CAPACITY BUILDING FOR A PROGRAM IN
WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT IN
GAZA AND THE WEST BANK
M.Sc. program developed jointly by
Islamic University of Gaza, Bethlehem University,
An-Najah University and Purdue University.
Course 1. Groundwater Flow and Transport
Handbook and Guide to the Course
David Scarpa
BETHLEHEM UNIVERSITY
2002
1
Course 1. Groundwater Flow and Transport
This is a 15-week course, with weekly inputs, requiring responses from students to
ensure comprehension of the text. Assessment will be based on completed
assignments, tests and a final examination. Students will also be required to engage
in practical fieldwork.
Pre-requisite knowledge: It is presumed that students have an elementary
knowledge of rock types, structural geological terms and geological history as
well as of the hydrologic cycle, particularly with reference to groundwater flow.
The OU/UK video, Water for Jordan, neatly sums up basic hydrological
principles, using a local area case study. Notes and assignments are available
and copies of the video can be supplied. Another useful source of basic
information
is
Overview
of
Middle
East
Water
Resources,
http://water.usgs.gov/exact/ (Check USAID, Tel Aviv) with many related topics
across this website. The website for Bethlehem University’s Water and Soil
Environmental Research Unit is http://WSERU.Bethlehem.edu
OUTLINE OF COURSE
Week
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
beginning
Sept.28 ‘02
Oct. 05
Oct.12
Oct.19
Oct.26
Nov.02
Nov 09
Nov.16
Nov.23
Nov.30
Dec.07
Dec.14
Dec.21
Dec.28
Jan.04 ’03
section
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
14
Competency areas
The Geology of Aquifers and their formation
Aquifer properties
Application of Darcy’s Law
Natural and artificial recharge
Draw-down as a function of pumping
Pumping tests for evaluating and protecting aquifers
Pumping tests to derive aquifer hydraulics
Dimensions of flow and transport problems
Geophysical recharge studies of shallow aquifers
Groundwater/surface water interaction
Formal report on groundwater related topic
Flow nets to estimate groundwater flow
Seawater intrusion
Completion and review of course
Final Examination
Note: The above outline is a rough guide of the distribution of time allocated, as some
sections will require slightly more time than others.
2
The Geology of Aquifers and their formation
1.1. Introduction:
The geology of aquifers may be considered under the general headings of
lithology and structure. Lithology is concerned with rock types, their formation
and characteristics. Important hydraulic characteristics are permeability and
porosity, which may be primary and/or secondary. The structure of an aquifer
refers to the deformations in the strata caused by folding, faulting, uplift and
other tectonic events.
The West Bank surface and the sub-surface strata containing the aquifers consist
of Cretaceous platform carbonates and other marine sediments. The clays, sands
and sandstones of the Gaza Coastal Aquifer are of recent origin.
Questions designed to ensure comprehension of notes are placed after each
paragraph in the background notes.



What is the difference between primary and secondary porosity?
What do you understand by platform carbonates?
From where do the clays, sands and sandstones of the Gaza Coastal Aquifer
originate?
The West Bank Aquifers are contained within the asymmetric anticlinal structure of the
Mountain Aquifer (Figure 1.1). There are also various associated types of perched
aquifer.
m
NW
13000/12344
SE
19000/11743
Western Basin Eastern Basin
1000
f
f
H2 P3 S2
A2
f
400
Major Rift Fault System
f
-400
Formations
Abu Dis
Jerusalem
Bethlehem & Hebron
Yatta
UBK & LBK
Qatana
Produc tion Wells
A2
S2
P3
H2
=
=
=
=
Azzaria 2
Shedema 2
PWA 3
Herodian 2
f =
=
=
=
fault
spring
Water table piezom etric in upper sub-aquifer
Piezom etric surfac e in lower sub-aquifer
Vertic al exaggeration x10
.
Figure 1.1
NW--SE sketch geological section through the Mountain Aquifer.
(source: CH2MHill, 2000).
3
The shallow Gaza coastal aquifer consists of longshore drift deposits and outwash
fluvial sediments. The structure consists of inter-fingering clays and
sands/sandstones, generally dipping seawards (Figure 1.2). The groundwater is
stored in the sands and sandstones, the clays although very porous, become
impermeable once saturated and thus act as aquicludes.
Figure 1.2
NW--SE sketch geological section through Gaza Aquifer.
(source: Melloul & Collin, 1994).
1.2. The West Bank Aquifers – Outline Geological History
The Precambrian Shield forms the basement of the Afro-Arabian tectonic plate
that did not become two distinct plates until the Miocene. The East African-Red
Sea-Gulf of Aqaba-Jordan Valley shear fault is a function of the separation of the
Arabian Plate from the African Plate as sea-floor spreading opened up the Red
Sea. In fact Palestine is part of the Sinai sub-plate and remains relatively static
while the Arabian Plate, on which the Kingdom of Jordan is located, slides
northwards along the Aqaba-Jordan Valley sinistral sheared transform fault (Fig.
1.3).

Using the maps and diagrams supplied, explain the terms:
“tectonic plate”, “sea-floor spreading”, “sheared transform fault”.
4
Figure 1.3 The Aqaba-Jordan Valley transform fault as a function of the
separation of Arabia from Africa (after Gass, 1980).
5
Figure 1.4. Stages in the folding of the Hebron Mountains during the late Upper
Cretaceous Period, with the Senonian sediments forming an onlap unconformity.
(Scarpa, 1995, modified after Flexer, et al. 1989).
6
Figure 1.5 Geological Sketch Map of the West Bank.
Source:Abed Rabbo, et al. (1999).
7
During the Mesozoic, the West Bank area was part of the continental shelf of the
Afro-Arabian Plate onto which mainly carbonate deposits were laid down. During
the last 34M years of the Cretaceous Period, these sediments were folded up
above sea level into the Syrian Arc System (Figure1.4). Subsequently, they were
subjected to sub-aerial denudation, including the present erosion caused by the
Jordan River and its tributaries.
The West Bank aquifers are of three major age groups, as illustrated by the
geological map, Figure 1.5.
1. The Eastern & Western Basins are mainly of Albian-Turonian age;
2. The Northern Basin is mainly of Eocene Age;
3. Most of the Jordan Valley aquifer is of Neogene age.
Much of the recharge area for the Western Basin is located in the West Bank,
almost all of the Eastern Basin lies within the West Basin as does a very large part
of the Northeastern Basin. Figure 1.6 locates the Gaza and West Bank aquifers
within the context of the whole of Israel/Palestine.
Figure 1.6. The Israeli/Palestinian aquifers.
Source: Aliewi & Jayyousi, 2000.
8





What do you understand by “continental shelf”?
What are the sources of carbonate deposits?
What would you include under the term, “ sub-aerial denudation”?
Study the diagrams summarizing the history of the anticlinal structure that
now contains the Mountain Aquifer. In your own words write a series of
explanatory captions for these diagrams.
Suggest the stages of formation of the sediments that contain the shallow
coastal aquifer.
1.3 The Background to Exploitation of the Eastern Basin of the Mountain Aquifer
It was failed attempts to find oil that provided geologists and hydrologists with
the first detailed data concerning the lithology, structure and aquifer potential of
the shelf deposits forming the anticlinal eastern limb dipping to the Dead Sea.
Three bore holes drilled by oil companies are particularly relevant; the Halhul 01
(White Pigeon 1) drilled by the MECOM oil company from an elevation of 930m
at 159866/110677 to a depth of 3810m in 1964, the Mar Saba 01, also drilled by
MECOM near the Mar Saba monastery in the Kidron Valley, about half-way from
Jerusalem to the Dead Sea at 181750/127129, to a depth of 1416m in 1965, and
the Ein Gedi 02 on the shore of the Dead Sea east of Hebron (185820/089280) by
Naphtha in 1957 to a depth of 2571m. (Fleischer, 1996: 8, 12, 20).
The structure of the Mountain Aquifer is not a simple anticline. Rather it is a
complex anticlinorum with folds plunging in various directions, affecting
groundwater flow. The apex of the main anticlinal structure separates
groundwater flow westwards towards the Mediterranean drainage systems or
eastwards to the Jordan Valley and the Dead Sea. The main recharge area is to the
windward side of the highest elevations of the mountains. The upper parts of the
Yatta Formation separate an unconfined upper sub-aquifer from a lower confined
sub-aquifer. Recharge water enters both sub-aquifers within the area of recharge.
The water table is the highest level of saturated rock and is represented by the
yellow dashed line in Figure 1.1. In the confined sub-aquifer the groundwater is
subjected to confining pressures and would rise naturally to the piezometric
surface for this sub-aquifer (black dashed line) if the aquicludal seal did not
prevent it. There is sometimes leakage through this seal.
Recharge is mainly from rain falling on the heights of the Hebron Mountains. The
water infiltrates to the saturation levels in the aquifer. The main discharge of the
groundwater in the Eastern Basin of the Mountain Aquifer is into the Dead Sea at
the Feshkha springs, at an elevation of 410m below sea level, that is, a head of
860m over a lateral distance of about 20km. The aquifer is located in an active
fault zone with the lateral forces of the major Gulf of Aqaba-Jordan Valley
transform fault as well as a significant vertical component of stepped faults along
its flanks.
9
The total thickness of Albian to Coniacian strata containing the aquifer is between
800m and 850m (Guttman, 1998:5), and is made up of several sub-aquifers. The
upper, unconfined sub-aquifer, sometimes referred to as the Upper Cenomanian
Aquifer, includes the Hebron, Bethlehem and Jerusalem formations. The lower,
confined sub-aquifer includes the Lower and Upper Beit Kahil (LBK & UBK)
formations, which are of Albian Age1. The aquiferous strata of the Yatta
Formation form the base of the Cenomanian. Borehole data indicate that the
separation between these two sub-aquifers is the impermeable strata of bluish
green clays and marls and some chalks of the upper part of the Yatta Formation
(the Moza Formation in Israeli literature).
In the Herodion well field the upper sub-aquifer is between 50m and 80m higher
than the lower (Guttman, 1998; 5). The depths to which the Herodion group of
wells are drilled are between 350m and 800m, that is, both the upper and lower
sub-aquifers are penetrated, although pumps are usually set near the base of the
upper sub-aquifer. Further south, near the town of Yatta, the Zif 1 borehole gives
evidence of a 200m difference between the two sub-aquifers.
The wells of the Herodion field are drilled into a synclinal trough, close to the
area of recharge in order to extract the greatest amount of high quality drinking
water. The low gradient of the syncline does not affect the direction of
groundwater flow in the confined sub-aquifer. However, the northeast plunging
syncline controls the flow direction in the unconfined aquifer towards the major
discharge of the Feshkha springs on the Dead Sea shore (Baida & Zuckerman,
1992).
A long-running dispute among Israeli geohydrologists (Mazor, 1962 and 1969;
Mazor & Mero, 1969; Mazor & Molcho, 1972; Yechieli, 1993; Yechieli, et al.,
1994), taken up recently by Palestinian, Abed Rabbo (2000), is concerned with
the source of the waters which emerge at Ein Feshkha, on the north west shore of
the Dead Sea to the east of the well field. Isotopic evidence suggests that waters
come from a variety of sources including the deep Lower Cretaceous Nubian
Sandstone sub-aquifer. This so-called fossil water is at least 20,000 years old, and
has leaked up over 2,500m through conduits provided by the stepped faults
flanking the Jordan Valley transform fault into, first the confined Upper
Cretaceous sub-aquifer, where it has mixed with waters several hundreds of years
old and then into the phreatic aquifer and mixed with waters about forty years old
(Scarpa, 2000b). There is also a runoff component into the quaternary gravels
close to the Dead Sea shore. There are two quite distinct water types that emerge
from this group of springs and seepages, both very saline. It seems that the
bilateral negotiators who formulated Article 40 of the Oslo 2 Accords (1995)
1These formations are consistently placed in the Lower Cenomanian in Palestinian and Jordanian literature,
but the clear omission or erosion surface at the top of the UBK formation in many southern West Bank
exposures as well as the palaeontological evidence (Braun & Hirsch, 1994; Braun et al., 1990; Hirsch, 1981a,
1983; Hirsch et al., 1983; Rosenfeld & Raab, 1974) quite clearly show that these formations must have been
deposited before the Cenomanian transgression.
10
chose not to take these facts into consideration or were ignorant of them. For them
to have arrived at an extraction rate of 178Mm3/yr for the eastern basin of the
Mountain Aquifer suggests that the calculations were based on a
misunderstanding of the nature of the Feshkha discharge.
Figure 1.7 is a section drawn across the eastern limb of the anticline from the
Halhul 01 borehole to the Ein Gedi 02 borehole, through the Bani Naim water
well field. You should note a significant difference in the hydraulics of this part of
the aquifer from that shown in Figure 1.1.
159866/110677
NW
Halhul 01 bore
m
1000
185820/089280
SE
Sa’ir Spring
Ein Gedi 2 bore hole
f
f
f
2134
f
400
f
f
Sea Level
2=
1=
3=
4=
=
=
f =
-400
Bani Naim 2 production well
Bani Naim 1 production well
Bani Naim 3 production well
Bani Naim 4 production well
Piezometric surface in lower aquifer
Piezometric surface in upper aquifer
fault
Vertical exaggeration x10
0
1
2
f
f
Dead Sea
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 km
1000
Figure 1.7 Eastern Basin of the Mountain Aquifer: NW-SE section from Halhul
borehole to Ein Gedi borehole through the Bani Naim water well field.
Source:CH2MHILL,2000. Legend as in Figure 1.1.

What is the significance in the different levels of the piezometric surfaces?
Guttman (1998:9) demonstrates that there is not a simple west-east flow of
groundwater. Rather, it is zonal, influenced by transmissivity barriers that act as
low transmissivity zones. Groundwater from the Herodion field is mainly
northeast and then eastwards, indicating that low transmissivity zones are
bypassed. The structural geology, that is, the major anticlinal and secondary
anticlinal axes, the direction of plunge as well as the faulting, all affect the rate
and direction of flow. The karstic nature of the surface and subsurface lithology is
a significant factor influencing infiltration to the upper sub-aquifer as well as the
rate of groundwater flow. Guttman (1998:13) calculates transmissivity rates in the
11
major recharge areas below the anticlinal axis of the Hebron Mountains as 200
m2/day to 400 m2/day.
Guttman and Zukerman (1995) completed a hydrogeological flow model for the
eastern basin of the Mountain Aquifer, calibrated for steady state and dynamic
state. The Report, prepared for the Israeli Water Commissioner, Mr Gideon Tzur,
confined itself to the lower aquifer, draining to the Jordan Valley and the Dead
Sea. The authors identified geological and tectonic structural controls as well as
areas of low transmissivity. This model served as an important tool for managerial
and political decisions concerning the development of water well extraction in the
light of Article 40 of the Interim Accords (1995).
A steady state water balance was achieved, based on a recharge input of 118.5M
m3/yr and natural spring discharge of 25.71M m3/yr into the Jordan River and
93.78M m3/yr into the Dead Sea. A period of twenty-five years (1969-94) was
used for the dynamic state calibration. This gave a good match between measured
and computed values. This study produced quite different results from that of
Shachnai, (1980) also conducted by Tahal (Water Planning for Israel Inc.).The
Tzukim springs in the earlier study gave a discharge value of about 100M m3/yr,
whereas the 1995 study measured only 53M m3/yr. In Guttman (1998) discharge
at Feshkha was measured at 53.30M m3/yr and at Kana, and Samar, further south,
16.22M m3/yr and 18.32M m3/yr respectively. This inclusion partly explains the
discrepancy. This amount of discharge cannot all come from annual recharge
alone, even accepting the routes mapped on Figure 15 of Guttman (1998).
Leakage from the confined Albian-Cenomanian aquifer and the deep Nubian
Sandstone aquifers must also contribute. Isotopic studies (Rosenthal, 1978;
Kronfeld, et al., 1992) confirm the variety of origins of the Feshkha discharge.
Discharge from the Feshkha, Kana and Samar springs is estimated to be about
95M m3/yr by Palestinian hydrologists, Al Khatib & Assaf, (1994). However
Schwartz (1990), Tahal Chief Scientist, gives a figure of 100M m3/yr, while
Article 40 of the Oslo Accords (1995), puts it as high as 178M m3/yr. Engineers
and hydrologists, familiar with the published literature as outlined above,
generally regard the aquifer potential published in the Oslo Accords as
exaggerated (De Bruijne, 2000:10).
The strong advice of Guttman & Zukerman (1995) to the Water Commissioner
was for further exploitation of the groundwater at the expense of reducing
saltwater up-flow at the Dead Sea springs. Other studies (Mazor, 1962 and 1969;
Mazor & Mero, 1969; Mazor & Molcho, 1972;Yechieli, 1993; Yechieli, et al.,
1994) had shown that this up-flow was negligible and the high salinity was due to
a variety of other sources. Dr. Dan Hamberg of Tahal, in the letter to Mr. Gideon
Tzur, published with the Report, recommended that a salinity model for the entire
Jordan Basin, but especially its eastern parts, be established (letter dated Sept. 14th
1995).
12
There is abundant evidence indicating considerable over-pumping of the aquifer.
In 1995 the static water level (SWL) measured in the Beit Fajjar well was
568.82m above mean sea level (amsl), 347.47m in Herodion 1, 305.29m in
Table 1.1 Hebron 1: simplified well log.
Depth b.g.l.
Formation
000-099
Jerusalem
099-240
Bethlehem
240-348
Hebron
348-405
Yatta
405-489
U.Beit Kahil
489-704
L.Beit Kahil
Lithology and hydrologic quality
Gravel with clay
Grey dolomite with white limestone (porous)
Brown clay
Grey marl
White to greyish limestone
Grey dolomite (partly porous)
White limestone (porous)
Alteration of grey l’stone & white-grey
dolomite
Grey limestone & grey marl
White to greyish limestone, some chalk
Dark grey limestone
Yellow to grey limestone
Alteration of yellow to grey l’st. to grey
dolomite
Grey limestone & grey marl
Alteration brown & grey dolomite with grey
marl
marl
Dolomite
Grey to brown limestone, (porous)
Brown limestone(very porous)
Brown dolomite (more porous to the bottom)
Grey limestone, some clay (very hard)
Dolomite (very porous)
Dolomite, some clay
Alteration of grey to white limestone altered
with thin porous layers of dolomite, marly
limestone.
Brown dolomite
Hard grey to white l’st. altered thin layers of
porous dolomite, marley limestone
Dolomite (porous)
Clayey l’st. altered with thin layers of porous
dolomite
Grey limestone, marly l’st. w. thin layers of
dolomite
Grey to white limestone (porous)
Grey limestone, hard marly limestone
Grey limestone (soft)
Grey limestone (hard)
Thickness
000-018
018-080
080-083
083-089
089-099
099-120
120-141
141-180
180-206
206-240
240-268
268-288
288-348
348-358
358-401
401-405
405-414
414-423
423-428
428-444
444-469
469-475
475-489
489-560
560-570
570-588
588-596
596-607
607-637
637-648
648-670
670-685
685-704
Sources : Tahal & CDM/Morganti
Herodion 2, 311.43m in Herodion 3 and 359.10m in Herodion 4/5. Pumps are
usually set at about 250 – 350m below the surface. About 11M m3/yr were
13
A
AQUIFER
Coastal
B
Western
C
Northern
Eastern
D
LEBANON
SYRIA
ISRAEL
Haifa
Jerusalem
C
JORDAN
B
WEST
BANK
Tel Aviv
Sur Bahir
Beit Jala
Amman
A
Jerusalem
Bethlehem
D
Sh
Beit Sahur
GAZA
Az
Jwc4
Hz
PWA3
120
H2
Z
120
Eh1
H1
H3
BF
Beit Ummar
H4/5
H1/2
PWA1
Sa’ir
110
110
Eh2
Halhul
0
2.5
2.5
5Km
Legend
Hebron
Existing well
New well or
under construction
BN3/4
Bani Naim
BN2
170
160
Figure 1.8 The deep wells drilled into the southern part of the eastern basin.
Source: Scarpa (2002, after Aliewi & Jarrar 2000).
14
pumped in 1995. The steady fall in the water table is particularly evident in the
drier years between 1979 and 1989 when a drop of about 30m was recorded. In
1972, the static water level in Herodion 2 stood at 340m (amsl) and by 1992 had
fallen to 300m. In 1987 the static water level in Herodion 4 stood at 377m amsl,
but had fallen to 346m by the middle of 1991. Thus the static water level in
Herodian 4 dropped 18.75m between 1986 and 1997 at an average annual rate of
1.7m, while in Herodian 2 between 1975 and 1997 it dropped 37.43m also at an
average annual rate of 1.7m. Between 1981 and 1997, the average rate of decline
in the static water table was 5.33m/yr, giving a total drop of 85.33m (Guttman &
Zuckerman, 1995; Aliewi & Jarrar 2000: 6-7). Figure 1.8 shows the distribution
of the deep wells drilled into the southern part of the eastern basin.
As part of the drilling programme implementing the requirements of Article 40 of
the Bilateral Interim Accords (1995), the Israeli Company Mekorot, in 1996,
drilled the water production boreholes Hebron 1 & 2 into the synclinal trough at
16835/11310 from an elevation of 710m to a depth of 705m (Table 1.1). These
began pumping in 1999. On January 1st 2000 the static water table in Hebron 1
stood at 288 metres below ground level (CDM/Morganti,). Between the Halhul 01
deep borehole and Hebron 1, on a straight line joining them, is the Aroub 1b
monitoring well begun in March 2000 on the south bank of Wadi Aroub in the
refugee camp of Al Aroub located at 16309066/11430289, at an elevation of
822m drilled to a depth of 1200m These data, together with that of topographic,
geological and structure maps, allow the drawing of the sketch sections, Figures
1.1 and 1.7, revealing the structure containing this part of the aquifer. A
simplified well log of Hebron 1 is shown as Table 1.1. The more detailed logs
from observation and production wells distributed throughout the well field allow
hydrological assessment of aquifer potential.
It may be ascertained from Table 1.1 that the water bearing rocks constitute the
bottom 20m of limestones and dolomites at the base of the Hebron formation,
supported by the clay-marl-shale seal at the top of the Yatta formation, which thus
forms the base of the unconfined sub-aquifer. The well is drilled to a depth of
704m, that is, to the base of the Lower Beit Kahil formation. The confined subaquifer is mostly in the Beit Kahil formations (Table 1.1).
1.4. The Northeastern West Bank Aquifers
The aquifer basin that lies between the cities of Nablus and Jenin drains north-eastwards
into the Galilee. It is contained within a shallow syncline of Eocene strata floored by
Upper Cretaceous rocks and partly covered by Quaternary sediments. The western basin,
between the cities of Tulkarm and Qalqiliya is mainly within the Upper Cretaceous and,
in places superficially covered by Quaternary deposits. About one third of the total area
of the northern West Bank, is of the Eocene, mainly nummulitic limestone group,
referred to as the Jenin Subseries (Rofe & Raffety, 1965). This forms a triangular
exposure, with Nablus in the south at the apex and Jenin in the north, in the middle of the
base of this
15
Figure 1.9 The Northeast Basin – simplified geology.
Source: http://water.usgs.gov/exact/overview/ (p.20).
triangle. The Jenin Subseries is about 500 m thick and includes the following five
facies:
(i)
chalk with minor chert;
16
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
chalk with minor interbedded nummulitic limestone;
limestone with minor interbedded chalk;
bedded massive nummulitic limestone;
reef limestone (Aliewi et al.,1995).
Karstic secondary porosity, the widening of joints, fractures and bedding planes
by solution erosion, have made this basin an important aquifer. This Eocene basin
is contained within the synclinal structure formed by the Upper Cretaceous strata
which crop out to the east and west. The syncline plunges north-eastwards.
The area including Nablus, Jenin, Qabatiya, and Birqin is included in the
northeastern basin (Figure 1.9). Rofe and Raffety (1965) define two aquifer
systems, viz., the shallow Eocene system and the deep Cenomanian-Turonian
system. The Eocene system depends directly on the renewable recharge from
precipitation, receiving an average annual rainfall of about 500 mm (Marei &
Haddad, 1996). The water that enters this aquifer moves to the north-east (Rofe &
Raffety, 1965). Many springs issue from this aquifer and wells have been drilled
for agricultural and domestic purposes.
The main aquifer in the Tulkarm area is the Cenomanian-Turonian system which
consists mainly of karstic limestones and dolomites. In the plains around
Tulkarm, Pleistocene formations of alluvial deposits crop out and form a shallow
aquifer system. Direct recharge to the aquifer systems takes place over the entire
area, with an average annual precipitation of about 600 mm, however, the yield
from the Cenomanian-Turonian system is not affected by variations in annual
rainfall. The groundwater moves from east to west, Weinberger, et al. (1994).
Marei & Haddad (1996) point to the absence of springs, indicating a lack of
impermeable near sub-surface strata. An east-west geological section (Figure
1.10) illustrates the structure of this aquifer.
Figure 1.10. The Northeastern aquifer basin: simplified geological section through
Tulkarm. Source:Abdul-Jaber et al. 1999)
17
1.5. The Gaza Coastal Aquifer.
This shallow coastal aquifer is made up of a series of sub-aquifers separated by
inter-fingering impervious clay lenses as illustrated in Figure 1.2. There is a
relationship between the western basin of the Mountain Aquifer and the shallow
coastal aquifer as illustrated in Figure 1.11
Figure 1.11 The structural relationship between the Western Basin of the
Mountain Aquifer and the shallow Gazan Coastal Aquifer.
Source: Scarpa (1996) adapted from Gvertzman (1994).
The map, Figure 1.12, locates the section above (Figure 1.2) within the Gazan
spatial context. The highest of the sub-aquifers is closest to the sea, while the
lowest extends further inland. This Pleistocene sequence is underlain by the
impervious Saqyieh clay formation of Miocene age. The aquifer consists of
18
Figure 1.12 The Gazan shallow coastal aquifer: simplified geology.
Source: IGS (various).
Pleistocene sedimentary deposits of alluvial sands, graded gravel, conglomerates,
pebbles and mixed soils. Randomly distributed marine clays act as aquitards
subdividing this aquifer into a number of sub-aquifers. The clay strata confine the
eastward extension of the aquifer but closer to the sea it is not so confined.
Groundwater flow is towards the Mediterranean, the shallow angle of the water
table grades to sea level at the coast, where saturation depth is about 120 m thick,
but tapers eastwards to just a few metres near the eastern extent of the aquifer
(Khalid, 1999:31-32).
19
1.6 The Jordan Valley Aquifer.
The Jordan River is the main surface water flow, controlling surface drainage
within the Jordan Basin and much of the West Bank groundwater flow (Fig.1.13).
Figure 1.13 The Jordan Valley Aquifer: simplified geology.
Source: http://water.usgs.gov/exact/overview/ (p.19.).
20
Some of this surface and groundwater infiltrates to the Jordan Valley aquifers.
Aquifers in the Jordan Valley are contained within Pleistocene, Neogene and
Eocene deposits. Eocene strata, consisting of limestones marls and chalks in the
Marj Na’jah area form the oldest exploited aquifer in the Jordan Valley. The
Neogene aquifer is, at most, 100m thick in the Bardalla, and Ein Beida area in the
northern part of the Jordan Valley. Consolidated conglomerates and gravels, with
some thin limestone beds form water bearing strata separated by impermeable
marl beds. The Pleistocene aquifer consists of unconsolidated alluvial sands and
gravels separated by impermeable saline lacustrine marls. Pleistocene deposits
occur throughout most of the Jordan Valley.
References for Section 1.
Abed Rabbo, A., Scarpa, D.J. and Qannam, Z., (1998). A study of the water quality
and hydrochemistry of the Herodion-BeitFajjar wells, Bethlehem
University Journal, 17, 10-28.
Abed Rabbo, A, Scarpa, D.J., Qannam, Z., Abdul Jaber, Q. & Younger, P. (1999)
Springs in the West Bank: Water Quality and Chemistry, Palestinian
Hydrology Group, Jerusalem.
Aliewi, A. & Jayyousi, A. (2000) The Palestinian Water Resources in the Final
Status Negotiations: Technical Framework and Professional Perception,
Sustainable Management of the West Bank and Gaza Aquifers Project.
Al Khatib, N. & Assaf, K. (1994) Palestinian water supplies and demands. Water and
Peace in the Middle East, J. Isaac, & H. Shuval (eds.) Elsevier, Amsterdam,
55-68.
Baida, U. & Zukerman, H. (1992) Water Planning for Israel, Jerusalem, Possibilities
of Exploitation and Development of Groundwater Resources, Tahal, Tel
Aviv (in Hebrew)
Brassington, R. (1991) Field Hydrogeology, Geological Society of London
Professional Handbook Series, Open University Press and Halstead Press,
John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Clark, L. (1991) Water Wells and Boreholes, Geological Society of London
Professional Handbook Series, Open University Press and Halstead Press,
John Wiley & Sons, New York.
De Bruijin, G., Moorehead, J. & Odeh, W. (2000) Water for Palestine: A Critical
Assessment of the European Investment Bank’s Lending Strategy in the
Rehabilitation of Water Resources in the Southern West Bank, CEE
Bankwatch Network, Palestinian Hydrology Group
Fleischer, L. (1996) Index of Oil and Gas Wells Drilled in Israel, The Ministry of
National Infrastructures, Earth Sciences Research Administration, Report
OG/2/96.
Flexer, A., Gilat, A., Hirsch, F., Honigstein, A. S., Rosenfeld, A. & Rueffer, T.
(1989). Late Cretaceous evolution of the Judean Mountains as indicated
by ostracodes, Terra Nova, 1, 349-358.
21
Gass. I (1980) Crustal; and Mantle Processes: Red Sea Case Study, The Open
University, Department of Earth Sciences].
Guttman, J. (1998) Hydrogeology of the Eastern Aquifer in the Judea Hills and
Jordan Valley, Multi-Lateral Project 02WT9719, Sub Project B, Annual
:Report: 1997, Mekorot. .
Guttman, J. (2000) Hydrogeology of the Eastern Aquifer in the Judea Hills and
Jordan Valley, Multi-Lateral Project 02WT9719, Sub Project B,
Final:Report: 2000, Mekorot Report No.468 .
Guttman, J, & Zukerman, H. (1995) Flow Model of the Eastern Basin of the Judean
Mountains, Tahal, Tel Aviv (in Hebrew).
Hirsch, F. (1981a) Albian and Early Cenomanian biostromes in Western Hebron
Mountains, Proceedings: Israel Geological Society Annual Meeting,
Kazrin, 27.
Hirsch, F. Honigstein, A. & Rosenfeld, A. (1983) Late Early Cretaceous (AptianAlbian) ostracodes from the Judean Mountains, Nues Jahrnb Geol.
Palaeontol. Monatsh. 11, 669-676.
Israeli/Palestinian Bilateral Negotiating Team (1995) Interim Accords, Article 40,
Water Supply and Sewage Disposal, Washington.
Khalid, A-L., M. (1999) A computational flow model for the determination of
groundwater availability in the Gaza Strip, Water and Environment,
Palestinian Hydrology Group, Nablus, December, 30-39.
Kronfeld, J., Vogel, J. & Rosenthal, A. (1992) Natural isotopes and water
stratification in the Judea Group Aquifer (Judean Desert), Israel Journal of
Earth Sciences, 39,71-76.
Levy, Z. (1988) Lithostratigraphic subdivision of the Hazera Formation (Late Albian
–Late Cenomanian)in the Negev, southern Israel, Israel Journal of Earth
Science, 37, 4, 205-210.
Mazor, E., 1962. Radon and radium content in some Israeli water sources and a
hypothesis on underground reservoirs of brines, oils and gasses in the Rift
Valley, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 26, 765-786.
Mazor, E., 1969. Compositional changes in sea water in contact with rocks, in
Proceedings of the Israeli Geological Society (1967-69) 18, 165.
Mazor, E. & Mero, F., 1969. The origin of the Tiberias-Nolit(check) mineral water
association in the Tiberias-Dead Sea Valley, Israel Journal of Hydrology,
44, 63-70.
Mazor , M. and Molcho, M., 1972. Geochemical studies on the Feshkha springs,
Dead Sea Basin, Journal of Hydrology, 15, 3
Melloul, A J. & Collin, M. (1994) The hydrological malaise of the Gaza Strip, Israel
Journal of Earth Sciences, 43, 105-116.
Rosenfeld, A. & Raab,M. (1974) Cenomanian Ostracodes from the Judea Group in
Israel, Israel Geological Survey, 62, Jerusalem.
Rosenthal, E. (1978) U234/U238 Disequilibrium in Waters of the Judea Group Aquifer
in the Eastern Slope of the Judean and Samaria Hills [in Hebrew; English
abstract] M.Sc. thesis Tel Aviv University.
Rosenthal, E., Harpaz, H., Maler, F., Gafni, G., Kuller, Z., Keshet, N, Gotfeld, A. &
Rittman, S. (1986) Judea and Samaria Springs Survey Part 1, Hebron
22
Mountain Area: Basic Data and Chemical Analysis, Nature Reserves
Authority (in Hebrew), Jerusalem.
Scarpa, D. J. (1994) Eastward groundwater flow from the Mountain Aquifer, Water
and Peace in the Middle East, eds. J. Isaac & H. Shuval, Elsevier Science
B.V. Amsterdam, 193-203
Scarpa, D.J. (1995) Introductory Geology, Bethlehem University Print Shop.
Wishahi, S.K. & Khalid, A-L., M. (1999) Hydrochemistry of the Jordan Valley
aquifers, Water and Environment, Palestinian Hydrology Group, Nablus,
December, 12-21.
Yechieli, Y. (1993) The Effect of the Water Level Changes in Closed Lakes (Dead
Sea) on the Surrounding Groundwater and Country Rocks, Ph.D.thesis,
Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot.
Yechieli, Y. Ronen, D., Carmi, I. & Kaufman,A. (1994) New tritium data in waters of
the Dead Sea area, Israel Journal of Earth Sciences, 43, 213-220.
23