DOCSLIB.ORG

Kansas Reservoirs, Designed for the Future

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Kansas Reservoirs, Designed for the Future by Dan Knupp Kansas reservoirs, designed for the future n early evening return flight its tributaries were fighting (along Each side had vociferous from nearly anywhere east with their interest groups) for supporters in Washington who of Kansas on the right attention in Washington D.C. One, were finally quieted when weather day can present the from the U.S. Army Corps of President Franklin Roosevelt dazzling visual welcome- Engineers, was championed by forced the two agencies into home of the sun’s reflection then Colonel Lewis Pick (later negotiations, ending in Aon the many reservoirs and lakes of Kansas. Seen from 40,000 feet with the setting sun lighting them President Franklin Roosevelt forced the two agencies up, lakes line up across the eastern half of the state – glistening gems into negotiations, ending in compromise, the “Pick- set in the patchwork of sunset shadow and color. Sloan Missouri Basin Program.” The Program was From cruise altitude authorized with passage of the “Flood Control descending to a landing in Wichita for me would mean contorting to Act of December 22, 1944.” catch a glimpse of lakes where sail boating and teaching sailing compromise, the “Pick-Sloan as a Red Cross volunteer were promoted to Brig. Gen). His plan Missouri Basin Program.” The special parts of many summers – emphasized flood control and Program was authorized with Cheney, El Dorado and Fall River! barge navigation and was a favorite passage of the “Flood Control Act of lower basin states. The second of December 22, 1944.” With it, Background and history each side won Although ALL PHOTOS COURTESY OF THE KANSAS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY most items on recreation is a their wish lists. major use of the The Act 24 major Kansas approved the lakes and general reservoirs, most comprehensive were originally plan for the parts of competing conservation, elements for a control, and use national Missouri of water River Basin resources in the development plan entire Missouri Dan Knupp that was talked Communications River Basin. The about as long ago combined Corps as the Civil War. Nothing much A solitary fisherman on Keith Sebelius Lake on Prairie Dog Creek and Bureau lists happened on the project until in Norton County. Recreation is one of the many uses for for the uses of Kansas reservoirs. major flooding on the upper these water Missouri River occurred during was authored by the U.S. Bureau resources included flood control, the spring of 1943. This disaster of Reclamation’s William Sloan. aids to navigation, irrigation, was serious enough to prompt The Sloan Plan emphasized supplemental water supplies, action even as WWII was raging irrigation, municipal/industrial power generation, in Europe and the Pacific. water supplies, hydroelectric municipal/industrial water At the time of the flooding, power, fish and wildlife habitat supplies, stream-pollution two competing plans for a series and recreation. This one was an abatement, sediment control, of dams on the Missouri River and upstream, farmer, and Western preservation and enhancement of state favorite. 64 THE KANSAS LIFELINE November 2006 fish and wildlife, and creation of federal reservoirs are in the industry wants water left in place. recreation opportunities. Arkansas Basin and were not part The environmental lobby sues to In a few short months after of Pick-Sloan – and not all have water released at critical passage, many Army engineers reservoirs in the Missouri Basin times for habitat maintenance and and soldiers returning from the were Pick-Sloan. barge owners counter-sue to have water released only during dry war had jobs in the Midwest, Competition persists for times to ensure down-stream tackling the construction Missouri River water nationally of nearly 100 dams navigation – including navigation The high price tag on the and the hundreds of miles of on the Mississippi River! Over the Flood Control Act was due in part floodwalls and levies on the 62 years since the Act’s passage, to the many uses the Plan massive Pick-Sloan to-do list. nasty political fighting over this encompassed and the interest Nationally, Pick-Sloan got the ball water has been common. As groups represented have been rolling as evidenced by the many population growth continues and competing ever since. In dry years additional reservoir projects that the Midwest contends with an farmers want more water released followed. In Kansas, nine of the ongoing drought, we can be for irrigation, while the recreation assured of more to come. Federal Reservoirs in Kansas MAP ARTWORK BY DAN KNUPP November 2006 THE KANSAS LIFELINE 65 Kansas Reservoirs . The Kansas Floods of 1951 1951 Kansas floods that inundated find Federal money immediately started “serious” dam much of the state. Despite the became available. Today 18 construction flood control political fervor reservoirs protect the flow in the Politicians became serious created in the disaster’s aftermath, lower Kansas River Basin. At the about flood protection some local political opposition to time of the ‘51 flood, only two immediately after the horrific July the Kansas River Basin reservoirs reservoirs in the lower Kansas Above: The Kansas (Kaw) River at Lawrence remained well into some dam River basin were completed in cresting during the 1993 flood. A June 1993 Kansas Geological Society photo shows the construction, especially at Tuttle Kansas – Cedar Bluff and high water at the bridge linking Lawrence and Creek on the Big Blue River. Kanopolis reservoirs – both on the North Lawrence. Flood control was a major Many local pols were opposed to Smoky Hill River. One in reason for constructing Kansas reservoirs. loss of tax base, town sites and Colorado and two in Nebraska Above right: An aerial view of Perry farm land but the political and were also online but all were Reservoir in Jefferson County, north of general public opposition slowly situated too far above most of the Hwy. 24 at Perry, Kansas. evaporated as previously hard-to- rainfall to do much good. With money flowing and many bad memories of high water guiding voters, 10 additional Kansas reservoirs have been constructed (see map on page 65) in the lower Kansas River Basin starting with Kirwin Reservoir on the North Fork of the Solomon River in 1955 and finishing with Clinton Reservoir on the Wakaurusa River in 1977. Other river basins in Kansas were also afforded reservoir protection. Dams were also planned and built at three locations in the Osage- Marais Des Cygnes River Basin: Pomona, Melvern and Hillsdale Reservoirs. The Verdigris River Basin, in southeast Kansas, had Fall River prior to 1951 but has seen Toronto; Elk City and Big Hill dams start containment, effectively protecting areas far to the south. Dams located in the upper Neosho River Basin have also been built containing waters 66 THE KANSAS LIFELINE November 2006 in Marion, Council Grove and or industrial water supply was a contracts with the Corps for water John Redmond Reservoirs. building block for the future of a storage in 13 of the State’s During early reservoir growing Kansas. The Corps of reservoirs. The contracts are construction in Kansas, the Pick- Engineers option as to whether managed by the Kansas Water Sloan Program component dealing or not to pay the costs for usable Office’s Water Marketing with reservoir use as a municipal reservoir storage space which Department. A benefit of these Above: A 1961 view from Indian Hill at would otherwise be constructed contracts has been that they have Kanapolis Reservoir on the Smoky Hill River in Ellsworth County. for flood control only with no provided ample water for municipal water storage features communities both urban and rural Above right: A view of the dam at Kirwin was a decision easily made by to grow and prosper in the more Reservoir on the Solomon River and Bow Creek in Phillips County. farsighted Kansas planners those populated eastern half of Kansas many years ago. Kansas signed during the last 25 to 40 years. A hot dry week for Kansas – in July 2006 Kansas Water Office Engineer Iona Branscum prepared this report on stream flow last July. After reviewing the USGS web page this morning, it is This office has been coordinating releases with both the apparent that many people in the state are benefiting from the Kansas City District and Tulsa District U.S. Army Corps of decisions made by prior administrations. Without the water Engineers. The State has provided input or requested supplies stored within the federal reservoirs, many of the additional releases from the following reservoirs: Milford, eastern streams would have little flow in them and multiple Tuttle Creek, Perry, Toronto, Fall River, Council Grove and municipal and other water users would be implementing water John Redmond. Releases from Elk City Lake are expected to conservation measures out of necessity. be needed by the end of the week. For example, the flow in the Kansas River at the Topeka The following list provides the inflows and outflows gage is above 900 c.f.s. Flow from the tributaries to the respectively from the reservoirs in the Kansas, Marais des Kansas River are providing about 200 c.f.s. Cgynes, Neosho and Verdigris basins. Inflow Outflow Inflow Outflow Inflow Outflow Inflow Outflow Milford 15 cfs 350 cfs Clinton 1 cfs 38 cfs Hillsdale 1cfs 24 cfs Elk City 0 cfs 15 cfs Tuttle Creek 100 450 Melvern 0 20 Toronto 5 12 Council Grove 5 32 Perry 1 25 Pomona 0 15 Fall River 2 8 Marion 0 13 J. Redmond 50 76 I don’t really know the people from the past who provided us with the ability to maintain flow in our streams during this drought, but I thank them anyway.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Docket No. FWS–HQ–NWRS–2019–0040; FXRS12610900000-190-FF09R20000]
    This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 09/10/2019 and available online at https://federalregister.gov/d/2019-18054, and on govinfo.gov Billing Code 4333-15 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Parts 26, 32, 36, and 71 [Docket No. FWS–HQ–NWRS–2019–0040; FXRS12610900000-190-FF09R20000] RIN 1018-BD79 2019–2020 Station-Specific Hunting and Sport Fishing Regulations AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), open seven National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs) that are currently closed to hunting and sport fishing. In addition, we expand hunting and sport fishing at 70 other NWRs, and add pertinent station-specific regulations for other NWRs that pertain to migratory game bird hunting, upland game hunting, big game hunting, and sport fishing for the 2019–2020 season. We also formally open 15 units of the National Fish Hatchery System to hunting and sport fishing. We also add pertinent station- specific regulations that pertain to migratory game bird hunting, upland game hunting, big game hunting, and sport fishing at these 15 National Fish Hatcheries (NFHs) for the 2019–2020 season. This rule includes global administrative updates to every NWR entry in our refuge- specific regulations and the reorganization of general public use regulations. We remove approximately 2,100 regulations that will have no impact on the administration of hunting and sport fishing within the National Wildlife Refuge System. We also simplify over 2,900 refuge- specific regulations to comply with a Presidential mandate to adhere to plain language standards 1 and to reduce the regulatory burden on the public.
    [Show full text]
  • Streamflow Depletion Investigations in the Republican River Basin: Colorado, Nebraska, and Kansas
    J. ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS, Vol. 27(3) 251-263, 1999 STREAMFLOW DEPLETION INVESTIGATIONS IN THE REPUBLICAN RIVER BASIN: COLORADO, NEBRASKA, AND KANSAS JOZSEF SZILAGYI University of Nebraska–Lincoln ABSTRACT Water is a critical resource in the Great Plains. This study examines the changes in long-term mean annual streamflow in the Republican River basin. In the past decades this basin, shared by three states, Colorado, Nebraska, and Kansas, displayed decreased streamflow volumes as the river enters Kansas across the Nebraska-Kansas border compared to values preceding the 1950s. A recent lawsuit filed by Kansas challenges water appropriations in Nebraska. More than half of the source area for this water, however, lies outside of Nebraska. Today a higher percentage of the annual flow is generated within Nebraska (i.e., 75% of the observed mean annual stream- flow at the NE-KS border) than before the 1950s (i.e., 66% of the observed mean annual streamflow) indicating annual streamflow has decreased more dramatically outside of Nebraska than within the state in the past fifty years. INTRODUCTION The Republican River basin’s 64,796 km2 drainage area is shared by three states: Colorado, Nebraska, and Kansas (see Figure 1). Nebraska has the largest single share of the drainage area, 25,154 km2 (39% of total); Colorado can claim about 20,000 km2 (31%), while the rest, about 19,583 km2 (30%), belongs to Kansas [1], from which about 12,800 km2 (20%) lies upstream of Hardy, near the Nebraska-Kansas border. Exact figures for the contributing drainage areas (portions of the drainage areas that actually contribute water to the stream) are hard to obtain because these areas in the headwater sections of the basin have been shrinking constantly in the past fifty years.
    [Show full text]
  • Norton Lake (Keith Sebelius Lake) Water Quality Impairment: Eutrophication Bundled with Ph and Dissolved Oxygen
    UPPER REPUBLICAN RIVER BASIN TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD Water Body: Norton Lake (Keith Sebelius Lake) Water Quality Impairment: Eutrophication bundled with pH and Dissolved Oxygen Subbasin: Prairie Dog Counties: Decatur, Graham, Norton, Rawlins, Sheridan, and Thomas HUC 8: 10250015 HUC 11 (HUC 14): 010 (010, 020, 030, 040, 050, 060, 070) (Figure 1) 020 (010, 020, 030, 040, 050, 060, 070) Ecoregion: Western High Plains, Flat to Rolling Cropland (25d) Central Great Plains, Rolling Plains and Breaks (27b) Drainage Area: Approximately 687 square miles Conservation Pool: Area = 2,055 acres Watershed Area: Lake Surface Area = 214:1 Maximum Depth = 12.0 meters (39.4 feet) Mean Depth = 4.9 meters (16 feet) Retention Time = 0.61 years (7.3 months) Designated Uses: Primary and Secondary Contact Recreation; Expected Aquatic Life Support, Drinking Water, Food Procurement, Industrial Water Supply, Irrigation Authority: Federal (U.S. Bureau of Reclamation), State (Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks) 2002 303(d) Listing: Upper Republican River Basin Lakes Impaired Use: All uses are impaired to a degree by eutrophication Water Quality Standard: 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)(B)). The introduction of plant nutrients into surface waters designated for primary or secondary contact recreational use shall be controlled to 1 prevent the development of objectionable concentrations of algae or algal by-products or nuisance growths of submersed, floating, or emergent aquatic vegetation.
    [Show full text]
  • Republican River Valley and Adjacent Areas, Nebraska
    A, Economic Geology, 97 B, Descriptive Geology 119 M, General Hydrograpmc investigations, 26 (0, Underground Waters, 72 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CHARLES I>. WALOOTT, DIKECTOR GEOLOGY AND WATER RESOURCES OF THE REPUBLICAN RIVER VALLEY AND ADJACENT AREAS, NEBRASKA G. E. CONDRA -FERTY OF -LOGICAL Sl'». WASHINGTON (GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1907 CONTENTS. Page. Introduction __'___________________________________ 7 Geography _____________________________________ 8 Topography______________________.._ 8 Drainage _____________________________.____ 8 Climate "_________________________ _ _________ ._..__ 9 Temperature_______l_____________________ 9 Rainfall _____________________________________ 9 Winds_____________________________________ 10 Descriptive geology ________________________________ 10 General relations _____ _________ ___ ________ 10 Structure____________________________ 11 Description of the rocks____ ______________________ 11 Carboniferous system_______________________ 11 Cretaceous system.__________________________ 12 Dakota formation_________________________ 12 Character and thickness______________ 12 Distribution_________________ 13 Benton group________________________ 13 Members represented________________ 13 Graneros shale_ ________________________ 14 Character and thickness_________________ 14 Exposures,_________ _______ _-_________ 14 Greenhorn limestone_____________________ 14 Character and thickness___________________ 14 Fossils_________________________ 16 Carlile shale______.___________________
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Goal Action Plans Section
    CIMARRON REGIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACTION PLANS CIMARRON PRIORITY GOAL #1 REDUCE THE RATE OF DECLINE OF THE OGALLALA AQUIFER IN THE REGION THROUGH VOLUNTARY, INCENTIVE-BASED CONSERVATION AS ASSESSED EVERY FIVE YEARS CIMARRON PRIORITY GOAL #2 EXTEND THE USABLE LIFETIME OF THE OGALLALA AQUIFER IN THE REGION THROUGH TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION (IRRIGATION, INDUSTRIAL, MUNICIPAL, ETC.), NEW CROP VARIETIES AND CONSERVATION FOR ALL USES AND FOR MANY GENERATIONS Goals 1 and 2 seek to reduce water use in the region therefore the following actions apply to both ACTION STEPS • Define and quantify the regional aquifer decline, establishing a baseline for comparison • Work with partners, including KDA and NRCS, to develop baseline of water saving technologies in use and voluntary incentive based conservation occurring and a method to track participation. Consider using the annual water reporting system, producer surveys and other means to identify water saving efforts if needed. • Secure funding, including statutory SGF transfer to SWPF, to support water conservation programs and evaluation of technologies, crop varieties and water management to save water. • Provide water users with information on available tools and programs, including but not limited to; LEMAS, WCAs, Multi-Year Flex Accounts, Water Banks, Irrigation Scheduling, RCPP-Soil Probe program through GMDs, K-State Extension tools, K-State Research/farms and additional tools and programs as made available. • Change producer perception from a “use it or lose it” mentality. • Use demonstration projects to educate producers to economically reduce water used. (Water technology farms, LEMAS, WCAs, K-State Research and Extension farm projects and other water management and water efficiency projects can provide valuable examples and information to producers to encourage their participation in water saving efforts.) • GMD3 and DWR work with producers to establish LEMAs and WCAs.
    [Show full text]
  • Kirwin National Wildlife Refuge Fishing Expansion
    U. S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION STATEMENT FOR CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION The Service proposes to expand fishing opportunities (boating regulations changes) on 1,360 acres of the Kirwin National Wildlife Refuge, Kansas in accordance with existing State, local, and Refuge-specific regulations (50 CFR 32.35). Within the spirit and intent of the Council on Environmental Quality's regulations for implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and other statutes, orders, and policies that protect fish and wildlife resources, I have established the following administrative record and determined that the following proposed action is categorically excluded from NEPA documentation requirements consistent with 40 CFR 1508.4, 43 CFR 46.205, and 516 DM 8.5. The Service has fully satisfied the other requirements for expanding these opportunities on the refuge, including: □X determining that the opportunities are compatible with the purposes for which the refuge was established and the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System (see attached Compatibility Determination); □X ensuring the opportunities are consistent with existing State, local, and refuge- specific regulations (50 CFR 32.35); *Use of signs and brochures may supplement the refuge-specific regulations □X complying with the National Environmental Policy Act (see attached); □X complying with the Endangered Species Act section 7 evaluation (see attached) OR □ N/A because there are no candidate, threatened or endangered species present; □X complying with the National Historic Preservation Act section 106 consultation; OR □ N/A because there are no cultural or historic resources present; The Service is, therefore, waiving the requirement to prepare an opening package in compliance with Service policy (605 FW 2.9A).
    [Show full text]
  • KANSAS Rapid Watershed Assessment
    KANSAS Rapid Watershed Assessment Prairie Dog Creek Watershed Hydrologic Unit Code – 10250015 December 2007 Produced by: U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service 760 South Broadway Salina, Kansas 67401 Kansas Department of Health and Environment Bureau of Water Watershed Management Section 1000 S.W. Jackson Topeka, Kansas 66612 Prairie Dog Creek – 10250015 DECEMBER 2007 "The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer." 2 Prairie Dog Creek – 10250015 DECEMBER 2007 Resource Profile Contents 1.0 Purpose 2.0 Introduction 3.0 Physical Description 3.1 Common Resource Area Map 3.2 Precipitation Map 3.3 Land Use and Land Cover Distribution Map 3.3.1
    [Show full text]
  • General Fishing Atlas Information
    ATLAS COVER Pages FISH 2021.qxp_ATLAS COVER Pages FISH 2/17/21 10:42 AM Page 1 Kansas Fishing Atlas 2021 Public Fishing Access Includes Walk-in Fishing Access (WIFA) Get our mobile app HuntFish KS ATLAS COVER Pages FISH 2021.qxp_ATLAS COVER Pages FISH 2/17/21 10:42 AM Page 2 WIFA Area Rules Walk-in Fishing Access (WIFA), formerly F.I.S.H., sites 6. Avoid stretching fences when crossing them, and use are leased from private landowners and are typically open to fence stiles where available. public fishing from March 1 – Oct. 31, though some proper- ties are open year-round. The WIFA program provides 7. Do not attempt to contact cooperating landowners to ask anglers increased opportunities to enjoy fishing on the state’s about fishing other portions of their land. streams and small impoundments, all that is required is a state fishing license. Funding for the program is provided Regulations governing WIFA area use: through fishing license revenues and Sport Fish Restoration Funds. Please observe all rules and regulations, and remem- • Impounded WIFA waters have a creel limit of two channel ber that common sense and ethical behavior will influence catfish, a creel limit of two largemouth bass, and an 18-inch the future of the program. minimum length limit on largemouth bass. Otherwise, all Kansas fishing regulations and statewide creel limits apply. It’s The following guidelines help maintain a good relation- especially important for anglers using the sites to respect and fol- ship between landowners and anglers: low the rules that apply on WIFA properties.
    [Show full text]
  • Kirwin Lake WRAPS 9 Element Watershed Protection Plan
    Kirwin Lake WRAPS 9 Element Watershed Protection Plan Water Quality Impairments Directly Addressed: • Kirwin Lake Eutrophication TMDL (Medium Priority) Other Impairments Which Stand to Benefit from Watershed Plan Implementation: • Kirwin Lake Dissolved Oxygen TMDL (Medium Priority) • Bow Creek Near Stockton Total Phosphorous 303(d) listing • North Fork Solomon River Near Glade Total Phosphorous 303(d) listing • Logan City Lake Eutrophication 303(d) listing Determination of Priority Areas Information collected by the Graham, Norton and Phillips county NRCS offices was used by KSU in a SWAT model to identify priority HUC12s. Because of extremely low soil erosion rates, the SLT requested KDHE verify the SWAT model results. KDHE used the Cropland/Slope Analysis method to verify the SWAT model data. The results confirmed the SWAT results identifying nine HUC12s. This method also identified eleven additional HUC12s as significant potential sediment contributors. The SLT agreed to develop two priority area, Tiers 1 and 2, above Kirwin Lake to focus BMP implementation towards addressing nonpoint source impairment issues. Best Management Practice and Load Reduction Goals Phosphorus Load to Watershed Plan Kirwin Lake Current Meet Kirwin Lake Phosphorus Load Phosphorus Load EU TMDL (143,000 lbs/yr) Reduction Goal (48,400 lbs/yr) (94,600 lbs/yr) BMPs to be implemented in association Watershed Plan Duration and Costs with Watershed Plan: • Total plan length = 30 years • Cropland-related BMPs o Load reduction goal of plan met during year 30 o Permanent vegetation • o Grassed waterways Total plan cost = $25,802,172 Cropland BMP Implementation o No-till cropland production o . $15,638,153 o Terraces Livestock BMP Implementation o Nutrient management o .
    [Show full text]
  • Bulletin Published Qu.4Ktekly
    BULLETIN PUBLISHED QU.4KTEKLY March, 1992 No. 1 THE WINTER BIRD COUNT FOR 1991 Max (:. Thompson The winter bird count of 1991 will eo down in KOS history as the vear with the largest number of counts ever taken in the state. A record 42 counts were made, 43 it' yo; count one that did not conform to the guidelines. There were only 582 participants but a near record 150 species werr seen. Some species were recorded only during the count week and if they had been put into the counts, there would have been a new record. The highest number ever recorded was 152 in 1990. The highest number of species observed was shared by Ernporia and Manhattan with 83 species each. This could very well be called the "vear of the gull". There were eight species seen, including two gulls new to the count. There were two probable California Gulls seen, one on the Udall-Winfield count and one at the Wilson Reservoir count. There was one probable Black-legged Kittiwake seen at Olathe. Gulls are notoriously hard to identify and sightings without specimens are always open to question. A Pomarine Jaeger seen at Junction City was a first winter count record. Another new species seen on the 1991 count were the five Trumpeter Swans at Webster Reservoir. Unfortunately, four of the five were later shot and killed by persons unknown. Another I'rumpeter Swan was reported from Sawyer. While there were no real surprises in the waterfowl counted, there were some surpris- ing numbers. Blue-winged Teal were present with 18 at Garden City and 400 at Parsons.
    [Show full text]
  • Deposition of Selenium and Other Constituents in Reservoir Bottom Sediment of the Solomon River Basin, North-Central Kansas
    Prepared in cooperation with the O'O BUREAU OF RECLAMATION Deposition of Selenium and Other Constituents in Reservoir Bottom Sediment of the Solomon River Basin, North-Central Kansas Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4230 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey B. E. D. A. Dam overlooking Kirwin Reservoir B. Waconda Lake C. Webster Reservoir D. Kirwin National Wildlife Refuge E. Gravity corer mounted on pontoon boat (photographs A-D taken by author; photograph E taken by David P. Mau, U.S. Geological Survey, Lawrence, Kansas) U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Prepared in cooperation with the BUREAU OF RECLAMATION Deposition of Selenium and Other Constituents in Reservoir Bottom Sediment of the Solomon River Basin, North-Central Kansas By VICTORIA G. CHRISTENSEN Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4230 Lawrence, Kansas 1999 U.S. Department of the Interior Bruce Babbitt, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Charles G. Groat, Director The use of brand, firm, or trade names in this report is for identification 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: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Information Services 4821 Quail Crest Place Building 810 Lawrence, KS 66049-3839 Box 25286, Federal Center Denver, CO 80225-0286 CONTENTS Abstract...............................................................................................................^ 1 Introduction
    [Show full text]
  • By Lloyd E. Stullken Water-Resources Investigations Report 84-4162
    HYDROLOGY OF PRAIRIE DOG CREEK VALLEY, NORTON DAM TO STATE LINE, NORTH-CENTRAL KANSAS By Lloyd E. Stullken U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 84-4162 Prepared in cooperation with the KANSAS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Garden City, Kansas 1984 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR WILLIAM P. CLARK, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information Copies of this report can write to: be purchased from: District Chief Open-File Services Section U.S. Geological Survey Western Distribution Branch 1950 Constant Avenue, Campus West U.S. Geological Survey University of Kansas Box 25425, Federal Center Lawrence, Kansas 66046 Denver, Colorado 80225 [Telephone: (913) 864-4321] [Telephone: (303) 236-7476] 11 CONTENTS Page Glossary ------------------------------ v Abstract ------------------------------ 1 Introduction ---------------------------- 2 Description of study area --------------------- 2 Surface water --------------------------- 4 Regulation by Norton Dam ------------------- 4 Precipitation and runoff relation --------------- 5 Surface- and ground-water relation -------------- 6 Ground water ---------------------------- 7 Aquifer description ---------------------- 7 Irrigation development -------------------- 7 Water levels ------------------------- 8 Ground water in storage -------------------- 9 Aquifer model --------------------------- 10 Model grid -------------------------- 12 Water budget ------------------------- 12 Recharge to aquifer ---------------------- 14 Infiltration -----------------------
    [Show full text]