DOCSLIB.ORG

Southwest Missouri Water Quality Improvement Project (Wqip) Spring River Basin Water Quality Gap Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Southwest Missouri Water Quality Improvement Project (Wqip) Spring River Basin Water Quality Gap Analysis SOUTHWEST MISSOURI WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (WQIP) SPRING RIVER BASIN WATER QUALITY GAP ANALYSIS November 2008 PREPARED FOR: Environmental Resources Coalition 3118 Emerald Lane Jefferson City, Missouri 65109 PREPARED BY: MEC Water Resources, Inc. 1123 Wilkes Boulevard, Suite 400 Columbia, Missouri 65201 Ozarks Environmental Water Resources Institute, Missouri State University Temple Hall 328 901 South National Avenue Springfield, Missouri 65897 (page intentionally left blank) Southwest Missouri Water Quality Improvement Project Missouri State University Spring River Basin Water Quality Gap Analysis MEC Water Resources, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................................................i LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................................................................iv LIST OF FIGURES............................................................................................................................................................... v ACRONYMS AND ABREVIATIONS........................................................................................................................vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................................................................ix I. INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................................1 II. STUDY AREA..................................................................................................................................................................3 2.1. Basin Characteristics.........................................................................................................................................3 2.2. Population and Land Use.................................................................................................................................3 2.3. Permitted Point Source Discharges ........................................................................................................7 2.4. Geology and Soils..............................................................................................................................................11 2.5. Climate and Hydrology .................................................................................................................................17 2.6. Regulatory Issues ..............................................................................................................................................21 2.6.1. Metals Contamination from Mining Activities...................................................................22 2.6.2. Biological Impairments Due to Sediment...............................................................................25 2.6.3. Nutrient Impairments ..........................................................................................................................25 2.6.4. Bacteria Impairments............................................................................................................................25 2.6.5. Low Dissolved Oxygen Impairments..........................................................................................26 III. METHODS.................................................................................................................................................................. 27 3.1. Data Collection...................................................................................................................................................27 3.2. Data Management ...........................................................................................................................................31 3.3. Data Assessment...............................................................................................................................................33 3.3.1 Data Quality Assessment .....................................................................................................................33 3.3.2. Parameters of Interest .........................................................................................................................35 November 2008 I Environmental Resources Coalition Page i Southwest Missouri Water Quality Improvement Project Missouri State University Spring River Basin Water Quality Gap Analysis MEC Water Resources, Inc. 3.3.3. Periods of Interest...................................................................................................................................35 3.3.4. Data Analysis...............................................................................................................................................41 3.3.5. Data Limitations.......................................................................................................................................42 IV. WATER QUALITY SUMMARY AND STATISTICS ................................................................................. 43 4.1. Nutrients and Algal Biomass.....................................................................................................................43 4..1.1. Phosphorus..................................................................................................................................................43 4..1.2. Nitrogen........................................................................................................................................................49 4.1.2.1 Total Nitrogen.....................................................................................................................................49 4.1.2.2 Nitrate plus Nitrite Nitrogen....................................................................................................54 4.1.3 Nutrient Limitations................................................................................................................................58 4.2. Escherichia coli...................................................................................................................................................59 4.3. Lead and Zinc.......................................................................................................................................................64 4.3.1. Historical Lead Data Analysis...........................................................................................................65 4.3.1. Historical Zinc Data Analysis ...........................................................................................................72 4.3.2. May 2006 EPA Metals Study Data.................................................................................................79 4.3.2.1. EPA Lead Data....................................................................................................................................79 4.3.2.2. EPA Zinc Data ....................................................................................................................................82 4.3.2.2. EPA Zinc Data ....................................................................................................................................83 V. BIOLOGICAL MONITORING.............................................................................................................................. 88 VI. DATA GAPS .............................................................................................................................................................. 91 6.1. Spatial Gaps ..........................................................................................................................................................91 6.2. Temporal Gaps....................................................................................................................................................93 6.3. Parameter Gaps..................................................................................................................................................94 6.4. Detection Limit Gaps .....................................................................................................................................96 6.5. Metadata Gaps....................................................................................................................................................98 November 2008 I Environmental Resources Coalition Page ii Southwest Missouri Water Quality Improvement Project Missouri State University Spring River Basin Water Quality Gap Analysis MEC Water Resources, Inc. 6.6. Unincorporated Data................................................................................................................................... 100 VII. RECOMMENDATIONS.....................................................................................................................................101 VIII. REFERENCES........................................................................................................................................................105 November 2008 I Environmental Resources Coalition Page iii Southwest Missouri Water Quality Improvement Project Missouri State University Spring River Basin Water Quality Gap Analysis MEC Water Resources, Inc. LIST OF TABLES 1. Spring River
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Immigrants I Through K
    I Iager, John, Switzerland, came to the county in 1865, in Newton County 1882 Atlas, patrons, from Missouri Pioneers Volume XVI Iberg, Jacob, Switzerland, 81, in the 1900 Federal Census of Newton CO, MO, Neosho Township Iburg, Herman C., Germany, 54, in the 1910 Federal Census of St. Clair CO, MO, Jackson Township. Also, Herman C. Iburg, Oenhousen [Oeynhausen ?], Germany, born February 23, 1855 [MO death certificate] died October 3, 1910, in St. Clair County, father John Iburg, mother Christina Daniels, informant Mrs. Herman C. Iburg Ihde, William, Petersdorf Cris Templen, Germany, from a 1915 petition for naturalization, McDonald County, Missouri, from Missouri Pioneers Volume XXVIII. Also, William Ihde, Germany, 59, in the 1920 Federal Census of McDonald CO, MO, Cyclone Ikenruth, Adam, Germany, 52, in the 1910 Federal Census of Cedar CO, MO, Linn Township Iker, Joseph, Baden, Germany, 37, in the 1870 Federal Census of Hickory CO, MO, Montgomery Township Iles, Thomas, England, 60, in the 1910 Federal Census of Dade CO, MO, Grant Township. [On son William Carl Iles’ MO death certificate from Dade County father is listed as Thomas Iles born in England and mother Ellen Perr__man[?] ] Imme, Adolph, Germany, 55, in the 1900 Federal Census of Jasper CO, MO, Webb City Immel, John, Germany, born January 28, 1834 [MO death certificate] died August 24, 1917, in Joplin, Jasper County. And, 68, in the 1900 Federal Census of Jasper CO, MO, Joplin Immel, Mrs. Katherine, Germany, born October 7, 1849 [MO death certificate] died June 1, 1933, in Joplin, Jasper County, father Christian Miller, mother Marie Hoffman, husband [deceased] John Immel Inch, Jack, England, 32, born May, 1868, in the 1900 Federal Census of Lawrence CO, MO, Vineyard Township Indermuehle, Gottlieb, Canton Bern, Switzerland, born March 14, 1830 [MO death certificate] died March 4, 1912, in Laclede County, father Christain Indermuehle, informant J.
    [Show full text]
  • Short Creek and Shoal Creek in the Spring River Watershed Water Quality Impairment: Total Phosphorus
    NEOSHO BASIN TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD Waterbody / Assessment Unit: Short Creek and Shoal Creek in the Spring River Watershed Water Quality Impairment: Total Phosphorus 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION Subbasin: Spring Counties: Cherokee HUC8: 11070207 HUC10(12): 08(06) & 09(04) Ecoregion: Ozark Highlands, Springfield Plateau (39a) Drainage Area: Shoal Creek = approximately 10.1 square miles in Kansas Short Creek = approximately 5.94 square miles in Kansas Water Quality Limited Segments Covered Under this TMDL: Station Main Stem Segment Tributary Station SC570 Short Creek (881) Station SC212 Shoal Creek (2) Unnamed Stream (886) 2008, 2010, 2012 & 2014 303(d) Listings: Kansas Stream segments monitored by stations SC212 on Short Creek and SC570 on Shoal Creek, are cited as impaired by Total Phosphorus (TP) for the Neosho Basin. Impaired Use: Special Aquatic Life, Expected Aquatic Life, Contact Recreation and Domestic Water Supply. Water Quality Criteria: Nutrients – Narratives: The introduction of plant nutrient into surface waters designated for domestic water supply use shall be controlled to prevent interference with the production of drinking water (K.A.R. 28-16-28e(c)(3)(D)). 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 (K.A.R. 28-16- 28e(c)(2)(A)). The introduction of plant nutrients into surface waters designated for primary or secondary contact recreational use shall be controlled to prevent the development of objectionable concentrations of algae or algal by-products or nuisance growths of submersed, floating, or emergent aquatic vegetation (K.A.R.
    [Show full text]
  • Spring River
    NEOSHO RIVER BASIN TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD Water Body/Assessment Unit: Spring River Watershed, including Shoal Creek, Short Creek, Shawnee Creek, Turkey Creek and Center Creek Water Quality Impairment: Metals (Lead, Zinc, Copper & Cadmium) 1. INTRODUCTION AND PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION Subbasin: Spring County: Cherokee HUC 8: 11070207 Ecoregion: Ozark Highlands; Springfield Plateau (39a) Drainage Area: Approximately 2830 square miles from Oklahoma Stateline, of which about 520 square miles lie in Kansas and balance is in Missouri. Drainage between Baxter Springs and Crestline is about 1100 square miles. Water Quality Limited Segments on Spring River: 1, 3, 4, 19 Water Quality Limited Segments on Tributaries: 2, 881, 17, 22, 18, 23 Watershed Hierarchy of Main Stem and Tributary Segments Monitored by KDHE Stations (Figure 1) HUC 8 11070207 – Spring River Watershed: Spring River at Baxter Springs Station 213 Spring River (1) Willow Creek (20) Brush Creek (23) Station 212 Shoal Creek (2) Unnamed Trib (886) Spring River (3) Station 569 Shawnee Creek (17) Little Shawnee Creek (22) Station 570 Short Creek (881) Spring River (4) Station 211 Turkey Creek (18) Spring River (19) Station 210 Center Creek Station 568 Spring River nr Crestline (6) 1 Designated Uses of Impaired Streams: Spring River Exceptional State Water, Special Aquatic Life Support, Primary C Recreation, Domestic Water Supply, Food Procurement; Groundwater Recharge, Industrial Water Supply, Irrigation; Livestock Watering. Shoal Creek same; Turkey Creek same, except General Purpose Water instead of Exceptional State Water Expected Aquatic Life Support, Secondary b Recreation & Food Procurement on Shawnee Creek, Little Shawnee Creek, Willow Creek & Brush Creek and Short Creek same, except no Food Procurement 1998 & 2002 303(d) Listings: Neosho River Basin Streams and Biological Impairment Impaired Use: Chronic and Acute Aquatic Life Support Water Quality Standard: Agricultural water supply use.
    [Show full text]
  • WATER-QUALITY CHARACTERIZATION of the SPRING RIVER BASIN, SOUTHWESTERN MISSOURI and SOUTHEASTERN KANSAS by Jerri V
    WATER-QUALITY CHARACTERIZATION OF THE SPRING RIVER BASIN, SOUTHWESTERN MISSOURI AND SOUTHEASTERN KANSAS By Jerri V. Davis and John G. Schumacher U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 90-4176 Prepared in cooperation with the MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Rolla, Missouri 1992 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MANUEL LUJAN, JR., Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information Copies of this report can be write to: purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Books and Open-File Reports Section 1400 Independence Road Federal Center Mail Stop 200 Box 25425 Rolla, Missouri 65401 Denver, Colorado 80225 11 CONTENTS Page Abstract...................................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction......................................................................................^ 2 Purpose, scope, and methodology....................................................................................................... 2 Previous investigations....................................................................................................................... 4 Description of the Spring River basin....................................................................................................... 5 Water-quality problems on the Spring River and tributaries................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Past and Present Conditions of the Tri-State Mining District
    BearWorks MSU Graduate Theses Summer 2020 The Legacy of Mining in Southwest Missouri: Past and Present Conditions of the Tri-State Mining District Anastasia M C McClanahan Missouri State University, [email protected] As with any intellectual project, the content and views expressed in this thesis may be considered objectionable by some readers. However, this student-scholar’s work has been judged to have academic value by the student’s thesis committee members trained in the discipline. The content and views expressed in this thesis are those of the student-scholar and are not endorsed by Missouri State University, its Graduate College, or its employees. Follow this and additional works at: https://bearworks.missouristate.edu/theses Part of the Environmental Chemistry Commons, Environmental Health and Protection Commons, Environmental Monitoring Commons, Environmental Public Health Commons, Geochemistry Commons, Geology Commons, Natural Resources and Conservation Commons, Other Earth Sciences Commons, Other Environmental Sciences Commons, Soil Science Commons, Sustainability Commons, and the Water Resource Management Commons Recommended Citation McClanahan, Anastasia M C, "The Legacy of Mining in Southwest Missouri: Past and Present Conditions of the Tri-State Mining District" (2020). MSU Graduate Theses. 3556. https://bearworks.missouristate.edu/theses/3556 This article or document was made available through BearWorks, the institutional repository of Missouri State University. The work contained in it may be protected by
    [Show full text]
  • Spring 2001 Pt. 1 (Pdf)
    5 American Currents Vol. 27, No. 2 A Species on the Edge: Occurrence of Pimephales vigilax (Teleostei: Cyprinidae) in the Spring River Drainage, Missouri Robert A. Hrabik Missouri Department of Conservation, Fisheries Research, Assessment, and Monitoring Section, Long Term Resource Monitoring Program, Open River Field Station, Jackson, MO 63755, [email protected] he bullhead minnow (Pimephales vigilax, Fig. 1) 1924). Fowler was reporting on a series of collections by is a wide-ranging North American cyprinid Spencer Baird, Charles Girard, and Edward Cope that had found from the Ohio River drainage in not before appeared in publication. He noted a series of 42 T Pennsylvania, the Mobile River drainage in specimens of Ceratichthys (Pimephales) vigilax from Indiana, Alabama, and the Rio Grande drainage in Texas and México Iowa, Arkansas, Texas, and Missouri-Carthage (presumably to the Mississippi River drainage in Minnesota (Lee and from Spring River). Fowler gave no dates nor did he list the Kucas, 1980). It has been introduced to the upper Rio Grande collector(s). Baird and Girard were ichthyologists working in western Texas and New Mexico, and to the Kansas River for the U.S. Fish Commission who described (and redescribed) in Kansas, where it is common (Lee and Kucas, 1980; Cross many fishes from the Midwestern United States from the and Collins, 1995). Reports from the Missouri River drainage 1850s through the 1860s, including P. vigilax. Cope, a largely in Iowa and Nebraska (Evermann and Cox, 1896), and South self-taught naturalist, specialized in several branches of biology Dakota, were misidentifications and the specimens were later and paleontology.
    [Show full text]
  • Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain and Tributary Flood Plains, Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009–11
    Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain and Tributary Flood Plains, Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009–11 Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5028 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. Chat piles (mine tailings) in the Tar Creek Basin, Cherokee County, Kansas (photograph by Eric Looper, U.S. Geological Survey). Occurrence and Variability of Mining- Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain and Tributary Flood Plains, Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009–11 By Kyle E. Juracek Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5028 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2013 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, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text.
    [Show full text]
  • Status Survey of the Western Fanshell and the Neosho Mucket in Oklahoma
    1990 c.3 OKLAHOMA <) PROJECT TITLE: STATUS SURVEY OF THE WESTERN FANSHELL AND THE NEOSHO MUCKET IN OKLAHOMA To determine the distribution and abundance of the freshwater mussels Cyprogenia aberti (Conrad) and Lampsilis rafinesqueana Frierson in Oklahoma. A survey to determine the status of the freshwater mussels, Cyprogenia aberti (Conrad) and Lampsilis rafinesqueana Frierson, in Oklahoma was completed during August and September, 1989. These species are also known by the common names of Western Fanshell and Neosho Mucket, respectively. The western fanshell is probably extinct in the state. It is known that the species formerly occurred in the Verdigris River in Oklahoma and as a result of this study, was determined that it had also existed in the Caney River. However, no evidence of living or fresh specimens was found in any river system in northeastern Oklahoma. The Neosho mucket has also disappeared from most of its former range within the state and presently only occurs in a segment of the Illinois River system extending from the Lake Frances dam near the Arkansas border to Lake Tenkiller. Protection for this species is recommended. This report describes efforts to determine the status of two species of freshwater mussels (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Unionidae) in Oklahoma. Both species are generally considered to be rare and have rather limited geographical distributions. Both species may meet the criteria of endangered species and thus it was considered important to gain some information as to their current status. Both species have been recorded in Oklahoma but their current abundance and distribution in the state were unknown. The western fanshell, Cyprogenia aberti (Conrad) was described in 1850 from specimens collected on the rapids of the Verdigris River, Chambers' Ford, Oklahoma (Johnson, 1980).
    [Show full text]
  • R6-R7 Mou and Watershed Strategy Document
    MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 6 SUPERFUND DIVISION AND U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 7 SUPERFUND DIVISION PERTAINING TO REMEDIATION OF THE WATERSHED AREAS IN THE TRI-STATE MINING DISTRICT IN OKLAHOMA, KANSAS AND MISSOURI This Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) is entered into by and between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) Region 6 Superfund Division (“R6SF”) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 7 Superfund Division (“R7SF”). This MOU is intended to help coordinate R6SF and R7SF investigation and remediation of the watershed areas in the Tri-State Mining District which includes parts of Ottawa County in Oklahoma, Cherokee County in Kansas, and Jasper and Newton Counties in Missouri. I. RECITALS Whereas under 40 CFR § 1.5, R6SF is responsible for the execution of the EPA Superfund program in Oklahoma; Whereas under 40 CFR § 1.5, R7SF is responsible for the execution of the EPA Superfund program in Kansas and Missouri; Whereas R6SF and R7SF are responsible for the execution of States, Tribes/Nations, Public and Community participation and relations activities in accordance with the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) and the Comprehensive, Environmental, Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. Whereas historic mining operations in the Upper and Lower Spring River and the Neosho River basins (hereinafter the watershed areas) have caused the release of contaminants of concern which may pose a risk to human
    [Show full text]
  • Mining-Related Contamination of the Spring River Flood Plain in Cherokee County, Kansas
    Mining-Related Contamination of the Spring River Flood Plain in Cherokee County, Kansas A proposal written for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VII By Kyle Juracek and Andy Ziegler U.S. Geological Survey. February 14,2008 Revised January 5, 2009 and March 23, 2009 Introduction Historical mining activity in the Tri-State Mining District of southeast Kansas, southwest Missouri, and northeast Oklahoma (figure 1), has resulted in a substantial ongoing input of cadmium, lead, and zinc to the environment. Recent studies by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, documented cadmium, lead, and zinc concentrations in sediment that far exceeded background levels as well as probable- effects guidelines for adverse biological effects (Pope, 2005; Juracek, 2006). These studies sampled deposited sediment in the Spring River and its tributaries. Tar Creek, and Empire Lake in Cherokee County, Kansas. Adverse effects of the mining-related contamination on freshwater mussels was documented by Angelo et al. (2007). However, the contamination is not corifined to stream channels and lake beds. During high flows, contaminated sediment is carried out of the channels and deposited on the adjoining flood plains. Limited evidence of flood-plain contamination was provided by two near-charmel samples of surficial flood-plain soil that.were collected near the Spring River and Shoal Creek upstream from Empire Lake (Juracek, 2006, sites SRF-1 and SCF- 1). For the Spring River flood-plain sample, cadmium and lead concentrations exceeded the threshold-effects guideline for adverse biological effects and the zinc concentration exceeded the probable-effects guideline.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 – Joplin's Historic Character
    CHAPTER 2 – JOPLIN’S HISTORIC CHARACTER Joplin is significant as the commercial center of the Tri-State Mining District encompassing portions of southwest Missouri, southeastern Kansas, and northeast Oklahoma. From its founding in the 1870s through the mid-twentieth century, Joplin served as the marketing, commercial, and transportation hub of the mining district, providing a focus for a large area well beyond its borders. After World War II lead and zinc mining within the region declined, yet Joplin has continued to grow and evolve. Today, Joplin retains much of its historic character, particularly in its downtown core and surrounding residential neighborhoods. It is this historic character, its contributing features, and the quality of life that they provide that are the subject of the Historic Preservation Plan. 2.1 REGIONAL CONTEXT Joplin is located within the watershed of the Spring River, a tributary of the Neosho River and the Arkansas River. Geographically, it is positioned at the northwest edge of the Springfield Plateau, a portion of the Ozark Highlands ecoregion. The Spring River originates near Aurora, Missouri and flows north and west toward the Missouri/Kansas border. About seventy-five percent of the river’s watershed, 2,777 square miles, is within southwest Missouri. Once in Kansas, the river turns south, joining the Neosho River near Wyandotte in northeastern Oklahoma. HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN 2-1 CHAPTER 2 ▪ DRAFT JULY 31, 2016 Arkansas River Watershed (Shanon1 2015). Grand Lake and Neosho River Watersheds (Left: Kmussler
    [Show full text]
  • Historic U.S. 66 Bridge Database 1926-1985
    HISTORIC U.S. 66 BRIDGE DATABASE 1926-1985 © 2015 Jim Ross FOR NON-PROFIT USE ONLY COMPILED BY JIM ROSS IN PREPARATION FOR THE BOOK: ROUTE 66 CROSSINGS: Historic Bridges of the Mother Road, published in 2016 by THE UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA PRESS. It is recommended that the book be used as a companion to this database. INTRODUCTION Information in this database makes no claim to the final word on the bridges of Route 66, simply because it remains a work in progress. In addition to unresolved questions about early Route 66 alignments in some areas as well as dates that certain pathways were signed as US 66, the quest to ferret out build dates and bridge types for many of the lost structures continues. Along that thread, no attempt was made to verify which bridges original to the interstates carried Route 66 signage as the route was gradually dismantled, though the ones likely to have done so are addressed in the database. Some culverts that were too small to qualify as bridges but with historical significance were documented also, along with a few notable examples of structures integral to the roadway, such as railroad grade separations and tunnels. To the extent records were available, state departments of transportation were the primary source used to verify bridge types and build dates. It was also necessary to use unofficial web-based resources and documents found in the literature, not all of which could be considered reliable. In some instances, build dates were estimated (circa) based on favored designs for a given era and other supporting evidence.
    [Show full text]