Effects of groundwater pumping in the lower Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River basin

L. Elliott Jones

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · 70156679

Effects of groundwater pumping in the lower Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River basin

L. Elliott Jones

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

USGS developed a groundwater-flow model of the Upper Floridan aquifer in lower Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River basin in southwest Georgia and adjacent parts of Alabama and Florida to determine the effect of agricultural groundwater pumping on aquifer/stream flow within the basin. Aquifer/stream flow is the sum of groundwater outflow to and inflow from streams, and is an important consideration for water managers in the development of water-allocation and operating plans. Specifically, the model was used to evaluate how agricultural pumping relates to 7Q10 low streamflow, a statistical low flow indicative of drought conditions that would occur during seven consecutive days, on average, once every 10 years. Argus ONETM, a software package that combines a geographic information system (GIS) and numerical modeling in an Open Numerical Environment, facilitated the design of a detailed finite-element mesh to represent the complex geometry of the stream system in the lower basin as a groundwater-model boundary. To determine the effects on aquifer/stream flow of pumping at different locations within the model area, a pumping rate equivalent to a typical center-pivot irrigation system (50,000 ft3/d) was applied individually at each of the 18,951 model nodes in repeated steady-state simulations that were compared to a base case representing drought conditions during October 1999. Effects of nodal pumping on aquifer/stream flow and other boundary flows, as compared with the base-case simulation, were computed and stored in a response matrix. Queries to the response matrix were designed to determine the sensitivity of targeted stream reaches to agricultural pumping. Argus ONE enabled creation of contour plots of query results to illustrate the spatial variation across the model area of simulated aquifer/streamflow reductions, expressed as a percentage of the long-term 7Q10 low streamflow at key USGS gaging stations in the basin. These results would enable water managers to assess the relative impact of agricultural pumping and drought conditions on streamflow throughout the basin, and to develop mitigation strategies to conserve water resources and preserve aquatic habitat.

Explore related subjects

Conference Paper

Source-reported bounding extent: 29.635545914466675° to 32.88420028540548° latitude; -85.242919921875° to -82.5567626953125° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

L. Elliott Jones. 2012. Effects of groundwater pumping in the lower Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River basin. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70156679

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Time-to-depth conversion of seismic-reflection data from eastern Lake Superior and implications for the eastern arm of the Midcontinent Rift

Seismic-reflection data were acquired in the mid 1980s along several lines across eastern Lake Superior by industry and the Great Lakes International Multidisciplinary Program on Crustal Evolution (GLIMPCE) (Fig. 1). The lines form part of a larger network of crossing lines over the entire lake, which can be used to develop three-dimensional geologic models of the Mesoproterozoic Midcontinent Rift that lies below. To better interpret these lines, we developed velocity models to convert seismic reflections versus two-way travel time (TWTT) to reflections versus depth. In addition, the velocity models themselves provide insights into the structure of the Midcontinent Rift by recognizing common velocity ranges for certain rock types (Grauch, 2023).

eastern Lake Superior↗

USGS2026

Revisiting the utility of regional-scale, high-quality geophysical data in mineral exploration - A case study featuring the Mammoth Magnetic Anomaly, Pinal County, Arizona

Regional aeromagnetic surveys passively measure the total magnetic intensity (TMI) and are a foundational tool used in mineral exploration (Airo, 2015). With the increased global demand and the number of critical mineral resources required for manufacturing high-tech devices, developing high-quality, regional-scale geophysical surveys could aid critical mineral exploration efforts and geologic mapping. In 2019, the U. S. Geological Survey launched the Earth Mapping Resources Initiative (Earth MRI) to modernize the geologic and geophysical mapping of regions that have the potential to contain critical mineral resources within the United States. In support of planning Earth MRI geophysical surveys, Drenth and Grauch (2019) defined five aeromagnetic data quality rankings (rank 1 through rank 5) applying them to the airborne geophysical survey inventory of the United States (Johnson et al., 2021). Rank 1 aeromagnetic surveys are of the highest quality, meeting modern standards and allowing best practices for qualitative and quantitative interpretation; whereas rank 5 aeromagnetic surveys are of the lowest quality, being useful only for qualitative interpretation of broad features. Through the Earth MRI effort, 48 high-quality, regional-scale rank 1 and 2 airborne magnetic and radiometric geophysical surveys have been planned, collected, or publicly release through May 2025 (U. S. Geological Survey, 2025). Here, a portion of a rank 1 Earth MRI aeromagnetic survey in southeast Arizona is presented and compared to a legacy rank 5 aeromagnetic survey over the Mammoth Magnetic Anomaly (MMA), demonstrating how modern, high-quality aeromagnetic data improves our view of crustal geology, aiding mineral exploration.

Arizona↗

USGS2026

Early Miocene volcanic rocks and associated tectonics, Lava Hills and southern Bristol Mountains, California

Volcanic rocks of latest Oligocene to early Miocene age form an east-west belt across part of the central eastern Mojave Desert from the Whipple Mountains on the east to the Rosamond Hills on the west. We term this the central belt because it is separated from northern and southern belts by swaths with no volcanic rocks. Limited geochronologic data indicate that much of the belt is latest Oligocene and early Miocene in age, about 24 to 19 Ma, a finding that is consistent with these rocks being overlain by the 18.8 Ma Peach Spring Tuff in many places. We describe Miocene geology in a central area of the belt, in the Lava Hills, southern Bristol Mountains, and southern Old Dad Mountains. Sedimentary basins formed coeval with early andesite to rhyolite volcanism, progressing from fluvial and lacustrine tuffaceous sandstone to volcanic lavas, tuffs, and breccias, indicating that early basins formed proximal to volcanic edifices. Higher strata are fluvial and lacustrine with lavas punctuating the sequence. Although basins may partly have been formed within topographic lows bounded by volcanic domes, plateaus, and stratovolcanoes, consistent stratigraphic sections over wide areas indicate that tectonic basin evolution affected broad areas. The volcanic section is capped by local basalt flows and the regional Peach Spring Tuff. Limited data on normal faults support interpretations of early extensional basin development caused by northeast-southwest oriented stretching. Later extension caused stratal rotations, tilting early deposits down to the southwest. This tilted and subsequently beveled basin architecture was overlain by the youngest volcanic deposits, primarily rhyolite and basalt. The Peach Spring Tuff, 18.8 Ma, lies within this upper unit. Similar stratigraphic and structural relations are exposed in the nearby Marble Mountains and Van Winkle Mountain sections, reinforcing that a broad area underwent similar volcanism and tectonism. In our study area the upper unit is only very gently tilted except near dextral strike-slip faults of the eastern California shear zone. These late Miocene to Recent faults are represented as four main fault zones spaced about 5 km apart, representing distributed shear north of the Bristol Lake basin.

California↗