New
Mexico
Bureauof Mines and Mineral
Resources
Open-File Report 133
A TWO-DIMENSIONAL HYDROLOGIC MODEL
OF THE ANIMAS VALLEY, HIDALGO COUNTY, NEW MEXICO
Keith M. O'Brien
Hydrologist
and
William J. Stone
Hydrogeologist
January 1983
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1
Introduction
The Animas Valley
Problem and purpose
of study
Purpose of this report
Previous Work
Acknowledgments
1
3
3
4
5
6
6
Geologic Setting
Geologic History
Surface Geology
Geophysics
Subsurface Geology
11
13
Hydrologic Setting
Ground Water Flow System
Aquifer Extent
Recharge
Hydraulic Properties
19
19
19
21
22
Description of Model
Computer Code
Area Modelled and Grid
26
26
27
Steady-State Simulation
Flow Equation
Data
Calibration
32
32
32
33
Transient Simulation
Flow Equation
Data
Calibration
Verification
37
37
37
41
41
Model Confidence
Sources of Error
Sensitivity Analysis
44
44
46
References
52
Table
1
Table
2
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
7
Reported recharge values €or ground-water
basins proximal to the Animas Valley
Irrigation data for the Lower Animas Valley
Location of Study Area
Geologic Map
Tectonic and Volcanic Features
Complete Bouguer Gravity Anomaly
( 5 milligal contour interval)
23
39
2
8
9
Map
10
Page
Figure
5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure10
Figure 11
Figure 1 2
Figure 13
Figure 14
Figure 1 5
Figure 16
Figure 1 7
Figure18
Complete Bouguer Gravity Anomaly Map
(2.5 milligalcontourinterval)
Location of Seismic Refraction Profiles
S e i s m i cR e f r a c t i o nP r o f i l e# 4
S e i s m i cR e f r a c t i o nP r o f i l e# 5
S e i s m i cR e f r a c t i o nP r o f i l e# 3
Finite-Difference Grid
andBoundary Conditions
Steady-StateCalibrationResult(April1948)
T r a n s m i s s i v i t y Magnitude and D i s t r i b u t i o n
Relationship of gravity data to transmissivity
magnitudeand
distribution
TransientCalibrationResult(April
1948 t o
January 1 9 5 5 )
TransientVerificationResult(April
1948 t o
A p r i l 1981)
Model s e n s i t i v i t y r e s u l t s f o r s t o r a g e c o e f f i c i e n t
(SC), t r a n s m i s s i v i t y ( T ) , ground-water
(R)
withdrawal ( Q ) , and mountain-frontrecharge
Model s e n s i t i v i t y r e s u l t s a l o n g
column 11 ( e a s t w e s tp r o f i l eo fw a t e r - l e v e l s ) .T r a n s m i s s i v i t y
( T ) , mountain-frontrecharge
( Q ) , ground-water
withdrawal ( R ) , and s t o r a g ec o e f f i c i e n t ( S C )
values are perturbed by
and2.0
factorsof0.5
Model s e n s i t i v i t y r e s u l t s along column 2 2 ( e a s t w e s tp r o f i l eo fw a t e rl e v e l s ) .T r a n s m i s s i v i t y
( T ) , mountain-frontrecharge
( R ) , ground-water
withdrawal ( Q ) , and s t o r a g ec o e f f i c i e n t ( S C )
valuesareperturbed
by factors of 0.5
and 2.0
12
14
15
16
18
28
31
34
35
42
43
47
49
51
INTRODUCTION
TheAnimas
Valley
The Animas Valley i s a t o p o g r a p h i c a l l y c l o s e d b a s i n l o c a t e d
inwesternHidalgo
County, southwest New Mexico ( f i g . 1). The
v a l l e y i s approximately 80 m i long, lying roughly between the
M e x i c a n b o r d e r a n d u s h i g h w a y 70. The w i d t h o f t h e v a l l e y v a r i e s
from 6 t o 1 2 m i along i t s length.
d r a i n a g eb a s i n
The areaofthesurface-water
i s 2,341 sq m i .
The Animas V a l l e y l i e s i n t h e
Mexican Highlands section of
I t i s bounded on t h e
t h e Basin and Range physiographicprovince.
west by the Peloncillo Mountains
and on t h e e a s t by t h e Pyramid
Mountains, and t h e Animas Mountains ( f i g . 1).
Thesemountains
r i s e 1,000 t o 2,000 f t (300 t o 600 m ) above t h e v a l l e y f l o o r .
northern topographic boundary
dune f i e l d j u s t southof
i s markedby
US 70.
The
The
an extensive eolian
southerntopographicdivide
l i e s s i x miles a c r o s s t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l b o u n d a r y i n
Mexico.
The c l i m a t e o f t h e Animas V a l l e y i s a r i d t o s e m i - a r i d (Cox,
1 9 7 3 ) .P r e c i p i t a t i o ng e n e r a l l ya v e r a g e s1 0i n c h e s
t h ev a l l e y
(250 mm) i n
and 22 i n c h e s (560 mm) inthehighermountains.
Based
on 30 y e a r so fd a t a( 1 9 3 1 - 1 9 6 0 ) ,p r e c i p i t a t i o na tL o r d s b u r gf a l l s
below 5.71 i n c h e s (145 mm) and exceeds 13.84 i n c h e s (352 mm) one
year i n t e n .R a i n f a l l
i s g r e a t e s t i n l a t e summer and e a r l y f a l l ;
half of the average annual precipitation occurs
September.
Animas Creek,which
Mountains and flows northerly
i n July through
r i s e s i n t h es o u t h e r nP e l o n c i l l o
t o a p o i n t j u s t south of the
of Animas, i s t h e o n l y p e r e n n i a l s t r e a m
i n t h es t u d ya r e a .
Ephemeralsurface-waterflowoccursalongalluvialfansthatare
1
town
.
.
.
..
. .
.
..
I
-i.
.... ..
Figure 1
L o c a t i o n ,of StudyArea
' .
...
.. .. .._. . . . ..
. .
..
located along the west
and e a s t v a l l e y m a r g i n s .
Problem and purpose of study
The c e n t r a l p a r t o f t h e v a l l e yi s a n i m p o r t a n t a r e a f o r
and i s t h e s i t e o f
i r r i g a t e da g r i c u l t u r e( L a n s f o r de ta l . ,1 9 8 0 )
theLightning
Dock
Known
GeothermalResourceArea
( f i g . 1).
is
Although an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e h y d r o g e o l o g y o f t h e v a l l e y
important to both the agricultural
economy and the development of
t h ea r e a ' sg e o t h e r m a lr e s o u r c e s ,t h ew a t e rr e s o u r c e so ft h e
entirearea
1957).
1957 (Reeder,
h a v en o tb e e ns t u d i e di nd e t a i ls i n c e
The Animas Valley i s a l s o a ne x c e l l e n t
closedalluvialbasin.
exampleof
a
For t h e s e r e a s o n s t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y
initiatedaspartofthe
U.S.
was
GeologicalSurveyWater-Resource
Division's Southwest Alluvial Basin Regional Aquifer System
by t h e U . S .
Analysis.Researchsupported
GeologicalSurvey,
Department of I n t e r i o r 'under USGS Agreement No. 14-08-0001-18812.
Purpose of t h i s r e p o r t
Basic data compiled for the
released in a series of
Animas Valley study have been
New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral
Resources Open-file reports so.that the information compiled
would be a v a i l a b l e f o r u s e p r i o r t o t h e c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e
project.O'Brien
data,O'Brien
and Stone(1981)gavethebasicwater-level
and Stone(1982a)gavethebasicwater-quality
d a t a , and O'Brien and Stone(1982b)gavethedrill-hole
t e s t i n gd a t a .T h i sr e p o r t
i s t h ef i n a lp r o j e c tr e p o r t
the two-dimensional hydrologic
Valley.
and
and g i v e s
model developed f o r t h e Animas
Previous Work
i n t h e Animas Valley
Previousgeologicalinvestigations
i n c l u d e works by Lasky(1938),Gillerman(1958),Flege(1959),
Wrucke
and
Bromfield(1961),Zeller(1962),
e t al.(1978),Deal,
andDrewes(1978),Armstrong,
E l s t o n ,e ta l .( 1 9 7 9 ) ,
( 1 9 7 2 ) , Thorman
etal.(1978),
Drewes and Thorman (1980,1980a),Lepley
( 1 9 8 1 ) , Lohse (19811, Hayes
(19821,
(1982),and
Soul;
Fleischhauer and Stone
Drewes (1982).
Previous geophysical
work i n t h e Animas V a l l e y i n c l u d e s
i n v e s t i g a t i o n s by J i r a c e k and Smith (19761, Smith(1978),
(1981),Lance,
e ta l .
Wynn
(1982), and Ackermann ( w r i t t e n
communication, 1 9 8 2 ) .
Previous hydrogeological studies
i n t h e Animas Valleywere
conducted by Schwennesen
(19181,
Reeder
(1957),
Arras ( 1 9 7 9 ) ,
Logsdon ( 1 9 8 1 ) , Hawkins ( 1 9 8 1 ) , and Hawkins and Stephens(1981).
Schwennesen(1918)examined
ofgroundwaterinthe
basins.
thesurficialdeposits
and occurrence
and San L u i s
Animas, Playas,Hachita,
Reeder ( 1 9 5 7 ) collectedhydrologicdatafrom
1948 t o
1955 i n o r d e r t o e v a l u a t e t h e e f f e c t s o
pumping
f
on t h e g r o u n d -
watersupplyofthe
Animas Valley.Arras
aquifer characteristics of the Lightning
(1979) i n v e s t i g a t e dt h e
DockKnown
Geothermal
Resource Area (KGRA) l o c a t e d on t h e e a s t e r n m a r g i n o f t h e
Valley.
Logsdon (1981)conducted
t h eL i g h t n i n g
Dock KGRA.
Animas
a detailedgeochemicalstudyof
Hawkins ( 1 9 8 1 )i n v e s t i g a t e dt h e
waterflowsystem
i n and a d j a c e n t t o t h e L i g h t n i n g
throughtheuseof
a two-dimensionalcomputer
Dock KGRA
model.Hawkinsand
Stephens(1981)updatedthehydrogeothermaldatabase
Lightning Dock KGRA and p r e s e n t e d t h e p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h
4
ground-
i n the
by
Hawkins (1981).
Acknowledgments
The a u t h o r s wish t o acknowledg e t h e as s i s t a n c e of A 11an
Sanford andJahnSchlue(GeoscienceDepartment,
New Mexico Tech)
w i t hi n t e r p r e t a t i o no fg e o p h y s i c a ld a t a .S p e c i a lt h a n k sa r e
DanielStephens(GeoscienceDepartment,
New MexicoTech)
due
and
David Hawkins (Hargis and Montgomery, I n c . )f o ri n v a l u a b l e
d i s c u s s i o n s . of t h e i r r e s e a r c h on t h e Animas V a l l e y , a s w e l l a s
comments on our work.
5
GEOLOGIC SETTING
GeologicHistory
TWO m a j o r t e c t o n i c e v e n t s a r e e v i d e n t i n t h e
The present physiography
i s an expression of the
tectonicevent.Accordingto
Drewes (1982),the
75 m.y.
Laramideorogenyoccurredaround
ago.
Animas Valley.
most r e c e n t
mainphaseofthe
I t is associated
with compressional deformation producing extensive thrust plates
originatingalongnorthwesttrendingbasementfaults.Thrusting
was followed by widespread
magmatism.
AftertheLaramideorogeny,tensionalconditionsreplaced
compression.
Eocene andwas
The r e g i o n , w a st o p o g r a p h i c a l l yh i g hd u r i n gt h e
deeply eroded with the
d e t r i t u s transported o u t of
t h er e g i o n .
The B a s i n a n d R a n g e t e c t o n i c e v e n t o f m i d d l e t o l a t e
T e r t i a r y age r e f l e c t s an e a s t - w e s t o r i e n t e d t e n s i o n a l s t r e s s
systemresultinginblock-faulting,
emplacement of granitic plutons,
complexes.High-anglenormal
renewedvolcanism,
and formation of cauldron
f a u l t i n ga s s o c i a t e dw i t hb l o c k
faultingoccurredduringthelateststageofthetectonicevent.
The b a s i n was occupied by Lake Animas i n L a t e P l e i s t o c e n e
Holocene t i m e s( F l e i s c h h a u e r
and Stone,1982).
the Pleistocene has been characterized
and
The p e r i o ds i n c e
by some f a u l t i n g and
erosion.Intermontanebasinsthatformedduringthelateststage
ofBasin
since the
and Range tectonism have continued to receive sediments
mid-Miocene.
Surface Geology
The
rocks
of Precambrian
exposed
in
the
granodiorite,
bordering
Paleozoic
mountain
and
ranges
Mesozoic
consist
sedimentary
rocks, Tertiary/Cretaceous volcanic rocks, Tertiary intrusive
rocks, Tertiary conglomerate, Quaternary/Tertiary basalt flows,
and Quaternary/Tertiary conglomerate (fig. 2).
Tertiary
m.y. old stock in the Animas
intrusive rocks include 34.9
a
Mountains, a 30-33 m.y. old quartz-monzonite-porphyry stock in
the Peloncillo Mountains, and 5a6 m.y. old granodiorite stock in
the northern Pyramid Mountains. Tertiary volcanic rocks have
been dated in the Peloncillo Mountains near Road Forks
41.7 at
m.y. and
in
at 67 m.y.
the
northern
Pyramid
Mountains
southwest
of
Lordsburg
The Pyramid Mountains are chiefly composed
of
Oligocene rhyolitic to andesitic rocks. Two Quaternary/Tertiary
basalt flows west of the town
m.y. and
0.14 m.y.
of
Animas
have
been dated
at
4.4
The northwest-southeast trending exposureof
Precambrian, Paleozoic, and Mesozoic rocks corresponds roughly to
the
thrust
zone
trend of gravity
shown
on figure 3 and the northwest-southeast
highs
shown
on
figure
4.
Elston et al. (1979) delineated approximate limitsof
cauldron-outer-ring-fracture
zones
volcanics in Hidalgo County (fig.3).
associated
with
Tertiary
Delineation of the major
faults in figure
3 is based on geologic field mapping, Landsat
imagery, complete and residual Bouguer gravity anomalies, and
seismic refraction profiles.
Fleischhauer and Stone(1982) identified and dated three
shorelines of Pleistocene/Holocene Lake Animas. At its highest
stage,
Lake
Animas in
Pleistocene
time
7
was
17 mi ( 2 7 km) long, 8
:ks
32'0
I
~~
Figurd 2
. Geologic
map compiledfrom Dane and Bachman (1965),
Clemons (19831, Drewes and Thorman (1980, 1980a), and
Drewes (1982).
32'00'
109'00'
Figure 3
T e c t o n i c . a n dv o l c a n i cf e a t u r e sc o m p i l e d
from E l s t o n . e t a l .
(1979), Thompson (1981),
andLohse
(1.981).
1090001 . .
. .
..
. I
109000'
Figure 4
,
,
Complete Bouguer gravity anomaly map
( 5 milligal contour interval).from
Lance et al. (1982)
m i (13 k m ) wide, 50 f t ( 1 5 m ) deep,andcovered
an a r e a 150 sq m i
(390 sq km).
Geophysics
Numerous g e o p h y s i c a l d a t a h e l p d e f i n e t h e t e c t o n i c
and
v o l c a n i cf e a t u r e si nt h e
Animas Valley.Theseinclude
milligal(mgal)complete
Bouguer g r a v i t y anomaly map (Lance, e t
al.,1982),
a 5-
a 2.5 mgal complete Bouguer g r a v i t y anomaly map
(Wynn, 1 9 8 1 ) ,a n dt h r e es e i s m i c - r e f r a c t i o np r o f i l e s
(Hans
Ackermann, writtencommunication,1982).
The 5 mgal complete Bouguer g r a v i t y anomaly map shows
t h e v a l l e y t o c o n s i s t o f a , s e r i e so f e l o n g a t e g r a v i t y l o w s
( f i g . 4).
These lows a r ei n t e r p r e t e da s
a s e r i e so fl i n k e d
structural depressions similar to those characterizing the
Grande r i f t i n t h e v i c i n i t y o f S o c o r r o a s d e s c r i b e d
Rio
by Sanford
(1968).
The major gravity low
and Lordsburg ( f i g . 5 ) .
i s t h a t s i t u a t e d between Road Forks
The 2.5 mgal complete Bouguer g r a v i t y
this f e a t u r e is
anomaly map shows t h a t t h e c e n t r a l p o r t i o n o f
symmetricalincrosssection,whereasthenorthern
p o r t i o n sa r ea s y m m e t r i c a l .
and southern
The symmetryofthedepression
s i g n i f i e st h en a t u r eo ff a u l t sa l o n gt h eb o r d e ro ft h eb a s i n .
A
g r a v i t y low t h a t shows a s t e e p d i p from t h e m o u n t a i n s t o
valleys indicates
a narrowfault
the
zone w i t h l a r g e d i s p l a c e m e n t
( d i s t i n c td e n s i t yc o n t r a s t ) ,w h e r e a s ,
a g r a d u a ld i pi n d i c a t e ss t e p
faulting(gradualdensitycontrast)withorwithout
some t i l t i n g .
Two s e r i e s o f g r a v i t y h i g h s d e f i n e n o r t h w e s t - s o u t h e a s t
north-southtrendsofhigh-densitymaterial.
The northwest-
and
.
Figure 5.
I
Complete Bouguer anomaly gravity map (2.5 milligal
contour interval) from Wynn (1981)
i s i n t e r r u p t e d by a g r a v i t y low
southeast trend of gravity highs
a st h et r e n dc r o s s e st h e
4).
Animas V a l l e y( f i g .
superposition of the gravity
low on t h e t r e i d
The
of gravity highs
is
suggests that the northwest-southeast trend of gravity highs
olderthanthenorth-southtrendofgravityhighs.
Seismic-refraction data were purchased
t h e U.S.
and i n t e r p r e t e d by
GeologicalSurveyfortheSouthwestAlluvialBasins
P r o j e c t (Hans Ackermann, w r i t t e n communication, 1982).
h e r e i n ,s e i s m i cr e f r a c t i o np r o f i l e s( f i g s .
7,
A s shown
8 and 9 ) r e f l e c t
r e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s by t h ea u t h o r s .G e n e r a l l y ,s e i s m i cv e l o c i t i e s
g r e a t e rt h a n
10,000 t o 11,000 f t / s i n d i c a t e
geologicunitthat
a dense,low-porosity
would n o t y i e l d s i g n i f i c a n t q u a n t i t i e s o f
watertowells.
Location of seismic-refraction profiles
6.
P r o f i l e number 4 i s o r i e n t e de a s t - w e s t
i s shown i n f i g u r e
and i n d i c a t e st h e
n a t u r e o f t h e b o r d e r i n g f a u l t s i n t h e v i c i n i t y o f t h etown of
Animas ( f i g . 7 ) .
A t t h i sp o i n ti nt h eb a s i n ,t h eb o r d e rf a u l t s
are high-angle normal faults with an indeterminate
throw.
amount of
P r o f i l e number 5 i s a l s oo r i e n t e de a s t - w e s t
and shows t h e
t o consist of
bordering faults in the vicinity
of Cotton City
s e r i e so fs t e p - f a u l t s( f i g .
The n a t u r eo ft h eb o r d e r i n g
faults as defined
8).
by s e i s m i c - r e f r a c t i o n p r o f i l e
and by c r o s s - s e c t i o n s c o n s t r u c t e d a c r o s s c o m p l e t e
numbers 4 and 5
Bouguer g r a v i t y
anomaly maps ( f i g s . 4 and 5 ) a t t h e l o c a t i o n s o f p r o f i l e
numbers
4 and 5 i s s i m i l a r .
Subsurface Geology
The geomorphology of
Lower Animas V a l l e y p r o v i d e s c l u e s t o
13
a
..
.
.
..
109b00' .
'
.
.
Figui-e 6. L o c a t i o n o f s e i s m i c Y e f r a c t i o n p r o f i l e s
..
G.ROUND-WATER
4,000
3,000
MOUNTAINS
2,000
t-
PELONCILLO
I ,000
AN I MAS VALLEY
16.0 Velocities
(ft/s+l,OOO) . ' .
,
'
Vertical
exaggeration
0 (msl)
is
'
- I ,000
Shotpoint separation is
*
MILES
F i g u r e 7.
Seismic r e f r a c t i o n p r o f i l e #4.
-2,000
W
W
LL
3
..
.
.
t h ec o m p o s i t i o no fb a s i n - f i l l .
The compilationofsubsurface
d a t ar e v e a l si ng e o l o g i cc r o s s - s e c t i o n
horizon of clay that represents deposition
(O'Brien and Stone, 198233).
s e c t i o n A-A'
from Lake Animas
O t h e rc l a yu n i t s
are poorly correlated
shown i nc r o s s -
and p r o b a b l y r e p r e s e n t b a s i n -
i s composed of a
c e n t e rf a c i e sd e p o s i t i o n .B a s i n - f i l l
heterogeneousmixtureofclay,
a n e a rs u r f a c e
A-A'
s i l t , sandand
The t h i c k n e s s o f b a s i n - f i l l d e t e r m i n a b l e
g r a v i t y ,r e f r a c t i o n ,
1.8 km).
and petroleumdata
gravel.
from geologic,
i s 5,000-6,000
i s t h et h i c k n e s so f
Of g r e a t e ri m p o r t a n c et ot h es t u d y
w a t e r - b e a r i n gs e d i m e n t s .R e f r a c t i o np r o f i l e s
3, 4,
760 f t (200 m ) , 2,600 f t (800 m ) , and2,000
and 5 r e v e a l
f t (600 m ) o f
p o t e n t i a lw a t e r - b e a r i n gs e d i m e n t s ,r e s p e c t i v e l y .
ofpotentialwater-bearingsediments
f t (1.5-
The t h i c k n e s s
shownon
profile 3 (fig. 9)
i s much l e s s t h a n t h a t shown on p r o f i l e s 4 and 5 ( f i g s . 7 and 8 ) .
Apparently,potentialwater-bearingsedimentsinthe
Valley have been eroded by
Lower Animas Valley.
Animas Creekwould
Upper Animas
Animas Creek and r e d e p o s i t e d i n t h e
The c o a r s e s ts e d i m e n t st r a n s p o r t e d
bedepositedatthesouthern(upstream)
by
end of
t h e Lower Animas Valley where there i s a d e c r e a s e i n t h e s l o p e o f
thelandsurface(O'Brien
andStone,
17
1981,
Plate 3 ) .
.
.
.:
, ..
.
. .
.
..
1333
-
,. .X
.I
HYDROLOGIC SETTING
Ground-Water Flow System
Large-scale ground-water withdrawals began during the
irrigation season
1948
and d i s r u p t e d t h e dynamic e q u i l i b r i u m o f t h e
ground-waterflowsystem.
t o A p r i l 1948wereused
Thus, w a t e r - l e v e ld a t ac o l l e c t e dp r i o r
todefinetheunconfinedhydrologic
system a t t h es t e a d y - s t a t ec o n d i t i o n( O ' B r i e n
and Stone,1981).
Steady-state water levels indicate northerly ground-water flow
t h a td i s c h a r g e s
1981, P l a t e 1).
t o t h e G i l a Riversystem(O'Brien
A c r o s ss e c t i o n
byO'Brien
and Stone,
and Stone (1981,
s i x miles
P l a t e 3 ) shows a n a b r u p t d r o p i n w a t e r - l e v e l e l e v a t i o n
southof
Animas.
existence of
The c a u s eo ft h i ss h a r pd e c l i n e
a perchedwater
zone i n t h e Upper Animas Valley.
The m a i n z o n e o f s a t u r a t i o n t h a t e x i s t s
Valleyhasnotbeenlocated
water development
is the
i n t h e Lower Animas
i n t h e Upper Animas Valley.
Ground-
i n t h e Upper Animas Valley i s c o n f i n e d t o t h e
shallow perched ground-water system existing along
Animas Creek
(O'Brien and Stone, 1981).
AquiferExtent
Seismic-refraction profile
number 3 i n d i c a t e s a n a b r u p t
thickening of unconsolidated sediments
( f i g .9 ) .F i g u r e
s i x miles south of
Animas
4 shows a g r a v i t y low i n d i c a t i n g a s t r u c t u r a l
d e p r e s s i o ni nt h i sr e g i o n .G e o l o g i ch i s t o r ys u g g e s t st h a ts i n c e
t h e mainphaseof
t h e Laramide orogeny the
Upper Animas Valley
has been topographically higher than the
Lower Animas Valley.
Thistopographiceffectcauseserosion
and t r a n s p o r t o f s e d i m e n t s
from t h e Upper Animas Valley and s u b s e q u e n t d e p o s i t i o n i n t h e
19
Lower Animas Valley.Consequently,thepredominanceofcoarsegrained sediments
and g r e a t e r t h i c k n e s s o f u n c o n s o l i d a t e d
material at the break in slope between the
V a l l e y( f i g .
Upper and Lower Animas
9 ) c r e a t e s a d i s t i n c td i f f e r e n c ei nt h eh y d r o l o g i c
character of the aquifer in the
twoareas(especially
t r a n s m i s s i v i t yv a l u e s ) .I n d i r e c tc o n f i r m a t i o no f
t h i s conclusion
i s p r o v i d e d b y t h e f a c t t h a t t h e r e a rno
e wells currently
penetrating a large saturated thickness of basin fill in the
Upper Animas Valley. We concluded on t h e b a s i s o f s e i s m i c r e f r a c t i o np r o f i l e s ,g r a v i t yd a t a ,g e o l o g i ch i s t o r y ,
logs that the
main zone of saturation in the
and w e l l
Animas Valleyfrom
which large ground-water supplies could
be developed has
a
southern boundary located approximately
s i x miles south of the
town of Animas.
The remaining boundaries of the main
zone o f s a t u r a t i o n i n
t h e Lower Animas Valley were defined primarily
by means of .a
2.5
mgal complete Bouguer g r a v i t y anomaly map ( f i g . 5 ) and a t e c t o n i c
f e a t u r e s map ( f i g . 3 ) .
The e a s t and westboundariesofthe
unconfined hydrologic system coincide with the basin margin
faultsas
shown i n f i g u r e
3.
The n o r t h e r ne x t e n to ft h e
unconfinedsystemcorresponds
g r a v i t y low i n t h e
to the northern extent of the
Lower Animas Valley(near
The southeastern hydrologic boundary
low. a l l u v i a l d i v i d e between the
Precise location of this
w a t e r - l e v e ld a t ap r i o r
Summit) ( f i g . 5 ) .
is associated with
a
Animas and Playas Valleys.
boundary i s d i f f i c u l t b e c a u s e r e p o r t e d
t o 1981 i nt h i sa r e aa r es c a r c e .
water flow directions could not be discerned
20
Ground-
from t h e e x i s t i n g
data.Recentdevelopmentofgroundwaterin
providedadditionaldata
thisareahas
on theground-waterflowsystem.
Analysisoftheseadditionalwater-leveldataindicatesthe
existence of
Valleys.
a ground-water divide between the
Animas and Playas
i s probablyformedbytwo
The ground-waterdivide
intersecting cones of depression that have developed
i r r i g a t i o n pumpage i n t h e Animas Valley andby
smeltingpurposesinthePlayasValley.
i s situatedover
a subsurface high
p r o f i l e number 4 ( f i g . 7 ) .
by
pumpage f o r
The ground-waterdivide
shown i n s e i s m i c - r e f r a c t i o n
W a k e r - l e v e ld a t aa r ei n s u f f i c i e n tt o
d e l i n e a t et h ee x i s t e n c eo ft h i sd i v i d ep r i o rt o
1981.
existence of this divide at the steady-state condition
Thus, t h e
is
speculative.
~
The n a t u r e o f t h e e a s t e r n b o u n d a r y o f t h eAnimas Valley i n
t h ev i c i n i t yo f
Lordsburg i s a l s op r o b l e m a t i c a l .F i g u r e
s u r f a c e - w a t e rd r a i n a g ei n t ot h e
1 shows
Lower Animas Valley.Figure
5
indicatesthatinthesubsurfacebroadinterveningareasexist
b e t w e e na d j a c e n tg r a v i t yh i g h s .
dense material provide pathways for
These i n t e r v e n i n ga r e a so fl e s s
ground water
Lower Animas ValleyfromtheLordsburgValley.
surface water
andgroundwaterfrom
dischargeintothe
t o move i n t o t h e
Hence, both
t h e Lordsburg Valley
Lower Animas Valley.
Recharge
Recharge i n t h e
Animas Valley was assumed t o o c c u r s o l e l y
alongmountainfronts.Recharge
from i r r i g a t i o nr e t u r nf l o wo r
from p r e c i p i t a t i o n on valley lowlands
was assumed t o b e
negligible.Mountain-frontrechargevaluesweredeterminedfrom
~
~
~
~~~~
~
the following algorithm derived through regression analysis by
Jack Dewey ( w r i t t e n communication,1982):
Qa = (0.0155) A0'.8
S0-292 p
1.01
where Qa i s mountain-front recharge [ft3/s],
A i s surface-water drainage area
[mi2],
S i s s l o p e of p r i n c i p a l d r a i n a g e
way [ f t / m i l ,
and
P i s mean winterprecipitation(October1931throughApril
1960)[in].
Dewey d e r i v e d t h i s a l g o r i t h m
from d a t a c o l l e c t e d f o r t h e
Albuquerque-Belenbasin.Becauseevapotranspirationinthe
Animas Valley i s g r e a t e r t h a n t h a t i n t h e
t h ea l g o r i t h m
Albuquerque-Belen b a s i n
was modified.Dividingthecalculatedmountain-
front recharge values
by a f a c t o r o f t h r e e g a v e
v a l u e (Dewey, personalcommunication,1982).
recharge calculations,
a reasonable
The r e s u l t so ft h e
when compared on t h e b a s i s o f p e r c e n t o f
mean a n n u a l p r e c i p i t a t i o n , a r e w i t h i n t h e r a n g e o f r e p o r t e d
values for
similar g r o u n d - w a t e r b a s i n s i n t h e v i c i n i t y o f t h e
Animas Valley(Table
1).
H y d r a u l i cP r o p e r t i e s
Hydraulic parameters describing the nature of the waterbearing, basin-fill material
wereobtained
from previousworks.
Reeder ( 1 9 5 7 ) r e p o r t e dt h er e s u l t so ft h r e ea q u i f e rt e s t s .
calculatedtransmissivityvaluesranging
gpd/ft(2,940
ft2/d).
determined.
from 22,000 t o 246,000
t o 32,890 f t 2 / d ) and averaging50,000gpd/ft(6,685
Arras ( 1 9 7 9 )r e p o r t e dt h er e s u l t so f
fromwhich
He
a transmissivityof
one pumping t e s t
26,600 g p d / f t ( 3 , 5 6 0 f t 2 / d )
Summers (1967)analyzedwater-levelchanges
22
was
and
TABLE 1
- ReportedRechargeValues
Drainage
Area
Basin
(mi2)
for Grod-water Basins moximal t o the Animas Valley
Mean Annual
Ground-water
precipitation
Recharge
Percent of
(in/Yr)
Precipitation
(ac-ft/yr)
Source
Wmntain-Front Recharge Calculations
San Simon, AZ
309
Willcox, AZ
Hardt
White,
9
15,000
10
550'
11
75,000
23
Cienega, AZ
113
20
6,900
6
Geraghty and Miller (1970)
Cienega,
20
AZ
113
4,800
4
Nuzman
Cienega, AZ
113
19,558
16
Kafri, e t
Cienega,
20
AZ
113
15,700
13
Kafri, aelt.
1,180
2
Animas,
m
112
20
11
Recharge Calculations for Mountain-FrontAreas
Peloncillo Mtn
34
9
16 2,500
Pyramid M t n
65
11
3,000
(1965)
Brown, Schunann (1969)
i n the
(1970)
al.
(1976)
(1976)
Hawkins (1981)
Animas Valley
O'Brien and Stone,
this report
8
O'Brien and Stone,
t h i s report
pumping r a t e s i n t h e i r r i g a t e d a r e a o f
an18-yearperiodanddetermined
Lower ArimasValleyover
an a v e r a g e t r a n s m i s s i v i t y o f
61,700 g p d / f(t 8 , 2 5 0f t 2 / d ) Specific-capacity data compiled
byReeder
converted to transmissivity data following
Walton (1970).
.
( 1 9 5 7 ) canbe
a method o u t l i n e d i n
The method u t i l i z e st h ef o l l o w i n ge q u a t i o n :
Q / s = T/264 log(Tt/2,693
r2S)
-
65.5
where Q / s i s s p e c i f i c c a p a c i t y [ g p m / f t ] ,
Q i s d i s c h a r g e [gpm],
s i s drawdown E f t ] ,
T i s transmissivity[gpd/ftl,
S
i s s t o r a g ec o e f f i c i e n t[ d i m e n s i o n l e s s ] ,
r i s nominal r a d i u s o f w e l l [ f t ] ,
t is time after
and
pumping s t a r t e d [ m i n u t e s ] .
Examination of specific-capacity data reveals decreasing values
w i t ht i m e
(1948-1955).Decreasingvaluesofspecificcapacity
areusuallycaused
by p a r t i a l p e n e t r a t i o n , w e l l
loss, and
presenceofhydrogeologicboundaries.Specific-capacitydataof
t h e g r e a t e s t magnitudewerechosenfrom
the data to avoid these
effects.
Storage-coefficientvalues
and Summers (1967).
were r e p o r t e d byReeder
(1957)
Reeder(1957)calculatedanaveragestorage
c o e f f i c i e n t by d i v i d i n g t h e
volume of water
pumped over the
e n t i r e v a l l e y by t h e volume of dewatered sediments for the
i r r i g a t i o ny e a r s
1948through
c o e f f i c i e n t sr a n g i n g
Summers (1967)applied
1954.
He computed s t o r a g e
from 0.07 t o 0.14 and averaging 0.11.
a T h e i s - t y p es o l u t i o na n a l y s i st ot h
from t h e Lower Animas Valley.Water-leveldatafrom
24
e .data
1948 t o 1966
for wells located four
c e n t e r wereused
or more m i l e s from t h e i r r i g a t i o n pumping
i nh i sa n a l y s i s .
0.07 f o rs t o r a g ec o e f f i c i e n t .
b o r d e rf a u l t sh a v e
He computed v a l u e so f
0.06 t o
However, Summers assumed t h a tt h e
no e f f e c t on drawdown.
Thisassumptioncauses
hiscalculatedvaluestounderestimatetheactualstorage
(1957) averagevalueof
coefficient.Therefore,Reeder's
was t a k e n t o b e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e s t o r a g e c o e f f i c i e n t o f t h e
water-bearing material in the
Animas Valley.
25
0.11
.
DESCRIPTION O F MODEL
Computer Code
A FORTRAN I V computercodedeveloped
Survey(Trescott
etal.,
by t h e U.S.
1 9 7 6 ) was chosen t o s i m u l a t e
dimensions ground-water flow
Geological
i n two
i n t h e Animas Valley because
v e r t i c a l ground-waterflow
was assumed t o b e i n s i g n i f i c a n t .
code o f f e r s a numerical approximation
The
t o t h e ground-water flow
equation by means o ft h ef i n i t e - d i f f e r e n c et e c h n i q u e .T h r e e
solutionalgorithmsareavailableforsolvingthesimultaneous
equationsgenerated
by t h ef i n i t e - d i f f e r e n c ea p p r o x i m a t i o n .
The
solutionalgorithmsincludethestronglyimplicitprocedure,the
iterativealternatingdirectionimplicitprocedure,
s u c c e s s i v eo v e r r e l a x a t i o n
method.
procedure was chosen because
and t h e l i n e
The s t r o n g l yi m p l i c i t
it g e n e r a l l y r e q u i r e s l e s s
computer
t i m e and h a s f e w e r n u m e r i c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s .
Program options allow simulation of the ground-water flow
system as a confined,unconfined,or
combined (confined and
unconfined)system.Althoughtheground-waterflowsystem
Lower Animas Valley i s generally an unconfined system,
s i m u l a t e d a s a confinedsystem.Simulationof
i nt h e
it was
an unconfined
systemrequiresspecificationofthelowersurfaceofthewater-
.
is
b e a r i n gs y s t e m .S i n c et h el o w e rs u r f a c eo ft h eb a s i n - f i l l
poorly known, e r r o r s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h s i m u l a t i o n o f t h e s y s t e m a s
unconfinedwere
felt to be greater than errors associated with
simulationofthesystemasconfined.Jacob(1944)
when t h e s a t u r a t e d t h i c k n e s s o f t h e w a t e r - b e a r i n g s y s t e m
greater than
drawdown inducedby
showed t h a t
i s much
pumpage, t h e drawdown i n t h e two
26
words, when t h ep e r c e n t
systems w i l l be comparable.Inother
i s small,the
change i n s a t u r a t e d t h i c k n e s s
unconfined and confinedsystems
drawdown i n
w i l l becomparable.Jacob's
2
equation is:
Sa = Swt
- 2m
Swt
where Sa i s drawdown which would o c c u r i n
a confinedsystem,
S w t i s observed drawdown i n unconfinedsystem,and
m is initialsaturatedthicknessofwater-bearingsystem.
Area Modelled and G r i d
The ground-water flow system in the
Animas Valley w a s
s i m u l a t e d f r o m a p o i n t s i x m i l e s ( 1 0 km) s o u t h o f t h e t o w n o f
Animas t o a p o i n t f o u r m i l e s ( 6 km) n o r t h of S u m m i t .
which flow
The a r e a i n
was s i m u l a t e d i s bounded on the west by the border
f a u l t a l o n g t h e f r o n t o f t h e P e l o n c i l l o M o u n t a i and
n s on t h e e a s t
by theborder fault along the fronts ofth
Animas
e
and Pyramid
Mountains.
The s i m u l a t e da r e a
encompassed t h e main zoneof
saturationasdefinedinthehydrologicsetting.
A block-centered grid
Lower Animas V a l l e y( f i g .
was c o n s t r u c t e d a l o n g t h e a x i s o f t h e
10).
The a r e ac h o s e nf o rs i m u l a t i o n
was d i s c r e t i z e di n t oo n e - m i l e - s q u a r eb l o c k s .
The amount of
detail in the data did not warrant the use of smaller blocks.
The t o t a l a r e a c o v e r e dby t h e s i m u l a t i o n was 4 5 7 s q m i .
Model b o u n d a r i e s c a n b e e i t h e r c o n s t a n t - h e a d o r c o n s t a n t flux.
A c o n s t a n t - f l u xb o u n d a r yw i t ht h ef l u xe q u a lt oz e r o
i n d i c a t e s a no-flowboundary.
The north,northwest,
and
northeast boundaries in the modelled area are represented
constant-headnodes(fig.
I
10).
The s o u t he, a s t ,
27
and west
by
ROWS
2
Figure 10.
4
6
8
10
12
F i n i t e - d i f f e r e n c eg r i da n db o u n d a r yc o n d i t i o n s .
I
boundaries are approximated as constant-flux nodes
and t h e
southeastboundary
i s representedbyno-fluxnodes(fig.
O v e r a l l ,t h e r ea r e
64 c o n s t a n t - f l u x ,
9).
34 constant-head,
and 6 no-
flux nodes simulating the boundary conditions of &he,modelled
area.
Constant-headnodeswereassigned
t o nodes d i s t a n t from t h e
major pumping c e n t e r and along the northern boundary of the
modelledarea(fig.
C o t t o nC i t y( f i g .
10).
2).
The major pumping c e n t e r i s l o c a t e d a t
I nt h i s
way, s p e c i f i c a t i o no ft h e
of ground-water flux entering or exiting the system
determined by t h e computercode.This
amount
was
method o f d e t e r m i n i n g f l u x
v a l u e s was f e l t t o b e more accurate than computing constant-flux
values because of the existence of water-level data at boundaries
o ft h es i m u l a t e da r e a .
Mountain-front recharge values were determined
from t h e
algorithmof,Dewey(personalcommunication,1982)asdescribed
above.Constant-fluxvalueswereassignedtonodesbordering
mountain f r o n t s i n t h e v i c i n i t y o f t h e
pumping c e n t e r i n amounts
proportional to the calculated mountain-front recharge occurring
a d j a c e n tt o
boundary g r i db l o c k s( f i g .
10).
Constant-fluxvalues
assigned to nodes along the southern boundary were determined
initially considering the
nodes t o be constant-headnodes.
Constant-head values were selected
t h e 1948 a g r i c u l t u r a ls e a s o n .
from w a t e r - l e v e l d a t a p r i o r
A s t e a d y - s t a t es i m u l a t i o n
executed and the ground-water flux
recorded.
from the modelled area
Each node alongthesouthernboundary
a constant-head t o a no-fluxnode,whereupon,
s i m u l a t i o n was executed.
by
to
was
was
was changedfrom
a steady-state
The d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e ground-waterflux
29
from t h e m o d e l l e d a r e a a f t e a
r s i n g l e node was changed t o a nof l u x node while keeping the remaining southern boundary nodes as
constant-head nodes and the flux
when a l l s o u t h e r n boundarynodes
were specified as constant-head nodes
f l u x node.
was a s s i g n e d t o t h a t
The magnitudeoftheground-waterfluxacrossthe
southern modelled boundary by
t h i s method t o t a l l e d 4,607ac-
ft/yr.
a v a l u eo f
Reeder(1957)computed
t o t a lf l u xa c r o s st h e
2,700 a c - f t / y r a s t h e
4,150 w a t e r - l e v e lc o n t o u rl i n e( f i g .
Hawkins ( 1 9 8 1 ) d e t e r m i n e d t h e t o t a l f l o w i n t o t h e
Valley from the
€t/yr.
Upper Animas V a l l e y t o b e a p p r o x i m a t e l y
1.7 times Reeder'svalue
No-fluxnodeswere
3,170acis
and 1.45 t i m e s Hawkins' value.
assigned to the boundary grid blocks repre-
s e n t i n gt h ea r e ab e t w e e nt h e
f l u x nodeswerechosen
11).
Lower Animas
The s o u t h e r nb o u n d a r yf l u xc a l c u l a t e di nt h i ss t u d y
thisarea
no-
Animas andPyramidMountains.
No-
t o approximate the ground-water divide in
formed by two i n t e r s e c t i n gc o n e so fd e p r e s s i o n( f i g .1 0 ) .
30
STEADY-STATE
SIMULATION
Flow Equation
The f i r s t s t e p i n t h e m o d e l l i n g p r o c e d u r e
was t o s i m u l a t e
thesteady-stateconditionoftheground-waterflowsystem.
S t e a d y s t a t e was d e f i n e d by w a t e r - l e v e l d a t a c o l l e c t e d p r i o r t o
large-scaleground-waterdevelopmentforirrigation.
Ground-
water pumpage f o r i r r i g a t i o n p u r p o s e s b e g a n d u r i n g t h e
1948
a g r i c u l t u r a ls e a s o n .T h i sa r t i f i c i a ld i s c h a r g eo fg r o u n d - w a t e r
terminatedthesteady-stateconditionoftheflowsystem.
The two-dimensional,steady-state,ground-waterflow
w h e r e x and y a r e t h e C a r t e s i a n c o o r d i n a t e a x e s i n t h e h o r i z o n t a l
plane
h i s hydraulic head
ELI,
T i s transmissivity CL2/tl,
and
W(x,y,t) i s t h ev o l u m e t r i cf l u xo fr e c h a r g ep e ru n i ts u r f a c e
area [ ~ / t ] .
Data
N e c e s s a r yd a t af o rt h es t e a d y - s t a t es i m u l a t i o ni n c l u d e
boundaryconditions,
matrix.
a transmissivitymatrix,
and a s t a r t i n g head
The boundaryconditionswerechosenaspreviously
d e s c r i b e d , and t h e s t a r t i n g
water-leveldata(O'Brien
headmatrix
and Stone,
was chosenfrom
existing
1981).
The t r a n s m i s s i v i t y m a t r i x was determined from reported
pumping and s p e c i f i c c a p a c i t y
tests, aswellascomplete
g r a v i t y anomaly maps i n combinationwithwelllogdata.
32
Bouguer
The
spatial distribution of these values
Range 20 west,Townships
was l i m i t e d p r i m a r i l y t o
25 and 2 6 s o u t h( f i g .
I no r d e rt o
1).
overcome t h i s d a t a d e f i c i e n c y , t h e f o l l o w i n g p a r a m e t e r e s t i m a t i o n
scheme was developed.Transmissivityvalueswereapproximated
utilizing aquifer thickness
h y d r a u l i cc o n d u c t i v i t y
from g r a v i t y d a t a
and e s t i m a t e d
fromwell-logdata.Ingridblockswhere
transmissivity values were available, the relationship between
a q u i f e rt h i c k n e s s
and h y d r a u l i cc o n d u c t i v i t y
was observed.
In
g r i d b l o c k s where t r a n s m i s s i v i t y v a l u e s w e r e n o t a v a i l a b l e , t h e
observed relationship between aquifer thickness/hydraulic
c o n d u c t i v i t y and t r a n s m i s s i v i t y was used t o e s t i m a t e
transmissivityvalues.
Calibration
Steady-state calibration
was considered to have been
achieved when simulated nodal head values were within
The head m a t r i x computedfrom
observednodalheadvalues.
initial execution of the
2 5 f t of
the
model produced a f a i r l y good matchof
t h eo b s e r v e df i e l dv a l u e s( f i g .
11). T r a n s m i s s i v i t yv a l u e sw e r e
a d j u s t e d fl0% u n t i l c a l i b r a t i o n w a s achieved(fig.
12).
Insufficient distribution of observed transmissivity values,
uncertaintyinherentinpublishedfieldmeasurements,
and t h e
effects of partially penetrating wells justify adjustment of
t r a n s m i s s i v i t yv a l u e sw i t h i n
a reasonablerange.
As a check on
the resulting transmissivity distribution, the transmissivity
m a t r i x was compared t o
complete Bouguer g r a v i t y anomaly maps.
The a g r e e m e n t o f t h e t r a n s m i s s i v i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n w i t h t h e
complete Bouguer g r a v i t y anomaly maps i s q u i t e good ( f i g . 1 3 ) .
33
Figure 12.
Transmissivity magnitude and distribution.
.
. .
.
.
..
,
. .
.
. .. . .
.
. .
n
.. . .
.
Figure 13.
Relationship of gravity data to transmissivity
magnitude and distribution:
I
The t o t a l s t e a d y - s t a t e
boundary of
ground-waterfluxacrossthenorthern
the simulated area
was determined by t h e model t o be
12,655ac-ft/yr.Streamflowgages
bracketing the area to
on theGilaRiver,roughly
which ground-water from
t h e Animas Valley
would d i s c h a r g e ,y i e l ds t r e a m f l o wg a i nv a l u e so f
and14,984ac-ft/yrfortheyears
19,778,
21,273,
1940, 1941, and 1942,
respectively.
The d r a i n a g ea r e ac o n t r i b u t i n gt ot h i s
t h eG i l aR i v e r
i s mostly composed o f t h e
segmentof
Animas Valley.
This
information provides another indication that the steady-state
ground-wateroflow model o f t h e
Animas Valley as conceived
f a i r agreement with the observed ground-water flow system.
36
is i n
TRANSIENT SIMULATION
Flow Equation
The s t e a d y - s t a t e c a l i b r a t i o n p r o c e s s p r o v i d e d
a
transmissivity matrix using boundary conditions chosen,
s t e a d y - s t a t e head m a t r i x .
The two-dimensional,transient,
ground-waterflowequation
is:
and a
wherex and yare the Cartesiancoordinate axesin thehorizontal
plane,
h i s t h e h y d r a u l i c head [L],
T i s the transmissivity
[L2/t],
S i s storagecoefficient[dimensionless],
t i s time [t], and
W(x,y,t) i s s o u r c eo rs i n kt e r m
Since storage coefficients
[Yt].
and ground-water withdrawals are not
needed t o s o l v e t h e s t e a d y - s t a t e c a s e o f t h e g r o u n d - w a t e r f l o w
equation, a t r a n s i e n t s i m u l a t i o n
was r u n t o c a l i b r a t e s t o r a g e
c o e f f i c i e n t s and t o v e r i f y ground-waterwithdrawals.
Verification of the
waterflowsystem
model was conducted by simulating the groundfrom April. 1948 t o A p r i l
1981.
Data
Additionaldataforthetransientsimulationincludethe
s t o r a g ec o e f f i c i e n tm a t r i x
andground-waterwithdrawals.
a v e r a g es t o r a g ec o e f f i c i e n td e t e r m i n e d
The
by Reeder ( 1 9 5 7 ) was
chosen a s t h e s t o r a g e c o e f f i c i e n t v a l u e o v e r t h e e n t i r e s i m u l a t e d
area.Ground-waterwithdrawalsplaced
on t h es t e a d y - s t a t e
ground-water flow system were compiled from information in the
37
S t a t eE n g i n e e r s O
' ffice
(SEO),
Deming.
The
d i s c h a r g e from 2 7 i r r i g a t i o n w e l l s i n
1948.
Farmersreportedhoursof
d u r i n gt h e
September and October,
pump o p e r a t i o n t o t h e
Based on d i s c h a r g e r a t e s m e a s u r e d
duration of
SEO measured
by t h e SEO and r e p o r t e d
pumping, t h e t o t a l volume of ground water
1948 i r r i g a t i o ns e a s o n
pumped
was estimated.This
scheme f o r
determining the magnitude of ground-water withdrawals
u t i l i z e df o rt h e
1949,
1950,
and
1951
In1951and1952,
was
i r r i g a t i o ns e a s o n s .
e l e c t r i c a l l y poweredmotorsreplaced
i n t e r n a l combustionmotorson
pumps i n t h e Animas Valley.In
1952, t h e SEO s t a r t e d t o e s t i m a t e t o t a l
on t h e b a s i s o f e l e c t r i c
ofwater
SEO.
ground-waterwithdrawals
power r e c o r d s and pump r a t i n g s ( q u a n t i t y
pumped p e r u n i t o f e l e c t r i c
powerconsumed).This
e s t i m a t i o n scheme for determining the magnitude of ground-water
withdrawals was used f o r t h e 1 9 5 2 through 1959 i r r i g a t i o n
seasons.
Ground-water withdrawal data for the
u n a v a i l a b l ef o rt h e1 9 6 0t h r o u g h
Animas Valley were
1968 i r r i g a t i o ns e a s o n s .
In
1969, t h e SEO renewed t h e i r commitment t o c a l c u l a t e ground-water
withdrawalsinthe
Animas V a l l e y . T h i s e f f o r t
was l i m i t e d t o t h e
calculation of the magnitude of ground-water withdrawals for
The SEO currentlycomputes
i n d i v i d u a lb a s i n se v e r yf i f t hy e a r .
ground-water withdrawals primarily
on t h e b a s i s o f c r o p t y p e .
1968 i s a
Irrigatedacreagefortheyears1960through
c o n s i s t e n t1 2 , 8 0 0a c r e s( t a b l e
pumpage i n 1959and1969
2).
The reportedground-water
averagesapproximately
Assuming t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p
21,000 a c - f t / y r .
between ground-water
38
pumpage and
Table 2
*
--
Irrigation data for the
Valley
Year
Irrigated
Acreage
Duration
of
Season
( days)
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1,000
4,000
6,800
7,900
9,000
10,900
11,000
11,400
11,400
12,500
12,800
12,800
12,800
12,800
12,800
12,800
12,800
12,800
12,800*
12,800*
12,800*
12,800*
11,940
14,075
14,075
14,075
14,095
14,680
14,680
14,680
14,680
14,680
14,215
14,210
150
180
195
195
195
220
220
195
195*
195*
195*
195*
195*
195*
195"
195"
195*
195*
195*
195"
195"
195*
195*
195*
195*
195*
195*
195*
195*
195*
195*
195"
195*
LowerAnimas
Ground-water
Pumpage
(ac-ft)
1,200
6,400
11,000
15,000
18,000
21,000
24,000
19,500
19,800
22,700
19,500
16,600
20,900
21,000*
21,000*
21,000*
21,000*
21,000*
21,000*
21,000*
21,000*
21,000*
20,180
21,000*
21,000*
21,000"
15,080"
15,080*
15,080
15,080*
15,080*
18,390*
18,390"
18,390
Estimated value
S o u r c e so ft h i si n f o r m a t i o ni n c l u d e
SEO f i l e s , Sorenson
(1977), Reeder (1957), Reeder e t a l . (1959, 1960), and
BrianWilson(personalcommunication,
1982).
irrigated acreage remained constant during the intervening
p e r i o d , a value of
waterwithdrawal
21,000 a c - f t was s e l e c t e d ' a s t h e ground-
for t h e 1960through1968
irrigationseasons.
Reeder ( 1 9 5 7 ) c o n s t r u c t e d maps showing t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f
irrigated acreage in the
Animas V a l l e y f o r t h e
1950and1955
a g r i c u l t u r a ls e a s o n s .I no r d e rt oa s s i g ng r o u n d - w a t e r
withdrawalstonodes,thegrid
acreage maps.
w a s superimposed on t h e i r r i g a t e d
The t o t a l ground-waterwithdrawalwithin
a grid
block was determined by t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e t o t a l i r r i g a t e d
a r e ai nt h a tg r i db l o c k .T h i sp e r c e n t a g eo ft o t a li r r i g a t e da r e a
was t h e n m u l t i p l i e d by the corresponding total ground-water
w i t h d r a w a lf o rt h a ts e a s o n .
The r e s u l t i n gv a l u e
was t h e ground-
water withdrawal for the grid block during that agricultural
season.Sinceonlytwoirrigatedacreage
distribution of
seasons had
maps werecompiled,the
ground-water withdrawal for other agricultural
to be determined
from t h e s e two e x i s t i n g d i s t r i b u t i o n
patterns.
Agricultural seasons with ground-water
18,500ac-ft/yrwereconsideredsimilarto
pumpage l e s s t h a n
the 1950 a g r i c u l t u r a l
season(15,000ac-ft/yr),whereas,agriculturalseasonswith
ground-water pumpage greater than 18,500 ac-ft/yr were considered
s i m i l a rt ot h e
1955 a g r i c u l t u r a ls e a s o n( 1 9 , 8 0 0a c - f t / y r ) .
distribution of
ground-water withdrawal for an agricultural
The
season followed the distribution pattern determined for either
t h e 1950 o r 1955 a g r i c u l t u r a l s e a s o n d e p e n d i n g
ofground-water
pumpage.
d i s t r i b u t i o np a t t e r n
on t h e magnitude
Hence, t h e 1950ground-waterwithdrawal
was used f o r t h e
through 1980 a g r i c u l t u r a ls e a s o n s .* T h e
40
1949,1950,1951,and1973
1955 ground-water
withdrawal distribution pattern
was used f o r t h e 1952 through
1972 a g r i c u l t u r a ls e a s o n s .
Calibration
A transient simulation
was executed for the period from
A p r i l 1948 t o January 1955 because fewer assumptions about the
d a t ab a s ea r en e c e s s a r yd u r i n gt h a tp e r i o d .C a l i b r a t i o n
was
considered achieved when s i m u l a t e d drawdown contour lines were
w i t h i n 10 f t ofReeder's(1957)observed
drawdown c o n t o u r s( f i g .
1 4 ) .I no r d e rt oa c h i e v ec a l i b r a t i o n ,t h en o d a ld i s t r i b u t i o no f
ground-water withdrawal
amountsnotexceeding
was moved between adjacent nodes in
fl0%.
ground-water withdrawals
The i n a c c u r a c yi nd i s t r i b u t i n g
t o nodes j u s t i f i e s t h e a d j u s t m e n t o f
ground-water withdrawals between adjacent
nodes. ' T h e s t o r a g e
c o e f f i c i e n t m a t r i x was n o t a l t e r e d d u r i n g t h e t r a n s i e n t
calibration.
Verification
Model v e r i f i c a t i o n was c a r r i e d o u t b y s i m u l a t i n g t h e
drawdown on t h e ground-water flow system from April
1981.
Ground-waterwithdrawalsforthe
a g r i c u l t u r a ls e a s o n sw e r e
transient data base
verification.
1948 t o A p r i l
1955 through 1980
added t o t h e t r a n s i e n t d a t a b a s e .
The
was n o t changed d u r i n g t h e t r a n s i e n t
The r e s u l t s o f t h e
model v e r i f i c a t i o n show t h a t t h e
s i m u l a t e d drawdown c o n t o u r l i n e s a r e w i t h i n 1 8 f t o f
drawdown c o n t o u r l i n e s ( f i g .
15).
the observed
Lordsburg
Figure 1 4 .
T r a n s i e n tc a l i b r a t i o n result (April 1948 t o January1955).
Observed drawdown 6romReeder(1957).
Figure 15.
T r a n s i e n tv e r i f i c a t i o nr e s u l tA p r i l
1948 t o April 1981.
Observed drawdown as compiled i n t h i s s t u d y .
MODEL CONFIDENCE
SourcesofError
The accuracy with which
a model s i m u l a t e s h i s t o r i c a l d a t a
provides an i n d i c a t i o n of t h e m o d e l ' s a b i l i t y t o p r o j e c t t h e
behaviorof
a ground-waterflowsystem.Errorsintheinput
model t o e r r o r s i n
parameters, as well as the sensitivity of the
t h ei n p u tp a r a m e t e r sa r ef u n d a m e n t a lf a c t o r si n
The m o d e l l i n g s t r a t e g y
i n p u tp a r a m e t e r s .I n i t i a l l y ,
defined.
The d e f i n i t i o no f
model confidence.
was designed t o m i n i m i z e e r r o r i n t h e
a s t e a d y - s t a t ec o n d i t i o n
a s t e a d y - s t a t ec o n d i t i o np e r m i t t e d
i n s p e c t i o n and a n a l y s i s of o n l y twoof
the four
The r e d u c t i o no ft h e
model i n p u t
of t h e ground-
parameters necessary for projecting the behavior
waterflowsystem.
was
number o fi n p u t
parameters reduced the complexity of adjusting four parameters to
only two parameters during calibration of the
state.
The r e s u l t o f t h i s s t r a t e g y
model a t steady-
was a t r a n s m i s s i v i t y m a t r i x
whichagreedfavorablywiththesubsurfacegeology(fig.
13),
boundary conditions which, in combination with the transmissivity
matrix, produced
good agreement with ground-water outflow from
t h e Animas Valley, and a simulated hydraulic head matrix which
resembledtheobservedhydraulicheadmatrix(fig.
11).
Simulation of the transient ground-water flow system from
A p r i l 1948 t o J a n u a r y
1955 r e q u i r e d two a d d i t i o n a l i n p u t
p a r a m e t e r s .S t o r a g ec o e f f i c i e n t sa r ep o o r l y
Animas Valley andan
used f o re a c h
average value determined
node i n t h e
known throughoutthe
byReeder(1957)
modelledarea.Ground-waterwithdrawal
recordsarerelativelycompleteforthisperiodalthougherrors
44
was
exist in the total
withdrawals.
amountand
distribution of ground-water
The t r a n s i e n t s i m u l a t i o n
from A p r i l 1948 t o J a n u a r y
1955 involved minor adjustment of the location of ground-water
withdrawals.Ground-waterwithdrawalvalueswereshiftedbetween
a d j a c e n tn o d e si na m o u n t sl e s st h a no re q u a lt o
The
*la%.
imprecision in assigning both magnitude
and l o c a t i o n o f
ground-
water withdrawal permits adjustment of these input parameters.
Calibration of this transient simulation
was considered achieved
when s i m u l a t e d drawdown contours were within
1 0 f t of observed
drawdown c o n t o u r s( f i g .1 4 ) .
Verification of the
from A p r i l 1948 t o A p r i l
model involved a t r a n s i e n t s i m u l a t i o n
1981.
Inputparameterswerenot
a d j u s t e dd u r i n gt h ev e r i f i c a t i o np r o c e s s .
The r e s u l t o f t h i s
transient simulation indicates that the
model approximates the
observed drawdown contours on the ground-water flow system in the
Animas V a l l e yt o
w i t h i n 18 f t ( f i g .
15).
The number of unknowns i n t h e s i m u l a t i o n o f t h e g r o u n d - w a t e r
f l o we q u a t i o np r o h i b i t
combination of
a uniquesolution.
Hence, more thanone
i n p u t parameters w i l l y i e l d s i m u l a t e d h y d r a u l i c
headdatathatsuitablymatchobservedhydraulicheaddata.
model r e s u l t s andmodel
projectionscould
following input parameters were better
1)
The
be r e f i n e d i f t h e
known:
Magnitude and d i s t r i b u t i o no fr e c h a r g e( m o u n t a i n - f r o n t ,
valleylowland,irrigationreturnflow,underflow):
2)
Magnitude and d i s t r i b u t i o n o ft r a n s m i s s i v i t y
and s t o r a g e
coefficient;
3)
Q u a n t i t y ,d u r a t i o n
and a r e a ld i s t r i b u t i o n
withdrawal:
45
of ground-water
4)
Magnitude and a r e a l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f
drawdown o f t h e
ground-watersystem.
Sensitivity Analysis
The s e n s i t i v i t y o f t h emodel t o e r r o r s i n t h e i n p u t
parameters was i n v e s t i g a t e d by p e r t u r b i n g p a r a m e t e r s by250%.
T r a n s m i s s i v i t y and s t o r a g e ' c o e f f i c i e n t v a l u e s
a l l nodes, whereas recharge
were perturbed only
specified.
at
and ground-water withdrawal values
a t nodes where these parameters were
Each parameter was perturbed by+50%and
determinedvalue.
consisted of
were perturbed
A computerrun,simulating
a 45-day non-pumping period,
a calendaryear,
a 180-day pumping
p e r i o d , and a 140-day non-pumping period.
encompassed 27 t i m e s t e p s
-50% of i t s
A computer r u n
and was executed following each
p a r a m e t e rp e r t u r b a t i o n .
The e f f e c t on t h e computedheadinducedby
particular parameter
perturbing a
was recorded by comparing the
values after each parameter perturbation with the
v a l u e s when a l lp a r a m e t e r s
t h e computedhead
cumulative error
wereunperturbed.
computed head
computedhead
The d i f f e r e n c e i n
v a l u e s was termedthecumulativeerror.
The
was d e f i n e d a s t h e a b s o l u t e v a l u e o f t h e
d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e computedhead
v a l u e s summed over a l l nodes i n
t h e modelled area.
Figure 1 6 i l l u s t r a t e s t h e c u m u l a t i v e e r r o r i n t h e
head values
when each parameter
computed
was perturbed by *50% O f i t s
determinedvalue.Stqragecoefficientvalues'perturbed
by-50%
of their determined values induced the greatest cumulative error.
On t h e o t h e r
hand, s t o r a g e c o e f f i c i e n t v a l u e s p e r t u r b e d
46
by+50%
170
sc
I40
Curnulatide Error ( f t )
a t t i m e ster, 27
120
110
IO0
90
I
80
Q
70
R
60
sc
50
40
30
20
-50
Figure 16.
Percent
chai
!
inparameter
+ 50
Model sensitivity results for storage coefficient (SC),
transmissivity (T), ground-water withdrawal (Q), and
mountain-front recharge ( R )
.
inducedtheleastcumulativeerror.Rechargevaluesperturbed
+50%and-50%inducedabout
t h e sameamount
by
of cumulative error;
61.2 f t and 64.3 f t ,r e s p e c t i v e l y .T r a n s m i s s i v i t yv a l u e s
perturbed by-50%
induced 18% more cumulative error
head values than transmissivity values perturbed
Ground-water withdrawal values perturbed
determined values induced 10%
i n computed
by+50%.
by+50% o f t h e i r
more c u m u l a t i v e e r r o r i n computed
head values than ground-water withdrawal values perturbed
-50%.
Hence, s t o r a g ec o e f f i c i e n t t, r a n s m i s s i v i t y ,
v a l u e s p e r t u r b e d by-50%
cumulative error in
by
and recharge
of their determined values induced
computedhead
c o e f f i c i e n t ,t r a n s m i s s i v i t y ,
more
values than storage
and rechargevaluesperturbedby
+50% o f t h e i r d e t e r m i n e d v a l u e s .
The s e n s i t i v i t y of t h e model t o changes i n i n p u t p a r a m e t e r s
was f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t e d b y p e r t u r b i n g e a c h p a r a m e t e r
+100% of i t s determinedvalue.
The computedhead
perturbing parameters were graphed versus
by-50%
and
v a l u e sa f t e r
computedhead
values
when parameterswerenotperturbed.Cross-sectionsofhead
valueswereconstructedalonggridcolumns
11 and 22.
columns 11 and 22 have constant-flux nodes
at their east
b o u n d a r i e s( f i g .1 0 ) .F i g u r e
parameters by-50%
17 shows t h ee f f e c t s
Grid
andwest
of p e r t u r b i n g
and +100%of t h e i rd e t e r m i n e dv a l u e s .
that the ratio of the horizontal to vertical scale
Note
i s 5280 t o 2 .
Figure 17a illustrates that perturbing transmissivity values
causes computedhead
valuesalongtheeast
values to deviate
from t h e d e t e r m i n e d head
and west boundaries of the cross-section.
Computed head values agpee with determined head values along the
c e n t r a lp o r t i o no ft h ec r o s s - s e c t i o n .F i g u r e
48
1 7 b i n d i c a t e st h a t
4244
4242
a.
Tx 0.5
Constant-Flux
Zonstont- Flux
Tx 2
.
,Boundary
Node at ( 1 1 , I l )
4240
4238
4236
,
b.
Rx 2
Z 4244
z
.2 4242
0
0
E
0
4240
a ..; .
--
.
2
4236
-
4244
L
4238
.
c
C.
E
0
0
>
01
-
4242
W
W
a
s-
4240
.
L
m
4238
4236
4244
d.
4242
4240
del sensitivity results
1 least-west profile of
water levels). Transmissivity (T)a
mountain-front recharge (R), groundwater withdrawal IQ), and Storage coefficient lsc). Values are perturbed
by factors of 0.5 and 2.
'4238
4236
Horizontal scalei
$'=Imi
Vertical sca~e;$'
= 2 tt
perturbedrechargevaluesdemonstrate
a b e h a v i o rs i m i l a r
t o t h a to ft h ep e r t u r b e dt r a n s m i s s i v i t yv a l u e s .
in figures 17a
The d i f f e r e n c e
and 1 7 b i s t h a t d o u b l i n g t r a n s m i s s i v i t y v a l u e s h a s
a similar affect
oncomputedhead
values as halving recharge
values.
Conversely, figure 17c
shows t h a t computedhead
v a l u e s from
perturbed ground-water withdrawal.values match determined head
valuesalongtheboundaryportionsoftheprofilebutdeviate
from t h e d e t e r m i n e d h e a d v a l u e s a l o n g t h e c e n t r a l p o r t i o n s o f t h e
profile.
Computed h e a dv a l u e sf r o mp e r t u r b e ds t o r a g ec o e f f i c i e n t
values illustrate a similar behavior as
computedhead
perturbedground-waterwithdrawalvalues(fig.
17d).
v a l u e s from
Figures17c
and 17d show that doubling ground-water withdrawal values has
similar affect
on computedhead
a
values as halving storage
c o e f f i c i e n tv a l u e s .
Perturbed transmissivity, recharge, ground-water withdrawal
and s t o r a g e c o e f f i c i e n t v a l u e s e x h i b i t t h e
f i g u r e 18 a s i n f i g u r e
same r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n
17.
The s e n s i t i v i t y a n a l y s i s
shows t h a t , when i n p u t
parametersareincreased,theparametersinducingthegreatest
cumulative error (greatest affect
on computedhead
t r a n s m i s s i v i t y andground-waterwithdrawal.
values)are
On t h e o t h e r
hand, when i n p u t p a r a m e t e r s a r e d e c r e a s e d , t h e p a r a m e t e r s
inducing the greatest cumulative error (greatest affect
computedhead
values)arestoragecoefficient
on
and t r a n s m i s s i v i t y .
. . ..
West
..
..
...
..
,.
ROWS
4151
415C
414E
N'
N
c
4154
0
V
E
0
a
4152
-.--
4150
c
d.
4152
4150.
4148.
Figure 18.
Model sensitivity results along column 22 (eastwest profile
of water levels). Transmissivity (TI, mountain-front recharge
(R), ground-water withdrawal (Q), and storage coefficient (Sc)
values are perturbed by .factors of 0.5 and 2.
...
. . . ._
East
REFERENCES
Armstrong, A.K,
Carten, R.B.,
S i l b e r m a n , M.L.,
Todd, V.R.,
H o g g a t t , W.C.,
1978, Geology of c e n t r a lP e l o n c i l l oM o u n t a i n s ,
HidalgoCounty,
N e w Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and
MineralResources,Circular158,19
p.
i n t h e Animas
1979, Geohydrologicalinvestigation
Arras, M.M.R.,
Valley,HidalgoCounty,
StateUniversity,
t h e s i s , N e w Mexico
New Mexico: M.S.
84 p.
and Schumann, H.H.,
Brown, S.G.,
and
1969,
Geohydrology
utilizationintheWillcoxbasin,
Counties,Arizona:
U.S.
and water
Graham and Cochise
GeologicalSurveyWaterSupplyPaper
1859-F, p. F1-F32
Clemons, R.E.,
1983,Geologichighway
map of New Mexico: New
Mexico GeologicalSociety,scale1:1,000,000
Cox, D.N.,
1973, S o i l Survey of HidalgoCounty,
New Mexico: U.S.
Dept. of Agriculture,SoilConservationService
and F o r e s t
S e r v i c e , i n c o o p e r a t i o n w i t h New Mexico A g r i c u l t u r a l
ExperimentStation,
Dane, C.H.,
U.S.
Deal, E.G.,
D.E.,
90 p.
and Bachman, G.O.,
1965,Geologic
GeologicalSurveySpecialGeologic
E l s t o n , W.E.,
Damon, P.E.,
volcanic geology
E r b , E.E.,
Map, s c a l e 1:500,000
P e t e r s o n , S.L.,
andShafiqullah,
of the Basin
map of New Mexico:
M.,
Reiter,
1978,Cenozoic
and Range province i n Hidalgo
County, southwestern New Mexico: New Mexico Geological
52
Society Guidebook 2 9 t hf i e l dc o n f e r e n c e ,p .
Doty, G.C-8
219-229
1960,ReconnaissanceofgroundwaterinPlayas
N e w Mexico: New Mexico S t a t e
Valley,HidalgoCounty,
Engineer,TechnicalReport
Drewes,Harald,1982,
1 5 , 40 p.
E l Paso-
Some g e n e r a lf e a t u r e so ft h e
Wickenburg t r a n s e c t o f t h e C o r d i l l e r a n O v e r t h r u s t B e l t ,
Texas t o Arizona: Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists,
1982 FieldConference
Drewes, Harald,1972,
Guidebook,p.
S t r u c t u r a l Geology o ft h eS a n t aR i t a
Mountains,southeastof
Tucson,Arizona:
SurveyProfessionalPaper
Drewes, H.,
88-96
and Thorman, C.H.,
U.S.
748, 35 p.
1980,Geologic
Map o ft h eS t e i n s
Quadrangle and t h e A d j a c e n t P a r t o f t h e
HidalgoCounty,
Geological
Vanar Quadrangle,
New Mexico: U . S . GeologicalSurvey
M i s c e l l a n e o u sI n v e s t i g a t i o n sS e r i e s
Map 1-1220,
scale
1:24,000
Drewes, H.,
and Thorman, C.H.,
CityQuadrangle
1980a,Geologic
and t h e A d j a c e n t P a r t
Quadrangle,Hidalgo
of t h e Vanar
County, New Mexico: U.S.
SurveyMiscellaneousInvestigationsSeries
1:24,000
Map oftheCotton
Geological
Map 1-1221,
scale
Flege,
R.F.,
1959,
Geology
of LordsburgQuadrangle,Hidalgo
of Mines and Mineral
County, New Mexico: New MexicoBureau
Resources, B u l l . 62, 36 p.
F l e i s c h h a u e r , H.L.,
J r . , andStone,
W.J.,
1982,Quaternary
geology of Lake Animas, HidalgoCounty,
New Mexico: New
Mexico Bureau of Mines and MineralResources,Circular174,
25 p.
Geraghtyand
M i l l e r ,I n c o r p o r a t e d ,
1970,Ground-water
report,
Empire Ranch a r e a , Pima and'Santa Cruz Counties,Arizona
Gillerman, E.,
1958,Geology
HidalgoCounty,
MexicoBureau
of theCentralPeloncilloMountains,
New Mexico,and
o f Minesand
CochiseCounty,Arizona:
New
Mineral Resources, Bulletin
57,
1 5 2 p.
Hawkins,
1981,Geohydrology
D.B.,
HidalgoCounty,
M.S.
of thelower
New Mexico--A
Animas Valley,
computer simulation study:
t h e s i s , New Mexico I n s t i t u t e of Mining and Technology,
105p.
and Stephens, D.B.,
Hawkins, D.B.,
1981,HydrologicStudy
of t h e
Animas Valley-Lightning Dock KGRA Areas: New Mexico Energy
I n s t i t u t e ,F i n a lT e c h n i c a lR e p o r t ,F i s c a l
Hayes, P.T.,
1982,Geologic
map of Bunk Rqbinson Peak and
Whitmire Canyon RoadlessAreas,
NM and AZ:
U.S.
Year 1981, 90 p.
Coronado National Forests,
GeologicalSurveyMiscellaneousField
S t u d i e s MapMF-1425-A
54
Jacob, C.E.
on determiningpermeabilityby
1944,Notes
t e s t s underwater-tableconditions:
pumping
GeologicalSurvey,
U.S.
unpublishedreport
J i r a c e k , G.R.,
and
Smith,
1976, Deep r e s i s t i v i t y
C.,
KGRA's i n New Mexico:Radium
investigations at two
andNorthrup,
and Lightning Dock, i n Woodward, L.A.
(eds.),Tectonics
Springs
S.A.
and MineralResourcesofSouthwesternNorth
America: New Mexico G e o l o g i c a l S o c i e t y S p e c i a l P u b l i c a t i o n
6 , p . 71-76
K a f r i , U.,
R a n d a l l , J.H.,
andSimpson,
1 9 7 6 ,E f f e c t so f
E.S.,
ground-water pumpage on s u r f a c e and ground-waterflows
adjoiningbasins:
in
An i n t e r i m r e p o r t , U n i v e r s i t y o f A r i z o n a
WaterResourcesResearchCenter
K a f r i , U.,
and J. Ben-Asher,
rechargethrough
ofHydrology,
K o t t l o w s k i , F.E.,
1978,Computer
e s t i m a t e so fn a t u r a l
s o i l s insouthernArizona,
v o l . 38,no.
F o s t e r , R.W.,
1/2,
p. 125-138
andWengerd,
S.A.,
1969, Key o i l
t e s t s and s t r a t i g r a p h i c s e c t i o n s i n s o u t h w e s t e r n
N e w Mexico Geological Society
Journal
U.S.A.:
New Mexico:
Guidebook, 20th Field
Conference, p. 186-196
Lance, J . O . ,
Jr., K e l l e r , G.R.,
andAiken,
C.L.V.,
1982, A
regional geophysical study of the western overthrust
belt i n
southwestern New Mexico, West T e x a s , and NorthernChihuahua:
Rocky Mountain AssociationofGeologists,
ConferenceGuidebook,
p . 123-130
55
1982 Field
L a n s f o r d , R.R.,
S o r e n s e n , E.F.,
L o s l e b o n , L.,
C r e e l , B.J.,
irrigation water
New Mexicoby
G o l l e h o n , N.R.,
West, F.G.,
1 9 8 0 ,S o u r c e so f
and i r r i g a t e d and dry cropland acreages
in
county, 1974-1979: New Mexico A g r i c u l t u r a l
ExperimentStation,ResearchReport
Lasky, S.G.,
Fishburn, M.,
1938,Geologyand
422, 39 p.
o r ed e p o s i t s
mining d i s t r i c t , HidalgoCounty,
NM:
of theLordsburg
U.S.
GeologicalSurvey
B u l l e t i n 885, 62 p .
map of t h e S t a t e o f
Lepley,Larry,1981,Lineament
New MexicoEnergy
N e w Mexico:
I n s t i t u t e ,F i n a lT e c h n i c a lR e p o r t ,F i s c a l
Year 1981, 2 1 p.
Logsdon,
1981, The aqueousgeochemistryoftheLightning
M.J.,
Dock
Known
GeothermalResourceArea,
Animas Valley,Hidalgo
of N e w Mexico,
County, New Mexico: M.S. t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y
239 p.
Lohse, R.L.,
1981,Temperaturestudiesinsouthwestern
New
Mexico: New Mexico Energy I n s t i t u t e , F i n a l T e c h n i c a l R e p o r t ,
F i s c a l Year1981,p.
Maker, H . J . ,
Cox, D.N.,
37-82
andAnderson,
J.U.,
1 9 7 0 ,S o i l
a s s o c i a t i o n s and l a n d c l a s s i f i c a t i o n f o r i r r i g a t i o n ,
Hidalgo
County, New Mexico: New Mexico Agricultural Experiment
1 7 7 , 28 p .
Station,ResearchReport
Morrison,
R.B.,
1965,Geologic
Quadrangles,Arizona
map o ft h e
Duncan andCanador
and New Mexico: U.S.
56
Peak
GeologicalSurvey
MiscellaneousGeologicInvestiga'tions
Map 1-442,
scale
1:48,000
Nuzman, C.,
1970,Watersupply
planningarea,
and u t i l i z a t i o n , Empire-Sonoita
P i m a and Santa Cruz Counties,Arizona:
Layne-Western Company Incorporated
O'Brien,
K.M.,
and
Stone,
W.J.,
1981,Water-leveldatacompiled
for hydrogeologic study of
Animas Valley,HidalgoCounty,
New Mexico: New MexicoBureau
Open-fileReport130,
O'Brien, K.M.,
and
Stone,
of Minesand
Mineral Resources
64 p.
W.J.,
1982a,Water-qualitydata
compiled for hydrogeologic study of
Animas Valley,Hidalgo
County, New Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral
ResourcesOpen-fileReport
O'Brien, K.M.,
and
Stone,
W.J.,
131, 25 p.
198233, D r i l l - h o l e and t e s t i n g
data compiled for hydrogeologic study of
New Mexico: New Mexico Bureauof
HidalgoCounty,
MineralResourcesOpen-fileReport132,
Reeder, H.O.,
Animas Valley,
Mines and
79 p.
1 9 5 7 , Ground Water i n Animas Valley,Hidalgo
County, New Mexico: N e w Mexico StateEngineer,Technical
Report 11, 101p.
Reeder, H.O.,
(ea.),
1959, Ground-water
l e v e l si n
1956: New Mexico StateEngineer,TechnicalRept.
Reeder, H.O.
(ea.),1960,
Ground-water
l e v e l si n
1957: New Mexico StateEngineer,TechnicalRept.
57
New Mexico,
1 9 , 251 p .
New Mexico,
2 2 , 306 p .
Sanford, A.R.,
1968, GravitySurvey
New Mexico: New MexicoBureau
Resources,Circular
Schwennesen, A.T.,
i n CentralSocorro
of Mines and Mineral
91, 14p.
1918, Ground Water i nt h e
Animas, Playas,
Hachita, and San L u i s Basins, New Mexico: U.S.
Geological
1 5 2 p.
SurveyWater-SupplyPaper422,
Smith, C.,
County,
1978,Geophysics,GeologyandGeothermalLeasing
StatusoftheLightning
Dock KGRA, Animas Valley, New
Mexico: New Mexico GeologicalSociety,
Guidebook 29th f i e l d
conference, p. 343-348
Sorenson, E.F.,
1977, Water U s e by c a t e g o r i e s i n New Mexico
c o u n t i e s and r i v e r b a s i n s ,
and i r r i g a t e d and drycropland
acreage i n 1975: New Mexico StateEngineer,Technical
Rept.
41, 34 p.
Soul&, J.M.,
1972,
StructuralgeologyofNorthernPartof
Mountains,HidalgoCounty,
New Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of
125, 1 5 p.
Mines.andMineralResources,Circular
Stone, W.J.,
and Mizell, N.H.,
Mexico--a
survey of
1 9 7 7 , Geothermalresourcesof
work t o d a t e :
N e w MexicoBureau
a n d MineralResources,Open-fileReport73,
S t o n e , W.J.,
and M i z e l l , N.H.,
Availability of geological
e a s t e r nh a l fo ft h e
U.S.
Animas
andHawley,
New
o f Mines
1 1 7 p.
J.W.,
1979,
and g e o p h y s i c a l d a t a f o r t h e
GeologicalSurvey'sSouthwestern
AlluvialBasinsRegionalAquiferStudy:
58
New Mexico Bureau of
Mines andMineralResources,Open-fileReport109,
Summers, W.K.,
i n New Mexico: New
1976,Catalogofthermalwaters
Mexico Bureau of
Minesand
80 p.
Mineral Resources Hydrologic
80 p.
Report4,
Summers, W.K.,
1967, A comparisonoflongterm
pumping t e s t s , Ground Water,
T e l f o r d , W.M.,
and s h o r tt e r m
5,no.
V.
3 , p. 33-34
G e l d a r t , L.P.,
S h e r i f f , R.E.,
1976, AppliedGeophysics:
New York, NY,
andKeys,
D.A.,
Cambridge U n i v e r i s t y
Press, 860 p.
Thompson, Sam, 111, 1981,Analysesofpetroleumsource
reservoir rocks in southwestern
EnergyResearch
and
New Mexico: New Mexico
and Development I n s t i t u t e , 120 p.
Thompson, Sam, 111, Tovar R.,
J.C.,
andConley,
J.N.,
1978, o i l
and g a s e x p l o r a t i o n
wells i n t h e PedregosaBasin:
GeologicalSociety,
Guidebook 29th f i e l dc o n f e r e n c e ,
New Mexico
p.
331-
342
Thorman, C.H.,
and Drewes, H.,
1978,Geolgoic
LordsburgQuadrangles,HidalgoCounty,
Map o ft h e
New Mexico: U . S .
Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigation Series
1-1151,
Garyand
Map
s c a l e 1:24,000
Trauger, F.D.,
1972,Water
r e s o u r c e s and generalgeologyof
Grant County, New Mexico: New Mexico Bureau of Mines and
MineralResources,HydrologicReport
T r e s c o t t , P.C.,
P i n d e r , G.F.,
2,
2 1 1 p.
a n d L a r s o n , S.P.,
59
1976, Finite-
d i f f e r e n c e model f o r a q u i f e r s i m u l a t i o n i n
U.S. Geological
w i t hr e s u l t so fn u m e r i c a le x p e r i m e n t s :
SurveyTechniques
C1,
two dimensions
of Water-ResourcesInvestigations,Chapter
Book 7 , 116p.
White, N.D.,
andHardt
h y d r o l o g i cd a t af o r
Counties,Arizona:
1965, E l e c t r i c a l - a n a l o ga n a l y s i so f
W.F.,
San Simon basin,Cochise
GeologicalSurvey
U.S.
and Graham
Water SupplyPaper
1809-R, p. Rl-R30
1970,GroundwaterResourceEvaluation:
Walton, W.C.,
McGraw-Hill,
W i l s o n , L.G.,
New York,
I n c . , 664 p.
DeCook, K . J . ,
and Newman, S.P.,
1980,Regional
rechargeresearchforsouthwestalluvialbasins:
Water
ResourcesResearchCenter,Tucson,Arizona
Wynn, J.C.,
1981,Complete
Bouguer anomaly map o f t h e S i l v e r
lox2O quadrangle, New Mexico-Arizona:
M i s c e l l a n e o u sI n v e s t i g a t i o nS e r i e s
Wrucke,
C.T.,
and Bromfield,
C.S.,
Z e l l e r , R.A.,
Jr.,
U.S. GeologicalSurvey
Map I-1310-A
1961, U.S.
MineralInvestigationFieldStudies
Geological
Survey
Map
MF-160
1962,Reconnaissancegeologic
Animas Mountains, New Mexico BureauMinesand
ResourcesGeologic
Map 1 7 , s c a l e 1:62,500
60
City
map ofSouthern
Mineral