range Median database

Industrial unclassified 20–39 21–2,160 116 7

Food 20 96–677 469 44

Textile mill products 22 246–1,076 315 7

Apparel 23 6–43 13 8

Lumber and wood 24 32–109 78 55

Furniture 25 25–65 30 11

Paper 26 114–8,304 863 6

Printing 27 15–66 42 46

Chemicals 28 128–653 289 7

Petroleum 29 278–1,437 1,045 2

Rubber 30 73–170 119 9

Stone, clay, glass, and concrete 32 13–224 202 34

Primary metal 33 87–424 178 3

Fabricated metal 34 48–585 95 19

Machinery 35 28–153 58 38

Electrical equipment 36 30–169 71 30

Transportation equipment 37 14–143 63 11

Instruments 38 40–141 66 9

Jewelry, precious metals 39 27–61 36 16
Methods 11

facilities across the Nation (Horn and others, 2008). The range 

and median of these national coefficients and the number of 

facilities in the VWU database for each water-use group are 

shown in table 4. 

The VWU database has 3,240 commercial facilities from 

the non-CWS and the D&B datasets that have been assigned 

to commercial water-use groups. Facilities within these 

broad water-use groups were divided into subgroups based 

generally on the size of the facility (number of employees or 

population served) or size in combination with other factors 

related to water use (table 5) that were determined from 

Internet searches. Subgroups in table 5 were defined according 

to natural groupings in metered delivery data for commercial 

facilities in the New Hampshire Seacoast study (Horn and 

others, 2008) and identification of factors that might contribute 

to the natural breaks, such as further definition by SIC code, 

or the presence of water-using amenities. For example, the 

presence of a pool or a restaurant at a hotel would be grounds 

for that facility to be assigned a larger coefficient within a 

given water-use group.

Water withdrawals for irrigation at golf courses were 

estimated as 0.005 Mgal/d per 1,000 yards of course length. 

This coefficient is the average of 55 withdrawals for irrigation 

at golf courses reported to the New Hampshire Department 

of Environmental Services Water User Registration database 

(Frederick Chormann, written commun., 2006). New 

Hampshire and Vermont have similar climates and irrigation 

needs; therefore, irrigation practices are assumed to be similar. 

The list of golf courses in Vermont and their yardage was 

found online at http://www.golflink.com/golf-courses/state.

aspx?state=VT (accessed June 15, 2009). 

Withdrawals for livestock are accounted for in the VWU 

database as the sum of estimates for dairy withdrawals plus 

an estimate for withdrawals at the State’s largest egg farm in 

Highgate. For the 2005 USGS national water-use compilation, 

withdrawals for dairy use comprised 84 percent of 

withdrawals for livestock watering, which accounted for about 

15 percent of total withdrawals from groundwater in Vermont 

(Kenny and others, 2009). Water withdrawals for livestock 

watering typically are based on county-wide estimates of the 

numbers of animals multiplied by animal-specific water-use 

coefficients (Lovelace, 2009). County-wide water withdrawals 

for dairy in Vermont were estimated for the six counties 

(Addison, Caledonia, Chittenden, Franklin, Orleans, and 

Rutland) that accounted for 86 percent of the dairy cows in 

Vermont in 2002 (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2004), 

using the number of dairy cows times the coefficient for dairy 

water use of 35 gallons per animal per day (Pennsylvania 

State University, 2002). County-wide dairy water use was 

disaggregated by overlaying the 2002 land-cover raster dataset 

(University of Vermont Spatial Analysis Laboratory, 2005) 

with the census-block data layer and prorating water use to 

census blocks on the basis of area classified as agricultural 

land. The assumption was made that, for census blocks, land 

area classified as agricultural and the number of dairy cows are 

directly related. Adopting assumptions used for the national 

water-use compilation (Kenny and others, 2009), 75 percent of 

withdrawals for dairy were presumed to be from groundwater, 

and 25 percent were presumed to be from surface water. 

Estimated withdrawals for livestock use are shown by MCD in 

appendix B.

Consumptive Use

The methods discussed in the preceding paragraphs 

describe how either withdrawal or return-flow information 

was obtained or estimated. Both types of reported data were 

available for only three facilities. Thus, one type of data 

usually was estimated from the other, as well as by factoring in 

an estimate of consumptive use. A conventional consumptiveuse coefficient of 10 percent of commercial and industrial 

withdrawals (Shaffer and Runkle, 2007, table 9; Horn and 

others, 2008) was used in this study. Consumptive-use 

coefficients of 90 and 2 percent were used to estimate return 

flows from withdrawals for irrigation of golf courses and for 

cooling at thermoelectric-power producing facilities (Shaffer 

and Runkle, 2007). Consumptive use at Entergy NuclearVermont Yankee was estimated to be 1 percent of withdrawals 

from May through October (Lynn DeWald, Entergy NuclearVermont Yankee, written commun., 2009).

When either withdrawals or return flows were estimated 

from the other and from an estimate of consumptive use, an 

assumption was needed regarding whether groundwater or 

surface water was the source of withdrawals and the receiving 

body of return flow. Unless otherwise known, the source of 

withdrawals that were estimated for facilities was assumed 

to be groundwater rather than surface water. This assumption 

is supported by the PWS database provided by the WSD. Of 

the 954 TNC and NTNC facilities in the database, only 14 (1 

percent) made withdrawals from surface-water sources (all 

from Lake Champlain or Arrowhead Mountain Lake); the 

rest of the withdrawals were from groundwater. Likewise, 

return flows that were estimated for facilities were assumed 

to discharge to groundwater because all discharges to surface 

water theoretically should be reported according to the 

discharge permitting program. Implicit in this assumption of 

100 percent compliance for discharge permits is the reality that 

there is no way to obtain information about facilities that do 

not comply with the permitting process—facilities operating 

illegally without a permit. 

Fish Hatcheries and Snowmaking

Two types of activities, fish hatcheries and snowmaking 

at ski areas, were given more attention in this study than other 

types of facilities because they use more water. Facilities 

for these activities were the only non-PWS facilities in the 

database with water-withdrawal locations assigned as points 

(latitude and longitude) in addition to census blocks to 

account, with relative geographic precision, for potentially 

large impacts on resources. 
12 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

Table 5. Water-withdrawal estimates for commercial facilities, by water-use group and subgroup.

[gal/d, gallons per day; SIC, Standard Industrial Classification]

Water-use group

Water-use subgroup

Basis for assigning facilities to subgroups Number of 

employees1

Facility waterwithdrawal estimate 

(gal/d)

Number of facilities 

in Vermont Water-Use 

database

Retail stores 5–19 250 318 Combination of number of employees and SIC code.

20–75 500 38

40–120 750 20

50–290 1,000 3

200 1,500 1

Grocery stores 5–40 500 175 Combination of number of employees and SIC code.

25–175 1,000 19

16–75 3,000 1

Restaurants 5–10 500 46 Combination of population served or number of 

employees and restaurant type, such as carry-out, 

fast food, or eat in.

5–35 1,000 115

6–130 1,500 59

25–180 2,000 15

5–110 2,500 7

Motels and inns 5–15 500 108 Combination of number of employees and the presence of water-using amenities such as restaurants, 

pools, and jacuzzis.

7–30 1,000 122

10–93 1,500 59

45–200 2,000 17

100–300 2,500 9

502–1,600 12,000 4

Campgrounds and youth 

recreational camps

5–10 250 13 Combination of population served or number of 

employees, presence of water-using amenities, and 

seasonal activity.

12–20 500 48

25–36 1,000 40

40–80 1,500 5

Businesses 5–20 250 614 Combination of number of employees and SIC code.

11–30 500 241

20–132 750 91

75–450 1,500 8

Recreational facilities 5–20 250 53 Combination of population served or number of 

employees, presence of water-using amenities, and 

seasonal activity.

15–99 500 62

20–135 1,000 27

245–404 2,000 6

400 3,000 1

Health-care facilities 5–42 500 15 Number of employees.

50–145 1,000 8

150–200 2,000 2

Medical offices and hospitals 5–30 500 90 Number of employees.

34–60 750 3

79–750 1,000 5

1,000–4,000 3,000 1

Schools and day cares 5–32 250 239 Number of employees.

31–80 500 56

80–147 1,000 33

150–700 2,000 19

970–2,500 6,000 2

Offices 5–53 500 397 Combination of number of employees and SIC code.

45–375 750 17

99–900 1,000 5

423–4,000 2,500 3

1

There is overlap between some of the subgroup ranges within water-use groups because factors other than the number of employees also go into the 

assignment to subgroups.
Methods 13

Four State and two national fish hatcheries report 

monthly return flows to the Direct Discharge Permit Section 

of the WMD. Withdrawals at fish hatcheries are inferred as 

100 percent of return flows because water circulates quickly 

through the raceways without perceptible losses (Thomas 

Wiggins, Fish Culture Operations Chief, Vermont Fish & 

Wildlife Department, oral commun., 2008). Sources of water 

for fish hatcheries were determined either from information 

provided on the Internet or by telephoning the facility. 

Monthly water withdrawals for snowmaking by source 

are reported by 12 resorts to the Vermont Agency of Natural 

Resources to ensure compliance with legislation designed to 

sustain aquatic communities and other stream functions 

(Title 10 V.S.A. Chapter 41, Subchapter 3. Water Withdrawal 

for Snowmaking). Less than 5 percent of water withdrawn for 

snowmaking in this humid region is estimated to evaporate 

(consumptive use) (James Shanley, U.S. Geological Survey, 

oral commun., 2009); thus at least 95 percent (97 percent was 

used for this study) of the annual withdrawal volume is estimated to be the annual return flow. Because meltwater from 

mid-winter thaws would produce predominantly surface-water 

runoff and spring meltwater recharges both groundwater and 

surface water, over the entire snowmaking season, return 

flows are estimated as 50 percent each to surface water 

and groundwater. 

Projecting Future Water Use

Projections of future water use were based on the 

Massachusetts Institute for Social and Economic Research 

(MISER) population projections, by MCD, for 2020 (Rayer, 

2003). The same procedure that was described above to 

estimate 2005 population for census blocks based on MCD 

populations was used to calculate the growth factor between 

2005 and 2020. This growth factor was multiplied by the 2005 

census-block populations to project populations for 2020 by 

census block. Growth factors for MCDs (fig. 4) range from 

minus 25 percent (Buels Gore) to 94 percent (Victory), the 

median is 7 percent, and quartiles are 1 and 18 percent.

Future domestic water use was estimated by multiplying 

the census block 2020 population projections by the percapita coefficient of 75 gallons per person per day. Projections 

of growth for non-domestic water use were made using the 

following assumptions: (1) per-capita domestic water use 

would not change between 2005 and 2020 (there is no basis 

to presume change); (2) the same growth rate calculated for 

domestic use applies to commercial facilities; (3) growth in 

industrial production would be offset by increases in water 

efficiencies, rendering 2020 projections for industrial use 

the same as 2005 values; and (4) similar to [3], potential 

expansions at fish hatcheries would be offset by greater water 

efficiencies, resulting in no change between 2005 and 2020 

(Thomas Wiggins, Vermont Fish & Wildlife, oral commun., 

2008). Projected increased withdrawals for snowmaking were 

from build-out (maximum expansion) analyses conducted by 

ski resorts (Brian Fitzgerald, VTDEC-Water Quality Division, 

written commun., 2009). Projected increases in withdrawals 

by CWSs were derived from two sources: Timothy Raymond, 

VTDEC-Water Supply Division (oral commun., 2008) and 

a spreadsheet of WSD revolving loan applications (accessed 

November 25, 2008, at http://www.vermontdrinkingwater.org/

DWSRFGuidanceDocuments/2008_Priority_List_Aug.xls). 

Data for growth areas (fig. 1) came from maps of future 

land use or growth centers from town or regional plans, verbal 

descriptions of growth areas in town or regional plans, and 

for some MCDs, from build-out analyses from online sources. 

The list of data sources used in this compilation of growtharea coverage is available at the New Hampshire-Vermont 

Water Science Center in Montpelier, Vermont. A field (growth 

area, fig. A1) in the Census block table of the VWU database 

indicates whether any part of the census block is contained 

within a growth area. The growth-area layer is intended to 

depict areas that towns or regions have identified as likely to 

grow and is independent of the previously described sources 

of projected changes in water use. This information can be 

useful in performing analyses comparing current withdrawals 

to projected withdrawals at scales finer than the MCD level, 

such as at the census-block level. The analysis of data and 

maps shown in this report is summarized by MCD (with one 

exception, Dover, shown at a larger scale) and, for the analysis, it was assumed that the projected population growth for 

2020 occurred evenly throughout the MCD. 

Quality Assurance of Service Areas

Spatial coverages of service areas were approximated for 

about 24 percent of the 99 municipal wastewater facilities and 

for about 69 percent of the 419 CWS facilities in the VWU 

database because this information was not readily available. 

Most of the CWS service areas that were approximated due 

to unavailability of data were for small facilities serving 

mobile home parks and condominiums. It was possible to get 

an idea of the accuracy of the methods used to delineate the 

approximated sewer service areas by focusing on Franklin 

County, where sewer service areas were both approximated 

and provided by the DHCA. Method 1, of approximating the 

sewer service area, resulted in about 31.5 percent (7,221 out 

of 22,954) inclusion of E911_sites within the service area. 

Method 2, which uses the sewer service area that was provided 

by the DHCA, resulted in about 29.5 percent (6,781 out of 

22,954) inclusion of E911_sites within the sewer service area. 

Thus, approximating the sewer service area resulted in an 

overestimation of 2 percent, and demonstrates the viability of 

this approximation method.
14 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

Connecticut River

Lake Champlain

73° 72°

45°

44°

43°

CANADA

WINDSOR

ESSEX

RUTLAND

ADDISON

WINDHAM

ORLEANS

FRANKLIN

CALEDONIA

WASHINGTON

BENNINGTON

CHITTENDEN

LAMOILLE

GRAND ISLE

ORANGE

0 10 20 MILES

0 10 20 KILOMETERS U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000 scale, Digital Elevation Model Dataset, 1998,

Vermont State Plane Coordinate System, North American Datum 1983 

EXPLANATION

1 dot equals 500 people in 2005—Dots are

 distributed randomly within the polygons 

Projected population growth, in percent

 ≤ 0

 > 0 to 10

 > 10 to 20

 > 20

County

Town

Less than or equal to

Greater than

≤

>

Eden

Stowe

Milton

Jay Derby

Lowell Fairfield

Ira

Troy

Groton

Peru

Orwell

Danville

Ripton

Newbury

Bethel

Dorset

Chester

Swanton

Chittenden

Lewis

Barton

Corinth

Highgate

Rupert

Bolton

Bristol

Barnet

Brighton

Essex

Lincoln

Danby

Cabot

Berlin

Pawlet

Pownal

Averill

Victory

Concord

Calais

Alburgh

Barnard

Winhall

Addison

Dover

Ferrisburg

Stratton Benson

Sutton

Jamaica

Bridport

Fairfax

Glover

Halifax

Underhill

Cambridge

Granville

Norton

Burke

Albany

Georgia

Hartford

Colchester

Rochester

Sharon

Elmore

Charlotte

Warren

Norwich

Lyndon

Johnson

Topsham

Hartland

Thetford

Pittsford

Wolcott

Granby

Plymouth

Ferdinand

Killington

Orange

Walden

Richford

Strafford

Duxbury

Franklin

Grafton

Ludlow

Holland

Guilford

Peacham

Pomfret

Randolph

Roxbury

Poultney

Irasburg

Reading

Woodford

Newark

Kirby

Waterbury

Sheldon

Arlington

Fletcher

Brandon

Weston

Mendon

Springfield

Morristown

Northfield

Royalton

Marlboro

Fayston

Montgomery

Morgan

Castleton

Tunbridge

Shoreham

Berkshire

Hancock

Ryegate

Sandgate

Vershire

Westford

Westfield

Stamford

Shelburne

Wells

Lunenburg

Braintree

Marshfield

Monkton

Canaan

Shrewsbury

Starksboro

Hardwick

Bridgewater

Brookfield

Mount Holly

South

Hero

Waterford

Wheelock

Shaftsbury

Woodstock

Middlesex

Stockbridge

Hinesburg

Wallingford

Woodbury

Bloomfield

Wilmington

Craftsbury

Putney

Belvidere

Worcester

Bakersfield

Guildhall

Sheffield

Townshend

Cavendish

Bennington

Westmore

Westminster

Manchester

Mount 

Tabor

Charleston

Huntington

Bradford

Andover

Rockingham

Lemington

Washington

Readsboro

Cornwall

Salisbury

Richmond

Maidstone

Tinmouth

Panton

Coventry

Newport Town

Fairlee

Clarendon

Brattleboro

Somerset

Vernon

Windham

Barre Town

Waitsfield

Wardsboro

Sudbury

Goshen

Brunswick

Pittsfield

Windsor

Leicester

Plainfield

Whiting

Fair 

Haven

Enosburg

Jericho

Chelsea

Newfane

North Hero

Moretown

Sunderland

St. AlbansTown

Hyde Park

Williston

Glastenbury

Middlebury

New Haven

Grand Isle

Greensboro

Whitingham

Weathersfield

East Haven

Williamstown

Londonderry

St. Johnsbury

Hubbardton

Dummerston

West Haven

Brownington

Searsburg

East

Montpelier

Athens

RutlandTown

South Burlington

West Fairlee

West 

Windsor

Weybridge

Waterville

Burlington

Averys Gore

Isle La Motte

Stannard

Brookline

West Rutland

Middletown

Springs

Waltham

Proctor

Montpelier

Landgrove

Newport Warren Gore

City

Baltimore

Buels Gore Barre City

St.

George

Vergennes

Warners Grant

Winooski

St. Albans City

Rutland City

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

Figure 4. Population distribution in Vermont by Minor Civil Division in 2005, and projected growth in population from 

2005 to 2020.
2005 and 2020 Population 15

Data Limitations

The VWU database contains over 36,000 entries of sitespecific water-use data (in many cases several hundred records 

for monthly values for individual facilities), out of which 

about 25,000 are based on reported data and 11,000 are based 

on estimates. In addition, more than 23,000 census blocks with 

estimated self-supplied domestic and livestock withdrawals 

and return flows are stored in the database. Checks of occasional anomalous values in reported data resulted in corrections to units or to decimal placement. 

Many of the coefficients used, such as per-capita water 

withdrawals and return flows, water use for industrial facilities based on number of employees and SIC codes, and water 

use for commercial facilities based on SIC codes and other 

site-specific characteristics, were assumed to be the same as 

those determined in the 2003 New Hampshire seacoast wateruse study (Horn and others, 2008) because there have been 

no similarly comprehensive studies in Vermont. Use of these 

coefficients in a study for Vermont assumes that factors related 

to water use—human behavior, climate, and economics—are 

comparable between the two areas. Furthermore, coefficients 

represent averages and are meant to provide relative approximations, rather than absolute accuracy for individual people 

or facilities. Similarly, assumptions about consumptive use, 

which is used to estimate withdrawals or return flows depending on which of the two types of data are available, introduce 

imprecision at the individual person or facility level.

Another limitation relates to using data from the VWU 

database at a finer resolution than MCDs, such as the censusblock level. Populations by census block for 2005 and 2020 

were extrapolated from 2000 populations as a single growth 

factor applied uniformly for all the census blocks in a given 

MCD. This method does not take into account changes in 

population growth rates within the town, that is, intra-MCD 

differences. This would be relevant if a planner, for example, 

was interested in honing in on a specific part of a town, such 

as a potential growth area, or was interested in an assessment 

of the impact of increasing withdrawals on a particular 

local resource. 

Other limitations of data in the VWU database relate 

to seasonal differences in water use. Seasonal differences in 

domestic water use can be significant because summer car 

washing, lawn and garden watering, and filling of swimming 

pools creates greater demand than in winter (Horn and others, 

2008). Seasonal housing and visits to resorts for summer, 

winter, and fall foliage, as well as college or university 

attendance, all may substantially affect water use for particular 

MCDs. Water withdrawals in winter increase in areas with 

heavy snowmobile traffic and at ski areas (especially those 

that make snow) because of the increase in seasonal travelers 

using hotels, restaurants, stores, and condominiums. Water 

withdrawals for crop irrigation were not estimated because 

these data are not collected by any agency, although estimates 

are made at the county level of acres of irrigated land. Also, 

very little crop land in the State is irrigated, and irrigators of 

crop land generally use efficient drip systems (Vern Grubinger, 

University of Vermont Extension, written commun., 2008). 

The structure of the VWU database is flexible enough 

to accommodate inputs and retrievals of seasonal waterwithdrawal and return-flow data, and the database can be 

populated with seasonal estimates for all categories of usage.

Differences from Previous Water-Use 

Compilations

A few differences in the categorization and methods 

used in this study and those used for estimates of water use 

in Vermont published in recent USGS Circulars (Solley and 

others, 1998; Hutson and others, 2004; Kenny and others, 

2009) should be mentioned. Water withdrawals for snowmaking were included in the commercial category of water use as 

defined in the circulars, and these withdrawals are treated as a 

separate category in this report. The D&B dataset used as the 

basis for estimating commercial and industrial withdrawals 

and return flows in this report, in the absence of reported data 

for the VWU database, was not used for the previous USGS 

compilations. Withdrawals for mining, livestock, and fish 

hatcheries in Vermont were estimated by national, rather than 

State, compilers for the 2005 USGS compilation. An explanation of other differences in estimating procedures, for example 

in allocating aggregate estimates between groundwater and 

surface-water sources, can be obtained from the authors.

2005 and 2020 Population

Areas in Vermont with the largest and densest 2005 

population clusters were centered around St. Albans City, 

Burlington, Barre-Montpelier, and Rutland City (fig. 4). 

MCDs with fewer than 2,000 people were spread throughout 

the State. Of the MCDs with projected growth greater than 

20 percent, only four had 2005 populations greater than 2,000: 

Alburgh, Fairfax, Cambridge, and Williston. Of the towns or 

cities with projected changes less than zero (that is, population 

loss), three had 2005 populations greater than 10,000 people: 

Rutland City, Bennington, and Brattleboro. A listing of 2005 

populations and 2020 population projections by MCD, as well 

as populations for 2005 that were self supplied for domestic 

water needs, appears in appendix B. 
16 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

Water Withdrawals and Return Flows 

Estimated for 2005 and Projected for 

2020

Summaries of water withdrawals and return flows by 

MCD for 2005 and projected for 2020 using data retrieved 

from the VWU database are presented in this section. Withdrawal data first are presented Statewide by category and 

source of water, then by MCD showing categories of selfsupplied domestic, CWS, and all other water users aggregated. 

Next, withdrawals of groundwater and surface water are 

presented by MCD. Total withdrawals, return flows, and total 

withdrawals minus return flows are illustrated and discussed. 

A final summary shows withdrawals by major watershed. The 

figures showing MCDs and categories of usage, total withdrawals, total return flows, and withdrawals by watershed also 

show percent of totals from or to groundwater. Appendix B 

shows all of the withdrawal estimates by category and source 

of water, and return flows to groundwater and surface water, 

for each MCD. 

Withdrawals by Category

In 2005, about 12 percent of total withdrawals 

(440 Mgal/d) were from groundwater sources (51 Mgal/d), 

and about 88 percent were from surface-water sources 

(389 Mgal/d) (fig. 5). If the Entergy Nuclear-Vermont Yankee 

plant, which accounted for the largest withdrawals in Vermont, 

was excluded from the analysis, total withdrawals would have 

been about 100 Mgal/d, and withdrawals of surface water 

would have been about 49 Mgal/d, or about 49 percent of the 

total water withdrawn. 

Withdrawals for thermoelectric-power use (340 Mgal/d) 

were about 78 percent of total withdrawals and about 87 percent of withdrawals from surface water (fig. 5). Withdrawals 

for public supply by CWSs (41 Mgal/d) accounted for about 

9 percent of total withdrawals, about 7 percent of surfacewater withdrawals (25 Mgal/d), and about 30 percent of 

groundwater withdrawals (15 Mgal/d). Withdrawals for 

domestic use (23 Mgal/d), almost entirely groundwater, 

accounted for about 5 percent of total withdrawals and about 

46 percent of groundwater withdrawals. Withdrawals for 

snowmaking use (5.8 Mgal/d) were entirely from surface 

water and accounted for about 1 percent of total withdrawals and 2 percent of surface-water withdrawals. Withdrawals 

for commercial and industrial use (8.8 Mgal/d) accounted 

for about 2 percent of total withdrawals, about 8 percent of 

groundwater withdrawals, and about 1 percent of surfacewater withdrawals. Withdrawals for fish hatcheries 

(14 Mgal/d) accounted for about 3 percent of total withdrawals, 9 percent of groundwater withdrawals, and 2 percent of 

surface-water withdrawals. Withdrawals for irrigation 

(1.9 Mgal/d) accounted for less than 1 percent of both total 

withdrawals and surface-water withdrawals. Withdrawals for 

livestock watering (4.2 Mgal/d) accounted for about 1 percent 

of total withdrawals, 6 percent of groundwater withdrawals, 

and less than 1 percent of surface-water withdrawals. In order 

to calculate total domestic, commercial, or industrial water 

use, a value for water delivered to these types of users by public suppliers would need to be estimated and added to the selfsupplied withdrawals that are provided by the VWU database.

Withdrawals for three types of use across Vermont 

in 2005 are shown in figure 6, along with the approximate 

percentage obtained from groundwater sources. About 

51 percent of the statewide population obtained domestic 

water on-site, and about 49 percent was supplied by a CWS 

(appendix B). Towns and cities with withdrawals greater 

than 0.1 Mgal/d for self-supplied domestic use were located 

throughout the State and accounted for at least half of the 

MCDs of Franklin, Chittenden, Lamoille, and Washington 

Counties (fig. 6A). It also can be seen in figure 6 that large 

self-supplied populations tended to be in towns near the 

major cities of St. Albans, Burlington, Montpelier, Barre, and 

Rutland; the cities themselves were served mostly or entirely 

by municipal water systems, but the surrounding areas were 

not. The population distribution map (fig. 4) illustrates that 

people lived in towns within easy commuting distance of 

these and other major cities but where extensive municipal 

water supply and wastewater services may have been absent. 

Withdrawals by households for self-supplied domestic use 

were virtually all from groundwater, although there were a 

few individual residences, mostly summer camps, that used 

lake water for household needs (not shown on map fig. 6A). 

The number of residences using lake water is dwindling as 

grandfathered permits for withdrawing surface water expire.

About 61 percent of MCDs in Vermont had some 

withdrawals by CWSs in 2005 (fig. 6B). St. Albans Town, 

Burlington, South Burlington, Waterford, Orange, Middlebury, 

Mendon, and Woodford had CWSs that withdrew greater 

than 1 Mgal/d. Many of these withdrawals were for CWSs 

that served large populations in neighboring cities or 

towns, such as St. Albans City (withdrawal in St. Albans 

Town), St. Johnsbury (withdrawals in Waterford), Barre 

City (withdrawals in Orange), Rutland City (withdrawals in 

Mendon), and Bennington (withdrawals in Woodford). Most 

of the large CWSs served, in addition to households, a variety 

of water users such as hospitals, schools, office complexes, 

malls, and manufacturers. The largest single withdrawal 

in Vermont by a CWS (5 Mgal/d in 2005) was from Lake 

Champlain by the Champlain Water District in South 

Burlington and provided water to about 68,000 users through 

12 municipal water systems in Chittenden County (accessed 

June 9, 2009, at http://www.cwd-h2o.org/PDFs/2008%20

Water%20Quality.pdf).

All MCDs that withdrew more than 1 Mgal/d, except 

Middlebury, obtained the water predominantly from surfacewater sources. Most (72 percent) of the MCDs with less than 

1 Mgal/d of CWS withdrawals obtained at least 95 percent of 

those withdrawals from groundwater.
Water Withdrawals and Return Flows Estimated for 2005 and Projected for 2020 17

CWS, 15, 30%

TP, 0.5, 1%

DO, 23, 46%

LV, 3.1, 6%

CI, 4.0 8%

FH, 4.7, 9%

IR, 1.9, 1% LV, 4.2, 1%

DO, 23, 5% 

CI, 8.8, 2%

CWS, 41, 9%

FH, 14, 3%

SN, 5.8, 1%

TP, 340, 78%

Total withdrawals

Total = 440 million gallons per day

Groundwater

Total = 51 million gallons per day

SN, 5.8, 2%

IR, 1.9, 1% LV, 1.0, 0%

CWS, 25, 7%

FH, 9.7, 2%

CI, 4.8, 1%

TP, 340, 87%

Surface water

Total = 389 million gallons per day

TP Thermoelectric power

FH Fish hatcheries

DO Domestic

LV Livestock

CI Commercial and industrial

IR Irrigation

SN Snowmaking

CWS Public supply, community water system

EXPLANATION

Category of water withdrawal, volume withdrawn by 

users in the category, in million gallons per day, percent 

of total for the pie chart contributed by withdrawals 

within this category. 

LV, 4.2, 1%

Figure 5. Water withdrawals in Vermont by category of use and source in 2005.
18 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020 73° 72° 45° 44° 43° 73° 72° 45° 44° 43° 73° 72° 45° 44° 43° Montpelier Rutland City Barre City St. Albans City Bethel Chittenden StrattonKillington Lunenburg Bennington Grand Isle Brattleboro Vernon Orange Woodford Mendon Waterford St. Albans Town Bennington Middlebury St. Johnsbury Rutland City Barre City South Burlington Burlington

A

B

C

Burlington

St. Albans City

Percent from groundwater—All  withdrawals for domestic use are assumed to be from groundwater.

≤ 50> 50 to < 95> 95

Million gallons per day

A

B

C

≤

>

WINDSOR

ESSEX

RUTLAND

ADDISON

WINDHAM

ORANGE

ORLEANS FRANKLIN

CALEDONIA

BENNINGTON

WASHINGTON

CHITTENDEN

LAMOILLE

GRAND ISLE

WINDSOR

ESSEX

RUTLAND

ADDISON

WINDHAM

ORANGE

ORLEANS

FRANKLIN

CALEDONIA

BENNINGTON

WASHINGTON

CHITTENDEN

LAMOILLE

GRAND ISLE

WINDSOR

ESSEX

RUTLAND

ADDISON

WINDHAM

ORANGE

ORLEANS FRANKLIN

CALEDONIA

BENNINGTON

WASHINGTON

CHITTENDEN

LAMOILLE

GRAND ISLE

TownCountyLess than or equal toGreater than

EXPLANATION

≤ 0.05> 0.05 to 0.1> 0.1 to 1> 1 to 340

No reported withdrawals

U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000 scale, Digital Elevation Model Dataset, 1998,Vermont State Plane Coordinate System, North American Datum 1983 

0 10 20 MILES

0 10 20 KILOMETERS

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

Figure 6. Total water withdrawals by (A) domestic self-supplied users, (B) community water systems, and (C) all other users, and percent of total from groundwater sources in Vermont, 2005.
Water Withdrawals and Return Flows Estimated for 2005 and Projected for 2020 19

Large withdrawals for other uses, greater than 1 Mgal/d 

(fig. 6C), generally corresponded to areas where public 

suppliers were absent because these withdrawals were for 

single users—snowmaking (Killington and Stratton), fish 

hatcheries (Grand Isle, Bethel, Chittenden, and Bennington), 

industries (Lunenburg and Brattleboro), and a power producer 

(Vernon). Except for Bethel, these large single users withdrew 

predominately surface water. The fish hatchery in Bethel 

withdrew groundwater from a zone near a stream that could 

appropriately be described as groundwater under the influence 

of surface water. 

For 95 out of 247 MCDs that had less than 1 Mgal/d 

withdrawn for other uses, greater than 95 percent of the 

withdrawals were groundwater. This percentage might have 

been slightly overestimated because of the assumption that all 

estimated water withdrawals for industrial and commercial 

uses, if not otherwise known, were groundwater. 

Groundwater

In 2005, Middlebury, Bethel, Hartford, Springfield, and 

Bennington had the largest withdrawals of groundwater, all 

greater than 1.0 Mgal/d (fig. 7). The smallest amounts of 

groundwater withdrawn generally corresponded to the smallest populations (fig. 4) in towns scattered throughout the State, 

such as in the northeast and the southern-central sections of 

the State.

Statewide in 2005, the largest percentage of groundwater 

withdrawals (46 percent) was for domestic use, with the largest amount (0.44 Mgal/d) for this use withdrawn by residents 

of Milton (appendix B). Withdrawals by CWSs, accounting for 

about 30 percent of withdrawals from groundwater statewide, 

were largest (greater than 0.87 Mgal/d) in Newport City, 

Middlebury, Hartford, and Springfield, where they comprised 

at least 75 percent of groundwater withdrawals. Withdrawals 

by fish hatcheries in Bethel (2.86 Mgal/d) and Bennington 

(1.11 Mgal/d) accounted for at least 73 percent of groundwater withdrawals in those towns. Withdrawals by self-supplied 

commercial and industrial facilities, spread throughout 

93 percent of Vermont’s MCDs, were largest (greater than 

0.2 Mgal/d) in Sheldon and Sharon. At least 80 percent of 

groundwater withdrawals in the towns of Panton, Addison, 

and Bridport were for livestock use. In addition to those three, 

other towns with groundwater withdrawals greater than 

0.1 Mgal/d for livestock use were Highgate, Swanton, 

Sheldon, Berkshire, Newport, St. Albans, and Fairfield. About 

94 percent of groundwater withdrawals in Burlington were for 

thermoelectric-power production (0.47 Mgal/d) at the McNeil 

Generating Station. 

Five towns, North Hero, Brunswick, Victory, Guildhall, 

and Searsburg have large projected percent increases in 

population resulting in large projected percent increases in 

groundwater withdrawals (greater than 20 percent) but very 

small projected volumetric increases (less than or equal 

to 0.01 Mgal/d) because the populations are small (figs. 7, 

8). Fairfax, Hardwick, Middlebury, Sharon, Proctor, and 

Manchester are noteworthy because they have large projected 

increases both in terms of amounts (greater than 

0.1 Mgal/d) and percentages (greater than 20 percent). 

Alburgh, Lunenburg, Williston, Warren, Winhall, and Dover 

have moderately large projected changes in total gallons 

(greater than 0.05 Mgal/d), as well as projected percent 

increases greater than 20 percent.

In addition to population growth causing projected 

increases in groundwater withdrawals, in some communities 

the increase in projected withdrawals also may be due to a 

single facility, such as a CWS or an industry. These possible 

explanatory factors appear as patterns superimposed onto 

MCDs with changes in groundwater withdrawals greater than 

0.05 Mgal/d (fig. 8). Although both factors may contribute 

to the projected increase, the pattern shown is that which 

explains over 50 percent of the increase. The implications are 

that (1) withdrawals for MCDs with projected increases due to 

population increases are distributed within the MCD proportionately with the population distribution and (2) withdrawals 

for MCDs with projected increases due to an individual facility would affect a single location within the MCD.

In 2005, groundwater withdrawals minus return flows to 

groundwater were larger than 1 Mgal/d in Middlebury, Bethel, 

Hartford, and Bennington, reflecting places where large 

groundwater withdrawals were predominantly returned to 

surface water (fig. 9). Projections for 2020 put the same four 

towns into the same largest grouping. In contrast, return flows 

to groundwater were larger than withdrawals from groundwater in MCDs with ski areas that withdrew surface water for 

snowmaking and returned an estimated 50 percent of those 

withdrawals to groundwater. 

The town of Dover, Vt., illustrates the capability of the 

VWU database to show details of groundwater withdrawals at 

the census-block level within an MCD. The 2005 withdrawals 

of groundwater were the largest in the census block (labeled 1 

in fig. 10A) to the east of Route 100 where the road’s direction turned northerly and in the census block (labeled 2) to 

the west of Route 100. Withdrawals of groundwater were 

large (> 0.01–0.03 Mgal/d) in four additional census blocks 

(3 through 6). Projected withdrawals of groundwater in 2020 

show three additional census blocks (7 through 9) that fall into 

the large (> 0.01–0.03 Mgal/d) grouping (fig. 10B). This detail 

may help planners target specific areas for in-depth resource 

availability assessments if water availability is a concern. As 

more information becomes available, refinements can be made 

to the map based on factors such as population distribution 

within the MCD.
20 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

≤ 

73° 72°

45°

44°

43°

CANADA

0 10 20 MILES

0 10 20 KILOMETERS

Eden

Stowe

Milton

Jay

Derby

Lowell

Fairfield

Ira

Troy

Groton

Peru

Orwell

Danville

Ripton

Newbury

Bethel

Dorset

Chester

Swanton

Chittenden

Lewis

Barton

Corinth

Highgate

Rupert

Bolton

Bristol

Barnet

Brighton

Essex

Lincoln

Danby

Cabot

Berlin

Pawlet

Pownal

Averill

Victory

Concord

Calais

Alburgh

Barnard

Winhall

Addison

Dover

Ferrisburg

Stratton

Benson

Sutton

Jamaica

Bridport

Fairfax

Glover

Halifax

Underhill

Cambridge

Granville

Norton

Burke

Albany

Georgia

Hartford

Colchester

Rochester

Sharon

Elmore

Charlotte

Warren

Norwich

Lyndon

Johnson

Topsham

Hartland

Thetford

Pittsford

Wolcott

Granby

Plymouth

Ferdinand

Killington

Orange

Walden

Richford

Strafford

Duxbury

Franklin

Grafton

Ludlow

Holland

Guilford

Peacham

Pomfret

Randolph

Roxbury

Poultney

Irasburg

Reading

Woodford

Newark

Kirby

Waterbury

Sheldon

Arlington

Fletcher

Brandon

Weston

Mendon

Springfield

Morristown

Northfield

Royalton

Marlboro

Fayston

Montgomery

Morgan

Castleton

Tunbridge

Shoreham

Berkshire

Hancock

Ryegate

Sandgate

Vershire

Westford

Westfield

Stamford

Shelburne

Wells

Lunenburg

Braintree

Marshfield

Monkton

Canaan

Shrewsbury

Starksboro

Hardwick

Bridgewater

Brookfield

Mount Holly

South

Hero

Waterford

Wheelock

Shaftsbury

Woodstock

Middlesex

Stockbridge

Hinesburg

Wallingford

Woodbury

Bloomfield

Wilmington

Craftsbury

Putney

Belvidere

Worcester

Bakersfield

Guildhall

Sheffield

Townshend

Cavendish

Bennington

Westmore

Westminster

Manchester

Mount 

Tabor

Charleston

Huntington

Bradford

Andover

Rockingham

Lemington

Washington

Readsboro

Cornwall

Salisbury

Richmond

Maidstone

Tinmouth

Panton

Coventry

Newport Town

Fairlee

Clarendon

Brattleboro

Somerset

Vernon

Windham

Barre Town

Waitsfield

Wardsboro

Sudbury

Goshen

Brunswick

Pittsfield

Windsor

Leicester

Plainfield

Whiting

Fair 

Haven

Enosburg

Jericho

Chelsea

Newfane

North Hero

Moretown

Sunderland

St. AlbansTown

Hyde Park

Williston

Glastenbury

Middlebury

New Haven

Grand Isle

Greensboro

Whitingham

Weathersfield

East Haven

Williamstown

Londonderry

St. Johnsbury

Hubbardton

Dummerston

West Haven

Brownington

Searsburg

East

Montpelier

Athens

Rutland Town

South Burlington

West Fairlee

West 

Windsor

Weybridge

Waterville

Burlington

Isle La Motte Averys Gore

Stannard

Brookline

West Rutland

Middletown

Springs

Waltham

Proctor

Montpelier

Landgrove

Warren Gore Newport

City

Baltimore

Buels Gore Barre City

St. George

Vergennes

Warners Grant

Winooski

St. Albans City

WINDSOR

ESSEX

RUTLAND

ADDISON

WINDHAM

FRANKLIN ORLEANS

CALEDONIA

WASHINGTON

BENNINGTON

CHITTENDEN

LAMOILLE

GRAND ISLE

ORANGE

U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000 scale, Digital Elevation Model Dataset, 1998,

Vermont State Plane Coordinate System, North American Datum 1983 

EXPLANATION

Groundwater withdrawals, in

 million gallons per day

 ≤ 0.1

 > 0.1 to 0.3

 > 0.3 to 1

 > 1 to 3

County

Town

Projected percent change

 − 20 to 0

 > 0 to 20

 > 20 to 495

Less than or equal to

> Greater than

Lake Champlain

Connecticut River New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

Figure 7. Withdrawals of groundwater in Vermont in 2005 and projected percent changes in withdrawals of 

groundwater from 2005 to 2020. 
Water Withdrawals and Return Flows Estimated for 2005 and Projected for 2020 21

Eden

Stowe

Milton

Jay Derby

Lowell Fairfield

Ira

Troy

Groton

Peru

Orwell

Danville

Ripton

Newbury

Bethel

Dorset

Chester

Swanton

Chittenden

Lewis

Barton

Corinth

Highgate

Rupert

Bolton

Bristol

Barnet

Brighton

Essex

Lincoln

Danby

Cabot

Berlin

Pawlet

Pownal

Averill

Victory

Concord

Calais

Alburgh

Barnard

Winhall

Addison

Dover

Ferrisburg

Stratton Benson

Sutton

Jamaica

Bridport

Fairfax

Glover

Halifax

Underhill

Cambridge

Granville

Norton

Burke

Albany

Georgia

Hartford

Colchester

Rochester

Sharon

Elmore

Charlotte

Warren

Norwich

Lyndon

Johnson

Topsham

Hartland

Thetford

Pittsford

Wolcott

Granby

Plymouth

Ferdinand

Killington

Orange

Walden

Richford

Strafford

Duxbury

Franklin

Grafton

Ludlow

Holland

Guilford

Peacham

Pomfret

Randolph

Roxbury

Poultney

Irasburg

Reading

Woodford

Newark

Kirby

Waterbury

Sheldon

Arlington

Fletcher

Brandon

Weston

Mendon

Springfield

Morristown

Northfield

Royalton

Marlboro

Fayston

Montgomery

Morgan

Castleton

Tunbridge

Shoreham

Berkshire

Hancock

Ryegate

Sandgate

Vershire

Westford

Westfield

Stamford

Shelburne

Wells

Lunenburg

Braintree

Marshfield

Monkton

Canaan

Shrewsbury

Starksboro

Hardwick

Bridgewater

Brookfield

Mount Holly

South

Hero

Waterford

Wheelock

Shaftsbury

Woodstock

Middlesex

Stockbridge

Hinesburg

Wallingford

Woodbury

Bloomfield

Wilmington

Craftsbury

Putney

Belvidere

Worcester

Bakersfield

Guildhall

Sheffield

Townshend

Cavendish

Bennington

Westmore

Westminster

Manchester

Mount 

Tabor

Charleston

Huntington

Bradford

Andover

Rockingham

Lemington

Washington

Readsboro

Cornwall

Salisbury

Richmond

Maidstone

Tinmouth

Panton

Coventry

Newport Town

Fairlee

Clarendon

Brattleboro

Somerset

Vernon

Windham

Barre Town

Waitsfield

Wardsboro

Sudbury

Goshen

Brunswick

Pittsfield

Windsor

Leicester

Plainfield

Whiting

Fair 

Haven

Enosburg

Jericho

Chelsea

Newfane

North Hero

Moretown

Sunderland

St. AlbansTown

Hyde Park

Williston

Glastenbury

Middlebury

New Haven

Grand Isle

Greensboro

Whitingham

Weathersfield

East Haven

Williamstown

Londonderry

St. Johnsbury

Hubbardton

Dummerston

West Haven

Brownington

Searsburg

East

Montpelier

Athens

Rutland Town

South Burlington

West Fairlee

West 

Windsor

Weybridge

Waterville

Burlington

Averys Gore

Isle La Motte

Stannard

Brookline

West Rutland

Middletown Springs

Waltham

Proctor

Montpelier

Landgrove

Newport Warren Gore City

Baltimore

Buels Gore Barre City

St. George

Vergennes

Warners Grant

Winooski

St. Albans City

Rutland City

EXPLANATION

Projected changes in groundwater withdrawals,

 in million gallons per day

 ≤ 0.01

 > 0.01 to 0.05

 > 0.05 to 0.1

 > 0.1 to 0.4

Projected changes > 0.05, in million gallons

 per day are based on:

 Distributed population

 Local individual facility

County

Town

Less than or equal to

Greater than

≤

>

73° 72°

45°

44°

43°

CANADA

0 10 20 MILES

0 10 20 KILOMETERS

U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000 scale, Digital Elevation Model Dataset, 1998,

Vermont State Plane Coordinate System, North American Datum 1983 

WINDSOR

ESSEX

RUTLAND

ADDISON

WINDHAM

ORLEANS

FRANKLIN

CALEDONIA

WASHINGTON

BENNINGTON

CHITTENDEN

LAMOILLE

GRAND ISLE

ORANGE

Connecticut River

Lake Champlain

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

Figure 8. Projected changes in groundwater withdrawals in Vermont from 2005 to 2020.
22 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000 scale, Digital Elevation Model Dataset, 1998,

Vermont State Plane Coordinate System, North American Datum 1983 

EXPLANATION

≤ 0

> 0 to 0.1

> 0.1 to 1

> 1 to 3

County

Town

Less than or equal to

Greater than

Groundwater withdrawals minus return flows,

 in million gallons per day

≤

>

CANADA CANADA

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

2005 2020

0 10 20 MILES

0 10 20 KILOMETERS

WINDSOR

ESSEX

RUTLAND

ADDISON

WINDHAM

ORLEANS

FRANKLIN

CALEDONIA

WASHINGTON

BENNINGTON

CHITTENDEN

LAMOILLE

GRAND ISLE

ORANGE

WINDSOR

ESSEX

RUTLAND

ADDISON

WINDHAM

ORLEANS

FRANKLIN

CALEDONIA

WASHINGTON

BENNINGTON

CHITTENDEN

LAMOILLE

GRAND ISLE

ORANGE

Rutland City

Eden

Stowe

Milton

Jay Derby

Lowell Fairfield

Ira

Troy

Groton

Peru

Orwell

Danville

Ripton

Newbury

Bethel

Dorset

Chester

Swanton

Chittenden

Lewis

Barton

Corinth

Highgate

Rupert

Bolton

Bristol

Barnet

Brighton

Essex

Lincoln

Danby

Cabot

Berlin

Pawlet

Pownal

Victory

Concord

Calais

Alburgh

Barnard

Winhall

Addison

Dover

Ferrisburg

Stratton Benson

Sutton

Jamaica

Bridport

Fairfax

Glover

Halifax

Underhill

Cambridge

Granville

Norton

Burke

Albany

Georgia

Hartford

Colchester

Rochester

Sharon

Elmore

Charlotte

Warren

Norwich

Lyndon

Johnson

Topsham

Hartland

Thetford

Pittsford

Wolcott

Plymouth

Ferdinand

Killington

Orange

Walden

Richford

Strafford

Duxbury

Franklin

Grafton

Ludlow

Holland

Guilford

Peacham

Pomfret

Randolph

Roxbury

Poultney

Irasburg

Reading

Woodford

Newark

Kirby

Waterbury

Sheldon

Arlington

Fletcher

Brandon

Weston

Mendon

Springfield

Morristown

Northfield

Royalton

Marlboro

Fayston

Montgomery

Morgan

Castleton

Tunbridge

Shoreham

Berkshire

Hancock

Ryegate

Sandgate

Vershire

Westford

Westfield

Stamford

Shelburne

Wells

Braintree

Marshfield

Monkton

Shrewsbury

Starksboro

Hardwick

Bridgewater

Brookfield

Mount Holly

South

Hero

Waterford

Wheelock

Shaftsbury

Woodstock

Middlesex

Stockbridge

Hinesburg

Wallingford

Woodbury

Wilmington

Craftsbury

Putney

Belvidere

Worcester

Bakersfield

Sheffield

Townshend

Cavendish

Bennington

Westmore

Westminster

Manchester

Mount 

Tabor

Charleston

Huntington

Bradford

Andover

Rockingham

Washington

Readsboro

Cornwall

Salisbury

Richmond

Tinmouth

Panton

Coventry

Newport Town

Fairlee

Clarendon

Brattleboro

Somerset

Vernon

Windham

Barre Town

Waitsfield

Wardsboro

Sudbury

Goshen

Pittsfield

Windsor

Leicester

Plainfield

Whiting

Fair 

Haven

Enosburg

Jericho

Chelsea

Newfane

North Hero

Moretown

Sunderland

St. AlbansTown

Hyde Park

Williston

Glastenbury

Middlebury

New Haven

Grand Isle

Greensboro

Whitingham

Weathersfield

East Haven

Williamstown

Londonderry

St. Johnsbury

Hubbardton

Dummerston

West Haven

Brownington

Searsburg

East

Montpelier

Athens

Rutland Town

South Burlington

West Fairlee

West 

Windsor

Weybridge

Waterville

Burlington

Averys Gore

Isle La Motte

Stannard

Brookline

West Rutland

Middletown

Springs

Waltham

Proctor

Montpelier

Landgrove

Newport Warren Gore

City

Baltimore

Buels Gore Barre City

St.

George

Vergennes

Warners Grant

Winooski

St. Albans City

Averill

Granby

Lunenburg

Canaan

Bloomfield

Guildhall

Lemington

Maidstone

Brunswick

Rutland City

Eden

Stowe

Milton

Jay Derby

Lowell Fairfield

Ira

Troy

Groton

Peru

Orwell

Danville

Ripton

Newbury

Bethel

Dorset

Chester

Swanton

Chittenden

Lewis

Barton

Corinth

Highgate

Rupert

Bolton

Bristol

Barnet

Brighton

Essex

Lincoln

Danby

Cabot

Berlin

Pawlet

Pownal

Victory

Concord

Calais

Alburgh

Barnard

Winhall

Addison

Dover

Ferrisburg

Stratton Benson

Sutton

Jamaica

Bridport

Fairfax

Glover

Halifax

Underhill

Cambridge

Granville

Norton

Burke

Albany

Georgia

Hartford

Colchester

Rochester

Sharon

Elmore

Charlotte

Warren

Norwich

Lyndon

Johnson

Topsham

Hartland

Thetford

Pittsford

Wolcott

Plymouth

Ferdinand

Killington

Orange

Walden

Richford

Strafford

Duxbury

Franklin

Grafton

Ludlow

Holland

Guilford

Peacham

Pomfret

Randolph

Roxbury

Poultney

Irasburg

Reading

Woodford

Newark

Kirby

Waterbury

Sheldon

Arlington

Fletcher

Brandon

Weston

Mendon

Springfield

Morristown

Northfield

Royalton

Marlboro

Fayston

Montgomery

Morgan

Castleton

Tunbridge

Shoreham

Berkshire

Hancock

Ryegate

Sandgate

Vershire

Westford

Westfield

Stamford

Shelburne

Wells

Braintree

Marshfield

Monkton

Shrewsbury

Starksboro

Hardwick

Bridgewater

Brookfield

Mount Holly

South

Hero

Waterford

Wheelock

Shaftsbury

Woodstock

Middlesex

Stockbridge

Hinesburg

Wallingford

Woodbury

Wilmington

Craftsbury

Putney

Belvidere

Worcester

Bakersfield

Sheffield

Townshend

Cavendish

Bennington

Westmore

Westminster

Manchester

Mount 

Tabor

Charleston

Huntington

Bradford

Andover

Rockingham

Washington

Readsboro

Cornwall

Salisbury

Richmond

Tinmouth

Panton

Coventry

Newport Town

Fairlee

Clarendon

Brattleboro

Somerset

Vernon

Windham

Barre Town

Waitsfield

Wardsboro

Sudbury

Goshen

Pittsfield

Windsor

Leicester

Plainfield

Whiting

Fair 

Haven

Enosburg

Jericho

Chelsea

Newfane

North Hero

Moretown

Sunderland

St. AlbansTown

Hyde Park

Williston

Glastenbury

Middlebury

New Haven

Grand Isle

Greensboro

Whitingham

Weathersfield

East Haven

Williamstown

Londonderry

St. Johnsbury

Hubbardton

Dummerston

West Haven

Brownington

Searsburg

East

Montpelier

Athens

RutlandTown

South Burlington

West Fairlee

West 

Windsor

Weybridge

Waterville

Burlington

Averys Gore

Isle La Motte

Stannard

Brookline

West Rutland

Middletown

Springs

Waltham

Proctor

Montpelier

Landgrove

Newport Warren Gore

City

Baltimore

Buels Gore Barre City

St.

George

Vergennes

Warners Grant

Winooski

St. Albans City

Averill

Granby

Lunenburg

Canaan

Bloomfield

Guildhall

Lemington

Maidstone

Brunswick

73° 72°

45°

44°

43°

73° 72°

45°

44°

43°

Figure 9. Groundwater withdrawals minus return flows to groundwater in Vermont in 2005 and projected for 2020.
Water Withdrawals and Return Flows Estimated for 2005 and Projected for 2020 23

72°50'

0 1 2 MILES

0 1 2 KILOMETERS

72°50'

43°

43°

6

Route 100

8

4

2

3

5

1

7

9

Wilmington

Newfane

Wardsboro

Somerset

Stratton

EXPLANATION

0 to 0.002

> 0.002 to 0.01

> 0.01 to 0.03

> 0.03 to 0.06

Roads

Census block outline

 and number

Greater than

Wilmington

Wardsboro

Newfane

Stratton

Somerset

Route 100

4

2

3

1

6

5

7

8

9 9

Withdrawals, in million

 gallons per day

>

A

B

Figure 10. Census blocks in Dover, Vermont, showing (A) withdrawals of groundwater in 2005 and (B) projected withdrawals of 

groundwater in 2020.
24 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

Surface Water

 In 2005, Grand Isle, Burlington, South Burlington, 

Mendon, Brattleboro, and Vernon had the largest withdrawals of surface water, greater than 2 Mgal/d (fig. 11). For all 

of those MCDs except Brattleboro, single categories of users 

accounted for at least 95 percent of the withdrawals: fish 

hatchery (Grand Isle), CWS (Burlington, South Burlington, 

and Mendon), and thermoelectric power (Vernon). The largest withdrawal of surface water from a single facility, about 

340 Mgal/d in 2005, was from the Connecticut River for 

thermoelectric-power production (once-through cooling) at 

the Entergy Nuclear-Vermont Yankee plant in Vernon, and the 

second largest, about 7 Mgal/d, was from Lake Champlain 

for the Grand Isle Fish Hatchery. St. Albans Town, Waterford, 

Orange, and Woodford also had CWS withdrawals from 

surface water greater than 1 Mgal/d. Chittenden and 

Bennington, in addition to Grand Isle, withdrew greater 

than 1 Mgal/d from surface water for use at fish hatcheries. 

Withdrawals from surface water for snowmaking were largest, greater than 0.5 Mgal/d, in Stowe, Killington, Ludlow, 

Stratton, and Dover. Close to 100 percent of withdrawals from 

surface water (greater than 0.06 Mgal/d) in the towns of 

Hartford and Manchester were for irrigation at golf courses. 

Golf courses in Stowe and Killington also withdrew greater 

than 0.06 Mgal/d for irrigation. Close to 100 percent of withdrawals from surface water in Highgate and Newport Town, 

about 0.05 and 0.04 Mgal/d, respectively, were for livestock 

use. Overall, only about 18 percent of the State’s MCDs withdrew at least 0.1 Mgal/d from surface water in 2005.

Because few MCDs in the State withdrew more than 

0.1 Mgal/d of surface water in 2005, projected changes in 

withdrawals of surface water from 2005 to 2020 consist of 

values that are predominantly less than or equal to 0 

(fig. 12). Large (greater than 0.5 Mgal/d) projected increases 

in withdrawals of surface water generally reflect estimated 

expansion of snowmaking operations at Green Mountain ski 

resorts in Stowe, Warren, Mendon, Killington, and Wilmington 

(fig. 1). A new surface-water source in Wilmington proposed 

to be used for snowmaking at Mount Snow in Dover accounts 

for Wilmington having both the greatest projected percent 

change and the greatest projected surface-water withdrawals.

Total Withdrawals and Return Flows

Eight MCDs had total withdrawals greater than 

2 Mgal/d, and 41 had total withdrawals of 0.5 to 2 Mgal/d 

(fig. 13). Of MCDs with total withdrawals greater than 

2 Mgal/d, one, Bethel, obtained greater than 95 percent of 

its water from groundwater, and one, Bennington, obtained 

50 to 95 percent of its water from groundwater. The rest of 

the MCDs obtained most of their water from surface-water 

sources. Of MCDs with total withdrawals of 0.5 to 2 Mgal/d, 

6 (Milton, Lyndon, Northfield, Middlebury, Salisbury, and 

Springfield) obtained more than 95 percent of their water from 

groundwater, and 14 others obtained 50 to 95 percent of their 

water from groundwater.

The largest projected total withdrawals by gallons and 

percent change generally occur in or near towns with ski 

areas, such as Cambridge, Burke, Stowe, Bolton, Warren, 

Killington, Plymouth, Ludlow, and Wilmington (fig. 14). 

This pattern may reflect that projections of water use for the 

snowmaking category were more readily available than for 

other categories. Counties where more than one-half of the 

MCDs have projected increases greater than 0.01 Mgal/d are 

Franklin, Orleans, Chittenden, Lamoille, Caledonia, Rutland, 

and Windham. 

The pattern of return-flow volumes (fig. 15) is similar 

to the pattern of total withdrawals (fig. 13). Return flow to 

groundwater comprises indirect discharges, leach fields, and 

an estimated 50 percent of snowmaking withdrawals at ski 

areas that are returned to the local environment as snowmelt 

(fig. 15). In 2005, most (21 out of 24) of the MCDs with return 

flows greater than 1 Mgal/d returned less than 50 percent 

to groundwater because more than one-half of their return 

flows were from municipal wastewater-treatment facilities 

with direct discharges to surface water. All MCDs with return 

flows of as much as 0.05 Mgal/d and most MCDs with return 

flows of 0.05 to 0.2 Mgal/d returned greater than 95 percent 

of their water to groundwater. The largest return flows to 

groundwater (appendix B) occurred in towns with ski areas 

(Stowe, Warren, Killington, Ludlow, Stratton and Dover) 

and also in Bennington and the Chittenden County towns of 

Milton, Colchester, Essex, and Jericho, where municipal sewer 

service areas did not cover large segments of the population. 

The seasonal element of return flows from snowmaking is 

important from a resource availability perspective.

The pattern of projected return flows for 2020 looks 

similar to the return-flow pattern for 2005 (fig. 15) because 

planned changes in the capacity of wastewater-treatment 

facilities were not assessed. Changes in volumetric groupings 

of return flows from 2005 to 2020 are based either on changes 

in population projections or on increases in snowmelt at ski 

areas due to increased withdrawals for snowmaking. 

In 2005, South Burlington, Waterford, Orange, Mendon, 

Woodford, and Vernon had the largest differences between 

withdrawals and return flows, greater than 1 Mgal/d (fig. 16). 

Except for South Burlington and Vernon, these were small 

towns with no obvious industry or large public supplier; however, water from these towns was withdrawn by CWSs for use 

and return to the environment in neighboring towns or cities. 

That is, the source of water used by the St. Johnsbury Water 

System was in Waterford; the source for the Barre City Water 

System was in Orange; the source for the Rutland City Water 

Department was in Mendon; and the primary source for the 

Bennington Water Department was in Woodford. Projections 

for 2020 indicate that Wilmington will join the previously 

listed MCDs whose differences between withdrawals and 

return flows are greater than 1 Mgal/d. A projected increase in 

withdrawals for snowmaking at a Dover ski area accounts for 

the increase in Wilmington. 
Water Withdrawals and Return Flows Estimated for 2005 and Projected for 2020 25

0 10 20 MILES

0 10 20 KILOMETERS

U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000 scale, Digital Elevation Model Dataset, 1998,

Vermont State Plane Coordinate System, North American Datum 1983 

EXPLANATION

Surface-water withdrawals,

 in million gallons per day

 ≤ 0.1

 > 0.1 to 0.5

 > 0.5 to 2

 > 2 to 340

County

Town

Projected percent change

– 100 to 0

> 0 to 20

> 20

 Lack of symbol indicates no change because

 all withdrawals are from groundwater

≤

>

Less than or equal to

Greater than

73° 72°

45°

44°

43°

CANADA

Stowe

Fairfield

Swanton

Chittenden

Barton

Berlin

Alburgh

Winhall

Addison

Dover

Stratton

Fairfax

Cambridge

Georgia

Warren

Plymouth

Killington

Orange

Richford

Ludlow

Roxbury

Woodford Marlboro

Fayston

Ryegate

Lunenburg

North Hero

Waterford

Shaftsbury

Woodstock

Bradford

Grand Isle

Rockingham

Panton

Fair Haven

Mendon

St. Albans Town

Bennington

Brattleboro

Vernon

Dummerston

Rutland Town

South 

Burlington

West 

Windsor

Burlington

Eden

Peru

Bethel

Lewis

Corinth

Rupert

Cabot

Pownal

Averill

Victory

Concord

Calais

Jamaica

Halifax

Granville

Norton

Sharon

Elmore

Norwich

Topsham

Hartland

Thetford

Wolcott

Granby

Ferdinand

Strafford

Duxbury

Grafton Guilford

Pomfret

Reading

Chelsea

Arlington

Weston

Newfane

Morgan

Tunbridge

Hancock

Sandgate

Vershire

Braintree

Marshfield

Canaan

Bridgewater

Brookfield

Moretown

Sunderland

Middlesex

Stockbridge

Bloomfield

Putney

Belvidere

Worcester

Guildhall

Townshend

Cavendish

Hyde Park

Westmore

Westminster

Andover

Lemington

Washington

Maidstone

Somerset

Windham

Waitsfield

Wardsboro

Brunswick

Glastenbury

Whitingham

Weathersfield

East Haven

Williamstown

Londonderry

Hubbardton

Pittsfield

Searsburg

East Montpelier

Athens

West Fairlee

Waterville

Averys Gore

Brookline

Proctor

Landgrove

Warren Gore

Rutland City

Baltimore

Buels Gore Barre City

Vergennes

Warners Grant

Winooski

St. Albans City

Milton

Jay Derby

Lowell

Ira

Troy

Groton

Orwell

Danville

Ripton

Newbury

Dorset

Chester

Highgate

Bolton

Bristol

Barnet

Brighton

Essex

Lincoln

Pawlet Danby

Barnard

Ferrisburg

Benson

Sutton

Bridport

Glover

Underhill

Burke

Albany

Hartford

Colchester

Rochester

Charlotte

Lyndon

Johnson

Pittsford

Walden

Franklin

Holland

Peacham

Enosburg

Randolph

Poultney

Irasburg

Jericho

Newark

Kirby

Waterbury

Sheldon

Fletcher

Brandon

Springfield

Morristown

Northfield

Royalton

Montgomery

Castleton

Shoreham

Berkshire

Westford

Westfield

Stamford

Shelburne

Wells

Monkton

Shrewsbury

Hardwick

Mount Holly

South Hero Wheelock

Hinesburg

Wallingford

Woodbury

Wilmington

Craftsbury

Bakersfield

Sheffield

Williston

Middlebury

New Haven

Mount Tabor

Charleston

Huntington Readsboro

Cornwall

Salisbury

Richmond

Tinmouth

Coventry

Newport Town

Sudbury

Goshen

Windsor

Leicester

Plainfield

Whiting

Starksboro

Manchester

Greensboro

Fairlee

Clarendon

Barre Town

St. Johnsbury

West Haven

Brownington

Weybridge

Isle La Motte

Stannard

West Rutland

Middletown Springs

Waltham

Montpelier

St. George

Newport City

Connecticut River

Lake Champlain

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

Figure 11. Withdrawals of surface water in 2005 and projected percent changes in withdrawals of surface water from 2005 

to 2020 in Vermont.
26 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

EXPLANATION

 − 0.6 to 0

 > 0 to 0.05

 > 0.05 to 0.5

County

Town

> Greater than

 > 0.5 to 2

Stowe

Warren

Killington

Mendon Wilmington

73° 72°

45°

44°

43°

CANADA

Eden

Peru

Bethel

Lewis

Corinth

Rupert

Cabot

Pownal

Averill

Victory

Concord

Calais

Jamaica

Halifax

Granville

Norton

Sharon

Elmore

Norwich

Topsham

Hartland

Thetford

Wolcott

Granby

Ferdinand

Strafford

Duxbury

Grafton Guilford

Pomfret

Reading

Chelsea

Arlington

Weston

Newfane

Morgan

Tunbridge

Hancock

Sandgate

Vershire

Braintree

Marshfield

Canaan

Bridgewater

Brookfield

Moretown

Sunderland

Middlesex

Stockbridge

Bloomfield

Putney

Belvidere

Worcester

Guildhall

Townshend

Cavendish

Hyde Park

Westmore

Glastenbury

Westminster

Andover

Lemington

Washington

Maidstone

Somerset

Windham

Waitsfield

Wardsboro

Brunswick

Pittsfield

Whitingham

Weathersfield

East Haven

Williamstown

Londonderry

Hubbardton

Searsburg

East Montpelier

Athens

West Fairlee

Waterville

Averys Gore

Brookline

Proctor

Landgrove

Warren Gore

Rutland City

Baltimore

Buels Gore Barre City

Vergennes

Warners Grant

Winooski

St. Albans City

Milton

Jay Derby

Fairfield Lowell

Ira

Troy

Groton

Orwell

Danville

Ripton

Newbury

Dorset Chester

Swanton

Chittenden

Barton

Highgate

Bolton

Bristol

Barnet

Brighton

Essex

Lincoln

Danby

Berlin

Pawlet

Alburgh

Barnard

Winhall

Addison

Dover

Ferrisburg

Stratton Benson

Sutton

Bridport

Fairfax

Glover

Underhill

Cambridge

Burke

Georgia

Albany

Hartford

Colchester

Rochester

Charlotte

Lyndon

Johnson

Pittsford

Plymouth

Orange

Walden

Richford

Franklin

Ludlow

Holland

Peacham

Enosburg

Randolph

Roxbury

Poultney

Irasburg

Jericho

Woodford

Newark Kirby

Waterbury

Sheldon

Fletcher

Brandon

Springfield

Morristown

Northfield

Royalton

Marlboro

Fayston

Montgomery

Castleton

Shoreham

Berkshire

Ryegate

Westford

Westfield

Stamford

Shelburne

Wells

Lunenburg

Monkton

Shrewsbury

Starksboro

North Hero

Hardwick

Mount Holly

South Hero

Waterford

Wheelock

Shaftsbury

Woodstock

Hinesburg

Wallingford

Woodbury

Craftsbury

Bakersfield

Sheffield

Bennington

Williston

Middlebury

Manchester

New Haven

Mount Tabor

Charleston

Huntington

Bradford

Grand Isle

Rockingham

Readsboro

Cornwall

Salisbury

Richmond

Tinmouth

Panton

Coventry

Newport Town

Clarendon

Brattleboro

Vernon

Sudbury

Goshen

Windsor

Leicester

Plainfield

Brownington

Whiting

Fair Haven

St. Albans Town

Greensboro

Fairlee

Barre Town

St. Johnsbury

Dummerston

West Haven

Rutland Town

South Burlington

West 

Windsor

Weybridge

Burlington

Isle La Motte

Stannard

West Rutland

Middletown 

Springs

Waltham

Montpelier

Newport City

St. George

• Mount

Snow

0 10 20 MILES

0 10 20 KILOMETERS

U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000 scale, Digital Elevation Model Dataset, 1998,

Vermont State Plane Coordinate System, North American Datum 1983 

Projected change in withdrawals, in

 million gallons per day

Connecticut River

Lake Champlain

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

Figure 12. Projected changes in withdrawals of surface water from 2005 to 2020 in Vermont.
Water Withdrawals and Return Flows Estimated for 2005 and Projected for 2020 27

Figure 13. Total water withdrawals and percent of total from groundwater sources in Vermont in 2005.

73° 72°

45°

44°

43°

CANADA

Stowe

Milton

Jay

Derby

Fairfield

Troy

Orwell

Danville

Newbury

Bethel

Dorset Chester

Swanton

Chittenden

Barton

Corinth

Highgate

Bolton

Bristol

Barnet

Brighton

Essex

Lincoln

Danby

Cabot

Berlin

Pawlet

Pownal

Concord

Calais

Alburgh

Winhall

Addison

Dover

Ferrisburg

Stratton

Benson

Sutton

Bridport

Fairfax

Underhill

Cambridge

Burke

Albany

Georgia

Hartford

Colchester

Rochester

Sharon

Charlotte

Warren

Norwich

Lyndon

Johnson

Hartland

Thetford

Pittsford

Wolcott

Plymouth

Killington

Orange

Richford

Duxbury

Franklin

Ludlow

Guilford

Enosburg

Randolph

Roxbury

Poultney

Irasburg

Jericho

Woodford

Chelsea

Waterbury

Sheldon

Arlington

Fletcher

Brandon

Springfield

Morristown

Northfield

Royalton

Marlboro

Fayston

Montgomery

Newfane

Castleton

Tunbridge

Shoreham

Berkshire

Ryegate

Westford

Shelburne

Lunenburg

Braintree

Marshfield

Monkton

Canaan

Shrewsbury

North Hero

Hardwick

Mount Holly

South Hero

Moretown

Waterford

Shaftsbury

Woodstock

Sunderland

Middlesex

Hinesburg

Wallingford Wilmington

Craftsbury

Putney

Bakersfield

Townshend

Cavendish

Hyde Park

Williston

Westminster

Middlebury

New Haven

Huntington

Bradford

Grand Isle

Rockingham

Cornwall Salisbury

Richmond

Panton

Coventry

Newport Town

Waitsfield

Windsor

Fair Haven

Mendon

Starksboro

St. Albans Town

Bennington

Manchester

Greensboro

Whitingham

Weathersfield

Williamstown

Fairlee

Clarendon

Brattleboro

Londonderry

Vernon

Barre Town

St. Johnsbury

Dummerston

East Montpelier

Rutland Town

South Burlington

West Windsor

Burlington

West Rutland

Newport City

St. George

Eden

Lowell

Ira

Groton

Peru

Ripton

Lewis

Rupert

Averill

Victory

Barnard

Jamaica

Glover

Halifax

Granville

Norton

Elmore

Topsham

Granby

Ferdinand

Walden

Strafford

Grafton

Holland

Peacham

Pomfret

Reading

Newark Kirby

Weston

Morgan

Hancock

Sandgate

Vershire

Westfield

Stamford

Wells

Bridgewater

Brookfield

Wheelock

Stockbridge

Woodbury

Bloomfield

Belvidere

Worcester

Guildhall

Sheffield

Westmore

Mount Tabor

Charleston

Andover

Lemington

Washington

Readsboro

Maidstone

Tinmouth

Somerset

Windham

Wardsboro

Sudbury

Goshen

Brunswick

Leicester

Plainfield

Whiting

Glastenbury

East Haven

Hubbardton

Pittsfield

West Haven

Brownington

Searsburg

Athens

West Fairlee

Weybridge

Waterville

Averys Gore

Isle La Motte

Stannard

Brookline

Middletown Springs

Waltham

Proctor

Montpelier

Landgrove

Warren Gore

Rutland City

Baltimore

Buels Gore Barre City

Vergennes

Warners Grant

Winooski

St. Albans City

Connecticut River

Lake Champlain

EXPLANATION

Percent from groundwater

 ≤ 50

 > 50 to 95

 > 95

Less than or equal to

Greater than

Total water withdrawals, in

 million gallons per day

 ≤ 0.1

 > 0.1 to 0.5

 > 0.5 to 2

 > 2 to 340

≤

>

U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000 scale, Digital Elevation Model Dataset, 1998,

Vermont State Plane Coordinate System, North American Datum 1983 

0 10 20 MILES

0 10 20 KILOMETERS

County

Town

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts
28 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000 scale, Digital Elevation Model Dataset, 1998,

Vermont State Plane Coordinate System, North American Datum 1983 

0 10 20 MILES

0 10 20 KILOMETERS

EXPLANATION

≤ 0.01

> 0.01 to 0.1

> 0.1 to 2

≤ 10

> 10 to 40

> 40

Projected changes in total withdrawals,

 in million gallons per day

Projected percent change

Less than or equal to

Greater than

≤

>

73° 72°

45°

44°

43°

CANADA

Eden

Milton

Jay Derby

Lowell

Fairfield

Ira

Troy

Groton

Peru

Orwell

Danville

Ripton

Newbury

Bethel

Dorset

Chester

Swanton

Chittenden

Lewis

Barton

Corinth

Highgate

Rupert

Bristol

Barnet

Brighton

Essex

Lincoln

Danby

Cabot

Berlin

Pawlet

Pownal

Averill

Victory

Concord

Calais

Alburgh

Barnard

Winhall

Addison

Dover

Ferrisburg

Stratton

Benson

Sutton

Jamaica

Bridport

Glover

Halifax

Underhill

Granville

Norton

Georgia Albany

Hartford

Colchester

Rochester

Elmore

Charlotte

Norwich

Lyndon

Johnson

Topsham

Hartland

Thetford

Pittsford

Wolcott Granby

Ferdinand

Orange

Walden

Richford

Strafford

Duxbury

Franklin

Grafton

Holland

Guilford

Peacham

Pomfret

Enosburg

Randolph

Roxbury

Poultney

Irasburg

Reading

Jericho

Woodford

Newark

Chelsea

Kirby

Waterbury

Sheldon

Arlington

Fletcher

Brandon

Weston

Morristown

Northfield

Royalton

Marlboro

Fayston

Montgomery

Newfane

Morgan

Castleton

Tunbridge

Shoreham

Berkshire

Hancock

Ryegate

Sandgate

Vershire

Westford

Westfield

Stamford

Shelburne

Wells

Braintree

Marshfield

Monkton

Canaan

Shrewsbury

Starksboro

North Hero

Bridgewater

Brookfield

Mount Holly

South Hero

Moretown

Waterford

Wheelock

Shaftsbury

Woodstock

Sunderland

Middlesex

Stockbridge

Hinesburg

Wallingford

Woodbury

Bloomfield

Craftsbury

Putney

Belvidere

Worcester

Bakersfield

Guildhall

Sheffield

Townshend

Cavendish

Hyde Park

Williston

Westmore

Westminster

New Haven

Mount Tabor

Charleston

Huntington

Bradford

Andover

Grand Isle

Rockingham

Lemington

Washington

Readsboro

Cornwall

Salisbury

Richmond

Maidstone

Tinmouth

Coventry

Newport Town

Fairlee

Somerset

Windham

Waitsfield

Wardsboro

Sudbury

Goshen

Brunswick

Windsor

Leicester

Plainfield

Whiting

Fair Haven

St. Albans Town

Bennington

Glastenbury

Greensboro

Whitingham

Weathersfield

East

Haven

Williamstown

Clarendon

Brattleboro

Londonderry

Vernon

Barre Town

St. Johnsbury

Hubbardton

Pittsfield

Dummerston

West Haven

Brownington

Searsburg

East Montpelier

Athens

Rutland Town

South

Burlington

West 

Fairlee

Weybridge

Waterville

Burlington

Averys Gore

Isle La Motte

Stannard

Brookline

West Rutland

Middletown

Springs

Waltham

Montpelier

Landgrove

Warren Gore

Rutland City

Newport City

Baltimore

Buels Gore

Barre City

St. George

Vergennes

Warners Grant

Winooski

St. Albans City

Stowe

Bolton

Fairfax

Cambridge

Burke

Sharon

Warren

Plymouth

Killington

Ludlow

Springfield

Lunenburg

Hardwick

Wilmington

Middlebury

Panton

Mendon

Manchester

West 

Windsor

Proctor WINDSOR

ESSEX

RUTLAND

ADDISON

WINDHAM

ORLEANS

FRANKLIN

CALEDONIA

WASHINGTON

BENNINGTON

CHITTENDEN

LAMOILLE

GRAND ISLE

ORANGE

County

Town

Connecticut River

Lake Champlain

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

Figure 14. Projected changes in total water withdrawals and projected percent changes in total water withdrawals in 

Vermont from 2005 to 2020.
Water Withdrawals and Return Flows Estimated for 2005 and Projected for 2020 29

Figure 15. Total return flows and percent of return flows to groundwater in Vermont in (A) 2005 and (B) projected for 2020.

WINDSOR

ESSEX

RUTLAND

ADDISON

WINDHAM

ORLEANS

FRANKLIN

CALEDONIA

WASHINGTON

BENNINGTON

CHITTENDEN

LAMOILLE

GRAND ISLE

ORANGE

WINDSOR

ESSEX

RUTLAND

ADDISON

WINDHAM

ORLEANS

FRANKLIN

CALEDONIA

WASHINGTON

BENNINGTON

CHITTENDEN

LAMOILLE

GRAND ISLE

ORANGE

CANADA CANADA

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000 scale, Digital Elevation Model Dataset, 1998,

Vermont State Plane Coordinate System, North American Datum 1983 

0 10 20 MILES

0 10 20 KILOMETERS

73° 72°

44°

43°

73° 72°

44°

43°

45° 45°

Eden

Stowe

Milton

Jay Derby

Lowell Fairfield

Ira

Troy

Groton

Peru

Orwell

Danville

Ripton

Newbury

Bethel

Dorset

Chester

Swanton

Chittenden

Lewis

Barton

Corinth

Highgate

Rupert

Bolton

Bristol

Barnet

Brighton

Essex

Lincoln

Danby

Cabot

Berlin

Pawlet

Pownal

Averill

Victory

Concord

Calais

Alburgh

Barnard

Winhall

Addison

Dover

Ferrisburg

Stratton

Benson

Sutton

Jamaica

Bridport

Fairfax

Glover

Halifax

Underhill

Cambridge

Granville

Norton

Burke

Georgia

Albany

Hartford

Colchester

Sharon

Elmore

Charlotte

Warren

Norwich

Lyndon Johnson

Topsham

Hartland

Thetford

Pittsford

Wolcott

Granby

Plymouth

Ferdinand

Killington

Orange

Walden

Richford

Strafford

Duxbury

Franklin

Grafton

Ludlow

Holland

Guilford

Peacham

Pomfret

Enosburg

Randolph

Roxbury

Poultney

Irasburg

Reading

Jericho

Woodford

Newark

Chelsea

Kirby

Waterbury

Sheldon

Arlington

Fletcher

Brandon

Weston

Mendon

Springfield

Morristown

Northfield

Royalton

Marlboro

Fayston

Montgomery

Newfane

Morgan

Castleton

Tunbridge

Shoreham

Berkshire

Hancock

Ryegate

Sandgate

Vershire

Westford

Westfield

Stamford

Shelburne

Wells

Lunenburg

Braintree

Marshfield

Monkton

Canaan

Starksboro

North Hero

Brookfield

South Hero

Moretown

Waterford

Wheelock

Woodstock

Middlesex

Putney

Belvidere

Worcester

Bakersfield

Guildhall

Sheffield

Townshend

Cavendish

Williston

Charleston

Huntington

Andover

Readsboro

Cornwall Salisbury

Maidstone

Tinmouth

Panton

Newport Town

Fairlee

Somerset

Windham

Waitsfield

Sudbury

Windsor

Leicester Rochester

Shrewsbury

Hardwick

Bridgewater

Mount Holly

Shaftsbury

Sunderland

St. Albans Town

Stockbridge

Hinesburg

Wallingford

Woodbury

Bloomfield

Wilmington

Craftsbury

Hyde Park

Bennington

Westmore

Glastenbury

Westminster

Middlebury

Manchester

New Haven

Mount Tabor

Bradford

Grand Isle

Rockingham

Lemington

Greensboro

Washington

Whitingham

Richmond

Weathersfield

East Haven

Coventry

Williamstown

Clarendon

Brattleboro

Londonderry

Vernon

Barre Town

Wardsboro

St. Johnsbury

Goshen

Brunswick

Hubbardton

Pittsfield

Dummerston

West Haven

Plainfield

Brownington

Searsburg

East Montpelier

Athens

Rutland Town

South Burlington

Whiting West Fairlee West Windsor

Fair Haven

Weybridge

Waterville

Burlington

Averys Gore

Isle La Motte

Stannard

Brookline

West Rutland

Middletown Springs

Waltham

Proctor

Montpelier

Landgrove

Warren Gore

Baltimore

Buels Gore

Barre City

St. George

Vergennes

Winooski

St. Albans City

Eden

Stowe

Milton

Jay Derby

Lowell Fairfield

Ira

Troy

Groton

Peru

Orwell

Danville

Ripton

Newbury

Bethel

Dorset

Chester

Swanton

Chittenden

Lewis

Barton

Corinth

Highgate

Rupert

Bolton

Bristol

Barnet

Brighton

Essex

Lincoln

Danby

Cabot

Berlin

Pawlet

Pownal

Averill

Victory

Concord

Calais

Alburgh

Barnard

Winhall

Addison

Dover

Ferrisburg

Stratton

Benson

Sutton

Jamaica

Bridport

Fairfax

Glover

Halifax

Underhill

Cambridge

Granville

Norton

Burke

Georgia

Albany

Hartford

Colchester

Sharon

Elmore

Charlotte

Warren

Norwich

Lyndon Johnson

Topsham

Hartland

Thetford

Pittsford

Wolcott

Granby

Plymouth

Ferdinand

Killington

Orange

Walden

Richford

Strafford

Duxbury

Franklin

Grafton

Ludlow

Holland

Guilford

Peacham

Pomfret

Enosburg

Randolph

Roxbury

Poultney

Irasburg

Reading

Jericho

Woodford

Newark

Chelsea

Kirby

Waterbury

Sheldon

Arlington

Fletcher

Brandon

Weston

Mendon

Springfield

Morristown

Northfield

Royalton

Marlboro

Fayston

Montgomery

Newfane

Morgan

Castleton

Tunbridge

Shoreham

Berkshire

Hancock

Ryegate

Sandgate

Vershire

Westford

Westfield

Stamford

Shelburne

Wells

Lunenburg

Braintree

Marshfield

Monkton

Canaan

Starksboro

North Hero

Brookfield

South Hero

Moretown

Waterford

Wheelock

Woodstock

Middlesex

Putney

Belvidere

Worcester

Bakersfield

Guildhall

Sheffield

Townshend

Cavendish

Williston

Charleston

Huntington

Andover

Readsboro

Cornwall Salisbury

Maidstone

Tinmouth

Panton

Newport Town

Fairlee

Somerset

Windham

Waitsfield

Sudbury

Windsor

Leicester Rochester

Shrewsbury

Hardwick

Bridgewater

Mount Holly

Shaftsbury

Sunderland

St. Albans Town

Stockbridge

Hinesburg

Wallingford

Woodbury

Bloomfield

Wilmington

Craftsbury

Hyde Park

Bennington

Westmore

Glastenbury

Westminster

Middlebury

Manchester

New Haven

Mount Tabor

Bradford

Grand Isle

Rockingham

Lemington

Greensboro

Washington

Whitingham

Richmond

Weathersfield

East Haven

Coventry

Williamstown

Clarendon

Brattleboro

Londonderry

Vernon

Barre Town

Wardsboro

St. Johnsbury

Goshen

Brunswick

Hubbardton

Pittsfield

Dummerston

West Haven

Plainfield

Brownington

Searsburg

East Montpelier

Athens

Rutland Town

South Burlington

Whiting West Fairlee West Windsor

Fair Haven

Weybridge

Waterville

Burlington

Averys Gore

Isle La Motte

Stannard

Brookline

West Rutland

Middletown Springs

Waltham

Proctor

Montpelier

Landgrove

Warren Gore

Baltimore

Buels Gore

Barre City

St. George

Vergennes

Winooski

St. Albans City

EXPLANATION

County

Town

Total return flows, in million

 gallons per day

≤ 50

> 95 to 100

> 50 to 95

> 0.05 to 0.2

0 to 0.05

> 0.2 to 1

> 1 to 340

Percent returned

 to groundwater

Less than or equal to

Greater than

Connecticut RiverConnecticut River

Lake Champlain

Lake Champlain

A B
30 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

Figure 16. The difference, in million gallons per day, between total water withdrawals and return flows in Vermont in (A) 2005 and 

(B) projected for 2020.

U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000 scale, Digital Elevation Model Dataset, 1998,

Vermont State Plane Coordinate System, North American Datum 1983 

0 10 20 MILES

0 10 20 KILOMETERS

73° 72°

45°

44°

43°

73° 72°

45°

44°

43°

EXPLANATION

≤ 0

> 0 to 0.1

> 0.1 to 1

> 1 to 3

County

Town

Less than or equal to

Greater than

WINDSOR

ESSEX

RUTLAND

ADDISON

WINDHAM

ORLEANS

FRANKLIN

CALEDONIA

WASHINGTON

BENNINGTON

CHITTENDEN

LAMOILLE

GRAND ISLE

ORANGE

WINDSOR

ESSEX

RUTLAND

ADDISON

WINDHAM

ORLEANS

FRANKLIN

CALEDONIA

WASHINGTON

BENNINGTON

CHITTENDEN

LAMOILLE

GRAND ISLE

ORANGE

CANADA CANADA

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

Pico Peak

Stratton

Mountain

Connecticut RiverConnecticut River

Lake Champlain

Lake Champlain

A B

Eden

Stowe

Milton

Jay Derby

Lowell Fairfield

Ira

Troy

Groton

Peru

Orwell

Danville

Ripton

Newbury

Bethel

Dorset

Chester

Swanton

Chittenden

Lewis

Barton

Corinth

Highgate

Rupert

Bolton

Bristol

Barnet

Brighton

Essex

Lincoln

Danby

Cabot

Berlin

Pawlet

Pownal

Averill

Victory

Concord

Calais

Alburgh

Barnard

Winhall

Addison

Dover

Ferrisburg

Stratton

Benson

Sutton

Jamaica

Bridport

Fairfax

Glover

Halifax

Underhill

Cambridge

Granville

Norton

Burke

Albany

Georgia

Hartford

Colchester

Rochester

Sharon

Elmore

Charlotte

Warren

Norwich

Lyndon

Johnson

Topsham

Hartland

Thetford

Pittsford

Wolcott

Granby

Plymouth

Ferdinand

Killington

Orange

Walden

Richford

Strafford

Duxbury

Franklin

Grafton

Ludlow

Holland

Guilford

Peacham

Pomfret

Randolph

Roxbury

Poultney

Irasburg

Reading

Newark

Kirby

Waterbury

Sheldon

Arlington

Fletcher

Brandon

Weston

Mendon

Springfield

Morristown

Northfield

Royalton

Marlboro

Fayston

Montgomery

Morgan

Castleton

Tunbridge Shoreham

Berkshire

Hancock

Ryegate

Sandgate

Vershire

Westford

Westfield

Stamford

Shelburne

Wells

Lunenburg

Braintree

Marshfield

Monkton

Canaan

Shrewsbury

Starksboro

Hardwick

Bridgewater

Brookfield

Mount Holly

South

Hero

Waterford

Wheelock

Shaftsbury

Woodstock

Middlesex

Stockbridge

Hinesburg

Woodbury

Bloomfield

Wilmington

Craftsbury

Putney

Belvidere

Worcester

Bakersfield

Guildhall

Sheffield

Townshend

Cavendish

Bennington

Westmore

Westminster

Manchester

Mount 

Tabor

Charleston

Huntington

Bradford

Andover

Rockingham

Lemington

Washington

Readsboro

Cornwall

Salisbury

Richmond

Maidstone

Tinmouth

Panton

Coventry

Newport Town

Fairlee

Clarendon

Brattleboro

Somerset

Vernon

Windham

Barre Town

Waitsfield

Wardsboro

Sudbury

Goshen

Brunswick

Pittsfield

Windsor

Leicester

Plainfield

Whiting

Fair 

Haven

Enosburg

Jericho

Chelsea

Newfane

North Hero

Moretown

Sunderland

St. AlbansTown

Hyde Park

Williston

Glastenbury

Middlebury

New Haven

Grand Isle

Greensboro

Whitingham

Weathersfield

East Haven

Williamstown

Londonderry

St. Johnsbury

Hubbardton

Dummerston

West Haven

Brownington

Searsburg

East

Montpelier

Athens

Rutland Town

South Burlington

West Fairlee

West 

Windsor

Weybridge

Waterville

Burlington

Averys Gore

Isle La Motte

Stannard

Brookline

West Rutland

Middletown

Springs

Waltham

Proctor

Montpelier

Landgrove

Warren Gore Newport

City

Baltimore

Buels Gore Barre City

St. George

Vergennes

Warners Grant

Winooski

St. Albans City

Rutland City

Eden

Stowe

Milton

Jay Derby

Lowell Fairfield

Ira

Troy

Groton

Peru

Orwell

Danville

Ripton

Newbury

Bethel

Dorset

Chester

Swanton

Chittenden

Lewis

Barton

Corinth

Highgate

Rupert

Bolton

Bristol

Barnet

Brighton

Essex

Lincoln

Danby

Cabot

Berlin

Pawlet

Pownal

Victory

Concord

Calais

Alburgh

Barnard

Winhall

Addison

Dover

Ferrisburg

Stratton Benson

Sutton

Jamaica

Bridport

Fairfax

Glover

Halifax

Underhill

Cambridge

Granville

Norton

Burke

Albany

Georgia

Hartford

Colchester

Rochester

Sharon

Elmore

Charlotte

Warren

Norwich

Lyndon

Johnson

Topsham

Hartland

Thetford

Pittsford

Wolcott

Plymouth

Ferdinand

Killington

Orange

Walden

Richford

Strafford

Duxbury

Franklin

Grafton

Ludlow

Holland

Guilford

Peacham

Pomfret

Randolph

Roxbury

Poultney

Irasburg

Reading

Woodford

Woodford

Newark

Kirby

Waterbury

Sheldon

Arlington

Fletcher

Brandon

Weston

Mendon

Springfield

Morristown

Northfield

Royalton

Marlboro

Fayston

Montgomery

Morgan

Castleton

Castleton

Tunbridge Shoreham

Berkshire

Hancock

Ryegate

Sandgate

Vershire

Westford

Westfield

Stamford

Shelburne

Wells

Braintree

Marshfield

Monkton

Shrewsbury

Starksboro

Hardwick

Bridgewater

Brookfield

Mount Holly

South

Hero

Waterford

Wheelock

Shaftsbury

Woodstock

Middlesex

Stockbridge

Hinesburg

Wallingford

Wallingford

Woodbury

Wilmington

Craftsbury

Putney

Belvidere

Worcester

Bakersfield

Sheffield

Townshend

Cavendish

Bennington

Westmore

Westminster

Manchester

Mount 

Tabor

Charleston

Huntington

Bradford

Andover

Rockingham

Washington

Readsboro

Cornwall

Salisbury

Richmond

Tinmouth

Panton

Coventry

Newport Town

Fairlee

Clarendon

Brattleboro

Somerset

Vernon

Windham

Barre Town

Waitsfield

Wardsboro

Sudbury

Goshen

Pittsfield

Windsor

Leicester

Plainfield

Whiting

Fair 

Haven

Enosburg

Jericho

Chelsea

Newfane

North Hero

Moretown

Sunderland

St. AlbansTown

Hyde Park

Williston

Glastenbury

Middlebury

New Haven

Grand Isle

Greensboro

Whitingham

Weathersfield

East Haven

Williamstown

Londonderry

St. Johnsbury

Hubbardton

Dummerston

West Haven

Brownington

Searsburg

East

Montpelier

Athens

Rutland Town

South Burlington

West Fairlee

West 

Windsor

Weybridge

Waterville

Burlington

Averys Gore

Isle La Motte

Stannard

Brookline

West Rutland

Middletown

Springs

Waltham

Proctor

Montpelier

Landgrove

Warren Gore Newport

City

Baltimore

Buels Gore Barre City

St. George

Vergennes

Warners Grant

Winooski

St. Albans City

Averill

Granby

Lunenburg

Canaan

Bloomfield

Guildhall

Lemington

Maidstone

Brunswick

Withdrawals minus return flows,

 in million gallons per day

Rutland City
Water Withdrawals and Return Flows Estimated for 2005 and Projected for 2020 31

About 15 percent of the MCDs had greater return flows 

than withdrawals. One or more of the following explanations 

may apply. The first possibility is water importation; for 

example, Milton, Colchester, Winooski, Essex, Jericho, 

Shelburne, and Hinesburg all used water that was withdrawn 

from Lake Champlain in South Burlington and returned that 

water within their own town boundaries. Other towns that 

had some sources of municipal water supplies in neighboring 

towns included Enosburg, St. Albans Town, Canaan (sources 

were in Canada), Guildhall (sources were in New Hampshire), 

Waterbury, Montpelier, Plainfield, Vergennes, Proctor, 

Stratton, and Brattleboro. Similarly, Pico Peak in Killington 

and Stratton Mountain in Stratton withdrew some water they 

used for snowmaking from sources in the neighboring towns 

of Mendon and Winhall, respectively. A second explanation 

for towns having greater return flows than withdrawals 

was that some towns, such as Bethel, Hartford, Poultney, 

Windsor, and Dover, had larger service areas for municipal 

sewer than for municipal water. In these cases, reported return 

flows were greater than reported (or estimated) withdrawals 

for CWSs, and non-reported withdrawals could have been 

underestimated. These two explanations accounted for 31 

out of the 38 cases where return flows were greater than 

withdrawals. A third explanation is that return flows actually 

might have been greater than withdrawals if groundwater 

leaked into sewer pipes and inflated return-flow volumes 

to greater than the volumes withdrawn and used. Errors in 

estimating water withdrawals or return flows due to limitations 

of methods based on coefficients, or erroneous assumptions, 

also could account for some of this imbalance.

Withdrawals by Watershed

The largest total withdrawals in 2005 were 

346.75 Mgal/d from the West River watershed and 

24.98 Mgal/d from the Lake Champlain Direct watershed 

(table 6, fig. 17). In 2005, the largest withdrawals of 

Table 6. Groundwater and surface-water withdrawals estimated for major watersheds in Vermont, 2005 and projected for 2020.

[HUC-8, 8-digit hydrologic-unit code; values may not sum to totals because of independent rounding]

HUC-8 Watershed

Withdrawals, in million gallons per day

Groundwater Surface water Total

2005 2020 2005 2020 2005 2020

01080101 Upper Connecticut 0.30 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.33

01080102 Passumpsic 1.67 1.82 1.77 2.13 3.44 3.95

01080103 Waits .76 .81 2.19 2.37 2.95 3.18

01080104 Upper Connecticut-Mascoma 2.19 2.32 .16 .17 2.35 2.49

01080105 White River 5.21 5.40 .59 .60 5.80 6.00

01080106 Black-Ottauquechee 4.38 4.68 2.86 4.44 7.24 9.12

01080107 West River 2.16 2.39 344.59 344.51 346.75 346.90

01080201 Middle Connecticut .20 .24 .00 .00 .20 .24

01080203 Deerfield .77 .87 .75 1.88 1.52 2.75

01110000 Saint Francois 2.63 2.76 .70 .70 3.33 3.46

02010001 Lake Champlain Canal 1.63 1.85 .39 .39 2.02 2.24

02010002 Otter Creek 7.03 7.76 4.93 5.48 11.96 13.24

02010003 Winooski River 6.52 6.90 4.32 6.14 10.84 13.04

02010005 Lamoille 4.23 4.91 .76 1.12 4.99 6.03

02010007 Missisquoi 3.26 3.42 .79 .79 4.05 4.21

02010008 Lake Champlain Direct 4.33 4.70 20.65 20.84 24.98 25.54

02020003 Hudson-Hoosic 3.71 3.91 3.23 3.23 6.94 7.14

TOTAL 50.97 55.05 388.70 394.81 439.67 449.86
32 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

Figure 17. Major watersheds in Vermont with total water withdrawals and percent of total withdrawals from groundwater sources in 

(A) 2005 and (B) projected for 2020.

U.S. Geological Survey 1:250,000 scale, Digital Elevation Model Dataset, 1998,

Vermont State Plane Coordinate System, North American Datum 1983,

Watershed boundaries from Natural Resource Conservation Service,

Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD), 2003, 1:24,000-scale. 

0 10 20 MILES

0 10 20 KILOMETERS

73° 72°

45°

44°

43°

73° 72°

45°

44°

43°

Deerfield

Upper

Connecticut

Upper

Connecticut

Middle

Connecticut

Middle

Connecticut

Upper

ConnecticutMascoma

Upper

ConnecticutMascoma

West

White

Winooski 

Otter Creek

Lamoille 

Missisquoi 

Passumpsic

Lake Champlain Direct

Saint Francois

Saint Francois

Waits

Black-Ottauquechee

Hudson-Hoosic 

Lake Champlain Canal

West

White

Winooski 

Otter Creek

Lamoille

Missisquoi 

Passumpsic

Lake Champlain Direct

Waits

Deerfield

Black-Ottauquechee

Hudson-Hoosic 

Lake Champlain Canal

CANADA CANADA

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

New Hampshire

New York

Massachusetts

EXPLANATION

≤ 2

> 2 to 5

> 5 to 20

> 20 to 347

≤ 50

> 50 to 95

> 95

Total withdrawals, in million

 gallons per day

Percent of total withdrawals 

 from groundwater sources

Watershed boundary Less than or equal to

Greater than

Lake ChamplainLake ChamplainB

Connecticut River

Connecticut River

A B
Summary 33

groundwater were in the Otter Creek watershed, 7.03 Mgal/d, 

and the Winooski River watershed, 6.52 Mgal/d. Large 

withdrawals from groundwater, 5.21, 4.38, and 4.33 Mgal/d, 

also were made in the White River, the Black-Ottauquechee 

River, and the Lake Champlain Direct watersheds, 

respectively. The largest withdrawals of surface water were 

made in the West River watershed, 344.59 Mgal/d, and the 

Lake Champlain Direct watershed, 20.65 Mgal/d. 

Increases in surface-water withdrawals of at least 

1 Mgal/d are projected in the Winooski River (1.82 Mgal/d), 

the Black-Ottauquechee River (1.58 Mgal/d), and the 

Deerfield River (1.13 Mgal/d) watersheds. These increases are 

due largely to estimated increases for snowmaking at ski areas. 

Increases in groundwater withdrawals of at least 0.5 Mgal/d 

are projected in the Otter Creek watershed (0.73 Mgal/d) 

largely due to projected increases in CWS capacity and in 

the Lamoille River watersheds (0.68 Mgal/d) largely due to 

projected population growth.

Summary

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the 

Vermont Geological Survey, characterized 2005 and 2020 

water usage and developed a water-use database for Vermont 

to assist in determining current and future groundwater 

demand in the State. The objective of this study was to 

identify areas where projected growth in Vermont might affect 

groundwater availability by (1) assessing base-year (2005) 

withdrawals and return flows, (2) applying projections for 

population growth as the basis for estimating future demand 

(2020) for water resources, and (3) producing estimates that 

could help to establish a priority system for State waterresource managers to direct more in-depth resource analyses. 

The projection of future water demand is based on population 

projections for each Minor Civil Division (MCD) for the year 

2020, build-out analyses for ski areas, and community water 

systems that are seeking loans for upgrades. 

In 2005, about 12 percent of total withdrawals 

440 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) were from groundwater 

sources (51 Mgal/d) and about 88 percent were from surfacewater sources (389 Mgal/d). If withdrawals by Entergy 

Nuclear-Vermont Yankee (thermoelectric power) were 

excluded from the analysis, total withdrawals would be about 

100 Mgal/d, and withdrawals from surface water would be 

about 49 Mgal/d, or about 49 percent of the total. 

In 2005, households in towns and cities throughout the 

State withdrew groundwater for self-supplied domestic use. 

Many of the MCDs where withdrawals by community water 

systems were greater than 1 Mgal/d had small populations, 

but the water was transferred to community water systems 

in neighboring cities or towns with large populations. All 

of the MCDs, except for Middlebury, with withdrawals by 

community water systems that totaled more than 1 Mgal/d, 

predominantly used surface water. Other large withdrawals 

were made mostly by single users (snowmaking facilities, 

fish hatcheries, industries, and power producers) and were 

generally surface water. For most MCDs that had withdrawals 

totaling less than 1 Mgal/d, withdrawals were predominantly 

groundwater.

The largest groundwater withdrawals (greater than 

1 Mgal/d) in 2005 were in Middlebury, Bethel, Hartford, 

Springfield, and Bennington. Large withdrawals from 

groundwater occurred in Milton for domestic use, in Bethel 

and Bennington for fish hatcheries, in Burlington for 

thermoelectric-power production, and in Sheldon and Sharon 

for self-supplied commercial or industrial use. Community 

water systems in Newport City, Middlebury, Hartford, and 

Springfield had large withdrawals of groundwater. Highgate, 

Swanton, Sheldon, Berkshire, Newport, St. Albans, Fairfield, 

Panton, Addison, and Bridport withdrew greater than 

0.1 Mgal/d of groundwater for livestock use. 

The largest withdrawals from surface water, greater 

than 2 Mgal/d, in 2005 were in Grand Isle, Burlington, 

South Burlington, Mendon, Brattleboro, and Vernon. The 

largest single withdrawals of surface water were in Vernon 

for thermoelectric-power production (340 Mgal/d) and in 

Grand Isle for a fish hatchery (7 Mgal/d). Withdrawals of 

surface water greater than 1 Mgal/d were made in St. Albans 

Town, Burlington, South Burlington, Waterford, Orange, 

Mendon, and Woodford by community water systems and in 

Grand Isle, Chittenden, and Bennington by fish hatcheries. 

Withdrawals from surface water were greater than 0.5 Mgal/d 

for snowmaking in Stowe, Killington, Ludlow, Stratton, and 

Dover. Withdrawals greater than 0.06 Mgal/d from surface 

water for irrigation at golf courses occurred in Stowe, 

Hartford, Killington, and Manchester. Nearly 100 percent of 

withdrawals from surface water in Highgate and Newport 

Town were for livestock use. Large projected increases in 

withdrawals of surface water generally reflect estimated 

expansion of snowmaking operations at ski resorts.

Eight MCDs had total water withdrawals greater than 

2 Mgal/d in 2005 and 41 had total withdrawals of 0.5 to 

2 Mgal/d. Most of these large withdrawals were from surface 

water, except in Bethel and Bennington, which withdrew predominantly from groundwater. The largest projected changes 

in total withdrawals are generally in or near towns with ski 

areas. 

MCDs that had large return-flow volumes were generally 

the same ones that had large total withdrawals. Most of the 

return flows greater than 1 Mgal/d were to surface water via 

direct discharges from wastewater-treatment facilities. Most 

of the return flows up to 0.2 Mgal/d went to groundwater. In 

2005, six MCDs had withdrawals that were at least 1 Mgal/d 

greater than return flows. In several of these cases, withdrawals were made by community water systems to be used in 

neighboring towns or cities. About 15 percent of MCDs had 

greater return flows than withdrawals. 
34 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

Acknowledgments

Many sets of data and responses to inquiries were 

provided to the authors from State agencies, regional 

commissions, and municipal departments. Especially helpful 

were Timothy Pricer, Timothy Raymond, Brian Fitzgerald, 

Virginia Little, and Bryan Harrington from the Vermont 

Department of Environmental Conservation and Melissa 

Prindiville from the Vermont Department of Housing and 

Community Affairs. Kevin Behn, Jim Henderson, Dan Currier, 

Pam Brangan, Karyl Fuller, Tracy McIntyre, Bethany Haase 

Remmers, April Harkness, Pete Fellows, and Jeff Nugent, 

geographic information systems specialists from the Regional 

Planning Commissions, provided digital datasets. Thanks 

also to Laurence Becker and Marjorie Gale of the Vermont 

Geological Survey for making this project happen.

References Cited

Agency of Natural Resources—Department of Environmental 

Conservation, 2005 (revised; original effective date: 1992), 

Environmental Protection Rules Chapter 21 Water Supply 

Rule, Water Supply Division, 236 p.

Doll, C.G., ed., 1970, Surficial Geologic Map of Vermont: 

Vermont Geological Survey, scale 1:250,000.

Dun & Bradstreet, 2008, Dun & Bradstreet Information Database: Murray Hill, N.J.

Dunne, Thomas, and Leopold, L.B., 1978, Water in environmental planning: New York, W.H. Freeman and Company, 

818 p.

Environmental Systems Research, Inc. (ESRI), 2009, ArcGIS 

Desktop: Redlands, Calif., v. 9.3.

Foster, D.H., Batorfalvy, T.N., and Medalie, Laura, 2000, 

Water use in Vermont: An activities guide for teachers: 

U.S. Geological Survey outreach product, 1 map, 17 p.

Gale, Marjorie, Knos, Ryan, Springston, George, and Becker, 

Laurence, 2009, Data summary, Vermont water wells—

preliminary map, Vermont Geological Survey, 1 pl.

Hodges, A.L., Jr., 1966, Ground-water favorability map of the 

Batten Kill, Walloomsac River and Hoosic River Basins: 

Vermont Department of Water Resources, scale 1:125,000.

Hodges, A.L., Jr., 1967a, Ground-water favorability map of 

the Otter Creek Basin, Vermont: Vermont Department of 

Water Resources, scale 1:125,000.

Hodges, A.L., Jr., 1967b, Ground-water favorability map of 

the Winooski River Basin, Vermont: Vermont Department 

of Water Resources, scale 1:125,000.

Hodges, A.L., Jr., 1967c, Ground-water favorability map of 

the Lamoille River Basin, Vermont: Vermont Department 

of Water Resources, scale 1:125,000.

Hodges, A.L., Jr., 1967d, Ground-water favorability map of 

the Missisquoi River Basin, Vermont: Vermont Department 

of Water Resources, scale 1:125,000.

Hodges, A.L., Jr., 1967e, Ground-water favorability map 

of the Lake Memphremagog Basin, Vermont: Vermont 

Department of Water Resources, scale 1:125,000.

Hodges, A.L., Jr., 1967f, Ground-water favorability map of 

the Nulhegan-Passumpsic River Basin, Vermont: Vermont 

Department of Water Resources, scale 1:125,000.

Hodges, A.L., Jr., 1968a, Ground-water favorability map of 

the Wells-Ompompanoosuc River Basin, Vermont: Vermont 

Department of Water Resources, scale 1:125,000.

Hodges, A.L., Jr., 1968b, Ground-water favorability map of 

the White River Basin, Vermont: Vermont Department of 

Water Resources, scale 1:125,000.

Hodges, A.L., Jr., 1968c, Ground-water favorability map of 

the Ottauquechee-Saxton River Basin, Vermont: Vermont 

Department of Water Resources, scale 1:125,000.

Hodges, A.L., Jr., 1968d, Ground-water favorability map of 

the West-Deerfield River Basin, Vermont: Vermont Department of Water Resources, scale 1:125,000.

Hodges, A.L., Jr., Butterfield, D., and Ashley, J.W., 1976, 

Ground-water resources of the Barre-Montpelier area, 

Vermont: Vermont Department of Water Resources, scale 

1:125,000.

Horn, M.A., 2002, User’s Manual for the New England WaterUse Data System (NEWUDS): U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 01–328, 392 p.

Horn, M.A., and Medalie, Laura, 1995, Estimated withdrawals 

and use of freshwater in Vermont, 1990: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 93–4097, 

1 pl.

Horn, M.A., Moore, R.B., Hayes, Laura, and Flanagan, S.M., 

2008, Methods for and estimates of 2003 and projected 

water use in the Seacoast Region, southeastern New Hampshire: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations 

Report 2007–5157, 87 p. 

Hutson, S.S., Barber, N.L., Kenny, J.F., Linsey, K.S., Lumia, 

D.S., and Maupin, M.A., 2004, Estimated use of water in 

the United States in 2000: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 

1268, 46 p.
References Cited 35

Kenny, J.F., Barber, N.L., Hutson, S.S., Linsey, K.S., 

Lovelace, J.K., and Maupin, M.A., 2009, Estimated use of 

water in the United States in 2005: U.S. Geological Survey 

Circular 1344, 52 p. 

Lovelace, J.K., 2009, Method for estimating water withdrawals for livestock in the United States, 2005: U.S. Geological 

Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2009–5041, 7 p.

Medalie, Laura, 1995, Wastewater collection and return flow 

in New England, 1990: U.S Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 95–4144, 79 p.

Medalie, Laura, 1997, Estimated water withdrawals and use in 

Vermont, 1995: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 97–4178, 18 p.

Olcott, P.G., 1995, Ground water atlas of the United States: 

Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New 

York, Rhode Island, Vermont: U.S. Geological Survey 

Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA–730M, 28 p.

Pennsylvania State University, College of Agricultural 

Sciences Cooperative Extension, 2002, Agricultural water 

needs and sources water supply, Fact Sheet F–195, 4 p.

Planning and Management Consultants, Ltd., 1995, IWRMAIN Water demand analysis software, User’s manual and 

system description, version 6.1: Carbondale, Ill., 497 p.

Rayer, Stefan, 2003, MISER Population projections for 

Vermont, 2000–2020: Amherst, Mass., Massachusetts 

Institute for Social and Economic Research, 5 p.

Shaffer, K.H., and Runkle, D.L., 2007, Consumptive water-use 

coefficients for the Great Lakes Basin and climatically similar areas: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations 

Report 2007–5197, 191 p.

Solley, W.B., Pierce, R.R., and Perlman, H.A., 1998, 

Estimated use of water in the United States in 1995: 

U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1200, 71 p.

Tessler, Steven, 2002, Data model and relational database design for the New England water-use data system 

(NEWUDS): U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

01–359, 70 p., 1 pl., on 1 CD–ROM.

U.S. Census Bureau, 2001, DemoCensus_BLCK2000, 

accessed December 12, 2008, at http://www.vcgi.

org/dataware/?page=./search_tools/search_action.

cfm&query=theme&theme_id=016-0040.

U.S. Census Bureau, 2005, Population estimates Minor Civil 

Divisions: 2000 to 2005, accessed July 8, 2008, at 

http://www.census.gov/popest/cities/SUB-EST2005-5.html.

U.S. Department of Agriculture National Agricultural 

Statistics Service, 2004, 2002 Census of agriculture: 

Vermont State and County data, v. 1: Geographic Area 

Series part 45, AC-02-A-45, 379 p.

U.S. Geological Survey, 1990, Vermont water supply and use, 

in Carr, J.E., Chase, E.B., Paulson, R.W., and Moody, D.W., 

comps., National Water Summary 1987–Hydrologic events 

and water supply and use: U.S. Geological Survey WaterSupply Paper 2350, p. 499–504.

University of Vermont Spatial Analysis Laboratory, 2005, 

2002 land cover/land use dataset for Vermont, accessed 

August 3, 2006, at http://www.vcgi.org/dataware/default.

cfm?layer=LCLU2002.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Appendixes A1, A2, and B
38 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

The Vermont Water-Use (VWU) database uses 

Microsoft Access software and a relational table structure to 

accommodate over 36,000 records of site-specific water-use 

data for 1,382 public-water-supply (PWS) facilities and 3,027 

non-PWS facilities. The VWU database is available in digital 

format from the Vermont Geological Survey in Waterbury, 

Vermont. The basic organization of the VWU database 

consists of four main linked tables—PWS facilities, Non-PWS 

facilities, PWS withdrawal points, and water use—shown 

in figure A1. Appendix A2 provides a dictionary of the data 

elements that are listed in figure A1. All water-withdrawal 

and return-flow values, estimated or reported, for facilities 

are listed as records in the Water use table. Identifying and 

locational information for records in the Water Use table 

can be tracked by following links between data elements in 

common with the other three main tables. For all facilities in 

the database, at a minimum, there are reported or estimated 

annual values for 2005 and projected estimates of water use 

for 2020. In addition, some entities have water-use values for 

months or for other years (1999 through 2008). 

Facilities are divided into two types, PWS and non-PWS 

facilities, which are organized differently in the database. 

Water-use values for withdrawals from PWS facilities are 

associated with individual points of withdrawal, listed in the 

PWS withdrawal points table, rather than with the facilities. 

This feature was designed to allow separate accounting for 

cases of multiple withdrawal points and imparts a benefit 

when withdrawals are in different census blocks or minor 

civil divisions (MCDs). In contrast, water-use values for 

withdrawals from non-PWS facilities are associated directly 

with the facility record, assuming that withdrawals and return 

flows occur at or near the facility. The only exceptions are for 

snowmaking and fish hatchery non-PWS facilities. Withdrawal 

points for these types of facilities are defined in the PWS 

withdrawal point table and are linked to the Water use table, 

whereas return flows link directly to the Water use table. This 

design enables accounting that is closely tied to the water 

resource for large water users.

In addition to the four main tables for individual 

facilities in the VWU database, the Census blocks table 

(fig. A1) contains a record with aggregated information for 

every census block in Vermont. Information in the Census 

blocks table includes 2000, 2005 estimated, and 2020 

projected populations; population growth factors from 2000 to 

2005 and from 2005 to 2020; a code to indicate whether part 

of or the entire census block is within a designated growth 

area; percent of withdrawals from on-site wells; percent of 

return flows treated on-site; percent of return flows going to a 

wastewater-treatment facility; domestic withdrawals for 2005 

and projected withdrawals for 2020; domestic return flows 

for 2005 and projected return flows for 2020; and estimated 

withdrawals for dairy livestock use from groundwater 

and surface water in 2005 and projected dairy livestock 

withdrawals for 2020. 

Several sequences of queries have been established to 

retrieve the data in meaningful arrays. For example, there are 

sequences of queries to retrieve withdrawals of groundwater, 

withdrawals of surface-water, total withdrawals, withdrawals 

by category, and return flows. The standard queries that were 

set up to create tables for values grouped by MCD can be 

adapted to group data instead by watershed, county, or census 

block, or to select a base year other than 2005. The tables that 

are created by running these queries are linked by MCD name 

to geographic datasets to create the summaries of data shown 

in the map figures in this report. 

Data received from State agencies were reported as 

annual daily averages, monthly daily averages, monthly 

maximum values, or total monthly volumes. For consistency, 

all monthly data were entered into the VWU database as 

daily averages over the month, unless a maximum was the 

only available value. A remark field tracks whether waterwithdrawal and return-flow values were based on reported 

data, estimated data (with different codes for different types 

of estimates), or maximum values. All data also were entered 

into the database as annual daily averages for 2005. The 

annual average was calculated as the total of withdrawals or 

return flows over the year divided by 365. While this method 

distorted data for activities that withdrew large volumes of 

water for only part of the year, the purpose was to maintain 

consistency on an annual basis because some of the seasonal 

data were only available as annual values. Since some data 

also were entered in the database as monthly values, retrievals 

can be made by month or season that could more realistically 

portray seasonal water use. 

Appendix A1. Description of the Vermont Water-Use Database
Appendix A1 39

Figure A1. Schematic diagram of Vermont Water-Use database showing main tables with selected fields and links between fields.

Water use

Use_ID

Facility_ID

nonPWS_FacilityID

Month

Year

Season

Water use for given month and year

Projected 2020 water use

Flow-processing code

Basis of water-use value (remark)

Groundwater or surface water

Withdrawal or return flow

nonPWS_FacilityID

Facility type

Latitude

Longitude

MCD

Census Block ID

WSID

PWS_FacilityID

PWS name

Population served

System type

PWS withdrawal points

SourcesID

WSID

nonPWS_FacilityID

MCD

Census Block ID

Latitude

Longitude Growth Area

Growth 00_05

Growth 05_20

2000 Population

2005 Population

2020 Population

% withdrawals from on-site wells

% return flows treated on-site

% return flows going to WWTF

Domestic withdrawals 2005

Domestic withdrawals 2020

Domestic return flows 2005

Domestic return flows 2020

GW Dairy 2005

SW Dairy 2005

GW Dairy 2020

SW Dairy 2020

Data element 1

Data element 2

.

.

EXPLANATION

WSID = Public Water System Identifier

PWS = Public Water System

ID = Identifier

MCD = Minor Civil Division

% = percent

WWTF = Wastewater-treatment facility

GW = Groundwater

SW = Surface water

= Linked fields; direction of arrow

indicates parent-to-child relationship

D

A

C

B

E

Census blocks

Census Block ID

PWS facilities

Public water supply (PWS) facilities (includes community, transient non-community, and 

non-transient non-community water systems) are listed in the PWS facilities table.

• Locations of sources of PWS withdrawals are listed in the PWS withdrawal points table

 (link A); records of withdrawals from PWS facilities are listed in the Water use table

 (link B).

• Records of return flows from PWS facilities are listed in the Water use table (link E).

Non-PWS facilities are listed in the Non-PWS facilities table.

• For fish hatcheries and ski areas, locations of sources of withdrawals are listed in the PWS

 withdrawal points table (link C); records of withdrawals are listed in the Water use

 table (link B).

• Records of return flows from fish hatcheries and ski areas are listed in the Water use

 table (link D).

• Records of withdrawals to, and return flows from, all other types of non-PWS facilities

 are listed in the Water use table (link D). 

Non-PWS facilities

Table name
40 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

Appendix A2. Data dictionary for selected data elements in the Vermont Water-Use database.—Continued

[%, percent; WWTF, wastewater-treatment facility; ID, identifier; PWS, public water system; Mgal/d, million gallons per day; MCD, Minor Civil Division]

Data element Table name Explanation of data element

% return flows going to WWTF Census blocks Percentage of population for the census block that is served by a municipal 

wastewater-treatment facility

% return flows treated on-site Census blocks Percentage of population for the census block that treats and discharges 

domestic wastewater on-site

% withdrawals from on-site wells Census blocks Percentage of population for the census block whose source of water is from 

on-site wells

2000 Population Census blocks Population in census block in 2000

2005 Population Census blocks Population in census block in 2005

2020 Population Census blocks Population in census block in 2020

Basis of water-use value (remark) Water use Code to indicate whether water-use values are reported, estimated, monthly 

maximums, based on number of employees and Standard Industrial 

Classification code, based on data from 2007, based on a telephone call 

to a facility, or primarily for dewatering at a mine. Records where the 

value for this field represents mine dewatering are not included with data 

presented in this report

Census Block ID PWS withdrawal points, 

Non-PWS facilities, and 

Census blocks

Unique identifier for census blocks

Domestic return flows 2005 Census blocks Estimate of aggregate domestic wastewater returned from on-site disposal 

systems in the census block to the ground in 20051

Domestic return flows 2020 Census blocks Estimate of aggregate domestic wastewater returned from on-site disposal 

systems in the census block to the ground in 20202

Domestic withdrawals 2005 Census blocks Estimate of aggregate withdrawals from on-site wells for the census block 

for 20053

Domestic withdrawals 2020 Census blocks Estimate of aggregate withdrawals from on-site wells for the census block 

for 20204

Facility_ID Water use Link to either PWS_FacilityID in PWS Facilities table or SourcesID in 

PWS withdrawal points table

Facility type Non-PWS facilities Code for water–use type to use as basis for queries by category. Possible 

types are agricultural, bottled water, commercial, fish hatcheries, industries, institutions, irrigation, mining, power generation, hydroelectric 

power, snowmaking, sewage treatment, and solid waste

Flow-processing code Water use Code to indicate direction and source or resource destination of flow; for 

example, intake from surface water, groundwater withdrawal, direct discharge, indirect discharge, estimate for snowmaking return flow as melt, 

or intermediate step, such as reported outflow from treatment to storage

Groundwater or surface water Water use Code to indicate groundwater or surface water

Growth area Census blocks “Yes” or “no” if part or all of this census block is or is not within a designated growth area

Growth 00_05 Census blocks Projected percentage growth from 2000 to 2005 based on population projections

Growth 05_20 Census blocks Projected percentage growth from 2005 to 2020 based on population projections

GW Dairy 2005 Census blocks Estimate for withdrawals from groundwater in 2005 for dairy livestock use

GW Dairy 2020 Census blocks Estimate for withdrawals from groundwater in 2020 for dairy livestock use
Appendix A2 41

Appendix A2. Data dictionary for selected data elements in the Vermont Water-Use database.—Continued

[%, percent; WWTF, wastewater-treatment facility; ID, identifier; PWS, public water system; Mgal/d, million gallons per day; MCD, Minor Civil Division]

Data element Table name Explanation of data element

Latitude PWS withdrawal points 

and Non-PWS facilities

Latitude in decimal degrees

Longitude PWS withdrawal points 

and Non-PWS facilities

Longitude in decimal degrees

MCD PWS Facilities, PWS 

withdrawal points, and 

Non-PWS facilities

Name of Minor Civil Division. Used to generate summary queries by MCD

Month Water use Numbers 1 through 12 or null if annual value

nonPWS_FacilityID PWS withdrawal points 

and Non-PWS facilities

Unique identifier for entries in Non-PWS facilities table

Population served PWS facilities Population served by PWS facility

Projected 2020 water use Water use Projected 2020 water-use value, in million gallons per day

PWS_FacilityID PWS facilities Unique identifier for entries in PWS facilities table

PWS Name PWS facilities Name of PWS facility

Season Water use “A” for an annual value; “W” for a winter month, November through 

March; “S” for a summer month, June through September; or “R” for rest 

of the year, October, April, or May

SourcesID PWS withdrawal points Unique identifier for entries in PWS withdrawal points table

SW Dairy 2005 Census blocks Estimate for withdrawals from surface water in 2005 for dairy livestock use

SW Dairy 2020 Census blocks Estimate for withdrawals from surface water in 2020 for dairy livestock use

System type PWS facilities Code to indicate whether PWS facility type is community, transient noncommunity, non-transient, non-community, or bottled water

Use_ID Water use Unique identifier for entries in Water use table

Water use for given month and 

year

Water use Water-use value, in million gallons per day

Withdrawal or return flow Water use Code to indicate whether water is a withdrawal or a return flow

WSID PWS facilities and PWS 

withdrawal points

PWS identifier from data provided by Vermont Water Supply Division

Year Water use Year associated with data element

1

 Value in Mgal/d = 2005 Population * % return flows treated on-site * 63 (per capita return-flow coefficient) /1,000,000.

2

 Value in Mgal/d = 2020 Population * % return flows treated on-site * 63 (per capita return-flow coefficient) /1,000,000.

3

 Value in Mgal/d = 2005 Population * % withdrawals from on-site wells * 75 (per capita water-use coefficient) /1,000,000.

4

 Value in Mgal/d = 2020 Population * % withdrawals from on-site wells * 75 (per capita water-use coefficient) /1,000,000.
42 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

Appendix B. Minor Civil Divisions with 2005 and projected 2020 populations, 2005 and projected 2020 groundwater and surface-water 

[CWS, community water system; --, no data; values may not sum to totals because of independent rounding, Return flows to groundwater include estimates 

Minor Civil 

Division

Population

Withdrawals 

Groundwater 

2005 2020 2005 2020 

Total Self 

supplied Total

Domestic Livestock Commercial 

& industrial CWS Fish hatcheries Total 

Million gallons per day 

Addison 1,457 300 1,843 0.02 0.12 0.00 -- -- 0.14 0.15 

Albany 851 844 914 0.06 0.03 0.00 0.01 -- 0.11 0.11 

Alburgh 2,083 1,663 2,777 0.12 -- 0.11 -- -- 0.23 0.29 

Andover 540 536 575 0.04 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.04 0.04 

Arlington 2,448 1,475 2,485 0.11 -- 0.03 0.07 -- 0.21 0.22 

Athens 334 336 429 0.03 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.03 0.03 

Averill 8 8 10 0.00 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.00 0.00 

Averys Gore 1 0 0 0.00 -- -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 

Bakersfield 1,373 1,049 1,504 0.08 0.02 0.00 0.03 -- 0.13 0.14 

Baltimore 262 261 323 0.02 -- -- -- -- 0.02 0.02 

Barnard 958 946 1,049 0.07 -- 0.01 0.01 -- 0.09 0.09 

Barnet 1,768 1,390 1,985 0.10 0.01 0.00 0.02 -- 0.13 0.15 

Barre City 9,128 415 9,376 0.03 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.04 0.04 

Barre Town 8,002 3,797 7,408 0.28 -- 0.04 0.06 -- 0.39 0.38 

Barton 2,915 1,296 2,681 0.10 0.01 0.02 0.13 -- 0.26 0.25 

Belvidere 292 290 373 0.02 -- 0.01 -- -- 0.03 0.04 

Bennington 15,375 3,129 15,109 0.23 -- 0.12 0.06 1.11 1.52 1.52 

Benson 1,036 1,039 1,313 0.08 0.02 0.00 0.00 -- 0.11 0.13 

Berkshire 1,575 1,430 1,633 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.22 -- 0.43 0.44 

Berlin 2,888 2,467 2,962 0.19 -- 0.09 0.05 -- 0.32 0.33 

Bethel 1,980 1,507 2,135 0.11 -- 0.01 0.03 2.86 3.01 3.02 

Bloomfield 263 257 287 0.02 -- -- -- -- 0.02 0.02 

Bolton 982 938 1,164 0.07 0.00 0.01 0.05 -- 0.13 0.14 

Bradford 2,716 1,129 2,786 0.08 -- 0.01 0.25 -- 0.34 0.38 

Braintree 1,237 1,226 1,209 0.09 -- 0.00 0.02 -- 0.11 0.11 

Brandon 3,947 2,503 3,813 0.19 0.02 0.02 0.43 -- 0.65 0.71 

Brattleboro 11,849 1,764 11,716 0.13 -- 0.03 0.03 -- 0.19 0.19 

Bridgewater 956 957 1,100 0.07 -- 0.01 0.01 -- 0.09 0.11 

Bridport 1,275 388 1,319 0.03 0.12 -- -- -- 0.15 0.15 

Brighton 1,332 550 1,110 0.03 -- 0.00 0.07 -- 0.10 0.10 

Bristol 3,795 2,051 3,963 0.15 0.01 0.02 0.27 -- 0.45 0.46 

Brookfield 1,267 1,247 1,365 0.09 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.10 0.11 

Brookline 457 459 597 0.03 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.04 0.05 

Brownington 899 893 1,110 0.07 0.01 0.00 -- -- 0.08 0.09 

Brunswick 107 107 159 0.01 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.01 0.01 

Buels Gore 12 12 9 0.00 -- -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 

Burke 1,676 1,528 1,708 0.11 0.00 0.01 0.02 -- 0.15 0.15 

Burlington1 38,531 2 43,501 0.00 0.00 0.03 -- -- 0.50 0.51 

Cabot 1,307 1,112 1,431 0.08 -- 0.00 0.02 -- 0.10 0.11 

Calais 1,552 1,431 1,646 0.11 -- 0.02 0.01 -- 0.13 0.14 

Cambridge 3,152 2,167 4,175 0.16 -- 0.01 0.17 -- 0.34 0.40 

Canaan 1,116 609 1,035 0.04 -- 0.00 0.09 -- 0.13 0.13 

Castleton 4,368 3,260 4,738 0.24 0.01 0.03 0.20 -- 0.49 0.57 

Cavendish 1,435 869 1,513 0.07 -- 0.01 0.08 -- 0.15 0.15 

Charleston 906 901 963 0.07 0.01 0.00 -- -- 0.08 0.08 

Charlotte 3,651 3,537 3,741 0.27 0.05 0.02 0.01 -- 0.34 0.34 
Appendix B 43

withdrawals, and 2005 return flows in Vermont.—Continued

for snowmelt from snowmaking operations at ski areas.]

Withdrawals

2005 Return flows

Surface water

2005 2020

Groundwater Surface water

Snowmaking Irrigation Livestock Commercial 

& industrial CWS Fish hatcheries Total

Million gallons per day

-- -- 0.04 -- 0.77 -- 0.81 0.81 0.09 --

-- -- 0.01 -- -- -- 0.01 0.01 0.05 --

-- 0.03 -- 0.00 0.10 -- 0.13 0.13 0.09 0.16

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.03 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.15 0.00

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.02 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.00 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.00 --

-- 0.03 0.01 -- -- -- 0.04 0.04 0.09 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.02 --

-- -- -- 0.00 -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.06 --

-- -- 0.00 -- 0.00 -- 0.01 0.01 0.11 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.02 2.81

-- -- -- -- 0.03 -- 0.03 0.03 0.16 --

-- 0.06 0.00 -- 0.11 -- 0.18 0.18 0.07 0.27

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.02 --

-- 0.03 -- -- 0.05 1.20 1.28 1.28 0.36 6.98

-- -- 0.01 -- -- -- 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.01

-- -- 0.04 -- -- -- 0.04 0.04 0.10 --

-- -- -- -- 0.66 -- 0.66 0.66 0.14 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.09 2.93

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.02 --

0.00 0.03 0.00 -- 0.02 -- 0.04 0.53 0.08 0.02

-- 0.02 -- -- 0.08 -- 0.10 0.12 0.12 0.07

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.08 --

-- 0.03 0.01 -- -- -- 0.04 0.04 0.11 0.36

-- 0.03 -- 1.50 0.51 -- 2.04 2.12 0.10 3.11

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.05 --

-- -- 0.04 -- -- -- 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.09

-- -- -- -- 0.07 -- 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.09

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.24 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.08 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.03 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.06 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.01 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.00 --

0.09 -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.10 0.45 0.15 0.05

-- 0.03 0.00 -- 4.13 -- 4.16 4.16 0.02 4.64

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.06 0.03

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.10 --

0.33 -- -- -- 0.01 -- 0.34 0.68 0.44 0.20

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.03 0.14

-- 0.03 0.00 -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.16 0.31

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.06 0.08

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.06 --

-- -- 0.02 0.00 0.00 -- 0.02 0.02 0.23 --
44 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

Appendix B. Minor Civil Divisions with 2005 and projected 2020 populations, 2005 and projected 2020 groundwater and surface-water 

[CWS, community water system; --, no data; values may not sum to totals because of independent rounding, Return flows to groundwater include estimates 

Minor Civil 

Division

Population

Withdrawals 

Groundwater 

2005 2020 2005 2020 

Total Self 

supplied Total

Domestic Livestock Commercial 

& industrial CWS Fish hatcheries Total 

Million gallons per day 

Chelsea 1,256 1,098 1,247 0.08 -- 0.01 0.03 -- 0.12 0.12 

Chester 3,112 1,803 3,095 0.14 -- 0.01 0.08 -- 0.22 0.22 

Chittenden 1,227 1,217 1,274 0.09 0.00 0.01 0.18 -- 0.28 0.31 

Clarendon 2,891 2,882 2,846 0.22 0.00 0.12 0.00 -- 0.34 0.34 

Colchester 17,165 1,738 19,492 0.13 0.01 0.02 0.02 -- 0.18 0.20 

Concord 1,208 1,177 1,339 0.09 -- 0.01 0.01 -- 0.10 0.12 

Corinth 1,484 1,471 1,678 0.11 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.11 0.13 

Cornwall 1,223 1,220 1,164 0.09 0.05 0.00 -- -- 0.15 0.14 

Coventry 1,032 940 1,197 0.07 0.05 0.01 0.02 -- 0.14 0.16 

Craftsbury 1,147 1,140 1,339 0.09 0.05 0.00 0.02 -- 0.15 0.17 

Danby 1,292 1,158 1,489 0.09 0.02 0.00 0.04 -- 0.14 0.16 

Danville 2,287 2,044 2,341 0.14 0.03 0.01 0.06 -- 0.23 0.25 

Derby 4,886 3,242 4,656 0.20 0.03 0.03 0.13 -- 0.39 0.42 

Dorset 2,123 1,704 2,104 0.13 -- 0.02 0.07 -- 0.21 0.21 

Dover 1,445 1,145 2,028 0.09 -- 0.07 0.11 -- 0.26 0.32 

Dummerston 1,940 1,936 1,839 0.15 -- 0.02 0.00 -- 0.16 0.16 

Duxbury 1,346 1,158 1,537 0.09 -- 0.02 -- -- 0.11 0.12 

East Haven 304 292 363 0.02 -- 0.00 0.01 -- 0.03 0.04 

East Montpelier 2,699 2,414 2,825 0.18 -- 0.02 0.04 -- 0.23 0.24 

Eden 1,141 1,144 1,666 0.09 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.09 0.13 

Elmore 939 933 1,318 0.07 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.07 0.10 

Enosburg 2,778 1,654 3,300 0.12 0.06 0.05 0.02 -- 0.26 0.28 

Essex 19,146 3,330 20,947 0.25 0.01 0.01 -- -- 0.27 0.30 

Fair Haven 2,969 673 3,064 0.05 0.00 0.01 -- -- 0.07 0.07 

Fairfax 4,011 3,400 5,695 0.26 0.06 0.01 0.05 -- 0.38 0.49 

Fairfield 1,877 1,578 2,039 0.12 0.11 0.00 0.03 -- 0.27 0.28 

Fairlee 1,017 575 1,074 0.04 -- 0.00 0.05 -- 0.10 0.10 

Fayston 1,235 1,194 1,461 0.09 -- 0.01 0.01 -- 0.11 0.13 

Ferdinand 33 33 32 0.00 -- -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 

Ferrisburg 2,723 2,092 2,953 0.16 0.09 0.02 -- -- 0.27 0.28 

Fletcher 1,285 1,274 1,622 0.10 0.01 0.00 -- -- 0.11 0.14 

Franklin 1,340 1,088 1,538 0.08 0.08 0.00 0.03 -- 0.20 0.21 

Georgia 4,520 3,523 5,313 0.26 0.09 0.15 0.02 -- 0.53 0.58 

Glastenbury 15 95 17 0.01 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.01 0.01 

Glover 975 968 1,099 0.07 0.01 0.00 0.00 -- 0.09 0.10 

Goshen 224 226 217 0.02 0.00 0.00 -- -- 0.02 0.02 

Grafton 635 642 653 0.05 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.05 0.05 

Granby 86 86 106 0.01 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.01 0.01 

Grand Isle 2,302 51 2,266 0.00 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.01 0.01 

Granville 296 285 339 0.02 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.03 0.03 

Greensboro 797 784 808 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.04 -- 0.09 0.10 

Groton 961 950 982 0.07 0.00 0.01 -- -- 0.08 0.08 

Guildhall 269 268 314 0.02 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.02 0.02 

Guilford 2,006 2,006 2,167 0.15 -- 0.01 -- -- 0.16 0.17 

Halifax 816 815 1,033 0.06 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.06 0.08 

Hancock 374 377 401 0.03 -- 0.01 -- -- 0.04 0.05 
Appendix B 45

withdrawals, and 2005 return flows in Vermont.—Continued

for snowmelt from snowmaking operations at ski areas.]

Withdrawals

2005 Return flows

Surface water

2005 2020

Groundwater Surface water

Snowmaking Irrigation Livestock Commercial 

& industrial CWS Fish hatcheries Total

Million gallons per day

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.06 0.03

-- 0.03 -- -- 0.04 -- 0.07 0.07 0.16 0.14

-- -- 0.00 -- 0.39 1.14 1.53 1.33 0.08 1.14

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.08

-- 0.02 0.00 -- 0.00 -- 0.03 0.03 0.85 0.00

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.07 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.09 --

-- -- 0.02 -- -- -- 0.02 0.02 0.08 --

-- -- 0.02 -- -- -- 0.02 0.02 0.06 0.05

-- -- 0.02 -- -- -- 0.02 0.02 0.07 --

-- -- 0.01 -- -- -- 0.01 0.01 0.08 --

-- -- 0.01 -- 0.02 -- 0.03 0.03 0.12 0.03

-- -- 0.01 -- 0.09 -- 0.10 0.10 0.26 --

-- 0.03 -- -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.13 --

0.60 0.06 -- -- -- -- 0.66 0.06 0.97 0.29

-- -- -- 0.00 0.50 -- 0.50 0.58 0.12 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.08 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.02 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.17 0.00

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.07 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.06 --

-- -- 0.02 -- -- -- 0.02 0.02 0.10 0.27

-- 0.05 0.00 -- -- -- 0.06 0.06 0.35 5.22

-- -- 0.00 -- 0.21 -- 0.21 0.21 0.03 0.23

-- -- 0.02 -- 0.72 -- 0.74 0.74 0.22 0.04

-- -- 0.04 -- 0.28 -- 0.32 0.32 0.12 --

-- 0.03 -- -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.06 --

0.13 0.02 -- -- -- -- 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.06

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.00 --

-- 0.03 0.03 0.01 -- -- 0.07 0.07 0.18 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.08 --

-- -- 0.03 -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.08 --

-- -- 0.03 0.10 -- -- 0.13 0.15 0.28 0.10

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.01 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.01 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.04 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.01 --

-- 0.02 -- -- 0.23 6.85 7.10 7.10 0.14 6.85

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.02 --

-- 0.03 0.00 -- 0.00 -- 0.03 0.03 0.05 --

-- -- 0.00 0.00 -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.06 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.02 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.12 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.05 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.02 --
46 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

Appendix B. Minor Civil Divisions with 2005 and projected 2020 populations, 2005 and projected 2020 groundwater and surface-water 

[CWS, community water system; --, no data; values may not sum to totals because of independent rounding, Return flows to groundwater include estimates 

Minor Civil 

Division

Population

Withdrawals 

Groundwater 

2005 2020 2005 2020 

Total Self 

supplied Total

Domestic Livestock Commercial 

& industrial CWS Fish hatcheries Total 

Million gallons per day 

Hardwick 3,230 3,169 3,705 0.10 0.05 0.03 0.26 -- 0.43 0.61 

Hartford 10,822 1,821 11,226 0.14 -- 0.04 0.96 -- 1.14 1.14 

Hartland 3,155 2,842 3,372 0.21 -- 0.02 0.02 -- 0.25 0.27 

Highgate 3,660 3,630 4,066 0.27 0.14 0.03 -- -- 0.44 0.49 

Hinesburg 4,425 3,173 5,314 0.24 0.02 0.06 0.12 -- 0.45 0.51 

Holland 597 592 840 0.04 0.02 0.00 -- -- 0.06 0.08 

Hubbardton 777 772 931 0.06 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.06 0.07 

Huntington 1,939 1,919 2,280 0.14 0.00 0.01 0.02 -- 0.18 0.20 

Hyde Park 3,092 2,267 3,329 0.17 -- 0.02 0.10 -- 0.28 0.30 

Ira 452 453 483 0.03 0.00 0.00 -- -- 0.04 0.04 

Irasburg 1,091 1,034 1,283 0.08 0.08 0.01 0.01 -- 0.18 0.19 

Isle La Motte 520 517 534 0.04 -- 0.01 -- -- 0.05 0.05 

Jamaica 926 931 1,119 0.07 -- 0.01 0.01 -- 0.09 0.10 

Jay 484 458 534 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.17 -- 0.23 0.24 

Jericho 5,068 2,646 5,562 0.20 0.00 0.01 0.04 -- 0.26 0.28 

Johnson 3,260 1,747 3,800 0.13 -- 0.01 0.10 -- 0.24 0.26 

Killington 1,134 973 1,364 0.07 0.01 0.10 0.10 -- 0.29 0.32 

Kirby 509 510 648 0.04 0.01 0.00 -- -- 0.05 0.06 

Landgrove 140 141 154 0.01 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.01 0.02 

Leicester 1,024 1,022 1,032 0.08 0.01 0.00 -- -- 0.09 0.09 

Lemington 110 109 97 0.01 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.01 0.01 

Lewis 1 0 0 0.00 -- -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 

Lincoln 1,268 1,275 1,472 0.10 0.00 0.00 -- -- 0.10 0.12 

Londonderry 1,779 1,695 1,789 0.13 -- 0.04 0.02 -- 0.18 0.18 

Lowell 747 742 938 0.06 0.03 0.00 -- -- 0.09 0.10 

Ludlow 2,694 1,374 2,513 0.10 -- 0.02 0.40 -- 0.53 0.60 

Lunenburg 1,321 1,323 1,562 0.07 -- 0.00 0.06 -- 0.13 0.18 

Lyndon 5,602 1,770 5,598 0.13 0.01 0.01 0.43 -- 0.59 0.59 

Maidstone 108 107 96 0.01 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.01 0.01 

Manchester 4,359 1,584 4,527 0.12 -- 0.03 0.59 -- 0.74 0.92 

Marlboro 988 984 1,027 0.07 -- 0.01 -- -- 0.08 0.09 

Marshfield 1,631 1,200 1,736 0.09 -- 0.01 0.10 -- 0.20 0.20 

Mendon 1,068 1,004 914 0.08 0.00 0.03 0.02 -- 0.13 0.11 

Middlebury 8,152 1,490 8,277 0.11 0.04 0.01 1.13 -- 1.29 1.62 

Middlesex 1,847 1,844 1,944 0.14 -- 0.01 -- -- 0.15 0.15 

Middletown 

Springs

820 823 979 0.06 0.01 0.00 -- -- 0.07 0.08 

Milton 10,169 5,822 11,076 0.44 0.03 0.02 0.07 -- 0.55 0.59 

Monkton 1,946 1,936 2,125 0.15 0.03 0.00 -- -- 0.18 0.19 

Montgomery 1,063 933 1,222 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.05 -- 0.12 0.13 

Montpelier 8,003 430 7,827 0.03 -- 0.00 0.01 -- 0.04 0.04 

Moretown 1,709 1,580 1,838 0.12 -- 0.01 0.00 -- 0.13 0.14 

Morgan 738 718 864 0.05 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.06 0.07 

Morristown 5,522 2,891 5,418 0.22 -- 0.02 0.50 -- 0.75 0.81 

Mount Holly 1,236 1,241 1,486 0.09 0.00 0.01 -- -- 0.11 0.13 

Mount Tabor 202 139 205 0.01 0.00 0.00 -- -- 0.02 0.02 
Appendix B 47

withdrawals, and 2005 return flows in Vermont.—Continued

for snowmelt from snowmaking operations at ski areas.]

Withdrawals

2005 Return flows

Surface water

2005 2020

Groundwater Surface water

Snowmaking Irrigation Livestock Commercial 

& industrial CWS Fish hatcheries Total

Million gallons per day

-- -- 0.02 -- -- -- 0.02 0.02 0.09 0.22

-- 0.07 -- -- 0.00 -- 0.07 0.07 0.13 1.23

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.20 --

-- -- 0.05 0.00 -- -- 0.05 0.05 0.23 --

-- 0.03 0.01 -- -- -- 0.04 0.04 0.23 0.31

-- -- 0.01 -- -- -- 0.01 0.01 0.04 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.05 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.12 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 0.20 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.03 --

-- -- 0.03 -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.07 --

-- -- -- 0.00 -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.03 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 0.06 --

-- 0.02 0.00 -- -- -- 0.02 0.02 0.03 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.32 --

-- -- -- -- 0.05 -- 0.05 0.05 0.10 0.15

0.82 0.06 0.00 -- -- -- 0.89 1.62 0.64 0.79

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.03 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.01 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.06 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.01 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.00 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.08 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.11 --

-- -- 0.01 -- -- -- 0.01 0.01 0.05 --

0.90 0.03 -- -- -- -- 0.93 1.11 0.54 0.83

-- -- -- 1.86 -- -- 1.86 2.05 0.14 1.73

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.27

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.01 --

-- 0.10 -- -- -- -- 0.10 0.10 0.18 0.30

-- -- -- -- 0.50 -- 0.50 0.58 0.06 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.08 0.02

0.02 -- 0.00 -- 2.23 -- 2.26 2.93 0.05 --

-- 0.03 0.01 -- -- -- 0.05 0.05 0.17 2.40

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.12 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.05 --

-- 0.01 0.01 0.00 -- -- 0.02 0.02 0.45 0.21

-- -- 0.01 -- -- -- 0.01 0.01 0.12 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.07 --

-- 0.03 -- -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.03 1.92

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.11 0.03

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.05 --

-- 0.06 -- -- -- -- 0.06 0.06 0.18 0.35

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.08 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.01 --
48 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

Appendix B. Minor Civil Divisions with 2005 and projected 2020 populations, 2005 and projected 2020 groundwater and surface-water 

[CWS, community water system; --, no data; values may not sum to totals because of independent rounding, Return flows to groundwater include estimates 

Minor Civil 

Division

Population

Withdrawals 

Groundwater 

2005 2020 2005 2020 

Total Self 

supplied Total

Domestic Livestock Commercial 

& industrial CWS Fish hatcheries Total 

Million gallons per day 

New Haven 1,815 1,814 2,034 0.14 0.08 0.01 -- -- 0.23 0.24 

Newark 464 464 691 0.03 0.00 0.00 -- -- 0.04 0.06 

Newbury 2,139 1,662 1,994 0.12 -- 0.02 0.03 -- 0.17 0.16 

Newfane 1,724 1,715 1,886 0.13 -- 0.01 -- -- 0.14 0.16 

Newport City 5,207 0 5,253 0.00 -- 0.00 0.90 -- 0.90 0.90 

Newport Town 1,806 1,619 1,632 0.11 0.13 0.00 0.03 -- 0.27 0.27 

North Hero 910 0 1,376 0.00 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.00 0.00 

Northfield 5,816 1,881 6,092 0.14 -- 0.07 0.38 -- 0.59 0.59 

Norton 227 220 272 0.02 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.02 0.02 

Norwich 3,567 2,454 3,947 0.18 -- 0.01 0.09 -- 0.29 0.31 

Orange 982 957 1,083 0.07 -- 0.01 -- -- 0.08 0.09 

Orwell 1,231 1,218 1,384 0.09 0.07 0.01 -- -- 0.17 0.18 

Panton 699 52 780 0.00 0.04 -- -- -- 0.05 0.05 

Pawlet 1,442 1,441 1,602 0.11 0.02 0.02 -- -- 0.15 0.16 

Peacham 683 678 710 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.01 -- 0.06 0.07 

Peru 432 374 520 0.03 -- 0.01 0.04 -- 0.07 0.08 

Pittsfield 424 426 455 0.03 -- 0.01 0.00 -- 0.04 0.05 

Pittsford 3,213 2,113 3,275 0.16 0.01 0.15 0.18 -- 0.51 0.54 

Plainfield 1,372 804 1,342 0.06 -- 0.01 -- -- 0.07 0.06 

Plymouth 580 572 610 0.04 -- 0.02 0.01 -- 0.07 0.08 

Pomfret 999 1,002 1,032 0.08 -- 0.01 -- -- 0.09 0.09 

Poultney 3,577 2,036 3,718 0.15 0.01 0.01 0.17 -- 0.33 0.39 

Pownal 3,535 3,022 3,558 0.23 -- 0.01 0.05 -- 0.29 0.29 

Proctor 1,847 524 1,750 0.04 -- -- 0.00 -- 0.04 0.23 

Putney 2,660 2,291 2,778 0.17 -- 0.01 0.03 -- 0.21 0.22 

Randolph 5,054 3,017 4,869 0.23 -- 0.11 0.23 -- 0.56 0.55 

Reading 721 713 765 0.05 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.05 0.06 

Readsboro 792 520 888 0.04 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.04 0.04 

Richford 2,351 871 2,400 0.07 0.02 0.01 -- -- 0.09 0.09 

Richmond 4,110 2,968 4,421 0.22 0.00 0.01 0.10 -- 0.33 0.35 

Ripton 586 585 778 0.04 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.05 0.06 

Rochester 1,170 839 1,154 0.06 -- 0.00 0.04 -- 0.10 0.10 

Rockingham 5,131 1,673 5,149 0.13 -- 0.01 0.01 -- 0.15 0.15 

Roxbury 569 584 671 0.04 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.05 0.05 

Royalton 2,542 2,151 2,958 0.16 -- 0.02 0.06 -- 0.24 0.28 

Rupert 718 706 698 0.05 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.05 0.05 

Rutland City 17,046 0 16,326 0.00 -- -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 

Rutland Town 4,135 3,328 3,870 0.25 0.00 0.06 0.07 -- 0.38 0.38 

Ryegate 1,194 1,014 1,235 0.08 0.02 0.04 0.02 -- 0.16 0.17 

Salisbury 1,129 1,126 1,208 0.08 0.03 0.01 -- 0.74 0.86 0.87 

Sandgate 347 349 444 0.03 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.03 0.04 

Searsburg 93 93 136 0.01 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.01 0.01 

Shaftsbury 3,749 2,296 3,989 0.17 -- 0.03 0.29 -- 0.49 0.51 

Sharon 1,384 1,391 1,781 0.10 -- 0.26 -- -- 0.37 0.47 

Sheffield 721 708 969 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 -- 0.06 0.08 

Shelburne 6,995 2,173 7,492 0.16 0.02 0.01 -- -- 0.19 0.21 
Appendix B 49

withdrawals, and 2005 return flows in Vermont.—Continued

for snowmelt from snowmaking operations at ski areas.]

Withdrawals

2005 Return flows

Surface water

2005 2020

Groundwater Surface water

Snowmaking Irrigation Livestock Commercial 

& industrial CWS Fish hatcheries Total

Million gallons per day

-- -- 0.03 -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.11 --

-- 0.01 0.00 -- -- -- 0.01 0.01 0.03 --

-- -- -- -- 0.02 -- 0.02 0.02 0.12 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.11 --

-- -- -- 0.25 -- -- 0.25 0.25 0.00 1.00

-- -- 0.04 -- -- -- 0.04 0.04 0.10 0.02

-- -- -- 0.00 0.14 -- 0.14 0.14 0.06 --

-- 0.03 -- -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.20 0.72

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.01 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.22 --

-- -- -- -- 1.91 -- 1.91 1.91 0.06 --

-- -- 0.02 -- -- -- 0.02 0.02 0.07 0.02

-- -- 0.01 -- 0.62 -- 0.63 0.82 0.04 --

-- -- 0.01 -- -- -- 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.01

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.04 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.05 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.03 --

-- 0.03 0.00 -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.16 0.18

-- 0.03 -- -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.06

0.33 -- -- -- -- -- 0.33 0.79 0.06 0.02

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.06 --

-- 0.03 0.00 -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.12 0.25

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.17 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.01 0.25

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.15 0.26

-- 0.03 -- -- 0.03 -- 0.06 0.06 0.14 0.23

-- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.04 --

-- -- -- 0.04 -- 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.04

-- 0.03 0.01 -- 0.13 -- 0.17 0.17 0.05 0.24

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.20 0.08

-- -- -- 0.00 -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.04 --

-- 0.02 -- -- -- -- 0.02 0.02 0.12 --

-- 0.03 -- -- 0.32 -- 0.35 0.35 0.11 0.62

-- -- -- -- -- 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.04 0.48

-- -- -- -- 0.03 -- 0.03 0.03 0.14 0.04

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.04 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.00 5.59

-- -- 0.00 0.76 -- -- 0.76 0.83 0.21 0.64

-- -- 0.01 0.28 -- -- 0.29 0.29 0.07 0.27

-- -- 0.01 0.00 -- -- 0.01 0.01 0.07 0.74

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.02 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.01 --

-- -- -- -- 0.12 -- 0.12 0.12 0.24 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.09 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.04 --

-- 0.03 0.01 -- -- -- 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.75
50 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

Appendix B. Minor Civil Divisions with 2005 and projected 2020 populations, 2005 and projected 2020 groundwater and surface-water 

[CWS, community water system; --, no data; values may not sum to totals because of independent rounding, Return flows to groundwater include estimates 

Minor Civil 

Division

Population

Withdrawals 

Groundwater 

2005 2020 2005 2020 

Total Self 

supplied Total

Domestic Livestock Commercial 

& industrial CWS Fish hatcheries Total 

Million gallons per day 

Sheldon 2,240 1,662 2,494 0.12 0.11 0.22 0.04 -- 0.50 0.52 

Shoreham 1,305 434 1,424 0.03 0.10 0.00 -- -- 0.13 0.13 

Shrewsbury 1,141 1,076 1,114 0.08 0.00 0.01 0.01 -- 0.10 0.10 

Somerset 5 5 4 0.00 -- -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 

South Burlington16,993 315 16,796 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.01 -- 0.07 0.07 

South Hero 1,888 1,286 2,005 0.10 -- 0.01 -- -- 0.11 0.11 

Springfield 8,891 3,145 8,556 0.24 -- 0.04 0.87 -- 1.15 1.27 

St. Albans City 7,476 0 8,019 0.00 -- -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 

St. Albans 

Town

5,911 3,402 6,315 0.26 0.11 0.01 -- -- 0.37 0.39 

St. George 682 680 717 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.02 -- 0.07 0.08 

St. Johnsbury 7,495 1,649 7,427 0.12 0.01 0.02 0.03 -- 0.18 0.18 

Stamford 818 815 769 0.06 -- 0.01 -- -- 0.07 0.06 

Stannard 193 196 248 0.01 0.00 -- -- -- 0.02 0.02 

Starksboro 1,928 1,669 2,392 0.13 0.01 0.00 0.07 -- 0.21 0.24 

Stockbridge 683 679 769 0.05 -- 0.01 0.01 -- 0.06 0.07 

Stowe 4,732 3,428 5,051 0.26 -- 0.05 0.54 -- 0.85 0.87 

Strafford 1,103 1,087 1,153 0.08 -- 0.01 -- -- 0.09 0.09 

Stratton 171 138 165 0.01 -- 0.01 0.11 -- 0.13 0.15 

Sudbury 610 607 691 0.05 0.01 0.00 -- -- 0.06 0.06 

Sunderland 896 800 851 0.06 -- 0.01 0.14 -- 0.20 0.20 

Sutton 1,056 1,064 1,305 0.07 0.02 0.01 0.02 -- 0.12 0.15 

Swanton 6,454 3,094 6,904 0.23 0.13 0.01 0.01 -- 0.38 0.39 

Thetford 2,784 2,782 2,835 0.21 -- 0.02 0.02 -- 0.24 0.25 

Tinmouth 615 611 665 0.05 0.01 0.00 -- -- 0.05 0.06 

Topsham 1,160 1,141 1,491 0.09 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.09 0.11 

Townshend 1,122 1,125 1,368 0.08 -- 0.02 -- -- 0.10 0.13 

Troy 1,710 1,123 1,565 0.08 0.10 0.01 0.16 -- 0.36 0.37 

Tunbridge 1,329 1,318 1,409 0.10 -- 0.01 -- -- 0.11 0.11 

Underhill 3,020 2,526 3,183 0.19 0.00 0.01 0.04 -- 0.25 0.26 

Vergennes 2,763 261 2,955 0.02 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.02 0.02 

Vernon2 2,100 2,104 2,661 0.16 -- 0.01 0.01 -- 0.18 0.22 

Vershire 639 643 763 0.05 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.05 0.06 

Victory 98 97 190 0.01 -- -- -- -- 0.01 0.01 

Waitsfield 1,719 1,704 1,911 0.13 -- 0.05 0.02 -- 0.20 0.22 

Walden 771 775 945 0.06 0.01 0.00 -- -- 0.07 0.08 

Wallingford 2,322 1,738 2,360 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.13 -- 0.27 0.29 

Waltham 490 454 489 0.03 0.02 0.00 -- -- 0.05 0.05 

Wardsboro 895 892 1,112 0.07 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.07 0.09 

Warners Grant - 0 0 0.00 -- -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 

Warren 1,734 1,588 2,250 0.12 -- 0.03 0.09 -- 0.23 0.29 

Warren Gore 10 10 8 0.00 -- -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 

Washington 1,098 878 1,147 0.07 -- 0.00 0.02 -- 0.08 0.09 

Waterbury 5,211 2,600 5,253 0.20 -- 0.06 0.10 -- 0.35 0.36 

Waterford 1,216 1,199 1,199 0.09 0.01 0.01 -- -- 0.11 0.11 

Waterville 693 692 907 0.05 -- 0.00 0.01 -- 0.06 0.07 
Appendix B 51

withdrawals, and 2005 return flows in Vermont.—Continued

for snowmelt from snowmaking operations at ski areas.]

Withdrawals

2005 Return flows

Surface water

2005 2020

Groundwater Surface water

Snowmaking Irrigation Livestock Commercial 

& industrial CWS Fish hatcheries Total

Million gallons per day

-- -- 0.04 -- -- -- 0.04 0.04 0.14 0.20

-- -- 0.03 -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.07 0.01

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.07 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.00 --

-- 0.04 0.00 -- 4.99 -- 5.03 5.03 0.00 2.45

-- 0.01 -- 0.01 0.06 -- 0.08 0.09 0.12 --

-- 0.03 -- -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.28 1.48

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.00 0.39

-- -- 0.04 0.00 1.45 -- 1.48 1.48 0.20 2.95

-- 0.03 0.00 -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.04 --

-- 0.03 0.00 -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.19 1.38

-- 0.03 -- -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.05 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.01 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.12 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.04 --

0.67 0.06 -- -- 0.06 -- 0.80 1.43 0.52 0.60

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.07 --

1.29 -- -- -- -- -- 1.29 0.98 0.89 0.70

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.04 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.06 --

-- -- 0.01 -- -- -- 0.01 0.01 0.07 --

-- 0.03 0.04 0.00 0.28 -- 0.35 0.35 0.20 0.65

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.18 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.04 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.07 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.07 --

-- -- 0.03 -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.13

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.08 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.19 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.00 0.44

-- -- -- -- -- -- 340.00 340.00 0.13 339.04

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.04 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.01 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.11 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.05 --

-- -- 0.00 0.04 0.02 -- 0.06 0.06 0.19 0.11

-- -- 0.01 -- -- -- 0.01 0.01 0.03 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.06 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.00 --

0.32 -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.33 1.05 1.31 0.16

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.00 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.07 --

-- 0.06 -- -- -- -- 0.06 0.06 0.24 0.32

-- -- 0.00 -- 1.59 -- 1.59 1.59 0.08 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.04 --
52 Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020

Appendix B. Minor Civil Divisions with 2005 and projected 2020 populations, 2005 and projected 2020 groundwater and surface-water 

[CWS, community water system; --, no data; values may not sum to totals because of independent rounding, Return flows to groundwater include estimates 

Minor Civil 

Division

Population

Withdrawals 

Groundwater 

2005 2020 2005 2020 

Total Self 

supplied Total

Domestic Livestock Commercial 

& industrial CWS Fish hatcheries Total 

Million gallons per day 

Weathersfield 2,853 2,476 2,710 0.19 -- 0.02 0.03 -- 0.23 0.22 

Wells 1,115 1,119 1,337 0.08 0.01 0.01 -- -- 0.09 0.11 

West Fairlee 738 706 915 0.05 -- 0.01 0.00 -- 0.06 0.08 

West Haven 308 307 272 0.02 0.01 -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 

West Rutland 2,529 452 2,695 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.34 -- 0.39 0.39 

West Windsor 1,116 1,097 1,122 0.08 -- 0.00 0.03 -- 0.11 0.11 

Westfield 531 442 552 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.03 -- 0.09 0.09 

Westford 2,129 2,126 2,427 0.16 0.01 0.00 0.00 -- 0.18 0.20 

Westminster 3,238 2,836 3,404 0.21 -- 0.04 0.03 -- 0.28 0.30 

Westmore 321 318 335 0.02 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.03 0.03 

Weston 649 643 619 0.05 -- 0.01 -- -- 0.06 0.05 

Weybridge 852 716 883 0.05 0.03 0.00 -- -- 0.08 0.09 

Wheelock 614 618 856 0.04 0.00 -- 0.00 -- 0.05 0.07 

Whiting 410 350 382 0.03 0.02 0.00 0.00 -- 0.05 0.05 

Whitingham 1,245 1,267 1,507 0.10 -- 0.01 -- -- 0.11 0.13 

Williamstown 3,284 2,181 3,718 0.16 -- 0.05 0.22 -- 0.44 0.46 

Williston 8,243 2,121 10,942 0.16 0.01 0.01 0.01 -- 0.19 0.24 

Wilmington 2,331 1,413 2,327 0.11 -- 0.03 0.11 -- 0.24 0.25 

Windham 346 342 416 0.03 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.03 0.03 

Windsor 3,735 699 3,582 0.05 -- 0.02 0.33 -- 0.40 0.44 

Winhall 762 661 962 0.05 -- 0.02 0.03 -- 0.10 0.15 

Winooski 6,353 0 6,748 0.00 -- -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 

Wolcott 1,672 1,662 1,861 0.12 -- 0.01 0.01 -- 0.14 0.16 

Woodbury 823 813 854 0.06 -- 0.00 -- -- 0.06 0.07 

Woodford 397 319 485 0.02 -- 0.00 0.00 -- 0.03 0.03 

Woodstock 3,224 1,824 2,941 0.14 -- 0.04 0.17 -- 0.35 0.33 

Worcester 887 741 958 0.06 -- 0.00 0.01 -- 0.06 0.07 

Total 623,050 315,714 666,045 23 3 4 15 5 51 55 

1

 Totals of groundwater withdrawals includes water withdrawn from wells for power production at Burlington Electric McNeil Generating Station.

2

 Totals of surface-water withdrawals and return flows includes water for thermoelectric power production at Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee.
Appendix B 53

withdrawals, and 2005 return flows in Vermont.—Continued

for snowmelt from snowmaking operations at ski areas.]

Withdrawals

2005 Return flows

Surface water

2005 2020

Groundwater Surface water

Snowmaking Irrigation Livestock Commercial 

& industrial CWS Fish hatcheries Total

Million gallons per day

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.18 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.07 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.04 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.02 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.20

0.11 -- -- -- -- -- 0.11 0.33 0.12 0.05

-- -- 0.01 -- -- -- 0.01 0.01 0.03 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.13 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.17 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.02 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.04 --

-- -- 0.01 -- -- -- 0.01 0.01 0.05 --

-- -- 0.00 -- -- -- 0.00 0.00 0.04 --

-- -- 0.01 -- -- -- 0.01 0.01 0.03 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.07 0.03

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.17 0.11

-- 0.04 0.00 -- -- -- 0.05 0.05 0.17 0.01

0.00 0.04 -- -- 0.01 -- 0.05 1.79 0.11 0.09

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.02 --

-- 0.03 -- -- -- -- 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.46

0.16 0.03 -- -- -- -- 0.19 0.20 0.04 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.00 0.86

-- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.10 --

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 0.01 0.05 --

-- -- -- -- 1.71 -- 1.71 1.71 0.02 --

-- 0.03 -- -- 0.11 -- 0.14 0.14 0.12 0.26

-- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00 -- 0.06 0.00

6 2 1 5 25 10 389 395 28 413
Prepared by the Pembroke and West Trenton Publishing Service Centers.

For more information concerning this report, contact:

Director

U.S. Geological Survey

New Hampshire-Vermont Water Science Center

331 Commerce Way, Suite 2

Pembroke, NH 03275

dc_nh@usgs.gov

or visit our Web site at:

http://nh.water.usgs.gov
Medalie and Horn—Estimated Water Withdrawals and Return Flows in Vermont in 2005 and 2020—Scientific Investigations Report 2010–5053

Printed on recycled paper