Hydrogeology, karst, and groundwater availability of Monroe County, West Virginia

Mark D. Kozar; Daniel H. Doctor; William K. Jones; Nathan Chien; Cheyenne E. Cox; Randall C. Orndorff; David J. Weary; Mitchell R. Weaver; Mitchell A. McAdoo; Mercer Parker

doi:10.3133/sir20235121

USGS · sir20235121

Hydrogeology, karst, and groundwater availability of Monroe County, West Virginia

Mark D. Kozar·Daniel H. Doctor·William K. Jones·Nathan Chien·Cheyenne E. Cox·Randall C. Orndorff·David J. Weary·Mitchell R. Weaver·Mitchell A. McAdoo·Mercer Parker

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Monroe County is in southeastern West Virginia, encompassing an area of 474 square miles. The area consists of karst and siliciclastic aquifers of Ordovician, Silurian, Devonian, and Mississippian age and is in parts of two physiographic provinces: the Valley and Ridge Province to the east of Peters Mountain, and the Appalachian Plateau Province to the west of Peters Mountain. This study was developed in response to inquiries from the Monroe County Commission requesting assessment of the water resources of the county to better understand the quantity of the county’s groundwater resources, for both current [2023] and future demand, and to provide information to support protection and management of the county’s valuable groundwater resources. Various products were developed for this study that provide knowledge with respect to water availability and contamination susceptibility of the karst aquifers within the county. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) geologists conducted extensive geologic mapping in support of the project, producing (1) a countywide bedrock geologic map, (2) a countywide hydrogeologic map, and (3) a light detection and ranging (lidar)-derived countywide digital elevation model and associated sinkhole map. A significant part of this work was to map in detail the Greenbrier Group at the formation level, which prior to this study had only partially been completed. The report also includes (4) a description of the lithologic units identified as part of the geologic mapping process. U.S. Geological Survey hydrologists completed several additional products for the hydrology part of the effort, including development of (1) a countywide potentiometric surface (water-table) map, (2) a countywide base-flow stream assessment, (3) countywide water-budget estimates, (4) well log surveys for 15 wells to better understand subsurface controls on groundwater flow within the study area, (5) two groundwater tracer tests to better refine the groundwater divide from the northern and southern parts of the karst aquifer in Monroe County; and finally, based on all available data collected for the study including the potentiometric surface map, geologic map, current [2023] and legacy fluorometric groundwater tracer tests, and base-flow stream assessments, (6) groundwater-basin delineations were reassessed for principal groundwater basins within the Greenbrier aquifer. In Monroe County, four principal hydrogeologic settings produce large yields of water for residential, agricultural, and other uses. The most relied upon water-bearing zone with respect to current [2023] public water supply is from springs along Peters Mountain. These springs are derived from intervals of fractured sandstone and resultant alluvial deposits. Groundwater flows downslope through these permeable alluvial deposits and discharges at the contact with less permeable strata, such as the Reedsville Shale. The second most relied upon water-bearing zone in Monroe County is within the karstic Greenbrier Group aquifer, in which the basal Hillsdale Limestone overlies the less permeable Maccrady Shale. This geologic contact between the Hillsdale Limestone and Maccrady Shale is not only targeted as a source of water for agricultural supply but also is targeted as a source of water for residential supply. The third most relied upon water-bearing zone is composed of shallow perched aquifers within the Greenbrier Group. The discontinuous nature of these perched aquifers makes mapping their extent impossible, but they are related to permeable geologic strata, such as karstified limestones with solutionally enhanced permeability that overlies less permeable shale or chert bedrock. During geologic mapping of the county, several of these perched aquifers were documented in the Pickaway, Union, and Alderson Limestones. A fourth zone consists of springs from Ordovician carbonates at the base of Peters Mountain, which are influenced by sinking streams as well as upwelling along faults. In terms of water quantity, the most sustainable springs are those having deeper-sourced flows. Public supplies are a principal source of water used for residential and commercial supply in the region, accounting for 0.49 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) of fresh-water withdrawals (0.14 Mgal/d of groundwater and 0.35 Mgal/d of surface water) for residential and commercial use and serving 6,645 individuals (49.2 percent of the population). An estimated 6,861 people, (50.8 percent of the population) primarily rely on private wells or other unregulated sources, such as springs, and withdraw 0.55 Mgal/d of groundwater for their residential use. Public water supply in the region is primarily (71.4 percent) derived from springs and augmented by stream withdrawals (backup sources mainly during low-flow periods), with the remaining portion (28.6 percent) derived from groundwater withdrawals from wells. For rural residents, however, 100 percent of their withdrawals are derived from groundwater (wells or springs).

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations Report Report

Source-reported bounding extent: 37.3729° to 37.7303° latitude; -80.8575° to -80.2215° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Mark D. Kozar, Daniel H. Doctor, William K. Jones, Nathan Chien, Cheyenne E. Cox, Randall C. Orndorff, David J. Weary, Mitchell R. Weaver, Mitchell A. McAdoo, Mercer Parker. 2023-12-14. Hydrogeology, karst, and groundwater availability of Monroe County, West Virginia. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20235121

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

Discover connections

United STates place Monroe County, West Virginia place Report subject Scientific Investigations Report subject West Virginia place

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Slip tendency and dilation tendency of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report presents the results of slip tendency and dilation tendency analysis of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, in the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This effort was undertaken as part of two studies: the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office-funded Innovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project, which is a multidisciplinary, multi-institution effort to develop new methodologies and best practices to accelerate the discovery of new, commercially viable hydrothermal resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Resources Investigations Project. The goal of this work is to identify faults and fault segments that are appropriately oriented to be stress-loaded for slip or to dilate under the ambient stress conditions. Both conditions may make such faults more likely to host permeability and fluid flow relative to other faults in the region. Slip tendency and dilation tendency were calculated for all fault segments in the study area from the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database. Results demonstrate that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency are common in the Great Basin region. The areas containing many high slip tendency and dilation tendency fault segments are associated with high strain rates. These areas also host a relatively high proportion of the known hydrothermal systems. This indicates that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency in areas with high strain-rate are potentially most prospective for hosting hydrothermal systems. The database published in coordination with this report contains the slip tendency and dilation tendency results data, including the fault geometry and stress data used to calculate these quantities, for both the Great Basin study area and the smaller INGENIOUS study area.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2026

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York, and coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York, and nearby coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater emergence flooding. Groundwater emergence fooding refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As a part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the coastal areas of Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Partnership, formerly called the Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 grid cells that were 900 meters by 900 meters (approximately 3,000 feet by 3,000 feet), for the purpose of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard score was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percentage of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A scenario with a higher sea-level position was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard score was reviewed in conjunction with the National Land Cover Database to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk of potential groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface waterbodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, in the scenario with higher sea-level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated for some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea-level condition and the higher sea-level position scenario.

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗

USGS2026

Streamflow assessment of Birch Creek, southern boundary of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation, Pondera County, northwestern Montana—Synoptic and continuous streamflow measurements through 2022

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Blackfeet Water Department, performed this study to assist water-resource managers in understanding and quantifying irrigation diversions, instream flows, and the spatial and temporal streamflow dynamics of Birch Creek in northwestern Montana. Birch Creek forms the southernmost boundary of the Blackfeet Indian Reservation and is highly valued culturally as an aquatic life and wildlife resource and as a principal source of water for irrigation. The study area included Birch Creek from Swift Dam to 53.3 miles downstream just above its confluence with the Two Medicine River. The study period was calendar year 2022, but selected historical information was also included in the study. Birch Creek streamflow originates through releases from Swift Reservoir, with the largest releases typically occurring during the irrigation season (May–October) to primarily meet the needs of downstream irrigators. This study included the compilation and collection of (1) continuous streamflow measured at streamgages installed for this study, (2) instantaneous streamflow measurements made during four synoptic events, and (3) reported daily values of Swift Reservoir outflow and irrigation diversions. Continuous streamflow data were available from two U.S. Geological Survey streamgages: Birch Creek below Heart Butte Road, near Heart Butte, Montana (upper streamgage; station 06094900), at river mile 12.9 and Birch Creek at Bullhead Bridge near Valier, Mont. (lower streamgage; station 06098120), at river mile 53.3. The upper streamgage (station 06094900) was primarily affected by the regulated releases from Swift Dam with daily mean streamflow typically slightly higher than the reported Swift Reservoir outflows. Daily mean streamflow ranged from 9.87 cubic feet per second (ft 3 /s) (November 18, 2022) to 640 ft 3 /s (June 22, 2022) during September 16, 2021–December 31, 2022. The mean annual streamflow was 122 ft 3 /s in water year 2022 (a water year is the 12-month period from October 1 to September 30 and is designated by the year in which it ends), about 13 percent greater than the mean annual reported Swift Reservoir outflows. The lower streamgage (station 06098120) was downstream from all major tributaries and diversions within the Birch Creek drainage basin. Daily mean streamflow ranged from 6.02 ft 3 /s (September 8, 2022) to 95.0 ft 3 /s (June 5, 2021) during August 26, 2020–December 31, 2022. Mean annual streamflow was 27.8 ft 3 /s for water year 2022. Flows at the lower streamgage (station 06098120) were typically lower than at the upper streamgage (station 06094900) from late April to early October, whereas flows from early October to late spring were similar to or greater than those at the upper streamgage. The upper streamgage had a total streamflow volume of 87,960 acre-feet (acre-ft) for water year 2022, whereas the lower streamgage had a total streamflow of 20,357 acre-ft. A net volume of about 67,603 acre-ft was removed from Birch Creek through diversions, losses to groundwater, and evapotranspiration along that reach during water year 2022. Most of the changes in main-stem streamflow could be accounted for by the tributary inflows or diversion outflows. The most dynamic streamflow gains and losses occurred along the upper few miles of Birch Creek. Streamflow was consistently lost to the groundwater system immediately below Swift Dam and then returned to levels that slightly exceeded the outflow at the dam near river mile 11.0. The overall net gains for the entire 53.3-mile study reach ranged from 15.5 to 42.6 ft 3 /s among the synoptic events. On several occasions, streamflow fell below minimum instream flow conditions specified in the Blackfeet Compact (water rights compact among the Blackfeet Tribe, State of Montana, and United States), which are subject to a 15-year deferral period (until June 12, 2033). Notably, a section of Birch Creek immediately downstream from Swift Dam was completely dry during the October 18, 2022, synoptic event.

Montana↗