DOCSLIB.ORG

Factsheet 3Col V 3.5.1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Factsheet 3Col V 3.5.1 Normal Streamflows and Water Levels Continue: Summary of Hydrologic Conditions in Georgia, 2014 The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Federal, State, and local agencies. Hydrologic water-quality information (Shaffer, 2013). South Atlantic Water Science Center (SAWSC) conditions are determined by comparing the Two of these Internet tools are WaterNow Georgia office, in cooperation with local, statistical analyses of data collected during and WaterAlert. WaterNow, available at State, and other Federal agencies, maintains a the current water year1 (WY) to historical data. http://water.usgs.gov/waternow/, allows users long-term hydrologic monitoring network of Changing hydrologic conditions underscore to request current data for a USGS site by text more than 350 real-time, continuous-record, the need for accurate, timely data to allow messaging or emailing using a mobile phone. streamflow-gaging stations (streamgages). informed decisions about the management and WaterAlert, available at http://water.usgs.gov/ The network includes 14 real-time lake- conservation of Georgia’s water resources for wateralert/, notifies a user by text message level monitoring stations, 72 real-time agricultural, recreational, ecological, and water- or email when a user-defined threshold is surface-water-quality monitors, and several supply needs and in protecting life and property. exceeded at a real-time USGS site. Beginning water-quality sampling programs. Additionally, with water year 2006 and ending with water the SAWSC Georgia office operates more Water Resources Internet Tools year 2013, annual water data reports are than 204 groundwater monitoring wells, 39 of available to the entire Nation as individual which are real-time. The wide-ranging coverage Historically, hydrologic data collected electronic Site Data Sheets. Starting with the of streamflow, reservoir, and groundwater by the USGS were compiled in annual data 2014 WY, NWISWeb provides an on-demand, monitoring sites allows for a comprehensive reports, but this method of publication was print-ready Water-Year Summary as an annual view of hydrologic conditions across the State. discontinued. Current and historical data water-data product (U.S. Geological Survey, One of the many benefits this monitoring are available through the National Water 2014b). Each site is assigned a unique USGS network provides is a spatially distributed Information System Web interface, or station number, and information on station overview of the hydrologic conditions of creeks, NWISWeb, at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis numbers, alongside numbers for wells and rivers, reservoirs, and aquifers in Georgia. (U.S. Geological Survey, 2014a). miscellaneous sites, can be found at Streamflow and groundwater data The USGS has several online water- http://help.waterdata.usgs.gov/faq/sites/do- are verified throughout the year by USGS resource tools designed to provide users with station-numbers-have-any-particular-meaning. hydrographers and made available to current streamflow and groundwater data, water-resource managers, recreationists, and flood inundation maps, stream statistics, and Selected USGS Water Resources Internet Tools Quarterly Hydrologic Conditions in Georgia for 2014 WY, Based on Drainage Basin Runoff USGS National Water Information System (NWIS) A. 10/01/13–12/31/13 B. 01/01/14–03/31/14 C. 04/01/14–06/30/14 D. 07/01/14–09/30/14 http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis GEORGIA Augusta Macon Columbus Savannah These maps represent hydrologic conditions during the 2014 WY compared with available historical USGS WaterNow data.Figure The observed 2 runoff—flow per unit area—is a good indicator of precipitation and streamflow http://water.usgs.gov/waternow/ conditions for a given basin (Langbein and Iseri, 1960). Runoff is calculated for each basin and presented uniformly over the entire basin area. Only streamflow stations with complete daily-flow datasets for the 2014 WY were used (U.S. Geological Survey, 2014c). EXPLANATION The average annual precipitation for Georgia ranges from 45 to 75 inches of rain. In the 2014 WY, the majority of the State received Percentile classes between 40 and 70 inches of rainfall (National Oceanic and Much above normal, >90 Atmospheric Administration, 2014). For the first quarter of the 2014 WY Above normal, 76 to 90 (October–December 2013, map A), the majority of the State observed Normal, 25 to 75 “normal” (25–75 percentile class) to “above normal” (76–90 percentile Below normal, 10 to 24 USGS WaterAlert class) runoff conditions. During the second quarter of the 2014 WY Much below normal <10 http://water.usgs.gov/wateralert/ (January–March 2014, map B ), the runoff conditions were almost entirely “normal” (25–75 percentile class). During the third quarter of the 2014 WY (April-June 2014, map C ), runoff conditions in the south were “much above normal” (>90 percentile class). During FRM: [email protected] MSG: 144 cfs Streamflow, 2013-11-10 9:42:00 the fourth quarter (July–September 2014, map D ), the State received 2–4 inches less than normal Scioto River below O’Shaughnessy Dam nr Dublin, OH (From precipitation at the majority of National Weather Service monitoring locations (Dunkley, 2015). The h p://water.usgs.gov/bns? YUhd6:03221000 Shaffer, cities of Macon and Columbus, Georgia, experienced the 2nd and 6th driest months on record, 2013) respectively, in August; the majority of runoff conditions were “below normal” (10–24 percentile class) and “much below normal” (less than 10 percentile class). U.S. Department of the Interior Fact Sheet 2016 –3016 U.S. Geological Survey Figure 1. March 2016 Daily Discharge and 7-Day Average Discharge Conditions for Select Gaging Locations, 2014 Water Year CUMBERLAND PLATEAU R BLUE EXPLANATION a g RIDGE SOUTH o o [Map] Chattooga River at Summerville, Ga. 02398000 t Sweetwater Creek near Austell, Ga. 02337000 t CAROLINA 02337000 Sweetwater Creek near Austell, Georgia 02398000 Chattooga River at Summerville, Georgia a h River basin boundary C 02398000 The Chattooga River flows 10,000 Sweetwater Creek is a major 10,000 VALLEY Physiographic boundary from the northwestern corner AND Coosa– tributary of the Chattahoochee RIDGE Tallapoosa– 02213000 Streamgage and number of Georgia in the Blue Ridge Weiss Tennessee River in the Piedmont Physio- 1,000 1,000 Lake Sweetwater Physiographic Province, into Creek graphic Province in central PIEDMONT Savannah–Ogeechee Sa Atlanta va Georgia (U.S. Geological Survey, 100 Alabama, where it flows into 02337000 n n Jackson a h 1975). For the 2014 WY, 7-day Weiss Lake (U.S. Geological r Lake e R 100 v i i v e average streamflow conditions 10 Survey, 1975). For the majority R GEORGIA r of the 2014 WY, 7-day average Ocmulgee–Altamaha were “normal” to “much above in cubic feet per second 7-day average discharge, in cubic feet per second O 7-day average discharge, c normal” with short periods of streamflow conditions were 02213000 Oconee– o 1 10 n e e O “normal” to “much above ge record in the “below normal” ec h 100,000 100,000 e normal.” Daily discharge for e range. Daily discharge fluctuated R iv R e i most of the 2014 WY was in e r v between the “median” and e O e 10,000 10,000 c r h m c COASTAL PLAIN “maximum” ranges of historical the “maximum” range. A new o u l o g Altam h a e r h daily mean flow 1,000 record-high daily discharge 1,000 a e a t e v t Ri Ri a ve was observed on April 8. h r C n 100 100 a e Satilla–Suwannee– c O r St Marys–Ochlockonee Chattahoochee–Flinte c Daily discharge, Daily discharge, v i i 10 10 R t t n e a n e l in cubic feet per second i t in cubic feet per second ALABAMA l h c A F o r o e 1 1 c v la i OND JFMAMJJAS h R OND JFMAMJJAS FLORIDA t i 02318500 2013 2014 W 2013 2014 N EXPLANATION [Graphs] 02318500 Withlacoochee River Ocmulgee River at Macon, Ga. 02213000 Withlacoochee River at US 84 near Quitman, Ga. 02318500 02213000 Ocmulgee River at Macon, Georgia 7-Day Average Discharge at US 84, near Quitman, Georgia 100,000 100,000 The Ocmulgee River flows Hydrographs show the 7-day average discharge for 2014 as compared to The Withlacoochee River flows historical 7-day averages. Data are categorized in percentile ranges from out of Jackson Lake and joins into the Suwannee River Basin “much above normal” (greater than the 90th percentile) to “much below 10,000 the Oconee River to form the EXPLANATION 10,000 normal” (less than the 10th percentile) (U.S. Geological Survey, 2014c). in the southern coastal plain of Altamaha River in the Coastal [Graphs] Georgia (U.S. Geological Survey, 1,000 Plain Physiographic Province in Historical 7-day average discharge— 1975). For much of the 2014 WY, Percentile in parentheses 100 central Georgia (U.S. Geological 1,000 7-day average streamflow Survey, 1975). In the 2014 WY, Much above normal (≥90) Above normal (76 to 89) conditions were “normal” to 10 the 7-day average discharges in cubic feet per second Normal (25 to 75) “much above normal,” from 7-day average discharge, in cubic feet per second were mostly “normal.” Daily 7-day average discharge, 100 Below normal (11 to 24) October to May and record-high 1 discharge fluctuated between Much below normal (≤10) 7-day average streamflows were 100,000 100,000 the “median” and “maximum” 2013 2014 2014 water year 7-day observed during April and May. average discharge ranges of historical daily-mean Daily discharge was mostly 10,000 flow, and record-high maximum in the “maximum” range from 10,000 Daily Discharge daily-mean discharges were October to May, and record-high 1,000 recorded during the month Hydrographs show 2014 daily-mean discharge, in cubic feet per second, as maximum daily-mean discharges compared to historical minimum and median discharge for the entire period 100 of December.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Stream-Temperature Characteristics in Georgia
    STREAM-TEMPERATURE CHARACTERISTICS IN GEORGIA By T.R. Dyar and S.J. Alhadeff ______________________________________________________________________________ U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4203 Prepared in cooperation with GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION Atlanta, Georgia 1997 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Charles G. Groat, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Information Services 3039 Amwiler Road, Suite 130 Denver Federal Center Peachtree Business Center Box 25286 Atlanta, GA 30360-2824 Denver, CO 80225-0286 CONTENTS Page Abstract . 1 Introduction . 1 Purpose and scope . 2 Previous investigations. 2 Station-identification system . 3 Stream-temperature data . 3 Long-term stream-temperature characteristics. 6 Natural stream-temperature characteristics . 7 Regression analysis . 7 Harmonic mean coefficient . 7 Amplitude coefficient. 10 Phase coefficient . 13 Statewide harmonic equation . 13 Examples of estimating natural stream-temperature characteristics . 15 Panther Creek . 15 West Armuchee Creek . 15 Alcovy River . 18 Altamaha River . 18 Summary of stream-temperature characteristics by river basin . 19 Savannah River basin . 19 Ogeechee River basin. 25 Altamaha River basin. 25 Satilla-St Marys River basins. 26 Suwannee-Ochlockonee River basins . 27 Chattahoochee River basin. 27 Flint River basin. 28 Coosa River basin. 29 Tennessee River basin . 31 Selected references. 31 Tabular data . 33 Graphs showing harmonic stream-temperature curves of observed data and statewide harmonic equation for selected stations, figures 14-211 . 51 iii ILLUSTRATIONS Page Figure 1. Map showing locations of 198 periodic and 22 daily stream-temperature stations, major river basins, and physiographic provinces in Georgia.
    [Show full text]
  • List of TMDL Implementation Plans with Tmdls Organized by Basin
    Latest 305(b)/303(d) List of Streams List of Stream Reaches With TMDLs and TMDL Implementation Plans - Updated June 2011 Total Maximum Daily Loadings TMDL TMDL PLAN DELIST BASIN NAME HUC10 REACH NAME LOCATION VIOLATIONS TMDL YEAR TMDL PLAN YEAR YEAR Altamaha 0307010601 Bullard Creek ~0.25 mi u/s Altamaha Road to Altamaha River Bio(sediment) TMDL 2007 09/30/2009 Altamaha 0307010601 Cobb Creek Oconee Creek to Altamaha River DO TMDL 2001 TMDL PLAN 08/31/2003 Altamaha 0307010601 Cobb Creek Oconee Creek to Altamaha River FC 2012 Altamaha 0307010601 Milligan Creek Uvalda to Altamaha River DO TMDL 2001 TMDL PLAN 08/31/2003 2006 Altamaha 0307010601 Milligan Creek Uvalda to Altamaha River FC TMDL 2001 TMDL PLAN 08/31/2003 Altamaha 0307010601 Oconee Creek Headwaters to Cobb Creek DO TMDL 2001 TMDL PLAN 08/31/2003 Altamaha 0307010601 Oconee Creek Headwaters to Cobb Creek FC TMDL 2001 TMDL PLAN 08/31/2003 Altamaha 0307010602 Ten Mile Creek Little Ten Mile Creek to Altamaha River Bio F 2012 Altamaha 0307010602 Ten Mile Creek Little Ten Mile Creek to Altamaha River DO TMDL 2001 TMDL PLAN 08/31/2003 Altamaha 0307010603 Beards Creek Spring Branch to Altamaha River Bio F 2012 Altamaha 0307010603 Five Mile Creek Headwaters to Altamaha River Bio(sediment) TMDL 2007 09/30/2009 Altamaha 0307010603 Goose Creek U/S Rd. S1922(Walton Griffis Rd.) to Little Goose Creek FC TMDL 2001 TMDL PLAN 08/31/2003 Altamaha 0307010603 Mushmelon Creek Headwaters to Delbos Bay Bio F 2012 Altamaha 0307010604 Altamaha River Confluence of Oconee and Ocmulgee Rivers to ITT Rayonier
    [Show full text]
  • Rule 391-3-6-.03. Water Use Classifications and 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. Rule 391-3-6-.03. Water Use Classifications and Water Quality Standards ( 1) Purpose. The establishment of water quality standards. (2) W ate r Quality Enhancement: (a) The purposes and intent of the State in establishing Water Quality Standards are to provide enhancement of water quality and prevention of pollution; to protect the public health or welfare in accordance with the public interest for drinking water supplies, conservation of fish, wildlife and other beneficial aquatic life, and agricultural, industrial, recreational, and other reasonable and necessary uses and to maintain and improve the biological integrity of the waters of the State. ( b) The following paragraphs describe the three tiers of the State's waters. (i) Tier 1 - Existing instream water uses and the level of water quality necessary to protect the existing uses shall be maintained and protected. (ii) Tier 2 - Where the quality of the waters exceed levels necessary to support propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water, that quality shall be maintained and protected unless the division finds, after full satisfaction of the intergovernmental coordination and public participation provisions of the division's continuing planning process, that allowing lower water quality is necessary to accommodate important economic or social development in the area in which the waters are located.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing Climate-Change-Induced Flood Risk in the Conasauga River
    Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 21, 1739–1757, 2021 https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-21-1739-2021 © Author(s) 2021. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Assessing climate-change-induced flood risk in the Conasauga River watershed: an application of ensemble hydrodynamic inundation modeling Tigstu T. Dullo1, George K. Darkwah1, Sudershan Gangrade2,3, Mario Morales-Hernández3,4, M. Bulbul Sharif5, Alfred J. Kalyanapu1, Shih-Chieh Kao2,3, Sheikh Ghafoor5, and Moetasim Ashfaq3,4 1Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Tennessee Technological University, Cookeville, TN 38505, USA 2Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA 3Climate Change Science Institute, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA 4Computational Sciences and Engineering Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN 37831, USA 5Department of Computer Science, Tennessee Technological University, Cookeville, TN 38505, USA Correspondence: Alfred J. Kalyanapu ([email protected]) Received: 13 October 2020 – Discussion started: 20 October 2020 Revised: 7 April 2021 – Accepted: 18 April 2021 – Published: 2 June 2021 Abstract. This study evaluates the impact of potential future Copyright statement. This paper has been authored by UT-Battelle, climate change on flood regimes, floodplain protection, and LLC, under contract DE-AC05-00OR22725 with the US Depart- electricity infrastructures across the Conasauga River wa- ment of Energy (DOE). The US government retains and the pub- tershed in the southeastern United States through ensemble lisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that hydrodynamic inundation modeling. The ensemble stream- the US government retains a nonexclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, flow scenarios were simulated by the Distributed Hydrol- worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this paper, or allow others to do so, for US government purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Benefits of Water Trails
    National Park Service Rivers, Trails & Conservation Assistance Program Southeast Regional Office--Atlanta Recreation Conservation Low investment Revenue generators Georgia has a variety of water resources--lakes, rivers and the coast. Each offers a different kind of opportunity for healthy outdoor activity In the U.S., participation increased 117% from 1995-2005. Water trails provide recreational opportunities for all sizes and ages- -children, adults, seniors. Water quality & quantity Wildlife Land use Canoe trails make connections between land, water, riparian edges and wildlife habitats. Canoe trails create environmental stewards. They are a constituency that understands land use & watershed issues. Upstream issues = downstream problems. And paddle groups such as Georgia Canoe Association sponsor clean-ups of rivers. The economics of the trail implementation: Inexpensive relative to other recreation projects. Not as much land to buy or structures to build. Access facilities can be minimal and inexpensive. Existing public land and facilities on rivers, lakes and the coast. Revenue generation from the canoe trail: Increased spending in the local area. Existing businesses increase profits-- restaurants, outfitters, lodging . New businesses develop to support the trail. Purchases of gear & equipment increase and support business. Festivals and events around the trail support the local community. More value from local government support. Improve local community with higher quality of life & improved tax base. Altamaha River www.altmahariver.org trail starts near the end of the Ocmulgee river and goes to Darien. City of Canton—Greenway Master Plan (2000) includes blueway. Will become part of the Etowah River Blueway. Chattahoochee Canoe Trail –Upper section (proposed)—about 40 miles from Sautee Creek to Clarks Bridge at Lake Lanier.
    [Show full text]
  • GEORGIA TROUT FISHING REGULATIONS Trout Season Trout
    GEORGIA TROUT FISHING REGULATIONS Trout Season All designated trout waters are now open year round. Trout Fishing Hours • Fishing 24 hours a day is allowed on all trout streams and all impoundments on trout streams except those in the next paragraph. • Fishing hours on Dockery Lake, Rock Creek Lake, the Chattahoochee River from Buford Dam to Peachtree Creek, the Conasauga River watershed upstream of the Georgia-Tennessee state line and Smith Creek downstream of Unicoi dam are 30 minutes before sunrise until 30 minutes after sunset. Night fishing is not allowed. Trout Fishing Rules • Trout anglers are restricted to the use of one pole and line which must be hand held. No other type of gear may be used in trout streams. • It is unlawful to use live fish for bait in trout streams. Seining bait-fish is not allowed in any trout stream. Impoundments On Trout Streams Anglers can: • Fish for fish species other than trout without a trout license on Dockery and Rock Creek lakes. • Fish at night, except on Dockery and Rock Creek lakes. See Trout Fishing Hours for details. Impoundment notes: • If you fish for or possess trout, you must possess a trout license. If you catch a trout and do not possess a trout license you must release the trout immediately. • State park visitors are not required to have a trout license to fish in the impounded waters of the Park. However, those visitors wishing to harvest trout will need to have a trout license in their possession. Delayed Harvest Streams Anglers fishing delayed harvest streams must release all trout immediately and use and possess only artificial lures with one single hook per lure from Nov.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Consumption Guidelines: Rivers & Creeks
    FRESHWATER FISH CONSUMPTION GUIDELINES: RIVERS & CREEKS NO RESTRICTIONS ONE MEAL PER WEEK ONE MEAL PER MONTH DO NOT EAT NO DATA Bass, LargemouthBass, Other Bass, Shoal Bass, Spotted Bass, Striped Bass, White Bass, Bluegill Bowfin Buffalo Bullhead Carp Catfish, Blue Catfish, Channel Catfish,Flathead Catfish, White Crappie StripedMullet, Perch, Yellow Chain Pickerel, Redbreast Redhorse Redear Sucker Green Sunfish, Sunfish, Other Brown Trout, Rainbow Trout, Alapaha River Alapahoochee River Allatoona Crk. (Cobb Co.) Altamaha River Altamaha River (below US Route 25) Apalachee River Beaver Crk. (Taylor Co.) Brier Crk. (Burke Co.) Canoochee River (Hwy 192 to Lotts Crk.) Canoochee River (Lotts Crk. to Ogeechee River) Casey Canal Chattahoochee River (Helen to Lk. Lanier) (Buford Dam to Morgan Falls Dam) (Morgan Falls Dam to Peachtree Crk.) * (Peachtree Crk. to Pea Crk.) * (Pea Crk. to West Point Lk., below Franklin) * (West Point dam to I-85) (Oliver Dam to Upatoi Crk.) Chattooga River (NE Georgia, Rabun County) Chestatee River (below Tesnatee Riv.) Chickamauga Crk. (West) Cohulla Crk. (Whitfield Co.) Conasauga River (below Stateline) <18" Coosa River <20" 18 –32" (River Mile Zero to Hwy 100, Floyd Co.) ≥20" >32" <18" Coosa River <20" 18 –32" (Hwy 100 to Stateline, Floyd Co.) ≥20" >32" Coosa River (Coosa, Etowah below <20" Thompson-Weinman dam, Oostanaula) ≥20" Coosawattee River (below Carters) Etowah River (Dawson Co.) Etowah River (above Lake Allatoona) Etowah River (below Lake Allatoona dam) Flint River (Spalding/Fayette Cos.) Flint River (Meriwether/Upson/Pike Cos.) Flint River (Taylor Co.) Flint River (Macon/Dooly/Worth/Lee Cos.) <16" Flint River (Dougherty/Baker Mitchell Cos.) 16–30" >30" Gum Crk.
    [Show full text]
  • Extreme Drought: Summary of Hydrologic Conditions in Georgia, 2012 the U.S
    Extreme Drought: Summary of Hydrologic Conditions in Georgia, 2012 The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Streamflow and Groundwater Data WYs 1999–2012 can be accessed online at Georgia Water Science Center (GaWSC) http://ga.water.usgs.gov/publications/pubswdr. maintains a long-term hydrologic monitoring Daily, monthly, and yearly streamflow html. A digital map at http://maps.waterdata. network of more than 330 real-time stream-­­ statistics from the 2012 USGS annual data usgs.gov allows the user to search for current gages, including 10 real-time lake-level report (ADR; U.S. Geological Survey, 2012a) and historical data and graphics collected as monitoring stations, 63 real-time water-quality were used to develop this summary. Data for part of the USGS monitoring network. monitors, and 48 water-quality sampling stations. Additionally, the GaWSC operates more than 180 groundwater monitoring wells, Quarterly Hydrologic Conditions in Georgia for 2012 WY, Based on Drainage Basin Runoff 42 of which are real-time. One of the many D. 07/01/12– EXPLANATION benefits from this monitoring network is that A. 10/01/11– B. 01/01/12– C. 04/01/12– 09/30/12 Percentile classes the data analyses provide a well distributed 12/31/11 03/30/12 06/30/12 Highest overview of the hydrologic conditions of creeks, Much above normal, >90 rivers, reservoirs, and aquifers in Georgia. Above normal, 76 to 90 Streamflow and groundwater data are GEORGIA Normal, 25 to 75 verified throughout the year by USGS hydro­ Below normal, 10 to 24 graphers, and this information is available to Much below normal <10 water-resource managers, recreationalists, and Lowest Federal, State, and local agencies.
    [Show full text]
  • Total Maximum Daily Load Evaluation for Fifty-Eight Stream Segments in the Coosa River Basin for Fecal Coliform
    Total Maximum Daily Load Evaluation for Fifty-Eight Stream Segments in the Coosa River Basin for Fecal Coliform Submitted to: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 4 Atlanta, Georgia Submitted by: The Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division Atlanta, Georgia January 2004 Total Maximum Daily Load Evaluation January 2004 Coosa River Basin (Fecal coliform) Table of Contents Section Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. iv 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Watershed Description......................................................................................................1 1.3 Water Quality Standard.....................................................................................................9 2.0 WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................... 15 3.0 SOURCE ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................... 16 3.1 Point Source Assessment ............................................................................................... 16 3.2 Nonpoint Source Assessment........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mississippi Period Archaeology of the Georgia Valley and Ridge Province
    UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA Laboratory of Archaeology Series Report No. 25 Georgia Archaeological Research Design Paper, No. 4 MISSISSIPPI PERIOD ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE GEORGIA VALLEY AND RIDGE PROVINCE By David J. Hally Department of Anthropology University of Georgia and James B. Langford, Jr. The Coosawattee Foundation 1988 Reprinted, 1995 For John Wear, energetic pioneer in the archaeology of northwest Georgia TABLE OF CONTENTS FIGJRFS. • • . • . • . • • • • • . • . • • • • . • • . • . • . • . • . • . • • . • . • vi TABLES. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• vii .ACID\1~~ • ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • viii INTRODUcrION ••••••••••• 1 THE VALLEY MlD RIDGE PROVINCE 2 PREVIOUS ARCHAEDLOGICAL RESEARCH IN THE VALLEY AND RIDGE PROVINCE •••••••••••••••••.••••••••• 13 PREHISTORIC OVERVIEW ••••••••••• 22 EARLY MISSISSIPPI PERIOD {A.D. 900-1200) •••••••• 41 MIDDLE tlISSISSIPPI PERIOD {A.D. 1200-1350) •••••••••• 55 LATE MISSISSIPPI PERIOD (A.D. 1350-1540) •••••••••••• 67 HESOURCE MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS 82 THE CULTURAL RESOURCES 82 RESEARCH PROBLEMS IN VALLEY AND RIJ::x:;E PROVINCE I~SSISSIPPIAN ARCHAIDLOGY ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 86 RESOURCE SIGf.\!IFICANCE 92 PRESERVING ARCHAIDLOGICAL RESOURCES 93 APPENDIX: PUBLISHED SOURCES FOR TYPE DESCRIPTIONS 98 REV"I:E'VV C~S AND REPLy........................................ 99 REFERENCES CITED ••............•..•.•.....•••.•.....•..•......... 109 v I I 1 FIGURES I I 1. Physiographic provinces of Georgia 3 2. The Georgia Valley and Ridge Province 4 I 3. Physiographic divisions of the Valley and Ridge Province 5 1 4. Distribution of chert resources in the Valley and Ridge Province 7 5. River systems in the Valley and Ridge Province 8 6. Distribution of floodplain soils along major rivers in the Valley and Ridge Province 11 7. Complicated stamped motifs referred to in the text 30 8. Radiocarbon dates for Mississippian sites in the Georgia Valley and Ridge Provi nce and surrounding areas, uncorrected 37 9.
    [Show full text]
  • * This Is an Excerpt from Protected Animals of Georgia Published By
    Common Name: RIVER REDHORSE Scientific Name: Moxostoma carinatum (Cope) Other Commonly Used Names: none Previously Used Scientific Names: Placopharynx carinatus Family: Catostomidae Rarity Ranks: G4/S2 State Legal Status: Rare Federal Legal Status: none Description: The river redhorse is a large, heavy-bodied sucker that can attain total lengths approaching 750 mm (30 in). The margin of the dorsal fin is straight to slightly concave and the upper lobe of the dorsal fin is pointed. The lips have deep longitudinal grooves (i.e., plicae). There are 12-14 dorsal fin rays, a complete lateral line with 42-44 scales (usually), and 6-9 large molariform teeth on the lower half of the pharyngeal arch. Body coloration of adults is brassy olive and the belly is white. The dorsal and caudal fins, particularly the distal margins of these fins, are bright red in adult males and females. Juveniles have a silvery body and a blotch saddle pattern across the back; juveniles may have red caudal fins, but not as intensely red as in adults. Breeding males develop medium to large tubercles on the snout, cheeks, head, anal rays and caudal rays, and may develop smaller tubercles elsewhere. During spawning, males develop a prominent dark lateral stripe, bordered above by a tan stripe, another dark stripe and a tan or pale dorsum; there is often a dark mask on the head. These spawning colors are ephemeral and will quickly vanish, especially if the fish is disturbed. Similar Species: The undescribed sicklefin redhorse (syntopic with the river redhorse only in Brasstown Creek, Towns Co.) also has brilliant red dorsal and caudal fins, but is easily distinguished by having a sickle-shaped (vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Water Use in the Tennessee Valley 2008.FH11
    in the Tennessee Valley for 2005 and Projected Use in 2030 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Prepared by River Operations in cooperation with U.S. Geological Survey Water Use in the Tennessee Valley for 2005 and Projected Use in 2030 Charles E. Bohac Michael J. McCall November 2008 Contents List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................. iii List of Figures ................................................................................................................................................ v Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................................................... vii Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... viii Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1–1 Background ............................................................................................................................................ 1–1 Purpose and Scope ............................................................................................................................... 1–2 Hydrologic Setting .................................................................................................................................. 1–2 Data Source
    [Show full text]