Large Springs of East Tennessee GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1755 Prepared in cooperation with the Tennessee Department of Conservation and Com­ merce, Division of Geology and Division of Heater Resources GEOr" TUCSON, Large Springs of East Tennessee By P-C. P. SUN, J. H. CRINER, and J. L. POOLE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1755 Prepared in cooperation with the Tennessee Department of Conservation and Com­ merce, Division of Geology and Division of Water Resources UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1963 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Thomas B. Nolan, Director The U.S. Geological Survey Library catalog card for this publication appears after page 52. For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C., 20402 CONTENTS Page Abstract__ _1_________________.______________.__________________ 1 Introduction _______________________________________________________ 1 Purpose and scope of the investigation___________________________ 1 Previous investigations.._______________________________________ 2 Geography ___________________________________________________ 3 Location and description of the area.____________________________ 3 Climate._____________________________________________________ 5 Geology and hydrology of springs_________________________________ 6 Summary of geologic conditions_______-___-_______--____-_____-- 6 Hydrologic settings of springs.______-_________--__--__--__---_-_ 8 Sprin gs_ _ _______________________________________________________ 8 Ground water and its relation to springs________________________ 9 Use and yield of water from springs_____-____-___--________-_-_ 9 Magnitude and variability of springs___________________________ 13 Quality of water from springs__________-______--__--__---_____-- 14 Discharge of ground water from storage by springs________________ 17 Correlation of spring discharges________-____-_---__--___-__--___ 22 Application of base-flow analysis and spring-discharge correlations _-._____ 24 Descriptions of springs_____________________________________________ 25 References_ _____________________________________________________ 52 ILLUSTRATIONS Page FIGURE 1. Map showing physiographic provinces of Tennessee and the area described in this report.__________________________ 2. Relation between topography, geology, and the location of springs._ ____________________________________________ 3. Locations of springs in east Tennessee__________________ 10 4. Minimum, average, and maximum discharges of springs __ 12 5. Variability of 82 selected springs of the second, third, and fourth magnitudes..__________________________________ 14 6. Relation between variability and discharge of 82 selected springs ______________________________________________ 15 7. Recession curve for Mill Spring, near Jefferson City.------- 18 8. Hydrograph of discharge from Mill Spring, Jefferson County, for 1953 and 1954_____._..__._.____.....____-.-_- . 19 m IV CONTENTS Page FIGURE 9. Geologic map and section of the vicinity of Mill Spring, Jefferson County--_-___-_---------_-----------.__-___. 21 10. Correlation graph for Bacon Spring, Anderson County, and Mill Spring, Jefferson County_-_-_-.---_-----_-_-_-.____ 23 11-30. Maps of east Tennessee counties showing location of springs and stations recording precipitation data: 11. Anderson County.________________________________ 32 12. Blount County-..---.--.---____________________ 33 13. Bradley County.._____-___-_.___-__________ 34 14. Carter County___________-___-_-___-___--_____-_ 35 15. Grainger County._______________________________ 36 16. Greene County_-_-_-__-_-_-_---_--_------__----__ 37 17. Hamblen County__-----__--__----_----.-------_--_ 38 18. Hamilton County___-_-____-__--__-_----_-___-___- 39 19. Jefferson County..______________________________ 40 20. Knox County____-_-__-_____-__-__-_____________- 41 21. London County________________________________ 42 22. McMinn County________________________________ 43 23. Meigs County______._____________________________ 44 24. Monroe Cour>ty___-__________-___-__--_--___-___- 45 25. Polk County____________-__-_____-___-__-___-__-- 46 26. Rhea County___________________________________ 47 27. Roane County__________________________________ 48 28. Sevier County__-__________-___-__--_--_--__------ 49 29. Sullivan County-_--_-_-_----------_-------------- 50 30. Unicoi County___________-____-_-__---__--______ 51 TABLES Page TABLE 1. Geologic formations in east Tennessee______________________ 7 2. Chemical analyses of water from representative springs in east Tennessee. ____-_____.._____-__________-_-___--__--__-- 16 3. Records of springs in east Tennessee______________________ 26 LARGE SPRINGS OF EAST TENNESSEE By P-C. P. SUN, J. H. CEINEE, and J. L. POOLE ABSTRACT Springs constitute an important source of water in east Tennessee, and many individual springs are capable of supplying the large quantities needed for mu­ nicipal and industrial supplies. Most of the springs in east Tennessee issue from solution openings and fractured and faulted zones in limestone and dolomite of the Knox Group, Chickamauga Limestone, and Conasauga Group. The ability of these rocks to yield a sustained flow of water to springs is dependent on a system of interconnected openings through which water can infiltrate from the land surface and move to points of natural discharge. Ninety springs were selected for detailed study, and 84 of these are analyzed in terms of magnitude and variability of discharge. Of the 84 springs analyzed, 4 flow at an average rate of 10 to 100 cfs (cubic feet per second), 62 at an average rate of 1 to 10 cfs, and 18 at an average rate of 1 cfs or less. Of the 90 springs, 75 are variable in their discharge; that is, the ratio of their fluctuations to their average discharges exceeds 100 percent. Mathematical analysis of the flow recession curve of Mill Spring near Jefferson City shows that the hydrologic system contributing to the flow of the spring has an effective capacity of about 70 million cubic feet of water. The rate of deple­ tion of this volume of water, in the absence of significant precipitation, averages 0.0056 cfs per day between the time when the hydrologic system is full and the time when the spring ceases to flow. From such a curve it is possible to determine at any time the residual volume of water remaining in the system and the expected rate of decrease in discharge from that time to cessation of flow. Correlation of discharge measurements of 22 springs with those of Mill Spring shows that rough approximations of discharge can be projected for springs for which few measurements are available. Seventeen of the springs analyzed in this manner show good correlation with Mill Spring: that is, their coefficients of correlation were 0.70 or better as compared with a perfect correlation factor of 1.00 INTRODUCTION PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE INVESTIGATION Springs are important sources of water for municipal, domestic, and farm use in east Tennessee; however, many are not developed, because of their inaccessibility or the lack of information regarding their adequacy and dependable low flows available for small-industry and community supplies. A spring discharging 450 gpm (gallons per 2 LARGE SPRINGS OF EAST TENNESSEE minute), or about 1 cfs (cubic foot per second), is capable of supplying a town of 6,500 population, if one assumes a per capita consumption of 100 gpd (gallons per day). The 90 springs described in this report were selected for study because their average yield was estimated to be 450 gpm or more. The primary purpose of the investigation has been to study the hydrologic characteristics of some of the larger undeveloped springs in east Tennessee, their variations in discharge, and the chemical character of water from a few selected springs. An additional objec­ tive has 'been to interpret the continuous records of one spring for the purpose of predicting flow from other springs in similar geologic and hydrologic settings. Although completely satisfactory correla­ tions of this type could not be made on the basis of available data and records, the study contributed greatly to the knowledge of the relation of springs to geology, precipitation, and the general ground-water conditions. Field work for this investigation began in 1950 as a continuation of > the reconnaissance of ground-water resources of east Tennessee, in which more than 960 springs were observed and described. The present study included the selection of little-used representative springs whose average discharges were initially estimated to exceed 450 gpm and therefore are considered to be adequate for moderate industrial or small municipal supplies. Ninety such springs were measured monthly for periods of 1 to 4 years, water samples were collected from typical springs for chemical analysis, and observations made as to color and temperature of the water and geologic settings of the springs. Records of discharge collected throughout the study show that the average flow from 62 of the 90 springs was greater than 450 gpm. This investigation was made by the U.S. Geological Survey as a part of the statewide program of water-resources studies in cooperation with the Division of Geology and Division of Water Resources, Tennessee Department of Conservation. Fieldwork was done in cooperation with the Division of Geology prior to the establishment of the Division of Water Resources, and this report was prepared under the joint