DOCSLIB.ORG

Preliminary Results of Hydrogeologic Investigations Humboldt River

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Preliminary Results of Hydrogeologic Investigations Humboldt River Preliminary Results of Hydrogeologic Investigations in the Valley of the Humboldt River Near Winnemucca, Nevada GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1754 Prepared in cooperation with the Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Preliminary Results of Hydrogeologic Investigations in the Valley of the Humboldt River Near Winnemucca, Nevada By PHILIP COHEN GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1754 Prepared in cooperation with the Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1964 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERFOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan. Director The U.S. Geological Survey Library cards for this publication appear after page 59 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C., 20402 CONTENTS Page Abstract _________________________________________________________ 1 Introduction._____________________________________________________ 2 Location and general features of the area.________________________ 2 Scope of the investigation and purpose and scope of the report._____ 3 Previous work_____________________ __________________________ 4 Acknowledgments _____________________________________________ 4 Numbering system of wells and test borings ______________________ 5 Methods of investigation. __________________________________________ 5 Field program.______________________________________________ 5 Laboratory studies____________________________________________ 7 Geology._______----_-----_--_-___-__________________________-____ 8 Geomorphic features----_-----__-_________-_--_.__-________-___ 8 Mountains- _______________________________________________ 8 Upland erosional surfaces and alluvial fans______---_-____-_-_ 9 Physiographic features formed by Lake Lahontan_____________ 9 Streams and associated geomorphic forms___________________ 11 Humboldt River______________________________________ 11 Little Humboldt River_-__________-_-____--______--__ 13 Small tributary streams__----_-_------__------_-------- 14 Lithology and water-bearing character of the rocks________________ 15 Consolidated rocks._______________________________________ 15 Rocks of Paleozoic and Mesozoic age. ___________________ 15 Rocks of Cenozoic age___ ___-___-___-______-_-______-__ 15 Rocks of late Tertiary and Quaternary age_______________ 15 Unconsolidated rocks______________________________________ 18 Pre-Lake Lahontan deposits.___________________________ 18 Lake Lahontan deposits._______________________________ 19 Lower silt and clay unit.________-___-___-__--_----_ 19 Alluvium-. _________________________________ 20 Medial gravel unit...________-__-______-__-_-_---__ 20 Upper silt and clay unit.___________________________ 23 Gravel-bar deposits-____________-_________--_-_---- 27 Post-Lake Lahontan deposits.__________________________ 27 Terrace deposits___-------_----_-____------___-_-_- 27 Fluviatile and subaerial deposits of the meander-scroll plain__________-___-_____.___________ 28 Fluviatile and lacustrine deposits.___________________ 29 Younger fanglomerate______________-_-___-___---- 29 Windblown deposits.. _________-_-_____________---- 30 Structural geology._------__-_______________-,____-__---__----- 30 nr IV CONTENTS Page Surface water.__----_--____________________._____________-_-__--_- 31 Humboldt River....____________________________________ 31 Comus gaging station._____________________________________ 31 Rose Creek gaging station _____________________________1__-- 32 Winnemucca gaging station________________________---__--_- 33 Relation between streamfiow at the Comus and Rose Creek gaging stations._________________________________________ 33 Seepage gains and losses along the Humboldt River.___________ 36 Other streams.._______________________________________________ 40 Ground water_____________________________________________________ 40 Principles of occurrence._______________-_____-_-_______--__-_-_ 40 Occurrence and movement of ground water._______-__-___--_-_--- 43 Ground-water recharge________________-____-_____-_---___-_ 43 Preliminary estimates of underflow from tributary areas____ 44 Grass Valley and the northwestern slope of the Fonoma Range__ _ ____________________________________ 45 Paradise Valley__________________-__-___--___---_ 46 Pole Creek-Rock Creek area________________________ 47 Valley of the Humboldt River upstream from the study area.__________________________________________ 47 Summary of underflow from tributary areas___________ 48 Seepage losses from the Humboldt River________-___-_-_- 48 Recharge resulting from irrigation _______________________ 49 Direct precipitation on the valley floor ___________________ 50 Ground-water discharge_____-----__--_-____--__-__-----_-_- 50 Underflow near the Rose Creek gaging station_____________ 50 Effluent seepage to the Humboldt River._________________ 50 Evapotranspiration_ _ __ _ _______________________________ 51 Changes of ground water in storage._________________________ 52 Specific retention._____________________________________ 52 Porosity._____________________________________________ 53 Specific yield________________________________________ 53 Changes related to rising ground-water levels____________ 55 Summary and conclusions__ _________-___--___-_____-_-____-_-__--__ 58 References cited___________________________________________________ 58 ILLUSTEATIONS [Plates are in separate volume] PLATE 1. Map of the Humboldt River drainage basin, Nevada, slewing area of this report. 2-4. Maps of the valley of the Humboldt River near Winnemucca, Nevada, showing 2. Geology and location of test borings, observation wells, and streamflow measuring stations. 3. Generalized water-level contours in December 1961. 4. Ground-water storage units. CONTENTS V Page FIGURE 1-2. Medial gravel collected from test boring 35/36-15dacl: 1. Unsorted and unwashed___________________________ 22 2. Sorted according to degree of roundness_____________ 23 3. Medial gravel collected from test boring 35/36-15ddbl._ __ 24 4 5. Generalized geologic sections: 4. Upper silt and clay unit________________________.__ 25 5. Lahontan gravel bar_________________.____________ 26 6. Streamflow measurements along the Humboldt between the Comus and Rose Creek gaging stations_______________ 38 7. Divisions of subsurface waters__________________________ 41 8. Histogram showing the frequency distribution of specifn- yield values____________.___________________________ 54 TABLES Page TABLE 1. Summary of test drilling in the valley of the Humboldt River near Winnemucca, Nev., 1959-60.______________________ 7 2. Lithology and distribution of the rocks of Paleozoic and Meso- zoic age in and near the valley of the Humboldt River near Winnemucca, Nev___________________________________ 16 3. Streamflow of the Humboldt River at the Comus gaging sta­ tion. _____________...__________._-__-_ 33 4. Monthly and yearly streamflow of the Humboldt River at tt 3 Comus and Rose Creek gaging stations, 1949-60 ________ 34 5. Designation and location of streamflow measuring stations aloro; the Humboldt River, near Winnemucca, Nev__________ 37 6. Streamflow measurements along the Humboldt River between the Comus and Rose Creek gaging stations, 1959-61 ______ 39 7. Streamflow at the Pole Creek gaging station, 1956-60. __ _ 40 8. Preliminary estimates of underflow through selected sectiors perpendicular to the Humboldt River._________________ 45 9. Laboratory specific-yield values of sediment samples from tte valley of the Humboldt River near Winnemucca, Nev____ 54 10. Ground-water storage units and short-term specific-yield values for rising ground-water levels in the valley of th^ Humboldt River near Winnemucca, Nev______________ 56 11. Increase of ground water in storage resulting from rising ground-water levels during April, May, and June in thi valley of the Humboldt River near Winnemucca, Nev____ 57 PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF HYDROGEOLOGIC INVESTIGATIONS IN THE VALLEY OF THE HUMPOLDT RIVER NEAR WINNEMUCCA, NEVADA By PHILIP COHEN ABSTRACT Most of the ground water of economic importance and nearly all the ground water closely associated with the flow of the Humboldt River in the 40-mile reach near Winnemucca, Nev., are in unconsolidated sedimentary deposits. These deposits range in age from Pliocene to Recent and range in character from coarse poorly sorted fanglomerate to lacustrine strata of clay, silt, sand, and gravel. The most permeable deposit consists of sand and gravel of Lake Lahontan age the so-called medial gravel unit which is underlain and over­ lain by fairly impermeable silt and clay also of Lake Lahontan age. The ultimate source of nearly all the water in the study area is prec'citation within the drainage basin of the Humboldt River. Much of this water reaches the study area as flow or underflow of the Humboldt River and as underflow from other valleys tributary to the study area. Little if any flow from the tributary streams in the study area usually reaches the Humbold*: River. Most of the tributary streamflow within the study area evaporates or is transpired by vegetation, but a part percolates downward through unconsoli­ dated deposits of the alluvial fans flanking the mountains and move* down- gradient as ground-water underflow toward the Humboldt River. Areas that contribute significant amounts of ground-water underflow to the valley of the Humboldt River within the study area are (1) the valle^ of the Humboldt River upstream from the study area, (2) the Pole Cre?k-Rock
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lahontan Cutthroat Trout Species Management Plan for the Upper Humboldt River Drainage Basin
    STATE OF NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE LAHONTAN CUTTHROAT TROUT SPECIES MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UPPER HUMBOLDT RIVER DRAINAGE BASIN Prepared by John Elliott SPECIES MANAGEMENT PLAN December 2004 LAHONTAN CUTTHROAT TROUT SPECIES MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE UPPER HUMBOLDT RIVER DRAINAGE BASIN SUBMITTED BY: _______________________________________ __________ John Elliott, Supervising Fisheries Biologist Date Nevada Department of Wildlife, Eastern Region APPROVED BY: _______________________________________ __________ Richard L. Haskins II, Fisheries Bureau Chief Date Nevada Department of Wildlife _______________________________________ __________ Kenneth E. Mayer, Director Date Nevada Department of Wildlife REVIEWED BY: _______________________________________ __________ Robert Williams, Field Supervisor Date Nevada Fish and Wildlife Office U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service _______________________________________ __________ Ron Wenker, State Director Date U.S.D.I. Bureau of Land Management _______________________________________ __________ Edward C. Monnig, Forest Supervisor Date Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest U.S.D.A. Forest Service TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ……………………………………………………………………..1 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………….…2 AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES……………………………………………………………….…4 CURRENT STATUS……………………………………………………………………………..6 RECOVERY OBJECTIVES……………………………………………………………………19 RECOVERY ACTIONS…………………………………………………………………………21 RECOVERY ACTION PRIORITIES BY SUBBASIN………………………………………….33 IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE……………………………………………………………..47
    [Show full text]
  • Nevada Department of Wildlife Statewide Fisheries Management
    NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE STATEWIDE FISHERIES MANAGEMENT FEDERAL AID JOB PROGRESS REPORTS F-20-50 2014 CHIMNEY RESERVOIR WESTERN REGION NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE, FISHERIES DIVISION JOB PROGRESS REPORT Table of Contents Contents Page SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 1 BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................. 1 OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................................. 1 PROCEDURES ............................................................................................................... 2 FINDINGS ....................................................................................................................... 3 GENERAL MANAGEMENT REVIEW ............................................................................. 9 STUDY REVIEW ........................................................................................................... 10 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................. 10 NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE, FISHERIES DIVISION JOB PROGRESS REPORT List of Tables Number Title Page 1 Chimney Reservoir Oppurtunistic Angler Survey 2014……………………..3 2 Chimney Reservoir Angler Questionnaire Results 2009-2013 ................... 4 3 Chimney Reservoir Stocking History 2010-2014 ...........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Paiute of California, Idaho, Nevada and Oregon
    טקוּפה http://family.lametayel.co.il/%D7%9E%D7%A1%D7%9F+%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A0%D7 %A1%D7%99%D7%A1%D7%A7%D7%95+%D7%9C%D7%9C%D7%90%D7%A1+%D7%9 5%D7%92%D7%90%D7%A1 تاكوبا Τακόπα The self-sacrifice on the tree came to them from a white-bearded god who visited them 2,000 years ago. He is called different names by different tribes: Tah-comah, Kate-Zahi, Tacopa, Nana-bush, Naapi, Kul-kul, Deganaweda, Ee-see-cotl, Hurukan, Waicomah, and Itzamatul. Some of these names can be translated to: the Pale Prophet, the bearded god, the Healer, the Lord of Water and Wind, and so forth. http://www.spiritualjourneys.com/article/diary-entry-a-gift-from-an-indian-spirit/ Chief Tecopa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Tecopa Chief Tecopa From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Chief Tecopa (c.1815–1904) was a Native American leader, his name means wildcat. [1] Chief Tecopa was a leader of the Southern Nevada tribe of the Paiute in the Ash Meadows and Pahrump areas. In the 1840s Tecopa and his warriors engaged the expedition of Kit Carson and John C. Fremont in a three-day battle at Resting Springs.[2] Later on in life Tecopa tried to maintain peaceful relations with the white settlers to the region and was known as a peacemaker. [3] Tecopa usually wore a bright red band suit with gold braid and a silk top hat. Whenever these clothes wore out they were replaced by the local white miners out of gratitude for Tecopa's help in maintaining peaceful relations with the Paiute.
    [Show full text]
  • Trends in Streamflow on the Humboldt River Between Elko and Imlay, Nevada, 1950–99
    Prepared in cooperation with the Nevada Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Trends in Streamflow on the Humboldt River between Elko and Imlay, Nevada, 1950–99 Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5199 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey FRONT COVER: Photographs of Humboldt River at Blossom bridge near Valmy, Nevada, upstream of the streamflow gage at Comus. Top photograph is from the bridge looking downstream on June 9, 1999 during high flow. Bottom photograph is from the bridge looking downstream on October 18, 2001 during a period of no flow. Photographs taken by D.E. Prudic. Trends in Streamflow on the Humboldt River between Elko and Imlay, Nevada, 1950–99 By David E. Prudic, Richard G. Niswonger, and Russell W. Plume Prepared in cooperation with the NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES Scientific Investigations Report 2005–5199 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior Gale A. Norton, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Carson City, Nevada: 2006 For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services Box 25286, Denver Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 For more information about the USGS and its products: Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/ Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report.
    [Show full text]
  • Humboldt River Chronology Part III—Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries
    Humboldt River Chronology Part III—Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries 1900 (February 8) It soon became evident that the plea presented in the Reese River Reveille (Austin) in September 1898 to eliminate the carp from the Humboldt River had met with little success. The Silver State (Winnemucca) reported in a very long article that there was no apparent use for carp: “Before the carp were placed in the river, the Humboldt was one of the best trout streams in the State; now the carp have overstocked the river, taken all the feed and destroyed the spawn of the other fish, so today you can catch nothing but carp…”1 1900 (February 27) In an early reference to the eventual construction of Rye Patch Reservoir, the Tuscarora Times-Review reported that “The ranchers in the vicinity of Lovelocks [Lovelock] have spent over $100,000 in litigation and this has not settled the water question and has not added a drop to the present supply. This [same] sum spent in storage reservoirs would have settled the water question in short order, but possibly the ranchers didn’t think of so simple a scheme as that.”2 1900 It was around this time that the annual cheatgrass began to replace the depleted climax perennial grass-forb understory and out-compete sagebrush that had been thinned or eliminated by range wildfires or excessive grazing by cattle and sheep throughout the Humboldt River Basin. This cheatgrass “invasion” would have extensive effects on trends in future wildfires as well as the habitats of animal species. For example, sharp-tail grouse and sage
    [Show full text]
  • Great Basin Region
    Summary Appraisals of the Nation's Ground-Water Resources­ Great Basin Region GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 813-G NEVADA r~ I I SummaryAppraisals of the Nation's GroundWater Resources-Great Basin Region By THOMAS E. EAKIN, DON PRICE, and J. R. HARRILL GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 813-G A regional appraisal and discussion of planning the future ground-water development in a region characterized by a semiarid climate and closed-basin drainage UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON: 1976 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR THOMAS S. KLEPPE, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY V. E. McKelvey, Director First printing 1976 Second printing 1977 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Eakin, Thomas Emery, 1914- Summary appraisals of the Nation's ground-water resources-Great Basin region. (Geological Survey Professional Paper 813-G Bibliography: p. Supt. of Docs. no.: I 19.16:813-G 1. Water, Underground-Great Basin. 2. Water resources development-Great Basin. I. Price, Don, 1929- joint author. II. Harrill, J. R., joint author. III. Title. IV. Series·: United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 813-G. GB1027.G73E2 333.9'104'0979 76-608224 For sale by the Branch of Distribution, U.S. Geological Survey 1200 South Eads Street, Arlington, VA 22202 CONTENTS Page Page System of measurement units ........................................................... IV Information to plan ground-water development. ............................ GIS Abstract .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. G 1 Options for ground-water development..........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Santa Rosa Ranger District United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service 2011
    Travel Analysis Report For Santa Rosa Ranger District United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service 2011 Santa Rosa Ranger District Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest Humboldt County, NV Santa Rosa Ranger District Travel Analysis 2007 Location: Humboldt County, Nevada Lead agency: USDA Forest Service Intermountain Region (R4) Humboldt -Toiyabe National Forest Responsible official: Jose Noriega, District Ranger Santa Rosa Ranger District 1200 Winnemucca Boulevard East Winnemucca, NV 89445 775-623-5025 ex 115 For further information: Kevin Wilmot, RELM Staff Officer, Forest Engineer Humboldt- Toiyabe National Forest Supervisor’s Office 1200 Franklin Way Sparks, NV 89431 775-352-1272 Notice: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice)
    [Show full text]
  • Humboldt River Chronology Part II – Pre-Twentieth Century
    Humboldt River Chronology Part II – Pre-Twentieth Century 2,000,000 Years Ago to 10,000 Years Ago (Pleistocene Epoch) The prehistory of the Humboldt River Basin is marked by profound changes in climate and hydrology. Ancient lake shorelines have provided invaluable information into the scope of these changes. For example, shoreline altitudes of a number of pluvial lakes (e.g., ancient Lake Lahontan) in the northern and western Great Basin1 have indicated successively smaller lakes from the Early to the Late Pleistocene Epoch.2 This decrease in lake size suggests a long-term drying tend in the region’s climate over the last two million years. Calculations based on differences in lake areas suggest that the highest levels of these pluvial lakes would have required a regional effective moisture of up to three times greater than the effective moisture level estimated to have existed in the Late Pleistocene. These previously unknown peak lake elevations (highstands) reflect significant changes in climate, tectonics and/or drainage basin configurations that could have facilitated the migration of aquatic species throughout the Great Basin.3 Lake Lahontan’s Early Pleistocene surface level (4,590 feet MSL) was more recently estimated to have been over 200 feet above its Late Pleistocene shoreline (4,380 feet MSL), a surface elevation widely recognized as this lake’s highstand. At this higher elevation, the Early Pleistocene Lake Lahontan would have extended its reach further up the Humboldt River from the Late Pleistocene highstand, which had been estimated to have reached just above Red House (about five miles above Comus).
    [Show full text]
  • BIG GAME STATUS BOOK 2020 COMPLETE(1).Pdf
    STATE OF NEVADA Steve Sisolak, Governor DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE Tony Wasley, Director GAME DIVISION Mike Scott, Chief Mike Cox, Bighorn Sheep and Mountain Goat Staff Specialist Pat Jackson, Predator Management Staff Specialist Cody McKee, Elk Staff Specialist Cody Schroeder, Mule Deer and Antelope Staff Specialist Peregrine Wolff, Wildlife Health Specialist Photo courtesy of Bureau of Land Management, Nevada State Office Western Region Southern Region Eastern Region Regional Supervisors Steve Kimble Tom Donham Big Game Biologists Chris Hampson Joe Bennett Travis Allen Carl Lackey Pat Cummings Clint Garrett Kyle Neill Cooper Munson Sarah Hale Ed Partee Kari Huebner Jason Salisbury Matt Jeffress Kody Menghini Scott Roberts This publication will be made available in an alternative format upon request. Nevada Department of Wildlife receives funding through the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration. Federal Laws prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, sex, or disability. If you believe you’ve been discriminated against in any NDOW program, activity, or facility, please write to the following: Diversity Program Manager or Director U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Nevada Department of Wildlife 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Mailstop: 7072-43 6980 Sierra Center Parkway, Suite 120 Arlington, VA 22203 Reno, Nevada 8911-2237 Individuals with hearing impairments may contact the Department via telecommunications device at our Headquarters at 775-688-1500 via a text telephone (TTY) telecommunications device by first calling the State of Nevada Relay Operator at 1-800-326-6868. NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE 2019-2020 BIG GAME STATUS This program is supported by Federal financial assistance titled “Statewide Game Management” submitted to the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • LAHONTAN CUTTHROAT TROUT RECOVERY PLAN Current Status: Lahontan Cutthroat Trout (LCT) Are Listed As Threatened
    Recovery Plan for the Lahontan Cutthroat Trout January 1995 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region 1 Portland, Oregon LAHONTAN CUTTHROAT TROUT (Oncorhynchus clarki henshawi) RECOVERY PLAN Prepared by Patrick D. Coffin William F. Cowan for Region 1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Portland, Oregon Approved: service Date: As the Nation ‘s principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior has responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural resources. This includes fostering the wisest use ofourlandand water resources, protecting our fish and wildlife, preserving the environmental and cultural values of our national parks and historical places, and providing for the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses our energy and mineral resourcesand worksto assure that theirdevelopment is in the best interests ofall our people. The Department also has a major responsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who live in island Territories under U.S. administration. A DISCLAIMER PAGE Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions which are believed to be required to recover and/or protect listed species. Plans are published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, sometimes prepared with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and others. Objectives will be attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor the official positions or approval of any individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
    [Show full text]
  • DRAFT Water Plan Framework
    June 2017 DRAFT Water Plan Framework Humboldt County, Nevada Prepared by: Prepared for: Resource Concepts, Inc. Humboldt County Board 340 N. Minnesota Street of Commissioners th Carson City, NV 89703 50 West 5 Street 775 / 883-1600 Winnemucca, NV 89445 [This page intentionally left blank.] DRAFT Water Plan for Humboldt County June 2017 Table of Contents Page 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 1-2 1.1 Purpose ........................................................................................................................................................................ 2 1.2 Preliminary Goals and Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Statutory Authority and Existing Plans .......................................................................................................... 3 1.4 Organization .............................................................................................................................................................. 4 1.5 Water Plan Process ................................................................................................................................................. 4 2.0 Water Resource Background and Assessment................................................................................. 5 2.1 Setting ..........................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Geophysical Investigations in the Humboldt River
    GEOPHYSICAL INVESTIGATIONS IN THE HUMBOLDT RIVER VALLEY NEAR WINNEMUCCA, NEVADA A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE By George M. Wilson January 1, 1960 o APPROVED: Director of Thesis APPROVED: Major Professor APPROVED: > S , \V-<rtL________ airman of Graduate Committee i CONTENTS Page Abstract........ ................ ...................... .. i Introduction.......... ................................ 2 Acknowledgements............................................... 3 Physiography and Drainage ..................................... 3 Geology ....................................................... 6 Introduction ............................................... 6 Older Rocks................................................. 7 Tertiary R o c k s ........................................... 7 Basalts....................................... 8 Valley Fill................................................. 9 Geologic History (Late Tertiary and Quaternary)............ 11 Geophysical Program ........................................... 13 Instrumentation............................................. 14 Field Procedure............................................. 15 Reduction of Field Data..................................... 15 Results of Geophysical Survey ................................. 18 Magnetic Interpretation. ................................. 18 Kern Ranch Area......................................... 19 C-D Wentz L i n e ...................
    [Show full text]