Scholars' Mine
Masters Theses Student Theses and Dissertations
1965
Piezometric levels and shallow aquifers, Dillon and Meramec Spring quadrangles, Missouri
James Hugh Crouch
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/masters_theses
Part of the Geological Engineering Commons Department:
Recommended Citation Crouch, James Hugh, "Piezometric levels and shallow aquifers, Dillon and Meramec Spring quadrangles, Missouri" (1965). Masters Theses. 7008. https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/masters_theses/7008
This thesis is brought to you by Scholars' Mine, a service of the Missouri S&T Library and Learning Resources. This work is protected by U. S. Copyright Law. Unauthorized use including reproduction for redistribution requires the permission of the copyright holder. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ../ ::;:, / . c\-
PIEZOMETRIC LEVELS AND SHALLOW AUUIFEKS, DILlON AND MERAMEC SPRING QUADRANGLES, MISSOURI
BY
JAMES HUGH CROUCH! tt{3f
A
THESIS
submitted to the faculty of the
UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI AT ROLLA
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
Degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE IN GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING
Rolla, Missouri
1965
Approved by Fe~~advisorl C740 ii
ABSTl~CT
Little is known al:::out groundwater in carbonate rock~ quantitative data about limestone and dolomite aquifers are almost non-existe.nt. Objectives of this study are: identi- fication of shallow aquifers, and yield, occurrence, and piezometric level of groundwater in cherty dolomitic rocks in eastern Phelps County, Missouri. Area studied comprises the 7.5-minute Dillon and Meramec Spring Quadrangles. The .... data used were derived from water well logs, interviews with well drillers and owners, and a previously available geo- logic map.
The Jefferson City, Roubidoux, and Gasconade formations are aquifers. Groundwater in the Jefferson City formation is perched. West and north of Dry Fork creek, groundwater occurs throughout the Roubidoux formation~ yields average
17.6 gallons per minute. The Gasconade formation yields groundwater throughout the area. Two units comprise this formationr yield in the upper averages 25.7 gpm. Lower unit yields average 19.5 gpm.
Groundwater occurs in joints, bedding planes, and solu- tion cavities and channels. Groundwater in drilled wells in the Roubidoux and Gasconade formations rises above the level at which it is encountered, indicating confinement. Open
joints and bedding planes in these formations indicate· they are only semiconfined. iii
The Roubidoux-Gasconade surface, and piezometric levels, were contoured from available well data. Because data were not adjusted for changes in water levels since date of mea surement, or for depth of casing and depth of well, the piezometric map is preliminary, subject to revision. An east-west piezometric trough coincides with a long, broad, structural ridge. Crestal fracturing along the structural ridge can explain the groundwater trough.
The piezometric map shows the Dry Fork and Little :Cry
Fork to be influent streams along their upper reaches, and effluent along their lower reaches. Major streams in the area are believed to contain underflow in the thick alluvium in their channels. The drainage basin of ~vleramec Spring was not determinable from the piezometric map. According to this map, groundwater flows toward the Spring from the north west and west, and toward the eastern border of the map. iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author is indebted to Dr. J'ames c. Maxwell, Associ
ate Professor of Geology, University of Missouri at i for his suggestions and guidance during the course of this investigation and for choosing this author as his research assistant under the Water Resources Research Grant received by the University of Missouri System. Dr. Haxwell was the advisor in charge of the work involved in this dissertation investigation. He constructively criticized the text and figures contained in this dissertation. The author expresses his thanks to the staff of the 1'1issouri Division of Geological Survey and Water Resources, Rolla, for their extensive public file of water well data, essential to this study. 1'~1ister Ken Anderson and Mister Charles Robertson, Geologists of the Missouri Geological Survey, aided this writer in interpretation of the water well logs in the file. Geology of the study area was dis cussed in the field with Mister James Williams, Geologist of the Missouri Geological Survey. The author expresses his appreciation to the Missouri Water Well Drillers Association, to the well drillers who provided the material for the Missouri Survey's file, and especially to drillers Roy Wallace, Charles Stack, and Ben Piazza who discussed with this author the groundwater con ditions in the study area and provided water well logs from v their private files. The author is also grateful to the residents of the area who provided additional well informa tion and permit~ed access to their wells. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT •••• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ii ACKOO 'itlLEDGI'1ENTS • • • • • • • • • • • ...... iv LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • vii LIST OF TABLES • • ...... • • • • • • • • viii I. INTRODUCTION. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 1 II. GEOG.RAPHY ...... 4 III. GIDLOGY • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 8 A. Ordovician System . • . • • • • • • • • • • • 10 B. Pennsylvanian System. • . • • • • . • • • • • 13 c. Quaternary System • • • • • • . • . • • • . . 14 D. Physiography and Structure. • • . . . • • • • 14 IV. HYDROlOGY • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 17 A. Streams • • • • • • . . . • • • • . . . . 17 B. Springs • ...... • • • . . . . 20 v. HETHODS USED IN INVESTIGATION • • • . . . • • • • 28 VI. RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION •••• • • • • • • • • • 34 A. Aquifers and Groundwater Yields • • • • • • • 34 B. Structure Contour Map • • • • • • • • • • • • 39 c. Occurrence of Groundwater • • • • • • . . . . 41 D. Preliminary Piezometric Contour Map • • • • • 46 VII. CONCLUSIONS • • • • • • • • • • • • . . • • • . . 52 BIBLIOGRAPh"'Y. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 55 APPENDICES. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ...... 60 VITA. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 77 vii LIST OF ILLUST:~TIONS Figures Page 1. location of Study Area. • • • • • • . • . • . 5 2. Generalized Geologic Columnar Section • . • . 9 3. Sample Well Driller's log • • . . • • • • . . 31 Plates I. Well Location Map • • • • • • ...... 57 II. Structural Contour Hap of the Top of the Gasconade Formation • • • • • • • • • • . . . 58 III. Preliminary ?iezometric Contour Map • • • • • 59 viii LIST OF TABLES Tables !?age 1. Discharge of Green Acre Branch • . . • . • • • 19 2. Discharge of Brook Spring. . . • • • • • • • . 23 3. Discharge of Meramec Spring. • • • . • . • • • 23 1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Most of the present knowledge of groundwater in the United States is derived from studies made in unconsoli- dated rocks. Very little has been written about the occurrence and movement of groundwater in consolidated rock. There are several reasons that may explain this fact. Todd (1963, p. 26) states that probably ninety per cent of all developed aquifers consist of unconsolidated rock, chiefly sand and gravel. Another reason may be that equa- tions developed for groundwater movement are derived from experiments in homogeneous granular material. The basic reason is very likely that the nation's demands for water have been met adequately in the past by using surface waters and groundwater from unconsolidated aquifers. As the demand increases, other sources of water will have to be used. One of these sources in an extensive area of consoli- dated carbonate rock. Underlying much of the Midwest and Plains states, from Ohio to Oklahoma, are thick deposits of ' Paleozoic' limestone and dolomite. These dense rocks contain many fractures and solution openings in which groundwater accumulates and migrates. Very few studies have been made of the quantity of water available from these rocks. General quantitative expressions for the flow of water in these rocks do not exist. This lack of quantitative knowledge about one of the nation's major sources of groundwater attracted this 2 writer to the subject. In November, 1964, Dr. James c. Maxwell suggested as a possible dissertation subject, a study of the occurrence of giOundwater between the city of Rolla, and Meramec Spring 1 in south central Missouri. This is an area of dolomite rock which contains many karst features such as caves, sinkholes, sink structures, entrenched streams, and large springs. Rainfall in this area is abundant. All of these factors make this an ideal location for a study of groundwater in consolidated carbonate rock. The main objectives of this thesis are to identify the shallow aquifers and determine the yield, nature of occur~ renee, and piezometric levels of groundwater in them. These objectives are accomplished by review of previous literature, an·alysis of well data, and interviews with well drillers and owners. Many of the well data were obtained from the geo logic well logs on file with the Missouri Division of Geo logical Survey and Water Resources. Water well drillers in the area provided additional well logs from their private files, and discussed their knowledge of the groundwater and subsurface geology with this writer. Personal contact was made with almost every well owner in the area. Also, many of the outcrops in the area were visited to become familiar with the geology. The University of Missouri at Rolla received a Water 3 Resources Research Grant in February, 1965. This grant was made to initiate a study of the availability, distribution, quantity and quality of water in carbonate karst terrain. The first efforts of the study were to be concentrated on the area drained by Meramec Spring, Missouri. Dr. Maxwell was made administrative investigator of the study, and he was designated principal investigator of the geology and groundwater phases of the investigation. This writer was fortunate to be chosen as his research assistant. The part of the initial phase of the investigation with which this writer assisted was the compilation of existing data and field examination of the area. Some of the information included in this dissertation is the result of the above mentioned investigation. This work was supported through the University of Missouri Water Resources Research Center, by the Office of Water Resource Research of the u. s. Depart ment of Interior. 4 CHAPTER II GEOGRAPHY As shown on figure 1, the area selected for this study is in the eastern section of Phelps County, and along the western edge of Crawford County, Missouri. Longitudinal 0 I 0 I limits are 91 30 west and 91 45 west. Latitudinal limits 0 I II 0 f are 37 52 30 north and 38 00 north. These limits also define the northern half of the 15-minute, 1:62,500 scale, Meramec Spring Quadrangle topographic map. This map was published in 1949 by the United States Geological Survey. In 1963, 7.5-minute topographic maps of the study area, with a scale of 1:24,000, were published by the United States Geological Survey. The map of the western half of the area is the Dillon Quadrangle, and the eastern half is the Meramec Spring Quadrangle. Approximately 115 square miles are covered by these maps. Tbgether, they represent an area having a length of almost 13.5 miles from east to west, and a north-south width of approximately 8.5 miles. These two maps were used in making this study. The predominant topographic features of the Dillon Quadrangle are gently rolling hills and ent~enched major stream valleys. Local relief in this quadrangle varies from 100 to 200 feet. Relief becomes greater and the valley slopes .steeper in the Meramec Spring Quadrangle. local re- lief increases eastward from 200 to 350 feet. This increase ··in relief is because the Meramec River, which drains almost ,_'"!- ... ~,~:."- .,..·::;:. :·~~-;... ~;,.;: ,:.,~.:~~~'- N MISSOURI • CRAWFOf'D ,_.,.,.,..~~ c 0 ...... VHI,IHII'H• PMEL.P8 co. 0 10 ...... L a I LOCATION MAP OF STUDY AREA fi'IGU,.EI 6 the entire study area, flows along the eastern boundary of the Meramec Spring Quadrangle. The lowest altitude, 760 feet above sea level, is on the floodplain of this river. In the northwest corner of the Dillon Quadrangle, the highest elevation, of over 1210 feet above sea level, is on top of a broad ridge. Spring Creek, a tributary of the Gasconade River, drains the northwestern slope of this ridge. This is the only place in the study area not drained by the Mera mec River. Two cities are in or near the study area. One of these, Rolla, Missouri, lies just outside the western boundary of the Dillon Quadrangle. The second city is St. James, Missouri. Almost all of this city is inside the northern boundary of the Meramec Spring Quadrangle. Both cities are connected by the St. Louis - San Francisco Railroad which runs in a north east-southwest direction across the northern part of the study area. Also connecting the cities is u. s. Highway 66, which approximately parallels the railroad. Numerous state and county highways and farm roads serve the area so that much of it is easily accessible by car. With the exception of the vicinity immediately surround ing St. James, the eastern section of the area is sparsely populated and heavily fOrested. Only about forty per cent of the western half of the area is forest covered. The major ity of the cleared upland is used as pasture for cattle. The 7 stream floodplains are usually cultivated in hay, wheat, oats, or corn. The population of the area in 1960 is esti- mated to have been 4500. This figure includes three-fourths of the population of St. James or approximately 2500 people. Climatological data for the state of Missouri are pub- lished by the u. s. Department of Commerce. The climate of the study area is classified by this writer as humid sub tropical according to Finch (1957, p. 124). Temperature and precipitation data for the study area are taken from the 60 year record of the station located at the University of Missouri at Rolla. From these records, the mean annual temperature is 56.30 F. The mean temperature of January is 33. 7°F, and ·the mean temperature of July is 78. 6°F. The sum of the mean monthly precipitations for the period from April through October is 28.40 inches. This is 68.5 per cent of the mean annual precipitation of 41.46 inches. Seasonal evaporation has been calculated for the last three years at the Weldon Spring Experimental Farm in St. Charles County, Missouri, approximately 80 miles northeast of the study area. The average fbr April through October is 37.05 inches. 8 CHAPTER III GEOLOGY Mueller (1951) mapped and studied in detail the geology of the north half of the 15-minute Meramec Spring Quadrangle. Martin and Williams (1963) did a reconnaissance survey on the study area for the Corps of Engineers. The Corps has proposed that a series of dams be constructed in the Mera mec River basin. The reconnaissance survey was conducted a. long the proposed lake sites on Dry Fork, Little Dry Fork, and Norman Creek which are tributary streams of the Meramec River. This survey was both a geologic and groundwater reconnaissance of the sites to determine the feasibility of constructi~g dams. Because both of these studies were made within the last fifteen years, it was deemed unnecessary to make an extensive geologic investigation of the dissertation area. Many of the outcrops were visited by the writer so he could have a better understanding of the literature and the problem. Strata exposed in the study area are mainly cherty dolo mites and sandstones. They range in age from Ordovician to Pennsylvanian as shown in the geologic columnar section, figure 2. Included in this section is the Eminence forma tion which is Cambrian in age. This formation is not exposed, and. only five- of the wells used in this investigation pene trate it. From the logs of these wells, the Eminence can be 9 SYSTEM SECTION THIO ~lVf}J• PENN. ~==-~-::=~ PENNSYLVANIAN 25-80 red end green I I I 1 \ J SEDIMENTS clays end shales l f ~ t , ~~ w-- ~ grey to buff erglll.aceous 100..250 dolomite and slllc:eoua dolomites --1-1--) ~~~ jc white to reddish z < 115-150 cross-bedded -u sandstone ond -8 cherty dolomites 5 grey to blue 275-300 cherty dolomites end white cryptozoen chert sends tone z z < described as a cherty dolomite which is similar to the over lying Gasconade formation. A. Ordovician System The Gasconade, Roubidoux, Jefferson City, and Cotter formations are the only rocks of the Ordovician System ex posed in the study area. In this dissertation, the term Jefferson City formation includes both the Jefferson City and Cotter formations of some previous workers. Mueller (1951, p. 69) followed this useage because it is difficult to separate the two formations by field examination. Most of the exposures of the Gasconade formation are along the lower, steep slopes of the major valleys in the eastern half of the study area. This formation extends to the hill tops in the southeast corner. Nowhere is the en tire formation exposed. A maximum thickness of 290 feet was penetrated in well number 16783, at Oak Meadow Country Club in sec. 4, T.37 N, R.7 w. A laterally continuous cryptozoan mass is found approx imately fifty to sixty feet below the top of the Gasconade formation. Because of the presence of this cryptozoan mass, the Gasconade formation can be divided into two lithologic units: the upper Gasconade unit and the lower Gasconade unit. This cryptozoan mass is chertified and is referred to as a cryptozoan "reef". It varies in thickness from l:l three to five feet. The interval from the top of this "reef" down to the top of the Eminence formation is known as the lower Gasconade unit. Two other cryptozoan 11 reefs 11 are found in the lower Gasconade unit, but they are laterally discon tinuous. Well logs supply data a'bout the lower Gasconade, be cause it is not completely exposed. This unit is a gray, very cherty dolomite. Average chert content of the lower Gasconade unit is approximately 50 per cent by volume. The bottom of the Gasconade formation contains a sandstone unit which is called the Gunter member. The average thickness of the Gunter member in the study area is about 25 feet. The upper Gasconade is a light gray, coarsely crystalline, medi um to massive, relatively chert-free dolomite. Average chert content of this dolomite is generally less than 10 per cent by volume. Martin and Williams (1963, p. 1) found a small amount of gray "finger-tip" sized chert fragments present in the uppermost beds of this unit. Overlying the Gasconade is the Roubidoux formation. Mueller (1951, p. 51) states that the contact may be uncon formable. The evidence in the area for an unconformity is a conglomeratic sandstone which he found immediately above the Gasconade in a few places. The Roubidoux formation forms a resistant cap on the hills east of the Dry Fork creek. It is also exposed in the walls and floors of the 12 valleys formed by the Dry Fork and Little Dry Fork creeks. This formation has an average thicl<.ness of 120 feet. Martin and Williams (1963, p. 2) divided the Roubidoux into three units: the lower, middle, and upper. The lower unit is usually covered, but it generally consists of thin to medium-thick interbedded sandstones and cherty dolomites. The average thickness of this unit is fifty feet. Local chertified cryptozoan "reefs" and algal mounds may be !;)re sent. A massive, fine to coarse-grained sandstone is found in the middle unit. It ranges from thirty to fifty feet in thickness and is usually cross-bedded and ripple-marked. This unit is quite frequently exposed, because it is resis tant to weathering. Very rarely is the upper unit exposed. From well logs it is known to contain thin beds of sandstone and cherty dolomite~ it has a thickness of about thirty feet. The Roubidoux - Jefferson City contact is essentially conformable according to Mueller (1951, p. 66). The Jeffer son City formation is confined to the uplands in the western and extreme northern parts of the area. There are two sink structures along Norman Creek, one at De Camp and the other at Reed Bank, which are filled with Jefferson City formation. A maximum thickness of 245 feet in the Jefferson City forma tion is fbund in well number 13804, located in Sec. 32, T.38, R. T. 13 Dolomite is the predominant rock type of the Jefferson City formation. The dolomite ranges from an argillaceous dolomite to a siliceous dolomite. Locally the formation may contain sandstone lenses, shale, clay, and chert. About thirty-five feet above the base of the Jefferson City formation is a unit called the Quarry Ledge. This ledge is a medium gray, finely crystalline, siliceous dolomite, and it is approximately eight feet thick. B. Pennsylvanian System Two outliers of Pennsylvanian rock are exposed in this area. One is at St. James, Missouri, and the other one covers parts of Sec. 29, 30, 31, and 32, T.38, R.7. Also, most of the filled sink structures in the Jefferson City and Roubidoux formation are filled with these rocks. The thick ness of the Pennsylvanian deposits within the study area is quite variable, but in the well logs, it never exceeds sixty feet. Sandstones, clays, chert conglomerates, chert breccias, and sandy clays were found in the Pennsylvanian deposits by Mueller (1951, p. 91). He says that large, residual boulders derived from the Pennsylvanian sandstone greatly resemble the Roubidoux sandstones, but generally the Roubidoux sandstones exhibit better developed bedding and the sand grains of the Roubidoux are slightly more coarse. Most of the clays are 14 white, maroon, or green. These green or maroon clays are the best identification for the Pennsylvanian deposits. c. Quaternary System Thick deposits of alluvium are found in the floodplains and along the channels of the large creeks and streams. Material deposited in the floodplains is usually a sandy silt, but lenses of gravel and sand are common. Many of the stream channels are filled with sand, gravel, and boul ders. The boulders and gravel are composed mainly of chert. D. Physiography and Structure The study area is situated in the Ozark Plateau Province as defined by Fenneman (1928). This Province contains an asyrnetrical domal structure known as the Ozark Dome. The dome rises in the St. Francois Mountains to an altitude of 1772 feet above sea level. Fenneman (1928), Bretz (1953), and Thornbury (1965) all agree that the Ozark Plateau has undergone several cycles of uplift and erosion. The area of study lies on the northwestern flank of the Ozark Dome. Regional dip of the strata in this area is ap proximately twenty feet per mile to the northwest. Accord ing to Mueller (1951, p. 95), low, broad folds trending north west have been superimposed on the regional dip. Local varia tions in dip are caused by subsurface solution and subsequent 15 settlement or collapse of the overlying strata. No major faulting has occurred in the area, but some evidence has been seen by Mueller (1951, p. 97) of small local faulting. Vertical to steeply inclined joints are common in all of the formations of this area. Although very well developed in the Gasconade formation they are most apparent in the massive sandstone unit of the Roubidoux formation. Many of these joints were measured by Martin and Williams (1963, p. 2), and generally they strike east-west, and north 10° east to north 10° west. Sink structures are located throughout the study area. A few sink holes are also present. Sink structures are filled sink holes. Sink holes always have a depression pre- sent at the surface. Sink structures in the study area range in size from twenty to one thousand feet in diameter. YJOst of the structures seem to be filled with Pennsylvanian rocks, but a few are filled with either Jefferson City or Roubidoux strata. The sink structures are formed by growth of solution caverns in the dolomites, accompanied or followed by a col- lapse of the overlying beds. Solution of the dolomites in the Roubidoux formation or small solution cavities in the upper Gasconade formation may account for the smaller sink structures, while the larger ones are probably caused by large caverns developing in the Gasconade formation. The broken nature of the strata filling the sinks suggests that 16 these strata are highly permeable. However, because the ~ajority of the sink structures are filled with Pennsyl vanian strata which contain clay, this may not be true. 17 CHAPTER IV HYDROI.DGY A. Streams As mentioned earlier, the Meramec River drains the en tire Meramec Spring: Quadrangle and almost all of the Dillon Quadrangle. Approximately one square mile in the northwest corner of the Dillon Quadrangle is drained by Spring Creek, a tributary of the Gasconade River. All of the drainage appears to have a sub-dendritic to dendritic pattern. None of the major streams in the area is perennial, except Meramec River, the lower reaches of the Dry Fork and Little Dry Fork, and Benton Creek. Dry Fork may not be per ennial above the bridge on Highway 8 approximately 3 miles southeast of St. James. This is based on observations by this writer of very low flow at several places along the creek. Little Dry Fork, which empties into Dry Fork, is perennial downstream from its confluence with Love Branch. Effluent from the Rolla sewage disposal plant flows into Love Branch just above its confluence with Little Dry Fork. The small streams in the area are ephemeral or intermit tent except for the ones on the north side of the lower Dry Fork Creek and east of the city of St. James. The streams between Dry Fork and the Meramec River or Benton Creek never flow except during periods of extended rainfall. The major 18 streams in this section are Norman Creek and the streams draining Asher Hollow and Brown Hollow. Average surface runoff for the state of Missouri is about 30 per cent of the annual precipitation (T. J. Roemer, private communication, 1965). In the study area, the run off may be less than this because of higher infiltration capacity of the cherty and sandy residual soils. Only two of the smaller streams in the area are gaged, so there are not enough data available to determine the runoff accurately. These t~ streams are Lanes Fork and Green Acre Branch. Be cause only the uppermost reaches of Lanes Fork are in the study area, the discharge data were not included in this dis sertation. Green Acre Branch lies entirely within the study area and it is tributary to Little Dry Fork. The gage on this stream is a water-stage recorder and the bottom of the stream is concrete controlled. Table 1 shows the monthly discharges in cubic feet per second. Runoff in inches shows the depth to which the drainage area would be covered if all the runoff for each month were uniformly distributed on ·it. Both Little Dry Fork and Dry Fork have deep deposits of sand and gravel in their channels. They are also character ized by a series of long, deep pools. As observed by this writer, most of these pools are between 5 and 10 feet deep and there appears to be sand and gravel beneath them. They are connected by shallow surface water flowing over gravel 19 TABLE I Monthly Discharge of Green Acre Branch Near Rolla, Missouri For 1963 Water Year Discharge in Cubic Feet per Second Runoff M:>nth Max. Min. Total Mean Inches Oct. 0.20 0 0.32 0.010 0.02 Nov. 0 0 0 0 0 Dec. 0.34 0 0.67 0.022 0.04 Jan. 0.08 0 0.22 0.007 0.01 Feb. 0.01 0 0.01 0.0004 0.0006 Mar. 6.15 0 18.26 0.589 1.09 Apr. 0.71 0 2.06 0.069 0.12 May 9.44; 0 24.07 0.766 1.44 June 1.76 0 2.21 0.074 0.13 July 0.07 0 0.08 0.003 0.005 Aug. 0.23 0 0.28 0.009 0.02 Sept. 0 0 0 0 0 20 beds. Because of the deep deposits of sand and gravel and the pooling of most of the water, it is believed by this writer that a large amount of the surface water drains into the sand and gravel and consequently travels as underflow. In order fbr surface flow to exist between the pools there must be a difference in elevation from pool to pool. This difference in elevation causes a difference in hydrostatic head between the pools which should sustain the underflow. All of the large streams between Dry Fork and the Meramec River or Benton Creek must lose surface water to the deep deposits of sand and gravel in their channels, because they never flow except during periods of extended rainfall. Ben ton Creek, even though it is perennial, almost certainly has considerable underflow in its gravel filled channel. B. Springs Three separate studies have been made of the large springs of ~ssouri. Bolon (1935) defines the location of some of the large springs and discusses the discharge of each. He ranks 27 of the largest springs according to their discharge. A study by Doll (1938) was also based on the larger springs. In this study Doll describes each spring and includes the location and extent of the probable drain age area of each. The Missouri Geological Survey and Water Resources published a report on the large springs of Missouri 21 by Beckman and Hinchey (1944). In this rer;>ort, Beckman and Hinchey describe the location, beauty, and discharge of the springs. Beckman and Hinchey also include a descript ion of the source of the larger springs. Included in their report are many springs that were not studied by Bolon or Doll. Small springs occur throughout the study area, except along Norman Creek, Asher Hollow, and Brown Hollow. In the Dillon Quadrangle most of the small springs emerge from the Jefferson City and Roubidoux formations, but in the Meramec Spring 7.5 minute Quadrangle the small springs usually emerge from the Gasconade formation. Martin and Williams (1963, p. 3) observed three springs emerging from the Roubidoux forma tion along the lower reaches of the Little Dry Fork. They also observed two springs along the upper reaches of Dry Fork creek within the study area. One of these emerges from the Roubidoux formation and the other from the Gasconade forma tion. They are both on the west side of Dry Fork. In talking with farmers in the area, it was learned that numerous springs, both large and small,emerged from outcrops of the Jefferson City and Roubidoux formations about 25 years ago. These springs have gradually ceased to flow over the years, but many of them still flow for a day or two after heavy rains and are locally referred to as "wet weather springs". During the past many of these springs supplied 22 the drinking water for the residents. Brook Spring, on the property of Boy's Town of Missouri, is the second largest spring in this vicinity. Beckman and Hinchey describe the spring as follows: "The water rises in a hexagonal rock basin about 20 feet in diameter, flows into a larger pool, and empties into a small creek 500 feet away." The creek which carries the spring water is tribu tary to Dry Fork. Discharge measurements for this spring are shown on table 2. In the past, water from this spring was used by Boy's Town. Meramec Spring, the seventh largest spring in Missouri, is in Sec. 1, T.37 N., R.6 W. This spring is privately owned, but facilities for visitors are provided during the daytime. A historical sketch of Meramec Spring may be found in Mueller's dissertation. Daily flow measurements from the spring were made from December, 1921, to October, 1929. Mean monthly discharges are shown on table 3. The spring emerges from a circular basin into a pool which is approximately 50 feet wide and 150 feet long. This pool is located at the base of a bluff composed of lower Gasconade dolomite. The circular basin from which the spring emerges is also formed in the lower Gasconade dolomite. Draining the pool is a creek which flows for about 3/4 of a mile before it joins the Meramec River. Skin divers in cooperation with the Missouri Division 23 TABLE II Discharge of Brook Spring Date Cubic Feet Gallons Per Second Per Day June 28, 1935 4.69 3,031,000 May 10, 1936 0.65 420,000 September 7, 1939 0.62 401,000 TABLE III Mean Monthly Discharge of Meramec Spring in Cubic Feet Per Second Year I"bnth 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 Jan. 119 114 119 83 197 102 102 Feb. 130 135 133 142 190 95 111 Mar. 233 209 102 164 218 125 142 Apr. 315 147 142 185 448 142 149 May 166 154 140 121 294 201 235 June 119 237 109 99 313 218 182 July 119 230 102 83 149 190 292 Aug. 102 171 95 83 142 164 182 Sept. 95 135 102 83 119 119 159 Oct .• 92 102 119 130.35 166 119 152 Nov. 81 90 142 175 268 107 Dec. 166 102 142 119 142 303 102 From Beckman and Hinchey. 24 of Geological Survey and Water Resources have submerged into the circular basin of the spring several times. Jerry Vine yard, a geologist employed by the ~ssouri Survey, informed this writer (private communication, 1965) that in 1965 the skin divers submerged to a depth of approximately 115 feet belo~ the level of the large pool. The circular basin is actually an inclined solution cavern and at a depth of ap proximately 115 feet the inclined cavern becomes essentially horizontal. I·t is not known how far this horizontal cavern extends, because the skin divers entered it for a distance of only about 200 feet. I '·' The depth at which the horizontal cavern is found indi- cat~s that the water supplying Meramec Spring is derived from the Eminence formation. The elevation of the pool in which the spring emerges is approximately 790 feet above sea level. A water well less than 500 yards away penetrated the top of the Eminence formation at an elevation of 730 feet above sea level. The approximate elevation of the horizon tal cavern supplying the spring water is 675 feet above sea level. This means the horizontal cavern is approximately 55 feet below the Gasconade-Eminence contact. The source of Meramec Spring is unknown, but it is thought by Beckman and Hinchey (1944, p. 94) that the region to the south, southwest, and west supplies the water. This location is based on the knowledge that the large streams 25 (Norman Creek, Asher Hollow, and Brown Hollow), south of the spring are dry except during periods of heavy rain- fall. Also, the large drainage basin of Dry Fork lies to the southwest and west of Mermec Spring, and it is probable that much of the rainfall on the Dry Fork basin seeps into the bedrock and thus contributes to the subsurface drainage system of the spring region. Doll (1938, pp. 94-95) in attempting to determine the location and size of the drainage basin of the spring, said: "It is thought that the spring obtains most of it~ water from the bed of Dry Fork and Norman Creek. nThe very name 'Dry Fork' suggests very little flow, ,yet the drainage area of Dry Fork is 425 square miles, or larger than the drainage area of the Meramec River al:ove the junction of the two streams. On the numerous occasions that I have crossed Dry Fork, just al:ove the junction, I would estimate the average flow was between 2 and 10 cubic feet per second. Norman Creek is a dry valley except after very heavy rains. "There are many cavern-like deposits of miner als directly south of the mine and these deposits tend to mark former solution channels, and show the trend of the drainage area of the spring. 11 Because Doll did not give the location of the above mentioned mine, this writer cannot verify the existence and trend of these cavern-like deposits of minerals. However, this author is in general agreement with the opinion that Dry Fork and Norman Creek supply some of the water for Meramec ~; _· Spring. The size of a spring's effective drainage area as 26 calculated by Doll was based on two assumptions. First, he assumed (Loll, 1938, p. 54) "that surface and subsurface 11 runoff would be the same on adjacent small areas • From the context of his dissertation it appears that Doll believed that the subsurface runoff from a given small area was equal to the surface runoff for the same area. Secondly, he assumed that over a given drainage area the surface had uniform absorptive qualities. From river station measure- rnents of surface runoff, Doll prepared a map showing lines of equal runoff per square mile for all of Missouri. He then determined the subsurface runoff per square mile of a spring by noting the location of the spring's assumed drain- age basin on the surface runoff map. This he called the Missouri Spring Factor. By dividing the mean annual dis- charge of Meramec Spring by its ~ssouri Spring Factor he arrived at 160 square miles as the size of the effective drainage basin for Meramec Spring. The following alternative derivation is offered here by this writer for the effective drainage basin of Meramec Spring. First, calculate the amount of water per square mile that seeps into the soil during precipitation. This figure could be arrived at by subtracting from the average annual rainfall, the water which is lost because of surface runoff and evapotranspiration. Then, divide this figure into the average annual discharge of the spring to determine 27 the effective drainage basin. Until surface runoff and evapotranspiration for the area are known, the size of the drainage basin cannot be predicted. l 28 CHAPTER V METHODS USED IN INVESTIGATION Data used in this investigation were obtained from water well logs, a geologic map of the study area, and from personal interviews with well drillers and well owners. Without the well logs it would have been impossible to con- duct this groundwater investigation. The geologic map used in this investigation was prepared by Mueller (1951). Most of the well log information used in this investi- gation was obtained from files of the Missouri Division of Geological Survey and Water Resources. Well drillers mail or deliver to the Missouri Survey samples of the rock they encounter while drilling a well, along with the owner's name, location of the well, static water level, production, total depth, and amount of casing placed in the well. The samples of drill cuttings are collected from each 5 foot drilling interval and are placed in cloth bags furnished by the Missouri Survey. Some of the well drillers are very cooperative with ', the Missouri Survey and mail in information on many of the wells they drill. Others submit this information only at the well owners request. For this reason the files are not as complete as they could be. On some of the Missouri Survey logs, of wells in the study area which did not penetrate the Gasconade formation, the depth to the Roubidoux-Gasoonade contact is estimated. This estimation is based on the 29 assumption that the Roubidoux has a constant thickness over a limited area. Because most of the sedimentary rocks of the Ozark Region of southern Missouri are cherty dolomites and lime stones which lack fossils, the Missouri Survey finds that it is difficult to distinguish one formation from the other when using drillers' unprocessed samples. The Survey geologists find that the best way to identify the formations is to study the insoluble residues remaining after acid decompo sition of the drill cuttings. These residues (shale, chert, oolites, quartz, sand grains, etc.) vary characteristically from one formation to another and, according to Grohsl Survey in preparing all the well logs that this writer used. A few characteristic insoluble residues are used to identify the strata listed on these logs. Red, green, and tan shale and clay characterize the Pennsylvanian strata. Smooth chert, containing very fine oolites and the quartz masses found in the "Quarry Ledge 11 are used to identify the Jeffer son City formation. A quartzose, oolitic chert is used for identification of the top of the Roubidoux formation and a sandy chert for the bottom. The upper Gasconade unit con tains less than 10 per cent by volume of black or gray, 30 quartzose chert. The lower Gasconade unit contains approxi mately 50 per cent chert which varies from a mottled, white, "dead 11 chert near the top to a gray to blue chert near the bottom. Most of the well drillers in the area keep private records of the water wells they drill. These records were very courteously made available to this writer. Only a few of these private logs contain information about the rock encountered during drilling, but all of them were helpful in this study. All of the drillers were willing to discuss their knowledge of the groundwater in the area. In these discussions particular emphasis was placed by this writer on learning which formations produce water and how the groundwater is found to occur in each formation. The drillers• logs usually contain the owner's name, the total depth of the well, the amount of casing placed in the well, static water level, and production. Some of them contain a description of the rock and the depth at which it was encountered. Figure 3 is a sample of a driller's log used in this study. Following this log is an explanation of the terms. The Jefferson City - Roubidoux contact usually could not be identified from these logs by this writer. The Roubidoux - Gasconade contact could usually be identified if the descriptions of the rock were detailed enough and if the well penetrated far enough below the contact. A few of these 31 WATER WELL LOG Land Owner Datt> ...... J-.9/ll-./.§.~...... ...... Mr. John Smith · Total Dept. of Well ...... ~.7.S...... n. Total Dept. Cased ...... 178 rt . Hole Size ...... §.. '.' ...... Static Water: Level ...... 265 rt. 360 Pump Should Be, or Is Set nt ················· ...... ft. Well Produce-s ·······················-~-~---································ Gallons Pc1· ~linutc..• ...... ...... - ...... FORMATION From To Ft. 0 5 Clay 5 60 Soft lime and shale 60 180 Solid limestone 180 310 Sandstone and flint 310 350 Limestone 350 1378 Flint "CII.I.A ""INTINII CICio CM 4•taa:l Form courtesy of Roy N. Wa~_lace .. J Lime and limestone are actually dolomite. Flint is chert. 0' to 180' is the Jefferson City formation. 180' to 310' is the Roubidoux formation. 310' to 378' is the Gasconade formation. Figure 3 32 logs were compared with the Missouri Survey's logs and the depths of the Roubidoux- Gasconade contacts on the drillers• logs were found to differ by about 10 feet from the contact determined by the Missouri Survey's insoluble residue method. Personal contact was made with every well owner whose well log was available for this study. Many other well owners were visited to learn who drilled their wells and also to discuss with the owners the groundwater yields and levels of each well. Any information about the groundwater of the well given by the owner was noted. Owners also sup plied information about old wells that were no longer used and about any springs they had on their property. All but two of the wells used in this study were sealed and had pumps in them. It is difficult to measure the static water level in a well which has a pump in it. Measuring de vices used for this purpose occasionally become entangled in the pipes and cables in the well. Because of economic and time limitations, this writer did not attempt to measure the present static water levels. The levels used were the ones measured by the well driller when the wells were originally drilled. Some of the wells have been deepened in order to obtain larger productions. The new static water levels mea sured at the time of deepening these wells were used instead of the original levels. Most of the wells in the study area have had their pumps temporarily removed since they were 33 originally installed. Although it was hoped by this writer that the static water level would have been measured when the pumps were removed, it was found that this is very rarely done. The information from the well logs and £rom the well owners was incorporated in the maps accompanying·this dis sertation. The scale used for these maps is 1:62500. At this scale, some of the wells had to be omitted, because they would overlap or be too crowded for clarity. This overlapping and crowding together is because the houses in some of the subdivisions near Rolla are built about 20 to 50 feet apart. When more than one well was available, the one placed on the map was usually the most recent well. 34 CHAPTER VI RESULTS OF INVESTIGATION A. Aquifers and Groundwater Yields As defined by Todd (1963, p. 15), an aquifer is a per meable geologic formation in which groundwater occurs, that is, geologic formations having voids which permit appreci able water to move through them under ordinary field con ditions, are classified as aquifers. In this dissertation the above definition of aquifer will be used. An aquiclude is an impermeable geologic formation which may contain groundwater but cannot transmit it. In order for a forma tion to transmit groundwater, the formation must contain interconnected voids. These voids may be intergranular pore spaces or they may be joints, fractures, bedding planes, or solution openings. Aquifers may be classed as unconfined or confined. If a well is drilled into an unconfined aquifer, the static water level in the well Will be at the same level at which the water is first encountered. However, when a well is drilled into a confined aquifer, the water will rise above the level at which it is first encountered. This· rise takes place because the groundwater is confined under pressure greater than atmospheric pressure. Fbr this· confinement to exist the groundwater must be overlain by relatively imper meable strata. 35 A formation may contain local oodies of groundwater which lie above the main groundwater body. These localize bodies of groundwater are called perched groundwater. They are separated from the main groundwater by a relatively im permeable strata of limited lateral extent and by a zone of aeration between the perched water and the main body of groundwater. A zone of aeration is a zone in a formation in which the voids contain both air and water. This is con trasted to a zone of saturation in which all the voids are entirely filled with water. A map of the groundwater areas of Missouri compiled by the ~ssouri Division of Geological Survey and Water Resources (Knight, 1962) shows that in most of the southern half of Missouri, the Roubidoux and Gasconade formations are the principal shallow aquifers. The present investigation showed that locally the Jefferson City, Roubidoux and Gasconade form ations are all aquifers. When groundwater is encountered during the drilling of a well in the Roubidoux and Gasconade formations, it almost always rises above the level at which it is encountered. However, if the water is encountered in the soil or weathered residuum which develops on all the sur face formations, the water will not rise above the level at which it is encountered. This soil water will not be included in the grQundwater discussions in this dissertation. Because of the groundwater found in these two aquifers will rise above 36 the level at which it is encountered, these aquifers should be classified as confined. All of the aquifers are jointed and these joints extend to the surface where the aquifers are exposed. Therefore, the strata overlying the groundwater is not completely im permeable. Between any two successive joints the ground water would be confined, but the groundwater found in a joint by drilling a well along the plane of the joint would not rise above the level at which it was first encountered. For this reason this writer believes the aquifers should be classified as semiconfined. Only fbur of the wells in this investigation were com pleted in the Jefferson City formation. Three were drilled before 1947 and one was drilled in 1956. There are three things which are common to all of these wells. Each is situated on a long broad ridge, at an elevation greater than 1120 feet above sea level and none of them produces more than 5 gallons of water per minute. Well drillers state that they may or may not encounter groundwater when drilling in this fbrmation. If they do find groundwater, and continue drill ing, they almost always lose the groundwater. That is, dry rock is encountered a few feet below the level at which they find the groundwater, and the groundwater is lost to this dry rock. For this reason, plus the fact that clay and shale lenses are known to occur in the Jefferson City formation, 37 this author believes the groundwater is perched. On some of the well logs, the static water level is found above the Jefferson City - Roubidoux contact. This may indicate that groundwater other than perched groundwater is sometimes en countered in the lower part of the Jefferson City formation. This only happens where the formation is over 100 feet thick. Of a total of 110 wells used in this investi~ation, 65 terminate in the Roubidoux formation. All of these are in the Dillon Quadrangle, and the majority are in the western half of this quadrangle where the overlying Jefferson City formation is thickest. Nearly 60 per cent of the 65 wells are completed in the top 100 feet of the Roubidoux formation. Six of these wells have had to be deepened or new wells drilled because the old wells could be pumped dry. Well drillers have noticed over the past ten years that the groundwater yield from the upper Roubidoux formation above the massive sandstone unit is decreasing. Except in a small area of the immediate vicinity surrounding St. James, none of the wells in the Meramec Springs 7.5 minute Quadrangle produces from this formation. Many of the wells in this quadrangle are cased completely through the Roubidoux forma tion. Production data from the 65 wells indicate that ground water yields have a large range. They range from a low of 3 gallons per minute to a high of 35 gallons per minute. The 38 high production comes from a sink structure filled with Pennsylvanian strata. The average yield of the wells in the Roubidoux formation is 17.6 gallons per minute. This agrees approximately with the normal yield of 20 gallons per minute and range of 10 to 30 gallons per minute shown by Knight (1962) for this area. Approximately, 85 per cent of the 37 wells which termi nate in the Gasconade formation have been completed since 1955. These 37 wells are found in both 7.5 minute quad rangles. This aquifer is the largest groundwater producer of the three formations investigated. Wells completed in the upper Gasconade unit have an average yield of 25.7 gal lons per minute. Yields of these wells range from 10 to 75 gallons per minute. The well which produces 75 gallons per minute is in Sec. 20, T.37 N., R.7 w.~ and the main flow of groundwater is found only 3 feet below the Roubidoux - Gasconade contact. In the lower Gasconade unit, the average yield per well is 19.5 gallons per minute, and the range is from 10 to 30 gallons per minute. This is higher than the normal yield of 15 gallons per minute and range of 10 to 20 gallons per minute shown by Knight (1962) for the Gasconade formation exclusive of the Gunter Member. Only one well used in this investigation is completed in the Gunter Member. This well produces 42 gallons per minute and this agrees with the normal yield of 40 gallons per minute shown by Knight 39 (1962) for this area. Well drillers find that there are more solution cavities and channels in the Gasconade formation than there are in the Jefferson City or Roubidoux formations. This fact may account for the larger groundwater yields from wells drilled into the Gasconade formation. However, well drillers find that solution cavities and channels more than a foot or so in height are a hinderance to groundwater production. They find that most of them contain mud, and this mud has to be removed or the wells will produce muddy water when pumped. The larger solution cavities and channels which contain mud are usually cased through or cemented off. In the smaller ones, enough of the mud can be removed so that the ground water which moves through them will not be muddy when it is pumped. This mud is removed by bailing it out with a bailer or by blowing it out with compressed air. The method used to remove the mud depends upon the type of drill rig used in drilling the well. B. Structure Contour Map A structure contour map of the top of the Gasconade formation was prepared by this writer to see if the structure of this formation would influence the groundwater levels. This map was constructed from the elevations of the Roubidoux Gasconade contacts found on the well logs and from the 40 previously completed geologic map of the area. As can be seen from the structure contour map only two wells in the northern half of the northwestern section of the area pene trate the Gasconade formation. This section is completely covered by the Jefferson City formation so no contact points were available from the geologic map. Because of this lack of information about the top of the Gasconade formation, this area was not contoured on the map. The top of the Gasconade formation i_s characterized by a long, broad· ridge, trending northwest-southeast and plung ing toward the northwest. The width of this ridge decreases in the direction of plunge. A smaller ridge, trending north northeast is located on the east half of the structure con tour map. There are numerous sink structures shown on this map. All of those identified by wells or contact points were found to coincide with sink structures on Mueller's (1951) geologic map. The other sink structures were taken from Mueller's map and transferred to this one. Only the largest sink structures were transferred. This was done because Mueller (1951, p. 99) and Martin and Williams (1963, p. 5) say that the larger sink structures in this area probably originate in the Gasconade formation. All of these sink structures can be explained by solution of the underlying rock accompanied or followed by collapse before or during 41 Pennsylvanian time. Three local highs are shown on the structure contour ' map by closed contours. If there is an unconformity exist- ing between the Roubidoux and Gasconade formations, then surface erosion, before the Roubidoux formation was deposited, may possibly explain the highs. Another possibility is dif- ferential compaction before lithification. Errors in the elevations given in the well logs may account for a small part of the relief shown. C. Occurrence of Groundwater Groundwater moves through the shallow dolomitic aquifers of the study area in three different ways. It travels along joints or fractures, along bedding planes, and through solu- tion cavities and channels. This writer has observed groundwater seeping from joints and bedding planes and the well drillers have stated they encounter groundwater in solution cavities and channels. The Roubidoux formation consists of interbedded sandstones and dolomites, and there may be intergranular movement of groundwater in the sand stones. This may be especially true of the massive sand- stone unit. Groundwater emerging from joints and bedding planes can be seen on some of the bluffs of the major streams. The flow from these joints and bedding planes is very slight 42 and it generally can be traced only a few feet down the face of the bluff before it disappears. Presumably, this dis appearance is caused by evaporation. It is thought by this writer that the joints and bedding planes are only slightly open, and that the groundwater moves in these in much the same manner as capillary water moves between two panes of glass. Those solution cavities or channels which have an open ing, large enough for a human to enter, exposed at the sur face are referred to as caves. There are a few large caves in this area. They are a.long Dry Fork and Norman Creek. The ones visited by this writer are in the upper Gasconade unit. There are also a few large caves along the lower Dry Fork in the Roubidoux formation. Martin and Williams (1963, ~. 4) say many of these latter caves are either overhangs at the base of the massive sandstone unit or enlarged joints where blocks of sandstone have broken away from the bluff. Small solution cavities and channels, less than one foot in diameter, are quite numerous in the area. These occur in both the Roubidoux and Gasconade formations. There are many different opinions on the origin of caves formed in limestone and dolomites. It is generally agreed that they are formed by aqueous solution, but the disagreement is over whether surface, vadose, or phreatic water causes the solution. Vadose water is water in the 43 zone of aeration or above the water table. Phreatic water occurs below the water talbe or in the zone of saturation. Davis {1930) was one of the first to postulate that many of the limestone caves found today were formed by circulation of phreatic water below the water table rather than by vadose water above the water table. Bretz (1955) in cooperation with the Missouri Division of Geological Survey and Water Resources made a study of the caves in the Ozarks. He concluded that the caves were formed by phre- atic waters circulating beneath the mature topography which preceded peneplanation of the Ozark Dome. He concludes that during peneplanation these caves were filled with residual red clays which filtered down from the peneplain. soil • Later, uplift brought many of these caves above the water table. Now, vadose water is removing the clay fill. Well drillers and well logs supply information about solution cavities and channels which do not have surface openings. These solution cavities and channels have been found throughout the entire area and are known to exist in all of the rock formations discussed here. The vertical extent of the cavities encountered in drilling ranges from a few inches to 20 feet in height. There are very likely many which have a much smaller vertical extent, but the well drillers cannot detect these when they encounter them. Probably many of these cavities and channels are intercon- 44 nected l:oth laterally and vertically. The lateral inter connections are by other cavities and channels and also by bedding planes. Vertical interconnection is along joints, fractures, and solution cavities and channels. Solutio.n of the dolomitic rock by circulating ground water is believed to be the major process in the development of these cavities and channels. This circulation begins in the joints and bedding planes. No evidence of intergranular permeability was observed by this writer in any of the dolo mite strata. Therefore, it is assumed that the only original permeability available for groundwater circulation was along joints and bedding planes. Because of this, the solution activity which originally starts the development of these cavities and channels is controlled by the joints and bed ding planes. Once these cavities and channels are suffici ently enlarged by solution and carrying enough groundwater to transport sediment, oorrasion may aid in further enlarge ment. Well drillers have found unctuous red clay filling many of the solution cavities and channels encountered in drilling. This red clay is referred to as mud by the well drillers, and they state that it completely fills many of the cavities and channels. The writer believes that this clay is similar in characteristics and origin to the red clays Bretz (1953, 1956) found in the caves he studied in 45 the Ozarks. The writer has observed this red clay in cut tings from a well on only one occasion. Even though this red clay fills many of the cavities and channels, the well drillers usually encounter ground water directly below the bottom of the clay fill. In order for groundwater to occur directly beneath the bottom of the clay fill, there has to be some permeable roCk on the floor of the cavities a.nd channels. Well drillers usually en counter chert fragments at the bottom of the solution cavi ties and channels. The writer believes these to be chert fragments which were left behind during the solution of the dolomitic rocks and which collected on the floor of the cavities and channels before the red clay was deposited. Sometimes the drillers find groundwater occurring on the top of the clay. Where this happens, the clay does not fill the solution cavity or channel because the well drillers can usually feel the drill bit drop before it encounters the clay. As mentioned ear.lier, solution cavities and channels are found in the Jefferson City, Roubidoux, and Gasconade formations. In the Dillon Quadrangle, well drillers encounter dry cavities and channels only in the Jefferson City and Roubidoux formations. However, in the Meramec Spring 7.5 minute quadrangle they encounter dry cavities and channels in all three of the formations. This is because all these 46 formations are exposed at the surface in this quadrangle. D. Preliminary Piez.ometric Contour Map A piezometric surface of a confined aquifer is defined by Todd (1953, p. 29) as: an imaginary surface coinciding with the hydrostatic pressure level of the water in the aquifer. This definition also would apply to semicohfined aquifers. Each well represented on the preliminary piezo metric contour map shows by its color the formation in which the well was completed. Generally shown above each well is the elevation of the static water level and the year in which this level was measured. This map is termed preliminary to a later revision by Dr. Maxwell. A revision will be necessary because the wells re~resented on it produce groundwater from three different formations and because no attempt has been made to update the static water levels in these wells. Two other factors make this map an inaccurate representation of the present piezometric surface. These are the general decline of groundwater levels in this area and the wide range of amount of casing in the wells. Therefore, in the use of this map, one should keep in mind its limitations. The most prominent feature of this map is a broad trough. This trough has a northwest-southeast trend in the western half of the map. The trough gently curves eastward 47 until the trend becomes east-west in the eastern section. Its axis plunges from a high of 940 feet above sea level in the west to a low of 760 feet above sea level in the east and its average plunge is approximately 31 feet per mile. There is a large groundwater high located in the north west corner of the map. A groundwater divide parallels the western boundary of the map. Its crest is found at an ele vation of approximately 950 feet above sea level. Four local highs are shown, but they do not appear to have any striking similarities. Two of these local highs represent perched groundwater in the Jefferson City formation. It appears from the gradients shown by the contours that ground water flows into the area from the northwest and southwest and that it leaves toward the eastern boundary of the area. The Meramec River along the eastern boundary of the area has cut its channel into the lower Gasconade unit. Eleva tions alohg the floodplain of this river are the lowest of the entire area. Therefore, it is quite reasonable that the groundwater of the area drains toward the eastern boundary. The static water levels in wells that are west of the Dry Fork Creek generally seem to be topographically control led. This means that static water levels are higher in wells drilled in the hills than they are in wells drilled in adjacent valleys. This can be explained by elevation dif ferences because the aquifers are semiconfined. The aquifers 48 are recharged by precipitation that seeps into the soil and then travels down the joints and solution openings in the aquifers tmtil it reaches the zone of saturation. Under a hill the zone of saturation can rise to a h.igher elevation than it can \Dlder an adjacent valley, siaply because the hill has a higher surface elevation. East and south of the Dry Fork this topographic control does not appear to exist. Instead it appears that .,st of the static water levels in the wells are controlled by ele vation of the surface water in Dry Fork Creek. In wells near the creek the elevations of the static water leve 1 are approximately equal to the elevation of the surface water in the creek. Wells farther away from the creek have lower static water level elevations than those near the creek. This is to be expected if the Dry Fork is influent, that is, if it discharges surface water to the aquifers. However, in all but four of the wells west and north of Dry Fork, the static water level elevations are higher than the elevation of the surface water in the creek. As noted above under Spri~gs, two saall spri~gs occur on the west side of the lower reaches of Dry Fork. These facts indicate that the north aacl west side of DTY Fork is effluent. It is a very unusual to have a stream effluent on one side and influent on the opposite side. If the piezo•tric coatours are ·used to study the 49 groundwater-surface water relationship of Dry Fork, a com pletely different situation exists. From the piezometric contour lines, Dry Fork appears to be influent except along its lower reaches, that is, the elevation indicated by the contours are lower than the elevation of the stream channel. In the upper one third of Sec. 9, T.37 N., R.6 w., or about 2 miles upstream or southwest of where Highway 8 crosses the Dry Fork, is the approximate location downstream from which this creek appears to be effluent. There are two short stretches along the Dry Fork, downstream from where it becomes an effluent stream, in which the piezometric con tours indicate a lower elevation than the surface water. This indicates that these stretches are influent, but at both of the stretches the piezometric contours are inferred. Therefore, the entire lower reaches of Dry Fork are probably effluent. This would explain why the creek is perennial downstream from the bridge on Highway 8. Norman Creek, according to the piezometric map, is influent. This may be one of the reasons it never flows except during periods of extended rainfall. Little Dry Fork is influent until approximately one mile above its conflu ence with love Branch. At this point the stream becomes effluent. This effluency ends approximately one mile above the mouth of Little Dry Fork. From here down to its con fluence with Dry Fork Creek, the Little Dry Fork is influent. 50 Therefore, the Little Dry Fork 11&Y be perennial because of effluent from the Rolla sewage disposal plant, and because of effluent from the grcnmdwater. If the lowest mile of the Little Dry Fork is influent, as the piezometric con tours indicate, there is a h_igh probability that the Rolla sew.age discharge is locally contaainati~g the shallow aquifers. Along the eastem boundary of the study area there were no static water level data available so this part of the aap could not be contoured. Because of this lack of piezometric contour lines the writer cannot describe the relationship ot: croundwater to the Mera.ec River. Also. because •he piezo•tric contour lines around Mera.c Spri~g are inferred, this writer cannot definitively describe the location of the drain.age area for the spring. Altho~gh so• of the water flowing out of the spring co•s froa the south west, some appears to be draining from the northwest. This is in addition to what has generally been believed to be the source area of the water for Meraaec Spring•. The piezometric trough shown on the map. generally follows the trend of the main ridge which characterizes the Gasconade structural surface. If this ri~ge is not an erosional ri.dge, but instead is ~ gently warped tectonic stmcture then the relationship between the piezo-.tric trouJh and the Gasconade stmctural surface can be explained. Along the 51 top of a warped surface the brittle rock will be fractured, because in the warping process the top surface is subjected to tension. If the rock is brittle it cannot yield except by rupture and dolomite is generally a brittle rock. The apex of the warped surface will be subjected to the largest tension fbrces because this part has to yield more. From this it follows that the rock at the apex of the warped surface will be more fractured than the rocks contained in the flank slopes. Permeability will be greater in the zone of the most fractured rock. It seems logical that the groundwater would flow or drain toward the zone of greatest permeability, because this zone would offer the least resis tance to the flow of groundwater. This may explain why the piezometric trough is generally along the main ridge of the Gasconade structural surface. 52 CHAPTER VII CONCLUSIONS The groundwater data used in this investigation were derived mainly from water well logs and from discussions with well drillers in the area. These data were used to determine which of the exposed formations are aquifers, the groundwater yield of each aquifer, and how the ground water is found to occur in each aquifer. Also, the static water levels, found on the well logs, were used to prepare a preliminary piezometric contour map. Another map was prepared to show the structure of the top of the Gasconade formation. These two maps were compared to see if any relationship existed between the piezometric surface and the structural surface of the top of the Gasconade formation. The Jefferson City, Roubidoux, and Gasconade formations were found to contain groundwater. The latter two of these formations were identified as semiconfined aquifers. Most of the groundwater in the Jefferson City aquifer is perched and the yields are usually less than 5 gallons per minute. The Roubidoux formation is known to be an aquifer only west and north of the Dry Fork Creek. Groundwater yields from this aquifer average 17.6 gallons per minute. Groundwater is produced from the Gasconade formation throughout the en tire study area. The upper unit of this formation averages 25.7 gallons per minute and the lower unit 19.5 gallons per 53 minute yield. Groundwater is transmitted by these aquifers along I joints and fractures, along bedding planes, and through solution cavities and channels. Many of these solution ' cavities and channels are·" filled with a red clay believed to be derived from the residual soil when this area was a peneplain. Even though the clay fills most of the cavities and channels, groundwater occurs in the permeable chert fragments on the floor of these cavities and channels. Streams which contain thick deposits of sand and gravel, are believed to have underflow along their channels. Dry Fork Creek was found to be influent in its upper reaches and effluent in its lower reaches. Above its oonfluence with Love Branch, Little Dry Fork is influent and below the confluence it is effluent. Just before it becomes tributary to Dry Fork, it becomes influent again. The entire course of Norman Creek was found to be influent. There is a pes- sibility that Dry Fork receives groundwater from the aquifers on the west and north side of its channel and on the east and south side of the channel Dry Fork discharges water to the aquifers. Groundwater seems to be flowing towards Meramec Spring from the northwestern and southwestern part of the study area. The entire source area of Meramec Spring cannot be determined until the present static water levels in the 54 wells are measured and a more complete piezometric contour map prepared~ The relationship of groundwater flow to the Meramec River cannot be determined from the preliminary pie zometric map. The top of the Gasconade formation is characterized by a long broad ridge. This ridge may be an erosional surface or it may represent a gently warped surface. If it repre sents a warped surface then it would possibly explain the groundwater trough on the piezometric map. According to the preliminary piezometric map, groundwater flows into the study area from the northwest and southwest and it leaves along the eastern border of the map. 55 BIBLIOGRAPHY ANDERSON, J. H., Hydrogeology of reservoir sites in the Meramec River basin, MQssouri, M.s. thesis, University of Missouri at Rolla, 1963. BECKMAN, H. C. and HINCHEY, N. s., The large springs of Missouri, Missouri Division of Geological Survey and Water Resources, 29, Ser. 2, 1944. BOLON, H. c., A study of Missouri springs, B.S. thesis, University of Missouri ·at Rolla, 1935. BRETZ, J. H., Genetic relations of caves to peneplains and big springs in the Ozarks, Amer. Jour. of Sci., 251, 1-25, 1953. DAVIS, w. M., Origin of limestone caverns, Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer., 41, 475-628, 1930. DOLL, W, L., Hydrography of larger springs of the Ozark Region of Missouri, B.S. thesis, University of Missouri at Rolla, 1938. DURHAM, w. L., An engineering evaluation of surficial soils of Dent County, Missouri, M.s. thesis, University of Missouri at Rolla, 1963. FENNEMAN, N. M., Physiography of Eastern United States, 631- 6621 McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, 1938. FINCH, v. c., et.al., Physical Elements of Geography, 123-195, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, 1957. FULLER, M. L., Underground waters of the eastern United States, u.s. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper, 114, 1905. GROHSKOPF, J. G. and McCRACKEN, E., Insoluable residues of some Paleozoic formations of Missouri, their pre paration, characteristics, and application, Missouri Division of Geological Survey and Water Resources, Report of Investigations, 10, 1949. KNIGHT, R. D., Groundwater areas of Missouri, (in) Ground water maps of Missouri, Missouri Division of Geo logical Survey and Water Resources, 1963. LINSLEY, R. K., et.al., Hydrology for Engineers, McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., New York, 1958. 56 MUELLER, H. E., Geology of the north half of Maramec Spring Quadrangle, Missouri, M.s. thesis, University of Missouri at Rolla, 1951. OWENS, w. G., Occurence of mineralized groundwater in southern St. Louis and Jefferson Counties, M2s souri, M.s. thesis, University of Missouri at Rolla, 1960. PERRY, B. L., Permeability study of algal reef beds within the Bonneterre formation, National Mine, St. Francois, Missouri, M.s. thesis, University of Missouri at Rolla, 1958. PISKIN, K., Groundwater investigation in the southern half of Franklin County, Missouri, M.s. thesis, Uni versity of MQssouri at Rolla, 1962. Stratigraphic succession in Missouri, Edited by J. w. Koe nig, Missouri Division of Geological Survey and Water Resources, 40, Ser. 2, 1961. THORNBURY, w. D., Principles of Geomorphology, 316-353, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1963. THORNBURY, w. D., Regional Geomorphology of the United States, 263, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1965. TODD, D. K., Ground Water Hydrology, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1963. u.s. Bureau of Census, Number of Inhabitants, Missouri, u.s. Census of Population, 27, 22, 1960. u.s. Weather Bureau, Climatological data, Missouri, u.s. Weather Bureau of Climatological Data, 64, 1960. IR. 6 w R.6 W.l R.5 W. Z0988 0 PLATE I 14268 13730 1319:: I J')O" 2387 0 71 •D I~Z!I~f .. Q ---CJ 0 0 140119 __ !)---- 152.91') 22916 e- 16283 -e-o () 13095 0 15391 013804 ___ Ot3731 0 0 15857 8853 WELL LOCATION MAP 04711 17653 '"" ( 0 16284 0 158:oJ5 0 0 ~ ' James Crouch, 1965 -e-18532 T. 38N. 9-7-33-ccc 11348 SCAL.E 11621500 T. 37.N. 22.193 22805 -e- & oO 16783 1- 15440 0 17449 T. 37N. 0 g 22943 13640 17372-9- e- 19938 -e-2.2944 0 e- ( -921025 -622565 22.443 Q20312 i fj 2 e-r 0 15253 ( 20986 Little '"----:::----- ' 0 7290 r-·r·t~·bcaO 01-rtc ,~------J 0 0 ?2Z 13J04 ~ 0 Map Location 2.2089 ( r·· 19005 2985 B- - 16298 0 1067!5 0 LEGEND .. · 0 0 .. -~ ~ I a Protrudinq Buried Wells cr ..... II. 0 ~ IlL ""· .J Used wells with pump 0 e II'J32 ~ w I ct Unused wells with pump 0 l: cD ~ 0 I[ Ill,' 4 Unused wella without pump ., -~ ~I 0 \ /' 1 ~'' hbc M.G.S. El W. R. Log, Number 1976!S / 7-7-1!5-obc \ Well drIller's loq, Numb•r 7-7- 27-d<:b 0 19940 \ 0 37 , . .,. bdd 9043 0 0 '\.:T 17893 0 R.6W. R.5W. H."" 1 fh.6W PLATE Ir I I I I I I I I I I \ ~/ \ ""' -...... c940 STRUCTURAL CONTOUR MAP (778) / 910 0 / . of the top of the / / ------/ GASCONADE . FORMATION , "' ...... I' ""' 0 James Crouch, 1965 eao of +93;-- I 920 -- • I --... I I ,· , I SCAL-E 1•821500 I I -- I' / / I 925 I • ...... I ' . I ~~-·~~-~~~0~~------~======~Contour Interval 20ft. ( ...... I -- 9~0. 9001 I 950 • I I I • 950 • I I • ..... 8JO I l 890 ____ I l 960 ------950• I --- I I' --- Mop Location 885 I I ,-0 I I I 0 l {ej)o l I 0 970 ~ 965 900~y·.·. I I 0 - • 9~0 0 I I ,I ~0 I 980 --- LEGEND \ ' -~I --·--- 920 ~ I 1940 •A. G. S. and w. R. Log • 99!> .990 0 800 I .990 ___-----;-;: -- ..., --. M.G. S. and W. R. L.oQ- Estimate 0 (800) 1 1 900 --- 1~10 --- _: ~ ~-- --- Well Drillers Log 916 0800 0 0 \ ,.,-~ •1030 / Geologic Map • 800 ~ ./ 925 ~ I I 0 Contour \ ~ 1010 • Inferred Contour 1040 I 930 , , ___,. .__------Aemoved by Erosion \ I 1055 \ \ I • • t l ·~040 I I (825) 0 0 ) ! I 1030\ 0 930 0 ll} ) • 936 l 0 \ I I ! \ \ R.7W R.6W 60 APPENDIX I EXPLANATION OF WELL NUMBERING SYSTEM Water well logs on file at the Missouri Division of Geological Survey and Water Resources are numbered accord ing to the date the rock samples are received by the Survey. The numbering system used by the MQssouri Geological Survey was used in this investigation only for the water well logs that were obtained from their files. In Appendix II, under the heading well number, the Missouri Geological Survey's water well logs are listed according to the number used by the Survey. Any wells listed without hyphens in the number are wells on file at the Missouri Geological Survey. Water well logs obtained from the well drillers were numbered according to· township, range, section, and part of the section in which the wells were located. On the well location map, Plate I, the first digit in these numbers repre sents the township with the initial number 3 omitted because all the wells are located within townships 37 and 38. In Appendix II, under the heading well number, this initial number 3 was not omitted. The digit following the first hyphen represents the range and the digit or digits follow ing the second hyphen represents the section. The small letters represent the part of the section in which the well is located. Following the well number in Appendix II is the location 61 of each well. The small letters used here represent the part of the section in which the well is located. The first letter designates one-quarter of a section, the second letter designates one-fourth of that quarter section, and the third letter designates one-fourth of that fourth of a quarter section. Each set of four quarters is lettered a, b, c, or d in a counter-clockwise direction with 11 a 11 in the northeast quarter. Below is an example of how these letters are used in well location. b a Location of well X in T.37 N., R.7 b a, w., Sec. 23, daa. b c d Well X c c d WATER WELL DATA IN APPENDIX II Data from the water well logs used in this investiga tion are in Appendix II. This appendix has been divided into frve sections, each section consists of data for wells 62 completed in one formation or unit. The five formations or units are the Jefferson City, Roubidoux, and Eminence formations, and the upper and lower units of the Gasconade formation. The water well logs from the Missouri Division of Geological Survey and Water Resources are listed first in each section and these are followed by the well driller's logs. The following abbreviations were used in the five sec tions of Appendix II. T.D. Total depth S. W. L. Static water level Prod. Production gpm Gallons per minute P. Pennsylvanian strata J.C. Jefferson City formation R. Roubidoux formation G. Gasconade formation u.G. Upper Gasconade unit L.G. Lower Gasconade unit Gr. Gunter member E. Eminence formation N.D. Not determined N.G. Not given APPENDIX II-A WELLS OOMPLETED IN THE JEFFERSON CITY FORMATION Surface Prod. Date Depth to T.D. W. Well No. location Elevation S. L. (gpm) Drilled Contacts 1 1 1 1 4711 T. 38 N. I R. 7W. I 1183 141 100 1-1/3 1938 Est. R./G.-405 Sec. 31 1 dbb 1 1 1 1 5254 T.37 N., R.7 W. 1 1130 137 40 3 1940 Est. R./G.-305 Sec. 32, dad 1 1 9043 T.37 N. I R.S w. I 1121 144 85' 5 1946 Sec. 36, daa 15290 T.38 N., R.7 W., 1193' 215 1 95' 2 1956 Sec. 30, adc 0"1 w APPENDIX II-B WELLS COMPLETED IN THE ROUBIOOUX FORMATION Surface Prod. Date Depth to Well No. location Elevation T.D. s.w.L. (qpm) Drilled Contacts 2232 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1028 1 137' 87 1 N.G. 1928 J.C./R.-35 1 Sec. 12, abc Est. R./G.-175 1 2549 T.37 N., R.7 W., 980' 124 1 80 1 N.G. 1932 Est. R./G.-135 1 Sec. 12, bbd 4186 T.37 N., R.7 W., 990 1 175 1 40 1 20 1937 J .• C./R. -130 1 Sec. 19, dad Est. R./G.-270 1 4758 T.37 N., R.6 W., 1103 1 225' 80 1 N.G. 1938 J.C./R.-162 1 Sec. 29, acd Est. R./G.-305 1 6358 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1028' 137 1 79 1 6 1940 J.C./R.-65 1 Sec. 20, bdb Est. R./G.-205 1 1 1 1 1 7026 T. 37 N. I R. 7 w. I 1077 218 150 5 1941 J.C./R.-120 Sec. 19, bca Est. R./G.-270 1 7158 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1021 1 40 1 110 1 8 1941 J.C./rt.-60 1 Sec. 26, aaa 7290 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1076 1 218 1 135 1 N.G. 1941 J.C./R.-140 1 Sec. 8, cba Est. R./G.-285 1 8216 T.37 N., R.7 W., 966 1 65' 47 1 N.G. 1942 J.C./R.-60 1 Sec. 17, CCC 0'\ ~ APPENDIX II-B (continued). Surface Prod. Date Depth to Well No. location T.D. s.w.L. Elevation ~gprn) Drilled Contacts 8503 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1007' 106 1 81 1 3 1943 Est. R./G..-130 1 Sec. 15, dbd 11348 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1118 1 230 1 134 1 10 1950 J.C./R.-170 1 Sec. 5, bba Est. R./G.-310 1 11695 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1065 1 252 1 122 1 16 1950 J.C./R.-155 1 Sec. 19, dda Est. R./G.-310 1 11932 T.37 N., R.8 W., 1099 1 300 1 165 1 16 1952 J.C./R.-210 1 Sec. 24, ddd 13095 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1074' 200 1 70 1 15 1954 J.C./R.-165 1 Sec. 26, dac 1 1 1 1 13192 T. 38 N. I R. 7 w., 1069 177 101 25 1954 J.C./R.-125 Sec. 28, cd 13193 T.38 N., R.7 W., 1128' 240 1 190 1 26 1954 J.C./R.-95 1 Sec. 24, ddb 13304 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1033 1 210 1 145 1 N.G. 1954 N.G. Sec. 7, dbc 1 1 1 13730 T. 38 N., R. 7 w. I 1195 300 185 8 1955 J.C./R.-230' Sec. 30, aab 13731 T.38 N., R.7 W., 1186 1 340 1 225 1 25 1955 P./J.C.-35' 1 Sec. 32, bbc J.C./R.-220 0'\ V1 APPENDIX II-B (continued). Surface Prod. Date Depth to location T.D. Well No. Elevation s.w.L. (gpm) Drilled Contacts 13739 T. 38 N. , R. 7 W. , 10241 ·125 1 58 1 30 1955 J.C./R.-60' Sec. 26 1 bbb 13804 T.38 N., R.7 W., 1197 1 350 1 235 1 21 1955 J.C./R.-245 1 Sec. 32, bba 13939 T.37 N., R.7 W., 994 1 135 1 60 1 8 1955 J.C./R.-50' Sec. 8 cdd '14059 T.38 N., R.7 W., 1051 1 142 1 49 1 35 1955 P./R.-85 1 Sec. 28, ada Est. R./G.-175 1 14567 T.38 N., R.7 W., 1195 1 375 1 250 1 . 21 1956 P./J.C.-25 1 Sec. 30, ccc J.C./R.-255 1 15256 T.38 N., R.7 W., 1068 1 142' 110 1 5 1956 J.C./R.-55 1 Sec. 24, cdd 15391 T.38 N., R.7 W., 1083 1 162 1 105 1 . 16 1956 J.C./R.-125 1 Sec. 34, aad 15440 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1107' 260 1 180' 13 1956 J.C./R.-125 1 Sec. 6, bda Est. R./G.-275 1 15682 T.38 N., R. 7 W., 1079 1 220 1 110' 20 1956 J.C./R.-90 1 Sec. 36, bdd 15857 T.38 N., R.7 W., 1195' 260 1 255 1 : 17 1956 J.C./R.-235 1 Sec. 31, aca m m APPENDIX II-B (continued). Surface Prod. Date Depth to Well No. location T.D. S. W. L. Elevation (gprn) Drilled Contacts ' 1 15895 T. 38 N. I' R. 7 w. I 1135~ 240• 185 10 1956 N.G. Sec. 36, cab 16283 T.38 N.r R.7 W., 1013• 100 1 40 1 18 1957 J.C./R.-35 1 Sec. 26, add 16284 T.38 N., R.7 W., 1177• 325 1 250 1 15 1957 P./J.C.-85 1 Sec. 31, caa J.C./R.-270 1 16287 T.37 N., R.6 W., 995 1 121 1 30 1 8 1957 J.C./R.-60 1 Sec. 7, bac Est. R./G.-195 1 1 1 1 16298 T.37 N. 1 R.7 W., 1044 196' 85 16 1957 J.C./R.-115 Sec. 18, CCC Est. R./G.-230' 16646 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1103' 270 1 157 1 19 1 1957 J.C./R.-190 1 Sec. 29, bca Est. R./G.-340 1 16873 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1037• 150' 83 1 25 1957 J. C./R. -65 I . Sec. 29, daa Est. R./G.-205 1 16882 T.38 N., R.7 W., 1182' 328' 248 1 20 1957 J.C./R.-255' Sec. 31, bba 1?.172 T.38 N., R.7 W., 1075' 133' so• 16 1958 J.C./R.-70 1 Sec. 29, dda ~7601 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1048' 125' 87• 2~ ~959 J.C./R.-70' Sec. 2~. deb Est. R./G.-225' 0'\...... APPENDIX II-B (continued). Surface Prod. Date Depth to location T.D. s.w.L. ~~1~ No. Elevation ~) Drilled Contacts 17653 T. 38 N. I R. 7 w. I 1162' 265' 195' 22 1958 J.C./R.-180' Sec. 22, acd 18311 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1110 1 200 1 150 1 21 1959 J.C./R.-150' Sec. 29, ace 18314 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1058' 155' 104' 30 1959 N.D. Sec. 33, dac 18320 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1090' 250 1 150 1 25 1959 J.C./R.-175 1 Sec. 21, ccb 18405 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1010 1 130 1 70 1 18 1959 J.C./R.-130 1 Sec. 18, deb 18519 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1116 1 253' 168 1 16 1959 J.C./R.-155 1 Sec. 29, caa 18532 T.38 N., R.7 W., 1163' 300 1 234 1 15 1959 J.C./R.-255 1 Sec. 31, cab 19003 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1079 1 235' 150 1 29 1960 J.C./R.-130 1 Sec. 18, cdd 20885 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1098 1 245 1 95 1 N.G. 1962 J.C./R.-210 1 Sec. 32, dab 20986 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1084 1 230' 160 1 15 1962 J.C./R.-110' 1 Sec. 7, bad Est. R./G.-240 0'\ 00 APPENDIX II-B (continued). "· Date Depth to Iocation Surface T.D. Prod. ~11 No. Elevation s.w.L. (gpm) Drilled Contacts 20992 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1063 1 230 1 140 1 20 1960 J.C./R.-125 1 Sec. 18, dba 22099 T. 37 N. , R. 7 ""w. , 1035 1 225 1 145 1 30 1963 J.C./R.-90 1 Sec. 18, bbd 22916 T.38 N., R.7 W., 1190 1 305 1 205 1 20 1964 J.C./R.-250 1 Sec. 29, ebb 37-7-2 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1130 1 275' 195 1 20 1964 N.D. aab Sec. 2, aab 37-7-3 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1025 1 118 1 30 1 3 1949 N.D. deb Sec. 3, deb 37-7-4 T.37 N., R.7 W., 990' 135 1 90 1 20 1963 N.D. ddc Sec. 3, ddc 37-7-9 T.37 N., R.7 W., 980 1 156 1 72 1 15 1960 N.D. CCC Sec. 9, ccc 37-7-10 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1030' 111 1 70 1 9 1949 N.D. ddc Sec. 10, ddc 37-7-11 T.37 N., R.7 W., 995 1 150' 95 1 10 1948 N.D. cda Sec. 11, cda 37-7-12 T.37 N., R.7 W., 990' 125 1 65' 20 1963 N.D. m be a Sec. 12, bca 1.0 APPENDIX II-B (continued). Surface Prod. Date Depth to 'Well No. location T.D. s. W. L. ..--~.f:':!i;' •• ~, ... Elevation (qpm) Drilled Contacts ... 37!00 7-15 T.37 N•. , R. 7 W., 1000 1 17Ql 110 1 20 1963 N.D. CCC Sec. 15, CCC 37-7-21 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1060 1 200 1 90 1 12 1946 N.D. abc Sec. 21, abc ~:~·.";·· 37-7-22 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1010 1 175 1 137 1 3-1/2 1953 N.D. abc Sec. 22, abc 37-7-22 T.37 N., R.7 W., 990 1 110 1 67 1 26 1951 N.D. bee Sec. 22, bee 37-7-31 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1100 1 201 1 133' 10 1960 J.C./R.-160 1 bdd Sec. 31, bdd 38-7-33 T.38 N., R.7 W., 1100' 200 1 135 1 30 1963 J.C./R.-110 1 CCC Sec. 33, CCC ....J 0 APPENDIX II-C WELLS OOMPLETED IN THE UPPER GASCONADE UNIT ~-·.>Jl<"·-·<1.~· ··t.t. .. 'iti';. "-· "' · "' · · Surface Prod: Date Depth to W!~l No. location Elevation T • D •, 8 • ~-~:-~ __ {_gmn_l Drilled ...... ,_ ·--'"------· ____:. •' - -·-----~~ Contacts 1 1 1 2695 T.37 N., R.7 W. 1 984' 166 52 N.G. 1933 J.C./R.-35 Sec. 18, bdb R./G.-160 1 1 1 1 8853 T. 38 N. ' R. 8 w. I 983 120 75 N.G. 1945 N.G. Sec. 32, 1 1 1 13640 T.37 N. 1 R.7 W., 1036' 280 80 25 1955 J.C./R.-70 1 Sec. 6 1 daa R./G.-215 1 1 1 14241 T.38 N. I R.8 w. I 1035 250 160' 10 1955 J.C./R.-75 Sec. 28, ebb R./G.-200 1 15115 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1050 1 235 1 155' 11 1956 R./G.-165 1 Sec. 15 1 dab 15234 T.37 N., R.7 W., 942' 140' 62 1 15 1956 R./G.-85 1 Sec. 22 1 dec 19497 T.38 N., R.6 W., lOll' 245 1 N.G. 20 1961 J.C./R.-75' Sec. 28, cac R./G.-200 1 1 J.C./R.-35 1 jl9938 T.37 N., R.7 W. 1 1008 235' N.G. 20 1961 Sec. 5, cbc R./G.-170' 20312 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1050 1 285' 130 1 60 1961 J.C./R.-80 1 Sec. 8, aac R./G.-225 1 -...J t-J APPENDIX II-C (continued). Surface Prod. Date Depth to No. location T.D. Well Elevation s.w-.L. (gpm) Drilled Contacts 21025 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1040 1 215' 116' 10 1962 J.C./R.-45 1 Sec. 8, bbb R./G.-195 1 21923 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1129 1 335 1 230 1 14 1963 J.C./R.-207 1 Sec. 6, bbd R./G.-320 1 22443 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1075 1 265 1 190 1 15 1963 J.C./R.-105 1 Sec. 7, baa R./G.-245 1 22565 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1045 1 200 1 115 1 20 1964 J.C./R.-45' Sec. 8, abb R./G.-190 1 1 1 1 1 22805 T. 37 N. I R. 7 w. I 1170 410 280 15 1964 P./J.C.-60 Sec. 6, baa J.C./R.-260 1 R./G.-377 1 22893 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1070 1 275' 130 1 75 1964 J.C./R.-145 1 Sec. 20, caa R./G.-272 1 22943 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1130 1 350 1 230 1 30 1964 J.C./R.-152 1 Sec. 6, dba R./G.-280 1 37-7-12 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1028 1 185 1 100 1 20 1963 J.C./R.-45 1 acb Sec. 12, acb R./G.-160 1 "-.! tv APPENDIX II-D WELLS OOMPLETED IN THE LOWER GASCONADE UNIT ,... t-4"'"'"_.. ' '~:.... \' ,}. '- "t'"!oo..:J•. ~ •• ,,.. Surface Prod. Date Depth to Well No. location T.D. s.w.I,. ''l Elevation (qpm) Drilled Contacts 1 2387 T.38 N. I R.6 w. I sao• 70 45~ N.G. 1930 ·, ': Sec. 23 1 CCC 3016 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1070 1 33'6 1 270 1 10 1933 R./G.-165' Sec. 24, cdb 10675 T.37 N., R.6 W., 943' 167 1 120' 10 1947 R./G.-100 1 1 Sec. 16 1 cdb U.G./L.G.-140 1 1 1 1 13717 T.37 N. 1 R.7 W. 1 1061 310 260 20 1955 R./G.-145 Sec. 23 1 dcd U.G./L.G.-25' 1 1 1 1 13729 T.37 N. 1 R.7 W. 1 1042 300 225 18 1955 R./G.-145 Sec. 23, cdd U.G./L.G.-205 1 1 1 1 R./G.-155t 14022 T.37 N. 1 R.7 W. 1 1070 330 270 10 1955 1 Sec. 25 1 bca U.G./L.G.-215 1 1 1 14268 T.38 N. I R.6 w. I 862 300 30 42 1956 R./G.-35' U.G./L.G.-75 1 Sec. 22 1 caa L.G./Gr.-275 1 15439 T.37 N., R.6 W., 981 1 235' 170 1 18 1956 R./G.-45 1 Sec. 32, cd U.G./L.G.-100 1 1 1 1 1 15567 T.37 N. 1 R.7 W. 1 1034 253 193 14 1956 R./G.-125 1 Sec. 23, bee U.G./L.G.-205 "-J w APPENDIX II-D (continued}. Depth to Surface T.D. Prod. Date Well No. location Elevation s.w.L. (gpm) Drilled Contacts 16867 T.38 N., R.6 W., 991 1 245 1 169 1 20 1957 R./G.-110 1 Sec. 28, U.G./L.G.-165 1 17124 T.37 N., R.6 W., 1048 1 310 1 245 1 10 1958 R./G.-150 1 Sec. 19, deb U.G./L.G.-185 1 17372 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1097 1 336 1 210 1 19 1958 J.C./R.-100 1 Sec. 6, cda R./G.-245 1 U.G./L.G.-325 1 17893 T.37 N., R.6 W., 1013 1 280 1 192 1 25 1958 R./G.-75' Sec. 34, dbc U.G./L.G.-110 1 19005 T.37 N., R.7 W., 965 1 260 1 39 1 30 1960 R./G.-110 1 Sec. 18, abc U.G./L.G.-195 1 1 1 22320 T.37 N., R.6 w. I 1G5JJ 330 1 2i'Z 15 1961 R./G.-150' Sec. 20, ccb U.G./L.G.-190' 22944 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1120 1 350 1 215 1 30 1964 J.C./R.-140 1 Sec. 6, dca R./G.-280 1 U.G./L.G.-340 1 37-7-27 T.37 N., R.7 W., 995' 1941 139' 20 1958 R./G.-70 1 add Sec. 27, add 37-7-27 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1000 1 194 1 130 1 11 1958 N.D. de Sec. 27, de ...J ,f;l. APPENDIX II-D (cori€1nued). Date Cepth to Surface T.D. Prod. Well No. location Elevation s.w.L. (gpm) Drilled Contacts 1 37-7-30 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1060 273• 225• 15 1962 R./G.-190 1 Sec. 30, bbc 37-7-30 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1060 1 365 1 270' 15 1965 R./G.-200' Sec. 30, bbc .....,) U1 APPENDIX II-E WELLS COHPLETED IN THE EMINENCE !ORMATION \,· .. jJ Surface :irod. Date Depth to T.D. S.W.L~ Well No. Location Elevation (gpm) Drilled Contacts 1 1 1 '•100 1 16783 T.37 N., R.7 W., 1098 530 155 1957 J.C./R.-75 Sec. 4, bbb R./U.G.-220 1 U.G./L.G.-300 1 L.G./Gr.-490 1 Gr./E.-520 1 1 17499 T.37 N., R.6 W., 1024 1 460 1 230 18 1958 L.G./Gr.-330 1 Sec. 2, aca Gr./E.-345 1 18331 T.37 N., R.6 W., 830 1 245 1 65 1 100 1959 L.G./Gr.-75 1 Sec. 1, bdd Gr./E.-100 1 19940 T.37 N., R.6 W., 1022 1 290 1 N.G. N.G. 1961 L.G./Gr.-205 1 Sec. 35, aab Gr./E.-230 1 1 1 1 19009 T.38 N. I R.6 w., 955 400 90 33 1960 R./U.G.-105 1 Sec. 22, cda U.G./L.G.-145 1 L.G./Gr.-365 1 Gr./E.-380 1 -.J 0'1 77 VITA James Hugh Crouch was born in Oxford, I~ssissippi, on December 8, 1937. He completed his primary and high school education in the Oxford Public Schools in May, 1956. He entered the University of Mississippi in September, 1956, and remained a student at the University until May, 1959. After working in Yosemite National Park for one year, he re-entered the University of Mississippi and completed the requirements for the Bachelor of Science Degree in Geologi cal Engineering in J"uly, 1962. He worked for one year in Lake Tahoe, Nevada, before enrolling at the University of Missouri at~Rolla, in September, 1963, as a candidate for the Degree of Master of Science in Geological Engineering.