USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · ofr8733

Water-quality data-collection activities in Colorado and Ohio; Phase II, Evaluation of 1984 field and laboratory quality-assurance practices

Abstract

Serious questions have been raised by Congress about the usefulness of water-quality data for addressing issues of regional and national scope and, especially, for characterizing the current quality of the Nation's streams and ground water. In response, the U.S. Geological Survey has undertaken a pilot study in Colorado and Ohio to (1) determine the characteristics of current (1984) water-quality data-collection activities of Federal, regional, State, and local agencies, and academic institutions; and (2) determine how well the data from these activities, collected for various purposes and using different procedures, can be used to improve our ability to answer major broad-scope questions, such as: A. What are (or were) natural or near-natural water-quality conditions? B. What are existing water-quality conditions? C. How has water quality changed, and how do the changes relate to human activities? Colorado and Ohio were chosen for the pilot study largely because they represent regions with different types of waterquality concerns and programs. The study has been divided into three phases, the objectives of which are: Phase I--Inventory water-quality data-collection programs, including costs, and identify those programs that met a set of broad criteria for producing data that are potentially appropriate for water-quality assessments of regional and national scope. Phase II--Evaluate the quality assurance of field and laboratory procedures used in producing the data from programs that met the broad criteria of Phase I. Phase III--Compile the qualifying data and evaluate the adequacy of this data base for addressing selected water-quality questions of regional and national scope. Water-quality data are collected by a large number of organizations for diverse purposes ranging from meeting statutory requirements to research on water chemistry. Combining these individual data bases is an appealing and potentially cost-effective way to attempt to develop a data base adequate for regional or national water-quality assessments. However, to combine data from diverse sources, field and laboratory procedures used to produce the data need to be equivalent and need to meet specific qualityassurance standards. It is these factors that are the focus of Phase II, which is described in this report. In the first phase of this study, an inventory was made of all public organizations and academic institutions that undertook water-quality data-collection activities in Colorado and Ohio in 1984. Water-quality programs identified in Phase I were tested against a set of broad screening criteria. A total of 44 waterquality programs in Colorado and 29 programs in Ohio passed the Phase-I screen and were examined in Phase II. These programs accounted for an estimated 165,000 analyses in Colorado and 76,300 analyses in Ohio for 20 selected constituents and properties. Although qualifying programs included both surface- and ground-water sampling, they emphasized surface waters and produced few groundwater analyses (3,660 for Colorado and 470 for Ohio). For Phase II, information about field and laboratory qualityassurance practices was provided by each organization and its supporting laboratories through questionnaires. This information was evaluated against a set of specific criteria for field and laboratory practices. The criteria were developed from guidelines published by public agencies and professional organizations such as the American Public Health Association, the U.Sc, Environmental Protection Agency, and the U.S. Geological Survey. Each of the eight criteria that comprise the Phase-II screen fall into one of two major categories--field practices or laboratory practices.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 36.992426° to 41.97678° latitude; -109.060062° to -80.518991° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Carolyn J. Oblinger Childress, Thomas H. Chaney, Donna Myers, J. Michael Norris, Janet Hren. 1987. Water-quality data-collection activities in Colorado and Ohio; Phase II, Evaluation of 1984 field and laboratory quality-assurance practices. https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr8733

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