Hualapai Basin Groundwater Update

Hualapai Basin

Water Budgets

Table 2. Summary of groundwater-budget components from Gaber and Truini (2011).

[Groundwater-budget values are in acre-feet per year, <, less than; WWTP, wastewater treatment plant]

Water-budget component	Detrital Valley Basin		Hualapai Valley Basin
	Inflow to aquifer	Outflow from aquifer	Inflow to aquifer	Outflow from aquifer
Natural recharge
Mountain-block recharge	1,200		4,400
Named ephemeral stream-channel recharge	-		600
Other ephemeral stream-channel recharge	<300		400
Underflow in	-		¹300
Natural discharge
to Lake Mead or Colorado River		1,400		5,700
Phreatic evapotranspiration (ET)		<300		<300
Groundwater withdrawals		<300
Kingman municipal		-		7,600
Community water suppliers		-		500
Self-supplied domestic		-		500
Industrial		-		-
Interbasin transfer				1,200
Incidental Recharge	<300		500
Infrastructure leakage			3,000
Septic systems			800
Treated WWTP effluent
Totals	1,600	1,600	9,900	15,500

USGS 2013-5122

¹From Freethey and Anderson (1986) predevelopment conditions.

²Partitioning between Colorado River and phreatic evapotranspiration uncertain because of a lack of data

³Groundwater is transferred in from Hualapai Valley Basin, but is not shown here because it is not part of the groundwater

Water-budget component This study (acre-ft/yr)		Other Studies
Water-budget component This study (acre-ft/yr)		Garner and Truini (2011) (acre-ft/yr)	Gillespie and Bentley (1971) (acre-ft/yr)	Freethey and Anderson (1986)¹(acre-ft/yr)	Other (see footnote 3) (acre-ft/yr)
Natural recharge
Mountain-block recharge	4,200	4,400	-	-	-
Truxton Wash stream-channel recharge	800	600	-	-	-
Other ephemeral stream-channel recharge	-	400	-	-	-
Underflow at Truxton Wash	-	²300	³-1,000	300	-
Total recharge	5,000	5,700	5,000	3,500	⁴2,000-2,500
Natural Discharge
To Lake Mead	-	5,700	5,000	3,800	-
Phreatic ET	-	<300	-	<1,000	-
Total discharge	5,600	5,700	5,000
Groundwater Withdrawals
City of Kingman municipal	8,900	7,600	-	-	-
CWS	-	500	-	-	-
SSD	1,100	500	-	-	-
Interbasin transfer	-	1,200	-	-	-
Agricultural pumping	26,000	-	-	-	-
Total withdrawal	36,000	9,800	-	-	⁵8,200
Incidental recharge
Infrastructure leakage	-	500	-	-	-
Septic systems	-	3,000	-	-	-
treated WWTP effluent	-	800	-	-	-
Total incidental recharge	4,500	4,200	-	-	-
Enhanced infiltration projects	1,200	-	-	-	-
Total inflow	10,700	9,900	-	-	-
Total outflow	41,600	15,500	-	-	-
Storage change	-30,900	-5,600	-	-	-
Total storage, in maf	-	5	10.5-21	-	⁴3.8-10.1

USGS 2021-5077

¹Data are predevelopment values obtained from unpublished tabular data. Plates in report show only qualitative ranges of values

²From Freethey and Anderson (1986) pre-development conditions, as there are insufficient data to calculate a current-condition value

³Negative value indicates basin outflow, rather than inflow, because of large Truxton Canyon pumping withdrawals in the 1960s

⁴Inavich and Conway (2009)

⁵Tadayoa (2005), value as of year 2000

Wells in the Hualapai Basin

Acreage Owned and Cultivated

Hualapai Basin Totals

Kingman Sub-basin

USGS Modflow Model

Modeled 4 Scenarios

Base Model (USGS Inputs)
- 140 years to 1,200ft depth.
- Utilizes 2017 data for both farms and municipal use.
Base Model with Updated Municipal Use
- 100 years to 1,200ft depth.
- Utilizes current municipal use with 2.5% for 30 years.

USGS Modflow Model

Modeled 4 Scenarios

Current Ag Acreage Frozen
- 130 years to 1,200ft depth.
- Allows a 10-year growth to maturity of existing acreage.
Full Build Out of Owned Acreage
- 50 years to 1,200ft depth.
- Assumes 10 years to build out and 10 years to maturity.
- Excludes Mountainous terrain.