Checking for non-preferred file/folder path names (may take a long time depending on the number of files/folders) ...
This resource contains some files/folders that have non-preferred characters in their name. Show non-conforming files/folders.
This resource contains content types with files that need to be updated to match with metadata changes. Show content type files that need updating.
| Authors: |
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Owners: |
|
This resource does not have an owner who is an active HydroShare user. Contact CUAHSI (help@cuahsi.org) for information on this resource. |
| Type: | Resource | |
| Storage: | The size of this resource is 81.8 KB | |
| Created: | May 10, 2026 at 5:47 p.m. (UTC) | |
| Last updated: | Jun 08, 2026 at 6:50 p.m. (UTC) | |
| Citation: | See how to cite this resource | |
| Content types: | CSV Content |
| Sharing Status: | Public |
|---|---|
| Views: | 122 |
| Downloads: | 2 |
| +1 Votes: | Be the first one to this. |
| Comments: | No comments (yet) |
Abstract
Groundwater is the primary water source for irrigated agriculture in many arid regions. Consequently, groundwater declines in cultivated drylands can threaten the sustainability of irrigation. However, little is known about why groundwater levels decline rapidly in some areas and more slowly in others. Here, we develop an accessible and reproducible workflow that integrates open-source, high-resolution data for groundwater-level records, evapotranspiration, and precipitation data to explore the relationship between agriculture and groundwater decline. We show that groundwater declines tend to be most rapid in areas where evapotranspiration exceeds precipitation. Our finding holds across multiple agricultural regions, spanning from southern California to eastern Arkansas. Our results suggest that regions where evapotranspiration exceeds precipitation are at elevated risk of groundwater depletion, and could be good areas to intensify future monitoring efforts. Altogether, our analyses demonstrate how climate and satellite data can be useful predictors of groundwater decline in cultivated drylands, and may provide a promising proxy for groundwater withdrawals where well metering data is absent.
Subject Keywords
Coverage
Spatial
Temporal
| Start Date: | |
|---|---|
| End Date: |
Content
README.md
AridGW Groundwater Monitoring Site Dataset (2000–2020)
Authors
Henry Oliver, Marie Tolteca, Richard Montes Lemus, Austin Martinez
Overview
This dataset contains groundwater level observations for 50 monitoring well sites across the United States. The data were compiled to support analysis of relationships between groundwater decline and hydrologic variables (e.g., evapotranspiration and precipitation) in irrigated, arid regions.
Column Descriptions
- year_value: Calendar year of the groundwater level measurement
- site_id: Unique identifier for each monitoring well site
- depth_to_gw_ft: Depth to groundwater surface below land surface (feet)
- depth_to_gw_m: Depth to groundwater surface below land surface (meters)
- latitude: Geographic latitude of the well site (decimal degrees, WGS84)
- longitude: Geographic longitude of the well site (decimal degrees, WGS84)
- data_source: Origin of the groundwater record (e.g., USGS or Jasechko)
- region: Regional grouping assigned to the well site (used for visualization and analysis)
Data Sources
This dataset combines groundwater records from two primary sources:
-
USGS Data Release (42 sites):
Cherry, M. L., & Johnson, Z. C. (2024). Long-term monotonic trends in aquifer and regional groundwater metrics in the United States through 2020. U.S. Geological Survey.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5066/P1SMQRLG -
Expert-identified sites (8 sites):
Provided by Dr. Scott Jasechko (University of California, Santa Barbara), selected based on prior knowledge of irrigated agricultural regions reliant on groundwater.
Site Selection Methodology
Study sites were selected through a combination of data-driven filtering and expert-guided qualitative assessment.
From the USGS dataset, wells were filtered to retain only those with consistent annual groundwater level records spanning 2000–2020, ensuring compatibility with evapotranspiration datasets used in the broader analysis. Candidate wells were then geographically constrained to regions known for intensive groundwater-supported agriculture, including:
- Biscayne Aquifer (Florida)
- Mississippi Embayment (Arkansas)
- Columbia River Basin (Washington)
- Harney Basin (Oregon)
- Snake River Plain (Idaho)
- High Plains Aquifer (West Texas / Eastern New Mexico)
- Western Kansas (south of Garden City)
Within these regions, sites were evaluated using satellite imagery in ArcGIS. Wells were selected based on the presence of nearby center-pivot irrigation infrastructure, identified through visual inspection.
A total of 50 sites were selected to balance geographic coverage and data availability. This selection process was qualitative and expert-informed rather than fully systematic or reproducible. As such, the dataset is intended to represent groundwater dynamics in irrigated, arid agricultural systems, while acknowledging some subjectivity in site selection.
Notes and Limitations
- Regional classifications are intended for visualization and analysis purposes only and do not represent formal hydrogeologic boundaries.
- The dataset reflects a targeted sample of irrigated regions and should not be interpreted as representative of all groundwater conditions across the United States.
Usage
This dataset is suitable for exploratory and comparative analyses of groundwater trends, particularly in relation to agricultural water use and hydrologic variability. Users should consider the qualitative nature of site selection when interpreting results.
How to Cite
This resource is shared under the Creative Commons Attribution CC BY.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Comments
There are currently no comments
New Comment