Prepared in cooperation with the

NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES

Ground-Water Use, Locations of Production Wells, and 

Areas Irrigated Using Ground Water in 1998, 

Middle Humboldt River Basin, North-Central Nevada

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Water-Resources Investigations Report 03–4227
(Back of Cover)
Ground-Water Use, Locations of Production Wells, and 

Areas Irrigated Using Ground Water in 1998, 

Middle Humboldt River Basin, North-Central Nevada

By Russell W. Plume

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Carson City, Nevada

2003

Prepared in cooperation with

NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES

Water-Resources Investigations Report 03–4227
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

GALE A. NORTON, Secretary

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

CHARLES G. GROAT, Director

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

For additional information Copies of this report can be

contact: purchased from:

District Chief U.S. Geological Survey 

U.S. Geological Survey Information Services

333 West Nye Lane, Room 203 Building 810

Carson City, NV 89706–0866 Box 25286, Federal Center

Denver, CO 80225–0286

email: GS-W-NVpublic-info@usgs.gov

http://nevada.usgs.gov
CONTENTS III

CONTENTS

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

Introduction............................................................................................................................................................................ 2

Background ............................................................................................................................................................... 2

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

Approach .................................................................................................................................................................... 2

Acknowledgments...................................................................................................................................................... 4

Irrigation Pumpage ................................................................................................................................................................ 5

1998 Irrigation Season ............................................................................................................................................... 5

Comparison of 1998 Irrigation Season with 1994-97 Seasons .................................................................................. 10

Ground-Water Use in 1998.................................................................................................................................................... 10

Summary................................................................................................................................................................................ 16

References Cited.................................................................................................................................................................... 16

Plate in pocket at back of report

1. Map showing locations of production wells and areas irrigated using ground water, 1998, middle Humboldt 

River Basin, north-central Nevada.

Figures

1. Map showing hydrographic areas in the middle Humboldt River Basin, north-central Nevada............................ 3

2. Graph showing total monthly precipitation January through June 1994-98, Battle Mountain, Nevada................ 10

3. Graph showing distribution of (A) Total ground-water pumpage, and (B) Total mine dewatering pumpage, 

1998, middle Humboldt River Basin, north-central Nevada.................................................................................. 12

Tables

1. Hydrographic areas in the middle Humboldt River Basin, north-central Nevada ................................................. 4

2. Power consumption, pump discharge, and estimated 1998 irrigation season pumpage for selected irrigation 

wells in the middle Humboldt River Basin, north-central Nevada ........................................................................ 6

3. Pump discharge and estimated 1998 irrigation season pumpage for three wells serving two flood-irrigated

fields in Pumpernickel Valley, Nevada................................................................................................................... 9

4. Comparison of power consumption during the 1994-97 irrigation seasons with power consumption 

during the 1998 season at selected irrigation wells and estimated water use during an average irrigation

season in the middle Humboldt River Basin, north-central Nevada ...................................................................... 11

5. Area irrigated with ground water, types and numbers of actively used production wells, and total groundwater use in 1998 in hydrographic areas of the middle Humboldt River Basin, north-central Nevada................. 13

6. Ground-water pumpage for mining purposes in 1998, middle Humboldt River Basin, north-central Nevada ..... 15
IV Ground-Water Use, Locations of Production Wells, and Areas Irrigated Using Ground Water in 1998, Middle Humboldt River Basin

CONVERSION FACTORS AND VERTICAL DATUM 

Multiply By To obtain

acre 4,047 square meter

acre-foot (acre-ft) 0.001233 cubic hectometer

acre-foot per day (acre-ft/d) 0.001233 cubic hectometer per day

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter

gallons per minute (gal/min) 6.309X10-5 cubic meter per second

inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter

kilowatthour (kWh) 3,600,000 joule

kilowatthour per day (kWh/d) 3,600,000 joule per day

kilowatthour per acre-foot (kWh/acre-ft) 2,919 joule per cubic meter

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer

square miles (mi2) 2.59 square kilometer

watthour (Wh) 3,600 joule

Temperature: Degrees Celsius (oC) can be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (oF) by using the formula oF = [1.8(oC)]+32. Degrees Fahrenheit 

can be converted to degrees Celsius by using the formula o

C = 0.556(oF-32).

Sea level: In this report, “sea level” refers to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD of 1929, formerly called “Sea-Level 

Datum of 1929”), which is derived from a general adjustment of the first-order leveling networks of the United States and Canada.
Abstract 1

Abstract

In 1998, ground water was being pumped 

from about 420 production wells in the middle 

Humboldt River Basin for a variety of uses. Principal uses were for agriculture, industry, mining, 

municipal, and power plant purposes. This report 

presents a compilation of the number and types of 

production wells, areas irrigated by ground water, 

and ground-water use in 14 hydrographic areas of 

the middle Humboldt River Basin in 1998.

Annual pumping records for production 

wells usually are reported to the Nevada Division 

of Water Resources. However, operators of irrigation wells are not consistently required to report 

annual pumpage. Daily power-consumption and 

pump-discharge rates measured at 20 wells during 

the 1998 irrigation season and total power use at 

each well were used to estimate the amount of 

water, in feet of depth, applied to 20 alfalfa fields. 

These fields include about 10 percent of the total 

area, 36,700 acres, irrigated with ground water in 

the middle Humboldt River Basin. In 1998 an 

average of 2.0 feet of water was applied to 14 

fields irrigated using center-pivot sprinkler systems, and an average of 2.6 feet of water was 

applied to 6 fields irrigated using wheel-line sprinkler systems. A similar approach was used to estimate the amount of water pumped at three wells 

using pumps powered by diesel engines. The two 

fields served by these three wells received 3.9 feet 

of water by flood irrigation during the 1998 irrigation season.

The amount of water applied to the fields 

irrigated by center-pivot and wheel-line irrigation 

systems during the 1998 irrigation season was less 

than what would have been applied during a typical irrigation season because late winter and spring 

precipitation exceeded long-term monthly averages by as much as four times. As a result, the 

health of crops was affected by over-saturated 

soils, and most irrigation wells were only used 

sporadically in the first part of the irrigation 

season. Power consumption at 19 of the 20 wells

in the 1994-97 irrigation seasons was 110 to 235 

percent of the power consumption in the 1998 

irrigation season. If the amount of water applied to 

fields during the 1998 irrigation season were 

adjusted to account for these differences in power 

consumption, the average amount of water applied 

to a field during a typical season using center-pivot 

and wheel-line sprinkler systems would be 3.1 feet 

and 3.7 feet, respectively.

Total ground water pumped in the middle 

Humboldt River Basin during 1998 was about 

298,000 acre-feet. This pumpage was distributed 

as follows: 78 percent for mining, 19 percent for 

irrigation, and 3 percent for industrial, municipal, 

and power plants combined. Mining pumpage is 

by far the largest source of ground-water use 

because several large gold mines have extended 

below local ground-water levels and the area 

around each mine must be dewatered in order to 

maintain a dry and workable mine. Total mining 

pumpage in 1998 was 233,000 acre-feet, of this 

total, 23,600 acre-feet was for consumptive use 

and 209,000 acre-feet was for dewatering eight 

mines. Excess water from the mines being dewatered was distributed as follows: 74,500 acre-feet 

was returned to aquifers by infiltration; 33,100 

acre-feet was used for irrigation and for consumptive use at two mines and a power plant; 96,700 

acre-feet was released to the Humboldt River or 

one of its tributaries; and 5,260 acre-feet was lost 

to evaporation.

Ground-Water Use, Locations of Production Wells, and Areas 

Irrigated Using Ground Water in 1998, Middle Humboldt River 

Basin, North-Central Nevada

By Russell W. Plume
2 Ground-Water Use, Locations of Production Wells, and Areas Irrigated Using Ground Water in 1998, Middle Humboldt River Basin

Introduction

Background

The Humboldt River Basin covers an area of 

nearly 17,000 mi2

 in Nevada, and it is the only major 

river basin that is entirely in the State (fig. 1). Streamflow of the Humboldt River and its tributaries and 

ground water are used by diverse, and sometimes competitive interests. Streamflow historically has been 

used for agricultural purposes—mainly irrigation of 

crops and meadows and watering stock. However, wetlands along the river and its tributaries provide wildlife 

habitat, and infiltration of streamflow is a source of 

recharge to shallow aquifers underlying the river floodplain. Prior to 1980, most ground-water pumped in the 

Humboldt River Basin was used for municipal and 

domestic use, irrigation of crops, watering stock, and 

for use at a few mines. During the last 20 years, pumping in the basin has increased as a result of the expansion of irrigated areas, the development of two power 

plants, a general increase in population, and development of large gold mines (fig. 1).

Agencies of Federal, State, and local government 

and other groups are concerned about the long-term 

viability of the water resources of the Humboldt River 

Basin because of the increased demand for ground 

water and the need to dewater some of the gold mines. 

In response to this concern, the U.S. Geological 

Survey, in cooperation with the Nevada Department 

of Conservation and Natural Resources, initiated the 

Humboldt River Basin Assessment. The objectives of 

the assessment are to (1) provide scientific appraisals 

of the ground-water and surface-water resources of 

each hydrographic area in the Humboldt River Basin, 

(2) determine the contribution of each hydrographic 

area to the quantity and timing of flow in the Humboldt 

River, and (3) determine the effects of all major water 

uses in the basin.

So far, assessment activities have focused on the 

middle Humboldt River Basin, which consists of 14 

hydrographic areas1 that cover 7,480 mi2 (fig. 1 and 

table 1). The 14 areas are tributary to the reach of the 

Humboldt River that extends from the mouth of Pine 

Creek on the east to Preble on the west (plate 1). The 

principal tributaries to this reach of the river are Pine 

Creek, Rock Creek, and the Reese River. Within the 

middle Humboldt River Basin there are 16 mines of 

varying size (15 gold mines and a barite mine), eight of 

which were being dewatered in 1998, several areas of 

differing size where ground water is used for irrigating 

crops, several municipalities that rely on ground water, 

and the Valmy Power Plant and Beowawe Geothermal 

Power Plant.

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to document the 

results of a study on ground-water use in the middle 

Humboldt River Basin during 1998 (fig. 1). The study 

objectives were to (1) identify areas where ground 

water is used for irrigation, (2) identify the principal 

crop type in each area, (3) determine irrigation application rates for each crop type, (4) use these rates to determine total pumpage for irrigation in each hydrographic 

area, and (5) develop a compilation of all production 

wells and associated ground-water pumpage in the 

middle Humboldt River Basin.

For purposes of this report, production wells are 

defined as those wells used for generating electricity, 

municipal use, mining including dewatering, industrial 

purposes other than mining, and agricultural. Production wells typically are pumped at rates ranging from 

hundreds to thousands of gallons per minute. Domestic 

wells and stock wells were not inventoried as part of 

this study because they typically are pumped at rates 

of only a few tens of gallons per minute or less. Total 

pumpage from domestic and stock wells had less 

potential to affect ground water than pumpage from 

production wells.

Approach

The approach used for this study was to first 

complete inventories of all production wells and of 

lands being irrigated with ground water in 1998 in the 

middle Humboldt River Basin. Locations of production 

wells were obtained from Nevada Division of Water 

Resources (NDWR) records and from well owners. 

Locations of irrigated lands and irrigation wells were 

determined from field inventories completed as part 

of this study. Most operators of production wells routinely report annual volumes of ground-water pumpage 

to the NDWR. This agency is the source for all pumpage information listed in this report, except for irrigation pumpage.

1Formal hydrographic areas in Nevada were delineated systematically by the U.S. Geological Survey and Nevada Division of 

Water Resources in the late 1960’s for scientific and administrative 

purposes (Cardinalli and others, 1968; Rush, 1968). The official 

hydrographic-area names, numbers, and geographic boundaries 

continue to be used in Geological Survey scientific reports and 

Division of Water Resources administrative activities.
Introduction 3

CV

BF

116

115

39

40

119

41

118

117

Reese

River

River

Rye Patch

Reservoir

Humboldt

Humboldt

Humboldt Humboldt

Martin

Creek

River

River

Rock

Creek

Pine

Creek

Marys River

North Fork Humboldt River

Maggie

Creek Susie

Creek

Ruby Mountains

Jarbidge

Mountains

East Humboldt Range

LANDER COUNTY

NYE COUNTY

ELKO COUNTY

WHITE PINE COUNTY

PERSHING COUNTY

CHURCHILL COUNTY

Imlay

Austin

Winnemucca

Carlin

Elko

Wells

Lovelock

HUMBOLDT COUNTY

PERSHING COUNTY

EUREKA COUNTY

LANDER COUNTY

Golconda

Preble

Midas

Battle

Mountain Mountain

Humboldt

Sink

PN

CL

UR

AV

MR

LR

WV

RC

WC

CA

PV

KC

CV

BF

PN

CL

UR

AV

MR

LR

WV

RC

WC

CA

PV

Little

KC

CHURCHILL

LANDER

Beowawe Beowawe

Reese

River

River

Humboldt

Rock

Creek

Pine

Creek

Battle

Mountain Beowawe

Ruby

Lake

Ruby

Lake

EUREKA

WHITE PINE

0

0 20 40 10 30 50 KILOMETERS

10 40 20 30 50 MILES

EXPLANATION

Middle Humboldt River Basin

Hydrographic area two letter

 identifier, name, and number

AV

BF

CA

CL

CV

KC

LR

MR

PN

PV

RC

UR

WC

WV

57

61

64

55

54

66

59

58

53

65

62

56

63

60

Antelope Valley

Boulder Flat 

Clovers Area 

Carico Lake Valley 

Crescent Valley 

Kelly Creek Area 

Lower Reese River Valley 

Middle Reese River Valley 

Pine Valley 

Pumpernickel Valley 

Rock Creek Valley 

Upper Reese River Valley 

Willow Creek Valley 

Whirlwind Valley 

Humboldt River Basin boundary

Active mine 

Hydrographic-area boundary

Active mine dewatered in 1998

Area of

figure

120 118 116 114 42

40

38

36

. .

.

.

.

Humboldt River

Basin

Carson City Ely

Las Vegas

Reno

Tonopah

NEVADA

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

1977-88; Universal Transverse Mercator projection

Zone 11

Figure 1. Hydrographic areas in the middle Humboldt River Basin, north-central Nevada.
4 Ground-Water Use, Locations of Production Wells, and Areas Irrigated Using Ground Water in 1998, Middle Humboldt River Basin

Owners of most irrigation wells are not required 

to report annual pumpage to the State of Nevada. Thus, 

an additional task was to estimate the amount of ground 

water pumped for irrigation in each hydrographic area 

in 1998. Total ground water pumped at selected wells 

during the 1998 irrigation season was estimated from 

(1) measurements of the amount of power used to pump 

one acre-ft of ground water, and (2) total power used at 

each of the wells during the irrigation season. The 

application rates at the fields served by these wells, in 

feet of water, were then used to estimate total ground 

water pumped for irrigation in each hydrographic area 

during the 1998 irrigation season. These totals are 

based on average application rates and on the inventories of irrigated acreage.

Acknowledgments

The successful completion of this report 

depended, in large part, on the assistance, cooperation, 

and contributions of many people. Private landowners 

and managers or owners of large ranches in the middle 

Humboldt River Basin granted the author access to 

their lands and wells. Personnel at the Betze, Genesis, 

Cortez, Pipeline, Lone Tree, McCoy, Twin Creeks, 

Getchell, Pinson, Copper Canyon, and Marigold Mines 

provided locations of production and dewatering wells 

at the mines. Support for the Humboldt River Basin 

Assessment was provided by Barrick Goldstrike 

Mines, Newmont Mining Corporation, Getchell Gold 

Company, and Glamis Gold Limited.

Table 1. Hydrographic areas in the Middle Humboldt River Basin, northcentral Nevada (see fig. 1 for locations).

Hydrographic area 1

1 Formal hydrographic areas in Nevada were delineated systematically by the U.S. 

Geological Survey and Nevada Division of Water Resources in the late 1960’s (Cardinalli and others, 1968, and Rush, 1968). These areas have been the basic units for assembling hydrologic data and for regulating water use in the State since 1968. The official 

hydrographic area names, numbers, and geographic boundaries continue to be used in 

Geological Survey scientific reports and Division of Water Resources administrative 

activities.

Identifier Name Number

Area 2

(square 

miles)

2 Areas, in square miles, from Berger (2000, p. 4). Areas in acres and totals 

rounded to three significant figures.

Area2

(acres)

AV

BF

CA

CL

CV

Antelope Valley

Boulder Flat

Clovers Area

Carico Lake Valley

Crescent Valley

57

61

64

55

54

450

540

720

380

750

288,000

346,000

461,000

243,000

480,000

KC

LR

MR

PN

PV

Kelly Creek Area

Lower Reese River Valley

Middle Reese River Valley

Pine Valley

Pumpernickel Valley

66

59

58

53

65

300

600

320

1,010

310

192,000

384,000

205,000

646,000

198,000

RC

UR

WC

WV

Rock Creek Valley

Upper Reese River Valley

Willow Creek Valley

Whirlwind Valley

62

56

63

60

450

1,140

410

100

288,000

730,000

262,000

64,000

Totals 7,480 4,790,000
Irrigation Pumpage 5

Irrigation Pumpage

1998 Irrigation Season

Total amounts of ground water, in feet of water, 

applied during the 1998 irrigation season, was estimated for 20 fields consisting of 3,850 acres of alfalfa 

and minor amounts of oats (table 2). This area represents about 10 percent of the total area of 36,700 acres 

irrigated by ground water in the middle Humboldt 

River Basin. The 20 fields are served by 20 irrigation 

wells from which total volumes of ground water 

pumped during the 1998 irrigation season were estimated using daily power-consumption and pump-discharge rates and total power used during the season. 

Both rates were measured one or more times during the 

irrigation season. The rates were used to compute a 

ratio that is the estimated amount of power required to 

pump one acre-ft of ground water. Instantaneous pump 

discharge was measured with an acoustic flowmeter 

and converted to an estimated daily pumpage rate, in 

acre-feet per day. Power consumption, in kilowatthours per day, was estimated by making an instantaneous measurement of the rate at which the disk on the 

electrical meter was revolving. The equation for converting this rate to an estimated daily power consumption rate, P, is

P = (86.4 x Kh x Tf x rev)/t, (1)

where Kh is the electrical meter constant in watt-hours 

per disk revolution (this value is shown on the 

meter face);

Tf is the transformer factor, a dimensionless ratio provided by the local power company;

rev is the number of revolutions the electrical meter 

disk turns in time (t), in seconds; and 

86.4 is a conversion factor that yields a value of P in 

kilowatt-hours per day.

This equation is a variation of one used by Hurr 

and Litke (1989, p. 13). Values for daily pump-discharge, power-consumption rates, and for the amount 

of power needed to pump an acre-foot of water are 

listed in table 2.

The total volume of ground water, in acre-feet, 

pumped at each irrigation well during the 1998 irrigation season was computed as the total power used 

during the year divided by the average power-use to 

pumpage ratio for the year (table 2). Finally, the 

amount of water, in feet of depth, applied to each field, 

was computed as total volume of ground water pumped 

during the 1998 irrigation season divided by total area 

of the field, in acres.

The most common irrigation method using 

ground water in the middle Humboldt River Basin is 

the center-pivot sprinkler system, which consists of 

sprinklers attached to a supply pipe that is mounted on 

wheels. The entire system revolves in a circle of about 

1/4-mile radius from a center pivot. The area irrigated 

by a center-pivot system is about 126 acres, but the area 

of individual fields can range from 120 to 130 acres. 

Total ground water, in feet, applied during the 1998 irrigation season by the 14 center-pivot sprinkler systems 

listed in table 2 ranged from 1.7 to 2.2 ft. The average, 

weighted by irrigated area, was 2.0 ft.

Wheel-line sprinkler systems are gradually being 

replaced in the middle Humboldt River Basin by the 

more efficient center-pivot sprinkler systems. Even 

though wheel-line sprinkler systems are not as common as center-pivot systems, they are still widely used. 

A wheel-line sprinkler system also consists of sprinklers attached to a supply pipe that is mounted on 

wheels; however, this type of system does not revolve 

around a center-pivot. Instead, a series of several wheel 

lines advance in a straight line from one side of a field 

to the other side. Total ground water, in feet, applied 

during the 1998 irrigation season by the six wheel-line 

sprinkler systems listed in table 2 ranged from 2.1 to 

3.1 ft. The average, weighted by irrigated area, was 

2.6 ft.

Flood irrigation is used extensively in the middle 

Humboldt River Basin where streamflow is diverted 

from the Humboldt River or one of its tributaries. However, there are two reasons why this irrigation method 

is not commonly used in areas where irrigation water 

must be pumped. First, more water must be applied to 

a flood-irrigated field than to a field of equal size irrigated by a center-pivot or wheel-line sprinkler system. 

One rancher stated that flood irrigation requires at least 

twice the amount of water needed for a center-pivot 

sprinkler system. Second, flood irrigation is more labor 

intensive and requires more care than the center-pivot 

or wheel-line irrigation systems.

In Pumpernickel Valley, three wells are used to 

flood irrigate two 320-acre fields (plate 1). The pump 

for each of these wells is driven by a diesel engine 

equipped with a meter that records hours of operation. 

These meters were read before and after the 1998 irrigation season. The total volume of water pumped at 

each of the wells during the season is computed as the 

daily pumpage, in acre-feet per day, multiplied by the 

number of days the diesel engine was in operation 

(table 3). The amount of water, in feet, applied to the 

two fields during the irrigation season was computed 

by dividing total pumpage from the three wells by the 

area of the two fields. The total amount of water 

applied to these fields was 3.9 ft during the 1998

irrigation season (table 3).
6 Ground-Water Use, Locations of Production Wells, and Areas Irrigated Using Ground Water in 1998, Middle Humboldt River Basin Table 2. Power consumption, pump discharge, and estimated 1998 irrigation season pumpage for selected irrigation wells in the middle H

central Nevada--Continued 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Well number (see plate 1) USGS site identification number1 Irrigated area (acres) Electrical meter Daily power use5 (kw-hr/d) Daily pumpage6 (acre-feet per day) Power use to pumpage ratio7 (kw-hr/acre-ft) 

Date2 Time2 (seconds) Kh3 Tf

4

Powe

use8

(kw-hr

Center-Pivot Sprinkler Systems

8 400607117092801 249

249

5/5/98

7/13/98

30.629.6

1.81.8

9696

2,4402,522

6.676.98

366361

--

1998 Irrigation Season - - - 11364 192,28

12 400509117103201 251

251

5/5/98

7/13/98

29.029.2

1.81.8

9696

2,5742,556

7.337.20

351355

--

1998 Irrigation Season - - - 11353 183,74

13 400514117112401 248

248

5/5/98

7/13/98

27.029.0

1.81.8

9696

2,7652,574

5.785.24

478491

1998 Irrigation Season - - - 11484 202,36

14 400501117113701 121 7/20/98 34.6 1.8 96 2,158 5.29 12408 103,6815 400445117113701 123 7/20/98 32.5 1.8 96 2,297 6.00 12383 102,2416 400410117140101 254

254

5/6/98

7/13/98

24.625.0

1.81.8

9696

3,0352,986

7.568.04

401371

--

1998 Irrigation Season - - - 11386 197,37

17 400317117131001 257

257

5/6/98

7/13/98

22.022.0

1.81.8

9696

3,3933,393

8.678.58

391395

--

1998 Irrigation Season - - - 11393 179,32

18 400316117123401 256

256

5/6/98

7/13/98

19.220.0

1.81.8

9696

3,8883,732

8.498.44

458442

--

1998 Irrigation Season - - - 11450 249,31

Summary--14 center-pivot sprinkler systems, supplied by 8 wells, were used to irrigate 1,760 acres of alfalfa during the 1998 irrigation seasonwells was 3,510 acre-feet. Total water applied to the 14 fields, in feet of depth, ranged from 1.7 to 2.2 feet, and the average, weighted by irriga

Table 2. Power consumption, pump discharge, and estimated 1998 irrigation season pumpage for selected irrigation wells in the Middle north-central Nevada
Irrigation Pumpage 7

Wheel-Line Sprinkler Systems

1 410621117134301 (13)

(13)

5/1/98

7/10/98

18.619.0

1.81.8

9696

4,0133,929

6.136.22

655632

--

1998 irrigation season 11644 267,74

2 410606117134901 7/10/98 27.0 1.8 96 2,765 3.91 12707 14,783 410542117135001 (13) 5/1/98

7/10/98

15.014.5

0.90.9

192192

4,9775,148

5.565.56

895926

--

1998 irrigation season 11910 361,53

Totals for Field 316 

7 400615117082501 270

270

5/4/98

7/13/98

12.012.2

0.90.9

9696

3,1103,059

7.787.60

400402

--

1998 irrigation season 11401 277,44

9 400539117092101 (15) 5/4/98

7/13/989/11/98

37.438.239.6

1.81.81.8

969696

1,9961,9541,885

6.405.876.13

312333308

---

1998 irrigation season 11318 159,45

10 400513117093801 (15) 5/4/98

9/1198

23.524.0

1.81.8

4848

1,5881,555

3.092.93

514531

--

1998 irrigation season 11522 133,39

11 400519117095601 (15) 5/4/98

7/13/989/11/98

18.819.220.8

1.81.81.8

969696

3,9713,8883,589

10.49.479.47

382411379

---

1998 irrigation season 11391 353,37

Totals for Field 653 

Table 2. Power consumption, pump discharge, and estimated 1998 irrigation season pumpage for selected irrigation wells in the middle 

central Nevada--Continued 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Well

number

(see plate 1)

USGS site

identification 

number1

Irrigated

area

(acres)

Electrical meter

Daily

power

use5

(kw-hr/d)

Daily

pumpage6

(acre-feet

per day)

Power use to

pumpage

ratio7

(kw-hr/acre-ft)

Date2 Time2 (seconds) Kh3 Tf4 Powe

use8 (kw-h
8 Ground-Water Use, Locations of Production Wells, and Areas Irrigated Using Ground Water in 1998, Middle Humboldt River Basin Wheel-Line Sprinkler Systems 19 400418117114201 (17) 5/6/98 7/13/98 16.0 16.0 1.8 1.8 9696 4,666 4,666 9.07 8.44 514 553

--

1998 irrigation season 11534 351,36

20 400339117112401 (17) 5/6/98

7/15/98

27.432.0

1.81.8

9696

2,7242,333

2.842.89

959807

--

1998 irrigation season 11883 164,35

21 400327117112701 (17) 5/6/98

7/15/98

24.225.4

1.81.8

192192

6,1695,878

12.311.3

502520

--

1998 irrigation season 11511 361,34

Totals for Field 554 - 

22 400249117151301 156

156

6/4/98

7/14/98

31.232.3

1.81.8

9696

2,3932,311

5.605.91

427391

--

1998 irrigation season 11409 198,24

23 400158117151601 145 7/14/98 35.8 1.8 96 2,085 4.09 12510 156,19

Summary--6 wheel-line sprinkler systems, supplied by 12 wells, were used to irrigate a total of 2,090 acres (1,930 acres of alfalfa and 160 acrirrigation season. Total pumpage from the 12 wells was 5,530 acre-feet. Total water applied to the 6 fields, in feet of depth, ranged from 2.1 t

weighted by irrigated area, was 2.6 feet.

1 USGS site identification numbers shown in this table are based on grid system of latitude and longitude. Each number consists of 15 digits. First six digits denote d

of latitude; next seven digits denote degrees, minutes, and seconds of longitude; and last two digits (assigned sequentially) identify sites within 1-second grid. For exampfor well number 8 is 400607117092801. This number refers to 40° 6′ 7′′ latitude and 117° 9′ 28′′ longitude, and it is first site recorded in that 1-second grid. This 15-digit 

nent identifier even if more precise latitude and longitude are determined later.

2 On indicated date, disk on electrical meter was turning at measured rate of five revolutions in indicated time, in seconds.3 Meter constant imprinted on a metal tag attached to the face of electrical meter. This constant indicates the number of watt-hours of electricity being consumed for 

disk.

4 Dimensionless number called the transformer factor that usually must be obtained from local power company. Number is used in calculation of energy consumptio

lines for pump motor do not pass directly through electrical meter. See Hurr and Litke (1989, p. 10-13 and fig. 5) for additional information.

Table 2. Power consumption, pump discharge, and estimated 1998 irrigation season pumpage for selected irrigation wells in the middle Hcentral Nevada--Continued 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Well

number

(see plate 1)

USGS site

identification 

number1

Irrigated

area

(acres)

Electrical meter

Daily

power

use5

(kw-hr/d)

Daily

pumpage6

(acre-feet

per day)

Power use to

pumpage

ratio7

(kw-hr/acre-ft)

Date2 Time2 (seconds) Kh3 Tf

4

Powe

use8

(kw-hr
Irrigation Pumpage 9

5 Power consumption rate, in kilowatt-hours per day (kw-hr/d) is computed from the following equation: P = (86.4 x Kh x Tf x rev) / time, where Kh is meter co

disk revolution, Tf is transformer factor, a dimensionless ratio, rev is the number of meter revolutions (in this table, 5 revolutions) measured in time, in seconds, and 86.4 i

of P, in kilowatt-hours per day.

6 Daily pump discharge, in acre-feet per day (acre-ft/d), estimated by measuring the instantaneous pump discharge with an acoustical flow meter.7 Ratio is determined by dividing daily power use by daily pumpage. Ratio, in kilowatt-hours per acre-foot (kw-hr/acre-ft), is an estimate of amount of electrical po

foot of water on indicated date.

8 Amount of electrical power, in kilowatt-hours (kw-hr), consumed by pump motor at well during 1998 irrigation season. Data obtained from Sierra Pacific Power 

well owner.

9 Estimated total ground water, in acre-feet, pumped during 1998 irrigation season. Computed by dividing total power used during 1998 irrigation season by averag

age.

10 Estimated amount of water, in feet of depth, used to irrigate field(s) supplied by this/these well(s) during 1998 irrigation season. Computed by dividing total pum

gated area, in acres.

11 Average of ratios determined during 1998 irrigation season.12 Assumed to represent average ratio for 1998 irrigation season because site was visited only once during season.13 Wells 1, 2 and 3 are used together to irrigate a single 316-acre field.14 Total pumpage from wells 1, 2, and 3 during 1998 irrigation season.15 Wells 9, 10,and 11 are used together to irrigate a single 653-acre field.16 Total pumpage from wells 9, 10, and 11 during 1998 irrigation season.17 Wells 19, 20, and 21 are used together to irrigate a single 554-acre field.18 Total pumpage from wells 19, 20, and 21 during 1998 irrigation season.

Table 3. Pump discharge and estimated 1998 irrigation season pumpage for three wells serving two floodirrigated fields in Pumpernickel Valley, Nevada.

Well number

USGS site

identification 

number 1

1 USGS site identification numbers shown in this table are based on grid system of latitude and longitude. Each number consists 

of 15 digits. First six digits denote degrees, minutes, and seconds of latitude; next seven digits denote degrees, minutes, and seconds 

of longitude; and last two digits (assigned sequentially) identify sites within 1-second grid. For example, site identification number for 

well 4 is 404613117274101. This number refers to 40° 46′ 13′′ latitude and 117° 27′ 41′′ longitude, and it is the first site recorded in that 

1-second grid. This 15-digit number is retained as a permanent identifier even if more precise latitude and longitude are determined later.

Irrigated

area

(acres)

Date

Daily

pumpage 2

(acre-feet

per day)

2 Estimated daily pump discharge, in acre-feet per day, measured on the pump discharge pipe with an acoustical flow meter.

1998 irrigation season

Time of

pumping 3

(days)

3 Pumps are driven by diesel engines. Time of pumping determined from hour meter on each engine.

Pumpage 4

(acre-feet)

4 Computed by multiplying daily pumpage by time of pumping.

Water use 5

(feet)

5 Computed by dividing total pumpage by irrigated area.

4 404613117274101 ( 6)

6 Wells 4, 5, and 6 are used together to irrigate two 320-acre fields of alfalfa.

7/11/98 7.1 81.3 577 -

5 404614117270901 (6) 7/12/98 12.0 85.7 1,030 -

6 404546117274101 (6) 5/2/98 7.87 20.2 159 -

(6) 7/11/98 11.1 63.3 703 -

Totals for 1998 irrigation season 640 - - - 2,470 3.9
10 Ground-Water Use, Locations of Production Wells, and Areas Irrigated Using Ground Water in 1998, Middle Humboldt River Basin

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE

PRECIPITATION, IN INCHES

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

Average 1944-2000

Comparison of 1998 Irrigation Season with 

1994-97 Seasons

A typical irrigation season in the middle Humboldt River Basin usually begins in early April and 

ends in early September with the final cutting of alfalfa. 

The typical season not only includes years of average 

or near average precipitation, but also includes years of 

below average precipitation. The 1998 irrigation season was not a typical irrigation season because winter 

and spring precipitation were well above average in the 

middle Humboldt River Basin. Precipitation at Battle 

Mountain was about twice the monthly average from 

January through April and in June, and was more than 

four times the monthly average in May (fig. 2). Consequently, soil moisture was well above normal by early 

April when pumping of ground water should have 

begun. Most center-pivot and wheel-line sprinkler systems were idle, or only used sporadically, in April, 

May, and early June because soils were so saturated 

that the growth and health of the alfalfa crops were 

being affected. Thus, the amounts of ground water 

applied to the 20 different fields listed in table 2 do not 

represent the amount of ground water that would have 

been used in a typical year.

Power-consumption records for the four irrigation seasons preceding 1998 were compared with 1998 

records and used to adjust 1998 water use (table 2) to 

an estimated use for the 1994-97 irrigation seasons, all 

of which were typical years. Table 4 lists comparisons 

of power consumption during each of the 1994-97 irrigation seasons with 1998 power consumption for 19 of 

the 20 irrigation systems listed in table 2. Power-consumption records for 1994-97 for well 8 were not available. The factors for each year were determined by 

dividing power use for a specific sprinkler system by 

power use in 1998. The factors indicate that power use 

in 1998 was consistently exceeded by power use in the 

1994-97 irrigation seasons at all of the irrigation systems listed in table 4.

Water used at each of the irrigation systems 

during a typical irrigation season was estimated by 

multiplying the amount of water used by the system 

in 1998 by the average factor for the 1994-97 seasons 

(table 4). Ground water applied to fields during the 

1998 irrigation season ranged from 1.7 to 2.2 ft using 

the center-pivot sprinkler systems and ranged from 

2.1 to 3.1 ft using the wheel-line sprinkler systems. 

Estimated amounts of ground water applied to the same 

fields during the previous four irrigation seasons 

ranged from 2.4 to 4.8 ft and 3.2 to 4.2 ft for centerpivot and wheel-line sprinkler systems, respectively. 

The area-weighted averages for a typical season are 

3.1 ft for the center-pivot systems and 3.7 ft for the 

wheel-line systems.

Ground-Water Use in 1998

Locations of production wells and areas irrigated 

with ground water in each hydrographic area in the 

middle Humboldt River Basin are shown on plate 1. 

Types and numbers of production wells, irrigated acreage, and water use for each hydrographic area are listed 

in table 5.

Figure 2. Total monthly precipitation January through June, 1994-98, Battle Mountain, Nevada.
Ground-Water Use in 1998 11

Total ground-water pumpage from 420 production wells in the middle Humboldt River Basin in 1998 

was about 298,000 acre-ft (table 5). This pumpage was 

distributed as follows—78 percent for mining, 19 percent for irrigation, and 3 percent for power plant, industrial, and municipal needs combined (fig. 3A).

The largest single source of ground-water pumpage in the middle Humboldt River Basin is mining. 

Total ground water pumped at 16 gold mines in 1998 

was 233,000 acre-ft (tables 5 and 6) and exceeded the 

total of all other ground-water pumpage by about four 

times (fig. 3A). Consumptive use for mining purposes 

was 23,600 acre-ft, and the excess of 209,000 acre-ft 

was pumped for the dewatering of eight gold mines. 

Dewatering totals in 1998 at the eight mines ranged 

from 90 acre-ft at the Pinson Mine to 95,400 acre-ft 

at the Betze Mine (table 6).

Managing this excess water can be difficult, 

especially when the volumes of water are large. The 

NDWR policy requires the excess water be returned to 

the aquifer in the same basin from which it was pumped 

either by infiltration or reinjection. However, these 

methods do not always work because the properties of 

soils and shallow alluvium may not be suitable for infiltration, and the unsaturated zone may not have the 

capacity to store the large volumes of ground water that 

must be pumped. Therefore, a second alternative for 

managing excess water is to substitute it for ground 

Table 4. Comparison of power consumption during the 1994-97 irrigation seasons with power 

consumption during the 1998 season at selected irrigation wells and estimated water use during an 

average irrigation season in the middle Humboldt River Basin, north-central Nevada. 1 2 3 4

1 Power consumption data at selected wells for 1994-97 irrigation seasons obtained from Sierra Pacific Power 

Company with well owner's permission. Ratios computed by dividing power consumption for indicated year by 1998 power 

consumption. Dash indicates power consumption data not available for that year.

2 Average power consumption for 1994-97 irrigation seasons. When only one value was available for 1994-97 period, 

that value was used as average.

3 Amount of water, in feet of depth, used in an average irrigation season. Computed by multiplying average ratio by 

amount of water, in feet of depth, applied in 1998.

4 This is a weighted average where the weighting is by irrigated area.

Well

numbers

(see plate 1)

Irrigated

Area

(acres)

Ratio of 1994-97 power consumption to 

1998 power consumption1

Water use

(feet of depth)

1994 1995 1996 1997 Average2 1998

(see table 2) 

Average

irrigation

season3

Center-Pivot Sprinkler Systems

12 251 - 1.29 1.60 1.35 1.41 2.1 3.0

13 248 - - 1.48 1.32 1.40 1.7 2.4

14 121 2.26 2.14 2.22 2.23 2.21 2.1 4.6

15 123 2.25 2.02 2.11 2.35 2.18 2.2 4.8

16 254 - 1.33 1.76 1.38 1.49 2.0 3.0

17 257 - - - 1.49 1.49 1.8 2.7

18 256 1.64 1.28 1.35 1.19 1.36 2.2 3.0

Total Area 1,510 Weighted Average 2.04 3.14

Wheel-Line Sprinkler Systems

1, 2, and 3 316 - - 1.10 1.33 1.22 2.6 3.2

7 270 - - - 1.34 1.34 2.6 3.5

9, 10, and 11 653 - - - 1.39 1.39 2.5 3.5

19, 20, and 21 554 1.56 1.38 1.51 1.52 1.49 2.8 4.2

22 156 - - - 1.25 1.25 3.1 3.9

23 145 - - - 1.63 1.63 2.1 3.4

Total Area 2,100 Weighted Average 2.64 3.74
12 Ground-Water Use, Locations of Production Wells, and Areas Irrigated Using Ground Water in 1998, Middle Humboldt River Basin

water being pumped for another purpose in another part 

of the basin. If neither infiltration nor substitution of 

use is feasible, the third alternative is to release excess 

water to the Humboldt River or one of its tributaries.

Table 6 and figure 3B show how water from the 

eight mines being dewatered was distributed in 1998 

according to the alternatives discussed above. A total of 

about 74,500 acre-ft (36 percent) of excess ground 

water was returned to aquifers by infiltration at Boulder 

Flat (Betze and Genesis Mines), Crescent Valley (Pipeline Mine), Lower Reese River Valley (McCoy Mine), 

and the Kelly Creek Area (Getchell, Pinson, and Twin 

Creeks Mines). A total of about 33,100 acre-ft (16 percent) of excess water was being substituted for other 

uses. Of this total, 28,100 acre-ft of excess water from 

the Betze Mine was for irrigation use in Boulder Flat, 

and 5,020 acre-ft from the Lone Tree Mine was for consumptive use at the Marigold Mine, and the Valmy 

Power Plant in the Clovers Area, and the Trenton 

Canyon Mine located outside the study area. A total of 

96,700 acre-ft (46 percent) of excess water was 

released to the Humboldt River or one of its tributaries 

from the Betze, Lone Tree, and Twin Creeks Mines. 

However, releases from the Betze Mine ended in 

February 1999. Finally, a total of about 5,260 acre-ft 

(2 percent) of excess water was lost to evaporation.

An estimated 57,800 acre-ft of ground water was 

pumped during 1998 for irrigation purposes (table 5). 

This pumpage is widely scattered in the middle Humboldt River Basin, and except for Rock Creek and 

Willow Creek Valleys, each hydrographic area has 

some area irrigated by ground water (plate 1). Irrigation 

pumpage is concentrated in relatively large areas in 

Antelope and Middle Reese River Valleys and to a 

lesser extent in Upper and Lower Reese River Valleys, 

the Clovers Area, and the Kelly Creek Area. The largest 

irrigated area by far is in Boulder Flat where centerpivot sprinkler systems are used to irrigate about 

10,100 acres of alfalfa and pasture. However, all of

the water used for irrigating these fields comes from 

wells used to dewater the Betze Mine about 10 miles

to the north.

Municipal wells serve the towns of Austin, Battle 

Mountain, Crescent Valley, and Beowawe. They also 

serve groups of residences at a Nevada Department of 

Transportation maintenance station on the eastern side 

Municipal, power plant,

and industrial

3% 

Mine dewatering

70%

Mining

consumptive use

8% 

Irrigation

19%

A B

Evaporation

2%

Substitution

of use

16% 

Infiltration

36%

Surface-water

release

46% 

Figure 3. Distribution of (A) Total ground-water pumpage, and (B) Total mine dewatering pumpage, 1998, middle Humboldt 

River Basin, north-central Nevada. Total pumpage was 298,000 acre-feet and total mine dewatering pumpage was 209,000 

acre-feet
Ground-Water Use in 1998 13

Table 5. Area irrigated with ground water, types and numbers of actively used production wells, and total ground-water use in 1998 in hyd

Humboldt River Basin, north-central Nevada 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

1 Computed as area, in acres, of center-pivot irrigation systems times 2 feet plus area, in acres, of wheel-line irrigation systems times 2.6 feet plus area, in acres, of f

3.9 feet.

2 Value based on 378 acres irrigated by center pivots and 221 acres irrigated by wheel lines.3 Water pumped as a by-product of oil production (Davis, 1999, p. 48). This water was returned to the local aquifer by way of injection wells.4 Value based on 123 acres irrigated by center pivots and 250 acres irrigated by wheel lines.5 Of this total, 2,420 acre-feet was for consumptive use at Cortez and Pipeline Mines and 32,700 acre-feet was for dewatering Pipeline Mine.6 Water supply for town of Crescent Valley and Beowawe School.

Hydrographic area

Irrigated

area

(acres)

Production wells

Irrigation Power plant Mining Industrial 

Number

Pumpage1

(acre 

feet)

Number

Pumpage

(acre 

feet)

Number

Pumpage

(acre

feet)

Number

Pumpage

(acre

feet)

N

Pine Valley 600 4 21,330 0 0 0 0 1 3254 Crescent Valley 380 2 4896 0 0 42 535,100 0 0 Carico Lake Valley 300 3 7585 0 0 0 0 0 0 Upper Reese River Valley 2,310 17 85,110 0 0 0 0 0 0 Antelope Valley 4,780 29 1012,200 0 0 0 0 0 0 Middle Reese River Valley 7,490 42 1116,900 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lower Reese River Valley 3,650 19 129,000 0 0 19 1328,600 0 0 Whirlwind Valley 36 1 1547 163 166,670 3 1771 0 0 Boulder Flat 10,100 1 18390 0 0 87 19102,000 1 261 Rock Creek Valley 0 0 0 0 0 1 21196 0 0 Willow Creek Valley 0 0 0 0 0 4 2279 0 0 Clovers Area 1,910 17 243,970 21 251,480 3 26419 0 0 Pumpernickel Valley 860 4 272,880 0 0 9 2851,400 0 0 Kelly Creek Area 1,360 11 293,490 0 0 51 3014,900 0 0 Totals 36,700 150 57,800 24 8,150 219 233,000 2 515 
14 Ground-Water Use, Locations of Production Wells, and Areas Irrigated Using Ground Water in 1998, Middle Humboldt River Basin 7 Value based on 300 acres irrigated by flood. Ground water is used to supplement streamflow runoff for an estimated one-half of the irrigation season. 8 Value based on 1,890 acres irrigated by center pivots, 230 acres irrigated by wheel lines, and 187 acres irrigated by flood 9 Water supply for town of Austin. 10 Value based on 2,770 acres irrigated by center pivots, 900 acres irrigated by wheel lines, and 1,110 acres irrigated by flood. 11 Value based on 4,280 acres irrigated by center pivots and 3,210 acres irrigated by wheel lines. 12 Value based on 880 acres irrigated by center pivots, 1,610 acres irrigated by wheel lines, and 1,160 acres irrigated by flood of which 760 acres is irrigated by surf

the season. 13 Of this total, 1,640 acre-feet was for consumptive use at the Copper Canyon and McCoy Mines and 25,200 acre-feet for dewatering the McCoy Mine. Of the dew

evaporated from infiltration ponds and 25,100 acre-feet was returned to local aquifers by infiltration. 14 Water supply for town of Battle Mountain. 15 Value based on 36 acres of wheel lines. Ground water is used about one-half of the season to supplement streamflow diversions from the Humboldt River. 16 Value is total withdrawal from geothermal wells at Beowawe Geothermal Power Plant. Of this total, 5,650 acre-feet is re-injected after passing through cooling toas evaporation. 17 Ground water pumped for consumptive use at Mule Canyon Mine. 18 Pumpage for 150 acres irrigated by wheel line in southern Boulder Flat. However, part of the water pumped from Betze Mine is used for irrigation in central Bou

19 Of this total, 6,340 acre-feet was for consumptive use at the Betze, Genesis, Dee, and Carlin Mines and 95,700 acre-feet was for mine dewatering mostly at the B

total, 13,800 acre-feet was returned to local aquifers by infiltration, 28,100 acre-feet was used for irrigation on 10,100 acres at 73 center-pivot sprinkler systems, 5,170 ev

and 48,600 acre-feet was discharged to the Humboldt River. Discharges to Humboldt River ceased early in 1999. 20 Municipal wells serving small groups of residents at Dunphy and at Nevada Department of Transportation Maintenance station in eastern Boulder Flat. Pumpage 

21 Permitted consumptive use at Rossi Mine. Pumpage not reported. 22 Consumptive use at Midas Joint Venture Gold Mine. 23 Water supply for town of Midas. Pumpage not reported. 24 Value based on 1,510 acres of center pivots, 261 acres of wheel lines, and 138 acres of flood that supplements surface-water diversion for one half the season. 25 Ground water pumped for cooling purposes at Valmy Power Plant. An additional 4,760 acre-feet was delivered from the Lone Tree Mine. 26 Consumptive use pumpage at Marigold Mine. Does not include 220 acre-ft delivered from Lone Tree Mine. See footnote 28. 27 Value based on 250 acres of center pivots and 610 acres of flood. 28 Of this total, 2,470 acre-feet was for consumptive use and 48,900 acre-ft was for mine dewatering. Of the dewatering total, 176 acre-ft used at Marigold Mine (22

Marigold reports), 66 acre-ft used at Trenton Canyon Mine outside study area, 4,740 acre-ft used at Valmy Power Plant, 21 acre-ft used for watering stock, and 44,000 ac

by way of the Iron Point Relief Canal. 29 Value based on 1,270 acres of wheel lines, and 95 acres of flood that supplements streamflow diversions for one-half of each season. 30 Of this total, 7,960 acre-feet was for consumptive use and 6,970 acre-feet was for mine dewatering at the Twin Creeks, Getchell, and Pinson Mines. Of the dewat

was returned to aquifers as infiltration, and 4,090 acre-ft released to Kelly Creek.
Ground-Water Use in 1998 15

of Boulder Flat, at Dunphy in southern Boulder Flat, 

and at Valmy in the western part of the Clovers Area. 

Total municipal use was 1,370 acre-ft in 1998 (table 5).

Ground water is used in the Clovers Area and in 

Whirlwind Valley for generation of electricity. In 1998, 

1,480 acre-ft of ground water was pumped at 21 wells 

in the Clovers Area for cooling purposes at the Valmy 

Power Plant (table 5). However, since 1998 these cooling water needs have been met mostly with excess 

water from the nearby Lone Tree Mine. Three geothermal wells at the Beowawe Geothermal Power Plant in 

Whirlwind Valley produce steam that is used to generate electricity. The total water withdrawn in 1998 was 

6,670 acre-ft, of which 85 percent was returned to the 

geothermal reservoir by re-injection, and the balance 

was lost to evaporation.

Ground-water pumpage for industrial purposes is 

not common in the middle Humboldt River Basin. The 

only industrial pumpage that could be confirmed from 

State of Nevada records was 254 acre-ft of water 

pumped as a by-product of oil production in Pine 

Valley and 261 acre-ft pumped at a chemical plant in 

western Boulder Flat (table 5).

 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Table 6. Ground-water pumpage for mining purposes in 1998, Middle Humboldt River Basin, north-central Nevada.

[All values in acre-feet, rounded to three significant figures if more than 100 acre-feet and two significant figures if less.]

1 Used to irrigate 10,100 acres by center pivot in Boulder Flat.

2 Released to Humboldt River near Dunphy. No releases since February 1999.

3 Water delivered to Valmy Power Plant and Marigold and Trenton Canyon Mines.

4 Water released to Iron Point Relief Canal.

5 Total includes 220 acre-ft of water delivered from Lone Tree Mine.

6 The Rossi Mine is a small barite mine. The total pumpage shown was not reported. Instead, the value is the permitted pumpage.

7 Released to Kelly Creek, a tributary of Humboldt River. All of this water infiltrates the stream channel before reaching the Humboldt River. 

Mine name

Total

mining

pumpage

Consumptive

use

Excess

water1

Distribution of excess water

Infiltration Substitution

of use

Release to

Humboldt River

or tributary

Evaporation

Betze 101,000 5,610 95,400 13,500 128,100 248,600 5,170

Carlin 94 94 - - - - -

Copper Canyon 1,790 1,790 - - - - -

Cortez 407 407 - - - - -

Dee 427 427 - - - - -

Genesis 490 205 285 285 - - -

Getchell 4,360 1,610 2,750 2,750 -

Lone Tree 51,400 2,470 48,900 - 35,020 444,000 -

Marigold 419 5639 - - - - -

McCoy 26,800 1,630 25,200 25,100 88

Midas Joint Venture 79 79 - - - - -

Mule Canyon 71 71 - - - - -

Pinson 1,120 1,030 90 90 - - -

Pipeline 34,700 2,010 32,700 32,700 - - -

Rossi6 6196 196 -

Twin Creeks 9,450 5,320 4,130 40 74,090

Totals 233,000 23,600 209,000 74,500 33,100 96,700 5,260
16 Ground-Water Use, Locations of Production Wells, and Areas Irrigated Using Ground Water in 1998, Middle Humboldt River Basin

Summary

Ground water is pumped in the middle Humboldt 

River Basin for a variety of uses, the principal of which 

are agricultural, industrial, mining, municipal, and 

power plant purposes. Ground water also is pumped at 

a number of domestic and stock wells, but these two 

uses are relatively small when compared with the principal uses. The purpose of this report is to develop a 

compilation of all production wells and areas irrigated 

by ground water, and to quantify 1998 ground-water 

use in each of the 14 hydrographic areas of the middle 

Humboldt River Basin.

Annual pumping records for production wells 

generally are reported to the Nevada Division of Water 

Resources. However, operators of irrigation wells are 

not consistently required to report annual pumpage. In 

order to make reasonable estimates of pumpage for irrigation use, daily power-consumption and pump-discharge rates were measured at 20 wells used to irrigate 

3,850 acres of alfalfa and minor amounts of oats by 

center-pivot and wheel-line sprinkler systems. This 

area represents about 10 percent of the total area of 

36,700 acres irrigated by ground water in the middle 

Humboldt River Basin. The two rates were used to 

compute a ratio that would estimate the amount of 

power required to pump one acre-foot of water at each 

of the wells. The estimated total volume of ground 

water pumped at each well during the irrigation season 

was determined by dividing total power use at the well 

during the season by the ratio. A similar approach was 

used to estimate total water pumped at three wells using 

pumps powered by diesel engines to flood-irrigate two 

fields. Finally, the total amount of water, in feet, 

applied to the irrigated fields was estimated by dividing 

area, in acres, irrigated by total amount of water, in 

acre-feet, that was pumped.

The amount of water applied to the fields irrigated 

by center-pivot and wheel-line sprinkler systems in 

1998 ranged from 1.7 to 2.2 ft and 2.1 to 3.1 ft, respectively. The averages were 2.0 and 2.6 ft, respectively. 

The amount of water, in feet of depth, applied to the 

flood-irrigated fields was 3.9 ft, about twice the amount 

of that used by a center-pivot sprinkler system.

The amounts of water applied to these fields 

during the 1998 irrigation season were less than what 

would have been applied during a typical irrigation 

season. Late winter and spring precipitation in 1998 

exceeded long-term monthly averages for January 

through June by almost two to four times. As a result, 

most irrigation wells were used only sporadically in the 

first part of the 1998 irrigation season.

Comparison of 1998 power-consumption records 

with those for 1994-97 shows that 1998 power consumption was consistently exceeded during the previous four years by 110 to 235 percent. If the amounts of 

water applied to fields during the 1998 irrigation season are adjusted to account for this, the average amount 

of water applied to a field using center-pivot and wheelline sprinkler systems during a typical year would be 

3.1 ft and 3.7 ft, respectively.

Total ground water pumped in the middle Humboldt River Basin during 1998 was about 298,000 acreft, and was distributed as follows: 78 percent for mining 

(including 70 percent for dewatering), 19 percent for 

irrigation, and 3 percent for industrial, municipal, and 

power plants combined. Mining pumpage was by far 

the largest because several gold mines have extended 

below local ground-water levels and the area around 

each mine must be dewatered in order to maintain a dry 

and workable mine. Excess water from the eight mines 

was distributed as follows: (1) A total of about 74,500 

acre-ft of excess ground water was returned to aquifers 

by infiltration at Boulder Flat, Crescent Valley, Lower 

Reese River Valley, and the Kelly Creek Area; (2) A 

total of 33,100 acre-ft was being substituted for irrigation use in Boulder Flat and for consumptive use at

a mine and a power plant in the Clovers Area and at 

a mine outside the study area; (3) A total of 96,700 

acre-ft was released to the Humboldt River or one of its 

tributaries from three mines; and (4) A total of 5,260 

acre-ft was lost to evaporation.

References Cited

Berger, D.L., 2000, Water Budget Estimates for the 14 

Hydrographic Areas in the Middle Humboldt River 

Basin, North-Central Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigation Report 00-4168, 55 p.

Cardinalli, J.L., Roach, L.M., Rush, F.E., and Vasey, B.J., 

comps., 1968, State of Nevada hydrographic areas: 

Nevada Division of Water Resources map, scale 

1:500,000.

Davis, D.A., 1999, Oil and Gas, in The Nevada Mineral

Industry 1998: Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology 

Special Publication MI-1998, 58 p.

Hurr, R.T., and Litke, D.W., 1989, Estimating pumping time 

and ground-water withdrawals using energy consumption data: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 89-4107, 27 p.

Rush, F.E., 1968, Index of hydrographic areas in Nevada: 

Nevada Division of Water Resources Information 

Report 6, 38 p.
Since 1879, the U.S. Geological Survey has been providing maps, reports, and information to help others 

who manage, develop, and protect our Nation’s water, energy, mineral, land, and biological resources. We 

help find natural resources, and we supply scientific understanding needed to help minimize or mitigate 

the effects of natural hazards and the environmental damage caused by human activities. The results of 

our efforts touch the daily lives of almost everyone.

Plume—GROUND-WATER USE, LOCATIONS OF PRODUCTION WELLS, AND AREAS IRRIGATED USING GROUND WATER IN 1998, MIDDLE HUMBOLDT RIVER BASIN—USGS, WRIR 03-4227