�����������������������������������������������������

���������������������������������������������������

���������������������������������������������

�����������������������������������������

�������������������������������� �������������������������������������

�������������������������������

����������������������
Cover: Photograph of irrigated alfafa. (Photograph taken by U.S. Geological Survey.)

Inset 1: Coal mining. (Photograph courtesy of Peabody Coal.)

Inset 2: Ground-water storage system. (Photograph courtesy of Arizona Water Company.)

Inset 3: Cholla thermoelectric powerplant near Joseph City, Arizona. (Photograph courtesy of Arizona Power Service.)

Inset 4: Ground-water withdrawal for drainage. (Photograph taken by U.S. Geological Survey.)
Water Withdrawals for Irrigation, Municipal, 

Mining, Thermoelectric-Power, and 

Drainage Uses in Arizona Outside of 

Active Management Areas, 1991–2000

By Saeid Tadayon

Prepared in cooperation with the 

Arizona Department of Water Resources

Scientific Investigations Report 2004–5293

U.S. Department of the Interior

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

Gale A. Norton, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Charles G. Groat, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2005

For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services

Box 25286, Denver Federal Center

Denver, CO 80225

For more information about the USGS and its products:

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication 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:

Tadayon, Saeid, 2005, Water withdrawals for irrigation, municipal, mining, thermoelectric-power, and drainage uses 

in Arizona outside of Active Management Areas, 1991–2000: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 

2004-5293, 28 p.
iii

Contents

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

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

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

Previous Investigations ........................................................................... 4

Water Withdrawals ....................................................................................... 5

Irrigation ............................................................................................. 5

Municipal ............................................................................................. 15

Public Water Suppliers ..................................................................... 15

Private Water Suppliers ..................................................................... 20

Self-Supplied Domestic Users ............................................................... 20

Mining ................................................................................................ 20

Thermoelectric Power .............................................................................. 23

Drainage ............................................................................................. 25

Summary ................................................................................................... 27

References Cited .......................................................................................... 27

Figures

 Figure 1. Graph showing population in Arizona, 1991–2000 ....................................... 2

 Figure 2. Map showing Arizona Department of Water Resources ground-water basins,

Active Management Areas, and Irrigation Non-expansion Areas ..................... 3

 Figure 3. Graph showing estimated annual ground-water withdrawals in Arizona, 1915–90 4

 Figure 4. Map showing agricultural areas delineated on the basis of satellite images

and aerial photographs, Arizona, 1992–98 ................................................ 9

 Figure 5. Graphs showing estimated annual ground-water withdrawals for irrigation in

ground-water basins outside of Active Management Areas, Arizona, 1991–2000 ... 11

 Figure 6. Graphs showing annual metered surface-water withdrawals for irrigation in

ground-water basins outside of Active Management Areas, Arizona, 1991–2000 ... 14

 Figure 7. Graphs showing estimated annual ground-water withdrawals for municipal

use in ground-water basins outside of Active Management Areas, Arizona,

1991–2000 .................................................................................... 17

 Figure 8. Graphs showing estimated annual ground-water withdrawals for mining in

ground-water basins outside of Active Management Areas, Arizona, 1991–2000 ... 22

 Figure 9. Graph showing ground-water withdrawals and energy generated by

thermoelectric powerplants in the Little Colorado River Plateau Basin,

Arizona, 1991–2000 ........................................................................ 24

 Figure 10. Graph showing ground-water withdrawals and energy generated by the

thermoelectric powerplant in the Willcox Basin, Arizona, 1991–2000 ............... 24

 Figure 11. Graph showing annual ground-water withdrawals for drainage of agricultural

lands in the Lower Gila and Yuma Basins, 1991–2000 ................................. 26

 Figure 12. Graph showing annual ground-water withdrawals for the 242 well field in the

Yuma Basin, Arizona, 1991–2000 ......................................................... 26
iv

Tables

Table 1. Population in Arizona, 1991–2000 ......................................................... 2

Table 2. Estimated annual ground-water withdrawals for irrigation in ground-water

basins outside of Active Management Areas, Arizona, 1991-2000 ..................... 10

Table 3. Annual metered surface-water withdrawals for irrigation in ground-water

basins outside of Active Management Areas, Arizona, 1991-2000 ..................... 10

Table 4. Estimated annual ground-water withdrawals for municipal use in

ground-water basins outside of Active Management Areas, Arizona, 1991-2000 ... 16

Table 5. Estimated annual ground-water withdrawals for mining use in ground-water 

basins outside of Active Management Areas, Arizona, 1991-2000 ..................... 21

Table 6. Annual ground-water withdrawals for thermoelectric power in ground-water 

basins outside of Active Management Areas, Arizona, 1991-2000 ..................... 23

Table 7. Annual ground-water withdrawals for drainage of agricultural lands in 

ground-water basins outside of Active Management Areas, Arizona, 1991–2000 ... 25

Table 8. Annual ground-water withdrawals for the 242 well field near Yuma, Arizona,

1991-2000 ....................................................................................... 25
v

Multiply By To obtain

acre 0.4047 hectare

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

acre-foot (acre-ft) 0.001233 cubic hectometer 

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter 

gallon (gal) 3.785 liter 

gallon (gal) 0.003785 cubic meter 

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

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer

DATUM

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1927 (NAD 27).

Conversion Factors and Datum

CONVERSION FACTORS
vi

This page is intentionally blank.
Abstract

Economic development in Arizona is largely influenced 

by access to adequate water supplies owing to the State’s 

predominantly semiarid to arid climate. Water demand is 

met by pumping ground water from aquifers or by conveying 

surface water through a system of reservoirs and canals. 

Water-withdrawal data provide important information on how 

water demand affects the State’s water resources. Information 

on water withdrawals also can help planners and managers 

assess the effectiveness of water-management policies, 

regulations, and conservation activities. 

This report includes water-withdrawal data for irrigation, 

municipal, mining, thermoelectric-power, and drainage uses 

for 1991–2000, and describes the methods used to collect, 

compile, and estimate the data. Data are reported for the 

Arizona Department of Water Resources ground-water basins 

outside of Active Management Areas.

Because of the climate, ground water and surface water 

are used to irrigate nearly all agricultural fields in Arizona. 

Irrigation accounted for the largest use of water in the study 

area during 1991–2000. The amount of water withdrawn for 

irrigation varies greatly from year to year for some of the 

basins, primarily because of differences in the consumptive 

water requirement for different crops and because of changes 

in irrigated acreage.

The population of Arizona increased about 35 percent 

from 1991 to 2000—from about 3.79 million in 1991 to about 

5.13 million in 2000. Correspondingly, water withdrawal for 

municipal use increased steadily in most of the basins during 

1991–2000.

Ground-water withdrawals for mining did not show any 

consistent trends during 1991–2000. Increases and decreases 

in withdrawals for mining were most likely due to variations 

in mineral production. Mineral prices and competition from 

mining in other States and foreign countries probably result 

in annual increases or decreases in mineral production in 

Arizona.

Between 1991 and 2000, ground-water withdrawals for 

thermoelectric-power generation generally increased owing 

to an increase in production of electricity. Ground-water 

withdrawals for drainage of agricultural lands in the Lower 

Gila and Yuma Basins varied irregularly from year to year. 

Annual total water withdrawals are not presented in this report 

because for some years irrigation values for some of the basins 

are reported as “less than 1,000 acre-feet,” and municipal and 

mining values for some of the basins are reported as “less than 

300 acre-feet.”

Introduction

Because of the predominantly semiarid to arid climate 

in Arizona, economic development in the State is largely 

influenced by access to adequate water supplies. Water 

demand is met by pumping ground water from aquifers or by 

conveying surface water through a system of reservoirs and 

canals. Water-withdrawal data in Arizona are collected by 

Federal, State, and local government agencies as well as by 

private organizations. Anthropogenic water use is a significant 

component of the hydrologic cycle in Arizona, and accurate 

spatial and temporal water-use data are useful for management 

of this valuable resource. Water-withdrawal data provide 

important information on how water demand affects the State’s 

water resources. Information on water withdrawals also can 

help planners and managers assess the effectiveness of watermanagement policies, regulations, and conservation activities.

Water Withdrawals for Irrigation, Municipal, Mining, 

Thermoelectric-Power, and Drainage Uses in Arizona 

Outside of Active Management Areas, 1991–2000

By Saeid Tadayon
Water withdrawal in Arizona is dominated primarily 

by agriculture and secondarily by rapidly growing urban 

populations. Because of the low rainfall in Arizona, agriculture 

in Arizona depends heavily on the State’s water resources. 

From 1991 to 2000, the population of Arizona increased about 

35 percent, from about 3.79 million to about 5.13 million 

(U.S. Census Bureau, 2004; table 1 and fig. 1).

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation 

with the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR), 

collected and compiled annual ground-water and surfacewater withdrawal data and estimated withdrawals for 

1991–2000. Ground-water withdrawal data for irrigation, 

municipal, mining, thermoelectric-power, and drainage uses 

were compiled for ADWR ground-water basins outside of 

Active Management Areas (AMAs; fig. 2). Ground-water 

withdrawal data for the Douglas, Harquahala, and Joseph City 

Irrigation Non-Expansion Areas (INAs) were compiled by the 

ADWR (fig. 2). In this report, ground-water withdrawals for 

Year Population

1991 3,788,576

1992 3,915,740

1993 4,065,440

1994 4,245,089

1995 4,432,499

1996 4,586,940

1997 4,736,990

1998 4,883,342

1999 5,023,823

2000 5,130,632

Table 1. Population in Arizona, 1991–2000.

[Data from U.S. Census Bureau, 2004]

Figure 1. Population in Arizona, 1991–2000.

the Douglas Basin include withdrawals for the Douglas INA 

and withdrawals for the Little Colorado River Plateau Basin 

include withdrawals for the Joseph City INA. Data for metered 

surface-water diversions for irrigation also were compiled. 

Nonmetered surface-water withdrawals for irrigation were 

estimated but are not presented in this report.

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to present estimated annual 

ground-water withdrawals for irrigation, municipal, mining, 

thermoelectric-power, and drainage uses for 1991–2000. The 

report also includes surface-water diversions by irrigation 

districts where the diversions were metered or were quantified 

by using nearby streamflow-gaging stations operated by the 

USGS or other agencies. It describes the methods used to 

collect, compile, and estimate withdrawal data for each of 

these water-use categories. The study area includes the ADWR 

ground-water basins outside of AMAs.

����

���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ����

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

����������� �� ��������

Ground-water withdrawal.

Surface water from river.

2 Water Withdrawals for Irrigation, Municipal, Mining, Thermoelectric-Power, and Drainage Uses in Arizona, 1991-2000
Figure 2. Arizona Department of Water Resources ground-water basins, Active Management Areas, and Irrigation Non-expansion 

Areas.

Introduction 3

����������������

Glen Canyon Dam

Hoover Dam

Davis

Dam

Parker Dam

Imperial Dam

San Luis

Lake Powell

Lake Mead

Lake

Mohave

DOUGLAS BASIN �

Utah Colorado

Nevada

California

Mexico

United States

New

Mexico

�������� �����

��������

�����

���� �����

0 25 50 100 Miles

0 25 50 100 Kilometers

LITTLE COLORADO RIVER PLATEAU

PINAL LOWER GILA

SALT RIVER

VERDE RIVER

COCONINO PLATEAU

KANAB PLATEAU

BILL WILLIAMS

WILLCOX

BIG SANDY

MORENCI

SAN SIMON WASH

AGUA FRIA

PEACH SPRINGS

PARIA

UPPER SAN PEDRO

SHIVWITS

PLATEAU

LOWER

SAN

PEDRO

SACRAMENTO

VALLEY

GRAND

WASH

LAKE

MOHAVE

HUALAPAI VALLEY

TONTO

CREEK

DOUGLAS

SANTA

CRUZ

HARQUAHALA

RANEGRAS

PLAIN

DETRITAL

VALLEY

CIENEGA

CREEK

UPPER HASSAYAMPA

MCMULLEN VALLEY

DUNCAN 

VALLEY

VIRGIN

RIVER

BONITA CREEK

ARAVAIPA

CANYON

WESTERN

MEXICAN

DRAINAGE

SAN RAFAEL

LAKE HAVASU BUTLER VALLEY

MEADVIEW

DONNELLY

WASH

SAN

BERNARDINO VALLEY

DRIPPING

SPRINGS WASH

TIGER

WASH

PHOENIX

PHOENIX

JOSEPH CITY

PRESCOTT

GILA BEND

TUCSON

LakeHavasu

YUMA

PARKER

SAFFORD

ST. JOHNS

115° 114° 113° 112° 111° 110° 109°

32°

33°

34°

35°

36°

37°

ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES 

Irrigation Non-expansion Area (INA)

 EXPLANATION

ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES GROUND-WATER BASIN

Active Management Area (AMA)
Irrigation withdrawal data represent the amount of 

ground water and surface water withdrawn for growing 

crops. Municipal withdrawal data include ground-water 

withdrawn by public and private water suppliers, and by 

self-supplied domestic users. Ground-water withdrawal 

data for mining represent withdrawals for metal mines and 

industrial-mineral mines. Ground-water withdrawal data 

for thermoelectric-power use represent withdrawals used 

for generating electricity. For 1991-2000, the USGS did not 

compile surface-water withdrawals for municipal, mining, and 

thermoelectric-power uses according to ADWR ground-water 

basins. Drainage withdrawal data represent withdrawals used 

to dewater the root zone in agricultural areas and withdrawals 

from Minute No. 242 (242 well field) used to address the 

problem of salinity of the Colorado River. In this report, 

water withdrawal refers to water removed from the ground 

or diverted from a surface-water source for various uses. The 

amount of water withdrawn for all categories shown in this 

report may not equal the actual amount of water used owing to 

water transfers or to the recirculation or reuse of water.

Previous Investigations

The USGS, in cooperation with the ADWR, collects 

and compiles ground-water withdrawal data for most areas 

in Arizona, and the USGS also compiles ground-water and 

surface-water withdrawal data in Arizona by county as part 

of a National water-use program. Data for years prior to and 

including 1990 were published in a series of reports and have 

been used in various hydrologic studies throughout the State.

Ground-water withdrawal data represent the amount of 

water pumped out of the ground for various uses and have 

been published in annual reports since 1955. Annual reports 

from 1955 to 1969 were published by the Arizona State Land 

Department. The Arizona Water Commission (precursor of 

the ADWR) published annual reports from 1970 to 1974, and 

the USGS published the reports from 1975 to 1990. In the 

1975 report, annual ground-water withdrawals for some areas 

were estimated for years as far back as 1915. Estimates of the 

distribution of annual ground-water withdrawals in Arizona by 

use category were published only from 1975 to 1990. Groundwater withdrawals were estimated for irrigation, municipal, 

industrial, and livestock use, and for drainage of agricultural 

lands.

The withdrawal data and periodic water-level 

measurements are used in studies of Arizona’s ground-water 

resources. Since 1939, the USGS and State of Arizona 

agencies have conducted joint studies to define the quantity, 

chemistry, and areal distribution of the resources and to 

monitor the effects of large-scale ground-water withdrawals. 

The USGS, in cooperation with the ADWR, published a series 

of reports from 1981 to 1994 entitled “Annual summary of 

ground-water conditions in Arizona” that included groundwater withdrawals by basin. Ground-water withdrawals in 

Arizona from 1915 to 1990 are shown in figure 3.

Figure 3. Estimated annual ground-water withdrawals in Arizona, 1915–90 (Anning and Duet, 1994).

�

���������

���������

���������

���������

���������

���������

������������ ������������ �� ���������

��������������������������������������������

��������������������

����

4 Water Withdrawals for Irrigation, Municipal, Mining, Thermoelectric-Power, and Drainage Uses in Arizona, 1991-2000
In addition to the cooperative program with the ADWR, 

the USGS has collected and compiled ground-water and 

surface-water withdrawal data, and estimated withdrawals 

from related data, for Arizona since 1950 and publishes the 

data periodically as part of a National water-use program 

(MacKichan, 1951, 1957; MacKichan and Kammerer, 1961; 

Murray, 1968; Murray and Reeves, 1972, 1977; Solly and 

others, 1983, 1988, 1993, 1998; and Hutson and others, 2004). 

The primary categories used in these reports are irrigation, 

public supply, mining, thermoelectric power, domestic, 

commercial, and industrial; however, withdrawal data for two 

or more categories were combined in some years and were 

listed under separate categories in other years. Summaries of 

estimated withdrawals from 1950 through 2000 are presented 

in the USGS Circular report series entitled “Estimated use of 

water in the United States” (for example, Hutson and others, 

2004).

Water Withdrawals

For the purpose of this report, withdrawals in each 

of the ADWR ground-water basins outside of AMAs are 

categorized by irrigation, municipal, mining, thermoelectricpower, and drainage use. Annual total withdrawals for each 

category are not given in this report because for some basins 

ground-water withdrawals for irrigation are reported as “less 

than 1,000 acre-feet” for some years and (or) ground-water 

withdrawals for municipal or mining use are reported as “less 

than 300 acre-feet” for some years. Ground-water withdrawal 

data for thermoelectric power and drainage were all greater 

than the reported value of 300 acre-feet during 1991-2000; 

however, to maintain consistency the annual total withdrawals 

for these categories also are not presented. Estimated annual 

water withdrawals for each basin are published as rounded 

values using the following criteria:

Values less than 1,000 acre-feet for irrigation are reported 

as “<1,000 acre-feet.”

For municipal, mining, thermoelectric power, and 

drainage, values are reported as follows:

Values less than 300 acre-feet are reported as 

“<300 acre-feet.”

Values from 300-999 acre-feet are reported to the nearest 

50 acre-feet.

Values from 1,000 to 9,999 acre-feet are reported to the 

nearest 100 acre-feet.

Values from 10,000 to 99,999 acre-feet are reported to the 

nearest 500 acre-feet.

Values from 100,000 to 999,999 acre-feet are reported to 

the nearest 1,000 acre-feet.

Values of 1,000,000 acre-feet and greater are reported to 

the nearest 5,000 acre-feet.

Irrigation

Water used for irrigation is a significant component of 

the water budget in many ground-water basins in Arizona. The 

semi-arid to arid climate necessitates the use of ground water 

and (or) surface water for irrigation of nearly all agricultural 

fields in Arizona. Water withdrawals in the irrigation category 

are predominantly used for sustaining plant growth; however, 

the category also includes water used for chemical application, 

dust suppression, and leaching of salts from the root zone, and 

includes water lost in conveyance (Hutson and others, 2004). 

The category includes self-supplied withdrawals and deliveries 

from a combination of irrigation districts or government 

agencies. Data are presented for estimated ground-water 

withdrawals and for metered surface-water withdrawals.

Surface water is withdrawn for irrigation.

Ground water is withdrawn for irrigation.

Water Withdrawals 5
Prior to 1991, the USGS estimated ground-water 

withdrawals for irrigation of crops in Arizona by using a 

power-divider method that used pump-efficiency and energyconsumption data. This method required field measurements 

of the discharge rate and the power-use rate for individual 

wells to provide an estimate of the average power required 

to pump 1 acre-foot of water from the well (Don Bills, U.S. 

Geological Survey, written commun., 2004). This method 

is no longer feasible for most of the basins because power 

data are not readily available. New methods have been used 

to compile or estimate water withdrawals and irrigated 

acreage for 1991–2000. Where available, metered groundwater and surface-water withdrawal data were used. Power 

data for 1991-94, however, were used to estimate groundwater withdrawals for irrigation in the Little Colorado River 

Plateau and Kanab Plateau Basins. Estimated ground-water 

withdrawals for these basins for 1995–2000 were extrapolated 

from the power data for 1991–94. For the remaining areas, 

estimated total withdrawals (ground water and surface water) 

were derived from calculations based on crop acreages, 

consumptive water requirement rates for crops, and irrigation 

efficiency for each county.

Most of the crop-acreage data used to estimate 

withdrawals, by county, are from the Arizona Agricultural 

Statistics Service (AASS, annual reports entitled “Arizona 

Agricultural Statistics,” published from 1992 to 2001). In 

some cases, county crop acreages were not published by the 

AASS in order to avoid disclosure of individual operations. 

Where the county crop-acreage data are not available, they 

are estimated from acreage data for prior years and (or) the 

1992 and 1997 Census of Agriculture (U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, 1999).

Measuring ground-water pumping rate for estimation of withdrawals 

for irrigation.

Barley. Photograph courtesy of 

U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Alfalfa.

Citrus.

6 Water Withdrawals for Irrigation, Municipal, Mining, Thermoelectric-Power, and Drainage Uses in Arizona, 1991-2000

Noncitrus orchard (pecan).
Consumptive water requirement rates for crops are 

determined by using a modified Blaney-Criddle method as 

described in Bureau of Reclamation (1992, appendix A). 

Inputs to the modified Blaney-Criddle method are latitude, 

average monthly temperature, total monthly precipitation, crop 

type, and crop planting and harvesting dates. Outputs from 

the modified Blaney-Criddle method are the consumptive 

water requirement by crop type for each month and the total 

for the growing season. Consumptive water requirement is 

the depth of irrigation water (feet), including precipitation, 

that is required consumptively for crop production (U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, 1967). Crop consumptive 

irrigation requirement is the planted acreage of the crop in the 

county multiplied by the consumptive water requirement and 

is reported in acre-feet.

County irrigation efficiency is the percentage of the crop 

consumptive water requirement divided by the total quantity 

of water withdrawn for irrigation in a particular county. 

Annual crop consumptive water requirements and irrigation 

withdrawals were estimated for all Arizona counties for 1980-

90. The average county irrigation efficiency calculated for the 

11-year period of 1980-90 (David Anning, U.S. Geological 

Survey, oral commun., 2004) was used for estimating 

withdrawals in this report. County irrigation efficiency 

takes into account conveyance losses and application losses. 

Conveyance losses are estimated as the difference between 

the volume of water applied to crops and the volume of water 

diverted from the source. Application losses include surface 

runoff, deep percolation, and losses due to irrigation system 

evaporation. 

A variety of crops with different consumptive water 

requirements are grown in Arizona in a season. For 

1991–2000, consumptive water requirements were estimated 

for the most common crops: alfalfa and other hay, barley, 

citrus and noncitrus orchards, corn, cotton, vegetables, and 

wheat. Estimated county irrigation withdrawals for a particular 

crop are based on the planted acreage of the crop, consumptive 

water requirement for the crop, and county irrigation 

efficiency. The following formula was used to estimate the 

withdrawal in a county for a particular crop: W = (A × C) / E, (1)

where

W is irrigation withdrawal, in acre-feet, for a 

particular crop;

A is planted acreage of the crop in the county, in 

acres;

C is consumptive water requirement for the crop 

based on the modified Blaney-Criddle method, 

in feet; and 

E is irrigation efficiency for the county, in decimal 

fraction.

Cotton.

Corn.

Vegetables (peppers).

Wheat.

Water Withdrawals 7
Total irrigation withdrawals for the county were then 

determined by adding together withdrawals for each crop 

grown in the county. County withdrawal data were then 

disaggregated into the ground-water basins delineated by the 

ADWR. These basins, in most cases, cross county boundaries, 

and each county may include parts of several basins. The 

withdrawal data were disaggregated on the basis of the spatial 

distribution of irrigated acreage as determined from satellite 

images and aerial photographs and were estimated annually 

for each basin for 1991-2000.

In 2004, the USGS, in cooperation with the ADWR, 

the Natural Resources Conservation Service, and the Bureau 

of Reclamation, prepared a map of agricultural areas in 

Arizona (fig. 4). Agricultural field boundaries were delineated 

on the basis of satellite images and aerial photographs to 

disaggregate county crop acreage and compile the data by 

ADWR ground-water basins. For various reasons, different 

satellite images and aerial photographs were used by different 

agencies for digitizing field boundaries. Field boundaries 

were delineated using land satellite (Landsat) Thematic 

Mapper (TM) images, Satellite Pour l’Observation de la Terra 

(SPOT), Carterra Digital Ortho Quads (DOQ-5), or Digital 

Orthophoto Quadrangles (DOQs), or a combination of these 

sources to create a geographical information system (GIS) 

coverage. TM images, taken in 1993, were received from the 

Landsat 5 satellite and have a ground resolution of 30 meters. 

The SPOT satellite imagery (1997) has a ground resolution of 

10 meters. Space Imaging’s Carterra DOQ-5 product (1998) is 

a digital orthorectified satellite imagery that is formatted into 

USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles and has a ground resolution 

of 5 meters. A DOQ is a computer-generated image of an 

aerial photograph in which the image displacement caused by 

terrain relief and camera tilt has been removed; it has a ground 

resolution of 1 meter. DOQ images from 1992 to 1997 were 

used in this report.

When metered ground-water or surface-water withdrawal 

data were not available for a particular basin, total irrigation 

withdrawal typically was estimated from the annual county 

consumptive water requirement and basin-wide irrigated 

acreage as determined from satellite images and aerial 

photographs. For several basins, irrigated acreages were 

estimated from published reports of other agencies or 

from unpublished information supplied to the USGS. Total 

irrigation withdrawal for a particular basin was estimated 

using the following formula:

WB = (WT / AT) × PB, (2)

where

WB is total irrigation withdrawal for a particular basin 

for a given year, in acre-feet;

WT is total irrigation withdrawal for the county in 

which all or part of the basin lies for a given 

year, in acre-feet;

AT is total planted acreage of crops in the county for a 

given year, in acres; and

PB is irrigated acreage in the basin as determined 

from satellite images and aerial photographs, 

published reports, and unpublished 

information supplied to the USGS, in acres.

When measured surface-water withdrawals were 

available for a basin, irrigation ground-water withdrawals 

were estimated by subtracting the metered amount of surface 

water from the total irrigation withdrawals. For the Yuma 

Basin, metered surface-water data are available; however, 

ground-water data are not available and the common practice 

of multicropping in the basin makes it difficult to accurately 

estimate irrigation withdrawals. Consequently, ground-water 

withdrawals for the Yuma Basin are estimated on the basis 

of withdrawal data reported for 1990. Both surface-water 

and ground-water withdrawals are delivered to agricultural 

fields in the Little Colorado River Plateau, Lower San Pedro, 

Salt River, Tonto Creek, Upper San Pedro, Verde River, and 

Virgin River Basins; however, the surface-water deliveries 

are not measured in these basins and are not presented in this 

report. This report includes only annual metered surface-water 

withdrawal data for irrigation. 

Estimates of annual ground-water and surface-water 

withdrawals for irrigation for 1991-2000 are summarized in 

tables 2 and 3 and are represented graphically in figures 5

and 6. The amount of water withdrawn for irrigation in some 

basins can vary greatly from year to year. This variation 

is primarily due to differences in the consumptive water 

requirement for different crops and to differences in irrigated 

acreage.

Example of satellite image (Safford, Arizona, area) showing 

agricultural lands.

8 Water Withdrawals for Irrigation, Municipal, Mining, Thermoelectric-Power, and Drainage Uses in Arizona, 1991-2000
Figure 4. Agricultural areas delineated on the basis of satellite images and aerial photographs, Arizona, 1992–98.

Water Withdrawals 9

����������������

Glen Canyon Dam

Hoover Dam

Davis

Dam

Parker Dam

Imperial Dam

San Luis

Lake Powell

Lake Mead

Lake

Mohave

DOUGLAS BASIN �

Utah Colorado

Nevada

California

Mexico

United States

New

Mexico

�������� �����

��������

����� ���� �����

0 25 50 100 Miles

0 25 50 100 Kilometers

115° 114° 113° 112° 111° 110° 109°

32°

33°

34°

35°

36°

37°

ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES 

Irrigation Non-expansion Area (INA)

 EXPLANATION

ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES GROUND-WATER BASIN

Active Management Area (AMA)

AGRICULTURAL AREAS DELINEATED BY THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY IN COOPERATION 

 WITH THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES, THE NATURAL RESOURCES 

 CONSERVATION SERVICE, AND THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
Basin 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Agua Fria 1,200 1,300 1,400 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,400 1,100 1,100 1,500

Aravaipa Canyon <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000

Bill Williams 18,500 18,500 18,500 18,500 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200 4,200

Butler Valley – – – 2,200 4,500 2,300 8,900 9,900 11,000 9,500

Douglas 31,000 34,000 32,500 36,500 30,000 37,500 39,500 37,000 32,500 39,000

Duncan Valley 7,200 5,300 6,300 5,900 4,800 9,300 6,300 5,600 6,700 13,500

Gila Bend 237,000 213,000 233,000 248,000 256,000 238,000 255,000 203,000 228,000 294,000

Harquahala INA 2,000 3,000 6,800 16,000 19,500 29,000 21,000 18,000 23,000 27,500

Kanab Plateau 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500

Lake Mohave 36,500 33,000 35,500 40,500 38,000 44,000 41,500 28,500 31,000 33,000

Little Colorado River Plateau1 37,000 36,000 36,000 34,500 34,500 34,500 34,500 34,500 34,500 34,500

Lower Gila 164,000 164,000 161,000 169,000 169,000 158,000 162,000 142,000 157,000 171,000

Lower San Pedro 12,500 12,500 12,500 13,500 13,000 12,500 14,000 12,500 13,500 14,000

McMullen Valley 76,000 73,000 74,500 80,500 80,000 81,000 81,000 72,000 78,500 86,000

Parker 3,200 2,400 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000

Ranegras Plain 29,000 27,000 29,000 31,000 32,000 32,500 31,500 29,500 32,500 34,000

Safford 79,000 60,000 91,500 108,000 91,500 106,500 64,500 67,500 76,000 142,000

Salt River <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000

San Simon Wash 4,000 3,900 4,000 4,300 3,700 3,600 4,400 3,400 3,600 3,800

Tonto Creek <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000 <1,000

Upper San Pedro 17,000 17,000 16,500 16,000 16,000 15,500 15,500 15,000 15,000 14,500

Verde River 7,200 8,000 8,800 8,200 8,500 9,700 9,000 7,100 6,700 9,300

Virgin River 7,700 7,200 7,700 8,100 8,400 8,600 8,000 7,500 8,500 8,800

Willcox 124,000 112,000 128,000 130,000 124,000 125,000 127,000 128,000 104,000 134,000

Yuma 120,000 121,000 119,000 122,000 124,000 112,000 115,000 101,000 113,000 121,000

1Withdrawal values include withdrawals within the Joseph City Irrigation Non-expansion Area.

Table 2. Estimated annual ground-water withdrawals for irrigation in ground-water basins outside of Active Management Areas, Arizona, 1991-2000.

[Values in acre-feet (rounded). Data not available for other basins. INA, Irrigation Non-expansion area; –, no data; <, less than]

Basin 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Gila Bend 70,000 88,000 66,500 76,000 57,000 78,000 69,500 74,500 72,500 48,000

Harquahala INA 35,000 21,000 27,500 52,500 103,000 113,500 116,000 78,000 55,500 62,500

Lake Mohave 59,000 44,500 59,000 58,000 62,500 66,500 67,500 61,000 79,500 66,000

Lower Gila 435,000 369,000 285,000 357,000 377,000 400,000 410,000 393,000 365,000 388,000

Parker 664,000 611,000 630,000 708,000 696,000 748,000 666,000 625,000 631,000 663,000

Safford1 136,000 133,000 130,000 120,000 120,000 103,000 135,000 138,000 116,000 53,500

Yuma 725,000 691,000 683,000 718,000 738,000 772,000 727,000 744,000 794,000 820,000

1Withdrawals include diversions to the Duncan Valley Basin.

Table 3. Annual metered surface-water withdrawals for irrigation in ground-water basins outside of Active Management Areas, Arizona, 1991-2000.

[Values in acre-feet (rounded). Data not available for other basins. INA, Irrigation-Non-expansion Area]

10 Water Withdrawals for Irrigation, Municipal, Mining, Thermoelectric-Power, and Drainage Uses in Arizona, 1991-2000
Figure 5. Estimated annual ground-water withdrawals for irrigation in ground-water basins outside of 

Active Management Areas, Arizona, 1991–2000.

����������������

��������������������������������������

����

����

���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ����

���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ����

���������

�������������

��������������

�����������

������������

�������������

�������������

������

������

������

������

������

�����

�����

�����

�����

�

������

������

������

������

������

������

�����

�����

�����

�����

�

������

������

������

������

������

������

�����

�����

�����

�����

�

������

������

������

������

������

������

�����

�����

�����

�����

�

������

������������������������

Water Withdrawals 11
Figure 5. Continued.

���������������� ��������������������������������������

���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ����

�������

��������������

������������������������������

���������������

��������������

����������� ���������������

�������������

������

������

������

������

������

������

������

������

�����

�

������

������

������

������

������

������

������

������

�����

�

������

������

������

������

������

������

������

������

�����

�

������

������

������

������

������

������

������

������

�����

�

��������������������������

���� ����

12 Water Withdrawals for Irrigation, Municipal, Mining, Thermoelectric-Power, and Drainage Uses in Arizona, 1991-2000
����������������

��������������������������������������

���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ����

���������

���������������

�������

�������

����

����������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

������

�

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

������

�

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

������

�

���������������������������

���� ����

Figure 5. Continued.

The largest ground-water withdrawals in the study area 

from 1991 to 2000 were in the Gila Bend Basin. Withdrawals 

in the basin were smallest (203,000 acre-feet) in 1998 and 

largest (294,000 acre-feet) in 2000 (table 2 and fig. 5C). Most 

of the surface-water withdrawals during 1991-2000 were in the 

Lower Gila, Parker, and Yuma Basins (table 3). Surface-water 

withdrawals in the Parker Basin fluctuated from a minimum of 

611,000 acre-feet in 1992 to a maximum of 748,000 acre-feet 

in 1996 (table 3 and fig. 6). 

Ground-water withdrawals in the Duncan Valley and 

Safford Basins in 2000 were 13,500 and 142,000 acre-feet, 

respectively (table 2). In addition 53,500 acre-feet of surface 

water was diverted from the Gila River to agricultural lands in 

the Safford Basin in 2000. Part of the surface water diverted 

to the Safford Basin was then delivered to agricultural lands 

in the Duncan Valley Basin; consequently, only the amount 

diverted to the Safford Basin is shown in table 3. The increase 

in ground-water withdrawals in the Duncan Valley and Safford 

Basins in some years was offset by a decrease in the amount of 

surface water diverted. 

Ground-water withdrawals in the Willcox Basin were 

smaller in 1992 (112,000 acre-feet) and 1999 (104,000 

acre-feet) than in other years, primarily because of differences 

in consumptive water requirement rates for different crops 

(table 2 and fig. 5C). Ground-water withdrawals in the Butler 

Valley Basin generally have increased from 1994 to 2000. 

Between 1991 and 1993, no crops were planted in the basin 

(Bill Remick, Arizona Department of Water Resources, 

written commun., 2004). In the Bill Williams Basin, groundwater withdrawals remained at 18,500 acre-feet from 1991 

to 1994 and decreased to about 4,200 acre-feet from 1995 to 

2000 (table 2 and fig. 5A). The decrease primarily was due 

to the retirement of some agricultural lands in the basin after 

1995 (Andrew Hautzinger, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

oral commun., 2004). The amount of ground water withdrawn 

for irrigation varied from year to year in the Gila Bend, 

Lower Gila, Safford, and Yuma Basins, primarily because 

of differences in consumptive water requirement rates for 

different crops and fluctuations in measured surface-water 

withdrawals.

Water Withdrawals 13
Figure 6. Annual metered surface-water withdrawals for irrigation in ground-water basins outside 

of Active Management Areas, Arizona, 1991–2000.

���������������

��������������������������������������

���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ����

���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ����

���������

�����������

������

�������

����

����������

��������������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�������

�

����

����

14 Water Withdrawals for Irrigation, Municipal, Mining, Thermoelectric-Power, and Drainage Uses in Arizona, 1991-2000
The largest surface-water withdrawals for irrigation 

were in the Lower Gila, Parker, and Yuma Basins where 

surface water is readily available from the Colorado River 

(table 3). In these basins, surface water constituted most of 

the total irrigation withdrawals (tables 2 and 3); surface-water 

withdrawals supply almost all water for irrigation in the Parker 

Basin. Because of the climate and the availability of water, 

some farmers are multicropping in the Lake Mohave, Parker, 

and Yuma Basins. Multicropping also is practiced in other 

parts of the study area, such as the Lower Gila and Gila Bend 

Basins. Within the study area, annual metered surface-water 

withdrawals for irrigation are greater than estimated annual 

ground-water withdrawals. This is due to the availability of 

surface water in agricultural areas along the Colorado River.

Municipal

Municipal-withdrawal data in this report represent water 

withdrawn by public and private water suppliers and selfsupplied domestic users. Public and private water suppliers 

deliver water to residential, commercial, industrial, and 

municipal users. Self-supplied domestic withdrawals primarily 

are for residential use. Annual estimated ground-water 

withdrawals for municipal use are listed by ADWR basin for 

areas outside of AMAs (table 4).

 In the study area, complete data sets from the private and 

public-water suppliers were not available for the Agua Fria, 

Cienega Creek, Ranegras Plain, and San Simon Wash Basins. 

Therefore, municipal ground-water withdrawals for these 

basins from 1991 to 2000 were estimated using population in 

the basins and per-capita water use for the county in which the 

basins are located. Populations were estimated from the 1990 

population listed in the Arizona Water Resources Assessment 

report, which was taken from the 1990 Census and the 

2000 Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and 

Referencing (TIGER) Census data set (Arizona Department of 

Water Resources, 1994; U.S. Census Bureau, 2000). Per-capita 

water use was estimated from averages of data for 1990, 1995, 

and 2000 that were reported for the State in the reports entitled 

“Estimated use of water in the United States” (water.usgs.

gov/watuse/). Per-capita water use was calculated by dividing 

the withdrawals by public and private water suppliers for each 

county by the estimated population served in the county for 

1990, 1995, and 2000.

Municipal ground-water withdrawals for 17 basins are 

listed as less than 300 acre-feet per year (table 4); however, 

withdrawals in the Butler Valley, Dripping Springs Wash, 

Grand Wash, and Tiger Wash Basins are considered to be 

negligible owing to the sparse populations in these basins 

(Arizona Department of Water Resources, 1994; U.S. Census 

Bureau, 2000; Bill Remick, Arizona Department of Water 

Resources, oral commun., 2004). Some of the basins, such as 

Bill Williams, Cienega Creek, Douglas, Lower Gila, Lower 

San Pedro, McMullen Valley, and San Simon Wash, did not 

show large increases in withdrawals from 1991 to 2000. The 

withdrawal was greatest in the Little Colorado River Plateau 

Basin, where it increased from 20,500 acre-feet in 1991 to 

27,000 acre-feet in 2000 (table 4 and fig. 7C). A combination 

of ground water and surface water is withdrawn for municipal 

use in some parts of the State. In these areas, fluctuations in 

surface-water withdrawals for municipal use in a particular 

year will affect the amount of ground water withdrawn. 

Municipal ground-water withdrawals in most of the basins 

increased steadily from 1991 to 2000 (table 4) as a result 

of population growth. In addition to population growth, the 

amount of water withdrawn also can be affected by climate, 

water-saving technologies, pricing, and use of alternative 

sources, such as water harvesting.

Public Water Suppliers

Withdrawals from public water suppliers refer to 

ground water withdrawn by a publicly owned, community 

water system for use by cities, rural water districts, mobilehome parks, Indian reservations, or military bases. Data 

for municipal withdrawals by public water suppliers were 

obtained primarily by telephone or written surveys. Several 

suppliers, however, did not provide the USGS with withdrawal 

data for some years. Missing data from these suppliers were 

estimated by extrapolating data from other years. Several 

public water suppliers reported water deliveries rather than 

ground-water withdrawals. In these instances, ground-water 

withdrawals were estimated by adding 10 percent to the water 

deliveries reported to the USGS to account for water losses 

in the distribution systems. The 10 percent water losses in the 

distribution system were based on the average of water losses 

for 1995 that were reported for Arizona in the report entitled 

“Estimated use of water in the United States” (water.usgs.

gov/watuse/).

Water Withdrawals 15
Basin 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Agua Fria 950 1,000 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,300 1,400 1,500 1,600 1,700

Aravaipa Canyon <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Big Sandy <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Bill Williams 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 550 550

Bonita Creek 2,800 2,800 2,200 2,400 3,200 3,300 3,300 3,300 3,300 3,300

Butler Valley <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Cienega Creek 450 500 500 500 500 500 550 550 550 550

Coconino Plateau <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Detrital Valley <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Donnelly Wash <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Douglas 5,500 5,400 4,800 6,000 5,200 7,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 5,800

Dripping Springs Wash <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Duncan Valley 650 650 650 600 650 700 700 750 800 1,000

Gila Bend 800 800 850 800 800 800 800 750 850 900

Grand Wash <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Harquahala INA 900 900 950 900 900 900 900 950 950 950

Hualapai Valley 4,400 5,400 5,400 6,000 6,300 7,000 6,900 6,800 7,500 8,200

Kanab Plateau 750 800 800 850 850 900 950 1,000 1,000 1,100

Lake Havasu 12,500 13,000 13,500 14,500 14,500 15,000 15,500 14,500 14,000 15,500

Lake Mohave 16,000 18,500 18,500 19,000 19,500 20,500 20,000 19,500 21,000 22,000

Little Colorado River Plateau1 20,500 20,500 20,000 21,000 21,000 24,000 24,000 22,000 24,500 27,000

Lower Gila 1,900 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,900 1,900 1,900 1,900 2,000

Lower San Pedro 2,500 2,400 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,600 2,600 2,400 2,400 2,500

McMullen Valley 450 450 450 500 500 500 500 500 500 500

Meadview <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Morenci 2,700 2,500 2,800 3,000 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,800 2,900 3,000

Paria <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Parker 2,700 2,700 2,800 3,100 3,100 3,200 3,200 3,200 3,200 3,300

Peach Springs <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Ranegras Plain <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 300 350

Sacramento Valley 1,300 1,500 1,500 1,600 1,700 1,700 1,600 1,800 1,900 1,800

Safford 2,500 2,400 3,500 4,200 2,700 2,700 2,800 2,800 2,800 3,000

Salt River 3,100 3,000 3,300 3,200 3,200 3,500 3,500 3,400 3,200 3,400

San Bernadino Valley <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

San Rafael <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

San Simon Wash 900 900 900 900 900 950 950 950 950 950

Shivwits Plateau <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Tiger Wash <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Tonto Creek 1,400 1,400 1,600 1,600 1,800 1,800 1,900 1,800 1,900 2,100

Upper Hassayampa 2,100 2,100 2,200 2,400 2,400 2,600 2,600 2,500 2,700 2,700

Upper San Pedro 14,500 15,000 15,500 16,500 16,500 16,500 17,500 17,500 17,500 18,000

Verde River 9,300 9,000 10,000 10,500 11,000 12,000 12,000 11,500 12,000 13,000

Virgin River <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Western Mexican Drainage <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Willcox 2,500 2,600 2,500 2,600 2,600 2,700 2,800 2,800 2,600 2,700

Yuma 7,200 7,800 8,300 8,600 8,700 10,500 10,500 10,000 11,000 11,500

1Withdrawal values include withdrawals within the Joseph City Irrigation Non-expansion Area.

Table 4. Estimated annual ground-water withdrawals for municipal use in ground-water basins outside of Active Management Areas, 

Arizona, 1991-2000.

[Values in acre-feet (rounded). INA, Irrigation Non-expansion Area; <, less than]

16 Water Withdrawals for Irrigation, Municipal, Mining, Thermoelectric-Power, and Drainage Uses in Arizona, 1991-2000
Figure 7. Estimated annual ground-water withdrawals for municipal use in ground-water basins 

outside of Active Management Areas, Arizona, 1991–2000.

����������������

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

���

���

���

���

�

��������������������������������������

���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ����

���������

�������������

���������

��������������

�������������

���������������

��������������

��������������

�������������

�������������

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

���

���

���

���

�

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

���

���

���

���

�

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

���

���

���

���

�

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

���

���

���

���

�

����������������������

���� ����

Water Withdrawals 17
����������������

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

���

�

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

���

�

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

���

�

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

���

�

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

���

�

��������������������������������������

���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ����

������������

���������������

������

�������

�����������

����������������

�������

������������������������

���� ����

����������

�����������������

�������

Figure 7. Continued.

18 Water Withdrawals for Irrigation, Municipal, Mining, Thermoelectric-Power, and Drainage Uses in Arizona, 1991-2000
Figure 7. Continued.

����������������

��������������������������������������

���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ����

���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ����

�������

�����������

���������������

�����������

����

���������������

�����������������������������

�����������

������

������

������

������

������

�����

�

������

������

������

������

������

�����

�

������

������

������

������

������

�����

�

������

������

������

������

������

�����

�

������

������

������

������

������

�����

�

�������������������������

����

����

����������

Water Withdrawals 19
Private Water Suppliers

Private water suppliers reported water deliveries rather 

than ground-water withdrawals to the Arizona Corporation 

Commission (ACC), which was the primary provider of 

delivery data for private water suppliers for 1991–2000. 

Some private water suppliers are not required to report their 

deliveries to the ACC; withdrawals by these suppliers are 

not included in this report. Ground-water withdrawals were 

estimated by adding 10 percent to the water deliveries to 

account for losses in the distribution systems. The losses in 

the distribution systems were based on the average of data 

for 1995 that were reported for Arizona in the report entitled 

“Estimated use of water in the United States” (water.usgs.gov/

watuse/). In some years, the data provided were incomplete 

because some suppliers did not report their deliveries to the 

ACC. Another problem was that data were sometimes reported 

to the ACC in incorrect units. In many cases, the suppliers 

reported their deliveries in gallons or other units instead of 

thousands of gallons, which was the requested format. 

Steps were taken to rectify the data from the ACC. 

Missing data were estimated by extrapolating available 

data from other years. To detect errors caused by the use of 

incorrect reporting units, the ratio of reported deliveries to 

the total number of customers served by the suppliers was 

compared to the reported deliveries and number of customers 

served for previous or subsequent years. In some instances, 

the reported deliveries were off by one or more orders of 

magnitude. In instances where the data were suspected to 

be erroneous, the delivery data were modified to agree with 

estimates obtained through this comparison procedure. 

Self-Supplied Domestic Users

The self-supplied domestic water users are all individuals 

who do not receive water from public or private water 

suppliers. Domestic wells are the principal source of water for 

most homes in rural areas of Arizona. Self-supplied domestic 

Self-supplied domestic well.

water use includes water for household purposes such as 

drinking, food preparation, washing clothes and dishes, 

bathing, flushing toilets, washing vehicles, and watering lawns 

and gardens. Ground-water withdrawals for self-supplied 

domestic uses for 1990, 1995, and 2000 were estimated to be 

about 1 percent of the total ground-water withdrawals reported 

in the USGS Circular report series entitled “Estimated use 

of water in the United States” (water.usgs.gov/watuse/). In 

some of the ADWR ground-water basins, however, water 

withdrawals by self-supplied domestic users could represent a 

substantial percentage of the municipal withdrawals.

Self-supplied domestic withdrawals are rarely measured 

or reported. Consequently, these withdrawals were estimated 

from the self-supplied domestic population and the percapita water use. The self-supplied domestic population was 

estimated on the basis of the 1990 Census of Population and 

Housing (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1992). 

To determine the self-supplied domestic population 

in each ADWR ground-water basin, the individual county 

population had to be disaggregated into separate ADWR 

ground-water basins. This was done using tables and maps 

from the U.S. Census (U.S. Department of Commerce, 1992). 

After disaggregating the county population into the ADWR 

ground-water basins, the population for each basin in a county 

was added together and the total was compared with the 

county population to verify the result. The population in each 

ground-water basin was then multiplied by the percentage 

of housing units in the basin that did not obtain water from 

public and (or) private water suppliers for 1990. The resulting 

number is the self-supplied domestic population in the basin. 

No information is available from the U.S. Census for the selfsupplied domestic population in Arizona since 1990. 

Self-supplied domestic withdrawals for each basin 

were estimated by multiplying the self-supplied domestic 

population in each county by the estimated per-capita 

water use from (1994) for the San Pedro River watershed 

(boundaries undefined). Ten Eyck estimated that a typical 

household of three people used 1.0 acre-foot of water per year 

for residential purposes. Because no information is available 

for the self-supplied domestic population after 1990 from the 

U.S. Census, the self-supplied domestic population totals and 

withdrawals were assumed to be constant for 1991–2000. 

The ADWR estimated and reported self-supplied domestic 

withdrawals in the Upper San Pedro Basin for 1990 and 2000 

(Linda Stitzer, Arizona Department of Water Resources, 

written commun., 2004). Self-supplied domestic withdrawals 

for the Upper San Pedro Basin for 1991 through 1999 were 

estimated by extrapolating the ADWR data from 1990 and 

2000. 

Mining

Water withdrawn for mining in Arizona is used for the 

extraction of naturally occurring materials and for dewatering, 

milling, dust control, washing of equipment, and other 

activities and preparations that are part of mining activities. 

20 Water Withdrawals for Irrigation, Municipal, Mining, Thermoelectric-Power, and Drainage Uses in Arizona, 1991-2000
Peabody Coal mines high-quality low-sulfur coal in the Little Colorado 

River Plateau Basin. Photograph courtesy of Peabody Coal.

Mines in Arizona are categorized as either metal mines or 

industrial-mineral mines (Phillips and others, 1994, 2000) 

in this report. Metal mines include copper, gold, silver, and 

molybdenum. Industrial minerals include sand and gravel, 

cement, coal, clay, diatomite, gypsum, and silica (Phillips and 

others, 2000).

Copper and coal mining rank first and second in 

economic importance in Arizona, respectively (Phillips 

and others, 2000). Arizona has continued to be the leading 

producer of copper in the Nation and accounted for about 

62 percent of the U.S. copper production in 1991 and 

about 65 percent in 2000 (Phillips and others, 1992, 2002). 

Metals such as gold, molybdenum, and silver commonly are 

recovered from ore that is primarily mined for copper. Mines 

in the Black Mesa and Kayenta areas produce high quality low 

sulfur coal in the Little Colorado River Plateau Basin (Phillips 

and others, 2000).

Ground-water withdrawal data for mining were collected 

or estimated for mines in ADWR ground-water basins outside 

of AMAs (table 5). Ground-water withdrawal data were 

obtained directly from each mining company. The companies 

provided the ground-water withdrawal data over the telephone, 

by fax, or by e-mail. Some of the mining companies contacted 

do not use water for their operations and are considered to 

be dry mining. Ground-water withdrawal data for one of the 

copper mining operations were not available after 1994. For 

that mining company, correlations between ground-water 

withdrawals and copper production for 1991–94 were used to 

estimate the withdrawals for 1995–2000. Copper production 

information was obtained from the Arizona Department of 

Mines and Minerals (Niles Niemuth, Arizona Department 

of Mines and Mineral Resources, written commun., 2001). 

Withdrawals can change from year to year as mining 

companies change their methods of extracting ores and as 

market prices fluctuate.

 Most sand and gravel and cement operations do not 

meter their ground-water withdrawals and lack gages on 

their wells. Ground-water withdrawal data were estimated 

for most of the sand and gravel operations and some of the 

mining operations that did not respond to inquiries about water 

withdrawals. The withdrawals were estimated on the basis 

of daily operating hours of the facilities and rated discharge 

capacity of the wells. Annual ground-water withdrawals were 

estimated by using the following formula:

Basin 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Big Sandy <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Bill Williams 16,000 13,500 17,000 19,000 19,000 20,000 22,000 19,000 20,500 22,000

Hualapai Valley <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Lake Havasu <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Lake Mohave <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Little Colorado River Plateau1 4,200 4,000 3,900 4,200 4,500 4,200 4,300 4,200 4,600 4,900

Lower San Pedro 30,000 31,500 29,500 32,000 31,000 32,500 30,500 28,500 23,000 16,000

Morenci 14,500 12,500 14,000 14,500 13,000 16,000 18,000 18,500 18,500 18,000

Peach Springs <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Sacramento Valley <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 300 350

Safford 700 750 600 600 600 700 450 500 400 450

Salt River 10,000 10,500 10,000 10,500 10,500 11,000 6,500 5,000 6,000 8,000

Upper San Pedro <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

Verde River 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,300 1,300 1,300 1,100 1,200 1,200 1,200

Willcox 300 300 300 300 300 300 <300 <300 450 <300

Yuma <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300 <300

1Withdrawal values include withdrawals within the Joseph City Irrigation Non-expansion Area.

Table 5. Estimated annual ground-water withdrawals for mining use in ground-water basins outside of Active Management Areas, Arizona, 1991-2000.

[Values in acre-feet (rounded). Data not available for other basins. <, less than]

Water Withdrawals 21
V = Q × D × H × M / 325,851, (3)

where

V is volume of water pumped, in acre-feet;

Q is pumping rate, in gallons per minute;

D is 365 days per year;

H is hours of operation per day;

M is 60 minutes per hour; and

325,851 is factor to convert gallons to acre-feet.

Ground-water withdrawals for mining were largest in 

the Lower San Pedro Basin (table 5 and fig. 8). Ground-water 

withdrawals for mining decreased substantially from 32,500 

acre-feet in 1996 to 16,000 acre-feet in 2000 (table 5). In 

the Salt River Basin, ground-water withdrawals for mining 

decreased substantially from 11,000 acre-feet in 1996 to 5,000 

acre-feet in 1998 (table 5). Annual increases or decreases 

in ground-water withdrawals for mining are mostly due to 

fluctuations in mineral production, which is driven by market 

prices. Variations in the amount of highway construction also 

can contribute to changes in water withdrawal for mining. 

��������������������������������������

���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ����

�������������

���������������

������������������

�������

����������

������� �����������

�����������������������������

������

������

������

������

�

������

������

������

������

�

������

������

������

������

�

������

������

������

������

�

���� ����

Figure 8. Estimated annual ground-water withdrawals for mining in ground-water basins outside of 

Active Management Areas, Arizona, 1991–2000.

22 Water Withdrawals for Irrigation, Municipal, Mining, Thermoelectric-Power, and Drainage Uses in Arizona, 1991-2000
Coronado Thermoelectric Powerplant near St. Johns, Arizona.

Photograph courtesy of Salt River Project.

Thermoelectric Power

Thermoelectric powerplants require water and fuel to 

generate electricity. Water is used in power generation to 

(1) process feed water for steam, (2) cool steam and thereby 

facilitate condensation and steam reuse, and (3) remove sulfur 

dioxide. Some water, however, may be used for cleaning 

and pollution control. The amount of water withdrawn 

by thermoelectric powerplants primarily is a function of 

powerplant size and the type of cooling system.

Ground-water withdrawal data for thermoelectric-power 

generation were collected from four plants outside of AMAs. 

Powerplants that reported withdrawals of ground water 

were the Apache plant in the Willcox Basin, and the Cholla, 

Coronado, and Springerville plants in the Little Colorado 

River Plateau Basin. All these plants use coal as a fuel for 

generating electricity. Water-withdrawal data were obtained 

directly from each plant. The plants use water primarily for 

creating high-pressure steam, which is directed against the 

blades of a turbine, thus creating mechanical energy (Steff 

Koeneman, Arizona Electric Power Cooperative, written 

commun., 2004). The amount of power generated each year, in 

gigawatts, also was obtained from each plant.

Year

Basin

Little Colorado 

River Plateau1 Willcox 

1991 27,500 6,600

1992 29,000 6,500

1993 29,500 5,000

1994 34,500 5,900

1995 27,000 5,700

1996 29,500 4,100

1997 32,000 4,600

1998 32,000 5,600

1999 34,000 5,700

2000 33,000 6,000

1Withdrawal values include withdrawals within the Joseph City Irrigation 

Non-expansion Area.

Table 6. Annual ground-water withdrawals for thermoelectric power 

in ground-water basins outside of Active Management Areas, Arizona, 

1991-2000.

[Values in acre-feet (rounded). Data not available for other basins]

Ground-water withdrawals and energy generated in the 

Little Colorado River Plateau Basin increased from 1991 to 

1994, decreased in 1995, and increased steadily from 1996 to 

2000 (table 6 and fig. 9). Ground-water withdrawals increased 

by 5,500 acre-feet, or 20 percent, and energy generated 

increased 5,000 gigawatts, or 42 percent, between 1991 

and 2000 (table 6 and fig. 9). In general, there is a positive 

correlation between ground-water withdrawals and power 

generated in the Little Colorado River Plateau Basin. 

Ground-water withdrawals for thermoelectric-power 

generation in the Willcox Basin decreased from 1991 to 1993, 

increased in 1994, decreased from 1994 to 1996, and increased 

steadily from 1997 to 2000 (table 6 and fig 10). There is a 

positive correlation between ground-water withdrawals and 

power generated in the Willcox Basin from 1996 to 2000; 

however, there is no correlation from 1991 to 1995.

The demand for electricity and, consequently, the amount 

of water withdrawn by powerplants are influenced by various 

economic conditions: income, population, weather, and the 

price of electricity. The data generally indicate an increasing 

trend in power production and ground-water withdrawals.

Water Withdrawals 23
Figure 9. Ground-water withdrawals and energy generated by thermoelectric powerplants in the Little Colorado River 

Plateau Basin, Arizona, 1991–2000.

���������������

���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ����

����

�����

�����

�����

�����

������

������

������

������

������

������ ���������� �� ���������

� �

�����

������

������

������

������

������

������

������

������������ ��������������� ���������

������������������������

����������������

������������������������

����������������

� �

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ����

����

��������

���� ������������ ��

���������

���

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

�����

������ ��������� �� ���������

Figure 10. Ground-water withdrawals and energy generated by the thermoelectric powerplant in the Willcox Basin, Arizona, 

1991–2000.

24 Water Withdrawals for Irrigation, Municipal, Mining, Thermoelectric-Power, and Drainage Uses in Arizona, 1991-2000
Year Basin

Lower Gila Yuma

1991 145,000 73,000

1992 116,000 51,000

1993 9,000 69,500

1994 50,000 53,000

1995 122,000 86,000

1996 120,000 83,000

1997 91,500 99,000

1998 98,500 107,000

1999 95,500 113,000

2000 110,000 107,000

Table 7. Annual ground-water withdrawals for drainage of agricultural 

lands in ground-water basins outside of Active Management Areas, 

Arizona, 1991–2000.

[Values in acre-feet (rounded)]

Ground water is withdrawn to dewater the root zone in some 

agricultural areas.

Drainage

Ground-water withdrawals for irrigation drainage 

reported here are those used to dewater the root zone in certain 

agricultural areas (table 7), and those from Minute No. 242 

(242 well field; table 8). Withdrawals from the 242 well field 

are used to provide water deliveries to Mexico as obligated by 

treaty (Russell Grimes, Bureau of Reclamation, oral commun., 

2004). Agricultural lands are drained primarily to remove 

excess water from the soil and to minimize crop stress caused 

by salt buildup in the soil profile (Luthin, 1978). Drainage 

also helps to promote better root growth, improve the quality 

of crops, and increase crop yield (Busman and Sands, 2002). 

Percolated irrigation water in some areas in Arizona has raised 

the ground-water level and subsequently led to waterlogging 

or salinity problems. Ground water is withdrawn for drainage 

in the Yuma and the Lower Gila Basins.

Drainage data for agricultural lands in the Lower Gila 

and Yuma Basins are published in the USGS annual water 

resources data report for Arizona (McCormack and others, 

2002). The amount of water withdrawn in the Lower Gila 

Basin ranged from a minimum of 9,000 acre-feet in 1993 to a 

maximum of 145,000 acre-feet in 1991 (table 7 and fig. 11). 

The amount of water withdrawn in 1993 was small because 

drainage wells were shut down for a time during and following 

flooding along the Gila River. In the Yuma Basin, withdrawals 

were smallest (51,000 acre-feet) in 1992 and largest (113,000 

acre-feet) in 1999 (table 7 and fig. 11).

 The purpose of the 242 well field is to deliver water to 

Mexico to comply with treaty obligations for assured supplies 

of Colorado River water (Bureau of Reclamation, 2004). 

Ground water is pumped at San Luis in the Yuma Basin near 

the International Border with Mexico and is conveyed to 

Mexico by means of a canal (lateral 242). Wells in the 242 

well field are about 600 feet deep and designed to pump an 

average of 7.5 cubic feet per second (Bureau of Reclamation, 

2004). There are 21 wells in the 242 well field.

Data for the 242 well field were obtained from the 

Bureau of Reclamation (Jerry Davis, Bureau of Reclamation, 

written commun., 2003) and the International Boundary and 

Water Commission. Annual ground-water withdrawals for the 

242 well field in the Yuma Basin are presented in table 8 and 

shown in figure 12. Ground-water withdrawals from the 242 

well field were largest in 1991 (31,000 acre-feet) and smallest 

in 1997 (450 acre-feet). Changes in annual withdrawals from 

the 242 well field were due to increases or decreases in water 

delivery from U.S. water districts to Mexico. In some years the 

water districts did not deliver all their available Colorado River 

allocations in the Yuma area for irrigation because they were 

not needed, and the excess water was delivered to Mexico 

(Jerry Davis, Bureau of Reclamation, oral commun., 2004). In 

these years, the pumpage from the 242 well field was reduced 

and less water from the well field was delivered to Mexico.

Year Yuma Basin

1991 31,000

1992 23,500

1993 6,900

1994 19,000

1995 12,500

1996 6,200

1997 450

1998 5,200

1999 4,000

2000 4,300

Table 8. Annual ground-water withdrawals for the 242 well field near 

Yuma, Arizona, 1991-2000.

[Values in acre-feet (rounded)]

Water Withdrawals 25
Figure 11. Annual ground-water withdrawals for drainage of agricultural lands in the Lower Gila and Yuma Basins, 1991–2000.

���������������

�

������

������

������

������

�������

�������

�������

�������

����������������������������������������������

����

���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ����

����������

����

Figure 12. Annual ground-water withdrawals for the 242 well field in the Yuma Basin, Arizona, 1991–2000.

����

���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ���� ����

�����

�

������

������

������

������

������

������

�����

������� ������������ ��

���������

26 Water Withdrawals for Irrigation, Municipal, Mining, Thermoelectric-Power, and Drainage Uses in Arizona, 1991-2000
Summary

Access to adequate water supplies is a primary factor 

in economic development in Arizona. Because of the mostly 

semiarid to arid climate in the State, water demand is met by 

pumping ground water from aquifers or by conveying surface 

water through a system of reservoirs and canals. Waterwithdrawal data provide important information on how water 

demand affects the State’s water resources. Information on 

water withdrawals also can help planners and managers assess 

the effectiveness of water-management policies, regulations, 

and conservation activities.

Ground-water withdrawal data were collected, 

compiled, and estimated for irrigation, municipal, mining, 

thermoelectric-power, and drainage use in Arizona Department 

of Water Resources ground-water basins outside Active 

Management Areas for 1991-2000. Data for metered surfacewater diversions also were compiled. Both surface-water and 

ground-water withdrawals are delivered to agricultural fields 

in the Little Colorado River Plateau, Lower San Pedro, Salt 

River, Tonto Creek, Upper San Pedro, Verde River, and Virgin 

River Basins; however, the surface-water deliveries are not 

measured and are not presented in this report. This report 

includes only annual metered surface-water withdrawals for 

irrigation. 

Water withdrawal in Arizona is dominated primarily 

by agriculture use and secondarily by municipal use for 

rapidly growing urban populations. Because of low rainfall, 

agriculture in Arizona depends heavily on the State’s water 

resources. Several methods were used to compile or estimate 

water withdrawals and irrigated acreage for 1991–2000. A 

variety of crops are grown in Arizona, and different crops use 

different amounts of water over the course of the growing 

season. For 1991–2000, consumptive water requirements were 

estimated for the most common crops: alfalfa and other hay, 

barley, citrus and noncitrus orchards, corn, cotton, vegetables, 

and wheat. Total withdrawals were calculated as the county 

irrigation efficiency and consumptive water requirement 

within the study area.

The largest ground-water withdrawals for irrigation were 

in the Gila Bend Basin and ranged from 203,000 acre-feet in 

1998 to 294,000 acre-feet in 2000. The largest surface-water 

withdrawals for irrigation were in the Lower Gila, Parker, 

and Yuma Basins where surface water is available from the 

Colorado River. In some of the basins, the amount of water 

used for irrigation varied greatly from year to year. This was 

due to differences in consumptive water requirement rates for 

different crops and differences in irrigated acreage.

Withdrawals categorized as municipal in this report 

include water supplied by public and private-water suppliers, 

and self-supplied domestic users. Municipal ground-water 

withdrawals for most of the basins steadily increased from 

1991 to 2000, following the trend of increasing population. 

The largest withdrawals were in the Little Colorado River 

Plateau Basin where they increased from 20,500 acre-feet in 

1991 to 27,000 acre-feet in 2000. Population growth is the 

primary cause for the increase in municipal ground-water 

withdrawals during 1991–2000.

In most years, the largest ground-water withdrawals for 

mining were in the Lower San Pedro Basin. Ground-water 

withdrawals for mining decreased substantially from 32,500 

acre-feet in 1996 to 16,000 acre-feet in 2000. In the Salt 

River Basin, ground-water withdrawals for mining decreased 

substantially from 11,000 acre-feet in 1996 to 5,000 acrefeet in 1998. Annual increases or decreases in ground-water 

withdrawals for mining primarily are due to fluctuations in 

mineral production, which is driven by market prices.

Ground-water withdrawals by thermoelectric powerplants 

increased by 5,500 acre-feet, or 20 percent, between 1991 and 

2000. There is a positive correlation between ground-water 

withdrawals for thermoelectric power generation and power 

generated in the Willcox Basin from 1996 to 2000; however, 

there was no correlation from 1991 to 1995. The demand for 

electricity is influenced by various factors, including personal 

income, population, weather, and the price of electricity.

Data on ground-water withdrawals for irrigation 

drainage represent withdrawals for dewatering the root zone 

in agricultural areas and withdrawals from the 242 well field, 

which provides water deliveries to Mexico as obligated by 

treaty. Ground-water withdrawals for drainage of agricultural 

lands and from the 242 well field varied from year to year. 

References Cited

Anning, D.W., and Duet, N.R., 1994, Summary of groundwater conditions in Arizona, 1987–90: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 94-476, 2 sheets.

Arizona Department of Water Resources, 1994, Arizona Water 

Resources Assessment, Volume I, Inventory and Analysis, 

August 1994: Arizona Department of Water Resources, 

253 p.

Bureau of Reclamation, 1992, Plan of study and methods 

manual for Colorado River system consumptive uses and 

losses report 1985–1990: Bureau of Reclamation, Appendix 

A, 23 p.

Bureau of Reclamation, 2004, CRB – Salinity control project 

protective and regulatory pumping unit, accessed June 10, 

2004 at http://www.usbr.gov/dataweb/html/crbscpprpu.html.

Busman, L., and Sands, G., 2002, What is agricultural 

drainage, agricultural drainage issues and answers: 

University of Minnesota Extension Service, accessed 

June 2004, at http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/

cropsystems/dc7740.html

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

S.L., Maupin, M.A., 2004, Estimated use of water in the 

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

1268, 46 p, accessed August 11, 2004, at URL: http://water.

usgs.gov/pubs/circ/2004/circ1268.

References Cited 27
Luthin, J.N., 1978, Drainage Engineering: Malabar, Florida, 

Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company, 281 p.

MacKichan, K.A., 1951, Estimated use of water in the United 

States, 1950: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 115, 13 p.

MacKichan, K.A., 1957, Estimated use of water in the United 

States, 1955: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 398, 18 p.

MacKichan, K.A., and Kammerer, J.C., 1961, Estimated use 

of water in the United States, 1960: U.S. Geological Survey 

Circular 456, 26 p.

McCormack, H.F., Fisk, G.G., Duet, N.R., Evans, D.W., and 

Castillo, N.K., 2002, Water resources data, Arizona, water 

year 2001: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Data Report 

AZ–01–1, 399 p.

Murray, C.R., 1968, Estimated use of water in the United 

States, 1965: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 556, 53 p.

Murray, C.R., and Reeves, E.B., 1972, Estimated use of water 

in the United States, 1970: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 

676, 37 p.

Murray, C.R., and Reeves, E.B., 1977, Estimated use of water 

in the United States, 1975: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 

765, 39 p.

Phillips, K.A., Niemuth, N.J., and Bain, D.R., 1992, Active 

mines in Arizona, 1993: Department of Mines and Mineral 

Resources Directory 40, 25 p.

Phillips, K.A., Niemuth, N.J., and Bain, D.R., 1994, Active 

mines in Arizona, 1995: Department of Mines and Mineral 

Resources Directory 43, 25 p.

Phillips, K.A., Niemuth, N.J., and Bain, D.R., 2000, Active 

mines in Arizona, 2000: Department of Mines and Mineral 

Resources Directory 48, 31 p.

Phillips, K.A., Niemuth, N.J., and Bain, D.R., 2002, Active 

mines in Arizona, 2001–2002: Department of Mines and 

Mineral Resources Directory 49, 34 p.

Solley, W.B., Chase, E.B., and Mann, W.B., IV, 1983, 

Estimated use of water in the United States, 1980: U.S. 

Geological Survey Circular 1001, 56 p.

Solley, W.B., Merk, C.F., and Pierce, R.R., 1988, Estimated 

use of water in the United States, 1985: U.S. Geological 

Survey Circular 1004, 82 p.

Solley, W.B., Pierce, R.R., and Perlman, H.A., 1993, 

Estimated use of water in the United States, 1990: U.S. 

Geological Survey Circular 1081, 76 p.

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

Estimated use of water in the United States, 1995: U.S. 

Geological Survey Circular 1200, 71 p.

Ten Eyck, G.S., 1994, Identification and qualification of 

domestic, stockwatering and stockpond, water right 

entitlements, San Pedro River Watershed: Leonard Rice 

Consulting Water Engineers, Inc., 15 p.

U.S. Census Bureau, 2000, Census Bureau Geography 2000, 

accessed March 10, 2004, at http://www.census.gov.

U.S. Census Bureau, 2004, Intercensal population 

estimates of Arizona Counties 1970–2003, accessed 

June 7, 2004, at http://www.workforce.az.gov/admin/

uploadedPublications/524_betty70-97-2.pdf.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1967 (rev. 1970), Irrigation 

water requirements: U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 

Engineering Division, Technical Release no. 21, 88 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural 

Statistics Service, 1999, 1997 Census of Agriculture, 

volume 1, part 51, chapter 2, United States Summary and 

State Data, State-Level Data, accessed July 13, 2004, at 

http://www.nass.usda.gov/census/census97/volume1/us-51/

toc297.htm.

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1992, 1990, Census of 

population and housing, summary social, economic, and 

housing characteristics: 1990 CPH-5-4, 78 p. (A-G)

28 Water Withdrawals for Irrigation, Municipal, Mining, Thermoelectric-Power, and Drainage Uses in Arizona, 1991-2000
Manuscript approved for publication, December 9, 2004

Prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey Publishing staff,

Arizona Water Science Center, Tucson, Arizona 

Steve A. Longsworth

Naomi K. Castillo

Washington Water Science Center, Tacoma, Washington

Debra Grillo

Bill Gibbs 

Bobbie Jo Richey

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

Director, Arizona Water Science Center

U.S. Geological Survey

520 N. Park Avenue – Suite 221 

Tucson, Arizona 85719

http://az.water.usgs.gov/
������������� �������

�������������������������

���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������