Mountain‐Block Recharge: A Review of Current Understanding

Katherine H. Markovich; Andrew H. Manning; Laura E. Condon; Jennifer C. McIntosh

doi:10.1029/2019wr025676

journal article Open Access Nov 01, 2019

Mountain‐Block Recharge: A Review of Current Understanding

Katherine H. Markovich

Andrew H. Manning

Laura E. Condon

Jennifer C. McIntosh

Water Resources Research Vol. 55 No. 11 pp. 8278-8304 · American Geophysical Union (AGU)

View at Publisher Save 10.1029/2019wr025676

Abstract

AbstractMountain‐block recharge (MBR) is the subsurface inflow of groundwater to lowland aquifers from adjacent mountains. MBR can be a major component of recharge but remains difficult to characterize and quantify due to limited hydrogeologic, climatic, and other data in the mountain block and at the mountain front. The number of MBR‐related studies has increased dramatically in the 15 years since the last review of the topic was conducted by Wilson and Guan (2004), generating important advancements. We review this recent body of literature, summarize current understanding of factors controlling MBR, and provide recommendations for future research priorities. Prior to 2004, most MBR studies were performed in the southwestern United States. Since then, numerous studies have detected and quantified MBR in basins around the world, typically estimating MBR to be 5–50% of basin‐fill aquifer recharge. Theoretical studies using generic numerical modeling domains have revealed fundamental hydrogeologic and topographic controls on the amount of MBR and where it originates within the mountain block. Several mountain‐focused hydrogeologic studies have confirmed the widespread existence of mountain bedrock aquifers hosting considerable groundwater flow and, in some cases, identified the occurrence of interbasin flow leaving headwater catchments in the subsurface—both of which are required for MBR to occur. Future MBR research should focus on the collection of high‐priority data (e.g., subsurface data near the mountain front and within the mountain block) and the development of sophisticated coupled models calibrated to multiple data types to best constrain MBR and predict how it may change in response to climate warming.

Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References

151

[1]

10.1029/1999wr900130

[2]

10.1002/hyp.7950

[3]

10.1111/j.1745-6584.2011.00881.x

[4]

10.1029/2010wr009598

[5]

10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.02.053

[6]

10.1029/2017wr022356

[7]

10.1180/minmag.2008.072.1.7

[8]

10.1016/j.jaridenv.2011.01.011

[9]

10.1029/2005wr004387

[10]

10.1002/2013wr014451

[11]

10.1038/nature04141

[12]

10.1016/j.jhydrol.2016.12.036

[13]

10.1038/nclimate2198

[14]

10.1023/a:1005380714349

[15]

Bexfield B. L. M. (2016)

[16]

10.1002/2015wr017401

[17]

10.1111/j.1745-6584.2006.00289.x

[18]

10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.10.013

[19]

10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.01.022

[20]

10.5194/hess-22-1629-2018

[21]

10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.08.050

[22]

10.1111/j.1745-6584.2011.00882.x

[23]

Brush C. F. Dogrul E. C. &Tariq N. K.(2013).Development and calibration of the California Central Valley groundwater‐surface water simulation model (C2VSim) Version 3.02‐CG(Techincal Memorandum p. 196): California Department of Water Resources Bay‐Delta Office.

[24]

10.1177/030913339401800102

[25]

10.1130/0091-7613(1996)024<1025:fzaaps>2.3.co;2

[26]

10.1130/ges01348.1

[27]

10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.02.012

[28]

The Importance of Interflow to Groundwater Recharge in a Snowmelt‐Dominated Headwater Basin

Rosemary W. H. Carroll, Jeffrey S. Deems, Richard Niswonger et al.

Geophysical Research Letters 10.1029/2019gl082447

[29]

10.1175/1520-0477(2001)082<0399:citoos>2.3.co;2

[30]

10.1007/s10584-007-9377-6

[31]

Cederberg J. Gardner P. &Thiros S.(2009).Hydrology of northern Utah Valley Utah County Utah 1975‐2005: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2008‐5197. 10.3133/sir20085197

[32]

10.1111/j.1745-6584.2008.00443.x

[33]

10.1023/b:clim.0000013684.13621.1f

[34]

10.3189/2013aog62a232

[35]

10.1007/s10040-009-0453-z

[36]

10.1002/2015wr017274

[37]

10.1002/hyp.13363

[38]

10.1029/2005jd006470

[39]

10.1016/j.gexplo.2018.07.013

[40]

10.1029/2012wr012251

[41]

10.1029/2008jd010636

[42]

Faunt C. "Groundwater availability of the Central Valley aquifer, California, U.S" Geological Survey Professional Paper (2009)

[43]

10.1111/j.1745-6584.1964.tb01780.x

[44]

10.1029/2017jf004280

[45]

10.2136/vzj2006.0135

[46]

10.1002/2016wr019699

[47]

10.1002/2016wr019553

[48]

10.1029/2017wr021825

[49]

Gardner P.(2009).Three‐dimensional numerical model of ground‐water flow in northern Utah Valley Utah County Utah U.S: Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2008‐5049. p. 95. 10.3133/sir20085049

[50]

10.1016/j.apgeochem.2014.02.010

Showing 50 of 151 references

Cited By

158

Origin, Age, and Flow Path of Groundwater Associated With High‐Mountain Springs in Arid Andean Regions

Carolina Calvi, Eleonora Carol · 2026

Hydrological Processes

Groundwater dominates snowmelt runoff and controls streamflow efficiency in the western United States

Paul D. Brooks, D. Kip Solomon · 2025

Communications Earth & Environm...

Evaluating mountain recharge in Yamanashi, Japan, using stable isotopes and a hydrogeological groundwater flow model

Cuong Quoc Nguyen, Tatsuki Kimura · 2025

Hydrology Research

Influence of land use/land cover on stream water quality in two watersheds in the central Andes of Bolivia: An optimised methodology

P.E. Prado, C.G. Oporto · 2025

Ecological Indicators

The importance of mountain-block recharge in semiarid basins: An insight from the High-Atlas, Morocco

Houssne Bouimouass, Sarah Tweed · 2024

Journal of Hydrology

Cryosphere–groundwater connectivity is a missing link in the mountain water cycle

Marit van Tiel, Caroline Aubry-Wake · 2024

Nature Water

Isogeochemical Characterization of Mountain System Recharge Processes in the Sierra Nevada, California

Sandra Armengol, Hoori Ajami · 2024

Water Resources Research

Geological controls on the geothermal system and hydrogeochemistry of the deep low-salinity Upper Cretaceous aquifers in the Zharkent (eastern Ily) Basin, south-eastern Kazakhstan

Ashirgul Kozhagulova, Vadim Yapiyev · 2023

Frontiers in Earth Science

Characteristics of hydraulic conductivity in mountain block systems and its effects on mountain block recharge: Insights from field investigation and numerical modeling

Yunmei Fu, Yanhui Dong · 2022

Journal of Hydrology

Distinguishing Mountain Front and Mountain Block Recharge in an Intermontane Basin of the Himalayan Region

Tanveer Dar, Nachiketa Rai · 2022

Groundwater

Temporal and Spatial Patterns of Groundwater Recharge Across a Small Watershed in the California Sierra Nevada Mountains

Christina Meadows, Benjamin Hagedorn · 2022

Frontiers in Water

Groundwater circulation patterns in bedrock aquifers from a pre-selected area of high-level radioactive waste repository based on two-dimensional numerical simulation

Lulu Li, Qiulan Zhang · 2022

Journal of Hydrology

Groundwater recharge sources in semiarid irrigated mountain fronts

Houssne Bouimouass, Younes Fakir · 2020

Hydrological Processes

A review of groundwater in high mountain environments

Lauren D. Somers, Jeffrey M. McKenzie · 2020

WIREs Water

Groundwater resources and recharge processes in the Western Andean Front of Central Chile

Matías Taucare, Linda Daniele · 2020

Science of The Total Environment

Metrics

158

Citations

151

References

Details

Published: Nov 01, 2019
Vol/Issue: 55(11)
Pages: 8278-8304
License: View

Authors

K

Katherine H. Markovich

Department of Hydrology and Atmospheric Sciences University of Arizona Tucson AZ USA

A

Andrew H. Manning

U.S. Geological Survey Denver CO USA

L

Laura E. Condon

Department of Hydrology and Atmospheric Sciences University of Arizona Tucson AZ USA

J

Jennifer C. McIntosh

Department of Hydrology and Atmospheric Sciences University of Arizona Tucson AZ USA

Funding

National Science Foundation Award: EAR-1806383

Cite This Article

Katherine H. Markovich, Andrew H. Manning, Laura E. Condon, et al. (2019). Mountain‐Block Recharge: A Review of Current Understanding. Water Resources Research, 55(11), 8278-8304. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019wr025676

Mountain‐Block Recharge: A Review of Current Understanding

You May Also Like