Analyses of Water-Level Differentials and Variations in Recharge between the Surficial and Upper Floridan Aquifers in East-Central and Northeast Florida

Louis C. Murray

doi:10.3133/sir20075081

Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20075081

Analyses of Water-Level Differentials and Variations in Recharge between the Surficial and Upper Floridan Aquifers in East-Central and Northeast Florida

Louis C. Murray

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Continuous (daily) water-level data collected at 29 monitoring-well cluster sites were analyzed to document variations in recharge between the surficial (SAS) and Floridan (FAS) aquifer systems in east-central and northeast Florida. According to Darcy's law, changes in the water-level differentials (differentials) between these systems are proportional to changes in the vertical flux of water between them. Variations in FAS recharge rates are of interest to water-resource managers because changes in these rates affect sensitive water resources subject to minimum flow and water-level restrictions, such as the amount of water discharged from springs and changes in lake and wetland water levels. Mean daily differentials between 2000-2004 ranged from less than 1 foot at a site in east-central Florida to more than 114 feet at a site in northeast Florida. Sites with greater mean differentials exhibited lower percentage-based ranges in fluctuations than did sites with lower mean differentials. When averaged for all sites, differentials (and thus Upper Floridan aquifer (UFA) recharge rates) decreased by about 18 percent per site between 2000-2004. This pattern can be associated with reductions in ground-water withdrawals from the UFA that occurred after 2000 as the peninsula emerged from a 3-year drought. Monthly differentials exhibited a well-defined seasonal pattern in which UFA recharge rates were greatest during the dry spring months (8 percent above the 5-year daily mean in May) and least during the wetter summer/early fall months (4 percent below the 5-year daily mean in October). In contrast, differentials exceeded the 5-year daily mean in all but 2 months of 2000, indicative of relatively high ground-water withdrawals throughout the year. On average, the UFA received about 6 percent more recharge at the project sites in 2000 than between 2000-2004. No statistically significant correlations were detected between monthly differentials and precipitation at 27 of the 29 sites between 2000-2004. For longer periods of record, double-mass plots of differentials and precipitation indicate the UFA recharge rate increased by about 34 percent at a site in west Orange County between the periods of 1974-1983 and 1983-2004. Given the absence of a trend in rainfall, the increase can likely be attributed to ground-water development. At a site in south Lake County, double-mass plots indicate that dredging of the Palatlakaha River and other nearby drainage improvements may have reduced recharge rates to the UFA by about 30 percent from the period between 1960-1965 to 1965-1970. Water-level differentials were positively correlated with land-surface altitude. The correlation was particularly strong for the 11 sites located in physiographically-defined ridge areas (coefficient of determination (R2) = 0.89). Weaker yet statistically significant negative correlations were detected between differentials and the model-calibrated leakance and thickness of the intermediate confining unit (ICU). Recharge to the UFA decreased by about 14 percent at the Charlotte Street monitoring-well site in Seminole County between 2000-2004. The decrease can be attributed to a reduction in nearby pumpage, from 57 to 49 million gallons per day over the 5-year period, with a subsequent recovery in UFA water levels that exceeded those in the SAS. Differentials at Charlotte were influenced by system memory of both precipitation and pumpage. While not statistically correlated with monthly precipitation, monthly differentials were well correlated with the 9-month moving average of precipitation. Similarly, differentials were best correlated with the 2-month moving average of pumpage. The polynomial function that quantifies the correlation between differentials and the 2-month moving average of pumpage indicates that, in terms of UFA recharge rates, the system was closer to a steady-state condition in 2000 when pumpage rates were high, than from 2001-2004 when p

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations Report Report

Source-reported bounding extent: 27° to 31° latitude; -83° to -80° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Louis C. Murray. 2007. Analyses of Water-Level Differentials and Variations in Recharge between the Surficial and Upper Floridan Aquifers in East-Central and Northeast Florida. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20075081

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Baseline water-quality inventory and summary for the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park, New Jersey

The Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park (PAGR), established in 2011 in the City of Paterson, New Jersey, contains many cultural, historical, and natural resources. Because of the PAGR’s young age and limited resources, a long record of natural resource data is not available for use to guide future park management and planning decisions. A detailed natural resource inventory was identified as an immediate need in the “Foundation Document—Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park,” given the history of extensive industrial activity throughout the PAGR and the Passaic River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service and the Urban Waters Federal Partnership for the Lower Passaic River, inventoried water-quality monitoring efforts and compiled historical water-quality data from secondary data sources to define baseline conditions in the PAGR and the surrounding study area. This report documents the methods used to harmonize water-quality data aggregated from multiple sources for the PAGR study area. Procedures implemented during data harmonization include compiling data from multiple sources, assessing the dataset for completeness, addressing metadata concerns, and creating a consistent and quality-assured dataset for future analysis. The harmonized dataset contains 14 aggregated surface-water sites, 1,103 individual sampling days, and 32,000 water-quality records throughout the period of record defined for this study (1952–2021). Summary statistics and comparison to water-quality criteria are provided for focus parameters that can support PAGR management, including field properties, suspended material, total dissolved solids, specific conductance, chloride, sulfate, Escherichia coli, nutrients, contaminants of concern related to fish consumption advisories, and litter and floatable debris. A spatial data gap was identified for the recreational area near the base of the Great Falls and immediately downstream from a known combined sewer overflow discharge location. Analytic data gaps were identified for continuous streamflow and water-quality parameters, floatable debris characterization, and harmful algal blooms identification. Continuous collection of contaminants of concern was identified as a temporal data gap, as these parameters were not consistently collected within the study area. The water-quality data synthesis and summary presented in this report can assist PAGR staff in understanding the complex baseline water resources within the study area and can serve as a baseline to design future water-quality monitoring efforts and evaluate changes in water quality over time. The harmonized dataset, as well as future New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Harbor Discharge Group monitoring data and assessments, can also be used to examine the status and trends in surface-water quality, support compliance with the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and further investigate changes to park water resources that can affect ecological and human health.

New Jersey↗

USGS2026

Slip tendency and dilation tendency of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report presents the results of slip tendency and dilation tendency analysis of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, in the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This effort was undertaken as part of two studies: the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office-funded Innovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project, which is a multidisciplinary, multi-institution effort to develop new methodologies and best practices to accelerate the discovery of new, commercially viable hydrothermal resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Resources Investigations Project. The goal of this work is to identify faults and fault segments that are appropriately oriented to be stress-loaded for slip or to dilate under the ambient stress conditions. Both conditions may make such faults more likely to host permeability and fluid flow relative to other faults in the region. Slip tendency and dilation tendency were calculated for all fault segments in the study area from the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database. Results demonstrate that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency are common in the Great Basin region. The areas containing many high slip tendency and dilation tendency fault segments are associated with high strain rates. These areas also host a relatively high proportion of the known hydrothermal systems. This indicates that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency in areas with high strain-rate are potentially most prospective for hosting hydrothermal systems. The database published in coordination with this report contains the slip tendency and dilation tendency results data, including the fault geometry and stress data used to calculate these quantities, for both the Great Basin study area and the smaller INGENIOUS study area.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, ↗

USGS2026

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York, and coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York, and nearby coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater emergence flooding. Groundwater emergence fooding refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As a part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the coastal areas of Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Partnership, formerly called the Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 grid cells that were 900 meters by 900 meters (approximately 3,000 feet by 3,000 feet), for the purpose of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard score was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percentage of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A scenario with a higher sea-level position was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard score was reviewed in conjunction with the National Land Cover Database to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk of potential groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface waterbodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, in the scenario with higher sea-level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated for some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea-level condition and the higher sea-level position scenario.

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗