Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Aquaculture”

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.

At least 343 records · Page 19Linked to original sources
USGS1993

Summary of reported agriculture and irrigation water use in Mississippi County, Arkansas, 1991

This report summarizes the 1991 water-use reporting through the Conservation District Office in Mississippi County, Arkansas. The number of withdrawal registrations for Mississippi County was 981 (946 groundwater and 35 surface water). Water withdrawals reported during the registration process total 0.06 Mgal/d (0.01 Mgal/d groundwater and 0.05 Mgal/d surface water) for agriculture and 97.82 Mgal/d (94.16 Mgal/d groundwater and 3.66 Mgal/d surface water) for irrigation. The registration reports for 1991 indicate that this water was applied to 109,345 acres of land to irrigate rice, corn, soybeans, milo, cotton, hay, vegetables, berries, and sod as well as for the agricultural use of animal aquaculture.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1993

Summary of reported agriculture and irrigation water use in Phillips County, Arkansas, 1991

This report summarizes the 1991 water-use reporting through the Conservation District Office in Phillips County, Arkansas. The number of withdrawal registrations for Phillips County was 1,109 (1,103 groundwater and 6 surface water). Water withdrawals reported during the registration process total 0.15 Mgal/d (0.15 Mgal/d groundwater and none from surface water) for agriculture and 123.75 Mgal/d (122.66 Mgal/d groundwater and 1.09 Mgal/d surface water) for irrigation. The registration reports for 1991 indicate that this water was applied to 96,502 acres of land to irrigate wheat, rice, corn, soybeans, milo, cotton, hay, vegetables, grapes, nuts, fruit trees, and sod, as well as for the agricultural use of animal aquaculture.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1993

Summary of reported agriculture and irrigation water use in Poinsett County, Arkansas, 1991

This report summarizes the 1991 water-use reporting through the Conservation District Office of Poinsett County, Arkansas. The number of withdrawal registrations for Poinsett County was 1,826 (1,644 groundwater and 182 surface water). Water withdrawals reported during the registration process total 15.12 Mgal/d (11.76 Mgal/d groundwater and 3.26 Mgal/d surface water) for agriculture and 443.50 Mgal/d (394.22 Mgal/d groundwater and 49.28 Mgal/d surface water) for irrigation. The registration reports for 1991 indicate that this water was applied to 244,505 acres of land to irrigate rice, corn, soybeans, milo, cotton, and hay as well as for the agricultural uses of animal aquaculture and ducks.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1993

Summary of reported agriculture and irrigation water use in Prairie County, Arkansas, 1991

This report summarizes the 1991 water-use reporting through the Conservation District Office in Prairie County, Arkansas. The number of withdrawal registrations for Prairie County was 2,187 (1,786 groundwater and 401 surface water). Water with- drawals reported during the registration process total 26.93 Mgal/d (26.84 Mgal/d groundwater and 0.09 Mgal/d surface water) for agriculture and 191.08 Mgal/d (138.79 Mgal/d groundwater and 52.29 Mgal/d surface water) for irrigation. The registration reports for 1991 indicate that this water was applied to 144,956 acres of land to irrigate rice, corn, soybeans, milo, cash grains, unknown crop, cotton hay, berries, and fruit trees as well as for the agricultural uses of animal aquaculture, minnows, timber, and ducks.

Open-File Report↗
USGS1993

Summary of reported agriculture and irrigation water use in Randolph County, Arkansas, 1991

This report summarizes the 1991 water-use reporting through the Conservation District Office in Randolph County, Arkansas. The number of withdrawal registrations for Randolph County was 613 (494 groundwater and 119 surface water). Water withdrawals reported during the registration process total 0.08 Mgal/d (0.08 Mgal/d groundwater and none from surface water) for agriculture and 69.48 Mgal/d (53.60 Mgal/d groundwater and 15.88 Mgal/d surface water) for irrigation. The registration reports for 1991 indicate that this water was applied to 30,530 acres of land to irrigate rice, corn, soybeans, milo, and hay as well as for the agricultural use of animal aquaculture.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2019

Groundwater availability in the Ozark Plateaus aquifer system

Executive Summary The study described in this report, initiated by the U.S. Geological Survey in 2014, was designed to evaluate fresh groundwater resources within the Ozark Plateaus, central United States, as an area within a broader national assessment of groundwater availability. The goals of the Ozark study were to evaluate historical effects of human activities on water levels and groundwater availability, quantify groundwater resources now and under probable future pumping and climate conditions, and evaluate existing monitoring networks for their value in making better predictions of future groundwater resources. Previous studies include simulation of local-scale groundwater flow under varying temporal scales, or simulation of the regional system under steady-state conditions. While these studies are useful, particularly for the problem for which they were designed, there is a need to look at the larger regional system under transient conditions to fully evaluate the water resource over time. This study focused on multiple spatial and temporal scales to examine changes in groundwater pumping, storage, and water-level declines. The regional scale provides a broad view of the sources and demands on the system with time. The study area covers approximately 68,000 square miles in the central United States in parts of Missouri, Arkansas, Kansas, and Oklahoma and encompasses the Ozark Plateaus Physiographic Province (Ozark Plateaus), including the Salem Plateau, Springfield Plateau, and Boston Mountains. Groundwater is withdrawn from the Ozark Plateaus aquifer system (Ozark system) for public supply and for domestic, agriculture (including irrigation and aquaculture), livestock, and non-agricultural use (including industrial, thermoelectric power generation, mining, and commercial). The Ozark system provides an important drinking-water supply for people living in the Ozark Plateaus because public supply and domestic use combined constitute the largest groundwater use. Precipitation is the ultimate source of freshwater to the Ozark system; most rainfall occurs during April, May, and June, and precipitation increases generally from north to south across the study area. Groundwater use currently accounts for only 10 percent of the total water use in the areas overlying the Ozark system, but provides a critical drinking-water resource because public supply and domestic groundwater withdrawals are largely from groundwater resources. The 380 million gallons per day of groundwater withdrawn from the Ozark system in 2010 accounts for approximately 2 percent of recharge. Although groundwater use represents a small component of the hydrologic budget, because of low storage in aquifer units, cones of depression with steep water-level gradients can develop quickly around pumping centers. The amount of water entering and leaving the aquifer system from 1900 to about 1965 was relatively constant at a rate of about 13 billion gallons per day (Bgal/d). Much of this inflow of water is discharged through streams in the system to balance the hydrologic budget. Changes in storage over time (from outflows to inflows) reflect the large variability in recharge: if recharge decreases, water levels will decrease, resulting in less groundwater discharge to streams and more water released from aquifer storage. Conversely, when recharge increases, water levels increase, more groundwater discharges to streams, and aquifer storage is replenished. Although pumping generally increased from 1900 to 2016, it does not appear to correlate with the change in storage over the same time period. Regionally, simulated change in groundwater storage corresponds with changes in recharge, more so than with increases in pumping. Average recharge was 11.6 Bgal/d for the period 1900 to 2016. Recharge was generally above average from predevelopment to 1965, followed by a period of below-average recharge from 1965 to about 1980. Recharge remained consistently above average from 1980 to about 1988, after which there was a period of average or below-average recharge, reflected by a decline through the mid-2000s. The implications and potential effects of increased pumping and long-term climate change on the Ozark Plateaus hydrologic system and groundwater availability are a concern for communities and resource managers in the area. Pumping varies from year to year, but is generally expected to moderately increase with population, industrial, and agricultural needs. Most climate models predict warmer minimum and maximum air temperatures by midcentury in the Ozark Plateaus area, especially from midspring through early fall. Three scenarios were developed to simulate possible future conditions from 2016 to 2060 and assess the potential effects on the hydrologic system and availability of water resources. For each scenario, changes in water levels and hydrologic budget components were evaluated from predevelopment (1900) to present (2016) and 45 years into the future (2060). The baseline scenario represents an extension of the average (1996 to 2016) seasonal pumping and recharge values. The pumping scenario is an extension of the average (1996 to 2016) seasonal recharge values with increases in pumping following the historical trend for the period 2016–2060 of up to 120 percent of the 1996 to 2016 average seasonal pumping values. The general circulation model (GCM) scenario is an extension of the average (1996 to 2016) seasonal pumping values and variable recharge based on seasonal averages of soil water storage from a water-balance model using temperature and precipitation from multiple GCMs. The general patterns of water-level decline are similar for each scenario. The areas of water-level decline in southwest Missouri and northeast Oklahoma are only marginally different by 2060 from those of 2009. In one area south of Springfield, Mo., water-level declines are less in the baseline and GCM scenarios than in 2009. This may be the result of a transition from groundwater use to surface-water supplies for a larger percentage of the demand in the area. For all three scenarios, forecasted pumping, recharge, and aquifer properties play an important role in determining the uncertainty of water-level forecasts at 94 real-time observation wells. Simulated aquifer properties in the productive middle and lower Ozark aquifers and the St. Francois confining unit of the Ozark system contribute most to predictive uncertainty in water levels at approximately 35 percent of the real-time observation wells. Out of the 94 real-time observation wells, 82 are developed in the lower Ozark aquifer.

Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma↗
USGS2007

Hydrogeologic Setting and Ground-Water Flow in the Leetown Area, West Virginia

The Leetown Science Center is a research facility operated by the U.S. Geological Survey that occupies approximately 455-acres near Kearneysville, Jefferson County, West Virginia. Aquatic and fish research conducted at the Center requires adequate supplies of high-quality, cold ground water. Three large springs and three production wells currently (in 2006) supply water to the Center. The recent construction of a second research facility (National Center for Cool and Cold Water Aquaculture) operated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and co-located on Center property has placed additional demands on available water resources in the area. A three-dimensional steady-state finite-difference ground-water flow model was developed to simulate ground-water flow in the Leetown area and was used to assess the availability of ground water to sustain current and anticipated future demands. The model also was developed to test a conceptual model of ground-water flow in the complex karst aquifer system in the Leetown area. Due to the complexity of the karst aquifer system, a multidisciplinary research study was required to define the hydrogeologic setting. Geologic mapping, surface- and borehole-geophysical surveys, stream base-flow surveys, and aquifer tests were conducted to provide the hydrogeologic data necessary to develop and calibrate the model. It would not have been possible to develop a numerical model of the study area without the intensive data collection and methods developments components of the larger, more comprehensive hydrogeologic investigation. Results of geologic mapping and surface-geophysical surveys verified the presence of several prominent thrust faults and identified additional faults and other complex geologic structures (including overturned anticlines and synclines) in the area. These geologic structures are known to control ground-water flow in the region. Results of this study indicate that cross-strike faults and fracture zones are major avenues of ground-water flow. Prior to this investigation, the conceptual model of ground-water flow for the region focused primarily on bedding planes and strike-parallel faults and joints as controls on ground-water flow but did not recognize the importance of cross-strike faults and fracture zones that allow ground water to flow downgradient across or through less permeable geologic formations. Results of the ground-water flow simulation indicate that current operations at the Center do not substantially affect either streamflow (less than a 5-percent reduction in annual streamflow) or ground-water levels in the Leetown area under normal climatic conditions but potentially could have greater effects on streamflow during long-term drought (reduction in streamflow of approximately 14 percent). On the basis of simulation results, ground-water withdrawals based on the anticipated need for an additional 150 to 200 gal/min (gallons per minute) of water at the Center also would not seriously affect streamflow (less than 8 to 9 percent reduction in streamflow) or ground-water levels in the area during normal climatic conditions. During drought conditions, however, the effects of current ground-water withdrawals and anticipated additional withdrawals of 150 to 200 gal/min to augment existing supplies result in moderate to substantial declines in water levels of 0.5-1.2 feet (ft) in the vicinity of the Center's springs and production wells. Streamflow was predicted to be reduced locally by approximately 21 percent. Such withdrawals during a drought or prolonged period of below normal ground-water levels would result in substantial declines in the flow of the Center's springs and likely would not be sustainable for more than a few months. The drought simulated in this model was roughly equivalent to the more than 1-year drought that affected the region from November 1998 through February 2000. The potential reduction in streamflow is a result of capture of ground water tha

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2008

Methods for and estimates of 2003 and projected water use in the Seacoast Region, Southeastern New Hampshire

New methods were developed to estimate water use in 2003 and future water demand in 2017 and 2025 in the Seacoast region in southeastern New Hampshire, which has experienced a 37-percent population increase during 1980 to 2000. Water-use activities for which estimates were developed include water withdrawal, delivery, demand, consumptive use, release, return flow, and transfer by registered and aggregated unregistered (less than 20,000 gallons per day (gal/d)) users at the census-block and town scales. Estimates of water use rely on understanding what influences water demand and its associated consumptive use, because changes in demand and consumptive use affect withdrawal and return flow. Domestic water demand was estimated using a per capita water demand model that related metered deliveries to domestic users with census block and block-group data. The model was used to predict annual, summer, and winter per capita water-demand coefficients for each census block. Significant predictors of domestic water demand include population per housing unit, median value of owner-occupied single family homes, median year of housing construction (with 1900 as the base value), population density, housing unit density, and proportion of housing units that are in urban areas. Mean annual domestic per capita water-demand coefficient in the Seacoast region was 75 gal/d; the coefficient increased to 91 gal/d during the summer and decreased to 65 gal/d during the winter. Domestic consumptive use was estimated as the difference between annual and winter domestic water demand. Estimates of commercial and industrial water demand were based on coefficients derived from reported use and metered deliveries. Projections of water demand in 2017 and 2025 were determined by using the housing and employee projections for those years developed through a Transportation Demand Model and applying current domestic and non-domestic coefficients. Water demand in 2003 was estimated as 25.8 million gallons per day (Mgal/d), 35 percent of which was during the summer months of June, July, and August. Domestic water demand was 18.6 Mgal/d (72 percent), commercial water demand was 3.7 Mgal/d (14 percent), industrial water demand was 2.9 Mgal/d (11 percent), irrigation water demand was 0.3 Mgal/d (1 percent), and mining and aquaculture water demand was 0.2 Mgal/d (1 percent). Domestic consumptive use for the Seacoast region was 16 percent of domestic water demand, which translates to a loss of 3 Mgal/d over the entire Seacoast region. In 2003, water withdrawal was 771.2 Mgal/d, of which 742.2 Mgal/d was instream use for hydroelectric power generation and thermoelectric power cooling. The remaining 29.0 Mgal/d was withdrawn by community water systems (22.6 Mgal/d; 72 percent), domestic users (6.4 Mgal/d; 21 percent), commercial users (1.0 Mgal/d; 3 percent), industrial users (1.0 Mgal/d; 3 percent), irrigation (0.2 Mgal/d; 1 percent) and other users (less than 0.1 Mgal/d). Return flow for 2003 was 772.2 Mgal/d, of which 742.0 Mgal/d was returned following use for hydroelectric power generation and thermoelectric plant cooling. The remaining 30.2 Mgal/d was returned by community wastewater systems (20.2 Mgal/d; 68 percent), domestic users (7.8 Mgal/d; 26 percent), commercial users (1.2 Mgal/d; 3 percent), industrial users (0.8 Mgal/d; 3 percent), and other users (0.1 Mgal/d). Domestic water demand is projected to increase by 54 percent to 28.7 Mgal/d from 2003 to 2025 based on projection of future population growth. Non-domestic (commercial, industrial, irrigation, and mining) water demand is projected to increase by 66 percent to 11.8 Mgal/d from 2003 to 2025.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2007

Water Use in Arkansas, 2005

The water-use program in Arkansas is a cooperative effort between the Arkansas Natural Resources Commission and the U.S. Geological Survey to inventory water use. During 2005, the amount of water withdrawn from ground- and surface-water sources in Arkansas was estimated to be 11,455 million gallons per day (Mgal/d). Of this amount, about 7,510 Mgal/d (66 percent) was from ground-water and about 3,946 Mgal/d (34 percent) was from surface-water sources. Approximately 93 percent of the population (2.6 million people) in Arkansas was served by public supply systems during 2005. These systems withdrew approximately 404 Mgal/d. Most of the water, 66 percent, was from surface-water sources. The statewide average for per-capita residential use from public supply systems was 157 gallons per day and increased about 35 percent between 1965 and 2005. The largest use of water was for irrigation (8,265 Mgal/d), which accounted for 92 percent (6,942 Mgal/d) of the ground water withdrawn in Arkansas and 72 percent of the total withdrawals (both ground water and surface water). The next largest use category is thermoelectric generation (1,997 Mgal/d), followed by public supply (404 Mgal/d) and duck (hunting) clubs (269 Mgal/d). The withdrawal categories of domestic, commercial, industrial, mining, livestock, and aquaculture each withdrew less than 260 Mgal/d.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2008

Estimated use of water in South Dakota, 2005

During 2005, withdrawals from ground-water and surface-water sources in South Dakota for the eight categories of offstream use totaled about 500 million gallons per day (Mgal/d). Of total withdrawals, about 271 Mgal/d was withdrawn from ground water and about 230 Mgal/d was withdrawn from surface water. The largest use of water in South Dakota during 2005 was irrigation, which accounted for about 58 percent of the total water withdrawn, followed by public supply, which accounted for about 20 percent of withdrawals. Public-supply systems served about 666,210 people, or about 86 percent of South Dakota's population in 2005. Public-supply systems withdrew about 100 Mgal/d in 2005. Ground-water withdrawals accounted for about 66 percent of the total withdrawals (66 Mgal/d), and surface-water withdrawals accounted for about 34 percent of total withdrawals (35 Mgal/d). Total public-supply withdrawals averaged about 151 gallons per day (gal/d) per capita. About 65 percent of the public-supply water was used for domestic purposes, and the average per capita domestic use was 99 gal/d. Self-supplied domestic withdrawals were about 8 Mgal/d, all of which was from ground water. About 109,750 people obtained household water from private wells in 2005, and per capita use was about 70 gal/d. Industrial self-supplied water use during 2005 was about 4 Mgal/d, of which about 98 percent was from ground water and about 2 percent was from surface water. Total withdrawals for thermoelectric use were about 5 Mgal/d, of which about 1 Mgal/d was from ground water and about 4 Mgal/d was from surface water. Total mining water use was about 10 Mgal/d, of which about 5 Mgal/d came from ground water and about 6 Mgal/d came from surface water. Total livestock water use was about 48 Mgal/d, of which about 19 Mgal/d came from ground water and about 28 Mgal/d came from surface water. Total aquaculture use was about 33 Mgal/d, of which about 19 Mgal/d came from ground water and about 14 Mgal/d came from surface water. Irrigation withdrawals during 2005 totaled about 292 Mgal/d, of which about 149 Mgal/d was from ground-water sources and about 143 Mgal/d was from surface-water sources. An estimated 421,830 acres was irrigated during 2005. Of the total acres irrigated, 298,160 acres was irrigated by sprinkler application and 123,670 acres was irrigated by surface (or flood) application. The only instream use reported for South Dakota was for hydroelectric power generation. During 2005, about 68,400 Mgal/d was used by the hydroelectric powerplants to generate about 3,688 gigawatt-hours of electricity. Total water use in South Dakota decreased by about 25 percent (175 Mgal/d) between 1985 and 2005 despite an increase in the State's population of about 70,000 people. Total ground-water use increased slightly (about 21 Mgal/d) between 1985 and 2005, whereas surface-water use decreased by about 195 Mgal/d. The decreases in both total use and surface-water use are mostly attributable to decreases in irrigation water use. Total irrigation water use decreased by about 168 Mgal/d between 1985 and 2005, and surface-water irrigation use decreased by about 204 Mgal/d. Ground-water irrigation use increased by about 36 Mgal/d between 1985 and 2005. Water use for public supply increased about 20 Mgal/d between 1985 and 2005, and the population served by public suppliers increased by about 118,000 people. In contrast, the number of people relying on private wells for domestic use decreased by about 48,000 between 1985 and 2005. All self-supplied domestic water use in 2005 was supplied by ground water. Total domestic use decreased about 8 Mgal/d between 1985 and 2005.

South Dakota↗
USGS2009

Estimated water use in Washington, 2005

Water use in the State of Washington has evolved in the past century from meager domestic and stock water needs to the current complex requirements of domestic-water users, large irrigation projects, industrial plants, and numerous other uses such as fish habitat and recreational activities. Since 1950, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has, at 5-year intervals, compiled data on the amount of water used in homes, businesses, industries, and on farms throughout the State. This water-use data, combined with other related USGS information, has facilitated a unique understanding of the effects of human activity on the State's water resources. As water availability continues to emerge as an important issue in the 21st century, the need for consistent, long-term water-use data will increase to support wise use of this essential natural resource. This report presents state and county estimates of the amount of public- and self-supplied water used for domestic, irrigation, livestock, aquaculture, industrial, mining, and thermoelectric power purposes in the State of Washington during 2005. Offstream fresh-water use was estimated to be 5,780 million gallons per day (Mgal/d). Domestic water use was estimated to be 648 Mgal/d or 11 percent of the total. Irrigation water use was estimated to be 3,520 Mgal/d, or 61 percent of the total. Industrial fresh-water use was estimated to be 520 Mgal/d, or 9 percent of the total. These three categories accounted for about 81 percent (4,690 Mgal/d) of the total of the estimated offstream freshwater use in Washington during 2005.

Washington↗
USGS2010

Estimated Withdrawals and Other Elements of Water Use in the Great Lakes Basin of the United States in 2005

Estimates of water withdrawals in the United States part of the Great Lakes Basin and 107 of its watersheds designated by the 8-digit hydrologic unit code (HUCs) indicate that about 30.3 billion gallons per day (Bgal/d) were withdrawn for practically all categories of use in 2005. Virtually all water withdrawn was freshwater. Surface-water withdrawals totaled 28.8 Bgal/d, or 95 percent of total withdrawals; about 24 Bgal/d was withdrawn from the Great Lakes or their connecting channels. Total withdrawals, and total surface-water withdrawals, decreased 7 percent from 1995 to 2005, generally following the withdrawal trends of industrial use and that of the largest use-thermoelectric power. Groundwater withdrawals increased 3 percent from 1995 to 2005 and 33 percent during 1985-2005. The substantial increase since 1985 results primarily from increases in irrigation and self-supplied domestic withdrawals. In 2005, withdrawals for public supply, domestic, and irrigation use accounted for 81 percent of groundwater withdrawals. About 21.9 Bgal/d, or 72 percent of total withdrawals for 2005, was used for thermoelectric power. Virtually all of this water was derived from surface water and used for once-through cooling at powerplants. As such, the reuse potential of this water in the basin is high, with the majority of the withdrawn water returned to its surface-water source. Public-supply withdrawals were 3.81 Bgal/d (13 percent), with withdrawals declining by about 13 percent from 1995 to 2005. In 2005, about 77 percent of the population in the Great Lakes Basin obtained drinking water from public suppliers, compared to about 78 percent in 1995 and 83 percent in 1985. Surface water consistently provided about 88 percent of the total withdrawals for public supply since 1985. Self-supplied industrial withdrawals in 2005 totaled 2.93 Bgal/d (10 percent), possibly as much as 30 percent less than in 1995. Surface water was the source for 95 percent of industrial withdrawals. Combined withdrawals for mining, irrigation, domestic, aquaculture, and livestock use (in order of decreasing rate) were 1.63 Bgal/d, or only 5 percent of total withdrawals; the withdrawals were distributed almost equally between surface-water and groundwater sources. Withdrawals for each of these uses, except livestock, increased almost continuously during 1985-2005. Withdrawals for mining increased 103 percent and for irrigation 94 percent during 1985-2005; livestock withdrawals decreased 25 percent from their peak in 1990. The number of irrigated acres increased 56 percent since 1985, totaling 750,000 acres in 2005. No use of reclaimed wastewater for industrial or irrigation applications was reported; however, sources of information regarding its use were sparse. Within the basin, the Lake Michigan watershed accounted for 15.0 Bgal/d, or 49 percent, of total water withdrawals for 2005; an estimated 12.3 Bgal/d was withdrawn directly from Lake Michigan. The State of Michigan accounted for 38 percent of total water withdrawals, representing the largest surface-water withdrawals (primarily for thermoelectric power use) and groundwater withdrawals (primarily for public supply and self-supplied domestic use). A disproportionately large percentage of surface-water withdrawals (6 percent, 1.80 Bgal/d) were in Illinois, given this state represents less than 1 percent of the land area of the basin. Ninety percent of the Illinois population served by the water withdrawn from Lake Michigan for public supply resides outside the basin. Within land-based HUCs, the Lower Maumee (04100009) of Ohio accounted for the largest total withdrawal and total surface-water withdrawal (about 0.75 Bgal/d). The St. Joseph (04050001) of Michigan and Indiana accounted for the largest total groundwater withdrawal (0.25 Bgal/d).

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2012

Fate and transport of cyanobacteria and associated toxins and taste-and-odor compounds from upstream reservoir releases in the Kansas River, Kansas, September and October 2011

Cyanobacteria cause a multitude of water-quality concerns, including the potential to produce toxins and taste-and-odor compounds. Toxins and taste-and-odor compounds may cause substantial economic and public health concerns and are of particular interest in lakes, reservoirs, and rivers that are used for drinking-water supply, recreation, or aquaculture. The Kansas River is a primary source of drinking water for about 800,000 people in northeastern Kansas. Water released from Milford Lake to the Kansas River during a toxic cyanobacterial bloom in late August 2011 prompted concerns about cyanobacteria and associated toxins and taste-and-odor compounds in downstream drinking-water supplies. During September and October 2011 water-quality samples were collected to characterize the transport of cyanobacteria and associated compounds from upstream reservoirs to the Kansas River. This study is one of the first to quantitatively document the transport of cyanobacteria and associated compounds during reservoir releases and improves understanding of the fate and transport of cyanotoxins and taste-and-odor compounds downstream from reservoirs. Milford Lake was the only reservoir in the study area with an ongoing cyanobacterial bloom during reservoir releases. Concentrations of cyanobacteria and associated toxins and taste-and-odor compounds in Milford Lake (upstream from the dam) were not necessarily indicative of outflow conditions (below the dam). Total microcystin concentrations, one of the most commonly occurring cyanobacterial toxins, in Milford Lake were 650 to 7,500 times higher than the Kansas Department of Health and Environment guidance level for a public health warning (20 micrograms per liter) for most of September 2011. By comparison, total microcystin concentrations in the Milford Lake outflow generally were less than 10 percent of the concentrations in surface accumulations, and never exceeded 20 micrograms per liter. The Republican River, downstream from Milford Lake, was the only Kansas River tributary with detectable microcystin concentrations throughout the study period, and concentrations exceeded 1 microgram per liter for most of September 2011. Microcystin was detected periodically in other tributaries, but concentrations were low (less than 0.3 micrograms per liter). In contrast, the taste-and-odor compounds geosmin and 2-methylisoborneol (MIB) were detected in all tributaries located immediately downstream from reservoirs and total concentrations generally exceeded the human detection threshold (5 to 10 nanograms per liter) from September through mid-October. Microcystin, geosmin, and MIB were not detected in the Smoky Hill River upstream from the confluence with the Republican River that forms the Kansas River. Within a week after initial reservoir releases, microcystin, geosmin, and MIB were detected throughout a 173-mile reach of the Kansas River; these compounds remained detectable throughout the reach until mid-October. Losses to groundwater when streamflows in the Kansas River were increasing indicate the potential for reservoir releases to affect groundwater quality as well as surface-water quality. Total microcystin concentrations in the Kansas River generally were highest within about 24 miles of the confluence of the Smoky Hill and Republican Rivers, and decreased downstream; concentrations exceeded 1 microgram per liter in the Kansas River upstream from Topeka during the first 2 weeks of September. Patterns in microcystin occurrence and concentration at Kansas River tributary and main-stem sites indicate that Milford Lake was the source of microcystin in the Kansas River; however, the source of taste-and-odor compounds was not as evident, possibly because multiple tributaries contributed taste-and-odor compounds to the Kansas River. Microcystin and taste-and-odor compounds co-occurred in 56 percent of samples collected, indicating co-occurrence was common. Despite frequent co-occurrence, the spatial and temporal patterns in microcystin, geosmin, and MIB were unique and did not necessarily match patterns in cyanobacterial abundance. Use of a single compound or cyanobacterial abundance alone cannot necessarily be used as an indicator of the presence or concentration of these compounds. Measured concentrations of cyanobacteria and associated compounds were substantially higher than expected concentrations based on simple dilution models at some sites and substantially lower at others, though spatial and temporal patterns were unique for individual compounds. Data were not collected in such a way to determine whether differences between measured and expected concentrations were statistically significant. Results, however, indicate that simple dilution models were not sufficient to describe the downstream transport of cyanobacteria and associated compounds in the Kansas River.

Kansas↗
USGS2014

Evaluation of groundwater and surface-water interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area, Caddo County, Oklahoma, 2010-13

Streamflows, springs, and wetlands are important natural and cultural resources to the Caddo Nation. Consequently, the Caddo Nation is concerned about the vulnerability of the Rush Springs aquifer to overdrafting and whether the aquifer will continue to be a viable source of water to tribal members and other local residents in the future. Interest in the long-term viability of local water resources has resulted in ongoing development of a comprehensive water plan by the Caddo Nation. As part of a multiyear project with the Caddo Nation to provide information and tools to better manage and protect water resources, the U.S. Geological Survey studied the hydraulic connection between the Rush Springs aquifer and springs and streams overlying the aquifer. The Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area is located in southwestern Oklahoma, primarily in Caddo County. Underlying the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area is the Permian-age Rush Springs aquifer. Water from the Rush Springs aquifer is used for irrigation, public, livestock and aquaculture, and other supply purposes. Groundwater from the Rush Springs aquifer also is withdrawn by domestic (self-supplied) wells, although domestic use was not included in the water-use summary in this report. Perennial streamflow in many streams and creeks overlying the Rush Springs aquifer, such as Cobb Creek, Lake Creek, and Willow Creek, originates from springs and seeps discharging from the aquifer. This report provides information on the evaluation of groundwater and surface-water resources in the Caddo Nation Jurisdictional Area, and in particular, information that describes the hydraulic connection between the Rush Springs aquifer and springs and streams overlying the aquifer. This report also includes data and analyses of base flow, evidence for groundwater and surface-water interactions, locations of springs and wetland areas, groundwater flows interpreted from potentiometric-surface maps, and hydrographs of water levels monitored in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area from 2010 to 2013. Flow in streams overlying the Rush Springs aquifer, on average, were composed of 50 percent base flow in most years. Monthly mean base flow appeared to maintain streamflows throughout each year, but periods of zero flow were documented in daily hydrographs at each measured site, typically in the summer months. A pneumatic slug-test technique was used at 15 sites to determine the horizontal hydraulic conductivity of streambed sediments in streams overlying the Rush Springs aquifer. Converting horizontal hydraulic conductivities (Kh) from the slug-test analyses to vertical hydraulic conductivities (Kv) by using a ratio of Kv/Kh = 0.1 resulted in estimates of vertical streambed hydraulic conductivity ranging from 0.1 to 8.6 feet per day. Data obtained from a hydraulic potentiomanometer in streambed sediments and streams in August 2012 indicate that water flow was from the streambed sediments to the stream (gaining) at 6 of 15 sites, and that water flow was from the stream to the streambed sediments (losing) at 9 of 15 sites. The groundwater and surface-water interaction data collected at the Cobb Creek near Eakly, Okla., streamflow gaging station (07325800), indicate that the bedrock groundwater, alluvial groundwater, and surface-water resources are closely connected. Because of this hydrologic connection, large perennial streams in the study area may change from gaining to losing streams in the summer. The timing and severity of this change from a gaining to a losing condition probably is affected by the local or regional withdrawal of groundwater for irrigation in the summer growing season. Wells placed closer to streams have a greater and more immediate effect on alluvial groundwater levels and stream stages than wells placed farther from streams. Large-capacity irrigation wells, even those completed hundreds of feet below land surface in the bedrock aquifer, can induce surface-water flow from nearby streams by lowering alluvial groundwater levels below the stream altitude. Twenty-five new springs visible from public roads and paths were documented during a survey of springs in 2011. Most of the springs are in upland draws on the flanks of topographic ridges. Wetlands primarily were identified by using a combination of data sources including the National Wetlands Inventory, Soil Survey Geographic database frequently flooded soils maps, and aerial photographs. Regional flow directions were determined by analysis of water levels measured in 29 wells completed in the Rush 2 Springs aquifer in Caddo County and the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area. Water levels were monitored every 30 minutes in five wells by using a vented pressure transducer and a data-collection platform with real-time transmitting equipment in each well. Those five wells ranged in depth from 210 to 350 feet. Water levels in these five wells indicate that there was a decrease in water storage in the Rush Springs aquifer from October 2010 to June 2013.

Oklahoma↗
USGS2014

Hydrogeology, hydraulic characteristics, and water-quality conditions in the surficial, Castle Hayne and Peedee aquifers of the greater New Hanover County area, North Carolina, 2012-13

A major issue facing the greater New Hanover County, North Carolina, area is the increased demand for drinking water resources as a result of rapid growth. The principal sources of freshwater supply in the greater New Hanover County area are withdrawals of surface water from the Cape Fear River and groundwater from the underlying Castle Hayne and Peedee aquifers. Industrial, mining, irrigation, and aquaculture groundwater withdrawals increasingly compete with public-supply utilities for freshwater resources. Future population growth and economic expansion will require increased dependence on high-quality sources of fresh groundwater. An evaluation of the hydrogeology and water-quality conditions in the surficial, Castle Hayne, and Peedee aquifers was conducted in New Hanover, eastern Brunswick, and southern Pender Counties, North Carolina. A hydrogeologic framework was delineated by using a description of the geologic and hydrogeologic units that compose aquifers and their confining units. Current and historic water-level, water-quality, and water-isotope data were used to approximate the present boundary between freshwater and brackish water in the study area. Water-level data collected during August–September 2012 and March 2013 in the Castle Hayne aquifer show that recharge areas with the highest groundwater altitudes are located in central New Hanover County, and the lowest are located in a discharge area along the Atlantic Ocean. Between 1964 and 2012, groundwater levels in the Castle Hayne aquifer in central New Hanover County have rebounded by about 10 feet, but in the Pages Creek area groundwater levels declined in excess of 20 feet. In the Peedee aquifer, the August–September 2012 groundwater levels were affected by industrial withdrawals in north-central New Hanover County. Groundwater levels in the Peedee aquifer declined more than 20 feet between 1964 and 2012 in northeastern New Hanover County because of increased withdrawals. Vertical gradients calculated between the Castle Hayne and Peedee aquifers at six well cluster sites were downward in August–September 2012 and March 2013 with the exception of one well pair that had a slight upward gradient in March 2013. Major ion chemistry results from samples collected in August–September 2012 from 97 well sites suggest that seawater is mixing with groundwater in both the Castle Hayne and Peedee aquifers in several locations in Brunswick, New Hanover, and Pender Counties. The 250 milligram per liter line of equal chloride concentration has moved inland in both aquifers since 1965, with the area between Futch and Pages Creeks in northeastern New Hanover County experiencing the greatest increase. Groundwater from the surficial, Castle Hayne, and Peedee aquifers had a stable isotope of water composition similar to that of modern precipitation. A comparison of chloride concentration data collected from public-supply wells in the 1960s with that collected in 2012 shows marked increases in chloride concentrations in the Peedee aquifer near the town of Carolina Beach at the southern end of New Hanover County.

North Carolina↗
USGS2015

Estimated freshwater withdrawals in Washington, 2010

Every 5 years since 1950, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has compiled data on the amount of water used in homes, businesses, industries, and farms throughout the State. This water-use data, combined with other related USGS information, has facilitated a unique understanding of the effects of human activity on the State’s water resources. As water availability continues to emerge as an important issue in the 21st century, the need for consistent, long-term water-use data will increase to support wise use of this essential natural resource. The amount of public- and self-supplied water used for domestic, irrigation, livestock, aquaculture, industrial, mining, and thermoelectric power was estimated for state, county, and eastern and western regions of Washington during calendar year 2010. Withdrawals of freshwater for offstream uses were estimated to be about 4,885 million gallons per day. The total estimated freshwater withdrawals for 2010 was approximately 15 percent less than the 2005 estimate because of decreases in irrigation and thermoelectric power withdrawals.

Washington↗
USGS2016

Water use in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin, Alabama, Florida, and Georgia, 2010, and water-use trends, 1985-2010

The Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) River Basin encompasses about 20,230 square miles in parts of Alabama, Florida, and Georgia. Increasing population growth and agricultural production from the 1970s to 2010 has prompted increases in water-resources development and substantially increased water demand in the basin. Since the 1980s, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are parties to litigation concerning water management in the ACF River Basin. Estimating the 2010 water use in the ACF River Basin is one aspect of a multipart water resources study on the ACF River Basin that began in 2011. This ACF River Basin study is one focus area of the U.S. Geological Survey’s National Water Census program. The 2010 water-use estimates for the ACF River Basin are presented in this report. These estimates include an inventory of the quantity and sources of water withdrawn by category of use and location (State and river basin), and the surface-water returns in the ACF River Basin during 2010. Water-use trends from 1985 to 2010 in the basin also are presented. Offstream water-withdrawal data in the ACF River Basin are presented for each of the following categories: public supply, self-supplied domestic, self-supplied commercial, industrial, mining, agricultural (including crop irrigation, livestock, and aquaculture uses), and thermoelectric-power generation. Water-use data are compiled for the 14 subbasins in the ACF River Basin. For the counties in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia that are partially within the ACF River Basin, data are presented for only that part of the county that lies within the basin. A variety of Federal, State, local, private, and online sources in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia were used to gather surface-water and groundwater withdrawal, surface-water discharges (return flows), and water-use data for the ACF River Basin in 2010. The population in the ACF River Basin was 3.835 million in 2010, a 45-percent increase from the 1990 population of nearly 2.636 million. About 92 percent of the 2010 ACF population resided in Georgia with nearly 75 percent living in the Atlanta metropolitan area. In 2010, 1,645 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) of water were withdrawn from groundwater (576 Mgal/d) and surface-water (1,069 Mgal/d) sources in the ACF River Basin. About 89 percent of the groundwater and 83 percent of the surface-water withdrawals were from Georgia. About 5.6 percent of the total groundwater and nearly 4 percent of the total surface-water withdrawals in the ACF River Basin were from Florida, whereas about 5.3 percent of groundwater and nearly 16 percent of surface water were withdrawn in Alabama. Total water use (withdrawals plus public-supplied deliveries) in the ACF River Basin was 1,593 Mgal/d in 2010. About 56 Mgal/d of water withdrawn in the ACF River Basin was delivered (interbasin transfer) to basins beyond the ACF River Basin. About 564 Mgal/d of water was returned to surface-water bodies in the ACF River Basin. Most of that amount, 63 percent, was treated wastewater discharged by public wastewater-treatment facilities. Water used for once-through cooling by thermoelectric-power facilities accounted for nearly 24 percent of the surface-water returns in the basin. About 70 percent of all water withdrawals in the ACF River Basin were by self-supplied agricultural water users and public water suppliers. Agricultural withdrawals were greatest in the Flint River Basin (501 Mgal/d) with ground-water representing 84 percent of the withdrawals from that basin. Within the Flint River Basin, agricultural withdrawals were greatest in the Lower Flint River and Spring Creek subbasins. About 3.52 million people were served by public water suppliers in the ACF River Basin during 2010, and 88 percent of that population used surface water. Georgia had the largest public-supplied population, representing nearly 93 percent (3.17 million) of the public-supplied population in the ACF River Basin. Public water suppliers served 193,700 people (5.7 percent) in Alabama and 31,880 people in Florida (1.3 percent). Public-supply losses were estimated at 101 Mgal/d. Withdrawals for public supply (483 Mgal/d) and self-supplied industry (141 Mgal/d) were greatest in the Chattahoochee River Basin. Surface water accounted for 96 percent of all withdrawals in the Chattahoochee River Basin. Withdrawals for public supply were greatest in the Upper Chattahoochee River subbasin (366 Mgal/d), whereas self-supplied industrial withdrawals were greatest in the Lower Chattahoochee River subbasin (110 Mgal/d). Water-use trends in the ACF River Basin have varied during the 25 years between 1985 and 2010. Surface-water withdrawals declined between 1985 and 2000, sharply increased in 2000, and declined again between 2000 and 2010. In contrast, groundwater withdrawals increased between 1985 and 2000, declined in 2005, and increased between 2005 and 2010.

Alabama, Florida, Georgia↗
USGS2018

Hydrogeologic framework and groundwater conditions of the Ararat Basin in Armenia

Armenia is a landlocked country located in the mountainous Caucasus region between Asia and Europe. It shares borders with the countries of Georgia on the north, Azerbaijan on the east, Iran on the south, and Turkey and Azerbaijan on the west. The Ararat Basin is a transboundary basin in Armenia and Turkey. The Ararat Basin (or Ararat Valley) is an intermountain depression that contains the Aras River and its tributaries, which also form the border between Armenia and Turkey and divide the basin into northern and southern regions. The Ararat Basin also contains Armenia’s largest agricultural and fish farming zone that is supplied by high-quality water from wells completed in the artesian aquifers that underlie the basin. Groundwater constitutes about 40 percent of all water use, and groundwater provides 96 percent of the water used for drinking purposes in Armenia. Since 2000, groundwater withdrawals and consumption in the Ararat Basin of Armenia have increased because of the growth of aquaculture and other uses. Increased groundwater withdrawals caused decreased springflow, reduced well discharges, falling water levels, and a reduction of the number of flowing artesian wells in the southern part of Ararat Basin in Armenia. In 2016, the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) began a cooperative study in Armenia to share science and field techniques to increase the country’s capabilities for groundwater study and modeling. The purpose of this report is to describe the hydrogeologic framework and groundwater conditions of the Ararat Basin in Armenia based on data collected in 2016 and previous hydrogeologic studies. The study area includes the Ararat Basin in Armenia. This report was completed through a partnership with USAID/Armenia in the implementation of its Science, Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships effort through the Advanced Science and Partnerships for Integrated Resource Development program and associated partners, including the Government of Armenia, Armenia’s Hydrogeological Monitoring Center, and the USAID Global Development Lab and its GeoCenter. The hydrogeologic framework of the Ararat Basin includes several basin-fill stratigraphic units consisting of interbedded dense clays, gravels, sands, volcanic basalts, and andesite deposits. Previously published cross sections and well lithologic logs were used to map nine general hydrogeologic units. Hydrogeologic units were mapped based on lithology and water-bearing potential. Water-level data measured in the water-bearing hydrogeologic units 2, 4, 6, and 8 in 2016 were used to create potentiometric surface maps. In hydrogeologic unit 2, the estimated direction of groundwater flow is from the west to north in the western part of the basin (away from the Aras River) and from north to south (toward the Aras River) in the eastern part of the basin. In hydrogeologic unit 4, the direction of groundwater flow is generally from west to east and north to south (toward the Aras River) except in the western part of the basin where groundwater flow is toward the north or northwest. Hydrogeologic unit 6 has the same general pattern of groundwater flow as unit 4. Hydrogeologic unit 8 is the deepest of the water-bearing units and is confined in the basin. Groundwater flow generally is from the south to north (away from the Aras River) in the western part of the basin and from west to east and north to south (toward the Aras River) elsewhere in the basin. In addition to water levels, personnel from Armenia’s Hydrogeological Monitoring Center also measured specific conductance at 540 wells and temperature at 2,470 wells in the Ararat Basin using U.S. Geological Survey protocols in 2016. The minimum specific conductance was 377 microsiemens per centimeter (μS/cm), the maximum value was 4,000 μS/cm, and the mean was 998 μS/cm. The maximum water temperature was 24.2 degrees Celsius. An analysis between water temperature and well depth indicated no relation; however, spatially, most wells with cooler water temperatures were within the 2016 pressure boundary or in the western part of the basin. Wells with generally warmer water temperatures were in the eastern part of the basin. Samples were collected from four groundwater sites and one surface-water site by the U.S. Geological Survey in 2016. The stable-isotope values were similar for all five sites, indicating similar recharge sources for the sampled wells. The Hrazdan River sample was consistent with the groundwater samples, indicating the river could serve as a source of recharge to the Ararat artesian aquifer.

Ararat Basin↗