USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · ofr20071066

Ground-Water Quality in the St. Lawrence River Basin, New York, 2005-06

Abstract

The Federal Clean Water Act requires that States monitor and report on the quality of ground water and surface water. To satisfy part of these requirements, the U.S. Geological Survey and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation have developed a program in which ground-water quality is assessed in 2 to 3 of New York State's 14 major river basins each year. To characterize the quality of ground water in the St. Lawrence River Basin in northern New York, water samples were collected from 14 domestic and 11 production wells between August 2005 and January 2006. Eight of the wells were finished in sand and gravel and 17 wells were finished in bedrock. Ground-water samples were collected and processed using standard U.S. Geological Survey procedures and were analyzed for 229 constituents and physical properties, including inorganic constituents, nutrients, trace elements, radon-222, pesticides and pesticide degradates, volatile organic compounds, and bacteria. Sixty-six constituents were detected above laboratory reporting levels. Concentrations of most compounds at most sites were within drinking water standards established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and New York State Department of Health, but a few compounds exceeded drinking water standards at some sites. Water in the basin is generally hard to very hard (hardness equal to 121 mg/L as CaCO3 or greater); hardness and alkalinity were generally higher in the St. Lawrence Valley than in the Adirondack Mountains. The cation with the highest median concentration was calcium; the anion with the highest median concentration was bicarbonate. The concentration of chloride in one sample exceeded the 250 milligrams per liter U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Secondary Drinking Water Standard; the concentration of sulfate in one sample also exceeded the 250 milligrams per liter U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Secondary Drinking Water Standard. Nitrate was the predominant nutrient detected but no sample exceeded the 10 mg/L U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Maximum Contaminant Level. The trace elements detected with the highest median concentrations were strontium, barium, and iron. Concentration of trace elements in several samples exceeded U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Secondary Drinking Water Standards, including aluminum (50 micrograms per liter, 4 samples), iron (300 micrograms per liter, 5 samples), and manganese (50 micrograms per liter, 4 samples). The concentration of uranium in one sample from a domestic well finished in crystalline bedrock was three times the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Maximum Contaminant Level of 30 micrograms per liter. The median concentration of radon-222 was 600 picoCuries per liter, but concentrations as high as 18,800 picoCuries per liter were detected; two wells with high radon concentrations also had high uranium concentrations. Radon-222 is not currently regulated, but the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has proposed a Maximum Contaminant Level of 300 picoCuries per liter along with an Alternative Maximum Contaminant Level of 4,000 picoCuries per liter, to be in effect in states that have programs to address radon in indoor air. Concentrations of radon-222 exceeded the proposed Maximum Contaminant Level in 60 percent of samples and exceeded the proposed Alternative Maximum Contaminant Level in 8 percent of samples. Six pesticides and pesticide degradates were detected; all were amide or triazine herbicides or degradates. Five volatile organic compounds were detected, including disinfection byproducts such as trichloromethane and gasoline components or additives such as methyl tert-butyl ether. No pesticides, pesticide degradates, or volatile organic compounds were detected above established limits. Coliform bacteria, including Escherichia coli, were detected in three wells finished in carbonate bedrock.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Elizabeth A. Nystrom. 2007. Ground-Water Quality in the St. Lawrence River Basin, New York, 2005-06. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20071066

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Estimating aftershock risk for entry into earthquake-damaged buildings

We present a simple method to estimate the risk of experiencing strong shaking from aftershocks during entry into earthquake-damaged buildings. We compute wait times until the probability of strong ground shaking from aftershocks reaches a predefined risk threshold; for example, a 0.4 percent probability of experiencing Modified Mercalli Intensity 7 or greater shaking during the planned building entry. We also develop a relation between aftershock probability and the probability of strong shaking, so that users can reference the U.S. Geological Survey aftershock forecast during an ongoing aftershock sequence to determine if the risk threshold has been met. We apply our method to active continental regions (for example, the Western United States), stable continental regions (for example, the Central and Eastern United States), and subduction zones (for example, Cascadia or Alaska).

Open-File Report

End-user needs for remote sensing wetlands of the Prairie Pothole Region of North America

The Prairie Pothole Region (PPR) of North America comprises globally important grassland and wetland ecosystems critical for numerous populations of migratory birds. Due to the importance of this region for migratory birds, and particularly waterfowl, and the threats of habitat loss due to intensifying agriculture, there is a mature and diverse system of conservation organizations, agencies, and partnerships that spends hundreds of millions of dollars annually on habitat conservation to support migratory bird populations. Remote sensing can be a powerful tool for observing and evaluating global change at large scales as well as expanding inferences from field studies to the broader landscape with statistical models. However, development and utilization of these tools has lagged behind their demand for several reasons, including concerns over spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy of products; perception of a misalignment with decision-maker needs; technological barriers such as skill sets of conservation professionals, computing resources, data access, and usability. In this report, we summarize the needs of conservation professionals and scientists who use or want to use remote sensing data products to inform science about wetland change and conservation of wetlands in the PPR. We assembled this information through several methods leading up to, during, and following a January 2026 PPR Wetland Remote Sensing Workshop. The workshop included United States and Canadian scientists, conservation professionals, and policy experts. Our goal was to bring together end-users and remote sensing product developers jointly to explore reducing the lag between product development and utilization of products to inform science and conservation. Specifically, we aimed to identify gaps in wetland remote sensing that limit effective monitoring, management, and conservation in the PPR, and to develop a framework that outlines pathways to address these gaps by fostering collaboration, improving communication networks, encouraging discussion, and building on existing and ongoing efforts. This report summarizes our participants’ descriptions of end-user needs and the outcomes of the workshop.

Prairie Pothole region

Bathymetric survey and storage capacity of Upper Lake Mary near Flagstaff, Arizona in 2024

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the city of Flagstaff, collected bathymetric, light detection and ranging (lidar), and land-survey data of Upper Lake Mary in Arizona during the months of April and October 2024. The city of Flagstaff uses a combination of groundwater from well fields throughout the Flagstaff area and surface water, mainly from Upper Lake Mary, for its potable water supply. The purpose of the survey is to update previous surveys using new technology and compare the results to previous surveys to determine if there was a decrease in storage capacity that could affect the city’s water supply. The lakebed was mapped in April 2024 using a vessel equipped with a multibeam echosounder (MBES) and mobile lidar scanner with positioning captured using a real-time kinematic global navigation satellite system (RTK GNSS) base and receivers. In October 2024, areas of the reservoir that were too shallow for the boat and shoreline that were not captured by the vessel-based lidar were surveyed on foot using hand-held RTK GNSS receivers. At full pool (spillway elevation of 6,831.82 feet above NAVD 88 [2,082.34 meters (m)], Upper Lake Mary has a storage capacity of 16,449.80 acre-feet (20,290,611.73 cubic meters) and a surface area of 953.57 acres (3,860,926.075 square meters). The reservoir is 5.7 miles (9.7 kilometers) long and varies in width from 326 feet (99.36 m) near the central, narrow portion of the reservoir to 2,613 feet (796.44 m) in the upper portion. Comparisons between this survey and the previous two surveys from the 1950s and 2006 indicate no apparent decrease in reservoir area or storage capacity. Results of the 2024 survey indicate that Upper Lake Mary’s storage capacity increased by 0.9 percent from the 2006 survey and a 1.6 percent increase in surface area from the 2006 survey.

Arizona