Hydrologic Conditions in Kansas, Water Year 2019

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Hydrologic Conditions in Kansas, Water Year 2019 Hydrologic Conditions in Kansas, Water Year 2019 The U.S. Geological Survey Kansas provides important information Kansas at the end of WY 2017 (fig. 2A). (USGS), in cooperation with Federal, for many functions including managing During WY 2018, most of the eastern State, and local agencies, maintains water resources, protecting human life half of the State experienced normal a long-term network of hydrologic and property, maintaining agricultural (average) to below normal precipitation, monitoring stations in Kansas. In water and industrial activities, the operation of whereas parts of the western half of the year (WY) 2019, this network included reservoirs, the development of infrastruc- State experienced above normal precipi- 217 real-time streamgages (fig. 1). A WY ture, accurate ecological assessments, and tation, particularly north-central Kansas is the 12-month period from October 1 recreational purposes. (fig. 2B). South-central and eastern through September 30 and is designated Kansas experienced below and much by the calendar year in which it ends. below normal precipitation, resulting in Real-time hydrologic data are veri- abnormally dry to extreme drought condi- fied by USGS personnel throughout the Preceding Conditions and tions at the end of WY 2018 (fig. 3) that year providing regular measurements of Precipitation continued into WY 2019. streamflow, lake levels, and groundwater Heavy rainfall events in October and levels. These data and associated analyses Despite some isolated, heavy November of 2018 ended drought condi- provide a unique overview of hydrologic precipitation events, overall streamflow tions, and by the beginning of December, conditions and help improve the under- and drainage basin runoff conditions dry conditions were virtually nonexis- standing of Kansas’ water resources. decreased for the State of Kansas tent in Kansas and remained that way Annual assessments of hydrologic condi- between WYs 2017 and 2018. During throughout WY 2019 (National Drought tions are made by comparing statistical WY 2017, precipitation in most of the Mitigation Center, 2019). Overall, normal analyses of current and past WY data State was classified as normal to below to much above normal precipitation for the period of record. Long-term normal, which resulted in drought condi- occurred throughout WY 2019 (fig. 4A) monitoring of hydrologic conditions in tions in much of central and eastern (National Oceanic and Atmospheric River basins South Fork Republican Tuttle Creek River Basin Lake Kansas River Basin KANSAS Wilson Lake Milford Perry Lake Lake Kanopolis Pomona Lake CedarCedar Bluff LakeLake Lake Clinton Lake EXPLANATION Melvern Major cities Lake Hillsdale Rivers Horse Thief Reservoir Lake Cheney Lake Streamage location Cimarron River Basin Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data 0 50 100 MILES Albers Equal Area Conic projection North American Datum of 1983 0 50 100 KILOMETERS Figure 1. United States Geological Survey streamgages in Kansas and selected river basins. U.S. Department of the Interior Fact Sheet 2020–3029 U.S. Geological Survey July 2020 A. Water year 2017 Administration, 2019). The above normal precipitation within a month on record; precipitation for WY 2019 extended from out of 125 years of record, the precipita- the northeast portion of the State, with tion for May (10.26 inches) beat the 1951 more than 20 inches of above normal record of 9.36 inches (National Weather annual rainfall occurring in places, down Service, 2019). Additionally, in WY to the southwest portion of the State, with 2019, Kansas experienced the second only a small area experiencing normal largest amount of precipitation in a water precipitation (National Weather Service, year within 130-years of record (National 2019) (fig. 4B). Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, B. Water year 2018 2019) and the most cumulative runoff on record (fig. 5A). Runoff, or streamflow per unit Streamflow Conditions area, is a good indicator of precipita- and Drainage Basin tion and streamflow for a given drainage basin. The monthly average runoff graph Runoff shows the continuity of above normal hydrologic conditions during WY 2019 Kansas experienced several (fig. 5B). Streamflow conditions were EXPLANATION record-breaking hydrologic conditions much above normal in Kansas during Normal precipitation, in percent during WY 2019, including the most the first quarter of the WY (October to 175 100 150 90 A. Percentage of normal precipitation, water year 2019 125 75 110 50 100 25 Figure 2. Comparison of statewide percentage of normal precipitation (1981–2010) (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2019). A, Water year 2017. B, Water year 2018. A. Water year 2017 B. Inches of precipitation above normal, water year 2019 B. Water year 2018 EXPLANATION Drought intensity Abnormally dry Moderate drought Severe drought Extreme drought Exceptional drought Figure 3. Comparison of drought conditions in Kansas (National Drought Mitigation Center, 2019). A, At the end of Figure 4. Precipitation for water year 2019 (National Oceanic and Atmospheric water year 2017. B, At the end of water Administration, 2019). A, Statewide percentage of normal (1981–2010) precipitation for water year 2018. year 2019. B, Statewide inches of precipitation above normal (1981–2010) for water year 2019. A. Cumulative daily average runoff EXPLANATION [<, less than; >, greater than] Percentile classes <10 10–24 25–75 Low Much below Below normal normal Normal 76–90 >90 Above Much above High No data normal normal Water Year 2019 ctober December 2018 B. Monthly average runoff January arch 2019 pril June 2019 July September 2019 EXPLANATION Percentile class lowest 90th percentile 10th percentile 5 10 24 25 75 76 90 95 highest Runoff Below Normal Above Much below normal normal normal Much above normal Figure 6. Comparison of monthly streamflow conditions across Kansas Figure 5. Graphs showing average runoff in Kansas for water year 2019 (U.S. Geological throughout water year 2019 (U.S. Geological Survey 2019a). A, Comparison of cumulative daily average runoff. B, Monthly average runoff. Survey, 2019a). December 2018), except for small areas maintained through March by a strong remained, ending the water year with the in northwest and southwest Kansas, blizzard in the region. April through June State in mostly normal to high stream- which were slightly below normal maintained mostly above normal to high flow conditions (fig. 6). (fig. 6). By January to March, streamflow streamflow conditions from multiple Due to large precipitation events, conditions in the northern and central widespread precipitation events. In July runoff conditions in most of Kansas portions of Kansas remained in the through September, the normal to above were in the 90th percentile by May, normal to much above normal percentile normal trend of streamflow conditions with every county but one in north- class. Above normal streamflow was western Kansas experiencing normal to record high runoff conditions (fig. 7). Precipitation events began decreasing in magnitude by July. In response to the heavy precipitation, Kansas reser- voirs began releasing large outflows to decrease the elevation of water stored in the reservoir’s respective flood pools (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 2019). This resulted in streamflow conditions that were continuously much above normal for rivers in the upper and lower Kansas River Basin (fig. 1) and normal to above normal conditions in most of the State. The eastern portion of the State, where most of the large reservoirs are located, had the highest percentiles EXPLANATION of monthly streamflow conditions for [<, less than; >, greater than] the month of July. However, much Percentile classes of the western part of the State still experienced above normal conditions, <10 10–24 25–75 76–90 >90 Low Much below Below Above Much above High No data with only the Cimarron and South Fork normal normal Normal normal normal Republican River Basins (fig. 1) experi- encing below normal streamflow condi- Figure 7. Streamflow conditions across Kansas throughout May 2019 (U.S. Geological tions. By the end of WY 2019, most of Survey, 2019a). the State was still experiencing above normal or normal conditions, which can persisting flood conditions was in 1993. backwater conditions at many sites in be attributed to the above normal pre- Six streamgages that have been operated Kansas, resulting in peak of record and cipitation occurring throughout the WY by the USGS prior to WY 1993 observed sustained high water-surface elevations and to reservoir releases. a new peak of record. at various streamgages. Backwater is a In WY 2019, rivers above flood condition that occurs when high water- stage for more than 30 days in stream surface elevations downstream or from reaches with a USGS streamgage the main channel affect the height and Record Breaking High included the Marias Des Cygnes, flow of the water upstream. Streamgages Water Arkansas, Neosho, Kansas, Republican, with data above flood stage for more than Big Blue, Black Vermillion, Fancy Creek, 15 days because of backwater from Tuttle WY 2019 was characterized by Cow Creek, Cottonwood, and Missouri Creek Lake (06886900) and Milford sustained high water in much of the Rivers (fig.1). Flood stage is deter- Lake (06857050) included: Republican State. For 69 percent of the WY, one or mined by the National Weather Service, River at Clay Center (06856600), Big more streamgages were above National although not all USGS streamgages have Blue River at Blue Rapids (06884700), Weather Service flood stage, leav- a National Weather Service flood stage. Black Vermillion River near Frankfort ing 114 days without flooding in the The above average precipitation and (06885500), and Fancy Creek at Winkler State (U.S. Geological Survey, 2019b) runoff that occurred in WY 2019 caused (06886500) (fig. 1). (fig. 8). Photographs of flooding events taken by USGS personnel are shown in figure 9. WY 2019 observed 200 more days of flooding than WY 2018 and 194 more days of flooding than WY 2017 (U.S. Geological Survey, 2019b). Many streamgages observed a new peak of record for water eleva- tion in WY 2019.
Recommended publications
  • Kansas Fishing Regulations Summary
    2 Kansas Fishing 0 Regulations 0 5 Summary The new Community Fisheries Assistance Program (CFAP) promises to increase opportunities for anglers to fish close to home. For detailed information, see Page 16. PURCHASE FISHING LICENSES AND VIEW WEEKLY FISHING REPORTS ONLINE AT THE DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE AND PARKS' WEBSITE, WWW.KDWP.STATE.KS.US TABLE OF CONTENTS Wildlife and Parks Offices, e-mail . Zebra Mussel, White Perch Alerts . State Record Fish . Lawful Fishing . Reservoirs, Lakes, and River Access . Are Fish Safe To Eat? . Definitions . Fish Identification . Urban Fishing, Trout, Fishing Clinics . License Information and Fees . Special Event Permits, Boats . FISH Access . Length and Creel Limits . Community Fisheries Assistance . Becoming An Outdoors-Woman (BOW) . Common Concerns, Missouri River Rules . Master Angler Award . State Park Fees . WILDLIFE & PARKS OFFICES KANSAS WILDLIFE & Maps and area brochures are available through offices listed on this page and from the PARKS COMMISSION department website, www.kdwp.state.ks.us. As a cabinet-level agency, the Kansas Office of the Secretary AREA & STATE PARK OFFICES Department of Wildlife and Parks is adminis- 1020 S Kansas Ave., Rm 200 tered by a secretary of Wildlife and Parks Topeka, KS 66612-1327.....(785) 296-2281 Cedar Bluff SP....................(785) 726-3212 and is advised by a seven-member Wildlife Cheney SP .........................(316) 542-3664 and Parks Commission. All positions are Pratt Operations Office Cheyenne Bottoms WA ......(620) 793-7730 appointed by the governor with the commis- 512 SE 25th Ave. Clinton SP ..........................(785) 842-8562 sioners serving staggered four-year terms. Pratt, KS 67124-8174 ........(620) 672-5911 Council Grove WA..............(620) 767-5900 Serving as a regulatory body for the depart- Crawford SP .......................(620) 362-3671 ment, the commission is a non-partisan Region 1 Office Cross Timbers SP ..............(620) 637-2213 board, made up of no more than four mem- 1426 Hwy 183 Alt., P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Level Management Plans Water Year 2021
    LAKE LEVEL MANAGEMENT PLANS WATER YEAR 2021 Kansas Water Office September 2020 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
    [Show full text]
  • Discovery Report Lower Republican Watershed, HUC 10250017
    Discovery Report Lower Republican Watershed, HUC 10250017 Clay, Cloud, Dickinson, Geary, Jewell, Mitchell, Republic, Riley, and Washington Counties, KS Report Number 01 2/1/2012 i Project Area Community List Community Name City of Agenda City of Aurora City of Belleville City of Clay Center City of Clifton City of Clyde City of Concordia City of Courtland City of Formoso Fort Riley North City of Green City of Jamestown City of Jewell City of Junction City City of Linn City of Mankato City of Milford City of Morganville City of Palmer City of Randall City of Scottsville City of Vining City of Wakefield ii Table of Contents I. General Information ............................................................................................ 1 II. Watershed Stakeholder Coordination ................................................................ 22 III. Data Analysis ....................................................................................................... 2 i. Data that can be used for Flood Risk Products .................................................... 7 ii. Other Data and Information ................................................................................. 8 IV. Discovery Meeting ............................................................................................ 21 V. Appendix and Tables ......................................................................................... 23 iii I. General Information The purpose of this Discovery Report is to provide a foundation for the proposed Federal Emergency Management
    [Show full text]
  • Estimation of Potential Runoff-Contributing Areas in Kansas Using Topographic and Soil Information
    Prepared in cooperation with the KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT Estimation of Potential Runoff-Contributing Areas in Kansas Using Topographic and Soil Information Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4242 EXPLANATION Potential contributing area Boundary of major river basin Hiii Infiltration-excess overland flow only ^H Saturation-excess overland flow only - Subbasin boundary Hi Infiltration- and saturation-excess overland flows L I Noncontributing area U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Estimation of Potential Runoff Contributing Areas in Kansas Using Topographic and Soil Information By KYLE E. JURACEK Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4242 Prepared in cooperation with the KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT Lawrence, Kansas 1999 U.S. Department of the Interior Bruce Babbitt, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Charles G. Groat, Director Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Geological Survey. For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: U.S. Geological Survey District Chief Information Services U.S. Geological Survey Building 810, Federal Center 4821 Quail Crest Place Box 25286 Lawrence, KS 66049-3839 Denver, CO 80225-0286 CONTENTS Abstract...........................................................................................................................................................^ 1 Introduction .........................................................................................................................................................................^
    [Show full text]
  • Suspended-Sediment Loads, Reservoir Sediment Trap Efficiency, and Upstream and Downstream Channel Stability for Kanopolis and Tuttle Creek Lakes, Kansas, 2008–10
    Prepared in cooperation with the Kansas Water Office Suspended-Sediment Loads, Reservoir Sediment Trap Efficiency, and Upstream and Downstream Channel Stability for Kanopolis and Tuttle Creek Lakes, Kansas, 2008–10 Scientific Investigations Report 2011–5187 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Front cover. Upper left: Tuttle Creek Lake upstream from highway 16 bridge, May 16, 2011 (photograph by Dirk Hargadine, USGS). Lower right: Tuttle Creek Lake downstream from highway 16 bridge, May 16, 2011 (photograph by Dirk Hargadine, USGS). Note: On May 16, 2011, the water-surface elevation for Tuttle Creek Lake was 1,075.1 feet. The normal elevation for the multi-purpose pool of the reservoir is 1,075.0 feet. Back cover. Water-quality monitor in Little Blue River near Barnes, Kansas. Note active channel-bank erosion at upper right (photograph by Bill Holladay, USGS). Suspended-Sediment Loads, Reservoir Sediment Trap Efficiency, and Upstream and Downstream Channel Stability for Kanopolis and Tuttle Creek Lakes, Kansas, 2008–10 By Kyle E. Juracek Prepared in cooperation with the Kansas Water Office Scientific Investigations Report 2011–5187 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2011 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Kansas Water Authority Annual Report to The
    KANSAS WATER AUTHORITY ANNUAL REPORT TO THE GOVERNOR & LEGISLATURE 2021 www.kwo.ks.gov Table of Contents 01 Letter from the Chair 02 State Water Plan Fund Recommendations 04 Summary of Request for SGF/EDIF Transfer Restoration 04 Kansas Water Plan 5-Year Update 05 KWA Performance-Based Budget Task Force Ogallala Aquifer Initiatives 06 Water Conservation Areas/Local Enhanced Management Areas 07 KWO Water Technology Farms 07 KDA Irrigation Technology 08 KDA Water Transition Assistance Program/Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program 08 Index Well Network & Modeling Reservoir Water Supply & Sediment Management 09 KWO Bathymetric Survey Program 10 KWO Water Injection Dredging 10 KDA Streambank Stabilization 11 KWO Watershed Conservation Practice Implementation 11 KDA Watershed Dam Construction 12 KWO Unfunded Liability & Capital Development Plan Update Water Quality Initiatives 14 KWO Milford Lake Watershed Regional Conservation Partnership Program 14 KDHE Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy (WRAPS) 15 KDHE Harmful Algal Bloom Pilot Project 16 KDHE Drinking Water Protection Program 16 KDHE Contamination Remediation 16 KDA Water Resources Cost-Share 17 KWO Equus Beds Chloride Plume Project 17 KWO Produced Water Pilot Project 18 KDA Non-Point Source Pollution Assistance 18 KDA State Aid to Conservation Districts 19 KWO Arbuckle Study 19 Upper Arkansas Mineralization Study 20 KDHE Total Maximum Daily Load Program 20 KDWPT Aquatic Nuisance Species Program Statewide Water Issues 21 Quivira/Rattlesnake Creek 22 Hays/Russell – R9 Ranch
    [Show full text]
  • Kansas River Basin Model
    Kansas River Basin Model Edward Parker, P.E. US Army Corps of Engineers Kansas City District KANSAS CITY DISTRICT NEBRASKA IOWA RATHBUN M I HARLAN COUNTY S S I LONG S S I SMITHVILLE BRANCH P TUTTLE P CREEK I URI PERRY SSO K MI ANS AS R I MILFORD R. V CLINTON E WILSON BLUE SPRINGS R POMONA LONGVIEW HARRY S. TRUMAN R COLO. KANOPOLIS MELVERN HILLSDALE IV ER Lake of the Ozarks STOCKTON KANSAS POMME DE TERRE MISSOURI US Army Corps of Engineers Kansas City District Kansas River Basin Operation Challenges • Protect nesting Least Terns and Piping Plovers that have taken residence along the Kansas River. • Supply navigation water support for the Missouri River. • Reviewing requests from the State of Kansas and the USBR to alter the standard operation to improve support for recreation, irrigation, fish & wildlife. US Army Corps of Engineers Kansas City District Model Requirements • Model Period 1/1/1920 through 12/31/2000 • Six-Hour routing period • Forecast local inflow using recession • Use historic pan evaporation – Monthly vary pan coefficient • Parallel and tandem operation • Consider all authorized puposes • Use current method of flood control US Army Corps of Engineers Kansas City District Model PMP Revisions • Model period from 1/1/1929 through 12/30/2001 • Mean daily flows for modeling rather than 6-hour data derived from mean daily flow values. • Delete the requirement to forecast future hydrologic conditions. • Average monthly lake evaporation rather than daily • Utilize a standard pan evaporation coefficient of 0.7 rather than a monthly varying value. • Separate the study basin between the Smoky River Basin and the Republican/Kansas River Basin.
    [Show full text]
  • Cedar Bluff Reservoir 2000 Reservoir Survey
    CEDAR BLUFF RESERVOIR 2000 RESERVOIR SURVEY RE.SO' -J U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved 0MB No. 0704-0 188 L AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave Blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED March 2001 Final _______________________________ 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NTJMBERS Cedar Bluff Reservoir PR 2000 Reservoir Survey 6. AUTHOR(S) Ronald L. Ferrari ______________________ 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER Bureau of Reclamation, Technical Service Center, Denver CO 80225-0007 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY REPORT NUMBER Bureau of Reclamation, Denver Federal Center, P0 Box 25007, DIBR Denver CO 80225-0007 ____________________________ 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Hard copy available at Bureau of Reclamation Technical Service Center, Denver, Colorado 12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILiTY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE 13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 worch) The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) surveyed Cedar Bluff Reservoir in September of 2000 to develop a topographic map and compute a present storage-elevation relationship (area-capacity tables). The data were used to calculate reservoir capacity lost due to sediment accumulation since dam closure in November of 1950. The underwater survey was conducted in September of 2000 near reservoir elevation 2143.7 feet (project datum). The underwater survey used sonic depth recording equipment interfaced with a global positioning system (GPS) that gave continuous sounding positions throughout the underwater portions of the reservoir covered by the survey vessel. The above-water topography was detennined by digitizing the developed contour lines from the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • FISHERIES and WILDLIFE DIVISION FISH CULTURE SECTION 1999 PRODUCTION REPORT
    FISHERIES and WILDLIFE DIVISION FISH CULTURE SECTION 1999 PRODUCTION REPORT h Meade Fish Rearing Station KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE AND PARKS 1'his program receives Federal financial assistance from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act o f 1973, Title 11 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, the U.S. Department o f the Interior and its bureaus prohibit discrimination on the bases of race, color, national origin, age, disability or sex (in educational programs). I f you believe that you have been discriminated against in any program, activity or facility, or if you desire further information please write to: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Office for Diversity and Civil Rights Programs-Extemal Programs 4040 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 130 Arlington, VA 22203 FISH CULTURE SECTION 1999 PRODUCTION REPORT FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE DIVISION KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE AND PARKS Steve Williams, Secretary January, 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION 1 TRENDS IN FISH PRODUCTION DEMAND 2 FISH PRODUCTION SUMMARY 3 FARLINGTON HATCHERY 5 Channel Catfish 8 Largemouth Bass 10 Redear Sunfish 11 Saugeye 12 Percid/Morone sps. 13 Striped Bass 14 Striped Bass Hybrids 15 Walleye 17 Grass Carp 18 MEADE FISH REARING STATION 19 Hybrid Bluegill 23 Largemouth Bass 24 Smallmouth Bass 26 Grass Carp 28 MILFORD HATCHERY 29 Channel Catfish 33 Largemouth Bass 36 Paddlefish 37 Striped Bass 38 Striped Bass Hybrids (WBxSTB) 40 Percid sp.
    [Show full text]
  • Milford Lake – Eutrophication and Dissolved Oxygen
    KANSAS-LOWER REPUBLICAN BASIN TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD Waterbody / Assessment Unit (AU): Milford Lake Water Quality Impairment: Eutrophication and Dissolved Oxygen 1. INTRODUCTION AND PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION Subbasin: Lower Republican Counties: Geary, Cloud, Clay, Riley, Washington, Jewell, Republic, Dickinson HUC8: 10250017 HUC10 (HUC12): 01 (01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07) 02 (01, 02, 03, 04, 05) 03 (01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10) 04 (01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09) 05 (01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08) 06 (01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09) 10250016 07 (08) 08 (01, 02, 03, 04, 05) 09 (01, 02, 03) Ecoregion: Central Great Plains, Smoky Hills (27a), Flint Hills (28) Drainage Area: 2,361 square miles in Kansas-Lower Republican Basin Milford Lake Conservation Pool: Surface Area = 15,498 acres Watershed/ Lake Ratio = 98:1 Maximum Depth = 18.0 m Mean Depth = 7.4 m Storage Volume = 373,152 acre-feet Estimated Retention Tim = 0.18 years Mean Annual Inflow = 497,618 acre-feet (2005-2012) Mean Annual Outflow = 451,852 acre-feet (2005-2012) Year Constructed: 1967 Design Sedimentation Rate: 1730 acre-feet/year Actual Sedimentation Rate: 1007 acre-feet/year Milford Lake Designated Uses: Expected Aquatic Life; Primary Contact Recreation Class A; Domestic Water Supply; Food Procurement; Ground Water Recharge; Industrial Water Supply; Irrigation Use; and Livestock Watering Use. 1 303(d) Listings: Milford Lake Eutrophication; 2004 and 2012 Kansas-Lower Republican River Basin Lakes. Dissolved Oxygen; 2002, 2004, 2008, 2010, and 2012 Kansas- Lower Republican River Basin Lakes.
    [Show full text]
  • State of the Resource & Regional Goal Action Plan Implementation
    State of the Resource & Regional Goal Action Plan Implementation Report August 2018 Smoky Hill-Saline Regional Planning Area Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................2 WATER USE TRENDS ...........................................................................................................................3 WATER RESOURCES CONDITIONS .......................................................................................................5 GROUNDWATER ................................................................................................................................................ 5 SURFACE WATER ............................................................................................................................................... 6 WATER QUALITY .............................................................................................................................. 10 IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS .......................................................................................................... 14 SURFACE WATER ............................................................................................................................................. 14 IMPLEMENTATION NEEDS ................................................................................................................ 16 REGIONAL GOALS & ACTION PLAN PROGRESS .................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Level Management Plans Water Year 2017
    LAKE LEVEL MANAGEMENT PLANS WATER YEAR 2017 KANSAS WATER OFFICE 2016 CORPS OF ENGINEERS, KANSAS CITY DISTRICT ............................................................................................................................................................ 1 CLINTON LAKE ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 HILLSDALE LAKE ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 KANOPOLIS LAKE ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 7 MELVERN LAKE ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 MILFORD LAKE ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 11 PERRY LAKE .............................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]