The ground-water and surface-water system in the Yuma area in southwestern Arizona and southeastern California is managed intensely to meet water-delivery requirements of customers in the United States, to manage high ground-water levels in the valleys, and to maintain treaty-mandated water-quality and quantity requirements of Mexico. The following components in this report, which were identified to be useful in the development of a ground-water management model, are: (1) refinement of the hydrogeologic framework; (2) updated water-level maps, general ground-water flow patterns, and an estimate of the amount of ground water stored in the mound under Yuma Mesa; (3) review and documentation of the ground-water budget calculated by the Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Department of the Interior (Reclamation); and (4) water-chemistry characterization to identify the spatial distribution of water quality, information on sources and ages of ground water, and information about the productive-interval depths of the aquifer. A refined three-dimensional digital hydrogeologic framework model includes the following hydrogeologic units from bottom to top: (1) the effective hydrologic basement of the basin aquifer, which includes the Pliocene Bouse Formation, Tertiary volcanic and sedimentary rocks, and pre-Tertiary metamorphic and plutonic rocks; (2) undifferentiated lower units to represent the Pliocene transition zone and wedge zone; (3) coarse-gravel unit; (4) lower, middle, and upper basin fill to represent the upper, fine-grained zone between the top of the coarse-gravel unit and the land surface; and (5) clay A and clay B. Data for the refined model includes digital elevation models, borehole lithology data, geophysical data, and structural data to represent the geometry of the hydrogeologic units. The top surface of the coarse-gravel unit, defined by using borehole and geophysical data, varies similarly to terraces resulting from the down cutting of the Colorado River. Clay A is nearly the same as the previous conceptual hydrogeologic model definition (Olmsted and others, 1973), except for a minor westward extension from the city of Yuma. Clay B is extended to the southerly international boundary and increased in areal extent by about two-thirds of the original extent (Olmsted and others, 1973). The other hydrogeologic units generally are the same as in the previous conceptual hydrogeologic model. Before development, the Colorado and Gila Rivers were the sources of nearly all the ground water in the Yuma area through direct infiltration of water from river channels and annual overbank flooding. After construction of upstream reservoirs and clearing and irrigation of the floodplains, the rivers now act as drains for the ground water. Ground-water levels in most of the Yuma area are higher now than they were in predevelopment time. A general gradient of ground-water flow toward the natural discharge area south of the Yuma area still exists, but many other changes in flow are evident. Ground water in Yuma Valley once flowed away from the Colorado River, but now has a component of flow towards the river and Mexicali Valley. A ground-water mound has formed under Yuma Mesa from long-term surface-water irrigation; about 600,000 to 800,000 acre-ft of water are stored in the mound. Ground-water withdrawals adjacent to the southerly international boundary have resulted in water-level declines in that area. The reviewed and documented water budget includes the following components: (1) recharge in irrigated areas, (2) evapotranspiration by irrigated crops and phreatophytes, (3) ground-water return flow to the Colorado River, and (4) ground-water withdrawals (including those in Mexicali Valley). Recharge components were calculated by subtracting the amount of water used by crops from the amount of water delivered. Evapotranspiration rates were calculated on the basis of established methods, thus were appropriate for input to the ground-wate

Hydrologic conditions in the newly created Agua Fria National Monument were characterized on the basis of existing hydrologic and geologic information, and streamflow data collected in May 2002. The study results are intended to support the Bureau of Land Management's future water-resource management responsibilities, including quantification of a Federal reserved water right within the monument. This report presents the study results, identifies data deficiencies, and describes specific approaches for consideration in future studies. Within the Agua Fria National Monument, the Agua Fria River flows generally from north to south, traversing almost the entire 23-mile length of the monument. Streamflow has been measured continuously at a site near the northern boundary of the monument since 1940. Streamflow statistics for this site, and streamflow measurements from other sites along the Agua Fria River, indicate that the river is perennial in the northern part of the monument but generally is intermittent in downstream reaches. The principal controls on streamflow along the river within the monument appear to be geology, the occurrence and distribution of alluvium, inflow at the northern boundary and from tributary canyons, precipitation, and evapotranspiration. At present, (2004) there is no consistent surface-water quality monitoring program being implemented for the monument. Ground-water recharge within the monument likely results from surface-water losses and direct infiltration of precipitation. Wells are most numerous in the Cordes Junction and Black Canyon City areas. Only eight wells are within the monument. Ground-water quality data for wells in the monument area consist of specific-conductance values and fluoride concentrations. During the study, ground-water quality data were available for only one well within the monument. No ground-water monitoring program is currently in place for the monument or surrounding areas.

Pipe Spring National Monument, near the border of Arizona and Utah, includes several low-discharge springs that are the primary natural features of the monument. The National Park Service is concerned about the declines in spring discharge. Seismic-refraction and frequency-domain electromagnetic-induction methods were employed in an attempt to better understand the relation between spring discharge and geologic structure. The particular method used for the seismic-refraction surveys was unable to resolve structural features in the monument. Electromagnetic surveys delineated differences in apparent conductivity of the shallow subsurface deposits. The differences are attributable to differences in saturation, lithology, and structure of these deposits.