USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Nature Based Solutions”

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.

292 records · Page 17Linked to original sources
USGS2012

Hydrological information products for the Off-Project Water Program of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement

The Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) was developed by a diverse group of stakeholders, Federal and State resource management agencies, Tribal representatives, and interest groups to provide a comprehensive solution to ecological and water-supply issues in the Klamath Basin. The Off-Project Water Program (OPWP), one component of the KBRA, has as one of its purposes to permanently provide an additional 30,000 acre-feet of water per year on an average annual basis to Upper Klamath Lake through "voluntary retirement of water rights or water uses or other means as agreed to by the Klamath Tribes, to improve fisheries habitat and also provide for stability of irrigation water deliveries." The geographic area where the water rights could be retired encompasses approximately 1,900 square miles. The OPWP area is defined as including the Sprague River drainage, the Sycan River drainage downstream of Sycan Marsh, the Wood River drainage, and the Williamson River drainage from Kirk Reef at the southern end of Klamath Marsh downstream to the confluence with the Sprague River. Extensive, broad, flat, poorly drained uplands, valleys, and wetlands characterize much of the study area. Irrigation is almost entirely used for pasture. To assist parties involved with decisionmaking and implementation of the OPWP, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Klamath Tribes and other stakeholders, created five hydrological information products. These products include GIS digital maps and datasets containing spatial information on evapotranspiration, subirrigation indicators, water rights, subbasin streamflow statistics, and return-flow indicators. The evapotranspiration (ET) datasets were created under contract for this study by Evapotranspiration, Plus, LLC, of Twin Falls, Idaho. A high-resolution remote sensing technique known as Mapping Evapotranspiration at High Resolution and Internalized Calibration (METRIC) was used to create estimates of the spatial distribution of ET. The METRIC technique uses thermal infrared Landsat imagery to quantify actual evapotranspiration at a 30-meter resolution that can be related to individual irrigated fields. Because evaporation uses heat energy, ground surfaces with large ET rates are left cooler as a result of ET than ground surfaces that have less ET. As a consequence, irrigated fields appear in the Landsat images as cooler than nonirrigated fields. Products produced from this study include total seasonal and total monthly (April-October) actual evapotranspiration maps for 2004 (a dry year) and 2006 (a wet year). Maps showing indicators of natural subirrigation were also provided by this study. "Subirrigation" as used here is the evapotranspiration of shallow groundwater by plants with roots that penetrate to or near the water table. Subirrigation often occurs at locations where the water table is at or above the plant rooting depth. Natural consumptive use by plants diminishes the benefit of retiring water rights in subirrigated areas. Some agricultural production may be possible, however, on subirrigated lands for which water rights are retired. Because of the difficulty in precisely mapping and quantifying subirrigation, this study presents several sources of spatially mapped data that can be used as indicators of higher subirrigation probability. These include the floodplain boundaries defined by stream geomorphology, water-table depth defined in Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soil surveys, and soil rooting depth defined in NRCS soil surveys. The two water-rights mapping products created in the study were "points of diversion" (POD) and "place of use" (POU) for surface-water irrigation rights. To create these maps, all surface-water rights data, decrees, certificates, permits, and unadjudicated claims within the entire 1,900 square mile study area were aggregated into a common GIS geodatabase. Surface-water irrigation rights within a 5-mile buffer of the study area were then selected and identified. The POU area was then totaled by water right for primary and supplemental water rights. The maximum annual volume (acre-feet) allowed under each water right also was calculated using the POU area and duty (allowable annual irrigation application in feet). In cases where a water right has more than one designated POD, the total volume for the water right was equally distributed to each POD listed for the water right. Because of this, mapped distribution of diversion rates for some rights may differ from actual practice. Water-right information in the map products was from digital datasets obtained from the Oregon Water Resources Department and was, at the time acquired, the best available compilation of water-right information available. Because the completeness and accuracy of the water-right data could not be verified, users are encouraged to check directly with the Oregon Water Resources Department where specific information on individual rights or locations is essential. A dataset containing streamflow statistics for 72 subbasins in the study area was created for the study area. The statistics include annual flow durations (5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 95-percent exceedances) and 7-day, 10-year (7Q10) and 7-day, 2-year (7Q2) low flows, and were computed using regional regression equations based on measured streamflow records in the region. Daily streamflow records used were adjusted as needed for crop consumptive use; therefore the statistics represent streamflow under more natural conditions as though irrigation diversions did not exist. Statistics are provided for flow rates resulting from streamflow originating from within the entire drainage area upstream of the subbasin pour point (referring to the outlet of the contributing drainage basin). The statistics were computed for the purpose of providing decision makers with the ability to estimate streamflow that would be expected after water conservation techniques have been implemented or a water right has been retired. A final product from the study are datasets of indicators of the potential for subsurface return flow of irrigation water from agricultural areas to nearby streams. The datasets contain information on factors such as proximity to surface-water features, geomorphic floodplain characteristics, and depth to water. The digital data, metadata, and example illustrations for the datasets described in this report are available on-line from the USGS Water Resources National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) Node Website http://water.usgs.gov/lookup/getgislist or from the U.S. Government website DATA.gov at http://www.data.gov with links provided in a Microsoft® Excel® workbook in appendix A.

California;Oregon↗
USGS2017

Geology and mining history of the Southeast Missouri Barite District and the Valles Mines, Washington, Jefferson, and St. Francois Counties, Missouri

The Southeast Missouri Barite District and the Valles Mines are located in Washington, Jefferson, and St. Francois Counties, Missouri, where barite and lead ore are present together in surficial and near-surface deposits. Lead mining in the area began in the early 1700’s and extended into the early 1900’s. Hand mining of lead in the residuum resulted in widespread pits (also called shafts or diggings), and there was some underground mining of lead in bedrock. By the 1860’s barite was recovered from the residuum by hand mining, also resulting in widespread diggings, but generally not underground mines in bedrock. Mechanized open-pit mining of the residuum for barite began in the 1920’s. Barite production slowed by the 1980’s, and there has not been any barite mining since 1998. Mechanized barite mining resulted in large mined areas and tailings ponds containing waste from barite mills. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has determined that lead is present in surface soils in Washington and Jefferson Counties at concentrations exceeding health-based screening levels. Also, elevated concentrations of barium, arsenic, and cadmium have been identified in surface soils, and lead concentrations exceeding the Federal drinking-water standard of 15 micrograms per liter have been identified in private drinking-water wells. Potential sources of these contaminants are wastes associated with barite mining, wastes associated with lead mining, or unmined natural deposits of barium, lead, and other metals. As a first step in helping EPA determine the source of soil and groundwater contamination, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the EPA, investigated the geology and mining history of the Southeast Missouri Barite District and the Valles Mines. Ore minerals are barite (barium sulfate), galena (lead sulfide), cerussite (lead carbonate), anglesite (lead sulfate), sphalerite (zinc sulfide), smithsonite (zinc carbonate), and chalcopyrite (copper-iron sulfide). The Cambrian Potosi Dolomite is the most important formation for the ore deposits, followed by the Eminence Dolomite. Because galena, sphalerite, and barite are less soluble than dolomite, chemical weathering of the ore-bearing dolomite bedrock resulted in the concentration of ore minerals in the residuum. Most of the barite and lead mining was in the residuum, which averages 10 to 15 feet thick. Lead mining by French explorers may have begun in 1719 along Old Mines Creek at Cabanage de Renaudiere, which was followed shortly by the discovery of lead and the development of lead mines at Mine Renault (also called Forche a Renault Mine), Old Mines, and at other places along the Big River, Mineral Fork, and Forche a Renault Creek. Lead mining began sometime between 1775 and 1780 at Mine a Breton, the name of which was later changed to Potosi. Other mining areas were developed in the early part of the 19th century, including Fourche a Courtois (Palmer Mines), the French Diggings, and the Richwoods Mines. Zinc became a valuable resource after the Civil War, and the Valles Mines was an important supplier of zinc as well as lead, with at least some production up until the 1920’s. Lead mining declined in the early part of the 20th century as mining in the Old Lead Belt, Mine La Motte, and the Tri-State District expanded. The earliest lead mines were diggings in the residuum and were round holes (shafts) about 4 feet in diameter dug with pick and shovel about 15–20 feet deep, with drifts dug a short distance laterally from the bottom of the shafts. This mining process was repeated a short distance away until a large area was covered with pits. Some mining in bedrock began by about 1800, with shafts as deep as 170 feet and as much as several hundred feet of lateral drifts. Smelting of the lead ore to elemental lead was first done using a log furnace, which was inefficient; estimates have been made that only about 50 percent of the lead was recovered, and the remainder was lost to the ashes (slags) and to volatilization. Starting in 1798, ash furnaces were used to smelt the ashes from the log furnaces. These two furnaces were worked in tandem for many years but were gradually replaced by other furnaces, including the Scotch hearth. Estimates of lead recovery as high as 80–90 percent have been made for the Scotch hearth. By the mid-1870’s the air furnace was being used, also with estimated lead recovery as high as 80–90 percent. Zinc furnaces were built when zinc became a valuable commodity, but much of the zinc ore was shipped out of the area, either to a smelter in St. Louis, Missouri, or to other smelters. The total lead and zinc production from the Southeast Missouri Barite District and the Valles Mines is estimated at 180,000 tons of lead and 60,000 tons of zinc. An estimated 97,000 tons of lead and an estimated 120,000 tons of zinc were lost during smelting. The estimated losses do not include losses at the mine site during mining and preparation for smelting, such as the loss of fine-grained galena during hand cleaning or the discarding of zinc ore before its value was known, for which no estimates are available. Hand mining for barite in the residuum was active by at least the 1860’s and peaked from 1905 to the 1930’s when several thousand people were engaged in barite mining. Hand mining (diggings) and cleaning of the ore was done in much the same way as earlier lead mining, with the additional use of a rattle box to further clean the barite. Mechanized open-pit mining of old barite diggings began in 1924 to recover barite left behind by hand mining, and washing plants were used to clean the clay from the barite. Hand mining, however, continued to thrive, and washer plants began to close temporarily in 1931; nearly all of the barite produced before 1937 was by hand mining. By the 1940’s, however, all barite mining was mechanized. Mechanized mining used shovels powered by steam, gasoline, or electricity (and by the 1950’s draglines and front-end loaders) to mine the residuum. The ore was loaded onto rail cars (and by the 1940’s, trucks) for shipment to washer plants. Clay was removed from the barite using a log washer, and a jig was used to concentrate the barite. Overflow from the log washers was waste and went to a mud (tailings) pond. The coarse jig tailings went to tailings piles or were used as railroad ballast and, later, to create roads within the mine pit. Some barite was ground, depending on its final use, and some ground barite was bleached using a hot solution of sulfuric acid to remove impurities such as iron minerals and lead sulfide (galena). An earlier bleaching process used lead-lined tanks. Large quantities of water were required for milling the barite; some was recirculated water and the remainder came from dammed streams or was pumped from wells. Tailings and wastewater were impounded behind dikes that were built across small valleys and were increased in height as necessary using washer waste and any overburden that had been stripped. In some cases, dikes were built across valleys that had already been mined for barite. The total production of barite from the Southeast Missouri Barite District and the Valles Mines is estimated to have been about 13.1 million tons. Most of the barite production was from Washington County. Hand mining and processing of barite was inefficient. Estimates of barite recovery range from less than one-fourth to about one-half because pillars between the shafts in the residuum needed to be left unmined for stability. With mechanized mining, large amounts of barite were lost during the milling process. It has been estimated that about 30 percent of the barite was lost and that about two-thirds of the lost barite was fine-grained and was discharged to the tailings ponds. Some galena was lost to the tailings ponds. A 1972 inventory of tailings ponds by the Missouri Geological Survey identified 67 ponds in the Southeast Missouri Barite District (there are more than this currently documented). Results from samples from four ponds that were drilled were used to estimate that the 67 ponds contained almost 39 million tons (or cubic yards) of tailings averaging about 5 percent barite, for a potential reserve of 1.935 million tons of barite. It is not known how much lead was removed during barite mining, either by hand or mechanized mining and processing, how much lead was recovered, or how much lead went as fines to the tailing ponds or as coarse material to mine roads or was otherwise lost.

Missouri↗
USGS2022

Fishway Entrance Palisade

This technical report summarizes the work that was conducted by the University of Massachusetts Amherst and the United States Geological Survey (USGS), along with other project partners, on the Fishway Entrance Palisade (EP), a projected funded through the Department of Energy’s (DOE) funding opportunity titled ‘Innovative Solutions for Fish Passage at Hydropower Dams’ (DE‐FOA‐0001662). The period of performance ranged from September 1, 2018 through September 30, 2021. The EP is a novel fish passage engineering technology designed to provide more favorable entry conditions for fish and to reduce costs relative to conventional fishway auxiliary water systems (AWS). The EP project has four primary components. First, the Northeast United States Auxiliary Water Systems Database was created (Northeast Fishway Auxiliary Water Systems Database Section). The database, developed with material provided by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, contains information on fishway type (e.g., lift, Denil, pool and weir) and Auxiliary Water System (AWS) details (e.g., water conveyance method, diffuser type) for 60 hydroelectric sites in the region. Findings indicate that nearly 4 out of every 10 fishway in the region is a fish lift and approximately 1 out of every 4 is a Denil ladder. The remainder are a mix of vertical slot fishways, pool and weirs, and Ice Harbor fishways. Furthermore, over half of all AWS systems use floor diffusers to discharge the auxiliary (or attraction) water into the entrance of a fishway, whereas only 14% use wall diffusers. Second, limited experiments on a conventional AWS with live, actively migrating fish were conducted at the USGS Easter Ecological Science Center (EESC) S.O. Conte Research Laboratory (Conventional Auxiliary Water System Experiments Section). This study determined how water velocity through a wall diffuser, without turning vanes or timber baffles to distribute the flow, affects the behavior and passage of adult American shad, a conservative surrogate species for migratory fish on the East Coast. Two gross diffuser velocity treatments were examined, 0.5 ft/s and 1.0 ft/s. These wall diffuser velocities represented current (0.5 ft/s) and past (1.0 ft/s) design criteria guidelines set forth by the USFWS North Atlantic-Appalachian Region (Rojas 2020; USFWS 2019). Six trials with a total of 151 American Shad were conducted in June of 2019 for the two treatments. No differences in American shad passage efficiency were discovered between the two treatments, while approximately 3 in every 4 attempts were successful at passing the diffuser. While these results may appear to indicate that the generally accepted gross wall diffuser velocity criteria for American shad of 0.5 ft/s could be safely increased to 1.0 ft/s, further analysis is warranted. Furthermore, it is unknown how other migratory and resident fish species that traverse these structures would be impacted by such a change. Studying the wall diffuser hydraulics led to an important AWS observation. Without turning vanes or timber baffles in this study, doubling the diffuser area was insufficient at producing the type of flow field change one may expect by halving the gross diffuser velocity. Instead, the flow fields throughout each treatments study area were similar, which led to similar results in shad performance. This not only highlights the importance of installing flow guidance devices like turning vanes, but also to the importance of properly maintaining them, which can be costly. Third, more expansive experiments on the novel EP were conducted in the spring of 2019 and 2021 (Fishway Entrance Palisade Experiments). The goal of this study was to determine how adult American shad responded to a variety of conditions at a full-scale EP. A total of six treatments were examined by changing the average auxiliary channel velocity between 1.0 and 5.0 ft/s in intervals of 1.0 ft/s and by inserting/removing an entrance gate at the opening of the fishway. Thirty trials with a total of 1,273 shad were conducted over the two years. In all treatments, at least ~7 out of every 10 fish successfully passed the EP diffuser and swam into the entrance channel within the 3.5-hour long trial, highlighting the general effectiveness of the novel AWS technology. In both study years, lower velocities through the EP diffuser led to increased shad performance, though performance peaked for the 2 ft/s velocity treatment. This treatment condition represents an approximate six-fold increase in gross diffuser velocity relative to conventional auxiliary water systems, which in turn presents opportunities for cost savings (e.g., reduction in diffuser size). Shad performance, in general, was worse in 2019 than in 2021, potentially due to the different run timing when our trials were conducted (2019 trials occurred near the end of the migration season, unlike in 2021). Treatments in 2019 had approximately a 20% reduction in entrance efficiency by the trial end, including a 16.7% drop for the 3 ft/s velocity treatment in 2019 relative to 2021 (the only carryover treatment between years). Lastly, adding an entrance gate caused a significant delay to entry. The time to 25% entry raised ~20 minutes from the near instantaneous 25% entry that was reported for the other treatments conducted in the same year (2021). Though by the end of the 3.5-hour trial, the overall entrance efficiency nearly matched those of the other 2021 treatments. The fourth and final component of the EP project was an economic analysis that focused on the cost of attraction and environmental flows (Modeling Power Generation Losses Due to Environmental and Fish Passage Attraction Flows at a Run-Of-River Hydroelectric Operation in the Northeast). The study assessed the economic impact of meeting environmental flow requirements at a representative hydroelectric facility and fish lift in the Northeast. An initial finding of the study was that there is a paucity of published data on the costs of meeting attraction and environmental flows. This is due, in part, to the proprietary nature of this data. To explore the costs associated with these flows, three types of environmental flows were assessed: upstream fishway attraction flows, downstream fishway attraction flows, and habitat maintenance minimum flows. A physics-based model was developed and calibrated with three years of hourly generation and flow data as inputs. Gage flow inputs were adjusted and used to calculate power generated. To address hydrologic variability, the model was executed to simulate 30 years of historical flows. Results indicate that both interannual and seasonal climatic factors impact the costs of meeting environmental flow requirements. Generation potential is most strongly curtailed during dry years in terms of maximizing the capacity factor (the percent of time a plant generates at capacity). Dry years, and especially dry summers, have the most significant costs associated with mitigation flows. Of the three types of flows, habitat flows are most costly in terms of power production, followed by upstream attraction flows. Downstream attraction flows are least costly. This finding is the likely result of differences in both flow rates and duration of the seasonal requirement for each flow. Overall, environmental flows represented a 2-12% loss in annual generation, but losses during a dry summer can reach over 20%.

Final Technical Report↗
USGS1967

Swatara Creek basin of southeastern Pennsylvania: An evaluation of its hydrologic system

Local concentrations of population in the Swatara Creek basin of Pennsylvania find it necessary to store, transport, and treat water because local supplies are either deficient or have been contaminated by disposal of wastes in upstream areas. Water in the basin is available for the deficient areas and for dilution of the coal-mine drainage in the northern parts and the sewage wastes in the southern parts. Swatara Creek drains 576 square miles just east of Harrisburg, Pa., and is the largest tributary to the Susquehanna River from the north side below Harrisburg. It rises in the southern Pocono Mountains and flows southwestward across the Lebanon Plateau. On an average day Swatara Creek discharges more than 630 million gallons into the Susquehanna River at Middletown, Pa. In a year this amounts to about 23 inches of water over the entire basin and is the residual from an average annual precipitation of 45.5 inches. During an average year the flow in Swatara Creek from the upper third of the basin above Harper Tavern is always greater than 1,300 mgd (million gallons per day) for at least 15 days and is always greater than 25 mgd for at least 350 days. The daily streamflow from the basin averages 1.1 mgd per sq mi, but yields from different areas range from 0.97 to 1.22 mgd per sq mi. These variations are caused chiefly by differences in precipitation and land cover. The area of lowest yield is in the valleys west of Tremont, and the highest yields are in the Upper and Lower Little Swatara Creek subbasins. At high and medium stages the chemical character of the water in the streams is suitable for public and private supplies. At lower stages, defending on the areas and the amounts of contamination by coal-mine drainage and sewage pollution, the natural flow may require some treatment. At low stages the chemical characteristics of the natural flow not affected by man is almost identical with that of the ground water in the area drained by the stream. In general, the total dissolved solids range from about 25 to 400 parts per million and the hardness is as much as about 300 parts per million. The ground-water increment to the base flow of Swatara Creek averages about 240 mgd, or about 8.8 inches annually, for the basin. Generally, ground-water supplies in amounts of less than 0.5 mgd can be developed south of Blue Mountain. Supplies of several million gallons per day have been developed for industrial use from the permeable limestones in the south-central part of the basin. More intensive investigation in other parts of the basin would indicate areas where supplies of more than 0.5 mgd could be developed from properly spaced wells. The chemical character of water from wells depends largely on the host rock. In highly soluble rocks water contains large amount of dissolved solids; in more resistant rocks concentrations are lower. The chemical character of unpolluted ground water generally reflects the composition of the more readily soluble minerals in the local geologic environment. Areas contaminated by septic- tank effluent may have above normal amounts of nitrate and detergent products. Except where polluted, most ground water is suitable for public and industrial uses without extensive treatment. Sites for storage of surface water exist in the part of the basin lying in the valley and ridge area. As much as 30 to 40 percent of the annual flow could be impounded for release as low-flow augmentation for dilution of mine drainage and other wastes in the basin. Low sediment yields of supplying drainage areas would ensure a long life expectancy of reservoirs at these sites. Overbank flooding of the main stem of the Swatara Creek and its tributaries has occurred many times in the past. However, it has not been a hazard because urban development has not encroached on the flood plain. An inundation map of the August 1933 flood provides a basis that urban planners may use to avoid future damage. As water in the Swatara Creek moves downstream to the Susquehanna River, the flow is influenced consecutively by a large annual rainfall on the northern valley and ridge area, the wastes of surface and subsurface coal-mining activities, and less annual rainfall on the part of the basin lying in the Lebanon Plateau area; the flow is supplemented and further influenced by many tributaries and by the industrial and domestic wastes that are carried by these secondary streams. The annual precipitation ranges from 52 inches at the east edge and 49 inches at the west edge of the mountainous part of the basin to about 41 inches at the southwestern part at Middletown. The rainfall generally is adequate during the growing season to mature the crops. The mean annual temperature at Lebanon is about 52°F, and the growing season is about 180 days. In this report the basin has been divided into eight hydrologic zones, leased on runoff, natural use of water, and chemical character of water. Four zones lie in the valley and ridge area, three lie in the Lebanon Plateau area, and one lies in the highland along the southeastern basin boundary. In each of the zones the hydrologic characteristics are virtually the same, but they may be completely different from those in adjacent zones. The boundaries of the zones generally coincide with boundaries between geologic formations, and the areas in each zone include rocks of similar influence on water. Streams in zone 4 at the northeast edge of the plateau have the highest average surface runoff from 1.2 to 1.1 mgd per sq mi whereas those in zone 2 at the northwest edge of the valley and ridge area have the lowest, about 1.0 mgd. Streams in zone 8, along the southeast edge of the basin, have the largest sustained low-flow yield, about 0.26 to 0.19 mgd per sq mi; those in zone 5 overlying the Martinsburg Shale east of Harrisburg have the smallest sustained low-flow yields, 0.03 to 0.01 mgd. Streams in the limestone area of zone 7 have the greatest range in low-flow yields in any one zone from 0.60 to 0 mgd per sq mi. Low-flow yields in zones 1 through 4 range from 0.13 to 0.03 mgd per sq mi. Surface flows from zones 1 and 2 are generally acidic and contain high concentrations of sulfate, iron, and total dissolved solids especially where contaminated with mine wastes. Surface flows from zones 3 and 4 are dilute, slightly alkaline, and suitable for public water supplies. Surface flows from zones 5, 6, and 7 are alkaline and contain moderate concentrations of dissolved solids with waters of highest hardness occurring in zone 7. Surface flows from zone 8 are dilute to moderately mineralized and are relatively high in silica concentration. Nitrate concentrations are high in surf Fee flows below sewage outfalls and in ground water contaminated by septic tank effluent and industrial wastes. Average annual sediment yields of 550 to 650 tons per square mile are characteristic of zones 1 and 2 where strip mining has destroyed the forest cover and coal culm is carried into the streams. From agricultural lands on the Martinsburg Shale in zones 5 and 6, annual sediment yields range from 300 to 350 tons per square mile; but from agricultural lands on the siliceous rocks in zone 8 and zones 3 and 4 in the valley and ridge area, the sediment yield ranges from 200 to 250 tons annually per square mile. Lowest annual sediment yields in the basin are in the forested areas of siliceous rocks in zones 2, 3, 4, and 5, and in the sinkhole topography of the limestones in zone 7 where the yield ranges from 30 to 35 tons and 50 to 60 tons per square mile, respectively. The amount of ground water that can be developed in the basin is dependent on the ability of the underlying rocks to yield water to wells. More than 300 gpm (gallons per minute) can be obtained from wells in alluvial materials in the valley bottoms and in some of the limestones where large solution channels and fractures are penetrated by the wells. From 50 to 300 gpm can be obtained from wells in loosely cemented sandstones and in fractured limestones. From 10 to 50 gpm can be developed from wells in the shales and harder sandstones. The most dense rocks will yield from 1 to 10 gpm from fractures and crevices. Most wells yield water from the upper 350 feet of the formation, for this part contains the most fractures or solution channels. Studies show that the velocity at which a contaminant will move downstream in the basin is related to the discharge of the stream at the time. At a stream discharge of about 400 mgd at Pine Grove, a contaminant in Swatara Creek would require about 40 hours to move from Pine Grove to Middletown. As a result of dispersion and dilution, the maximum concentration of the contaminant at Middletown would be less than 20 percent the concentration at Pine Grove under these conditions. An evaluation of the availability of water in the basin indicates that about I,239 mgd enters as precipitation, 630 mgd leaves as streamflow, 580 mgd is evaporated and transpired, and 56 mgd is diverted for use by man. Not all the diversions for man's use are lost to the basin, as about 27 mgd is returned as sewage for reuse. About one-fourth of the waste water is returned to the ground and the remainder to stream drainageways. Of that diverted by man, 11.6 mgd is used for public supply and 44.4 mgd for industrial and private supplies. Diversions of streamflow furnish 86 percent of the public supply and 27 percent of the industrial supply, and ground-water sources yield the remainder. Municipal and private sewage treatment plants are upgrading the waste water in many places, but no provisions are being made for treatment other than natural dilution and assimilation for the 15 mgd of coal-nine drainage in the northern part of the basin. Technology for economic treatment of mine water is not available at this time, although research in this field is being done. Urbanization eastward from Harrisburg and around Lebanon has increased the population density of the basin. Densities of 500 people per square mile and water use exceeding 2.0 mgd per sq mi can be expected in the future. By the year 2000 the population of the basin may increase 60 percent; and if the per capita rate of use increases 0.5 percent per year the domestic requirements for water will be about two times the present use, or 23 mgd. Similarly, if the present 1:4 ratio of domestic use to industrial use of water continues, at least 89 mgd will be needed for industry in the future. Although an increase to twice the present use of water can be foreseen, or 112 mgd, water for the dilution and assimilation of wastes from treatment systems are not included. Providing water for dilution of wastes from treatment plants has not been a problem, but in the future the amounts needed for this purpose will be greater as the population increases. As water becomes more valuable, treatment of sewage wastes to reduce the biochemical-oxygen-demand load by at least 80 to 90 percent will be necessary to conserve water for more productive uses. As much as 100 mgd may be needed for waste dilution in the basin by year 2000. The present trends in suburban and light industrial development will probably persist in the basin. Problems arising through changes in economic value of water, conflicts in use, and alternatives in development are typical of those confronting the manager of a water-resource system.

Pennsylvania↗