Geology ReportsSearch

USGS · sir20075049

Recharge area, base-flow and quick-flow discharge rates and ages, and general water quality of Big Spring in Carter County, Missouri, 2000-04

Abstract

Exploration for lead deposits has occurred in a mature karst area of southeast Missouri that is highly valued for its scenic beauty and recreational opportunities. The area contains the two largest springs in Missouri (Big Spring and Greer Spring), both of which flow into federally designated scenic rivers. Concerns about potential mining effects on the area ground water and aquatic biota prompted an investigation of Big Spring. Water-level measurements made during 2000 helped define the recharge area of Big Spring, Greer Spring, Mammoth Spring, and Boze Mill Spring. The data infer two distinct potentiometric surfaces. The shallow potentiometric surface, where the depth-to-water is less than about 250 feet, tends to mimic topographic features and is strongly controlled by streams. The deep potentiometric surface, where the depth-to-water is greater than about 250 feet represents ground-water hydraulic heads within the more mature karst areas. A highly permeable zone extends about 20 mile west of Big Spring toward the upper Hurricane Creek Basin. Deeper flowing water in the Big Spring recharge area is directed toward this permeable zone. The estimated sizes of the spring recharge areas are 426 square miles for Big Spring, 352 square miles for Greer Spring, 290 square miles for Mammoth Spring, and 54 square miles for Boze Mill Spring. A discharge accumulation curve using Big Spring daily mean discharge data shows no substantial change in the discharge pattern of Big Spring during the period of record (water years 1922 through 2004). The extended periods when the spring flow deviated from the trend line can be attributed to prolonged departures from normal precipitation. The maximum possible instantaneous flow from Big Spring has not been adequately defined because of backwater effects from the Current River during high-flow conditions. Physical constraints within the spring conduit system may restrict its maximum flow. The largest discharge measured at Big Spring during the period of record (water years 1922 through 2004) was 1,170 cubic feet per second on December 7, 1982. The daily mean water temperature of Big Spring was monitored during water years 2001 through 2004 and showed little variability, ranging from 13 to 15° C (degree Celsius). Water temperatures generally vary less than 1° C throughout the year. The warmest temperatures occur during October and November and decrease until April, indicating Big Spring water temperature does show a slight seasonal variation. The use of the traditional hydrograph separation program HYSEP to determine the base flow and quick flow or runoff components at Big Spring failed to yield base-flow and quick-flow discharge curves that matched observations of spring characteristics. Big Spring discharge data were used in combination with specific conductance data to develop an improved hydrograph separation method for the spring. The estimated annual mean quick flow ranged from 15 to 48 cubic feet per second for the HYSEP analysis and ranged from 26 to 154 cubic feet per second for the discharge and specific conductance method for water years 2001 to 2004. Using the discharge and specific conductance method, the estimated base-flow component rises abruptly as the spring hydrograph rises, attains a peak value on the same day as the discharge peak, and then declines abruptly from its peak value. Several days later, base flow begins to increase again at an approximately linear trend, coinciding with the time at which the percentage of quick flow has reached a maximum after each recharge-induced discharge peak. The interval between the discharge peak and the peak in percentage quick flow ranges from 8 to 11 days for seven hydrograph peaks, consistent with quick-flow traveltime estimates by dye-trace tests from the mature karst Hurricane Creek Basin in the central part of the recharge area. Concentrations of environmental tracers chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs: CFC-11, CFC-12, CFC-113), and sulfur hexafluoride in discharge from Big Spring vary approximately linearly with percent quick flow from about 5 to 45 percent of discharge. Linear extrapolation to 100 percent quick flow implies CFC and SF 6 concentrations nearly identical to those in the 2002 atmosphere and indicates a modern age for the quick-flow component. Tracer concentrations for less than about 5 percent quick flow are increasingly lower than those expected from linear extrapolation to zero percent quick flow, indicating that the reservoir of older water in the Big Spring watershed may be a series of water mixtures with piston-flow ages greater than those obtained by extrapolation to zero percent quick flow. Each sample point with a low percentage of quick flow (less than 5 percent) may be a unique mixture. Environmental tracer data from Big Spring plot intermediate to the simple binary mixing of modern and old, pre-tracer water and results from the exponential mixture model. The mean ages of waters in the base-flow component approximately range from 30 to 200 years. The mean age of the base-flow component is youngest (30 to 40 years) in samples containing the highest quick-flow component (45 percent quick flow) and increases to 200 years or more as the fraction of quick flow decreases to less than 5 percent. Tritium data are consistent with a model of dilution of a modern component with an old, pre-tracer component and indicates that the old fraction is mostly pre-1960s in age with mean residence time of more than several hundred years. All of the samples from Big Spring and Greer Spring have water temperatures warmer than their nitrogen-argon recharge temperature, which range from approximately 10.5 to 14° C, suggesting recharge to the Big Spring watershed occurs primarily in late winter to early spring. The water temperatures at Big Spring are consistent with relatively shallow circulation (less than about 600 feet), and the water does not appear to be warmed by deep circulation along a geothermal gradient. Specific conductance values and concentrations of most inorganic constituents in water samples from Big Spring generally decrease with increasing discharge because of dilution with quick-flow water of lower ionic strength. Concentrations of some constituents such as chloride and nitrite plus nitrate, and fecal coliform densities, however, did not decrease with increasing discharge, indicating that quick flow probably is a more important source of these constituents compared to base flow. Water samples from Big Spring plot along the line of dolomite dissolution by carbonic acid, are at equilibrium with dolomite and calcite, and have a molar ratio of Ca:Mg of near 1, indicating dissolution of the mineral dolomite as the primary control on concentrations of calcium, magnesium, and bicarbonate. The flux of calcium and magnesium from Big Spring represents the dissolution of about 1,950 cubic feet of dolomite per day. The suspended sediment load of Big Spring was estimated to range from about 1 to about 70 tons per day, and the sediment load during base-flow periods ranged from about 1 to about 7 tons per day.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 36.8109° to 37.1008° latitude; -91.2245° to -90.6596° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jeffrey L. Imes, Niel Plummer, Michael J. Kleeschulte, John G. Schumacher. 2007. Recharge area, base-flow and quick-flow discharge rates and ages, and general water quality of Big Spring in Carter County, Missouri, 2000-04. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20075049

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Monitoring recreation on federally managed lands and waters—Aspects of visitor use

Federally managed public lands and waters receive around 1 billion recreational visits each year. Data on these visitors can aid in guiding policy decisions, managing resources effectively, and communicating the economic contributions of lands and waters. This report explores the methods used by agencies to collect data on aspects of recreational visitor use to Federal lands and waters (apart from visitation numbers, which are the focus of a companion publication). Aspects of recreational visitor use include visitor demographics, recreational activity participation, visitor satisfaction, visitor attitudes and experiences, trip characteristics, and economic contributions. We review practices used to understand aspects of visitor use across seven Federal agencies, revealing similarities such as the use of visitor intercept surveys and coverage of similar topic areas, and differences in how survey programs are operationalized and how specific questions on visitor surveys are worded. We also evaluate emerging technologies, such as geolocated social media and mobile device location data, for their potential to aid in understanding aspects of visitor use. This report concludes with potential opportunities to enhance data collection and coordination, ensuring cost-effective data collection and informed decision making.

Scientific Investigations Report

Evaluation of best management practices at an edge-of-field site in the Eagle Creek watershed, Ohio, 2012–20

In 2010, the U.S. Geological Survey worked in partnership with the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and the Natural Resources Conservation Service to identify farm fields in priority watersheds—watersheds critically important to Great Lake health. Intensive best management practices were implemented in five States to test the efficacy of best management practices, also referred to as agricultural conservation practices, to reduce sediment and nutrient runoff on agricultural fields. These fields were chosen as representatives of the priority watersheds because their farming practices and geographical conditions were common among farms in those watersheds. A farm site located near Findlay, Ohio, in the Eagle Creek watershed used two conservation practices, cover crop (Natural Resources Conservation Service practice standard 340) and variable rate technology (VRT; Natural Resources Conservation Service practice standard 590), which represent common practices in the Maumee priority watershed. This study monitored surface runoff and subsurface tile runoff at the Eagle Creek watershed site. The effects of cover crop and VRT nutrient application on sediment and nutrient runoff were assessed from October 2012 to September 2020. Cover crops were applied in fall of 2016, 2017, and 2018, coinciding with VRT applications. The following parameters were analyzed as part of the study: runoff discharge; peak discharge; and concentrations and loads of total phosphorus, particulate phosphorus, dissolved reactive phosphorus, and suspended sediment. High peak runoff events disproportionally affected nutrient concentrations and loads in runoff. A threshold of the 85th percentile of the peak discharge was chosen to assess the effect of cover crop and VRT nutrient application on nutrient mitigation at each gage. Runoff events below the 85th percentile were considered small, and runoff events over the 85th percentile were considered large. Concentrations from collected water-quality samples were used for the analysis; estimated concentrations were excluded from the statistical evaluation. All surface runoff parameters during small runoff events, except surface runoff volume, were significantly lower in the period with cover crops and VRT implementation. Contrarily, subsurface runoff parameters during small events were not statistically different between the periods with and without cover crops and VRT implementation. Surface and subsurface parameters during large events were also not statistically different between the periods with and without cover crops and VRT implementation. These results indicate cover crops and VRT may improve water quality during small runoff events, but additional best management practices that mitigate large runoff events may lead to greater water-quality improvement given the contribution of large events to overall losses.

Ohio

Continuous monitoring and temporal variability of fluorescence of dissolved organic matter in karst groundwater of the Edwards aquifer, south-central Texas, 2019–24

Widespread urbanization on the Edwards aquifer recharge zone in south-central Texas has prompted the development of new approaches and tools for evaluating the current and future status of water quality in the San Antonio and Barton Springs segments of the Edwards aquifer. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the San Antonio Water System and the City of Austin, applied continuous monitoring of fluorescence of dissolved organic matter (fDOM) to characterize the sources and transport of dissolved organic matter and associated constituents in the Edwards aquifer. Continuous fDOM time-series data were adjusted using empirically derived temperature, turbidity, and inner-filter-effect correction factors prior to analysis and interpretation. Fully corrected fDOM time-series data from the study sites were evaluated for short- and long-term temporal variability in fDOM in the context of the hydrologic and climatic conditions that occurred during the 5-year study period to understand vulnerability of the aquifer to potential contaminants in recharge. Study results indicate that fDOM is an effective proxy for dissolved organic carbon that, in turn, is indicative of the influx of recent surface water and associated contaminants, and thus, aquifer vulnerability to those contaminants. Although other continuously monitored water-quality parameters provide insights into changes in water quality in response to varying hydrologic conditions, the quantitative relation between fDOM and dissolved organic carbon directly indicates the timing and magnitude of pulses of organic constituents derived from the land surface, whereas other water-quality parameters do not.

Texas