Search USGS⌕ Search

USGS · sir20075121

Hydrology, Water Quality, and Surface- and Ground-Water Interactions in the Upper Hillsborough River Watershed, West-Central Florida

Abstract

A study of the Hillsborough River watershed was conducted between October 1999 through September 2003 to characterize the hydrology, water quality, and interaction between the surface and ground water in the highly karstic uppermost part of the watershed. Information such as locations of ground-water recharge and discharge, depth of the flow system interacting with the stream, and water quality in the watershed can aid in prudent water-management decisions. The upper Hillsborough River watershed covers a 220-square-mile area upstream from Hillsborough River State Park where the watershed is relatively undeveloped. The watershed contains a second order magnitude spring, many karst features, poorly drained swamps, marshes, upland flatwoods, and ridge areas. The upper Hillsborough River watershed is subdivided into two major subbasins, namely, the upper Hillsborough River subbasin, and the Blackwater Creek subbasin. The Blackwater Creek subbasin includes the Itchepackesassa Creek subbasin, which in turn includes the East Canal subbasin. The upper Hillsborough River watershed is underlain by thick sequences of carbonate rock that are covered by thin surficial deposits of unconsolidated sand and sandy clay. The clay layer is breached in many places because of the karst nature of the underlying limestone, and the highly variable degree of confinement between the Upper Floridan and surficial aquifers throughout the watershed. Potentiometric-surface maps indicate good hydraulic connection between the Upper Floridan aquifer and the Hillsborough River, and a poorer connection with Blackwater and Itchepackesassa Creeks. Similar water level elevations and fluctuations in the Upper Floridan and surficial aquifers at paired wells also indicate good hydraulic connection. Calcium was the dominant ion in ground water from all wells sampled in the watershed. Nitrate concentrations were near or below the detection limit in all except two wells that may have been affected by fertilizer or animal waste. Wells at the Blackwater Creek and Hillsborough River at State Road 39 transects showed little seasonal variation in dissolved organic carbon. Dissolved organic carbon concentrations, however, were greater during the wet season than during the dry season at the Hillsborough River Tract transect, indicating some influence from surface-water sources. During dry periods, streamflow in the upper Hillsborough River was sustained by ground water from the underlying Upper Floridan aquifer. During wet periods, streamflow had additional contributions from runoff, and release of water from extensive riverine wetlands, and by overflow from the Withlacoochee River. In contrast, streamflow in Blackwater and Itchepackesassa Creeks was less constant, with many no-flow days occurring during dry periods. During wet season storm events, streamflow peaks occur more rapidly because there is greater confinement between the surficial deposits and the Upper Floridan aquifer, and these creeks have been highly channelized, leaving less of the adjacent wetlands intact. During dry periods, Blackwater Creek is dry upstream from its confluence with Itchepackesassa Creek, and all downstream flow is from Itchepackesassa Creek. Much of the dry season flow in Itchepackesassa Creek originates from a treated wastewater effluent outfall located on East Canal. Long-term streamflow at the Hillsborough River and Blackwater Creek stations was greater than the discharge observed during the study period. Water quality in the upper Hillsborough River is influenced by ground-water discharge. The chemical composition of water from Blackwater Creek, Itchepackesassa Creek, and East Canal was more variable because there was less ground-water discharge to these creeks than to the upper Hillsborough River, and because of the influence of wastewater effluent. Strontium isotope data indicated that the source of the water at all Hillsborough River sites during the dry season was the Oli

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 27.5° to 28.5° latitude; -83.5° to -81.91666666666667° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J.T. Trommer, L. A. Sacks, E. L. Kuniansky. 2007. Hydrology, Water Quality, and Surface- and Ground-Water Interactions in the Upper Hillsborough River Watershed, West-Central Florida. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20075121

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

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↗

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, ↗

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↗