USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · sir20045209

A water-budget analysis of Medina and Diversion Lakes and the Medina/Diversion Lake system, with estimated recharge to Edwards aquifer, San Antonio area, Texas

Abstract

In January 2001, the U.S. Geological Survey—in cooperation with the Edwards Aquifer Authority—began a study to refine and, if possible, extend previously derived (1995–96) relations between the stage in Medina Lake and recharge to the Edwards aquifer to include the effects of reservoir stages below 1,018 feet and greater than 1,046 feet above National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929. The principal objective of this present (2001–02) study was to estimate ground-water outflow (seepage) from Medina Lake, Diversion Lake, and from the Medina/Diversion Lake system through the calculation of water budgets representing steady-state conditions over as wide a range as possible in the stages of Medina and Diversion Lakes. The water budgets were compiled for selected periods during which time the water-budget components were inferred to be relatively stable and the influence of precipitation, stormwater runoff, and changes in storage were presumably minimal. Water budgets for the Medina/Diversion Lake system were compiled for 127 water-budget periods ranging from 8 to 78 days from daily hydrologic data collected during March 1955–September 1964, October 1995–September 1996, and February 2001–June 2002. Budgets for Medina and Diversion Lakes were compiled for 14 periods ranging from 8 to 23 days from daily hydrologic data collected only during October 1995–September 1996 and April 2001–June 2002. Linear equations were developed to relate the stage in Medina Lake to ground-water outflow from Medina Lake, Diversion Lake, and the Medina/Diversion Lake system. The computed mean rates of outflow from Medina Lake ranged from about 18 to 182 acre-feet per day between stages of 1,019 and 1,064 feet above National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929. The computed rates of outflow from Diversion Lake ranged from about -85 to 52 acre-feet per day. The rates of outflow from the entire lake system ranged from about 5 to 178 acre-feet per day between Medina Lake stages of 963 to 1,064 feet. It is assumed that all outflow from the lake system enters the ground-water system as recharge to the Edwards aquifer. During the time that the stage in Medina Lake was greater than about 1,040 feet, Diversion Lake gained more water than it lost to the ground-water system and the rate of ground-water outflow from Medina Lake increased sharply while its stage was between about 1,043 and 1,045 feet. The observed outflow from Diversion Lake during this time decreased sharply to the extent that a net gain resulted—indicating that a substantial amount of the additional outflow from Medina Lake returned to Diversion Lake. When the stage in Medina Lake is at the spillway elevation of 1,064 feet, Diversion Lake appears to gain as much as 40 percent of the concurrent ground-water outflow from Medina Lake. An indication of water moving from the lake system into the ground-water system and back to the surface-water system was observed in the most downstream reach of the Medina River, between Diversion Lake and the Medina River near Riomedina. During conditions of no flow over Diversion Dam, this reach of the Medina River gained from about 32 to 94 acre-feet per day, with the gain increasing with increasing stage in Diversion Lake. The average of the monthly recharge to the Edwards aquifer from the Medina/Diversion Lake system—as estimated by the present study for the October 1995–September 2002 period—is 3,083 acre-feet, or about 56 percent of recharge computed for this period with a previously used (Lowry) method. The present study’s estimates of recharge for months with rising-lake stage conditions are about 44 percent of those computed with the previously used method, compared to about 60 percent for months with steady or falling-stage conditions. For stages greater than 1,045 feet, the present study estimated recharge to be about 52 percent of that computed with the previously used method, compared to about 64 percent at stages below 1,045 feet.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 29.087° to 30.289° latitude; -99.7577° to -98.4138° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Richard N. Slattery, Lisa D. Miller. 2004-12-22. A water-budget analysis of Medina and Diversion Lakes and the Medina/Diversion Lake system, with estimated recharge to Edwards aquifer, San Antonio area, Texas. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20045209

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Baseline water-quality inventory and summary for the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park, New Jersey

The Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park (PAGR), established in 2011 in the City of Paterson, New Jersey, contains many cultural, historical, and natural resources. Because of the PAGR’s young age and limited resources, a long record of natural resource data is not available for use to guide future park management and planning decisions. A detailed natural resource inventory was identified as an immediate need in the “Foundation Document—Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park,” given the history of extensive industrial activity throughout the PAGR and the Passaic River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service and the Urban Waters Federal Partnership for the Lower Passaic River, inventoried water-quality monitoring efforts and compiled historical water-quality data from secondary data sources to define baseline conditions in the PAGR and the surrounding study area. This report documents the methods used to harmonize water-quality data aggregated from multiple sources for the PAGR study area. Procedures implemented during data harmonization include compiling data from multiple sources, assessing the dataset for completeness, addressing metadata concerns, and creating a consistent and quality-assured dataset for future analysis. The harmonized dataset contains 14 aggregated surface-water sites, 1,103 individual sampling days, and 32,000 water-quality records throughout the period of record defined for this study (1952–2021). Summary statistics and comparison to water-quality criteria are provided for focus parameters that can support PAGR management, including field properties, suspended material, total dissolved solids, specific conductance, chloride, sulfate, Escherichia coli, nutrients, contaminants of concern related to fish consumption advisories, and litter and floatable debris. A spatial data gap was identified for the recreational area near the base of the Great Falls and immediately downstream from a known combined sewer overflow discharge location. Analytic data gaps were identified for continuous streamflow and water-quality parameters, floatable debris characterization, and harmful algal blooms identification. Continuous collection of contaminants of concern was identified as a temporal data gap, as these parameters were not consistently collected within the study area. The water-quality data synthesis and summary presented in this report can assist PAGR staff in understanding the complex baseline water resources within the study area and can serve as a baseline to design future water-quality monitoring efforts and evaluate changes in water quality over time. The harmonized dataset, as well as future New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Harbor Discharge Group monitoring data and assessments, can also be used to examine the status and trends in surface-water quality, support compliance with the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and further investigate changes to park water resources that can affect ecological and human health.

New Jersey↗

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.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, ↗

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↗