Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Florida Planning”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

256 records · Page 15Linked to original sources
USGS2013

Mobile Bay

Mobile Bay is the largest bay found in Alabama’s coastal area (Handley et al., 2007). It was named an Estuary of National Significance in 1995 under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) National Estuary Program (NEP), and its Comprehensive Conservation Management Plan was completed in 2002. Mobile Bay is 1,070 km 2 (413 miles 2 ) in area and 51 km (32 miles) long, making it the sixth largest estuary in the continental United States (Mobile Bay NEP, 2008). Its ecosystem provides habitat for more than 300 species of birds, 310 species of fish, 68 species of reptiles, 57 species of mammals, 40 species of amphibians, and 15 species of shrimp (Mobile Bay NEP, 1997). Mobile Bay lies between the Mississippi and Atlantic Flyways (Mobile Bay NEP, 2003). Commercial and residential development and industrial use is heavy in the Mobile Bay area. Although local growth and industrial markets support the Mobile Bay area economy, the resulting environmental damage to the very ecosystem upon which they depend remains a threat to the environment, economy, and population. The Mobile Bay ecosystem boasts high biological diversity and productivity and supports many freshwater and saltwater species of recreational and commercial importance. The great diversity of Mobile Bay reflects the diversity of Alabama, which is home to the largest number of different plant and animal species of all states east of the Mississippi River (Stein, 2002), and is bolstered by the unique climate and geographic conditions surrounding the bay. Freshwater inflow from the Mobile-Tensaw River Delta, ranging from 60,000 to 3,700,000 gallons per second (Wallace, 1996), mixes with saltwater from the Gulf of Mexico, which enters Mobile Bay via wind and tides (Burgan and Engle, 2006). Because of the unique conditions surrounding Mobile Bay, including shallow waters, a dynamic climate, and artificial hydrologic modifications—such as the construction of the Mobile Bay Causeway in the 1920s, which serves as an unintentional barrier between Delta waters north of the Causeway and saline waters south of the Causeway, the salinity of Mobile Bay is highly variable. Mobile Bay receives an average of 165 cm (65 inches) of rain per year from tropical storms, summer thunderstorms, and winter cold fronts (Stout et al., 1998). The climate and geography that have made Mobile Bay so rich in resources have also contributed to the threats surrounding its ecosystem. The extensive amount of rain in Mobile Bay creates large amounts of runoff, polluting the waters with fertilizers, chemicals, sediment, oil, trash, and sewage (Mobile Bay NEP, 1997). Tourism, ecotourism, recreational and commercial fishing, recreational boating, shipping, and chemical, pulp, and paper production are significant industries in Mobile Bay and the surrounding areas. Despite the approximate \$3 billion and 55,000 jobs these industries bring into the community (Alabama Tourism Department, 2010), the growth, development, and environmental stress they create are major threats to the Mobile Bay ecosystem. Among the nation’s states, Alabama ranks fifth in number of different species (144 endemic species), second in number of extinctions that have already occurred (90 extinct species) and fourth in number of species at risk for extinction (14.8% at risk out of 4,533 total species; Stein, 2002). Twenty-one of these threatened and endangered species are found in Mobile Bay, whose brackish waters provide a nursery area for many species of vertebrates and invertebrates. Some of these species include the Alabama sturgeon, Gulf sturgeon, heavy pigtoe mussel, inflated heel-splitter mussel, West Indian manatee, Alabama beach mouse, Perdido beach mouse, Alabama red-bellied turtle, gopher tortoise, Kemp’s ridley sea turtle, green sea turtle, loggerhead sea turtle, eastern indigo snake, flatwoods salamander, piping plover, red-cockaded woodpecker, and wood stork. Habitat loss underlies the decline of some bird species in Mobile Bay, and large mammals such as the red wolf, Florida panther, and Florida black bear are no longer found in the area. However, some rare species, such as the swallow-tailed kite, sandhill crane, and gopher tortoise can still be found (Duke and Kruczynski, 1992). The value of wetlands in Mobile Bay and the rest of the Gulf of Mexico is still being investigated. Although various monetary valuations of wetlands exist, critics remark that undervaluation of wetlands is inevitable (Mobile Bay NEP, 2008) and that estimates often do not place appropriate value on ecological services (Mitsch and Gosselink, 2000). Additionally, many estimates account only for anthropogenic values. One estimate concludes that one acre of wetlands performs \$3,000 worth of water purification each year (Mobile Bay NEP, 1997). With more than 76,890 hectares (190,000 acres) of wetlands in the Mobile Bay area, that equates to a value exceeding one-half billion dollars every year. Tourism, fishing, boating, production, and shipping are significant industries in the Mobile Bay area. More than 90% of fish landed in recreational and commercial fishing in the bay depend on bay habitat, including wetlands, for life requirements (Mobile Bay NEP, 1997). The Port of Mobile is Alabama’s only ocean-ship port (Mobile Bay NEP, 2008). Baldwin County, on the eastern side of the bay, experienced a population increase of 75% from 1990 to 2007, with an 89% increase in housing units (Mobile Bay NEP, 2008). Development and industry support the Mobile Bay economy, but they depend on the continued health, sustainability, and production of the water and living resources of the Mobile Bay ecosystem. Wetland loss, along with other forms of environmental degradation, remains a threat to the Mobile Bay ecosystem and Mobile Bay’s socioeconomic foundation.

Alabama↗
USGS2010

Nitrate-N movement in groundwater from the land application of treated municipal wastewater and other sources in the Wakulla Springs springshed, Leon and Wakulla Counties, Florida, 1966-2018

The City of Tallahassee began a pilot study in 1966 at the Southwest Farm sprayfield to determine whether disposal of treated municipal wastewater using center pivot irrigation techniques to uptake nitrate-nitrogen (nitrate-N) is feasible. Based on the early success of this project, a new, larger Southeast Farm sprayfield was opened in November 1980. However, a recent 2002 study indicated that nitrate-N from these operations may be moving through the Upper Floridan aquifer to Wakulla Springs, thus causing nitrate-N concentrations to increase in the spring water. The increase in nitrate-N combined with the generally clear spring water and abundant sunshine may be encouraging invasive plant species growth. Determining the link between the nitrate-N application at the sprayfields and increased nitrate-N levels is complicated because there are other sources of nitrate-N in the Wakulla Springs springshed, including atmospheric deposition, onsite sewage disposal systems, disposal of biosolids by land spreading, creeks discharging into sinks, domestic fertilizer application, and livestock wastes. Groundwater flow and fate and transport modeling were conducted to simulate the effect of all of the nitrate-N sources on Wakulla Springs from January 1, 1966, through December 31, 2018. The total simulated nitrate-N load to Wakulla Springs in 1967 was a relatively modest 69,000 kilograms per year (kg/yr). The major sources of the nitrate-N load in 1967 were determined to be: 1. Inflow to the study area across the lateral model boundaries at 31,000 kg/yr (45 percent), 2. Biosolids disposal by land spreading at 14,000 kg/yr (20 percent), 3. Creeks discharging into sinks at 7,800 kg/yr (11 percent), and 4. The Southwest Farm sprayfield at 4,500 kg/yr (7 percent). The total simulated nitrate-N load to Wakulla Springs in 1987 had increased dramatically to 297,000 kg/yr. The major sources of nitrate-N load in 1987 were determined to be: 1. The Southeast Farm sprayfield at 186,000 kg/yr (63 percent), 2. Biosolids at 37,000 kg/yr (12 percent), and 3. Inflow to the study area across the lateral model boundaries at 36,000 at kg/yr (12 percent). All of the other sources were 5 percent or less. The Wakulla Springs discharge can change rapidly, even during periods of little or no rainfall. This rapid change is probably the result of Wakulla Springs intermittently capturing groundwater that has been going to the Spring Creek Springs Group. This spring group is located in a marine estuary and is affected by tidally influenced saltwater intrusion. Two modeling scenarios were simulated and results are presented for 2007 and 2018 in an effort to bracket the range of possible current and future changes in the flow of Wakulla Springs. In scenario 1, it was assumed that Wakulla Springs was not capturing Spring Creek Springs Group flow. In scenario 2, it was assumed that Wakulla Springs was capturing Spring Creek Springs Group flow. Under the assumptions of scenario 1, the total simulated nitrate-N load to Wakulla Springs in 2007 was 207,200 kg/yr. The major sources of nitrate-N load were determined to be: 1. The Southeast Farm sprayfield at 111,000 kg/yr 53 percent), 2. Inflow to the study area across the lateral model boundaries at 44,000 at kg/yr (21 percent), and 3. Onsite sewage disposal systems at 24,000 kg/yr (12 percent). All of the other sources contributed 6 percent or less. Under the assumptions of scenario 2, the total simulated nitrate-N load to Wakulla Springs was 294,000 kg/yr. The major sources of nitrate-N load were determined to be: 1. The Southeast Farm sprayfield at 111,000 kg/yr (38 percent), 2. Onsite sewage disposal systems at 56,000 kg/yr (19 percent), 3. Inflow to the study area across the lateral model boundaries at 52,000 at kg/yr (18 percent), and 4. Creeks discharging into sinks at 31,000 kg/yr (11 percent). All of the other sources contributed 8 percent or less. The nitrate-N loads to Wakulla Springs from the Southeast Farm sprayfield for scenarios 1 and 2 were both 111,000 kg/yr. These amounts were the same because most of the water from the Southeast Farm sprayfield went into Wakulla Springs in both simulations. In contrast, the nitrate-N loads from onsite sewage disposal systems for scenarios 1 and 2 were 24,000 kg/yr and 56,000 kg/yr, respectively. The additional water captured by Wakulla Springs in scenario 2 came from an area that had a high density of residential and commercial sites using onsite sewage disposal systems Under the assumptions of scenario 1, the total simulated nitrate-N load to Wakulla Springs in 2018 will be 156,000 kg/yr. The major sources of nitrate-N load for scenario 1 are anticipated to be: 1. Inflow to the study area across the lateral model boundaries at 48,000 at kg/yr (31 percent), 2. The Southeast Farm sprayfield at 42,000 kg/yr (27 percent), 3. Onsite sewage disposal systems at 32,000 kg/yr (21 percent), and 4. Fertilizer at 17,000 kg/yr (11 percent). All of the other sources will contribute 5 percent or less. Under the assumptions of scenario 2, the total simulated nitrate-N load to Wakulla Springs in 2018 will be 266,000 kg/yr. The major sources of nitrate-N load for scenario 2 are anticipated to be: 1. Onsite sewage disposal systems at 80,000 kg/yr (30 percent), 2. Inflow to the study area across the lateral model boundaries at 57,000 at kg/yr (21 percent), 3. The Southeast Farm sprayfield at 43,000 kg/yr (16 percent), 4. Creeks discharging into sinks at 31,000 kg/yr (12 percent), and 5. Fertilizer at 32,000 kg/yr (12 percent). All of the other sources will contribute 6 percent or less. The simulated nitrate-N load from the Southeast Farm sprayfield to Wakulla Springs during 2007 through 2018 decreases from 111,000 kg/yr to 42,000 kg/yr in scenario 1 and decreases from 111,000 kg/yr to 43,000 kg/yr in scenario 2. Both scenarios show these decreases because of the simulated planned reduction in the concentration of nitrate-N in the wastewater used for irrigation from approximately 12 milligrams per liter (mg/L) in 2007 to 3 mg/L in 2018. In contrast, the simulated nitrate-N load from onsite sewage disposal systems to Wakulla Springs from 2007 through 2018 increases from 24,000 kg/yr to 32,000 kg/yr in scenario 1, and increases from 56,000 kg/yr to 80,000 kg/yr in scenario 2. Both scenarios show increases respective to the increases in population and residential and commercial sites using onsite sewage disposal systems. In addition, the simulated nitrate-N load to Wakulla Springs from 2007 through 2018 from inflow to the study area across the lateral model boundaries increases from 44,000 kg/yr to 48,000 kg/yr in scenario 1, and increases from 54,000 kg/yr to 57,000 kg/yr in scenario 2. Both scenarios show increases due to increasing nitrate-N levels upgradient in Leon County.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS1985

Environmental systems and management activities on the Kennedy Space Center, Merritt Island, Florida: results of a modeling workshop

In the early 1960's, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) began purchasing 140,000 acres on Merritt Island, Florida, in order to develop a center for space exploration. Most of this land was acquired to provide a safety and security buffer around NASA facilities. NASA, as the managing agency for the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), is responsible for preventing or controlling environmental pollution from the Federal facilities and activities at the Space Center and is committed to use all practicable means to protect and enhance the quality of the surrounding environment. The Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1963 when management authority for undeveloped lands at KSC was transferred to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In addition to manage for 11 Federally-listed threatened and endangered species and other resident and migratory fish and wildlife populations, the Refuge has comanagement responsibility for 19,000 acres of mosquito control impoundments and 2,500 acres of citrus groves. The Canaveral National Seashore was developed in 1975 when management of a portion of the coastal lands was transferred from NASA to the National Park Service. This multiagency jurisdiction on Merritt Island has resulted in a complex management environment. The modeling workshop described in this report was conducted May 21-25, 1984, at the Kennedy Space Center to: (1) enhance communication among the agencies with management responsibilities on Merritt Island; (2) integrate available information concerning the development, management, and ecology of Merritt Island; and (3) identify key research and monitoring needs associated with the management and use of the island's resources. The workshop was structured around the formulation of a model that would simulate primary management and use activities on Merritt Island and their effects on upland, impoundment, and estuarine vegetation and associated wildlife. The simulation model is composed of four connected submodels. The Uplands submodel calculates changes in acres and structural components of vegetation communities resulting from succession, fire, facilities development, and shuttle launch depositions, as well as the quantity and quality of surface runoff and aquifer input to an impoundment and an estuary. The Impoundment submodel next determines water quality and quantity and changes in vegetation resulting from water level manipulation and prescribed burning. The Estuary submodel than determines water quality parameters and acres of seagrass beds. Finally, the Wildlife submodel calculates habitat suitability indices for key species of interest, based on vegetation conditions in the uplands and impoundments and on several hydrologic parameters. The model represents a hypothetical management unit with 2,500 acres of uplands, a 600-acre impoundment, and a 1,500-acre section of estuary. Two management scenarios were run to analyze model behavior. The scenarios differ in the frequency of shuttle launches and prescribed burning, the extent of facilities development, the amount of land disposed waste material applied, and the nature and timing of impoundment water level control. Early in a model development project, the process of building the model is usually of greater benefit than the model itself. The model building process stimulates interaction among agencies, assists in integrating existing information, and helps identify research needs. These benefits usually accrue even in the absence of real predictive power in the resulting model. Open communication occurs among the Federal, State, and local agencies involved with activities on Merritt Island and the agencies have a cooperative working relationship. The workshop provided an opportunity for all of these agencies to meet at one time and have focused discussions on the key environmental and multiagency resource management issues. The workshop framework helped to integrate information and assumptions from a number of disciplines and agencies. This integration occurred in the computer simulation model and among workshop participants as submodel linkages were developed and scenario results discussed. A number of research needs were identified at the workshop during the model building and testing exercises and associated discussions. These needs were based on the informed judgement of researchers and managers familiar with Merritt Island or similar areas, rather than on a comprehensive literature review of sensitivity analysis of the preliminary model developed at the workshop. Some of the needs can be addressed by interpreting the results of completed studies from similar geographic areas as they relate to Merritt Island, while other will require additional research studies on Merritt Island. Major research needs associated with the Upland submodel include behavior of the near-surface aquifer, factors limiting slash pine regeneration, frequency and effects of natural fire on various cover types, cumulative effects of shuttle launches, and fate in upland soils of nitrogen and phosphorous from land applied waste material. Key Impoundment submodel needs include documentation of vegetation changes in response to altered water depth, salinity, and nutrient concentrations and better specification of the functional characteristics of impoundments as chemical filters. Important information gaps identified in the Estuary submodel include a more complete analysis of factors contributing to phytoplankton abundance, evaluation of sources of turbidity other than phytoplankton, and identification and quantification of factors limiting seagrass distribution. Primary research needs associated with the Wildlife submodel include a survey of breeding habitat, production data, and harvest data for mottled ducks; data on the emigration and immigration of juvenile mullet (and other transient fish) in the impoundment; the contribution of various seagrasses to habitat requirements of sea trout; and the effects of dissolved oxygen on survival of juvenile sea trout. Ideally, the modeling workshop process is iterative in nature. Periods between workshops are used for research, data collection, and model refinement. Each workshop integrates information collected since the last workshop and produces a more credible model that is more useful in evaluating management alternatives. Participants felt that continued application of this process would help provide ongoing integration and communication among agencies and would allow each agency's planning and management activities to be viewed within the context of an overall assessment.

Report↗
USGS1973

Geohydrology of the Cross-Florida Barge Canal area, with special reference to the Ocala vicinity

The Cross-Florida Barge Canal route commences at Palatka on the St. Johns River, about 75 miles upstream from the Atlantic Ocean, and extends 110 miles southwestward across Peninsular Florida into deep water in the Gulf of Mexico near Yankeetown. The canal will be equipped with five locks, each 600 feet long and 84 feet wide, and the channel will be a minimum of 12 feet deep and 150 feet wide. From near Ocala northeastward, the canal channel will replace much of the natural channel of the Oklawaha River, and will be excavated into beds of the so-called shallow sand aquifer of Miocene age and younger, which overlies limestone of the Floridan aquifer. Westward from Ocala, most of the canal will be excavated below the potentiometric surface into limestone and dolomite of the Floridan aquifer. Water levels of Rodman, Eureka, and Inglis Pools will be controlled by dams and spillways with the limited exchange of water between the pools and the aquifers. The water levels in the Summit Pools will fluctuate with the natural changes in the ground-water level of the Floridan aquifer, although the stage of the pool will be controlled partly by the stage held in the Eureka Pool. A dynamic inflow-outflow relationship will exist between the Summit Pool and the Floridan aquifer. The Floridan aquifer in the canal area is 1,000 to 1,200 feet thick and consists of limestone and dolomite of middle Eocene Miocene age, including from older to younger, the Lake City, Avon Park, and Ocala limestones plus permeable sandy, dolomitic limestone in the lower part of the Hawthorn Formation. It is possible that most of the flow to the two major springs in the area occurs in the upper 100 feet or so of the aquifer in the Ocala Limestone. The aquifer is underlain by the Oldsmar limestone of early Eocene age and is overlain by sand, clayey sand, clay and shell beds of Miocene through Holocene age, in thickness from a few feet to 300 feet. The permeable beds overlying the Floridan aquifer constitute the shallow aquifer, while the poorly permeable ones act as confining beds where the Floridan aquifer is under artesian conditions. A north-south line drawn separating the head of Silver Springs on the west from the Oklawaha River on the east marks the approximate western limit of a continuous blanket of materials of Miocene-Pliocene(?) age covering the rocks of the Floridan aquifer. East of the line, much of the aquifer is under artesian conditions, particularly in the Oklawaha River valley, although in some areas east of the valley, direct recharge through thick permeable Miocene-Pliocene(?) sands occurs. West of the line, only scattered remnants of a once continuous Miocene-Pliocene(?) cover remain. Lack of the cover is a result of erosion on the crest and flank of the Ocala Uplift, a broad northwest-southeast trending anticlinal upwarp, the axis of which is crossed by the canal route in the Dunnellon area. Over most of this area the Floridan aquifer is unconfined and receives direct recharge through a cover of a few tens of feet of sand and clayey sand of Quaternary age. Tensional stresses during the structural evolution of the Ocala Uplift produced an intersecting system of fractures and normal faults in rocks of the Floridan aquifer. The fractures and faults are important controls for orientation of solution channels and, therefore, for development of ground-water circulation patterns. When the system surface streams, which once drained the Barge Canal area, eroded the poorly permeable Miocene-Pliocene(?) cover from the flanks of the Ocala Uplift, surface runoff was reduced and precipitation began to directly infiltrate the underlying limestones. Now only principal streams remain, such as the Oklawaha and Withlacoochee Rivers and a few short tributaries, while one of the most highly developed subsurface drainage systems in the world has evolved in cavernous limestone of the Floridan aquifer. Two of the larger freshwater springs in the world now discharge from the Floridan aquifer in the canal area. Silver Springs near Ocala discharges an average 531 mgd (million gallons per day) down the 4-mile long Silver River, which flows on poorly permeable beds to the Oklawaha River. Rainbow Springs near Dunnellon discharges on average 468 mgd from numerous orifices in the bed of the 5-mile-long Rainbow River, which flows into the Withlacoochee River. The heads of the springs have migrated to their present positions partly because of a tendency of ground-water levels to decline as permeability in the aquifer is increased due to removal of limestone by solution, and because of mechanical erosion of the limestone in the vicinity of the spring heads. Also, points of principal spring discharges have shifted in the past due to changes in ground-water levels in response to changes in sea level. The subsurface drainage system is continuing to evolve today, as evidenced in part by frequent occurrence of new sinkholes and by the presence of significant amounts of calcium bicarbonate in the spring waters. Rodman Pool, at the east end of the canal, is separated from the Floridan aquifer by poorly permeable materials. The pool's operating water level will be only a few feet above the potentiometric surface at the downstream end, and at or slightly below the potentiometric surface at the upstream end. Little exchange of water between the Rodman Pool and the Floridan aquifer is expected. Eureka Pool, just upstream from Rodman Pool, will also be separated from the Floridan aquifer by poorly permeable beds. However, the stage of the pool will be about 15 feet higher than the natural potentiometric surface at the pool's downstream end, and some seepage into the Floridan aquifer is anticipated through faults and leaky parts of the poorly permeable beds, with a consequent rise in ground-water levels in areas adjacent to the lower end of the pool. Possibilities for particulate contamination of the aquifer will tend to be minimized because of the filtering capacity of the materials through which water must pass to reach the aquifer, although the natural filter will not preclude movement into the aquifer of contaminants which might become dissolved in the pool waters. No significant interchange of water between the pool and the aquifer is expected at the upstream end of the Eureka Pool. Present construction plans indicate an operating stage for Eureka Pool which will range between 38 and 40 feet above mean sea level, although it is possible to dredge the pool deep enough to permit a range in stage of 36 to 40 feet. A backwater effect extending up Silver River from the Eureka Pool is expected to regulate the stage at the head of Silver Springs between 39 and 44 feet above mean sea level if the pool ranges between 36 and 40 feet. If Eureka Pool ranges only between 38 and 40 feet, the range of stage at the head of the springs should be about 41 to 44 feet above mean sea level. From Inglis Lock west, the canal will have direct connection with the Gulf, and canal stage will fluctuate with the Gulf tide. Since the canal stage will be slightly lower than the adjacent ground-water levels along much of the reach, there will be some ground-water inflow to the canal. No significant changes in the existing ground-water regime are expected in the vicinity of Inglis Pool, the first step up in the canal east of the Gulf. Existing ground-water and surface-water levels in the area will not change appreciable, and the natural stage and flow of Rainbow Springs, which will flow by way of Rainbow River into Inglis Pool, should not be affected by canal operations. A possible adverse effect of the canal on the Inglis Pool area could result if sea water is locked up from the Gulf through Inglis Lock. However, the high step of 25 feet at the lock, flushing action of continuous flow from Inglis Pool to the lower reaches of the Withlacoochee River, and use of possible preventive locking procedures should minimize the problem. The potential for adverse effects on the ground-water regime is greatest in the area of the Summit Pool. Through most of the length of the pool, the canal channel will be excavated into limestone of the Floridan aquifer to depths of 12 to 27 feet below the potentiometric surface. Changes that will take place in the ground-water flow system in the Silver Springs drainage area, once the canal is completed, were estimated by flow-net analysis. Variation in aquifer transmissivity was determined by calculating transmissivity in 25 different flow cells surrounding Silver Springs. Transmissivity in the 25 cells averages about 15,600,000 gpd/ft [2,090,000 ft2/day (feet squared)], but transmissivity in the six cells through which the Summit Pool passes ranges from 9,000,000 to 44,000,000 gpd/ft (1,210,000 to 5,900,000 ft2/day). Transmissivity was used to compute static stage of the Summit Pool under given ground-water level conditions. Had the canal existed in May 1968 and had the stage of Eureka Pool been held at 36 feet at the time, the static stage in Summit Pool would have been about 42.1 feet above mean sea level. Thus, a conceptual model of the changes in the potentiometric surface wrought by the finished canal was drawn, and zones of ground-water inflow and outflow were delineated. Most outflow from the Summit Pool to the aquifer should be limited to one 4-mile-long zone along the north side of the pool, about 5 miles south of Silver Springs. It is estimated that a water volume equivalent to about 8 percent of the daily flow of Silver Springs will enter the Summit Pool each day from the southern one-third of the Silver Springs drainage area. A like amount will reenter the aquifer at the main zone of outflow and move toward Silver Springs at an estimated average velocity of about 200 feet per day, if something close to the natural static stage of the pool is maintained by return pumpage of the lockage losses. At a velocity of 200 feet per day, water from the Summit Pool would discharge at Silver Springs about 140 days later. However, any estimate of velocity in the highly cavernous limestone aquifer in the area should be used with caution, because difficult to measure changes in porosity and thickness of major zones of flow may cause large variations in velocity. If all lockage losses are returned to the Summit Pool by pumping from Eureka Pool, no net loss from the Silver Springs drainage area, except for some evaporation from the water surface in the canal and possible leakage around locks, will result from canal operations. The zone of outflow from the Summit Pool to the aquifer will be in a natural potentiometric trough, and the zone of inflow will be in a potentiometric ridge area. The equilibrium water level in the pool will tend to be about 1 foot higher than the altitude of the lowest level in the pre-canal potentiometric trough, and about 2 feet lower than the highest level on the pre-canal potentiometric ridge. West of the Silver Springs drainage area just east of Dunnellon Lock, in the area of a local potentiometric high, the water level in the Summit Pool is expected to be about 15 feet below the natural potentiometric surface. In most areas 2 to 3 miles away from the Summit Pool, effects of the canal on the natural potentiometric surface should be slight. The stage of the Summit Pool, judging from the 36-year record for ground-water level changes and the anticipated indirect effect of the controlled stage in Eureka Pool, should have a maximum of about 10.5 feet with a maximum water level of about 51.5 feet above mean sea level and a minimum of about 41.0 feet above mean sea level. Of particular importance in the Summit Pool is an implementation of well planned construction and operational procedures designed to minimize risks of ground-water contamination.

Florida↗