Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · pp813J

Summary appraisals of the nation's ground-water resources – Great Lakes region

Abstract

The Great Lakes Regions, as a whole, has abundant supplies of water. Nearly 805,000 billion cubic feet of water is contained in the Great Lakes. An additional 35,000 billion cubic feet of potable ground water is available from storage in the region. Estimated ground-water discharge to the streams and lakes of the region is 26 billion gallons per day. Despite this abundance of water, the United States part of the Great Lakes basin is faced with many water-related problems, most of which involve water quality and water supply. Other problems concern periods of low flow in streams, preservation of wetlands, detrimental effects of erosion, and flooding. The significance of ground water in these problems is often overlooked. Ground water can be an alternative to surface water as a source of supply, or it can be used conjunctively with surface water to provide flexibility in water-supply management. Ground water supplied approximately 1,800 million gallons per day of the 39,900 million gallons. per day used in the Great Lakes Region in 1970. The ground-water contribution was only 4.5 percent of the water used. Thus, ground water represents a potential source of supply for much of the region. It also can be used, where conditions permit, to maintain lake levels and flow in streams, to dilute poor quality surface water, and to maintain or create wetlands and ponds. In managing water resources, ground water and surface water should be considered parts of a single system. Management includes not only planning and controlling the development but also monitoring the effects of this development. Recent advances in ground-water hydrology have provided methods to resolve some of the development and management questions that formerly slowed the development of ground water. All of the States in the Great Lakes Region have some regulations to control the development or protect the quality of the ground water. These regulations, however, are not as comprehensive as those governing surface water. Future legislation could be designed to encourage the development of ground water and, at the same time, to protect the resource. Efficient development and management of ground-water resources requires a through knowledge of the system. Reports on ground water are available for about 80 percent of tbe Great Lakes Region. Most of these reports, however, are not sufficiently detailed to be useful in comprehensive planning. As ground-water development continues, quantitative groundwater studies, utilizing models as predictive tools, will enable this development to proceed in an efficient manner.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 40.84706035607122° to 49.89463439573421° latitude; -94.833984375° to -75.234375° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

William G. Weist. 1978. Summary appraisals of the nation's ground-water resources – Great Lakes region. https://doi.org/10.3133/pp813j

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Resurvey of the Marble Canyon and Bridge Canyon dam sites in Grand Canyon National Park—Changes in sediment storage and evidence supporting the occurrence of bedrock incision through the mid-20th century

The Bureau of Reclamation developed an extensive plan for a network of dams, water tunnels, and hydropower plants in and around Grand Canyon, Arizona, in the 1940s through 1960s. The two largest of these planned dams were the Marble Canyon and Bridge Canyon Dams on the Colorado River. Though these dams were ultimately never built, Reclamation conducted extensive topographic, bathymetric, and subsurface exploration work at the sites proposed for these dams in the 1940s and 1950s. Resurveys of these dam sites were conducted between 1998 and 2021 to determine the changes in sediment storage at these dam sites caused by the upstream construction and operation of Glen Canyon Dam and by the recession of Lake Mead, the reservoir impounded by Hoover Dam. The resurveys of the Marble Canyon dam sites indicate that the post-1950s changes in sediment storage at these dam sites are broadly consistent with flux-based estimates of voluminous sand erosion from Marble Canyon since the 1963 closure of Glen Canyon Dam. These resurveys also suggest that the pre-dam longitudinal variation in sediment thickness over bedrock played a key role in determining the locations of the sand erosion induced by Glen Canyon Dam; more sand eroded from locations where more sand was present in the 1950s. The resurvey of the Bridge Canyon dam sites indicates that the Colorado River’s incision of the Lake Mead delta is regulated both by bed-sediment grain size and downstream hydraulic controls. Finally, analyses of bed-sediment thickness and sedimentological data at the dam sites, and observations of bed scour and gravel transport, suggest that sufficient bedrock was exposed to allow bedrock incision during commonly recurring pre-dam snowmelt floods that entrained small boulders into transport.

Arizona

The eruptive behavior of distributed volcanism forming low shield edifices—A case study of Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field, U.S.A.

Distributed volcanic fields are present in various tectonic settings worldwide, and their characteristics reflect differing influences from magmatic and tectonic processes. In the southwestern United States alone, there are 37 Quaternary distributed volcanic fields. After the primary period of extensional tectonics in the southern Basin and Range 15–5 million years ago, the Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field developed in southwestern Arizona between 4 and 1 million years ago. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field consists primarily of low relief shield volcanoes, a type of distributed volcanism with poorly understood temporal evolution. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field is less than 200 kilometers (km) from the Colorado Plateau, Gulf of California, and southern San Andreas Fault system. This work identifies and examines controls on the emplacement of the Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field by documenting shallow and surficial structures as well as eruption characteristics and style through time. The Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field consists of 21 volcanoes with a total of 33 vents over an area of about 770 square kilometers (km 2 ). The prominence of low relief shield volcanoes may be explained by ascent of basaltic magmas through thin Basin and Range crust, without much crustal contamination, and low viscosities common to mafic compositions. Typical eruption characteristics involve the construction of low relief shield volcanoes followed by Strombolian fissure eruptions at the summits or near-summit medial areas that produce scoria lapilli, which may weld to form agglomerate. The total lifetime erupted volume of about 4.3 cubic kilometers (km 3 ) represents an average eruptive flux of approximately 2x10 -3 km 3 per thousand years (k.y.). This erupted volume is low relative to Neogene basaltic intraplate distributed volcanic fields worldwide, which typically range from 10 -3 to 1 km 3 k.y. -1 . Sentinel-Arlington volcanic field eruptions were likely triggered by intermittent rejuvenation of transient magmatic zones that exist in thinned crust. Instantaneous flux from point sources feeding the lava flows is estimated to be on the order of 10 -1 to 10 cubic meters per second.

Arizona

Capitalization of positional (Lower/Middle/Upper) and temporal (Early/Middle/Late) adjectives in the names of formal chronostratigraphic and geochronologic units of the Phanerozoic

Many authors are understandably confused about the capitalization of the words “lower,” “middle,” “upper,” “early,” and “late.” Where these words are used simply as descriptive adjectives, they should be in lowercase; where they form the first word of a formal chronostratigraphic or geochronologic unit name, they should be in uppercase.

Professional Paper