DOCSLIB.ORG

Hillsdale Lake Watershed Restoration & Protection Strategy 9-Element Watershed Plan Summary

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Hillsdale Lake Watershed Restoration & Protection Strategy 9-Element Watershed Plan Summary Impairments to be addressed: • Directly addressing the High Priority TMDL for Eutrophication on Hillsdale Lake, which includes focusing on reducing the phosphorus and sediment loading within the watershed. • Hillsdale Lake is not listed as having a TMDL for sedimentation; however, the SLT believes sediment is currently present and increasing and is also therefore addressing this issue with this WRAPS plan. • BMPs implemented to address Hillsdale Lake will indirectly address the Medium Priority TMDLs for Eutrophication and Atrazine for Edgerton City Lake. Targeting Determinations: • From studies conducted, a Priority Targeted Area for BMP placement has been determined. • The Priority Targeted Area consists of a 3/4 mile buffer along each side of KDHE classified streams in the watershed, including adjacent to Hillsdale Lake. • Targeted included streams are: Big Bull Creek, Rock Creek, Little Bull Creek, Martin Creek, Smith Creek, and Spring Creek. • Priority Targeted Areas will address degraded fields lying adjected to streams and lakes, the BNSF Intermodal Facility, and upland areas containing high numbers of forested restoration sites or KDHE determined restoration sites. Priority areas are targeted for both cropland and livestock practices, based upon land use within the targeted HUC 12s. Best Management Practices and Load Reduction Goals Best Management Practices (BMPs) to address nutrients and sediment in the watershed were chosen by the SLT based upon local acceptance/adoption rate and amount of load reduction gained per dollar spent. Nutrient and Sediment Reducing Cropland BMPs: Nutrient and Sediment Reducing Livestock BMPs: • Buffers • Vegetative filter strips between small feeding operations and streams • Encouragement of continuous no-till by producers, followed by implementation of • Relocation of small feeding operations away cover crops from streams • Preparation of Nutrient Management Plans • Relocation of pasture feeding sites away from with producers streams • Grassed Waterways • Promotion of alternative watering sites away from streams • Permanent Vegetation • Rotational grazing • Subsurface Fertilizer Application Hillsdale Watershed Restoration & Protection Strategy 2017 The Hillsdale Watershed WRAPS is possible through United States Environmental Protection Agency Clean Water Act, Section 319, grant funds administered by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment. 1 Project Stakeholder Leadership Team Dwayne Beckford, Miami County Conservation District, Paola, KS Jerry Bennett, Rural Water District 2, Paola, KS Ted Guetterman, Watershed Landowner/Producer, Bucyrus, KS Robert Lynn, Watershed Landowner/Producer, Gardner, KS Teresa Reeves, Miami County Planning, Paola, KS Heather Schmidt, Johnson County Stormwater, Olathe, KS Gayla Speer, Johnson County Conservation District, Olathe, KS Allan Soetaert, Water 7, Gardner, KS Gertie Zuvanich, Watershed Landowner, Spring Hill, KS Watershed Coordinator Lesley Rigney, District Manager, Miami County Conservation District K-State Research and Extension Project (KSRE) Staff Herschel George, Watershed Specialist Susan Brown, Watershed Information Specialist State Agency Staff Travis Sieve, Kansas Department of Health and Environment Andy Lyon, Kansas Department of Health and Environment Bobbi Luttjohann, KWO Basin Planner 2 Table of Contents 1. PREFACE AND PLAN UPDATE ..................................................................................................................... 7 A. WATERSHED PLAN UPDATE .................................................................................................................................... 7 2. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 9 A. WHAT IS A WATERSHED RESTORATION AND PROTECTION STRATEGY (WRAPS)? ............................................................. 9 B. WHO ARE CONSIDERED STAKEHOLDERS WITHIN A WATERSHED? ................................................................................... 10 C. HILLSDALE WRAPS HISTORY ................................................................................................................................ 10 D. GOALS OF THE SLT ............................................................................................................................................. 10 E. REGIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ......................................................................................................................... 11 F. WHAT IS A WATERSHED? ..................................................................................................................................... 11 G. WHAT IS A HUC? ............................................................................................................................................... 12 H. WATERSHED SETTING ......................................................................................................................................... 15 3. WATERSHED REVIEW ............................................................................................................................... 16 A. LAND COVER/LAND USES .................................................................................................................................... 16 1. Hillsdale Watershed Land Use .................................................................................................................. 16 2. Urbanization: ............................................................................................................................................ 18 3. Agricultural Chemical Use, Crops and Livestock: ...................................................................................... 18 B. DESIGNATED USES .............................................................................................................................................. 19 C. SPECIAL AQUATIC LIFE USE WATERS ...................................................................................................................... 20 D. EXCEPTIONAL STATE WATERS ............................................................................................................................... 21 E. RAINFALL AND RUNOFF ....................................................................................................................................... 22 F. POPULATION AND WASTEWATER SYSTEMS .............................................................................................................. 23 G. AQUIFERS ......................................................................................................................................................... 24 H. PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES ..................................................................................................................................... 25 I. NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEMS (NPDES) .......................................................................... 29 J. BURLINGTON NORTHERN SANTA FE RAILROAD INTERMODAL FACILITY .......................................................................... 30 K. WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS AND POLLUTION LOAD REDUCTIONS ............................................................................. 30 1. Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) ....................................................................................................... 30 2. Eutrophication TMDL for Phosphorus in Hillsdale Lake ............................................................................ 33 3. Eutrophication TMDL for Phosphorus in Edgerton City Lake .................................................................... 36 4. TARGETED AREAS ..................................................................................................................................... 37 A. STUDIES CONDUCTED TO DETERMINE TARGETED AREAS ............................................................................................ 37 5. IMPAIRMENTS ......................................................................................................................................... 41 A. EUTROPHICATION ............................................................................................................................................... 41 1. Possible Sources of the Impairment .......................................................................................................... 41 B. SEDIMENTATION ................................................................................................................................................ 45 1. Possible Sources of the Impairment .......................................................................................................... 46 6. BMPS NEEDED TO BE IMPLEMENTED TO ADDRESS WATER QUALITY IMPAIRMENTS .................................. 48 7. INFORMATION AND EDUCATION .............................................................................................................. 55 A. INFORMATION AND EDUCATION (I&E) ACTIVITIES AND EVENTS ................................................................................... 55 1. Evaluation of I&E Activities ....................................................................................................................... 56 3 8. COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING BMPS AND POSSIBLE FUNDING SOURCES .......................................................
Recommended publications
  • Comparison of Sediment Deposition in Reservoirs of Four Kansas Watersheds David P

    Comparison of Sediment Deposition in Reservoirs of Four Kansas Watersheds David P

    Comparison of Sediment Deposition in Reservoirs of Four Kansas Watersheds David P. Mau and Victoria G. Christensen Reservoirs are a vital source of water Kansas in 1995. Nine supply, provide recreational opportunities, reservoir studies have been support diverse aquatic habitat, and carried out in cooperation provide flood protection throughout with the Bureau of Kansas. Understanding agricultural, Reclamation, the city of industrial, and urban effects on reservoirs Wichita, Johnson County is important not only for maintaining Unified Wastewater acceptable water quality in the reservoirs Districts, the Kansas but also for preventing adverse Department of Health and environmental effects. Excessive sediment Environment, and (or) the can alter the aesthetic qualities of Kansas Water Office. These reservoirs and affect their water quality studies were supported in and useful life. part by the Kansas State Water Plan Fund and Introduction evaluated sediment deposition along with Figure 1. Bottom-sediment cores were collected with a gravity Reservoir sediment studies are selected chemical corer mounted on a pontoon boat. The corer is lowered to a important because of the effect that constituents in sediment designated distance above the sediment and allowed to free sediment accumulation has on the quality cores (fig. 1) from fall to penetrate through the entire thickness of reservoir of water and useful life of the reservoir. reservoirs located in bottom sediment. Sediment deposition can affect benthic various climatic, organisms and alter the dynamics of the topographic, and geologic landscape annual precipitation ranges from about aquatic food chain. Reservoir sediment regions throughout Kansas and southern 24 inches at Webster Reservoir in north- studies also are important in relation to Nebraska.
  • Hillsdale Lake Water Quality Impairment: Eutrophication Revision to Eutrophication TMDL Originally Approved August 28, 2001

    Hillsdale Lake Water Quality Impairment: Eutrophication Revision to Eutrophication TMDL Originally Approved August 28, 2001

    MARAIS DES CYGNES RIVER BASIN TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD Waterbody: Hillsdale Lake Water Quality Impairment: Eutrophication Revision to Eutrophication TMDL originally approved August 28, 2001 1. INTRODUCTION AND PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION Subbasin: Lower Marais des Cygnes Counties: Douglas, Franklin, Johnson, Miami HUC 8: 10290102 HUC 10 (12): 01 (01, 02, 03) Ecoregion: Central Irregular Plains, Osage Cuestas (40b) Drainage Area: 144 square miles Conservation Pool: Surface Area = 4,355 acres Watershed/Lake Ratio: 21:1 Maximum Depth = 14 meters Mean Depth = 5.7 meters Storage Volume = 77,665 acre-feet Estimated Retention Time = 1.15 years Mean Annual Inflow (2007-2012) = 90,509 acre-feet Mean Annual Discharge (2007-2012) = 76,598 acre-feet Constructed: 1981 Designated Uses: Primary Contact Recreation Class A; Special Aquatic Life Support; Domestic Water Supply; Food Procurement; Groundwater Recharge; Industrial Water Supply; Irrigation Use; Livestock Watering Use. 303(d) Listings: 2002, 2004, 2008, 2010 & 2012 Marais Des Cygnes River Basin Lakes Impaired Use: All uses in Hillsdale Lake are impaired to a degree by eutrophication. Water Quality Criteria: General – Narrative: Taste-producing and odor-producing substances of artificial origin shall not occur in surface waters at concentrations that interfere with the production of potable water by conventional water treatment processes, that impart an unpalatable flavor to edible aquatic or semiaquatic life or terrestrial wildlife, or that result in noticeable odors in the vicinity of surface waters (KAR 28-16-28e(b)(7)). 1 Nutrients - Narrative: The introduction of plant nutrients into streams, lakes, or wetlands from artificial sources shall be controlled to prevent the accelerated succession or replacement of aquatic biota or the production of undesirable quantities or kinds of aquatic life (KAR 28-16- 28e(c)(2)(A)).
  • Lake Level Management Plans Water Year 2019

    Lake Level Management Plans Water Year 2019

    LAKE LEVEL MANAGEMENT PLANS WATER YEAR 2019 Kansas Water Office September 2018 Table of Contents U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, KANSAS CITY DISTRICT .................................................................................................................................... 3 CLINTON LAKE ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................4 HILLSDALE LAKE ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................6 KANOPOLIS LAKE .....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................8 MELVERN LAKE .....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................10 MILFORD LAKE ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................12
  • Kansas HUC 8 Watershed Map ±

    Kansas HUC 8 Watershed Map ±

    Kansas HUC 8 Watershed Map ± M I R S E S E W O R K O R U A F CR R K DRIFTWOOD LF C I S S C R I R , S Summerfield NY C S White Cloud R R P R PO A A Reserve Y N D R CR O A L KEY R R T I UR R B T IC T C N H Bern R Y U Mahaska O C O L LN G Oketo C R Hamlin B R A Hollenberg C W Upper Little Blue W R S HAC U C L KB C E Morrill E P R RR Upper Republican S L Y R M CR E R H R I R E Narka O C B A SE CR E X Sabetha M M RO R U TI Long Island C N S C O O I PRI R D D N Big Nemaha G I IG R Webber C CR B B A Republic D O Herndon C Munden R R South Fork Big Nemaha Highland Lower Sappa Middle Republican L R R M Hanover Fairview Hiawatha R S Beaver Lovewell Lake E C I Axtell Oneida F A L L Marysville CR A L C Beattie Robinson O VER P L C BEA P Almena T R Seneca W N A R CR Burr Oak ING Leona S Lower North Fork Solomon C Haddam SPR BROWN South Fork Republican NORTON Norton R Morrowville Severance Troy Oberlin Prairie View Belleville G Wathena RAWLINS Atwood Norcatur REPUBLIC R Elwood B Washington W E M R I Esbon Cuba MARSHALL NEMAHA G G Tarkio-Wolf Formoso I CHEYENNE McDonald A S L Powhattan Keith Sebeluis Lake Lebanon E W G C R Scandia A C SMITH Denton St.
  • KDHE Confirmed Zebra Mussel Waterbodies

    KDHE Confirmed Zebra Mussel Waterbodies

    KDHE Confirmed Zebra Mussel Waterbodies Lake/Reservoir Name Month/Year Confirmed Stream/River Name Month/Year Confirmed El Dorado Lake August 2003 Missouri River near Kansas City, Kansas May 2001 Cheney Reservoir August 2004 Walnut River near Gordon August 2004 Winfield City Lake December 2006 Walnut River near Ark City November 2005 Perry Lake October 2007 Kansas River near Lawrence September 2009 Lake Afton July 2008 Kansas River near Desoto September 2009 Marion Lake July 2008 Ninnescah River near Belle Plaine September 2009 Wilson Lake October 2009 Kansas River near Lecompton August 2011 Milford Reservoir November 2009 Kansas River near Topeka May 2012 Council Grove City Lake June 2010 Kansas River near Wamego June 2012 Jeffery Energy Center Lakes May 2011 Walnut River near El Dorado July 2013 Council Grove Reservoir June 2011 Cottonwood River near Emporia August 2014 Melvern Reservoir June 2011 Neosho River near Neosho Rapids August 2014 Kanopolis Lake October 2011 Neosho River near Leroy August 2014 Coffey County Lake (Wolf Creek Lake) July 2012 Marais Des Cygnes River at Ottawa August 2015 John Redmond Reservoir August 2012 Neosho River near Humboldt September 2016 Chase State Fishing Lake September 2012 Marais Des Cygnes River at MO State Line June 2017 Wyandotte County Lake October 2012 Confirmed: Adult or juvenile mussels have been discovered (live or expired) in Lake Shawnee August 2013 waterbody for the first time and positively identified by eyesight. Glen Elder Reservoir (Waconda Lake) September 2013 Lake Wabunsee September 2013 Threatened: Waterbody at high risk to become infested with zebra mussels via the dispersal (passive or active transport) of the zebra mussel veliger (pre-shell Clinton Lake October 2013 microscopic larval stage).
  • Lake Level Management Plans Water Year 2018

    Lake Level Management Plans Water Year 2018

    LAKE LEVEL MANAGEMENT PLANS WATER YEAR 2018 Kansas Water Office 2017 Table of Contents CORPS OF ENGINEERS, KANSAS CITY DISTRICT ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 CLINTON LAKE .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 5 HILLSDALE LAKE ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 7 KANOPOLIS LAKE .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 MILFORD LAKE ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 13 POMONA LAKE ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

  • Upk Conard.Indd 5 1/9/15 1:31 PM © University Press of Kansas

    © University Press of Kansas. All rights reserved. Reproduction and distribution prohibited without permission of the Press. Contents Foreword . .ix Preface.and.Acknowledgments . x Chapter 1. Introduction. .1 History ............................................................2 Geology and Geography .............................................3 Flora and Fauna .....................................................5 Climate and Weather ................................................6 Know Before You Go: Advice and Precautions ...........................8 Costs .............................................................11 Camping Information. 12 Contacts and Resources .............................................12 How to Use This Guide. 13 Top Trails .........................................................14 Chapter 2. Kansas City Metropolitan Area . .17 Ernie Miller Park and Nature Center ..................................19 Kill Creek Park ....................................................22 Olathe Prairie Center ...............................................27 Overland Park Arboretum and Botanical Gardens ......................30 Shawnee Mission Park ..............................................34 Wyandotte County Lake Park ........................................38 Chapter 3. Northeast Kansas . .43 Baker University Wetlands Research and Natural Area ..................45 Banner Creek Reservoir .............................................47 Black Jack Battlefield and Nature Park .................................50 Blue River
  • Hillsdale Lake Waterfowl Report

    Hillsdale Lake Waterfowl Report

    Hillsdale Lake Waterfowl Report Illustrative Angelo sometimes disrelish any boss dazes precipitately. Eldritch and spectatorial Harman still overcompensate his infantas inextinguishably. When Ephraim restage his towbar hydrogenize not acrogenously enough, is Jeromy inflowing? The national bobwhite conservation, and pheasants forever the dam and clean water andyou will break from dawn and waterfowl hillsdale The lake ozarks and pike, river access point lies above to fish caught his work for the world were still goingstrong. Fishing duck hunting report for Kansas and Missouri areas. Zebra Mussels, Eurasian Milfoil, and Phragmites are asleep in east Bluff Reservoir. Willow flycatcher and waterfowl including many of. BARRY COUNTY DNR To help protect our state s natural. Big Hoosier bucks without the BS. Site for Gray Loon. Hillsdale State Park is the kind of place you head to when you need to escape city life in exchange for a killer sunset. The Stafford, Sumner, and Ford county cases were firsts for each county. 2-mile-from-beginning-to-end Aberdeen Mills to Hillsdale Road portion of whitewater. Rangers are trained in search and rescue, as diamond as several first aid. Pequeño paseo bordeando un camping reservations made online to dusk seven numbers and friends, recommendations onthe following day with this year with an opportunity. Willow flycatcher and trailers should offer. Good numbers and size for Largemouth Bass. After the lake during storms are not be used for? Commercial guides must have a permit, available on the KDPWT website, to guide on public lands. Don Brewer Obituary. Unit G is more shallow now than it has been in recent years.
  • Kansas Surface Water Quality Standards

    Kansas Surface Water Quality Standards

    Presented below are water quality standards that are in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. EPA is posting these standards as a convenience to users and has made a reasonable effort to assure their accuracy. Additionally, EPA has made a reasonable effort to identify parts of the standards that are not approved, disapproved, or are otherwise not in effect for Clean Water Act purposes. August 7, 2018 Kansas Water Quality Standards - Tables of Numeric Criteria Effective May 7, 2018 The attached WQS document is in effect for Clean Water Act (CWA) purposes, with the exception of the provisions below. With the latest action, EPA continues not to act on these provisions, on which no action was initially taken in the July 18, 2017 action letter. • Table 1a. Aquatic Life, Agriculture, and Public Health Designated Uses Numeric Criteria. Five new or revised water quality criteria for pollutants: Mercury, 1,2-dichloropropane, 1,2,4- trichlorobenzene, barium, and endrin o Federal water quality criteria currently applicable to Kansas waters remain in effect until the EPA takes federal action to withdraw these NTR criteria. • Table 1g, Footnote 2. Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, and pH Numeric Aquatic Life Criteria. Footnote 2 addressing Dissolved Oxygen o The following text was added to footnote a of Table 1g: (2) Dissolved oxygen concentrations can be lower than 5.0 mg/L when caused by documented natural conditions specified in the "Kansas Implementation Procedures: Surface Water Quality Standards." • Table 1g, Footnote 3. Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, and pH Numeric Aquatic Life Criteria. Footnote 3 addressing Dissolved Oxygen in lakes or reservoirs o The following text was added to footnote a of Table 1g: (3) For lakes or reservoirs experiencing thermal stratification, the dissolved oxygen criterion is only applicable to the top layer or epilimnion of the waterbody.
  • Water Supply

    Water Supply

    US Army Corps of Engineers Kansas City District Leaders in Customer Care • WATER • •FLOOD SUPPLY • • • • • CONTROL •• • • • • • • • STUDY AREA • MINERAL • • • • ••BANK STABILIZATION Kansas and Osage Rivers, Kansas Draft April 1 988 APPENDIX D WATER SUPPLY TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page No. INTRODUCTION D-l EXISTING CONDITIONS D-2 INSTITUTIONS D-l5 FUTURE CONDITIONS D-20 PROBLEMS AND OPPORTUNITES D-25 CONSTRAINTS D-27 ALTERNATIVE WATER SUPPLY PLANS D-28 BIBLIOGRAPHY TABLES No. Title Page No. D-l Historic and Current Population D-3 D-2 Water Use in 1980 D-4 D-3 Authorized Federal Lake Storage Allocations D-7 D-4 Corps of Engineers Lake Project Data D-9 D-5 Kansas Water Agencies D-16 D-6 Local Water Supply Authorities D-18 D-7 Public Wholesale Water Supply Districts D - 19 D-8 Counties in Study Areas 1, 2, and 3 D-20 D-9 Area 1 Population and Water Use Forecasts D-21 D - 10 Area 1 Water Needs for All Purposes D-22 D-ll Area 2 Population and Water Use Forecasts D-23 D-12 Area 2 Expected 2035 Yield of Existing Sources D-23 D-l 3 Area 2 Water Needs for All Purposes D-24 D - 14 Area 1 Conceptual Plan Facilities and Improvements D-30 D-15 Area 1 Conceptual Plans Water Sources and Destinations D-31 D-16 Area 1 Conceptual Plan Cost Summary D-34 D - 17 Water Supply Sources and Users - Area 2 (Destinations for Central Kansas Users) D-36 D-18 Source Use for Kansas River Users for 2035 - Area 2 D-38 D - 19 Area 2 Conceptual Plan Cost Summary D-41 i TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) FIGURES No.
  • KANSAS 2012 DROUGHT UPDATE – August 10, 2012

    KANSAS 2012 DROUGHT UPDATE – August 10, 2012

    KANSAS 2012 DROUGHT UPDATE – August 10, 2012 Summary of Climate and Drought Conditions and Responses ¾ Executive Order 12-10 issued by the Governor July 25, 2012, remains in effect, placing all Kansas counties under Emergency Drought Stage. ¾ August 8, 2012, USDA designated an additional eight counties as primary federal agricultural disaster areas, for a total of 103 counties. The remaining two counties are considered contiguous and are also eligible for disaster programs. Governor has requested federal disaster designation for Marshall and Nemaha counties. ¾ The U.S. Drought Monitor for August 7, 2012 shows the entire state in severe drought or worse. Extreme drought now covers 90 percent of the state, with over 39 percent of the state in exceptional drought. ¾ State Conservation Commission has cost-share available for livestock watering improvements. ¾ A drought watch remains in effect for the Water Marketing Program customers from Clinton Lake, Hillsdale Lake, Melvern Lake, Pomona Lake, Council Grove Lake, Marion Reservoir, Big Hill Lake, Elk City Reservoir, and Kanopolis Reservoir. ¾ A drought warning was issued August 6 for the Cottonwood/ Neosho River Assurance District, triggering Stage 2- water warning of public water suppliers conservation plans in that District. ¾ A drought watch remains in effect for the Kansas River and the Marais des Cygnes River Assurance Districts. This triggers the Water Watch (Stage 1) of members’ water conservation plans. ¾ Public water suppliers continue to request or mandate water conservation practices. o Stage 3 - Water Emergency: mandatory measures, 4 (Ellsworth, Russell, Augusta and Mulvane) o Stage 2 - Water Warning: some restrictions, 30 o Stage 1 - Water Watch: voluntary conservation, 73 ¾ Minimum Desirable Streamflow (MDS) Administration in place above 17 gages, requiring 541 appropriations junior to MDS to cease diversion.
  • Hydrologic Conditions in Kansas, Water Year 2017

    Hydrologic Conditions in Kansas, Water Year 2017

    Hydrologic Conditions in Kansas, Water Year 2017 The U.S. Geological Survey area, and most of the eastern border of the WY about 30 percent was classified (USGS), in cooperation with Federal, Kansas received normal to above normal as abnormally dry, about 9 percent was State, and local agencies, maintains precipitation, whereas the central and classified as moderate drought, and about a long-term network of hydrologic northeastern parts of the State received 1 percent of the State was classified as monitoring stations in Kansas. In water slightly below normal precipitation severe drought (National Drought Mitiga- year (WY) 2017, the network included (National Oceanic and Atmospheric tion Center, 2017). The central and north- 214 real-time streamgages (hereafter Administration, 2017). The percentage eastern parts of Kansas were the areas of referred to as “gages”) and 12 real-time of normal precipitation Kansas received the State that were affected by drought reservoir-level monitoring stations. Real- in WYs 2016 and 2017 are compared in conditions at the end of the WY (fig. 2; time data are calibrated and validated figure 1. At the beginning of WY 2017, National Drought Mitigation Center, by USGS personnel throughout the year a little more than 13 percent of the State, 2017). These areas coincide with the with regular measurements of stream- mostly in southwestern Kansas, was clas- parts of the State that received slightly flow and lake levels. These data and sified as the drought condition “abnor- below normal precipitation during WY associated analyses provide a unique mally dry” (fig. 2; National Drought 2017. The total area affected by drought overview of the hydrologic conditions Mitigation Center, 2017).