U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Open-File Report 2006–1358

Knowledge and Understanding of the Hydrogeology of 

the Salt Basin in South-central New Mexico and Future 

Study Needs

By G.F. Huff and D.A. Chace

Sandia

National

Laboratories

A Department of Energy

National Laboratory
Knowledge and Understanding of the 

Hydrogeology of the Salt Basin in 

South-central New Mexico and Future 

Study Needs 

By G.F. Huff and D.A. Chace

Open-File Report 2006–1358

U.S. Department of the Interior

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

DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Mark D. Myers, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia 2006

For product and ordering information:

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

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth,

its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment:

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

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

Suggested citation:

Huff, G.F., and Chace, D.A., 2006, Knowledge and understanding of the hydrogeology of the Salt Basin in south-central 

New Mexico and future study needs: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2006-1358, 17 p. 

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 material contained within this report.

ii
Contents

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

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

 Purpose and Scope ...................................................................................................................................3

Hydrogeologic Overview ..............................................................................................................................4

 Geology........................................................................................................................................................4

 Major Aquifers............................................................................................................................................5

 Hydraulic Properties..................................................................................................................................6

 Ground-Water Movement ........................................................................................................................7

 Recharge.....................................................................................................................................................9

 Discharge..................................................................................................................................................10

 Conceptual Flow Model..........................................................................................................................12

 Water Quality............................................................................................................................................12

Future Study Needs.....................................................................................................................................13

Summary........................................................................................................................................................14

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................15

Figures

1. Location of Salt Basin ............................................................................................................................. 1

2a. Ground-water level monitoring-well network in the Salt Basin............................................................ 2

2b. Water-quality monitoring-well network in the Salt Basin...................................................................... 3

2c. Continuous remote electronic monitoring network in the Salt Basin.................................................. 4

3. Generalized section across the Salt Basin ........................................................................................... 5

4. Contours of water levels in the carbonate aquifer in the Salt Basin .................................................. 8

5. Water levels in wells 48-07-505 and 48-07-501 near Dell City, Texas ..................................................... 9

6. Selected watershed boundaries, streams, and physiographic features in the New Mexico part 

of the Salt Basin ......................................................................................................................... 10

7. Mean daily discharge in the Sacramento River measured at stream gaging station 08492900 

near Sunspot, New Mexico ....................................................................................................... 11

8. Correlation of water-levels changes to precipitation events in well ................................................... 11

9. Ground-water level changes in response to withdrawal near Dell City, Texas as a function of 

distance from the city ................................................................................................................ 12

iii
Conversion Factors

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter (mm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Area

acre 4,047 square meter (m2)

acre 0.4047 hectare (ha)

acre 0.4047 square hectometer (hm2) 

acre 0.004047 square kilometer (km2)

square mile (mi2) 259.0 hectare (ha)

square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2) 

Volume

gallon (gal) 3.785 liter (L) 

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

acre-foot (acre-ft) 0.001233 cubic hectometer (hm3) 

Flow rate

cubic foot per second (ft3/s) 0.02832 cubic meter per second (m3/s)

Transmissivity

foot squared per day (ft2/d) 0.09290 meter squared per day (m2

/d) 

iv
Abstract 

The Salt Basin covers about 2,400 square miles of 

south-central New Mexico and extends across the State 

line into Texas. As much as 57 million acre-feet of ground 

water may be stored within the New Mexico part of the 

Salt Basin of which 15 million acre-feet are potentially 

potable and recoverable. Recent work suggests that the 

volume of ground water in storage within the New Mexico 

portion of the Salt Basin may be substantially greater than 

57 million acre-feet. 

In this report, aquifers contained in the San 

Andres, Bone Spring, and Victorio Peak Limestones and 

in the Yeso, Hueco, and Abo Formations are collectively 

referred to as the “carbonate aquifer.” Porosity and 

permeability of the major aquifer are primarily determined 

by the density and interconnectedness of fractures and 

karstic solution channels. The spatial variability of these 

fractures and karstic features leads to a large spatial 

variability in hydraulic properties in the carbonate aquifer. 

Ground water generally moves southward away from 

recharge areas along the northern border of the Salt Basin 

and generally moves eastward to southeastward away 

from areas of distributed recharge on the Otero Mesa and 

the Diablo Plateau. Ground water originating from these 

recharge areas generally moves toward the central valley. 

Present day discharge is mostly through ground-water 

withdrawal for agricultural irrigation. A zone of relatively 

low hydraulic gradient, corresponding to the location of 

the Otero Break, extends from near the Sacramento River 

watershed southward toward Dell City, Texas. Ground 

Knowledge and 

Understanding of the 

Hydrogeology of the Salt 

Basin in South-central 

New Mexico and Future 

Study Needs

By G. F. Huff, U.S. Geological Survey and 

D. A. Chace, Sandia National Laboratories

water in the carbonate aquifer generally is very hard and has 

dissolved-solids concentrations ranging from 500 to 6,500 

milligrams per liter. 

Substantial variability exists in current estimates of (1) 

ground-water recharge, (2) natural ground-water discharge, 

(3) the volume of ground water in storage, (4) the volume 

of recoverable ground water, (5) the conceptual model of 

ground-water flow, (6) the distribution of ground-water 

quality, and (7) the distribution of hydraulic characteristics. 

Future study could reduce uncertainty in these estimates and 

allow for better management of ground-water resources in 

the Salt Basin.

Introduction

The Salt Basin (fig. 1) covers about 2,400 square 

miles of New Mexico and extends across the State line into 

Texas. The New Mexico part of the basin is bounded by the 

Peñasco Basin and Sacramento Mountains on the north, by 

the Guadalupe Mountains on the east, and by the Tularosa 

Basin on the west (Pecos Valley Water Users Organization, 

2001; Livingston Associates and John Shomaker and 

Associates, 2002).

3ACRAMENTO

-OUNTAINS

#ROW

&LATS

(UECO

-OUNTAINS

$IABLO

0LATEAU

/TERO

-ESA

"AYLOR

-OUNTAINS

$ELAWARE

-OUNTAINS

'UADALUPE

-OUNTAINS

NI S A " A S OR AL U 4

K

A ER "

OR ET /

0 E ® A S C O

              " A S I N

Y EL L A 6 L L E $

! !

/TERO#OUNTY

$O®A!NA#OUNTY

%L0ASO

#OUNTY

#HAVES#OUNTY

%DDY#OUNTY

(UDSPETH#OUNTY

#ULBERSON#OUNTY

3IERRA

#OUNTY

.%7-%8)#/

4%8!3

3%4!43 $% )4 .5

/ )# 8% -

$ELL#ITY

"OUNDARYOF

3ALT"ASIN

"OUNDARYOF 3ALT"ASIN

"ASEFROM53'EOLOGICAL3URVEYDIGITALDATA

5NIVERSAL4RANSVERSE-ERCATORPROJECTION

:ONE

(ORIZONTALCOORDINATEINFORMATIONISREFERENCEDTOTHE

.ORTH!MERICAN$ATUMOF.!$	

    +),/-%4%23

    -),%3

 







! !

)NDEXMAP

-APAREA

&IGURE,OCATIONOFTHE3ALT"ASINMODIFIEDFROM!SHWORTHAND(UTCHISON	

7ATER
LEVELCONTOURINMETERSABOVESEALEVEL

$ASHEDWHEREAPPROXIMATELYLOCATED

%80,!.!4)/.

Figure 1. Location of Salt Basin (modified from Ashworth, 1995, 

and Hutchison, 2006).
Figure 2a. Ground-water level monitoring-well network in the Salt Basin maintained by Sandia National Laboratories.

3ALT"ASIN

ADMINISTRATIVE

BOUNDARY

%80,!.!4)/.

'ROUND
WATERLEVEL

MONITORING
WELL

LOCATION

&IGUREA'ROUND
WATERLEVELMONITORING
WELLNETWORKINTHE3ALT"ASIN

MAINTAINEDBY3ANDIA.ATIONAL,ABORATORIES

.%7-%8)#/

4%8!3

WELLSMEASURED

WELLSMEASURED

WELLSMEASURED

WELLSMEASURED

WELLSMEASURED

WELLSMEASURED

WELLSMEASURED

WELLS

MEASURED

    +),/-%4%23

    -),%3

-APCREATEDFROM.ATIONAL'EOGRAPHIC4/0/§PROGRAM

!LAMOGORDO

$ELL#ITY

  





% $ $ 9

# ( ! 6 % 3

Published estimates indicated that as much as 30 

million acre-feet of ground water with dissolved-solids 

concentrations less than 1,000 milligrams per liter (mg/L) 

and as much as 25.5 million acre-feet of ground water with 

dissolved-solids concentrations between 1,000 and 3,000 mg/L 

may be in storage in the New Mexico part of the Salt Basin, 

approximately half of which may be recoverable (Livingston 

Associates and John Shomaker and Associates, 2002). These 

estimates indicated that as much as 57 million acre-feet of 

ground water may be stored within the New Mexico part 

of the Salt Basin. As much as 30 million acre-feet of this 

ground water may be recoverable and as much as 15 million 

acre-feet may be both recoverable and potable. These storage 

estimates are based on the assumptions that (1) 750 feet of 

saturated thickness exists throughout the entire Salt Basin, (2) 

the average porosity of the water-bearing material is 5 percent, 

(3) the water-bearing material can liberate one-half of the total 

volume of water in storage to a well, and (4) the water-bearing 

units act as a confined aquifer with a storage coefficient of 

0.05. 

 Hydrogeological information associated with the 

New Mexico part of the Salt Basin has been increased by 

a currently ongoing, but unpublished, hydrogeological 

investigation led by Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) as 

part of the New Mexico Small Business Assistance Program 

on behalf of the Last Chance Water Company. Since the 

spring of 2002, SNL has conducted hydraulic testing in 5 

wells, established a water-level monitoring network including 

60 wells (fig. 2a), collected water-quality samples from 

59 wells (fig. 2b), and operated a continuous water-level 

   Knowledge and Understanding of the Hydrogeology of the Salt Basin in South-central New Mexico
Figure 2b. Water-quality monitoring-well network in the Salt Basin maintained by Sandia National Laboratories.

!LAMOGORDO

3ALT"ASIN

ADMINISTRATIVE

BOUNDARY

%80,!.!4)/.

7ATER
QUALITY

MONITORING
WELL

LOCATION

 

.%7-%8)#/

4%8!3







&IGUREB7ATER
QUALITYMONITORING
WELLNETWORKINTHE3ALT"ASIN

MAINTAINEDBY3ANDIA.ATIONAL,ABORATORIES

WELLSSAMPLED

WELLSSAMPLED

    +),/-%4%23

    -),%3

-APCREATEDFROM.ATIONAL'EOGRAPHIC4/0/§PROGRAM

$ELL#ITY

% $ $ 9

# ( ! 6 % 3

monitoring network of 8 wells (fig. 2c). The U.S. Geological 

Survey (USGS), in cooperation with New Mexico Interstate 

Stream Commission and in collaboration with Sandia National 

Laboratories, is proposing a strategy that may reduce the 

uncertainty in assumptions currently made with respect to the 

hydrogeology of the Salt Basin to help better describe and 

quantify the water resources of the basin. For the purpose of 

this report, potable water is defined as having a dissolvedsolids concentration of less than 1,000 mg/L.

Purpose and Scope

This report provides a synopsis of the current state of 

knowledge and understanding of the hydrogeology of the Salt 

Basin and offers possible areas of future study. Substantial 

variability exists in current estimates of (1) ground-water 

recharge, (2) natural ground-water discharge, (3) the volume 

of ground water in storage, (4) the volume of recoverable 

ground water, (5) the conceptual model of ground-water 

flow, (6) the distribution of ground-water quality, and (7) the 

distribution of hydraulic characteristics. Uncertainty in these 

Introduction 
estimates leads to uncertainty in estimates of hydrogeologic 

characteristics. This report proposes a strategy that may 

reduce the uncertainty in assumptions currently made with 

respect to the hydrogeology of the Salt Basin allowing for 

better water-resources management. 

Hydrogeologic Overview

The Salt Basin contains three distinct physiographic 

provinces that, from west to east, include a gently eastwarddipping elevated plateau known as Otero Mesa in New 

Mexico and the Diablo Plateau in Texas, a central valley 

known as Crow Flats in New Mexico and as the Dell Valley 

in Texas, and a steep westward-facing escarpment that grades 

into the Guadalupe and Delaware Mountains (fig. 1). A 

generalized east-west cross section through the basin near the 

New Mexico-Texas State line (fig. 3) shows a downfaulted 

graben underlying the central valley (Ashworth, 1995). The 

graben fill consists of as much as 750 feet of alluvial deposits 

overlain by evaporite deposits consisting primarily of gypsum 

(Veldhuis and Keller, 1980).

Geology

Rocks that compose the plateaus and underlie the 

alluvial deposits in the Salt Basin are primarily carbonate and 

mixed carbonate/evaporite units of Permian age that represent 

Figure 2c. Continuous remote electronic monitoring network in the Salt Basin maintained by Sandia Laboratories.

3ALT"ASIN

ADMINISTRATIVE

BOUNDARY

%80,!.!4)/.

'ROUND
WATERLEVEL

MONITORING
WELL

LOCATION

2AINGAGE

&IGUREC#ONTINUOUSREMOTEELECTRONICMONITORINGNETWORKINTHE3ALT"ASIN

MAINTAINEDBY3ANDIA.ATIONAL,ABORATORIES

.%7-%8)#/

4%8!3

    +),/-%4%23

    -),%3

-APCREATEDFROM.ATIONAL'EOGRAPHIC4/0/§PROGRAM

7ATER
LEVELRESPONSE

SHOWNINFIGURE

MILESNORTHOF

$ELL#ITY4EXAS

MILESNORTH
NORTHEAST

OF$ELL#ITY4EXAS

MILESNORTH
NORTHWEST

OF$ELL#ITY4EXAS

MILESNORTHOF

$ELL#ITY4EXAS

!LAMOGORDO

$ELL#ITY

  





% $ $ 9

# ( ! 6 % 3

 Knowledge and Understanding of the Hydrogeology of the Salt Basin in South-central New Mexico
Figure 3. Generalized 

section across the 

Salt Basin (modified 

from Ashworth, 1995). 

Section location is 

shown in figure 1.

Victorio Peak Limestone

Victorio Peak Limestone

Bone Spring Limestone Bone Spring Limestone

Salt Basin Graben

Goat Seep

Limestone

Capitan Reef

Limestone

Alluvium Alluvium

Salt Flats

Igneous

intrusive

body

Diablo Plateau

Guadalupe Mountains

A A’

NOT TO SCALE

Figure 3. Generalized section across the Salt Basin (modified from Ashworth, 1995). Section location is shown in figure 1.

shelf-margin to basinal marine depositional environments. 

The units of Permian age include the Wolfcampian Stage 

Hueco and Abo Formations, Leonardian Stage Bone Spring 

and Victorio Peak Limestones and the Yeso Formation and 

the Guadalupian Stage San Andres Limestone. The Glorieta 

Sandstone of Guadalupian Stage is present locally but not 

regionally. The Cox Sandstone of Cretaceous age and 

volcanic rocks of Tertiary age are also present within the basin 

(Bjorklund, 1957; King and Harder, 1985; Hibbs and others, 

1997; Angle, 2001; Ashworth, 1995).

Correlations between units of Permian age within the 

Salt Basin, and as exposed in the Sacramento Mountains, 

are uncertain. Kerans and others (1994) reported the upper 

part of the Victorio Peak Limestone to be equivalent to the 

lower part of the San Andres Limestone. Mayer (1995) 

reported the subsurface transition between the Victorio Peak 

and San Andres Limestones to be poorly defined. Similarly, 

Pray (1961) reported the transition between the San Andres 

Limestone and the underlying carbonate lithology of the Yeso 

Formation, as exposed in the Sacramento Mountains, to be 

poorly defined. Hibbs and others (1997) reported the presence 

of recognizable San Andres, Victorio Peak, and Bone Spring 

units in the Otero Mesa. 

A prominent zone of fracturing, known as the Otero 

Break, exists in geologic units of Permian age in the Otero 

Mesa and Diablo Plateau. The Otero Break extends from 

north of Dell City, Texas, northwest into the Sacramento 

Mountains (Mayer, 1995). The Otero Break is likely the result 

of reactivation of a Paleozoic tectonic feature (Black, 1976). 

Karst features including sinkholes and solution channels are 

present in carbonate units in the New Mexico (Bjorklund, 

1957) and Texas (Ashworth, 1995) parts of the Salt Basin. 

Detailed discussions of additional structural elements of the 

basin were presented in Goetz (1977, 1985).

Major Aquifers

Major aquifers within the Salt Basin are described 

in the literature as being contained in carbonate-containing 

formations of Permian age. The number of geologic units 

described as containing major aquifers within the Salt Basin 

reflects the previously described uncertainties in stratigraphic 

correlation. In the New Mexico part of the basin, geologic 

units described as containing major aquifers include the 

San Andres Limestone and the Yeso Formation (Livingston 

Associates and John Shomaker and Associates, 2002), the 

Bone Spring in the Crow Flats area (Bjorklund, 1957) and 

the Victorio Peak and Bone Spring Limestones in Otero 

Mesa (Hibbs and others, 1997). In the Texas part of the 

basin, geologic units described as containing major aquifers 

include the Victorio Peak and Bone Spring Limestones in 

Diablo Plateau (Gates and others, 1980; Boyd and Kreitler, 

1986; Mayer, 1995; Ashworth, 1995; Angle, 2001) and the 

Capitan Reef and Goat Seep Limestones on the eastern margin 

of the basin (Gates and others, 1980; Boyd and Kreitler, 

1986; Angle, 2001). Minimum thicknesses for the Victorio 

Peak and Bone Spring aquifers in the Texas part of the basin 

Hydrogeologic Overview 
Guadalupe Peak

Hydraulic Properties

Hydraulic properties of the major aquifers are highly 

variable on a small spatial scale to the extent that yields 

from wells separated by 100 feet may differ by more 

than an order of magnitude (Scalapino, 1950). 

Kreitler and others (1990) reported no measurable 

drawdown in several pumping tests conducted 

on the Diablo Plateau for periods of 48 hours, 

or longer, using discharge rates of 20 gallons 

per minute or less. George and others (2005) 

referenced aquifer tests conducted on the Diablo 

Plateau that yielded results similar to those of 

Kreitler and others (1990). Peckham (1963) 

reported specific-capacity values ranging from 

5 to 64 gallons per minute per foot for wells 

in the Bone Spring-Victorio Peak aquifer near 

Dell City, Texas. These types of results have 

been generally confirmed during aquifer testing 

conducted by SNL in the south-central portion of 

the New Mexico Salt Basin (Chace and Roberts, 

2004). Hydraulic testing conducted by SNL yielded 

specific-capacity values more than an order of magnitude 

higher than those reported in Peckham (1963) for wells 

completed in the San Andres Limestone in the south-central 

portion of the New Mexico Salt Basin. Mullican and Mace 

(2001) estimated transmissivity values of 1,200 to 15,000 feet 

squared per day on the Diablo Plateau based on published 

specific-capacity data. Hutchison (2006) tabulated literature 

values of specific capacity between 7 and 1,167 gallons per 

minute per foot (Scalapino, 1950; Bjorklund, 1957; White and 

others, 1980) and corresponding estimates of transmissivity 

between 1,527 and 279,517 feet squared per day (Gates and 

others, 1980; Mace, 2001). It is unclear in the tabulation of 

Hutchison (2006) which wells are screened in the carbonate 

aquifers, the overlying alluvial deposits, or both. Traditional 

analysis of aquifer tests can yield estimates of transmissivity 

that are substantially smaller than regional values in aquifers 

that contain fractures or solution channels (Huntoon, 1995). 

Hydraulic testing and analysis conducted by SNL using the 

n-Dimensional Statistical Inverse Hydraulic Test Simulator 

(nSIGHTS) (Pickens and others, 1987; Roberts, 2002) has 

yielded aquifer transmissivity estimates approximately an 

order of magnitude higher than those tabulated by Hutchison 

(2006) and specific-capacity values approximately 50-percent 

higher than those tabulated by Hutchison (2006) for the 

San Andres Limestone in the south-central portion of the 

New Mexico Salt Basin (Chace and Roberts, 2004). These 

estimates are approximately two orders of magnitude higher 

than those representing good aquifers for ground-water 

are 800 and 500 feet, respectively (Ashworth, 1995). The 

average thickness of major aquifers in the New Mexico part 

of the Salt Basin is estimated to be 750 feet (Livingston 

Associates and John Shomaker and Associates, 2002). A 

more consistent stratigraphic model of the New Mexico part 

of the area, as described in King and Harder (1985), proposes 

the stratigraphic model of San Andres, Yeso, Hueco, and 

Abo Formations comprising carbonates of Permian age (from 

young to old) in the New Mexico part of the Salt Basin. 

King and Harder (1985) use this model with consistency 

for equivalent system(s) in the Texas part of the Salt Basin 

including the Bone Spring and Victorio Peak Limestones. The 

Hueco and Abo Formations in the New Mexico part of the Salt 

Basin have received little attention as potential aquifers. The 

Hueco and Abo Formations, however, are exposed at ground 

surface in the southwest corner of the New Mexico part of 

the Salt Basin where they are the source of water to several 

wells. King and Harder (1985) reported frequent occurrences 

of ground water encountered during drilling in the Hueco and 

Abo Formations on the Otero Mesa; therefore, the Hueco and 

Abo Formations could contain substantial water resources and 

be an aquifer in the New Mexico part of the Salt Basin.

 Knowledge andUnderstanding of the Hydrogeology of the Salt Basin in South-central New Mexico
development (Freeze and Cherry, 1979). Transmissivity 

estimates using nSIGHTS reflect the water-transmitting 

properties of fractures and solution channels. Estimates using 

nSIGHTS, therefore, are typically larger than those obtained 

using traditional aquifer-test analysis methods that provide 

results in terms of bulk tranmissivity of the aquifer matrix. 

Hydraulic-characteristic estimates associated with the Yeso, 

Hueco, and Abo Formations are currently not available for the 

New Mexico part of the Salt Basin.

Ground-Water Movement

Apparent directions of regional ground-water movement 

discussed in this section are based on ground-water-level 

contours drawn by Mayer (1995) (fig. 4). Ground water 

generally moves away from recharge areas along the northern 

border of the Salt Basin. Recharge originating in the 

Sacramento River watershed generally moves southeastward. 

Recharge originating from the Otero Mesa and the Diablo 

Plateau generally moves eastward to southeastward. Ground 

water originating from these recharge areas generally moves 

toward the central valley. An area of small hydraulic gradient, 

relative to other parts of the basin, extends from near the 

Sacramento River watershed southward toward Dell City, 

Texas. This zone of relatively low hydraulic gradient was 

first observed by Bjorklund (1957, p. 12) who ascribed the 

gradient to “unusually high permeability of the water-bearing 

materials, especially the Bone Spring Limestone with its 

many solution channels.” The continuation of this zone of 

relatively low hydraulic gradient was observed in the Texas 

part of the basin by Kreitler and others (1987). Ashworth 

(1995, p. 15) observed that local ground-water movement was 

controlled by “the orientation and concentration of solution 

cavities developed along prominent fractures and bedding 

planes.” Mayer (1995) observed a correspondence between 

this zone of relatively low hydraulic gradient and a zone of 

fracture-controlled transmissivity corresponding with the 

location of the Otero Break. The above observations suggest 

that fracturing, along with subsequent development of solution 

channels, in the Otero Break represents a zone of anisotropy 

in the major aquifers that influences the direction of groundwater movement.

Bjorklund (1957, p. 12) noted that “water levels in 

the Bone Spring fluctuate largely as a unit.” Water levels 

measured in well 48-07-505 (latitude 31o55’37” longitude 

105o11’52”) and in well 48-07-501 (latitude 31o55’36” 

longitude 105o11’49”) show very similar trends between about 

1948 and 1972 (fig. 5). Well 48-07-505 and well 48-07-501 

are open in the major aquifers in the Dell City, Texas, area 

Hydrogeologic Overview 

Moon over Guadalupe Peak
Figure 4. Contours of water levels in the carbonate aquifer in the Salt Basin (modified from Mayer, 1995).

Dell City

Timberon

Pinon Sacramento River

1450

1400

1350

1300

1250

1200

1150

1150

1200

1250

1300

1350

1400

1450

1100

1100

24 24

521

1576

2249

1437

1111

2317

62 180

180 62

NE W M E X I CO

T E XAS

Chaves County

Otero County

Hudspeth County

Diablo

Plateau

Otero

M esa

Otero Break

E X PL ANAT ION

Water-level contour, in meters above sea level. Dashed where approximately located

1100

Base fromU.S. Geological Surveydigital data, 2005, 1:100,000

Universal Transverse Mercator projection

Zone 13

Horizontal coordinate informationis referencedtothe

NorthAmericanDatumof 1983 (NAD83)

0 5 10 15 20 KILOMETERS

0 5 10 15 20 MILES

N

Watershed boundary

Ground-water system boundary

Figure 3.—Map showing contours of water levels in the carbonate aquifer in the Salt

Basin (modified fromMayer, 1995).

4

 Knowledge and Understanding of the Hydrogeology of the Salt Basin in South-central New Mexico
strongly correlated with elevation (r2

 = 0.952) (Mayer, 1995) 

indicating that most recharge originates in upland areas. 

Livingston Associates and John Shomaker and Associates 

(2002) estimated recharge to the New Mexico part of the 

basin to be about 35,078 acre-feet per year based on the 

estimated yields of watersheds draining onto the Otero Mesa. 

About half of this 35,078 acre-feet per year was attributed 

to the Sacramento River watershed. Bjorklund (1957, p. 15) 

estimated recharge to the entire Salt Basin to be “probably less 

than 100,000 acre-feet annually” based on historical changes 

in water levels in response to changing rates of ground-water 

withdrawal. Mayer (1995) estimated ground-water recharge 

to the entire basin to be between 89,192 and 97,299 acre-feet 

per year. Ashworth (1995) estimated ground-water recharge to 

the entire basin, including irrigation return flow, to be between 

90,000 and 100,000 acre-feet per year. Based on additional 

data on irrigation techniques (primarily flood irrigation 

between 1964 and 1989 subsequently replaced by sprinkler 

irrigation), Ashworth revised his estimated recharge rates 

upward to between 160,000 and 200,000 acre-feet per year. 

(Hutchison, 2006). 

Ground-water recharge, not associated with irrigation 

return flow, enters the Salt Basin as runoff from surrounding 

watersheds in the Sacramento and Hueco Mountains and as 

distributed recharge from precipitation over the Otero Mesa 

at depths of 220 and 910 feet, respectively. The similarity 

in water levels in these adjacent wells demonstrates that the 

aquifer contained in the carbonate units has a well developed 

vertical connection and, therefore, acts as a single hydraulic 

unit (Hutchison, 2006). Previous work has demonstrated some 

success in the construction of two-dimensional (one-layer) 

ground-water-flow models of the Salt Basin (Mayer, 1995; 

Bill Hutchison, El Paso Water Utilities, oral commun., 2006). 

The results of these modeling efforts and similarities in water 

levels suggest that some of the major aquifers in geologic 

units of Permian age generally act as a single hydraulic unit. 

Exceptions to this generalization may include aquifers in the 

Capitan Reef and Goat Seep Limestones on the eastern margin 

of the basin. It is unknown if the deeper water-bearing units, 

including the Yeso, Hueco, and Abo Formations, are vertically 

interconnected with the major aquifers. Incorporation of the 

Hueco and Abo Formations into a comprehensive groundwater-flow model could require construction of a threedimensional (multiple-layer) model. 

Recharge

The literature contains a number of widely varying 

estimates of ground-water recharge to the Salt Basin. 

Precipitation in watershed areas surrounding the basin is 

Hydrogeologic Overview 

Figure 5. Water levels in wells 48-07-505 and 48-07-501 near Dell City, Texas (data from Texas Water Development Board 

http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/home/index.asp).

Figure 4.—Water levels in wells 48-07-505 and 48-07-501 near Dell City, Texas (data fromTexas Water

Development Board).

3,570

3,580

3,590

3,600

3,610

3,620

3,630

3/1/1948

2/3/19492/5/1951

1/28/19535/25/19541/26/19571/26/1960

2/8/1963

1/27/1965

9/2/1966

1/30/19672/15/19692/23/1971

12/19/1972

1/15/19751/19/19781/18/1983

2/4/1986

2/18/1988

2/9/1990

12/6/1991

2/7/1995

1/22/1997

1/8/1999

1/11/20011/17/20031/10/2006

Date of water-level measurement

Water level, in feet above sea level

Well 48-07-505

Well 48-07-501

6
contained between 40,000 and 42,000 irrigated acres in Texas 

and between 5,000 and 6,000 irrigated acres in New Mexico 

between 1974 and 1976. About 39,000 acres were irrigated in 

the Texas part of the basin in 1979 by using 95,000 acre-feet 

of ground water (Texas Water Development Board, 1991). 

Irrigated acreage has fluctuated and largely declined since 

1979-80. Ashworth (1995) reported about 20,000 acres were 

irrigated in the Texas part of the basin in 1989 by using about 

95,000 acre-feet of ground water. Approximately 210,000 

acre-feet per year were used to irrigate almost 50,000 acres in 

2000 (Ashworth, 2001). Data on irrigated acreage in the basin 

tabulated by Hutchison (2006) for the period 1974-2002 show 

a maximum of 33,656 irrigated acres in 1975, a minimum of 

12,585 irrigated acres in 1994, and a 2002 estimate of 19,327 

irrigated acres. Current efforts are underway to verify and 

update historical irrigation rates and more accurately estimate 

current irrigation rates in the basin (Bill Hutchison, El Paso 

Water Utilities, oral commun., 2006). Crop irrigation has 

probably constituted the primary discharge of ground water in 

the basin since some time in the 1970s.

Ground-water withdrawal has produced a moderate 

decline in regional ground-water levels. Regional declines 

in ground-water levels between the late 1940s and about 

2000 typically have been 40 feet or less. These moderate 

declines in regional ground-water levels can be attributed to 

the high transmissivity of the major aquifers, which allows 

drawdown to be dissipated over large areas (Hutchison, 

2006). Widespread dissipation of drawdown is supported by 

and Diablo Plateau. Precipitation falling over the central 

valley probably contributes little, if any, to ground-water 

recharge (Kreitler and others, 1987; Mayer, 1995). Runoff 

from the Sacramento River and Pinion Creek watersheds (fig. 

6) is a major contributor to ground-water recharge in the New 

Mexico part of the Salt Basin. It is thought that virtually 

all surface -water discharge derived from these watersheds 

infiltrates into the Otero Mesa and is transmitted downward 

as ground-water recharge through a network of fractures and 

solution channels (Livingston Associates and John Shomaker 

and Associates, 2002). The USGS monitored discharge in 

the Sacramento River at streamflow-gaging station 08492900 

(fig. 6) from 1984 to 1989. The Sacramento River indicated 

pronounced variation in seasonal minimum and maximum 

discharge throughout the monitored period (fig. 7) suggesting 

that ground-water recharge on Otero Mesa undergoes similar 

variations. Activities of tritium in and carbon-14 apparent 

ages of ground water on the Diablo Plateau are consistent with 

components of local modern recharge (Kreitler and others, 

1987). Kreitler and others (1987) estimated a distributed 

recharge rate between 0.0005 and 0.009 inches per year over 

the Diablo Plateau. Mayer (1995) estimated a distributed 

recharge rate of 0.007 inches per year over the Otero Mesa and 

Diablo Plateau areas. Profiles of soil chloride concentration 

indicated that distributed recharge over the Diablo Plateau 

enters ground water primarily by infiltration through arroyos, 

creek beds, and depressions that act to concentrate runoff 

(Kreitler and others, 1990). The same is likely true for Otero 

Mesa. Water-level fluctuations in wells located close to areas 

of concentrated runoff are well correlated 

with precipitation events (fig. 8).

Discharge

Predevelopment ground-water 

discharge from the Salt Basin occurred by 

evaporation through salt-flat deposits in 

the central valley area and by spring flow 

(Bjorklund, 1957). Theoretical evaporation 

rates from the salt flats range from 15.7 to 

78.7 inches per year (49,000 to 243,000 

acre-feet per year.). Actual evaporation rates 

are likely less than the upper range of this 

estimate (Boyd and Kreitler, 1986). Davis 

and Leggat (1965) estimated evaporation 

from the Texas part of the basin to be 40,000 

acre-feet per year.

Crop irrigation began in the Dell 

City, Texas, area in 1947. About 6,000 

acres of land were irrigated in the Dell City, 

Texas, area in 1949 by using about 18,000 

acre-feet of ground water (Scalapino, 1950). 

Crop irrigation began in the Crow Flats 

area in 1949 (Bjorklund, 1957). Gates and 

others (1980) estimated that the Salt Basin 

10 Knowledge and Understanding of the Hydrogeology of the Salt Basin in South-central New Mexico

EXPLANATION

Streamgaging station and number

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 2005, 1:100,000

Universal Transverse Mercator projection

Zone 13

NEW MEXICO

TEXAS

105°30’ 105°

32°30’

32°

0 5 10 15 20 KILOMETERS

0 5 10 15 20 MILES

Crow Flats

boundary

Pinon Creek

Watershed

Sacramento River

Watershed

Figure 5. Selected watershed boundaries, streams, and physiographic features in the New Mexico part of the Salt Basin.

Boundary of Salt Basin

08492900

Pinon

Creek

Sacramento River

Otero Mesa

08492900

106°

Figure 6. Selected watershed boundaries, streams, and physiographic 

features in the New Mexico part of the Salt Basin.
Hydrogeologic Overview 11

Figure 8. Correlation of water-levels changes to precipitation events.

Figure 7. Mean daily discharge in the Sacramento River measured at streamgaging station 08492900 near Sunspot, New Mexico (data 

from U.S. Geological Survey http://water.usgs.gov).

0.1

1

10

100

7/3/1983 11/14/1984 3/29/1986 8/11/1987 12/23/1988 5/7/1990

DATE

MEAN DAILY DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

Figure 7. Mean daily discharge in the Sacramento River measured at streamgaging station 08492900 near Sunspot, New Mexico 

(data from U.S. Geological Survey). GROUND-WATER LEVEL, IN FEET ABOVE NGVD 29

DATE

Figure 8. Correlation of water-level changes to precipitation events.

3,800

3,750

3,700

3,650

07/01/2004 08/01/2004 09/01/2004 10/01/2004

EXPLANATION

Precipitation event at rain gages shown in figure 2c

Water levels measured in well identified in figure 2c
the observation that seasonal water-level fluctuations, as a 

result of withdrawal in the Dell City area, have been observed 

as far away as 18 miles north of Dell City, Texas (fig. 9). 

Ashworth (1995) indicated that the water-level decline near 

Dell City stabilized and, in some instances, began to recover 

following 1979. This recovery corresponded to a reduction in 

withdrawal rates between 1979 and 1984 from approximately 

140,000 acre-feet per year to approximately 100,000 acre-feet 

per year suggesting that a readjustment of water-levels in the 

aquifer was occurring with respect to new withdrawal stresses.

Conceptual Flow Model

The observed large degree of spatial variability in specific 

capacity (Scalapino, 1950; Bjorklund, 1957; Peckham, 1963; 

White and others, 1980) and estimated transmissivity (Gates 

and others, 1980; Mace, 2001; Mullican and Mace, 2001), the 

presence of fractures, solution channels, and karst features 

(Bjorklund, 1957; Ashworth, 1995; Mayer, 1995; Mayer and 

Sharp, 1998), and the ability to dissipate drawdown over wide 

Figure 9. Ground-water level changes in response to withdrawal near Dell City, Texas as a function of distance from the city.

areas (Hutchison, 2006) support a conceptual model of flow 

in the major aquifers as occurring largely within fractures 

or solution channels that are highly transmissive and highly 

interconnected. This inferred degree of interconnection, 

again, supports the concept of the major aquifers acting as 

a single hydraulic unit. Because of the lack of information 

associated with the Yeso, Hueco, and Abo Formations, 

however, it may not be appropriate to consider the entire 

Permian carbonate rock sequence in the Salt Basin as a single, 

vertically connected hydraulic unit. Thus, for simplicity, the 

aquifers contained in geologic units of Permian age in the 

Salt Basin, with the exceptions of the Capitan Reef and Goat 

Seep Limestones, will herein be referred to in this report as the 

“carbonate aquifer.”

Water Quality

Ashworth (1995) described ground water in the 

carbonate aquifer in the central valley region of the Texas part 

of the Salt Basin as very hard and brackish with dissolvedGROUND-WATER LEVEL CHANGE, IN FEET

TIME, IN DAYS

Figure 9. Ground-water level changes in response to withdrawal near Dell City, Texas, as a function of distance from Dell City, Texas.

0.0

-5.0

-10.0

01/01/2003 01/01/2004 01/01/2005 01/01/2006

5.11 miles north of Dell City, Texas

Well locations shown in figure 2c. Data from Sandia National Laboratory

15.28 miles north-northwest of Dell City, Texas

17.97 miles north-northeast of Dell City, Texas

29.50 miles north of Dell City, Texas

12 Knowledge and Understanding of the Hydrogeology of the Salt Basin in South-central New Mexico
solids concentrations generally ranging from 1,000 to 6,500 

mg/L; however, Sharp and others (1993) reported dissolvedsolids concentrations as high as 300,000 mg/L in the area of 

the Salt Basin playas east of Dell City, Texas. Livingston 

Associates and John Shomaker and Associates (2002) reported 

dissolved-solids concentrations ranging from less than 1,000 

to 4,000 mg/L in ground water in the carbonate aquifers in 

the New Mexico part of the basin. Hibbs and others (1997) 

reported dissolved-solids concentrations from 500 mg/L near 

the Sacramento River to more than 3,800 mg/L for ground 

water in the central-western part of Otero Mesa. Dissolvedsolids concentrations in ground water in areas of crop 

irrigation near Dell City, Texas, can be as high as 6,500 mg/L 

because of infiltration of saline irrigation return flow (Hibbs 

and others, 1997). 

Future Study Needs

The responsible development and management 

of ground-water resources in the Salt Basin require a 

comprehensive understanding of the hydrogeologic system. 

Much work has been done to gain a better hydrogeologic 

understanding of the New Mexico part of the Salt Basin; 

however, there still exists a degree of uncertainty associated 

with several hydrogeologic characteristics.

Seven tasks have been identified for potential future 

study in the Salt Basin. Completion of these tasks would 

Future Study Needs 13

lessen previously described uncertainties associated with the 

hydrogeologic characterization of the Salt Basin. The seven 

tasks include:

• Quantify the rate of ground-water recharge to the 

Salt Basin: Current estimates of ground-water recharge to 

the Salt Basin range from approximately 35,000 to 200,000 

acre-feet per year. Reducing the uncertainty associated with 

ground-water recharge will enhance efforts to determine the 

long-term effects of development in the Salt Basin.

• Quantify the rates of discharge, both natural 

and anthropogenic, leaving the Salt Basin: Under 

predevelopment conditions, discharge from the Salt Basin 

occurred primarily as evapotranspiration (ET) from the central 

valley and as spring flow. Estimates of this predevelopment 

discharge range from approximately 40,000 acre-feet per year 

to approximately 240,000 acre-feet per year. Ground-water 

withdrawal associated with irrigation near Dell City, Texas, 

exceeded 200,000 acre-feet per year in 2000 (Ashworth, 

2001). Bjorklund (1957) reported that spring flow at an area 

approximately 0.5 miles south of the New Mexico-Texas 

line had stopped in response to withdrawal-related lowering 

of ground-water levels. Spring discharge is likely not a 

substantial component of post-development ground-water 

discharge. The amount of water currently discharged through 

ET from the Salt Basin is poorly known. Water discharge 

through ET represents a resource that could potentially be 

captured for beneficial use through strategic ground-water 

withdrawal. The improved quantification of natural and 

Salt lakes flooded
anthropogenic discharge rates, along with the measurement of 

Salt Basin ground-water level responses to these discharges, 

is important with respect to the long-term management of the 

resources.

• Quantify the volume of ground water in storage 

in the New Mexico part of the Salt Basin: Improved 

quantification of the volume of ground water in storage in 

the New Mexico part of the Salt Basin is needed to estimate 

the long-term effects of ground-water development. The 

amount of ground water in storage is directly proportional 

to the saturated thickness and porosity of the water-bearing 

formations. Currently, the estimates of saturated thickness 

range between 750 feet and, if including the Yeso, Hueco, and 

Abo Formations, greater than 2,000 feet. The heterogeneous 

distribution of fractures in the carbonate aquifer suggests that 

porosity varies laterally and may vary vertically. Reducing 

the level of uncertainty associated with the saturated thickness 

and porosity distribution will result in a reduction in the 

uncertainty associated with the volume of ground water in 

storage. 

• Quantify the volume of recoverable ground water 

in storage in the New Mexico part of the Salt Basin: The 

portion of ground water that is recoverable depends largely 

on the physical nature of the aquifer. The current estimate 

of approximately 30 million acre-feet of recoverable ground 

water residing in the New Mexico part of the Salt Basin is 

based upon the assumption that the aquifer acts as a confined 

system and the estimate that 50 percent of the ground water 

present can be liberated to a well (Livingston Associates 

and John Shomaker and Associates, 2002). Work conducted 

by SNL suggested that the carbonate aquifer acts in an 

unconfined manner in many places thereby increasing the 

amount of recoverable ground water in storage. Specific yield 

of a fractured unconfined aquifer is directly related to effective 

porosity which, in turn, is controlled by the density and 

interconnectedness of the fracture system. The heterogeneous 

distribution of fractures in the carbonate aquifer (Mayer, 

1995) implies that specific yield may also be heterogeneously 

distributed. 

• Identify areas of the carbonate aquifer that may 

be vulnerable to the introduction and rapid movement of 

subsurface contaminants: Rapid ground-water movement, 

relative to rates of movement through granular porous 

media, is possible in aquifers characterized by the presence 

of fractures and karst features. Localized areas of rapid 

ground-water movement can be vulnerable to the rapid spread 

of subsurface contaminants. A better understanding of the 

hydrologic nature of the Salt Basin, including confined versus 

unconfined behavior and the spatial distribution of specific 

yield, will aid in reducing the uncertainty associated with 

the volume of recoverable ground water present in the New 

Mexico part of the Salt Basin and in assessing areas of the 

carbonate aquifer that may be vulnerable to the rapid spread of 

subsurface contaminants.

• Establish the distribution of water quality in the 

New Mexico part of the Salt Basin: The establishment of 

the spatial and vertical distribution of water quality throughout 

the Salt Basin will aid in the determination of the amount 

of potable ground water present in the Salt Basin and in the 

identification of areas of active recharge. It is anticipated that 

the best water quality will reside in the areas nearest to active 

recharge areas. These active recharge areas may be vulnerable 

to the introduction of contaminants.

• Develop a numerical ground-water-flow and 

transport model for the entire Salt Basin: Assuming that 

the six previous tasks are addressed and the hydrogeologic 

uncertainty associated with each is reduced to an acceptable 

level, the development of a numerical flow and transport 

model of the carbonate aquifer will allow the behavior of the 

system to be simulated under selected development scenarios. 

Such a model would help resource managers to minimize 

negative impacts associated with, while maximizing positive 

benefits from future, ground-water withdrawal.

Summary

The Salt Basin covers about 2,400 square miles of 

south-central New Mexico and extends across the State line 

into Texas. As much as 57 million acre-feet of ground water 

may be stored within the New Mexico part of the Salt Basin. 

As much as 30 million acre-feet of this ground water may 

be recoverable and as much as 15 million acre-feet may be 

both recoverable and potable. If the Yeso, Hueco, and Abo 

Formations contain major aquifers, the volume of ground 

water in storage within the New Mexico part of the Salt Basin 

may be substantially larger than 57 million acre-feet. 

The Salt Basin contains three distinct physiographic 

provinces which from west to east include a gently eastwarddipping elevated plateau known as Otero Mesa in New Mexico 

and the Diablo Plateau in Texas, a central valley known as 

Crow Flats in New Mexico and as the Dell Valley in Texas, 

and a steep westward-facing escarpment that grades into the 

Guadalupe and Delaware Mountains. The carbonate aquifer 

in the Salt Basin is contained in carbonate-bearing units of 

Permian age including the Bone Spring, Victorio Peak, and 

San Andres Limestones and, for the purpose of this report, 

the Yeso, Hueco, and Abo Formations. The Yeso, Hueco, 

and Abo Formations have traditionally not been considered as 

aquifers in the New Mexico part of the Salt Basin but could 

contain substantial volumes of potentially recoverable ground 

water. Porosity and permeability of the carbonate aquifer is 

primarily determined by the density and interconnectedness of 

14  Knowledge and Understanding of the Hydrogeology of the Salt Basin in South-central New Mexico
fractures and karstic solution channels. As is typical in such 

a hydrogeologic setting, hydraulic properties of the carbonate 

aquifer are highly variable on a small spatial scale. 

Ground water generally moves southward away from 

recharge areas along the northern border of the Salt Basin 

and generally moves eastward to southeastward away from 

areas of distributed recharge on the Otero Mesa and the 

Diablo Plateau. Ground water originating from these recharge 

areas generally moves toward the central valley. An area of 

small hydraulic gradient, relative to other parts of the basin, 

extends from near the Sacramento River watershed southward 

toward Dell City, Texas. This zone of relatively low hydraulic 

gradient corresponds to the location of the Otero Break, which 

is a zone of high fracture density in the carbonate aquifer. 

Predevelopment ground-water discharge from the Salt Basin 

occurred by evaporation through salt-flat deposits in the 

central valley area and by spring flow. Present day discharge 

is mostly through ground-water withdrawal for agricultural 

irrigation. Ground water in the carbonate aquifer is generally 

very hard and total dissolved-solids concentrations generally 

range from 500 to 6,500 mg/L. 

There is substantial variability in current estimates of (1) 

ground-water recharge, (2) natural ground-water discharge, 

(3) the volume of ground water in storage, (4) the volume of 

recoverable ground water, (5) the conceptual model of groundwater flow, (6) the distribution of ground-water quality, and 

(7) the distribution of hydraulic characteristics. Future study 

could remove some of the uncertainty in these estimates and 

allow for better management of ground-water resources in the 

Salt Basin.

References Cited

Angle, E.S., 2001, Hydrology of the Salt Basin, in Mace, R.E., 

Mulican, W.F., III, and Angle, E.S., eds., Aquifers of west 

Texas: Texas Water Development Board Report 356, p. 

232-247.

Ashworth, J.B., 1995, Ground-water resources of the Bone 

Spring–Victorio Peak aquifer in the Dell Valley area, Texas: 

Texas Water Development Board Report 344, 42 p.

Ashworth, J.B., 2001, Bone Spring – Victorio Peak aquifer of 

the Dell Valley region of Texas in Mace, R.E., Mullican, 

W.F., III and Angle, E.A., eds., Aquifers of west Texas: 

Texas Water Development Board Report 356, p. 135-152.

Bjorklund, L.J., 1957, Reconnaissance of ground-water 

conditions in the Crow Flats area, Otero County, New 

Mexico: New Mexico State Engineer Office Technical 

Report No. 8, 26 p.

Black, B.A, 1976, Tectonics of the northern and eastern parts 

of the Otero Platform, New Mexico: tectonics and mineral 

resources of southwestern North America: New Mexico 

Geological Society Special Publication No. 6, 34 p.

Boyd, F.M., and Kreitler, C.W., 1986, Hydrogeology of a 

gypsum playa, northern Salt Basin, Texas: Texas Bureau of 

Economic Geology Report of Investigations No. 158, 37 p.

Chace, D.A., and Roberts, R.M., 2004, South-central Salt 

Basin groundwater characterization, in El Paso Geological 

Society Field Guide Book for the Otero Mesa area, New 

Mexico: El Paso Geological Society, p. 47-61.

Summary 15
Davis, M.E., and Leggat, E.R., 1965, Reconnaissance 

investigation of ground-water resources of the upper Rio 

Grande Basin, Texas, in Reconnaissance investigation of 

the ground-water resources of the Rio Grande Basin, Texas: 

Texas Water Commission Bulletin 6502, p. U1-U99.

Freeze, R.A., and Cherry, J.A., 1979, Groundwater: 

Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice Hall, Inc., 604 p.

Gates, J.S., White, D.E., Stanley, W.D., and Ackermann, H.D., 

1980, Availability of fresh and slightly saline ground water 

in the basins of westernmost Texas: Texas Department of 

Water Resources Report 256, 108 p.

George, Peter, Mace, R.E., and Mullican, W.F., III, 2005, 

The hydrology of Hudspeth County, Texas: Texas Water 

Development Board Report 364, 95 p.

Goetz, L.K., 1977, Quaternary faulting in the Salt Basin 

grabens, west Texas: Austin, Tex., University of Texas at 

Austin, Masters thesis, 136 p.

Goetz, L.K., 1985, Salt Basin graben, a Basin-and-Range 

right-lateral transtensional fault zone, some speculations, 

in Dickerson, P.W. and Muehlberger, W.R., eds., Structure 

and tectonics of Trans-Pecos Texas: West Texas Geological 

Society Publication 85-81, p. 165-168.

Hibbs, B.J., Boghici, R.N., Hayes, M.E., Ashworth, J.B., 

Hanson, A.T., Samani, Z.A., Kennedy, J.F., and Creel, B.J., 

1997, Transboundary aquifers in the El Paso/Ciudad Juarez/

Las Cruces Region: Austin, Tex., Texas Water Development 

Board and Las Cruces, N.M., New Mexico Water Resources 

Research Institute, 148 p.

Huntoon, P.W., 1995, Is it appropriate to apply porous media 

groundwater circulation models to a karstic aquifer?, in ElKadi, A.I., ed., Groundwater models for resources analysis 

and management: Boca Raton, Fla., Lewis Publishers, p. 

339-358.

Hutchison, W. R., 2006, Groundwater management in El Paso, 

Texas: El Paso, Tex., University of Texas at El Paso, Ph.D. 

dissertation, 345 p.

Kerans, C., Lucia, F.J., and Senger, R.K., 1994, Integrated 

characterization of carbonate ramp reservoirs using 

Permian San Andres Formation outcrop analogs: American 

Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 78, p. 181-

216.

King, W.E., and Harder, V.M., 1985, Oil and gas potential of 

the Tularosa Basin – Otero platform – Salt Basin graben 

area, New Mexico and Texas: New Mexico Bureau of Mines 

and Mineral Resources Circular No. 198, 36 p.

Kreitler, C.W., Mullican, W.F., and Nativ, Ronit, 1990, 

Hydrogeology of the Diablo Plateau, Trans-Pecos Texas, 

in Kreitler, C.W., and Sharp, J.M., eds., Hydrology of 

Trans-Pecos Texas: Texas Bureau of Economic Geology 

Guidebook 25, p. 49-58.

Kreitler, C.W., Raney, J.A., Nativ, R., Collins, E.W., Mullican, 

W.F., III, Gustovson, T.C., and Henry, C.D., 1987, Siting 

a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility in Texas, 

v. 4 – Geologic and hydrologic investigations of State of 

Texas and University of Texas lands: Texas Bureau of 

Economic Geology report prepared for the Texas Low-Level 

Radioactive Waste Disposal Authority, 330 p.

Livingston Associates and John Shomaker and Associates, 

2002, Tularosa Basin and Salt Basin regional water plan 

2000-2040: Carrizozo, N. M., South Central Mountain 

RD&C Council, v. 1, variously paged.

Mace, R.E., 2001, Estimating transmissivity using specificcapacity data: Texas Bureau of Economic Geology 

Geological Circular 01-2, 44 p.

Mayer, J.M. and Sharp, J.M., Jr., 1998, Fracture control of 

regional ground-water flow in a carbonate aquifer in a semiarid region: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 110, 

p. 269-283.

Mayer, J.R., 1995, The role of fractures in regional 

groundwater flow: Field evidence and model results from 

the Basin-and Range of Texas and New Mexico: Austin, 

Tex., University of Texas at Austin, Ph.D. dissertation, 218 

p.

16  Knowledge and Understanding of the Hydrogeology of the Salt Basin in South-central New Mexico
Mullican, W.F., III and Mace, R.E., 2001, The Diablo Plateau 

aquifer, in Mace, R.E., Mullican, W.F., III and Angle, E.A., 

eds., Aquifers of west Texas: Texas Water Development 

Board Report 356, p. 257-267.

Peckham, R.C., 1963, Summary of ground-water aquifers in 

the Rio Grande Basin: Texas Water Commission Circular 

63-05, 16 p.

Pecos Valley Water Users Organization, 2001, Lower Pecos 

Valley regional water plan, v. 1 – Executive summary 

and atlas: Cloudcroft, N. M., Pecos Valley Water Users 

Organization, 1 p, 29 pls.

Pickens, J.F., Grisak, G.E., Avis, J.D., Belanger, D.W., and 

Thury, M., 1987, Analysis and interpretation of borehole 

hydraulic tests in deep boreholes: Principles, model 

development, and applications: Water Resources Research, 

v. 23, no. 7, p. 1341-1375.

Pray, L.C., 1961, Geology of the Sacramento Mountains 

escarpment, Otero County, New Mexico: New Mexico 

Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources Bulletin 35, 144 p., 

3 pls.

Roberts, R.M., 2002, Moderately fractured rock experiment: 

well test analysis using nSIGHTS: Ontario Power 

Generation, Nuclear Waste Management Division Report 

No. 06819-REP-01300-10062-R00, 178p.

Scalapino, R.A., 1950, Development of ground water for 

irrigation in the Dell City area, Hudspeth County, Texas: 

Texas Board of Water Engineers Bulletin 5004, 39 p.

Sharp, J.M. Jr., J. R. Mayer, and E. McCutcheon, 1993, 

Hydrogeologic trends in the Dell City area, Hudspeth 

County, Texas: New Mexico Geologic Society Guidebook, 

44th Field Conference, pp. 327-330.

Texas Water Development Board, 1991, Surveys of irrigation 

in Texas – 1958, 1964, 1969, 1974, 1979, 1984, and 1989: 

Texas Water Development Board Report 329, 125 p.

Veldhuis, J.H. and Keller, G.R., 1980, An integrated geological 

and geophysical study of the Salt Basin graben, west Texas, 

in Dickerson, P.W., Hoffer, J.M., and Callendar, J.F., eds., 

Trans-Pecos Region, southwestern New Mexico and west 

Texas: New Mexico Geological Society Guidebook 31, p. 

141-150.

White, D.E., Gates, J.S., Smith, J.T., and Fry, B.J., 1980, 

Groundwater data for the Salt Basin, Eagle Flat, Red 

Light Draw, Green River Valley, and Presidio Bolson in 

westernmost Texas: Texas Department of Water Resources 

Report 259.

Reference Cited 17

Produced for the New Mexico Water Science Center by the 

Lafayette Publishing Service Center.