Withdrawals, Water Levels, And Specific Conductance In The .

3y ago
21 Views
2 Downloads
3.35 MB
61 Pages
Last View : 19d ago
Last Download : 3m ago
Upload by : Anton Mixon
Transcription

In cooperation withLouisiana State University Agricultural CenterCooperative Extension Service and theLouisiana Rice Research BoardWithdrawals, Water Levels, and SpecificConductance in the Chicot Aquifer System inSouthwestern Louisiana, 2000-03ScientificInvestigations Report2004-5212U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

Withdrawals, Water Levels, and SpecificConductance in the Chicot Aquifer Systemin Southwestern Louisiana, 2000-03By John K. Lovelace, Jared W. Fontenot, and C. Paul FrederickIn cooperation with Louisiana State University Agricultural CenterCooperative Extension Service and theLouisiana Rice Research BoardScientific Investigations Report 2004-5212U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

U.S. Department of the InteriorGale A. Norton, SecretaryU.S. Geological SurveyCharles G. Groat, DirectorU.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2004For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information ServicesBox 25286, Denver Federal CenterDenver, CO 80225For more information about the USGS and its products:Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGSWorld Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not implyendorsement by the U.S. Government.Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.Suggested citation:Lovelace, J.K., Fontenot, J.W., and Frederick, C.P., 2004, Withdrawals, water levels, and specific conductance inthe Chicot aquifer system in southwestern Louisiana, 2000-03: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific InvestigationsReport 2004-5212, 56 p.

iiiContentsAbstract. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1Purpose and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Description of Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Data Collection and Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Previous Investigations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Acknowledgments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Hydrogeology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Withdrawals and Water Levels. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Specific Conductance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19Selected References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Figures1. Map showing location of the study area in southwestern Louisiana. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22. Graph showing water withdrawal rates for rice irrigation in southwestern Louisiana, 1960-2000. . . . .43. Diagram showing partial hydrogeologic column of aquifers in southwesternLouisiana. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64. Graph showing departure from normal monthly precipitation (1971-2000) in southwesternLouisiana, January 1999 through June 2003. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .75-7. Maps showing:5. Potentiometric surface of the massive, upper, and “200-foot” sandsof the Chicot aquifer system in southwestern Louisiana, June 2002. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .86. Potentiometric surface of the massive, upper, and “200-foot” sandsof the Chicot aquifer system in southwestern Louisiana, January 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .97. Water-level change in the massive, upper, and “200-foot” sands of theChicot aquifer system in southwestern Louisiana, June 2002 to January 2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108. Hydrograph showing hourly water levels at selected wells screened in theChicot aquifer system in southwestern Louisiana, 2000-03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119. Graph showing the relation between specific conductance values and chlorideconcentrations in the Chicot aquifer system in southwestern Louisiana. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1210-12. Maps showing:10. Specific conductance in the massive, upper, and “200-foot” sandsof the Chicot aquifer system in southwestern Louisiana. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1311. Location of wells sampled for specific conductance in southwestern Louisiana, 2000-03. . . . 1512. Location of wells sampled for specific conductance near Iowa, Louisiana, 2000-03 . . . . . . . . . 1613. Graphs showing specific conductance values at selected wells in southwesternLouisiana, 2000-03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1714. Graphs showing hourly specific conductance values during pumping at selectedwells screened in the Chicot aquifer system in southwestern Louisiana, 2000-03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

ivTables1. Water-level data used to construct potentiometric-surface maps for June 2002and January 2003, and water-level change map, June 2002 to January 2003,in the massive, upper, and “200-foot” sands of the Chicot aquifer system insouthwestern Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242. Commonly accepted tolerance of rice to selected saltwater concentrations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123. Selected data for wells in the Chicot aquifer system or the Atchafalaya aquifer insouthwestern Louisiana, including specific conductance values and chlorideconcentrations, 2000-03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32Conversion Factors, Datums, and AbbreviatedWater-Quality UnitsMultiplyByTo obtainLengthinch (in.)foot (ft)mile (mi)25.40.30481.609millimeter (mm)meter (m)kilometer (km)Areaacresquare mile (mi2)0.0040472.590square kilometer (km2)square kilometer (km2)Volumegallon (gal)3.785liter (L)Flow ratefoot per year (ft/yr)million gallons per day (Mgal/d)0.30483,875meter per year (m/yr)cubic meter per day (m3/d)Temperature in degrees Celsius ( C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit ( F) as follows: F (1.8 x C) 32Vertical coordinate information in this report is referenced to the National Geodetic VerticalDatum of 1929 (NGVD 29)--a geodetic datum derived from a general adjustment of the first-orderlevel nets of both the United States and Canada, formerly called Sea Level Datum of 1929.Horizontal coordinate information in this report is referenced to the North American Datum of1927 (NAD 27).Specific conductance is given in microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius (µS/cm at25 C).Concentrations of chloride in water are given in milligrams per liter (mg/L).

Withdrawals, Water Levels, and Specific Conductancein the Chicot Aquifer System in Southwestern Louisiana,2000-03By John K. Lovelace, Jared W. Fontenot, and C. Paul FrederickAbstractThe Chicot aquifer system is the principal source of freshground-water supplies in southwestern Louisiana. Much of thearea is rural and rice cultivation is the primary agriculturalactivity. About 540 million gallons per day were withdrawnfrom the aquifer system in southwestern Louisiana in 2000.Potentiometric-surface maps of the aquifer system were createdfor June 2002 and January 2003 to determine where water-leveldeclines occur due to seasonal ground-water withdrawals. During June 2002, water levels in the aquifer system were morethan 40 feet below the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of1929 (NGVD 29) in parts of Acadia, Calcasieu, Evangeline, andJefferson Davis Parishes, in an area that generally coincideswith rice-farming areas. During January 2003, water levelswere more than 30 feet below NGVD 29 in these areas.From June 2002 to January 2003, water levels generallyrecovered between 5 and 20 feet in the Chicot aquifer system inmost of Acadia and Jefferson Davis Parishes, southeastern Calcasieu Parish, and southern Evangeline Parish, in an area thatgenerally coincides with rice-farming areas. These water-levelchanges are representative of the areal extent and magnitude oftypical seasonal water-level fluctuations that occur in the aquifer system in response to seasonal ground-water withdrawalsfor rice irrigation.The presence of saltwater has been documented in the Chicot aquifer system beneath coastal parishes and in some areaswhere the aquifer system merges with the stratigraphically adjacent Atchafalaya aquifer. Data collected during the period 1943to 2003 from 1,355 wells screened in the massive, upper, and“200-foot” sands of the Chicot aquifer system and the Atchafalaya aquifer were used to delineate areas having similar specificconductance values and determine areas where wells areaffected by saltwater. Near the outcrop area, specific conductance values in the Chicot aquifer system generally are less than150 µS/cm (microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius). Specific conductance values increase south and east of theoutcrop area. Specific conductance values generally range from151 to 500 µS/cm in rice-farming areas of northwestern AcadiaParish, southeastern Allen Parish, western Evangeline Parish,and northern and central Jefferson Davis Parish. Specific conductance values generally range from 501 to 1,000 µS/cm inmost of the remaining rice-farming areas. Specific conductancevalues often exceed 1,000 µS/cm in an area along the borderbetween Calcasieu and Jefferson Davis Parishes near Iowa,Louisiana, parts of northeastern Cameron Parish, an area ofnorthwestern and central St. Landry Parish; parts of VermilionParish, and several areas along the eastern boundary of thestudy area where the Chicot aquifer system merges with theAtchafalaya aquifer. The maximum specific conductance value,12,100 µS/cm, is from a well in Cameron Parish.During 2000-03, specific conductance was measured in521 water samples from 166 wells screened in the Chicot aquifer system or the Atchafalaya aquifer. Specific conductance values exceeded 1,000 µS/cm in water samples from wells in Calcasieu, Cameron, Jefferson Davis, St. Landry, St. Martin, St.Mary, and Vermilion Parishes. Specific conductance valuesexceeded 2,000 µS/cm in only two wells—an irrigation welllocated about 2 miles south of Iowa and a USGS observationwell used to monitor saltwater encroachment in east-centralVermilion Parish. Specific conductance values increasedsteadily at one well, from 1,090 µS/cm in April 2000 to2,860 µS/cm in April 2003. Nearby wells did not show similarincreases.Specific conductance was measured hourly during pumping at two irrigation wells between 2000 and 2003. Specificconductance values were greater than 1,000 µS/cm in bothwells, indicating the presence of saltwater near the wells. Specific conductance values generally fluctuated about 150 µS/cmat both wells, but no long-term trends in the specific conductance were evident in either well.IntroductionThe Chicot aquifer system underlies an area of about9,000 mi2 in southwestern Louisiana (fig. 1) and is the principalsource of fresh ground-water supplies in the region. Much of thearea is rural, and rice cultivation is the primary agriculturalactivity. Withdrawals from the aquifer system, primarily for

2 Withdrawals, Water Levels, and Specific Conductance in the Chicot Aquifer System93 30 93 00 92 30 92 00 91 30 E X P L A N AT I O NOUTCROP AREAAlexandriaRECALCASI EURIVERDM IS S ISRAPIDESLeesvilleBOUNDARY OF STUDY AREASIPPIMarksvilleAV OY E L L E SRIVEVERNONLAND USED FOR RICE FARMING(SOURCE: LOUISIANA DEPARTMENTOF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, 1995)RBOUNDARY OF FRESHWATER INTHE CHICOT AQUIFER SYSTEM(modified from Smoot, 1986)WESTERN BOUNDARY OF THEATCHAFALAYA AQUIFER(modified from Nyman, 1989)eERquRIVzpiNesALLENCu-1386CONTROL POINT AND WELL NUMBERFOR WHICH GRAPH OF HOURLYSPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE IS SHOWNneCONTROL POINT AND WELL NUMBERFOR WHICH HYDROGRAPH KILOMETERSSt. MartinvilleELCLA ASKE IEUAbbevilleCameronIBERIAG R A NDLAKErMementaStudy AreaMISSISSIPPIS T.MARYIndex Map29 30 Map credit: Modified from Official Map of Louisiana, Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, 1986Figure 1. Location of the study area in southwestern Louisiana.LO U I S I A N AFr a n k l i nuW H I TELAKEGulf of MexicoARKANSASN e w I b e r i a Te c h eTEXASVERMILIONCAKELASANBICAMERONl Cn-92Ve rmlCn-19630 00 ilionYO0LafayetteUBAE50QR i ve rDS u-1386Ac-326 lyoJEFFERSOND AV I SLake CharlesJD-485ARLCACADIAEUBaCAVERi v e rIASlAc-428RICALCASIEUH o u s t onOpelousasRVEBa yo uRIAPPROXIMATE BOUNDARY BETWEENTHE UPPER AND LOWER SANDS TOTHE EAST AND THE "200-" AND"700-FOOT" SANDS TO THE WEST(modified from Nyman, 1989)EEOberlin30 30 New RoadsUPYATEXALAVille PlatteCOHAFS T.LANDRYAPPROXIMATE BOUNDARY BETWEENTHE CHICOT MASSIVE SAND TO THENORTH AND THE "200-," "500-," AND"700-FOOT" SANDS TO THE SOUTH(Nyman, 1989)TEAT CB E AU R E G A R DAPPROXIMATE BOUNDARY BETWEENTHE CHICOT MASSIVE SAND TO THENORTH AND THE UPPER AND LOWERSANDS TO THE SOUTH (Nyman, 1989)INE VA N G E L I N ElEv-229R IV E RDeRidderPOAS31 00

Introductionrice irrigation, have caused water levels to decline as much as100 ft beneath some rice-farming areas of southwestern Louisiana since the early 1900’s, creating an elongated cone ofdepression in the water-level surface over much of the region(Zack, 1971, p. 7-9 and pl. 2). In 1999, about 610,000 acres ofrice were planted in southwestern Louisiana (fig. 1) (LouisianaCooperative Extension Service, 2000). The water withdrawalrate from the aquifer system for rice irrigation in 2000, whichwas estimated based on 1999 acreage, was about 540 Mgal/d(Sargent, 2002, p. 17 and 92). Figure 2 shows water withdrawalrates for rice irrigation in southwestern Louisiana from 1960 to2000.From 1990 to 2000, water levels at several observationwells screened in the Chicot aquifer system and located in ricefarming areas declined at an average rate of 1 to 2 ft/yr(Tomaszewski and others, 2002, p. 11). Water levels in someareas of the aquifer system also fluctuate seasonally, primarilyin response to ground-water withdrawals for rice irrigation(Nyman and others, 1990, p. 17), and wells in these areas couldbe affected seasonally.The presence of saltwater1 has been documented in theChicot aquifer system beneath coastal parishes, in some areaswhere the aquifer system merges with the stratigraphically adjacent Atchafalaya aquifer, and in isolated bodies of saltwaternear Lake Charles, Iowa, and south of Abbeville, Louisiana(Nyman, 1984). Seasonal pumping for rice irrigation has alteredflow directions in the Chicot aquifer system and can induce lateral or upward movement of saltwater (Nyman, 1984, p. 1).Some irrigation wells screened in the aquifer system may beaffected by saltwater encroachment, especially during periodsof increased pumping in response to drought conditions.Some farmers and residents of southwestern Louisiana areconcerned that water levels in the Chicot aquifer system maydecline below pump intakes in their wells, leaving them withoutwater, or that their wells will be affected by saltwater encroachment. Current (2000-03) information is needed to (1) determinethe location, duration, and magnitude of seasonal water-leveldeclines; (2) delineate areas where wells are affected by saltwater; and (3) determine whether specific conductance, an indicator of saltwater, is increasing in water from wells in these areas.In response to this need, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), incooperation with the Louisiana State University AgriculturalCenter, Louisiana Cooperative Extensive Service (LCES), andthe Louisiana Rice Research Board, established a study in 2000to monitor water levels and specific conductance in wellsscreened in the Chicot aquifer system over a 3-year period.Results of this study were reported periodically; potentiometricsurface maps and data for June 2000 and January 2001 werepublished in Lovelace and others (2001; 2002). This is the thirdand final report.3Purpose and ScopeThis report describes water withdrawals, water levels, andspecific conductance in the Chicot aquifer system in southwestern Louisiana during 2000-03. Trends in water levels and specific conductance also are discussed. Maps illustrate the potentiometric surface of the massive, upper, and “200-foot” sands ofthe aquifer system during June 2002 and January 2003. Waterlevel data from 141 wells used to construct the potentiometricsurfaces are presented in a table. A map, based on data collectedduring 1943-2003, shows areas having similar specific conductance values in the massive, upper, and “200-foot” sands of theaquifer system. Specific conductance data collected during2000-03 from 166 wells in southwestern Louisiana, are presented in a table. Graphs of water level and specific conductance data from selected wells also are presented. All data presented are on file at the USGS office in Baton Rouge,Louisiana, and stored in the USGS National Water InformationSystem data base.Data presented in this report establish baseline conditionsthat could enable current (2003) and future farmers, agriculturalagents, and water-resources managers to determine the effectsof ground-water withdrawals on water levels and water qualityin the Chicot aquifer system. Results of this study may helpimprove understanding of conditions in similar coastal settingsin other areas of the United States.Description of Study AreaThe study area includes all or parts of 15 parishes in southwestern Louisiana: Acadia, Allen, Beauregard, Calcasieu,Cameron, Evangeline, Lafayette, Iberia, Jefferson Davis,Rapides, St. Landry, St. Martin, St. Mary, Vermilion, and Vernon Parishes (fig. 1). The climate is generally warm, humid, andtemperate. The average annual temperature is about 20oC andthe average annual precipitation is 55 in. (National Oceanic andAtmospheric Administration, 1995, p. 7, 9).Data Collection and MethodsWater levels were measured using steel or electrical tapesmarked with 0.01-ft gradations. Wells in which water levelswere measured were not being pumped at the time

150 µS/cm (microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Cel-sius). Specific conductance values increase south and east of the outcrop area. Specific conductan ce values generally range from 151 to 500 µS/cm in rice-farming areas of northwestern Acadia Parish, southeastern Allen Parish, western Evangeline Parish,

Related Documents:

important in maintaining operations, and represents a growing operational expense. Water withdrawals - volumes from water stressed areas 1-25 The facilities in Cape Town and Port Elizabeth, South Africa, are located in water-stressed areas. Water withdrawals - volumes by source 100% Municipal supply is the main source of water

John Hancock must report to the IRS all taxable withdrawals that exceed 10. Withdrawals taken before you reach age 59½ may incur an additional 10% early distribution penalty tax under section 72 of the Internal Revenue Code. If the contract is a SIMPLE IRA, the penalty tax is 25% for withdrawals taken during the first two years of your

» IRA withdrawals were infrequent and mostly retirement related. Twenty-seven percent of traditional IRA- owning households in mid-2020 took withdrawals in tax year 2019, about the same share as in tax year 2018. » The majority of traditional IRA withdrawals were made by retirees. Eighty-five percent of households that

Susquehanna River Basin Jim Richenderfer, Ph.D., P.G. Director, Technical Programs Susquehanna River Basin Commission Telephone: (717) 238 -0425 E-mail: jrichenderfer@srbc.net Surface Water Withdrawals; Threshold (100,000 gpd) Groundwater Withdrawals; Threshold (100,000 gpd) .

Proficiency bands Following the introduction to the language element, learning sequences with targeted strategies are provided for 4 proficiency bands: LEAP Levels 1-4 and leaping to levels 5-6 LEAP Levels 5-6 leaping to levels 7-9 LEAP Levels 7-9 leaping to levels 10-12 LEAP Levels 10-12 leaping to levels 13-14.

Water Re-use. PRESENTATION TITLE / SUBTITLE / DATE 3. Water Scarcity. Lack of access to clean drinking water. New challenges call for new solutions Water Mapping: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, Reclaim Water resources Water Fit for Purpose Water resources Tap Water Waste water Cow Water Rain water Others WIIX Mapping True Cost of Water

Water Demand refers to the amount of water a treatment plant must produce in order to meet all water needs in the community. In the United States, 80% of water withdrawals are from surface waters and 20% are from groundwater. In 2005, water usage in the United States averaged at 410 billion gallons per day. Climate change and population

National factors – political issues, level and type of government support for business, taxation, the economy, e.g. level of employment, inflation, exchange rates, cost of loans Local factors – location of business, requirements for resources, e.g. premises, staff, equipment, location of suppliers, competitors and customers