Geology ReportsSearch

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Florida Geological Survey Information Circular”

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.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

Water-resources data for Alachua, Bradford, Clay, and Union Counties, Florida

A study of the water resources of Alachua, Bradford, Clay, and Union counties, Florida (fig. 1), was made by the Water Resources Division of the U. S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Florida Geological Survey during the period 1957-61. The results of this study will be published by the Florida Geological Survey in the following reports by William E. Clark, Rufus H. Musgrove, Clarence G. Menke, and Joseph W. Cagle, Jr.: "Interim Report on the Water Resources of Alachua, Bradford, Clay, and Union Counties, Florida," "Water Resources of Alachua, Bradford, Clay, and Union Counties, Florida," and "Hydrology of Brooklyn Lake, near Keystone Heights, Florida."

Florida

Digital surfaces and hydrogeologic data for the Mesozoic through early Tertiary rocks in the Southeastern Coastal Plain in parts of Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and Florida

A digital dataset of hydrogeologic data for Mesozoic through early Tertiary rocks in the Southeastern Coastal Plain was developed using data from five U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) reports published between 1951 and 1996. These reports contain maps and data depicting the extent and elevation of the Southeast Coastal Plain stratigraphic and hydrogeologic units in Florida and parts of Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina. The reports are: Professional Paper 1410-B (Renken, 1996), Professional Paper 1088 (Brown and others, 1979), Professional Paper 524-G (Applin and Applin, 1967), Professional Paper 447 (Applin and Applin, 1965), and Circular 91 (Applin, 1951). The digital dataset provides hydrogeologic data for the USGS Energy Resources Program assessment of potential reservoirs for carbon sequestration and for the USGS Groundwater Resource Program assessment of saline aquifers in the southeastern United States. A Geographic Information System (ArcGIS 9.3.1) was used to construct 33 digital (raster) surfaces representing the top or base of key stratigraphic and hydrogeologic units. In addition, the Geographic Information System was used to generate 102 geo-referenced scanned maps from the five reports and a geo-database containing structural and thickness contours, faults, extent polygons, and common features. The dataset also includes point data of well construction and stratigraphic elevations and scanned images of two geologic cross sections and a nomenclature chart.

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, South Caro

USGS Gulf Coast Science Conference and Florida Integrated Science Center Meeting: Proceedings with abstracts, October 20-23, 2008, Orlando, Florida

Welcome! The USGS is the Nation's premier source of information in support of science-based decision making for resource management. We are excited to have the opportunity to bring together a diverse array of USGS scientists, managers, specialists, and others from science centers around the Gulf working on biologic, geologic, and hydrologic issues related to the Gulf of Mexico and the State of Florida. We've organized the meeting around the major themes outlined in the USGS Circular 1309, Facing Tomorrow's Challenges - U.S. Geological Survey Science in the Decade 2007-2017. USGS senior leadership will provide a panel discussion about the Gulf of Mexico and Integrated Science. Capstone talks will summarize major topics and key issues. Interactive poster sessions each evening will provide the opportunity for you to present your results and talk with your peers. We hope that discussions and interactions at this meeting will help USGS scientists working in Florida and the Gulf Coast region find common interests, forge scientific collaborations and chart a direction for the future. We hope that the meeting environment will encourage interaction, innovation and stimulate ideas among the many scientists working throughout the region. We'd like to create a community of practice across disciplines and specialties that will help us address complex scientific and societal issues. Please take advantage of this opportunity to visit with colleagues, get to know new ones, share ideas and brainstorm about future possibilities. It is our pleasure to provide this opportunity. We are glad you're here.

Open-File Report

Hydrology of Central Florida Lakes - A Primer

INTRODUCTION Lakes are among the most valued natural resources of central Florida. The landscape of central Florida is riddled with lakeswhen viewed from the air, it almost seems there is more water than land. Florida has more naturally formed lakes than other southeastern States, where many lakes are created by building dams across streams. The abundance of lakes on the Florida peninsula is a result of the geology and geologic history of the State. An estimated 7,800 lakes in Florida are greater than 1 acre in surface area. Of these, 35 percent are located in just four counties (fig. 1): Lake, Orange, Osceola, and Polk (Hughes, 1974b). Lakes add to the aesthetic and commercial value of the area and are used by many residents and visitors for fishing, boating, swimming, and other types of outdoor recreation. Lakes also are used for other purposes such as irrigation, flood control, water supply, and navigation. Residents and visitors commonly ask questions such as Whyare there so many lakes here?, Why is my lake drying up (or flooding)?, or Is my lake spring-fed? These questions indicate that the basic hydrology of lakes and the interaction of lakes with ground water and surface water are not well understood by the general population. Because of the importance of lakes to residents of central Florida and the many questions and misconceptions about lakes, this primer was prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in cooperation with the St. Johns River Water Management District and the South Florida Water Management District. The USGS has been collecting hydrologic data in central Florida since the 1920s, obtaining valuable information that has been used to better understand the hydrology of the water resources of central Florida, including lakes. In addition to data collection, as of 1994, the USGS had published 66 reports and maps on central Florida lakes (Garcia and Hoy, 1995). The main purpose of this primer is to describe the hydrology of lakes in central Florida, the interactions between lakes and ground- and surface-waters, and to describe how these interactions affect lake water levels. Included are descriptions of the basic geology and geomorphology of central Florida, origins of central Florida lakes, factors that affect lake water levels, lake water quality, and common methods of improving water quality. The geographic area discussed in this primer is approximate (fig. 1) and includes west and east-central Florida, extending from the Gulf of Mexico to the Atlantic Ocean coastlines, northward into Marion, Putnam, and Flagler Counties, and southward to Lake Okeechobee. The information presented here was obtained from the many publications available on lakes in central Florida, as well as from publications on Florida geology, hydrology, and primers on ground water, surface water, and water quality. Many publications are available that provide more detailed information on lake water quality, and this primer is not intended as an extensive treatise on that subject. The reader is referred to the reference section of this primer for sources of more detailed information on lake water quality. Lakes discussed in this report are identified in figure 2. Technical terms used in the report are shown in bold italics and are defined in the glossary. The classification of some water bodies as lakes is highly subjective. What one individual considers a lake another might consider a pond. Generally, any water- filled depression or group of depressions in the land surface could be considered a lake. Lakes differ from swamps or wetlands in the type and amount of vegetation, water depth, and some water-quality characteristics. Lakes typically have emergent vegetation along the shoreline with a large expanse of open water in the center. Swamps or wetlands, on the other hand, are characterized by a water surface interrupted by the emergence of many varieties of plant life, from saw grasses to cypress trees. Lakes may be na

Circular

New York Water-Use Program and data, 2000

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has been publishing estimates of water use every five years since 1950 in the Estimated use of water in the United States circular series. In 1978, the Congress expanded the water-use activities of the USGS by establishing the National Water-Use Information Program (NWUIP). The water-use program in New York is part of the NWUIP and is based on a cooperative agreement between the USGS and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). Together, the NYSDEC and USGS collect, compile, and store water-use data to provide a data base that is useful for water-resources management. The New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) collects a wide variety of data elements relating to public-water supplies such as the name and location of the suppliers and the amount of water withdrawn. This valuable information is provided to the water-use program. The information summarized in this fact sheet has been published in U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1268, Estimated use of water in the United States in 2000 which can be accessed at http://water.usgs.gov/watuse . The 2000 data (by county) as well as previous years data can also be found at that site. Water withdrawal refers to the removal of water from the ground or its diversion from a surface-water source for use. Withdrawals of fresh and saline surface water and fresh ground water during 2000 were included in this study. The categories considered in this data compilation are public-water supply; deliveries to domestic from public-water suppliers and domestic self-supplied; industrial; thermoelectric-power generation; and irrigation. Saline withdrawals were included for the categories of industrial, mining, and thermoelectric-power generation. Saline water is a significant percentage of total withdrawals for the category of thermoelectric-power generation. The categories of withdrawal for which data were compiled for the 2000 calendar year do not include some of the categories that were addressed in 1995 and published in USGS Circular 1200, Estimated use of water in the United States in 1995. For the 2000 compilation, emphasis was placed on ensuring the quality of data that were collected, rather than attempting to address all categories and data elements on a national scale. Categories that were included in 1995 but not in 2000 are commercial; livestock; mining; the non-withdrawal categories of hydroelectric-power generation, wastewater treatment and public-water supply deliveries to commercial and industrial users. Any comparison made between 1995 and 2000 data need to be made with these category differences in mind. In 1995, the categories of commercial, livestock, and mining were about 280 Mgal/d (million gallons per day) of freshwater and 2.7 percent of total freshwater withdrawals. In addition, the report, New York water-use program and data, 1995, U. S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 014-02, concentrated on freshwater and did not include saline-surface water withdrawals in the figures. Any comparison between the 1995 and 2000 figures need to be made with this in mind. In 2000, about 12,100 Mgal/d (million gallons per day) of fresh surface and ground water and saline surface water were withdrawn from New York's rivers, streams, lakes, estuaries, bays, and aquifers for the categories addressed. Freshwater withdrawals comprised about 7,080 Mgal/d of this total. With a total population of 18,980,000 people in New York State, the total freshwater withdrawals represent an average of more than 370 gal/d (gallons per day) per capita. The amounts of fresh surface water, ground water, saline surface water, and total amounts of water withdrawn by categories of water use in New York during 2000 are shown. Many of New York's large population centers have developed along major rivers and lakes; as a result, more than 87 percent of the freshwater withdrawals in 2000 were from surface-water bodies (6,190 Mgal/d). More than 65 percent of fresh surface-water withdrawals were for thermoelectric-power generation, and about 32 percent were by public-water suppliers. Of the 890 Mgal/d of ground water withdrawn in 2000 statewide, 65 percent was withdrawn by public-water suppliers, and about 16 percent each by industrial and domestic users. More freshwater is withdrawn by thermoelectric plants than for any other water-use category. Of the freshwater withdrawals within New York, about 57 percent were made by fossil-fuel and nuclear powerplants; about 36 percent were for public-water supply; about 4.2 percent was by industrial users, 2.0 percent by domestic users, and about 0.5 percent was for irrigation. Total withdrawals, total surface-water and fresh ground-water withdrawals, in New York are plotted, by county. The categories of public-water supply and thermoelectric power account for the withdrawals that exceed 100 Mgal/d per county. The counties that have public-water supply withdrawals that exceed 100 Mgal/d are: Delaware (453 Mgal/d), Ulster, Nassau, Erie, Sullivan, Westchester, Suffolk, Putnam, and Schoharie (115 Mgal/d). These large withdrawals are from surface water except in Nassau and Suffolk Counties on Long Island, where groundwater is the sole source of freshwater. Delaware, Putnam, Schoharie, Sullivan, Ulster, and Westchester Counties, in the southeastern part of the State, provide surface water to the aqueducts that supply drinking water to New York City. In 2000, the average amount of water delivered to New York City from these counties averaged 1,260 Mgal/d. Erie County, in western New York, had withdrawals totaling 176 Mgal/d of fresh surface water for public-water supply. More freshwater and more total water is withdrawn for the generation of thermoelectric power than for any other water-use category. All of the withdrawals are of surface water. Seven counties have total thermoelectric withdrawals that exceed 500 Mgal/d: Queens (1,690 Mgal/d), Westchester, Oswego, Suffolk, Erie, Orange, and Rockland (560 Mgal/d). The counties of Oswego, Erie, and Orange withdrew only fresh surface water for thermoelectric plants. Their sources of water were Lake Ontario (Oswego County), Niagara River (Erie County), and the Hudson River (Orange County). Queens, Westchester, Suffolk, and Rockland withdraw only saline surface water for the production of thermoelectric power. The sources of saline surface water for the thermoelectric plants in the counties of Queens, Westchester, Suffolk, and Rockland are the estuaries of the Hudson River and East River and bays of the Atlantic Ocean (Long Island Sound and the eastern shore of Jamaica Bay). New York ranked eighth in the United States in 2000 in total withdrawals (fresh and saline water); the States that exceeded New York in total withdrawals are those that have large populations (such as California and Texas) and (or) use large quantities of water for irrigation (such as Florida and Idaho). Of the categories considered for the 2000 compilation, New York did not have nationally significant withdrawals for either irrigation or industrial water use. New York ranked third after California and Texas in withdrawals of freshwater for public supply, in the withdrawal of fresh surface water for public-water supply, in total population, and in number of people served by public-water supplies. New York ranked sixth in total withdrawals for the generation of thermoelectric power and total surface-water withdrawals. Finally, New York ranked fourth in withdrawals of ground water for public supply.

Open-File Report