Data Network, Collection, and Analysis in the 

Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada 

Open-File Report 2011–1089

Prepared in cooperation with Eureka County, Nevada 

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Data Network, Collection, and Analysis in the 

Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada

By Lari A. Knochenmus, David L. Berger, Michael T. Moreo, and J. LaRue Smith

Prepared in cooperation with Eureka County, Nevada

Open-File Report 2011–1089

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: 2011

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:

Knochenmus, L.A., Berger, D.L., Moreo, M.T., and Smith, J.L., 2011, Data network, collection, and analysis in the 

Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2011–1089, 24 p.
iii

Contents

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

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

Data-Collection Network..............................................................................................................................3

Quality of Water in Aquifers and Springs ..................................................................................................3

Temporal Changes in Groundwater Levels..............................................................................................10

Historical Groundwater Budgets ..............................................................................................................10

Monitor Valley .....................................................................................................................................14

Kobeh Valley ........................................................................................................................................14

Antelope Valley ...................................................................................................................................14

Stevens Basin......................................................................................................................................14

Diamond Valley....................................................................................................................................15

Groundwater Discharge and Evapotranspiration ..................................................................................15

Potential Areas of Groundwater Discharge...................................................................................15

Evapotranspiration Units ...................................................................................................................15

Evapotranspiration Rates ..................................................................................................................19

Groundwater Discharge ....................................................................................................................19

Continued Research in the Diamond Valley Flow System ....................................................................20

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................20

Appendix A. Drillers’ Logs for Wells Drilled as Part of Phase 2 of the Study in the 

Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada .........................................................................23
iv

Figures

Figure 1. Map showing locations of hydrographic areas and selected geographic

features of the Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada ........................ 2

Figure 2. Map showing locations of data collection sites in the Diamond Valley flow

system, central Nevada..................................................................... 7

Figure 3. Map showing relative concentration and water types in aquifers and 

springs in the Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada........................... 9

Figure 4. Map showing water-level changes from 1960s–2010 and period-of-record

hydrographs in Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada ........................ 11

Figure 5. Map showing water-level changes between the years 2005 and 2010 and

period-of-record hydrographs in Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada ... 12

Figure 6. Graph showing annual precipitation at weather station at Eureka, Nevada,

1965-2010 and mean annual precipitation during wet and dry periods, Diamond

Valley flow system, central Nevada ...................................................... 13

Figure 7. Map showing locations of field-mapped points and potential areas of

groundwater discharge in Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada............ 16

Figure 8. Map showing preliminary evapotranspiration units in the Diamond Valley flow

system, central Nevada..................................................................... 17

Figure 9. Graph showing fractional histogram of MSAVI values in the Diamond Valley

flow system, central Nevada............................................................... 18

Figure 10. Graph showing example relation between remotely sensed vegetation 

index and groundwater discharge rate ................................................... 19

Tables

Table 1. Site identification, location, site type, characteristics, and data type for the

Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada .......................................... 4

Table 2. Selected water-quality constituents in water from wells and springs in the

Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada .......................................... 8

Table 3. Summary of historical groundwater budgets and perennial yields for

hydrographic areas in the Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada ............ 13

Table 4. Preliminary estimates of evapotranspiration-unit acreage delineated by

hydrographic area in Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada.................. 19
v

Conversion Factors, Datums, and Abbreviations and 

Acronyms

Conversion Factors

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

Area

acre 4,047 square meter (m2)

square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2) 

Volume

acre-foot (acre-ft) 1,233 cubic meter (m3)

Flow rate

acre-foot per year (acre-ft/yr) 1,233 cubic meter per year (m3/yr)

Datums

Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 

(NAVD 88).

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

Altitude, as used in this report, refers to distance above the vertical datum.

Abbreviations and Acronyms

ET evapotranspiration

meq/L milliequivalents per liter

MSAVI Modified Soil-Adjusted Vegetation Index

NDWR Nevada Division of Water Resources

NAIP National Agriculture Imagery Program

NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service

NWIS USGS National Water Information System

NWQL USGS National Water Quality Lab

SSURGO Soil Survey Geographic soils database

TM Thematic Mapper

USGS U.S. Geological Survey 
This page intentionally left blank.
Data Network, Collection, and Analysis in the 

Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada

By Lari A. Knochenmus, David L. Berger, Michael T. Moreo, and J. LaRue Smith

Abstract

Future groundwater development and its effect on future 

municipal, irrigation, and alternative energy uses in the 

Diamond Valley flow system are of concern for officials in 

Eureka County, Nevada. To provide a better understanding 

of the groundwater resources, the U.S. Geological Survey, 

in cooperation with Eureka County, commenced a multiphase study of the Diamond Valley flow system in 2005. 

Groundwater development primarily in southern Diamond 

Valley has resulted in water-level declines since the 1960s 

ranging from less than 5 to 100 feet. Groundwater resources in 

the Diamond Valley flow system outside of southern Diamond 

Valley have been relatively undeveloped.

Data collected during phase 2 of the study (2006–09) 

included micrometeorological data at 4 evapotranspiration 

stations, 3 located in natural vegetation and 1 located in an 

agricultural field; groundwater levels in 95 wells; waterquality constituents in aquifers and springs at 21 locations; 

lithologic information from 7 recently drilled wells; and 

geophysical logs from 3 well sites. This report describes what 

was accomplished during phase 2 of the study, provides the 

data collected, and presents the approaches to strengthen 

relations between evapotranspiration rates measured at 

micrometeorological stations and spatially distributed 

groundwater discharge. This report also presents the approach 

to improve delineation of areas of groundwater discharge 

and describes the current methodology used to improve the 

accuracy of spatially distributed groundwater discharge rates 

in the Diamond Valley flow system. 

Introduction

Encompassing about 3,000 mi2, the Diamond Valley flow 

system (Harrill and others, 1988) in central Nevada consists 

of five hydrographic areas including southern and northern 

Monitor Valleys, Kobeh, and Antelope Valleys, Stevens 

Basin, and Diamond Valley (fig. 1). Prior to groundwater 

development, the large discharge area in northern Diamond 

Valley was the terminus of the flow system. Beginning in the 

mid-20th century, groundwater resources in southern Diamond 

Valley have been developed for irrigation and mining uses. 

Limited groundwater development has occurred in areas of 

Kobeh and Antelope Valleys. Other hydrographic areas in the 

flow system are largely undeveloped (Tumbusch and Plume, 

2006). 

Future groundwater development and its effect on 

future municipal, irrigation, and alternative energy uses 

are of concern for officials in Eureka County, Nevada. 

To improve understanding of the groundwater resources, 

the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with 

Eureka County, commenced a multi-phase study of the 

Diamond Valley flow system in 2005. The results of phase 1 

(2005–06) are published in Tumbusch and Plume (2006). The 

2006 report describes the geologic setting including waterbearing characteristics of the hydrogeologic units and the 

occurrence and movement of groundwater in the basin-fill 

aquifers. Phase 2 of the study (2006–09) focused on refining 

groundwater discharge estimates and developing a conceptual 

model of the Diamond Valley flow system. Data collection 

and interpretations to meet these objectives are still ongoing 

(2011). This report describes what was accomplished during 

phase 2, provides the data, and presents approaches that will 

be used to strengthen relations between evapotranspiration 

(ET) rates measured at micrometeorological stations and 

spatially distributed estimates of groundwater discharge. This 

report also presents the approach to improve delineation of 

areas of groundwater discharge and describes the current 

methodology used to improve the accuracy of spatially 

distributed groundwater discharge rates in the Diamond 

Valley flow system. Collection of hydrologic data including 

groundwater levels, groundwater and spring water-quality 

constituents, and ET rates continues during phase 3 of the 

study (2009–13). Using the data collected during the three 

phases, spatially representative distributions of groundwater 

discharge estimates and water-quality characteristics will 

be presented, as well as baseline hydrologic conditions for 

undeveloped areas. This information and a conceptual model 

of the flow system will be provided in a USGS ScientificInvestigations Report to be published at the end of phase 3. 
2 Data Network, Collection, and Analysis in the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada

tac11-4173_fig 01

!

!

!

!

GARDEN VALLEY

B I G

S

M

O

K

Y

V A

L

L

E

Y

N

E

W A

R

K

V A

L

L

E

Y

S

UL

P H

UR

S

PR IN

G

S

RANGE

S I M P S O N

P A

R

K

M

O

U

N

T A I N S

T O

Q

U I M A

R A

N

G

E

LITTLE

SMOKY

VALLEY

ROBERTS

MOUNTAINS

PINE

VALLEY

D I A

M

O

N

D

M

O

U

N

T

A I N

S

LITTLE

FISH

LAKE

VALLEY

M

O

N I T O

R

R A

N

G

E

SOUTHERN

DIAMOND

VALLEY

KOBEH

VALLEY

NORTHERN

MONITOR

VALLEY

NORTHERN

DIAMOND

VALLEY

SOUTHERN

MONITOR

VALLEY

ANTELOPE

VALLEY

STEVENS

BASIN

Devils

Gate

Kitchen

Meadow

Bean Flat

Hay

Ranch

Bartine

Ranch

Klobe

Springs

Fish Creek

Springs

Austin

Eureka

117° 116°30' 116° 115°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

38°30'

Base from ESRI ArcGIS Online Map Service

http://services.arcgisonline.com/arcgis/services:

World_Topo_Map, 2010.

Universe Transverse Mercator projection, Zone 11

North American Datum of 1983.

0 10 20 30 40 MILES

0 10 20 30 40 KILOMETERS

EXPLANATION

AREA

OF

MAP

NEVADA

Hydrographic-area boundary

Diamond Valley subarea boundary (Harrill, 1968)

Figure 1. Locations of hydrographic areas and selected geographic features of the Diamond Valley flow system, 

central Nevada.
Quality of Water in Aquifers and Springs 3

Data-Collection Network

Data collected during phase 2 of the study included 

micrometeorological data at 4 ET stations, 3 located in natural 

vegetation and 1 located in an agricultural field; groundwater 

levels in 95 wells; water-quality constituents in aquifers and 

springs at 21 locations; lithologic information from 7 recently 

drilled wells; and geophysical logs from 3 well sites (table 1). 

The locations of data-collection sites are shown in figure 2. 

Water levels in wells are measured in the spring to early 

summer and most wells have data since 2005. Several wells 

in the study area have much longer periods of record, some 

going back to the mid-20th century. Seven wells were drilled 

during the study; three associated with the natural vegetation 

ET stations and four observation wells. One well is located 

in Antelope Valley and three wells are located in Diamond 

Valley. The lithology is described in drillers’ logs shown in 

appendix A. The logs also are available in the State of Nevada 

Division of Water Resources well log database (State of 

Nevada, 2011, available at http://water.nv.gov/engineering/

wlog/wlog.cfm). 

Quality of Water in Aquifers and 

Springs

The chemical composition of water in the Diamond 

Valley flow system is controlled by the differences in the 

composition and solubility of aquifer material and the length 

of time that the water has been in contact with these materials. 

Generally, the longer the residence time the greater the 

concentrations of solutes. Precipitation contributes only minor 

amounts of solutes. Evaporation can increase concentrations 

of most major ions, but chemical reactions also can remove 

selected solutes by mineral precipitation and ion exchange. 

Major-ion composition and total dissolved solids affect the 

aesthetic properties of water, such as taste, color, and odor, and 

other properties, such as sodium adsorption ratio, which may 

adversely affect the suitability of water for crop irrigation. 

Water-quality samples were collected from 21 sites—18 

wells and 3 springs—during August and November 2008. 

Data collected included field parameters, dissolved solids 

and major ions, and stable isotopes (table 2). All waterquality samples and field parameters were collected using 

standard USGS National Field Manual methods and protocols 

(U.S. Geological Survey, 2010, available at http://water.

usgs.gov/owq/FieldManual/index.html). Groundwater and 

spring samples were collected using a portable pump at all 

sites except two wells. Field parameters including water 

temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, and specific conductance 

were collected using a flow-through chamber fitted with 

probes at wells and springs that could be sampled using a 

pump. Due to their small size (2-in. diameter) and limited 

yields, wells KW26 and AW6 were sampled using a Teflon® 

bailer and field parameters were measured in a beaker 

(table 2). Alkalinity was determined in the field by titrating 

50 mL aliquots of filtered water to the inflection point at 

pH 4.5. Water samples were collected and stored at ambient 

temperature in plastic ice chests prior to overnight delivery 

for laboratory analyses. Samples analyzed for major ions were 

sent to the USGS National Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL) 

in Denver, Colo. Samples analyzed for stable isotopes were 

sent to the USGS Isotope Laboratory in Reston, Va.

Types of water can be classified based on the relative 

abundance of specific cations and anions, expressed in 

milliequivalents per liter (meq/L), and plotted as Stiff 

diagrams (Stiff, 1951). Stiff diagrams have three parallel 

horizontal axes. Concentrations, in meq/L, of sodium and 

potassium, calcium, and magnesium are plotted, one on each 

of the horizontal axes to the left of the vertical zero axis; and 

chloride, bicarbonate and carbonate, and sulfate are plotted, 

one on each of the horizontal axes to the right of the vertical 

axis. These six points form a polygon. The shape of the 

polygon indicates the water composition or type. The size 

of the polygon indicates the total ionic content (Hem, 1985). 

Figure 3 shows the Stiff diagrams for the 21 water-quality 

samples analyzed during phase 2 of the study. 
4 Data Network, Collection, and Analysis in the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada Table 1. Site identification, location, site type, characteristics, and data type for the Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada. [Locations of sites are shown in figure 2. ET, evapotranpiration; SPG, spring; DW, Diamond Valley well; KW, Kobeh Valley well; AW, Antelope Valley well; MW, Monitor Valley well altitude in feet above datum; depth in feet below land surface; screened interval in range of feet below land surface; –, no data; NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988] Site No. Site identification No. Station name Site type Latitude NAD 83 Longitude NAD 83 Altitude NAVD 88 Depth Screened interval Type of available data Water levels Water quality Hydro- graphs Well drillers report Geo- physical logs ET1 395006116030101 153 N23 E53 31BBDD DV NORTH ET ET 395006 1160304 5,901 – – – – – – – ET2 393711116124501 139 N20 E51 10DDCB1 KVE ET ET 393711 1161248 6,139 – – – – – – – ET3 393553116252401 139 N20 E49 23ACCB1 KVW ET ET 393553 1162527 6,054 – – – – – – – SPG1 395412116081601 053 N23 E52 05ACCB McCloud Spring spring 395412 1160816 6,513 – – – X – – – SPG2 393316115540501 153 N20 E54 33CABC1 Four Eyed Nicks Spring spring 393316 1155405 6,820 – – – X – – – SPG3 393400116392401 139 N20 E47 26CBCC1 Goldfish Spring spring 393400 1163924 6,684 – – – X – – – DW1 400116115534801 153 N25 E54 28BCBC1 well 400116 1155351 5,814 55 20–55

X – – – –

DW2 395441116040501 153 N24 E52 36CCCA1 well 395441 1160408 5,810 – – X – – – –

DW3 395255116051101 153 N23 E52 11ADAA1 well 395328 1160421 5,805 98 – X

X – – –

DW4 395220115561001 153 N23 E54 18DB 1 USGS well 395220 1155543 5,804 32 30–32

X – – – –

DW5 395147116043901 153 N23 E52 13CDBD1 TULE well 395206 1160354 5,804 – – X – – – –

DW6 395100115593001 153 N23 E53 27BBBA1 USGS well 395104 1155944 5,824 22 20–22

X

X – – –

DW7 395020116030001 153 N23 E53 29CCCA1 USGS well 395021 1160159 5,823 22 20–22

X – X – –

DW8 395008116040701 153 N23 E52 36BBDB1 SULPHUR well 395005 1160412 5,824 – – X – – – –

DW9 395003116030101 153 N23 E53 31BBDD DV NORTH ET well 395003 1160301 5,814 59 50–55

X – – X –

DW10 394717116044901 153 N22 E52 14ABDA1 VIEW WELL well 394734 1160439 5,862 83 – X

X – – –

DW11 394703115560401 153 N22 E54 18CADD well 394702 1155607 5,852 258 134–258 – – X – –

DW12 394657116074401 153 N22 E52 17DDAC1 well 394657 1160747 6,141 – – X – – – –

DW13 394654116073801 153 N22 E52 16CCCB1 ROMANO WINDMILL well 394654 1160741 6,121 – – X – – – –

DW14 394520115524001 153 N22 E54 27CABB1 well 394530 1155250 5,870 94 – X – – – –

DW15 394342114385402 153 N21HE52 35ADD 2 USBLM well 394349 1160421 5,887 160 140–160

X – – – –

DW16 394232115545701 153 N21 E54 5DCCC well 394234 1155459 5,882 – – – – X – –

DW17 394220116055002 153 N21 E52 10AAAC2 WEST DIAMOND VALLEY 2 SHAL well 394220 1160553 6,104 375 350–370

X

X – – –

DW18 394220116055001 153 N21 E52 10AAAC1 WEST DIAMOND VALLEY 1 DEEP well 394220 1160553 6,104 499 479–499

X

X – X

X

DW19 394149116003201 153 N21 E53 09DBDD well 394152 1160023 5,897 182 – – – X – –

DW20 394112116032301 153 N21 E53 18BCCC1 well 394112 1160326 5,924 – – X – – – –

DW21 394056115585001 153 N21 E53 14CACC well 394100 1155841 5,903 180 – – – X – –

DW22 393705115574201 153 N20 E53 02DDDD well 393704 1155745 5,967 250 120–250 – – X – –

DW23 393623115593301 153 N20 E53 10CACC1 APSW well 393624 1155943 5,946 214 80–204

X – – – –

DW24 393534116012601 153 N20 E53 17DCAA1 GID2 well 393532 1160125 5,951 214 a80–214

X – – – –

DW25 393453116014201 153 N20 E53 20CBDD1 SI well 393441 1160145 5,964 200 100–200

X – – – –

DW26 393447115570001 153 N20 E53 24DBAC1 BI well 393447 1155703 6,081 275 210–274

X – – – –

DW27 393422116042502 153 N20 E52 26AABC2 DEVILS GATE 2 SHALLOW well 393422 1160428 5,974 101 76–96

X

X – – –

DW28 393422116042501 153 N20 E52 26AABC1 DEVILS GATE 1 DEEP well 393422 1160428 5,974 181 156–176

X

X – X

X

DW29 393413116023001 153 N20 E53 30ABCC well 393415 1160236 5,988 155 – – – X – –

DW30 393335116005301 153 N20 E53 29DDDC1 GID1 well 393335 1160057 6,014 400 200–400

X – – – –

DW31 393327116013601 153 N20 E53 32BDCC1 well 393312 1160142 6,056 218 120–200

X – – – –

DW32 393244116024401 153 N20 E53 31CDCC1 SOUTH OF DEVILS GATE well 393244 1160244 6,211 338 288–328

X

X – X –

DW33 393143115572701 153 N19 E53 12C 1 well 393143 1155730 6,504 8 – X – – – –
Quality of Water in Aquifers and Springs 

5

Site 

No. 

Site 

identification No. Station name Site type Latitude NAD 83 Longitude NAD 83 Altitude NAVD 88 Depth Screened interval

Type of available data

Water 

levels

Water 

quality

Hydrographs Well drillers report Geo- physical logs

KW1 394514116172301 139 N22 E51 30BABB1 ROBERTS CREEK well 394502 1161703 6,474 350 110–305 X – – – –

KW2 394327116235401 139 N22 E50 31CCAC1 RUTABAGA well 394327 1162357 6,408 289 255–285 X – – – –

KW3 394216116101701 139 N21 E52 07BBDC1 well 394216 1161020 6,276 – – X – – – –

KW4 394125116223801 139 N21 E50 17BACC1 WAGON well 394125 1162241 6,226 124 90–124 X – – – –

KW5 394059116282901 139 N21 E49 16CCBB1 well 394054 1162836 6,242 50 – X – X – –

KW6 394036116183401 139 N21 E50 23AABD1 USGS-MX well 394038 1161840 6,225 139 – X – – – –

KW7 393957116103001 139 N21 E51 24DD 1 USGS-MX well 393956 1161045 6,320 201 – – X – – –

KW8 393954116104001 139 N21 E51 24DDDB1 well 393954 1161043 6,154 630 71–630 X X – – –

KW9 393942116245701 139 N21 E49 25BBDA1 well 393942 1162500 6,189 45 – X – – – –

KW10 393829116322401 139 N21 E48 35DBAB1 well 393829 1163227 6,212 – – X – – – –

KW11 393809116105501 139 N21 E51 36DCDB2 well 393809 1161058 6,083 842 60–842 X – – – –

KW12 393808116105801 139 N21 E51 36DCDB1 well 393808 1161058 6,084 1,100 63–1,100 X – – – –

KW13 393727116160601 139 N20 E51 07DABC1 LONE MOUNTAIN well 393727 1161609 6,144 – – X – – – –

KW14 393711116124801 139 N20 E51 10DDCB1 KVE ET well 393711 1161248 6,052 43 28–43 X – – X –

KW15 393646116332901 139 N20 E48 10CABB1 well 393646 1163332 6,243 – – X – – – –

KW16 393610116094201 139 N20 E52 18BBBB1 well 393610 1160945 6,013 – – X – – – –

KW17 393558116082201 139 N20 E52 17BCAA1 well 393558 1160825 6,019 – – X – – – –

KW18 393554116252801 139 N20 E49 23ACCB1 KVW ET well 393554 1162528 6,128 34 24–34 X – – X –

KW19 393546116092301 139 N20 E52 18ABDB1 well 393604 1160903 6,010 132 a20–125 X – – – –

KW20 393545116075101 139 N20 E52 17DBAA1 well 393545 1160754 6,039 110 85–105 X – – – –

KW21 393544116084801 139 N20 E52 17BDDA1 well 393551 1160811 6,039 90 – X – – – –

KW22 393446116064301 139 N20 E52 21DBDA1 well 393446 1160646 6,004 – – X – – – –

KW23 393246116280501 139 N19 E49 04CCDC1 Solar Stock Well well 393246 1162808 6,169 – – X X – – –

KW24 393129116212800 139 N19 E50 17ADDD1 Bartine Artesian well 393127 1162136 6,110 – – – X – – –

KW25 393058116244501 139 N19 E49 24BBAC1 well 393054 1162446 6,263 124 – X – – – –

KW26 393043116133201 139 N19 E51 22BCAC1 ANTELOPE VALLEY well 393043 1161332 6,321 331 275–315 X X – X X

KW27 393022116414201 139 N19 E47 16CCCB1 Dry Creek Farm well 393022 1164142 6,326 320 – – X – – –

KW28 392956116332201 139 N19 E48 22BDDB1 LINCOLN WELL well 392955 1163325 6,246 – – X X – – –

KW29 392849116405701 139 N19 E47 28CADD1 USGS-MX well 392848 1164109 6,286 150 – X – – – –

KW30 392821116425401 139 N19 E47 31AADC1 HICKISON WELL well 392821 1164255 6,312 – – X – – – –

KW31 392811116340201 139 N19 E48 34BCCB1 CAMINO WELL well 392811 1163352 6,329 146 – X – – – –

KW32 392800116380001 139 N19 E47 36BBBA1 well 392831 1163813 6,261 102 69–102 X – X – –

KW33 392754116213201 139 N18 E50 05DADD1 USGS-MX well 392744 1162136 6,324 167 – X – – – –

KW34 392703116380401 139 N18HE47 01ACBB1 USGS-MX well 392730 1163731 6,314 176 – X – – – –

Table 1. Site identification, location, site type, characteristics, and data type for the Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada.—Continued[Locations of sites are shown in figure 2. ET, evapotranpiration; SPG, spring; DW, Diamond Valley well; KW, Kobeh Valley well; AW, Antelope Valley well; MW, Monitor Valley well altitude in feet above datum; depth in feet below land surface; screened interval in range of feet below land surface; –, no data; NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988]
6 Data Network, Collection, and Analysis in the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada Site No. Site identification No. Station name Site type Latitude NAD 83 Longitude NAD 83 Altitude NAVD 88 Depth Screened interval Type of available data Water levels Water quality Hydro- graphs Well drillers report Geo- physical logs AW1 392847116143901 151 N19 E51 33CBAC1 USGS-MX well 392847 1161436 6,207 160 – X – – – – AW2 392529116133901 151 N18 E51 22BCDC1 well 392517 1161329 6,239 135 65–130

X – – – –

AW3 392331116164201 151 N18 E51 31BCDD1 well 392331 1161645 6,204 – – X – – – –

AW4 392310116125001 151 N18 E51 34DCCA1 ADRANS WELL well 392310 1161256 6,339 134 – X – X – –

AW5 392137116094901 151 N17 E52 07CACD1 MINE WELL well 392126 1160948 6,564 351 b164–351

X – – – –

AW6 391935116144901 151 N17 E51 20DDAC1 USGS-MX well 391937 1161444 6,361 186 – X

X – – –

AW7 391855116191501 151 N17 E50 26BCCC1 USGS-MX well 391902 1161912 6,404 160 – X – – – –

AW8 391835116163701 151 N17 E51 27CCBC1 well 391843 1161327 6,409 272 201–267

X – – – –

AW9 391626116155902 151 N16 E51 07DADA2 well 391618 1161545 6,325 105 28–54

X – – – –

AW10 391601116213201 151 N16 E50 08DDCD1 well 391601 1162135 6,504 – – X – – – –

AW11 391114116185101 151 N15 E50 02CCAB1 USGS-MX well 391147 1161849 6,470 174 – X – – – –

MW1 392654116421401 140A N18HE47 08BBDC1 well 392654 1164214 6,302 108 – X – – – –

MW2 392445116414801 140A N18 E47 08DBCB2 NO 4 WELL REPLACEMENT well 392445 1164149 6,321 – – X – – – –

MW3 391951116413301 140A N17 E47 08ACAC1 well 391950 1164138 6,386 – – X – X – –

MW4 391843116364201 140A N17 E48 18CBBC1 WALDOS WELL well 391843 1163645 6,684 – – X – – – –

MW5 391147116374101 140A N16 E47 35ABAB1 well 391126 1163824 6,518 180 160–180

X – – – –

MW6 391058116385501 140A N16 E47 35CBBA1 USGS-MX well 391101 1163903 6,549 182 – X – – – –

MW7 390608116364901 140A N15 E48 30CADD1 well 390617 1163642 6,700 350 – X – – – –

MW8 390438116394301 140A N14 E47 03CAAD1 USGS-MX well 390441 1164001 6,754 169 – X – – – –

MW9 390150116403801 140A N14 E47 21DDCA1 USGS-MX well 390151 1164045 6,810 192 – X – – – –

MW10 385819116462301 140B N12 E46 15ADDA1 USGS-MX well 385254 1164619 6,943 142 – X – – – –

MW11 385229116450501 140B N12 E46 13CCBD1 well 385229 1164508 6,819 380 c60–380

X – – – –

MW12 384926116474501 140B N11 E46 04ADCD1 well 384923 1164742 6,850 30 – X

X – – –

MW13 384736116481801 140B N11 E46 16BDDB1 USGS-MX well 384742 1164812 6,932 154 – X

X

X – –

MW14 384524116444001 140B N11 E46 36ABBA1 well 384524 1164443 6,873 – – X – – – –

MW15 384354116450201 140B N10 E46 12ACAA1 well 384327 1164447 6,894 13 – X – – – –

MW16 384005116480101 140B N10 E46 34AABD1 USGS-MX well 384010 1164655 7,031 136 – X – – – –

MW17 383740116434301 140B N09 E47 07DDCC1 well 383740 1164346 7,095 300 d100–300

X – – – –

Multiple screened intervals, ranges in feet below land surface.

a20-32, 51-60, 87-93, 105-125

b164-229, 317-351c60-160, 280-380

d100-120, 160-240, 240-300 

Table 1. Site identification, location, site type, characteristics, and data type for the Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada.—Continued[Locations of sites are shown in figure 2. ET, evapotranpiration; SPG, spring; DW, Diamond Valley well; KW, Kobeh Valley well; AW, Antelope Valley well; MW, Monitor Valley well altitude in feet above datum; depth in feet below land surface; screened interval in range of feet below land surface; –, no data; NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988]
Quality of Water in Aquifers and Springs 7

tac11-4173_fig 02

B I G

S

M

O

K

Y

V A

L

L

E

Y

N

E

W A

R

K

V A

L

L

E

Y

S

UL

P H

UR

S

PR IN

G

S

RANGE

S I M P S O N

P A

R

K

M

O

U

N

T A I N S

T O

Q

U I M A

R A

N

G

E

LITTLE

SMOKY

VALLEY

ROBERTS

MOUNTAINS

PINE

VALLEY

D I A

M

O

N

D

M

O

U

N

T

A I N

S

LITTLE

FISH

LAKE

VALLEY

M

O

N I T O

R

R A

N

G

E

SOUTHERN

DIAMOND

VALLEY

GARDEN VALLEY

KOBEH

VALLEY

NORTHERN

MONITOR

VALLEY

NORTHERN

DIAMOND

VALLEY

SOUTHERN

MONITOR

VALLEY

ANTELOPE

VALLEY

STEVENS

BASIN

Eureka Austin

117° 116°30' 116° 115°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

38°30'

MW17

MW16

MW15

MW14

MW13

MW12

MW11

MW10

MW9

MW8

MW7

MW6

MW5 AW11

AW10 AW9

AW8 MW4 AW7

MW3 AW6 AW5

AW3 AW4 MW2

AW2 MW1 KW34 KW33 KW32 KW31 KW30 KW29

KW28 KW27

KW25

KW24 KW23

SPG3

ET3 KW18 KW15 KW14

KW10

KW9

KW5 KW6 KW4

KW2 DW15 KW1

DW14

DW13

DW12

DW10 DW11

DW9 DW7

DW5

DW4

DW2

AW1

KW26

ET2 KW13

ET1

DW8

DW6

DW3

SPG1

DW1

SPG2

Base from ESRI ArcGIS Online Map Service

http://services.arcgisonline.com/arcgis/services:

World_Topo_Map, 2010.

Universe Transverse Mercator projection, Zone 11

North American Datum of 1983.

0 10 20 30 40 MILES

0 10 20 30 40 KILOMETERS

AREA

OF

MAP

NEVADA

Hydrographic-area boundary

Diamond Valley subarea boundary (Harrill, 1968)

EXPLANATION

Natural vegetation 

 evapotranspiration Spring Well

Site Type

Eureka

DW33 DW32

DW31

DW30

DW29

DW28

DW27

DW26

DW25

DW24 DW23

DW22

DW20 DW21

DW19

DW18

DW17

DW16

DW15

KW22

KW21

KW20 KW19

KW17

KW16

KW12

KW11

KW8

KW7

KW3

SPG2

ET2

Figure 2. Locations of data collection sites in the Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada. Data for sites are 

shown in table 1.
8 Data Network, Collection, and Analysis in the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada

Table 2. Selected water-quality constituents in water from wells and springs in the Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada.

[Site number location shown in figure 2. Abbreviations: oC, degrees in Celsius; and μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter <, less than; mg/L, milligrams 

per liter; permil, one-tenth of 1 percent; carbonate field tritration all less than 2 mg/L; –, not applicable]

Site No. Date Time

Temperature

(°C)

Specific 

conductance, 

lab (μS/cm)

Dissolved 

oxygen 

(mg/L)

pH

(field)

pH

(lab)

Bicarbonate, 

field, 

tritration

(mg/L)

Hardness 

(mg/L)

Calcium 

(mg/L)

Magnesium 

(mg/L)

SPG1 11-03-08 13:45 11.0 590 4.9 7.0 7.9 290 260 61 26.0

SPG2 08-07-08 9:00 11.0 420 7.8 7.6 8.0 270 180 64 6.0

SPG3 08-05-08 10:00 15.0 1,800 1.3 7.0 7.6 170 870 260 53.0

DW3 11-03-08 16:15 16.5 590 – 7.8 8.3 310 250 58 25.0

DW6 11-05-08 15:20 10.5 1,300 0.6 8.2 8.2 480 170 40 17.0

DW10 08-07-08 13:30 13.5 820 1.9 7.4 8.1 360 240 56 24.0

DW17 11-04-08 14:40 12.5 1,000 1.9 7.8 7.6 280 300 45 45.0

DW18 11-04-08 16:00 10.5 1,000 1.4 8.2 7.7 280 300 46 45.0

DW27 08-06-08 9:30 12.5 1,100 4.6 7.4 7.9 350 260 56 28.0

DW28 08-06-08 8:00 18.0 830 2.3 7.0 8.1 370 280 67 28.0

DW32 11-05-08 14:00 10.0 390 5.3 7.4 8.1 230 200 45 21.0

KW7 11-06-08 10:15 13.5 440 0.4 7.6 8.0 190 140 33 14.0

KW8 11-06-08 13:00 13.0 430 2.7 8.2 8.4 160 160 43 12.0

KW23 08-06-08 12:30 13.0 600 6.2 7.6 8.1 300 120 42 4.9

KW24 08-06-08 15:30 16.5 310 0.8 8.2 8.6 130 13 4.3 0.6

KW26 11-05-08 10:40 10.5 450 – 7.9 7.6 180 120 25 14.0

KW27 08-05-08 12:30 16.0 280 5.8 6.8 7.7 120 61 19 3.2

KW28 08-05-08 15:00 13.0 290 3.2 7.2 8.1 110 85 28 3.8

AW6 11-06-08 15:15 12.5 520 0.6 7.6 7.5 280 210 56 18.0

MW12 08-04-08 15:00 11.5 480 2.5 7.2 7.7 190 100 34 3.6

MW13 08-04-08 10:30 11.5 120 6.3 6.5 7.7 66 36 12 1.7

Site No. Date Time Sodium 

(mg/L)

Potassium 

(mg/L)

Chloride 

(mg/L)

Sulfate 

(mg/L 

as SO4

)

Fluoride 

(mg/L)

Alkalinity 

(mg/L as 

CaC03)

Total 

dissolved 

solids (mg/L)

delta 

deuterium

(permil)

delta 

oxygen-18

(permil)

SPG1 11-03-08 13:45 33.0 2.1 24.0 43.0 0.3 240 350 -121.8 -15.33

SPG2 08-07-08 9:00 14.0 0.9 6.7 8.8 0.2 220 240 -117.3 -15.26

SPG3 08-05-08 10:00 88.0 1.2 17.0 890.0 3.0 140 1,500 -128.6 -16.48

DW3 11-03-08 16:15 34.0 7.6 24.0 42.0 0.4 250 370 -122.7 -15.87

DW6 11-05-08 15:20 220.0 21.0 200.0 7.7 0.6 390 760 -118.5 -14.86

DW10 08-07-08 13:30 71.0 9.9 54.0 63.0 0.3 290 470 -121.6 -15.58

DW17 11-04-08 14:40 120.0 3.3 16.0 300.0 0.7 230 660 -133.8 -16.28

DW18 11-04-08 16:00 120.0 3.3 16.0 300.0 0.7 230 680 -133.5 -16.35

DW27 08-06-08 9:30 140.0 12.0 120.0 96.0 0.2 280 650 -123.3 -15.84

DW28 08-06-08 8:00 70.0 8.5 54.0 55.0 0.3 300 430 -123.2 -15.88

DW32 11-05-08 14:00 7.6 1.2 4.3 18.0 1

0.07 190 210 -121.7 -15.80

KW7 11-06-08 10:15 37.0 8.1 10.0 48.0 0.5 150 280 -141.2 -17.88

KW8 11-06-08 13:00 27.0 5.8 20.0 45.0 0.3 130 310 -136.8 -17.02

KW23 08-06-08 12:30 91.0 6.4 16.0 37.0 0.8 240 410 -121.4 -15.73

KW24 08-06-08 15:30 56.0 9.0 6.6 22.0 3.2 110 230 -128.5 -16.65

KW26 11-05-08 10:40 48.0 6.3 28.0 22.0 0.5 150 280 -132.1 -16.94

KW27 08-05-08 12:30 27.0 5.3 15.0 18.0 0.2 98 210 -123.8 -16.29

KW28 08-05-08 15:00 24.0 6.3 16.0 23.0 0.2 92 230 -124.6 -16.02

AW6 11-06-08 15:15 27.0 9.0 14.0 25.0 0.6 230 370 -123.0 -16.17

MW12 08-04-08 15:00 54.0 7.0 30.0 38.0 0.4 150 340 -110.2 -14.38

MW13 08-04-08 10:30 11.0 1.1 1.3 2.5 <0.12 54 97 -116.5 -15.65

1

Value was estimated by U.S. Geological Survey laboratory.
Quality of Water in Aquifers and Springs 9

tac11-4173_fig 03

")

B I G

S

M

O

K

Y

V A

L

L

E

Y

N

E

W A

R

K

V A

L

L

E

Y

S

UL

P H

UR

S

PR IN

G

S

RANGE

S I M P S O N

P A

R

K

M

O

U

N

T A I N S

T O

Q

U I M A

R A

N

G

E

LITTLE

SMOKY

VALLEY

ROBERTS

MOUNTAINS

PINE

VALLEY

D I A

M

O

N

D

M

O

U

N

T

A I N

S

LITTLE

FISH

LAKE

VALLEY

M

O

N I T O

R

R A

N

G

E

SOUTHERN

DIAMOND

VALLEY

GARDEN VALLEY

KOBEH

VALLEY

NORTHERN

MONITOR

VALLEY

NORTHERN

DIAMOND

VALLEY

SOUTHERN

MONITOR

VALLEY

ANTELOPE

VALLEY

STEVENS

BASIN

Devils

Gate

Kitchen

Meadow

Bean Flat

Eureka

Austin

117° 116°30' 116° 115°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

38°30'

Base from ESRI ArcGIS Online Map Service

http://services.arcgisonline.com/arcgis/services:

World_Topo_Map, 2010.

Universe Transverse Mercator projection, Zone 11

North American Datum of 1983.

0 10 20 30 40 MILES

0 10 20 30 40 KILOMETERS

SPG3

KW27

MW12

MW13

AW6

DW32 KW26

DW27

SPG2

DW18

DW17

DW6

DW3

DW28

DW10

KW7

KW8

KW23

KW24

KW28

SPG1

AREA

OF

MAP

NEVADA

EXPLANATION

Stiff Diagrams

Site Type

Hydrographic-area boundary

Diamond Valley subarea boundary (Harrill, 1968)

Spring Well

Cations

MILLIEQUIVALENTS PER LITER

Diagram shows concentration by relative position of vertices for the principal ions (Hem, 1985)

Sodium + Potassium Calcium

Magnesium Sulfate

Chloride

Bicarbonate + Carbonate

20 10 0 10 20

Anions

Figure 3. Relative concentration and water types in aquifers and springs in the Diamond Valley flow system, central 

Nevada.
10 Data Network, Collection, and Analysis in the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada

Temporal Changes in Groundwater 

Levels

Previous study phases established a groundwater level 

network that includes more than 40 wells in Monitor, Kobeh, 

and Antelope Valleys, and 100 wells in Diamond Valley. 

Most water levels were collected by the USGS and Nevada 

Division of Water Resources (NDWR) personnel prior to the 

irrigation season. Water-level data were compiled from the 

USGS National Water Information System (NWIS) and the 

State’s databases. Temporal changes in groundwater levels 

were investigated. Temporal declines in groundwater levels 

exceeding 10 ft in the Diamond Valley flow system coincide 

with areas of groundwater development. Groundwater 

development in southern Diamond Valley began in 1949; 

by 1964, more than 200 irrigation wells had been drilled 

(Harrill, 1968). Net annual pumpage estimates from 1950 

to 1965 increased two orders of magnitude (from 220 to 

12,000 acre-ft). Net annual pumpage increased from 40,000 

acre-ft in 1975 to 58,500 acre-ft in 1985 and decreased 

by 10,000 acre-ft by 1990 (Arteaga and others, 1995). 

Groundwater development primarily in southern Diamond 

Valley has resulted in water-level declines since the 1960s. 

Water-level declines in southern Diamond Valley ranged from 

less than 5 to 100 ft (fig. 4). The difference between water 

levels measured in 2005 and 2010, in areas outside southern 

Diamond Valley, changed by less than plus or minus 5 ft (point 

data, fig. 5). Except for two wells, inter-annual water-level 

changes, during the period from 2005 to 2010, were less than 

15 ft and less than 10 ft in most wells (hydrographs, fig. 5). 

Groundwater resources in the Diamond Valley flow system 

outside of southern Diamond Valley have been relatively 

undeveloped (fig. 5).

To explore temporal changes in water levels across the 

Diamond Valley flow system, hydrographs for selected wells 

were constructed to provide visual comparisons across the 

area. The hydrographs span the period from 1960 through 

2010 (figs. 4 and 5). The six representative hydrographs 

shown in figure 4 illustrate the long-term water-level declines 

in southern Diamond Valley. The mean yearly water-level 

decline ranged from about 1 to slightly more than 2 ft. Water 

levels were not collected during 1990 through 1996; however, 

water levels were nearly the same in 1989 and 1997. To 

evaluate recent trends, water levels collected during March 

for the years 1997–2010 were inspected. During 1997–2010, 

all six hydrographs exhibited persistent declines that likely 

were caused by groundwater withdrawals. Except for well 

DW29 (figs. 2 and 4), the inter-annual variability, as a result of 

climatic differences, is masked by pumping effects.

Hydrographs in figure 5 illustrate the general widespread 

stability of water levels outside of southern Diamond Valley. 

Water-level patterns and magnitudes were compared for 1973–

89 and 2005–10. Precipitation data from the Eureka gage is 

shown in figure 6. The period from 1973 to 1989 reflects a 

wetter period with an annual mean of 13.06 in. The period 

from 2005–10 reflects a drier period with an annual mean 

of 9.76 in. The long-term mean for 1965–2010 is 11.89 in. 

For both periods, the typical year-to-year groundwater-level 

fluctuation ranges from about 1 to 2 ft, but occasionally water 

levels fluctuate by more than 5 ft (fig. 5). Most hydrographs 

do not exhibit discernible trends or consistent water-level 

patterns; fluctuations likely are related to variable local 

climatic conditions. During 1960–2010, water levels at wells 

KW32 and DW7 declined slightly. Water levels at well KW32 

typically ranged from 47 to 51 ft below land surface during the 

wet period (1973–89) and from 51 to 56 ft below land surface 

during the dry period (2005–10). Water levels at well DW7 

had the smallest inter-annual fluctuations but were about 2 ft 

lower during the dry period than the wet period.

Historical Groundwater Budgets

Several water-resources investigations present 

groundwater budgets for the hydrographic areas that make 

up the Diamond Valley flow system (Eakin, 1962; Rush 

and Everett, 1964; Harrill, 1968). These investigations were 

completed prior to extensive groundwater development 

in southern Diamond Valley. Components of a natural 

groundwater budget for a particular hydrographic area include 

recharge from precipitation, subsurface inflow, groundwater 

discharge by evapotranspiration, and subsurface outflow 

(table 3).

Estimates of groundwater recharge from precipitation 

were derived using the Maxey-Eakin Method (Maxey and 

Eakin, 1949; Eakin and others, 1951; Watson and others, 

1976, p. 336) and the precipitation map of Nevada (Hardman 

and Mason, 1949). The method empirically related recharge 

to annual precipitation by adjusting “recharge efficiencies” to 

generate a balance between recharge and estimated discharge. 

The method assumes that higher altitudes receive greater 

percentages of precipitation that becomes recharge (Eakin, 

1966).

Estimates of groundwater discharge were derived by 

assigning groundwater discharge rates reported for other 

locations in the Southwestern United States to groundwater 

discharge areas within the Diamond Valley flow system 

according to vegetation types, density, and depth to the water 

table (Eakin, 1962). Shallow groundwater is discharged to the 

atmosphere by transpiration from phreatophytic vegetation 

and evaporation from bare soil and open-water surfaces, 

a process collectively referred to as ET. Since the early 

reconnaissance investigations, the accuracy of delineating 

areas of phreatophytic vegetation and measuring ET rates 

has improved; therefore, groundwater discharge rates applied 

to areas mapped in previous studies likely will differ from 

ongoing research in the Diamond Valley flow system. 
Historical Groundwater Budgets 11

tac11-4173_fig 04

!

!

!

!

!(

!(

!(!(!(!(!(

!(

!( !( !(

!(!(!(

!(!(!( !( !(

!(!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!(!( !(

!(

!(!(

!(!( !(

!(

!(!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

KOBEH

VALLEY

NORTHERN

MONITOR

VALLEY

NORTHERN

DIAMOND

VALLEY

SOUTHERN

MONITOR

VALLEY

ANTELOPE

VALLEY

STEVENS

BASIN

Devils

Gate

Kitchen

Meadow

Bean Flat

Hay

Ranch

Bartine

Ranch

Klobe

Springs

Fish Creek

Springs

Eureka

Austin

117° 116°30' 116° 115°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

38°30'

DW22

B I G

S

M

O

K

Y

V A

L

L

E

Y

N

E

W A

R

K

V A

L

L

E

Y

S

UL

P H

UR

S

PR IN

G

S

RANGE

S I M P S O N

P A

R

K

M

O

U

N

T A I N S

T O

Q

U I M A

R A

N

G

E

LITTLE

SMOKY

VALLEY

ROBERTS

MOUNTAINS

PINE

VALLEY

D I A

M

O

N

D

M

O U N

T

A I N

S

LITTLE

FISH

LAKE

VALLEY

M

O

N I T O

R

R A

N

G

E

SOUTHERN

DIAMOND

VALLEY

GARDEN VALLEY

DW19

DW16

DW11

DW29

DW21

Base from ESRI ArcGIS Online Map Service

http://services.arcgisonline.com/arcgis/services:

World_Topo_Map, 2010.

Universe Transverse Mercator projection, Zone 11

North American Datum of 1983.

0 10 20 30 40 MILES

0 10 20 30 40 KILOMETERS

AREA

OF

MAP

NEVADA

Hydrographic-area boundary

EXPLANATION

Sites with water-level change 

1960s - 2010, in feet

!( No change (+/- 5 ft)

!( < 20

!( 20 - 40

!( 40 - 60

!( 60 - 80

!( 80 -100

Diamond Valley subarea boundary (Harrill, 1968)

Site Number

Years

Depth to water, in feet 

below land surface

Figure 4. Water-level changes from 1960s-2010 and period-of-record hydrographs in Diamond Valley flow system, 

central Nevada. 
12 Data Network, Collection, and Analysis in the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada

tac11-4173_fig 05

!

!

!

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!( !(!(

!(

!(

!( !( !( !( !( !( !( !(

!(

!(!(!(!( !( !( !( !(

!( !( !( !(

!(

!(

!(!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(!( !(

!( !( !( !(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!(

!( !( !(

!(!(!(!(!( !( !(

!(!(!(!( !( !(!(!(!( !(

!(

!(!(

!(!( !(

!(

!(

!(

KOBEH

VALLEY

NORTHERN

MONITOR

VALLEY

NORTHERN

DIAMOND

VALLEY

SOUTHERN

MONITOR

VALLEY

ANTELOPE

VALLEY

STEVENS

BASIN

Devils

Gate

Kitchen

Meadow

Bean Flat

Hay

Ranch Bartine

Ranch

Klobe

Springs

Fish Creek !

Springs

Eureka

117° 116°30' 116° 115°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

38°30'

Base from ESRI ArcGIS Online Map Service

http://services.arcgisonline.com/arcgis/services:

World_Topo_Map, 2010.

Universe Transverse Mercator projection, Zone 11

North American Datum of 1983.

0 10 20 30 40 MILES

0 10 20 30 40 KILOMETERS

B I G

S

M

O

K

Y

V A

L

L

E

Y

N

E

W A

R

K

V A

L

L

E

Y

S

UL

P H

UR

S

PRIN

G

S

S I M P S O N

P A

R

K

M

O

U

N

T A

I

N S

T O

Q

U I M A

R A

N

G

E

LITTLE

SMOKY

VALLEY

PINE

VALLEY

D

I A

M

O

N

D

M

O

U

N

T

A I N

S

LITTLE

FISH

LAKE

VALLEY

M

O

N I

T O

R

R A

N

G

E

SOUTHERN

DIAMOND

VALLEY

GARDEN VALLEY

DW7

KW5

AW4

KW32

MW3

MW13

AREA

OF

MAP

NEVADA

Hydrographic-area boundary

EXPLANATION

Sites with water-level 

changes between the

years 2005 and 2010, 

in feet

!( No change

(± 5 ft)

!( < 10

!( 10 –15

!( 15 –20

Diamond Valley subarea boundary (Harrill, 1968)

Years

Depth to water, in feet 

below land surface

Site Number

Figure 5. Water-level changes between the years 2005 and 2010 and period-of-record hydrographs in Diamond 

Valley flow system, central Nevada.
Historical Groundwater Budgets 13

tac11-4173_fig 06 ANNUAL PRECIPITATION, IN INCHES 1965

1975

1985

1995

2005

Mean 11.89

Year

Wet Period 1973-89

Mean 13.06 inches

Dry Period 2005-10

Mean 9.76 inches

25

20

15

10

5

0

Figure 6. Annual precipitation at weather station at Eureka, Nevada, 1965–

2010 and mean annual precipitation during wet and dry periods, Diamond 

Valley flow system, central Nevada.

Table 3. Summary of historical groundwater budgets and perennial yields for hydrographic areas in the Diamond Valley flow system, 

central Nevada.

[Recharge, recharge from precipitation; Phreatophytes, acreage of native vegetation; ET, evapotranspiration; ft, feet; yr, year]

Hydrographic area

Groundwater inflow Groundwater outflow

Perennial 

yield

(acre-ft/yr) Precipitation

(acre-ft)

Recharge

(acre-ft/yr)

Subsurface 

inflow

(acre-ft/yr)

Phreatophytes

(acres)

Discharge 

by ET

(acre-ft/yr)

Subsurface 

outflow

(acre-ft/yr)

Monitor Valley Southern1 280,000 15,000 0 32,500 9,200 2,000 13,000

Monitor Valley Northern1 230,000 6,300 2,000 5,900 2,000 6,000 8,000

Monitor Valley Total1 510,000 21,300 – 38,400 11,200 6,000 21,000

Kobeh1 460,000 11,000 6,000 28,500 15,000 Trace 16,000

Antelope1 190,000 4,100 Trace 12,600 4,200 Trace2 4,000

Stevens Basin1 8,500 200 0 (

3) 0 200 200

South Diamond Valley4 240,000 12,000 150 4,200 1,400 – –

North Diamond Valley4 160,000 9,000 9,000 102,000 29,000 – –

Diamond Valley Total4 400,000 21,000 9,150 106,000 30,000 Terminus 30,000

Diamond Valley5 – 16,000 – – 23,000 – 23,000

1

 Rush and Everett (1964).

2

 2,000 acre-ft/yr as outflow from Antelope Valley.

3

 400 acres of bare soil, greater than 400 ft to water.

4

 Harrill (1968).

5

 Eakin (1962).
14 Data Network, Collection, and Analysis in the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada

As part of the early groundwater budgets, estimates 

of perennial yield also were developed. The Nevada State 

Engineer uses perennial yield to appropriate available 

groundwater. The perennial yield is “ultimately limited to the 

maximum amount of natural discharge that can be salvaged for 

beneficial use” and typically is determined as the average of 

total discharge and total recharge. Perennial yield estimates are 

developed for an entire hydrographic area; therefore, only with 

an ideal distribution of groundwater pumping can all available 

discharge be salvaged. Groundwater budgets for each 

hydrographic area are based on those previous investigations.

Monitor Valley

Rush and Everett (1964) subdivided Monitor Valley into 

northern and southern parts, to facilitate the development of 

a groundwater budget. Even though southern and northern 

Monitor Valleys are comparable in size (within 2 percent), 

the acreage at altitudes greater than 8,000 ft in southern 

Monitor Valley is 50 percent more than northern Monitor 

Valley, increasing the percentage of precipitation that becomes 

groundwater recharge from about 2.7 percent in northern 

Monitor Valley to 5.4 percent in southern Monitor Valley. 

The combined groundwater recharge from precipitation is 

21,300 acre-ft/yr; 15,000 and 6,300 acre-ft/yr in southern and 

northern Monitor Valleys, respectively. In southern Monitor 

Valley, groundwater inflow exceeds outflow by almost 

4,000 acre-ft/yr. Groundwater outflow totals 11,200 acre-ft/

yr. Groundwater discharge by ET includes about 9,000 acre-ft/

yr of transpiration from about 32,000 acres of phreatophytes 

and about 250 acre-ft/yr of evaporation from 2,500 acres of 

bare soil. Additionally, about 2,000 acre-ft/yr of subsurface 

flow enters northern Monitor Valley from southern Monitor 

Valley (table 3; Rush and Everett, 1964). In northern Monitor 

Valley, groundwater inflow is nearly equal to outflow at 

about 8,000 acre-ft/yr. Groundwater discharge by ET is 

2,000 acre-ft/yr from about 6,000 acres of phreatophytes and 

about 6,000 acre-ft/yr of subsurface outflow enters Kobeh 

Valley. The total estimated perennial yield for Monitor Valley 

is 21,000 acre-ft/yr; 13,000 and 8,000 acre-ft/yr for southern 

and northern Monitor Valleys, respectively.

Kobeh Valley

In Kobeh Valley, about 2 percent of the annual 

precipitation becomes groundwater recharge. Groundwater 

inflow totals 17,000 acre-ft/yr; 11,000 acre-ft/yr of recharge 

from precipitation, and 6,000 acre-ft/yr of subsurface inflow 

from northern Monitor Valley (Rush and Everett, 1964). 

Groundwater outflow totaling 15,000 acre-ft/yr includes 

12,500 acre-ft/yr of groundwater discharge by ET from 

28,500 acres of phreatophytes and about 2,500 acre-ft/yr of 

spring discharge at Bean Flat, the Bartine Ranch, and the Hay 

Ranch. Estimated perennial yield is 16,000 acre-ft/yr, the 

average of total groundwater inflow and outflow (table 3).

Antelope Valley

Groundwater inflow totals 4,100 acre-ft/yr; groundwater 

recharge from precipitation is about 2 percent of the estimated 

annual precipitation of 190,000 acre-ft (Rush and Everett, 

1964). Groundwater outflow is from groundwater discharge 

by ET and includes 3,200 acre-ft/yr from 12,600 acres of 

phreatophytes, and 1,000 acre-ft/yr of spring discharge at 

Kitchen Meadow and Klobe Springs (Rush and Everett, 1964). 

The historical groundwater budget for Antelope Valley 

is essentially in balance (table 3; Rush and Everett, 1964). 

Eakin (1962) and Rush and Everett (1964) state that underflow 

through the alluvium from Antelope and Kobeh Valleys 

into Diamond Valley is small. Rush and Everett (1964) also 

describe faults that function as a flow barrier impeding the 

northward flow of groundwater from Antelope to Kobeh 

Valleys resulting in the spring discharge at Kitchen Meadow 

and Klobe Springs.

 In a subsequent reconnaissance series report, Rush 

and Everett (1966) conclude that about 2,000 acre-ft/yr of 

subsurface outflow leaves Antelope Valley, discharging at Fish 

Creek Springs. Phase 1 water-level measurements indicate 

that groundwater may flow eastward from the southeastern 

part of Antelope Valley to Fish Creek Springs in Little Smoky 

Valley (Tumbusch and Plume, 2006). Refined estimates of 

groundwater discharge for Antelope Valley and additional 

water-level measurements in Little Smoky Valley may assist 

in determining the potential for subsurface flow to leave the 

Diamond Valley flow system and in determining the validity 

of the 2,000 acre-ft/yr imbalance for Antelope Valley. The 

perennial yield in Antelope Valley is about 4,000 acre-ft/yr 

(table 3; Rush and Everett, 1964). 

Stevens Basin

Groundwater inflow is 200 acre-ft/yr (table 3). 

Recharge from precipitation is about 2 percent of the annual 

precipitation (8,500 acre-ft). Neither subsurface inflow to nor 

outflow from Stevens Basin is noted (Rush and Everett, 1964). 

Furthermore, no groundwater discharge by evapotranspiration 

occurs in the basin. The depth to groundwater is greater 

than 400 ft below land surface which is too deep for use by 

phreatophytic vegetation. Rush and Everett (1964) suggest 

that the 200 acre-ft/yr imbalance is subsurface outflow from 

Stevens Basin probably to Antelope or Diamond Valleys. 

Perennial yield for Stevens Basin is 200 acre-ft/yr (table 3). 
Groundwater Discharge and Evapotranspiration 15

Diamond Valley

Eakin (1962) and Harrill (1968) published groundwater 

budgets for Diamond Valley. Eakin (1962) estimated 

groundwater recharge from precipitation to be about 

16,000 acre-ft/yr using a single precipitation distribution. 

Harrill (1968) recognized that precipitation is greater in the 

northern than in the southern part of Diamond Valley and 

developed a precipitation altitude relation for each part. 

Harrill (1968) estimated the total groundwater recharge from 

precipitation at 21,000 acre-ft/yr; 9,000 and 12,000 acre-ft/

yr in northern and southern Diamond Valleys, respectively. 

Subsurface inflow to northern Diamond Valley from Garden 

Valley (outside the flow system) was hypothesized by Eakin 

(1962) and estimated at 9,000 acre-ft/yr by Harrill (1968). 

Subsurface inflow to southern Diamond Valley through Devil’s 

Gate is considered small (150 acre-ft/yr) by Eakin (1962) and 

Harrill (1968). Estimates of perennial yield for northern and 

southern Diamond Valleys were not made by Harrill (1968).

Diamond Valley is the terminus of the flow system with 

no subsurface outflow; all groundwater outflow is discharge 

by ET. Eakin (1962) estimated groundwater discharge at 

about 23,000 acre-ft/yr and excluded discharge from the 

50,000-acre playa in northern Diamond Valley. Eakin (1962) 

estimated groundwater recharge to be 7,000 acre-ft/yr less than 

groundwater discharge, but did not determine a reason for the 

large difference. Harrill (1968) estimated about 5,000 acre-ft/

yr of groundwater discharges from the playa area using an 

annual ET rate of 0.1 acre-ft/acre. Total groundwater inflow 

is about the same as the groundwater outflow equaling about 

30,000 acre-ft/yr (Harrill, 1968).

Groundwater Discharge and 

Evapotranspiration

Groundwater discharge occurs in topographically low 

areas of the Diamond Valley flow system where groundwater 

is at or near land surface. Groundwater discharges to the 

surface by three natural processes: (1) spring and seep 

flow, (2) transpiration by phreatophytic vegetation, and 

(3) evaporation from soil. Phreatophytes obtain water from 

the water table using long tap roots. Numerous USGS studies 

in Nevada have shown that the amount and rate of ET from 

areas of groundwater discharge vary with vegetation type and 

density, and soil characteristics. These studies have applied 

various remote-sensing techniques within delineated areas 

of potential groundwater discharge using satellite imagery in 

combination with field mapping to identify and group areas 

of similar vegetation and soil conditions. These groupings 

are referred to as ET units. ET rates can be measured for 

individual ET units with micrometeorological sensors. 

Various methods of relating ET rates to ET units have been 

applied in past studies depending, in part, on the nature of 

the groundwater discharge area under investigation and the 

number of micrometeorological stations in operation. 

Potential Areas of Groundwater Discharge

Shallow groundwater may be consumed by ET in areas 

referred to in this report as potential areas of groundwater 

discharge. Potential areas of groundwater discharge are 

being defined and mapped using techniques similar to those 

described by Smith and others (2007). Preliminary potential 

areas of groundwater discharge boundaries were delineated 

from high-resolution imagery (National Agriculture Imagery 

Program; NAIP) and field mapping (fig. 7). NAIP images 

were acquired from aerial surveys conducted in October 

and November 2006. In general, the NAIP images facilitate 

straightforward boundary mapping by identifying the 

occurrence and extent of the phreatophytic shrubs greasewood 

(Sarcobatus vermiculatus) and rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus 

nauseous); however, in areas where greasewood-rabbitbrush 

shrubland are mixed with other desert shrubs, or are very 

sparse, the boundary is more difficult to define. Fieldwork is 

ongoing to improve the accuracy of delineated potential areas 

of groundwater discharge boundaries.

Evapotranspiration Units

Past studies have used Landsat satellite imagery in 

combination with field mapping to identify and delineate 

ET units within potential areas of groundwater discharge 

throughout arid and semi-arid regions of the Great Basin 

(Laczniak and others, 1999; Laczniak and others, 2001; Reiner 

and others, 2002; Smith and others, 2007; Allander and others, 

2009). ET units are defined as areas of similar vegetation type 

and density and similar soil characteristics where groundwater 

potentially is being lost to the atmosphere by evaporation or 

through plant transpiration (Laczniak and others, 1999, 2001, 

2006). In general, the more dense and healthy the vegetation 

and the wetter the soil, the greater is the ET. The general 

characteristics of ET units range from areas of no vegetation, 

such as open water, dry playa, and moist bare soil, to areas 

with vegetation that often are dominated by phreatophytic 

shrubs, grasses, rushes, and reeds. Three preliminary ET 

units—(1) phreatophytic and other vegetation, (2) playa, and 

(3) undifferentiated—are delineated in the Diamond Valley 

flow system based on Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) satellite 

imagery and the Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) soils 

database (fig. 8).
16 Data Network, Collection, and Analysis in the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada

tac11-4173_fig 07

")")")")

")")")")")")

")

")

")

")")

")

")

")

")")

")

")")

")")")

")")")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")

")")")")")")")") ")

")

")")")")")

")")

")")

")")

")

")")

")

")")

!

!

!

!

B I G

S

M

O

K

Y

V A

L

L

E

Y

N

E

W A

R

K

V A

L

L

E

Y

S

UL

P H

UR

S

PR IN

G

S

RANGE

S I M P S O N

P A

R

K

M

O

U

N

T A I N S

T O

Q

U I M A

R A

N

G

E

LITTLE

SMOKY

VALLEY

ROBERTS

MOUNTAINS

PINE

VALLEY

D I A

M

O

N

D

M

O

U

N T A I N

S

LITTLE

FISH

LAKE

VALLEY

M

O

N I T O

R

R A

N

G

E

SOUTHERN

DIAMOND

VALLEY

NORTHERN

DIAMOND

VALLEY

GARDEN VALLEY

KOBEH

VALLEY

NORTHERN

MONITOR

VALLEY

DIAMOND

VALLEY

SOUTHERN

MONITOR

VALLEY

ANTELOPE

VALLEY

STEVENS

BASIN

Devils

Gate

Kitchen

Meadow

Bean Flat

Hay

Ranch

Bartine

Ranch

Klobe

Springs

Fish Creek

Springs

Austin

Eureka

117° 116°30' 116° 115°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

38°30'

Base from ESRI ArcGIS Online Map Service

http://services.arcgisonline.com/arcgis/services:

World_Topo_Map, 2010.

Universe Transverse Mercator projection, Zone 11

North American Datum of 1983.

0 10 20 30 40 MILES

0 10 20 30 40 KILOMETERS

EXPLANATION

Hydrographic-area boundary

Potential area of groundwater discharge

AREA

OF

MAP

NEVADA

") Field mapped point

Diamond Valley subarea boundary (Harrill, 1968)

Reconnaisance discharge boundary (Harrill, 1988)

Figure 7. Locations of field-mapped points and potential areas of groundwater discharge in Diamond Valley flow 

system, central Nevada.
Groundwater Discharge and Evapotranspiration 17

Figure 8. Preliminary evapotranspiration units in the Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada.

tac11-4173_fig 08

!

!

!

!

B I G

S

M

O

K

Y

V A

L

L

E

Y

N

E

W A

R

K

V A

L

L

E

Y

S

UL

P H

UR

S

PR IN

G

S

RANGE

S I M P S O N

P A

R

K

M

O

U

N

T A I N S

T O

Q

U I M A

R A

N

G

E

LITTLE

SMOKY

VALLEY

ROBERTS

MOUNTAINS

PINE

VALLEY

D I A

M

O

N

D

M

O

U

N

T

A I N

S

LITTLE

FISH

LAKE

VALLEY

M

O

N I T O

R

R A

N

G

E

SOUTHERN

DIAMOND

VALLEY

NORTHERN

DIAMOND

VALLEY

GARDEN VALLEY

KOBEH

VALLEY

NORTHERN

MONITOR

VALLEY

DIAMOND

VALLEY

SOUTHERN

MONITOR

VALLEY

ANTELOPE

VALLEY

STEVENS

BASIN

Devils

Gate

Kitchen

Meadow

Bean Flat

Hay

Ranch

Bartine

Ranch

Klobe

Springs

Fish Creek

Springs

Austin

Eureka

117° 116°30' 116° 115°30'

40°

39°30'

39°

38°30'

Base from ESRI ArcGIS Online Map Service

http://services.arcgisonline.com/arcgis/services:

World_Topo_Map, 2010.

Universe Transverse Mercator projection, Zone 11

North American Datum of 1983.

0 10 20 30 40 MILES

0 10 20 30 40 KILOMETERS

AREA

OF

MAP

NEVADA

EXPLANATION

Hydrographic-area boundary

Diamond Valley subarea boundary (Harrill, 1968)

Playa

Undifferentiated

Phreatophytic and other vegetation

Evapotranspiration unit
18 Data Network, Collection, and Analysis in the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada

The phreatophyte ET unit, comprised primarily of 

phreatophytic vegetation, was delineated from two Landsat 

scenes (Landsat scene identifiers LT50410322007181EDC00 

and LT50410332007181EDC00 acquired June 30, 2007). Late 

June through early July is the optimum period to characterize 

vegetation health and vigor because solar radiation and 

phreatophyte transpiration are near annual maximums 

(Nichols, 2001; Moreo and others, 2007). Landsat images 

are georeferenced to allow geospatial evaluations and direct 

comparison with other spatially referenced datasets. Image 

standardization processes normalized the spectral data for 

differences in sun illumination geometry, atmospheric effects, 

and instrument calibration (Smith and others, 2007). The 

resulting dataset is in the physical units of percent reflectance, 

which is the percentage of solar energy reflected by the Earth’s 

surface at each approximately 100×100 ft picture element or 

pixel.

A Modified Soil-Adjusted Vegetation Index (MSAVI; 

Qi and others, 1994) value representing the health, density, 

and vigor of vegetation is computed for each phreatophyte 

ET-unit pixel. The MSAVI is particularly applicable for 

mapping sparse plant cover in desert landscapes because soil 

influences on the index are minimized. MSAVI values are 

dimensionless and can range from -1.0 to 1.0. MSAVI values 

in the phreatophyte ET unit range from 0.085 to 0.67. The 

distribution of MSAVI values are skewed to the low range 

indicating a large percentage of phreatophytic vegetation is 

greasewood-rabbitbrush shrubland (fig. 9).

Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO; U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, 2011, at http://soils.usda.gov/survey/geography/

ssurgo/) data was used to delineate the playa ET unit, which is 

located entirely in northern Diamond Valley (fig. 8). SSURGO 

is the most detailed level of soil mapping done by the Natural 

Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) with mapping scales 

ranging from 1:12,000 to 1:63,360. The dataset was converted 

to a raster dataset to be compatible with the Landsat MSAVI 

data.

A single ET-unit map was developed by layering ET 

units defined by the Landsat MSAVI and SSURGO soil data 

(fig. 8). The potential area of groundwater discharge was used 

to identify only those areas of the MSAVI data to be used in 

the final map. The resulting MSAVI dataset was compared 

to NAIP imagery and the field points that were collected to 

determine the lower detection limits of the MSAVI analysis. 

Pixels with MSAVI values less than 0.085 are grouped into a 

temporary undifferentiated ET unit. Preliminary estimates of 

evapotranspiration-unit acreage for each ET unit are given in 

table 4.

Figure 9. Fractional histogram of MSAVI values in the Diamond Valley flow system, central Nevada.

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

0.0850.0940.1030.1120.1210.1300.1390.1480.1570.1660.1750.1840.1930.2020.2120.2210.2300.2390.2480.2570.2660.2750.2840.2930.3020.3110.3200.3290.3380.3470.3560.3650.3740.3830.3920.4010.4110.4200.4290.4380.4470.4560.4660.4770.4860.4960.5110.5310.670

FRACTIONAL PERCENT

MODIFIED SOIL-ADJUSTED VEGETATION INDEX (MSAVI)
Groundwater Discharge and Evapotranspiration 19

Figure 10. Example relation between remotely sensed vegetation 

index and groundwater discharge rate.

Table 4. Preliminary estimates of evapotranspiration-unit acreage 

delineated by hydrographic area in Diamond Valley flow system, 

central Nevada.

Hydrographic area

Evapotranspiration unit, in acres

Playa Undifferentiated Phreatophytic and 

other vegetation

Monitor Valley, South 0 1,289 16,613

Monitor Valley, North 0 950 7,811

Kobeh Valley 0 5,280 41,397

Antelope Valley 0 835 6,712

Diamond Valley 59,103 5,488 64,857

Evapotranspiration Rates

During phase 2, three micrometeorological stations were 

established within the phreatophyte ET unit to measure ET 

rates in natural vegetation (table 1 and fig. 2). Each station was 

instrumented with sensors designed to measure ET rates using 

the Bowen-ratio method (Bowen, 1926). The Bowen-ratio 

method does not measure latent-heat flux directly, but assumes 

that the proportionality between sensible- and latent-heat 

fluxes can be defined by the ratio between the temperature and 

vapor-pressure gradient. Latent heat is the energy consumed in 

the ET process and sensible heat is the amount of energy that 

heats the air directly above the soil or plant canopy. Computed 

ET rates were evaluated following 1 year of data collection 

and were significantly higher than ET rates measured in 

similar environments in other recent groundwater discharge 

studies (Moreo and others, 2007; Allander and others, 

2009). For comparison, eddy-covariance sensors capable 

of measuring latent-heat flux directly were established and 

presently (September 2010) are co-located with Bowen-ratio 

sensors. Eddy-covariance data may then be used to adjust 

the Bowen-ratio data, if necessary. Following a comparison 

period, eddy-covariance stations (4) will be re-deployed to 

other sites in order to better characterize a relation between 

measured point estimates of ET and MSAVI.

Groundwater Discharge

Mean MSAVI values representing the ET source area 

at each ET site can be computed based on the relative and 

cumulative distribution of latent- and sensible-heat fluxes 

(Moreo and others, 2007, p. 16). A relation can then be 

developed between point ET discharge rate measurements and 

MSAVI (Moreo and others, 2007; Allander and others, 2009). 

Figure 10 shows an example of this relation. Once established, 

the relation between ET discharge rate and MSAVI can 

be used to spatially distribute groundwater discharge rates 

within the phreatophyte ET unit. A groundwater discharge 

volume can then be estimated for each hydrographic area by 

multiplying spatially distributed groundwater discharge rates 

by the number of acres within each groundwater discharge 

area.
20 Data Network, Collection, and Analysis in the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada

Continued Research in the Diamond 

Valley Flow System

Continued research in the Diamond Valley flow system 

during phase 3 is needed including the refinement of the 

groundwater budget, with particular emphasis on natural 

groundwater discharge. The ongoing work will include 

developing and strengthening relations between point 

estimates of ET (from micrometeorological stations) and 

spatially distributed MSAVI values by collecting ET rates over 

a wider, more representative range within the Diamond Valley 

flow system. Research efforts will focus on refining ET unit 

delineations as follows: (1) fieldwork is planned to eliminate 

the undifferentiated ET unit by determining the nature of areas 

where MSAVI values are low, (2) techniques are being tested 

to further reduce the soil influence on MSAVI, (3) Landsat 

images from later in the growing season will be evaluated 

to determine if the influence of saltgrass (Distichlis spicata) 

on MSAVI is adequately being captured by the late June 

through early July images, (4) inter-annual MSAVI variability 

will be evaluated, and (5) historical TM images and MSAVI 

distributions in southern Diamond Valley will be evaluated to 

determine whether phreatophyte distributions and densities 

have been affected by declining water levels. Additionally the 

geochemical composition of groundwater will be described 

for each hydrographic area, water-level changes and trends 

will continue to be evaluated, and a conceptual model of the 

flow system will be presented. A USGS scientific-investigation 

report that summarizes the results will be published at the end 

of the federal fiscal year 2013 (September 2013).

References Cited

Allander, K.K., Smith, J.L., and Johnson, M.J., 2009, 

Evapotranspiration from the lower Walker River basin, 

west-central Nevada, water years 2005–07: U.S. Geological 

Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2009–5079, 62 p. 

(Also available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2009/5079/).

Arteaga, F.E., Smith, J.L., and Harrill, J.R., 1995, Irrigated 

croplands, estimated pumpage, and water-level changes 

in Diamond Valley, Eureka and Elko Counties, Nevada, 

through 1990: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

95–107, 68 p.

Bowen, I.S., 1926, The ratio of heat losses by conduction and 

by evaporation from any water surface: Physics Review, 

v. 27, p. 779–787.

Eakin, T.E., 1962, Ground-water appraisal of Diamond Valley, 

Eureka and Elko Counties, Nevada: Carson City, Nev., 

Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, 

Ground-Water Resources, Reconnaissance Report 6, 60 p.

Eakin, T.E., 1966, A regional interbasin groundwater system 

in the White River Area, southeastern Nevada: Water 

Resources Research, v. 2, no. 2, p. 251-271. 

Eakin, T.E., Maxey, G.B., Robinson, T.W., Fredericks, J.C., 

and Loeltz, O.J., 1951, Contributions to the hydrology of 

eastern Nevada: Carson City, Nev., Nevada State Engineer, 

Water Resources Bulletin 12, 171 p. 

Hardman, George, and Mason, H.G., 1949, Irrigated lands 

in Nevada: Reno, University of Nevada, Agricultural 

Experiment Station Bulletin 183, 157 p.

Harrill, J.R., 1968, Hydrologic response to irrigation pumping 

in Diamond Valley, Eureka and Elko Counties, Nevada, 

1950–65: Carson City, Nev., Nevada Department of 

Conservation and Natural Resources,Water Resources 

Bulletin 35, 85 p.

Harrill, J.R., Gates, J.S., and Thomas, J.M., 1988, Major 

groundwater flow systems in the Great Basin region of 

Nevada, Utah, and adjacent states: U.S. Geological Survey 

Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-694-C.

Hem, J.D., 1985, Study and interpretation of the chemical 

characteristics of natural water: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Supply Paper 2254, 263 p.

Laczniak, R.J., DeMeo, G.A., Reiner, S.R., Smith, J.L., and 

Nylund, W.E., 1999, Estimates of ground-water discharge 

as determined from measurements of evapotranspiration, 

Ash Meadows area, Nye County, Nevada: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Resources Investigation Report 99-4079, 

70 p. (Also available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/

wri994079/).

Laczniak, R.J., Smith, J.L., and DeMeo, G.A., 2006, Annual 

ground-water discharge by evapotranspiration from areas of 

spring-fed riparian vegetation along the eastern margin of 

Death Valley, 2000–02: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific 

Investigations Report 2006-5145, 36 p. (Also available at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2006/5145/).

Laczniak, R.J., Smith, J.L., Elliott, P.E., DeMeo G.A., 

Chatigny, M.A., and Roemer, G., 2001, Ground-water 

discharge determined from estimates of evapotranspiration, 

Death Valley regional flow system, Nevada and California: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 01-4195, 51 p. (Also available at http://pubs.water.

usgs.gov/wri014195/).

Maxey, G.B., and Eakin, T.E., 1949, Ground water in White 

River Valley, White Pine, Nye, and Lincoln Counties, 

Nevada: Carson City, Nev., Nevada State Engineer, Water 

Resources Bulletin 8, 53 p.
References Cited 21

Moreo, M.T., Laczniak, R.J., and Stannard, D.I., 2007, 

Evapotranspiration rate measurements of vegetation 

typical of ground-water discharge areas in the Basin and 

Range Carbonate-Rock Aquifer System, Nevada and Utah, 

September 2005–August 2006: U.S. Geological Survey 

Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5078, 36 p. (Also 

available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2007/5078/).

Nichols, W.D., 2001, Regional ground-water 

evapotranspiration and ground-water budgets, Great Basin, 

Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1628, 

82 p.

Qi, J., Chehbouni, A., Huete, A.R., Kerr, Y.H., and Sorooshian, 

S., 1994, A modified soil adjusted vegetation index: Remote 

Sensing of Environment, v. 48, p. 119–126.

Reiner, S.R., Laczniak, R.J., DeMeo, G.A., Smith, J.L., 

Elliott, P.E., Nylund, W.E., and Fridrich, C.J., 2002, 

Ground-water discharge determined from measurements of 

evapotranspiration, other available hydrologic components, 

and shallow water-level changes, Oasis Valley, Nye 

County, Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 01-4239, 65 p. (Also available at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wri014239/).

Rush, F.E., and Everett, D.E., 1964, Ground-water appraisal 

of Monitor, Antelope, and Kobeh Valleys, Nevada: Carson 

City, Nev., Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural 

Resources, Ground-water Resources, Reconnaissance 

Report 30, 45 p. 

Rush, F.E., and Everett, D.E., 1966, Water-resources 

appraisal of Little Fish Lake, Hot Creek, and Little Smoky 

Valleys, Nevada: Carson City, Nev., Nevada Department 

of Conservation and Natural Resources, Ground-water 

Resources, Reconnaissance Report 38, 38 p. 

Smith, J.L., Laczniak, R.J., Moreo, M.T., and Welborn, 

T.L., 2007, Mapping evapotranspiration units in the Basin 

and Range carbonate-rock aquifer system, White Pine 

County, Nevada, and adjacent areas in Nevada and Utah: 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 

2007-5087, 20 p. (Also available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/

sir/2007/5087/).

State of Nevada, 2011, Well log database query tool: 

Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, 

Division of Water Resources database, accessed February 

24, 2011, at http://water.nv.gov/engineering/wlog/wlog.cfm.

Stiff, H.A., Jr., 1951, The interpretation of chemical water 

analysis by means of patterns: Journal of Petroleum 

Technology, v. 3, no. 10, p. 15–17.

Tumbusch, M.L., and Plume, R.W., 2006, Hydrogeologic 

framework and ground water in basin-fill deposits of 

the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada: 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigation Report 

2006–5249, 38 p. (Also available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/

sir/2006/5249/). 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, [2011], Soil Survey 

Geographic (SSURGO) database: Natural Resources 

Conservation Service database, accessed March 1, 2011, at 

http://soils.usda.gov/survey/geography/ssurgo/.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2010, National Field Manual for the 

Collection of Water-Quality Data: U.S Geological Survey 

database, accessed February 24, 2011, at http://water.usgs.

gov/owq/FieldManual/index.html. 

Watson, P., Sinclair, P., and Waggoner, R., 1976, Quantitative 

evaluation of a method of estimating recharge to the desert 

basins of Nevada: Journal of hydrology, v. 31, p. 335–357.
22 Data Network, Collection, and Analysis in the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada

This page intentionally left blank.
Appendix A 23

Appendix A. Drillers’ Logs for Wells Drilled as Part of Phase 2 of the Study in 

the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada.

Data are available in PDF format for download at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1089/.
24 Data Network, Collection, and Analysis in the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada

This page intentionally left blank.
Publishing support provided by the U.S. Geological Survey

Publishing Network, Tacoma Publishing Service Center

For more information concerning the research in this report, contact the

 Director, Nevada Water Science Center

U.S. Geological Survey

2730 N. Deer Run Road

Carson City, Nevada 89701

http://nevada.usgs.gov/
Knochenmus and others— Data Network, Collection, and Analysis in the Diamond Valley Flow System, Central Nevada—Open-File Report 2011–1089