DOCSLIB.ORG

Upper Solomon River - Lower Solomon River

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Upper Solomon River - Lower Solomon River SOLOMON BASIN TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD Waterbody/Assessment Unit (AU): Salt Creek (Minneapolis) - Upper Solomon River - Lower Solomon River Water Quality Impairment: Chloride 1. INTRODUCTION AND PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION Subbasin: Solomon River County: Cloud, Dickinson, Jewell, Lincoln, Ottawa, Mitchell, Saline and Smith HUC 8: 10260015 HUC 11 (HUC 14s): 010 (090) (see Figure 1) 020 (030, 040, 050, 060 and 070) 030 (010, 020, 030, 040, 050, 060, 070 and 080) 040 (010, 020, 030, 040, 050 and 060) 050 (010, 020, 030, 040 and 050) 060 (010, 060, 070 and 080) 070 (010, 020, 030, 040 and 050) Drainage Area: 1,349.2 square miles Main Stem Segment: WQLS: Lower Solomon River AU; 1, 3, 5, 6, 8 and 12 in part (Solomon River) starting at confluence with the Smoky Hill River on the west side of Dickinson County and traveling upstream to downstream boundary of HUC14 10260015030050 in southwest Cloud County (Figure 2). WQLS: Salt Creek (Minneapolis) AU; 27, 29 and 30 (Salt Creek) starting and confluence with the Solomon River in south-central Ottawa County and traveling upstream to headwaters in southwest Mitchell County (Figure 2). WQLS: Upper Solomon River AU; 12 in part, 14,16 and 23 (Solomon River) starting at downstream boundary of HUC14 10260015030050 in southwest Cloud County and traveling upstream to Waconda Lake in northwest Mitchell County (Figure 2). Tributaries: Lower Solomon R. AU Coal Creek (2) (see Figure 1) Sand Creek (4) Antelope Creek (58) Battle Creek (57) Lindsey Creek (7) Dry Creek (52) 1 Yockey Creek (50) Mortimer Creek (49) Cris Creek (48) Salt Cr. (Minneapolis) AU Lost Creek (56) (see Figure 1) First Creek (28) Spring Creek (53) Second Creek (53) W. Elkhorn Creek (47) Rattlesnake Creek (31 and 32) Battle Creek (33) Fifth Creek (45) Little Creek (44) Antelope Creek (43) Upper Solomon R. AU Second Creek (51) (see Figure 1) Fourth Creek (46) Marshall Creek (42) Plum Creek (13) Dry Creek (37) Leban Creek (41) Mulberry Creek (36) Indian Creek (40) Turkey Creek (39) Frog Creek (34) Designated Uses: Lower Solomon R. AU Expected Aquatic Life Support, Primary Contact Recreation, Domestic Water Supply; Food Procurement; Ground Water Recharge; Industrial Water Supply Use; Irrigation Use; Livestock Watering Use for Main Stem Segments (Solomon River segments 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 12) Salt Cr. (Minneapolis) AU Expected Aquatic Life Support, Primary Contact Recreation, Food Procurement Use for Main Stem Segments (Salt Creek segments 27, 29, 30) Upper Solomon R. AU Expected Aquatic Life Support, Primary Contact Recreation, Domestic Water Supply; Food Procurement; Ground Water Recharge; Industrial Water Supply Use; Irrigation Use; Livestock Watering Use for Main Stem Segments (Solomon River segments 12, 14, 16, 23). Impaired Use: Domestic Water Supply (Potentially) Water Quality Standard: Domestic Water Supply: 250 mg/L at any point of domestic water supply diversion (K.A.R.28-16-28e(c) (3) (A). 2 In stream segments where background concentrations of naturally occurring substances, including chlorides and sulfates, exceed the water quality criteria listed in Table 1a of subsection (d), at ambient flow, the existing water quality shall be maintained, and the newly established numeric criteria for domestic water supply shall be the background concentration, as defined in KAR 28-16-28b(e). Background concentrations shall be established using the methods outlined in the “Kansas implementation procedures: surface water quality standards,” as defined in KAR 28-16-28b(ee).. (KAR 28-16- 28e(c)(3)(B)). 860 mg/l for Aquatic Life Support [Acute criterion] (KAR 28-16- 28e(c)(2)(F)(ii)) In surface waters designated for the groundwater recharge use, water quality shall be such that, at a minimum, degradation of groundwater quality does not occur. Degradation shall include any statistically significant increase in the concentration of any chemical or radiological contaminant...in groundwater resulting from surface water infiltration or injection. (KAR 28-16-28e(c)(6)). 2. CURRENT WATER QUALITY CONDITION AND DESIRED ENDPOINT Level of Support for Designated Use under 2002 303(d): Not Supporting Domestic Water Supply Use. Monitoring Sites: Station 266 at Niles (Lower Solomon River); Station 512 near Minneapolis (Salt Creek); Station 511 near Glasco (Upper Solomon River). Period of Record Used: 1990 – 2001 for Stations 266, 511 and 512 (Figures 3, 4, and 5, respectively) Flow Record: Lower Solomon R.: Solomon River at Niles (USGS Station 06876900; 1970 - 2002) Salt Creek: Salt Creek near Ada (USGS Station 06876700; 1970 – 2002); Upper Solomon R.: Solomon River near Simpson (USGS Station 06876070; 1990 – 2002) Long Term Flow Conditions: Median Flows: Solomon River at Niles = 170 cfs Salt Creek = 15.3 cfs Solomon River at Simpson =138 cfs 3 Solomon River Chloride TMDL HUC and Stream Segment Map KDHE Water Quality Monitoring Site %a Fixed Site #Y USGS Gage Site M JEWELL u 303(d) Listed Streams - Chloride l b 060 e P Chloride r l r 10260015010 u y m r Other surface water 102600150C 20 C C r r y r 010 City WACONDA 040 D 7 6 3 So 3 LAKE 3 lomon County 2 R 16 1 4 3 Lakes 090 r 1 050 8 CLOUD C 4 r 4 y 030 C HUC11 Boundary (HUC11 labeled) 070 9 e 10260015030 n r k 9 r 3 ia r C d u 0 r C Grouped Assessment Units for Solomon R. Chloride TMDL 030 n r T I 4 n C A s r i a l C r n l 06876070 t 050 b C Lower Solomon R. Watershed e a 060 y C 4 e r r lo 1 h #Y e e 4 L s 2 511 p C k 3 r Salt Cr (Minneapolis) Watershed 4 e m c a h %a i C t 020 r t o r r 010 r M C Y Upper Solomon R. Watershed u 4 1 o o 6 d 2 070 Salt Cr F 040 n M o 0 (HUC14 labeled as 3-digit extension) F c 5 30 e if Litt 030 t S 2 Solomon River Basin le h 1 C 4 5 44 r 5 C 5 r r 2 C 5 8 y 060 4 C r 10260015060 020 5 D o 010 5 S w t) 10260015040 e 080 n r r a C c 020 C C li N MITCHELL o p y r 5 e m e Rattl n 6 ip o s 2 es d d nake F P c n LINCOLN C 3 L e i r i 3 1 C d r L 2 040 o ri s r s lo t h t c C 040 ( 29 C 7 Battle C r r 060 r r C t S 3 s a 080 lt d r 3 e #Y Cr 050 010 n C W l , r 06876700 a D r 7 C 8 S a 010 I 4 2 o g C C n 7 n i 10260015050 %a C r K r p o 3 2 h S 5 030 I 512 6 N lk 050 070 4 E S 5 020 O Cr N attle 57 JW B CN RA DC NT RP MS NM BR DP r PL SM WS Antelope C 10260015070 AT 8 MC CD 5 SH TH JA 3 050 SD GH RO OB CY RL PT JF LV 266 WY 030 OT SN %a WA LC GE WB OTTAWA #Y LG GO TR DG JO 06876900 S EL RS DK o SA lo EW MR OS SALINE m FR MI 040 1 o GL WH RH n SC LE NS BT LY R MP RC MN CS CF AN LN FI PN HG HM KE SF HV RN ED GW WO AL BB GY BU FO SG ST PR GT HS KW KM WL NO CR EK MT SV SW ME CA BA SU CL MG LB CM HP CQ CK 10 0 10 20 30 Miles Figure 1 (The Pipe Creek watershed was not impaired by chloride. Pipe Creek’s average chloride concentration was 23 mg/L) 4 Chloride in mg/L Chloride in mg/L Chloride in mg/L 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 1000 1200 1400 100 200 300 400 500 200 400 600 800 0 0 0 3/14/90 3/14/90 5/8/90 3/14/90 5/9/90 7/17/90 5/8/90 7/17/90 9/11/90 7/17/90 9/11/90 10/30/90 9/11/90 10/30/90 2/25/91 10/30/90 2/26/91 4/22/91 2/26/91 4/23/91 6/25/91 4/23/91 6/24/91 8/27/91 6/24/91 8/26/91 10/29/91 8/26/91 10/28/91 12/3/91 10/28/91 12/4/91 1/7/92 12/2/91 1/7/92 3/17/92 1/6/92 3/17/92 5/12/92 3/16/92 5/12/92 7/14/92 5/11/92 7/14/92 9/22/92 7/13/92 9/22/92 11/10/92 9/21/92 11/10/92 4/20/93 11/9/92 4/19/93 4/20/93 Dom. 6/15/93 Dom. Dom. 6/14/93 6/15/93 8/17/93 8/16/93 8/17/93 10/19/93 10/19/93 Chloride: WQSite266 Chloride: WQSite511 10/18/93 Chloride: WQSite512 W 12/14/93 W 12/14/93 1/11/94 W 12/13/93 ater Supply(250mg/L) ater Supply(250mg/L) 1/11/94 ater Supply(250mg/L) 1/10/94 3/22/94 3/21/94 3/22/94 Solomon River 5/17/94 Solomon River 5/16/94 5/17/94 7/19/94 7/18/94 7/19/94 9/20/94 Salt Creek 9/20/94 11/15/94 9/19/94 Figure 2 Figure 4 Figure 3 11/14/94 11/15/94 2/14/95 2/13/95 2/15/95 Sample Date Sample Date 4/18/95 Sample Date 4/17/95 4/19/95 5 6/20/95 6/19/95 6/21/95 8/22/95 8/21/95 8/23/95 10/17/95 10/16/95 10/18/95 12/12/95 12/11/95 12/13/95 3/19/96 3/18/96 3/20/96 5/14/96 5/13/96 5/15/96 7/16/96 7/15/96 7/17/96 9/17/96 9/16/96 11/13/96 9/18/96 Background (395mg/L) 11/12/96 Background (368mg/L) Background (647mg/L) 11/14/96 2/25/97 2/24/97 2/26/97 4/29/97 4/28/97 4/30/97 6/24/97 6/23/97 6/25/97 8/26/97 8/25/97 10/28/97 8/27/97 10/27/97 10/29/97 12/16/97 12/15/97 1/27/98 12/17/97 1/26/98 1/28/98 3/24/98 3/23/98 5/19/98 5/18/98 3/25/98 7/28/98 7/27/98 5/20/98 9/22/98 9/21/98 7/29/98 12/1/98 11/30/98 9/23/98 2/15/99 2/16/99 12/2/98 4/19/99 4/20/99 2/17/99 6/14/99 6/15/99 4/21/99 8/16/99 8/17/99 6/16/99 10/18/99 10/19/99 8/18/99 12/20/99 12/21/99 10/20/99 1/18/00 1/19/00 12/22/99 3/20/00 3/21/00 1/20/00 5/15/00 5/16/00 3/22/00 7/17/00 7/18/00 5/17/00 9/18/00 9/19/00 7/19/00 11/13/00 11/14/00 9/20/00 2/12/01 2/13/01 11/15/00 4/16/01 4/17/01 4/18/01 6/18/01 6/19/01 6/20/01 8/20/01 8/21/01 8/22/01 10/15/01 10/16/01 10/17/01 12/17/01 12/18/01 12/18/01 Current Conditions: Since loading capacity varies as a function of the flow present in the stream, this TMDL represents a continuum of desired loads over all flow conditions, rather than fixed at a single value.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Waconda Lake WRAPS 9 Element Watershed Protection Plan
    Waconda Lake WRAPS 9 Element Watershed Protection Plan Water Quality Impairments Directly Addressed: Waconda Lake Eutrophication TMDL (Medium Priority) North Fork Solomon River E. coli TMDL (Medium Priority) South Fork Solomon River E. coli TMDL (High Priority) Other Impairments Which Stand to Benefit from Watershed Plan Implementation: South Fork Solomon River Biology TMDL (Low Priority), Total Phosphorus 303(d) listing, and Total Suspended Solids 303(d) listing North Fork Solomon River Total Phosphorus 303(d) listing, Total Suspended Solids 303(d) listing, and Biology 303(d) listing Twin Creek Dissolved Oxygen TMDL (Medium Priority) Oak Creek Dissolved Oxygen 303(d) listing and Total Phosphorus 303(d) listing Carr Creek Total Phosphorus 303(d) listing and Total Suspended Solids 303(d) listing Beaver Creek Dissolved Oxygen 303(d) listing, Total Phosphorus 303(d) listing, and Total Suspended Solids 303(d) listing Deer Creek Dissolved Oxygen 303(d) listing and Total Phosphorus 303(d) listing Determination of Priority Areas Spreadsheet Tool for Estimating Pollutant Loads (STEPL) Model to identify HUC 12 watersheds within highest estimated phosphorus loads for cropland targeted areas Interpretation of water quality data included within bacteria TMDLs for North and South Fork Solomon Rivers to identify HUC 12 watersheds to focus BMP implementation towards addressing bacteria impairment issues. Best Management Practice and Load Reduction Goals Phosphorus Watershed Plan Waconda Lake Load to Meet Waconda Lake Current Waconda Lake
    [Show full text]
  • The 1951 Kansas - Missouri Floods
    The 1951 Kansas - Missouri Floods ... Have We Forgotten? Introduction - This report was originally written as NWS Technical Attachment 81-11 in 1981, the thirtieth anniversary of this devastating flood. The co-authors of the original report were Robert Cox, Ernest Kary, Lee Larson, Billy Olsen, and Craig Warren, all hydrologists at the Missouri Basin River Forecast Center at that time. Although most of the original report remains accurate today, Robert Cox has updated portions of the report in light of occurrences over the past twenty years. Comparisons of the 1951 flood to the events of 1993 as well as many other parenthetic remarks are examples of these revisions. The Storms of 1951 - Fifty years ago, the stage was being set for one of the greatest natural disasters ever to hit the Midwest. May, June and July of 1951 saw record rainfalls over most of Kansas and Missouri, resulting in record flooding on the Kansas, Osage, Neosho, Verdigris and Missouri Rivers. Twenty-eight lives were lost and damage totaled nearly 1 billion dollars. (Please note that monetary damages mentioned in this report are in 1951 dollars, unless otherwise stated. 1951 dollars can be equated to 2001 dollars using a factor of 6.83. The total damage would be $6.4 billion today.) More than 150 communities were devastated by the floods including two state capitals, Topeka and Jefferson City, as well as both Kansas Cities. Most of Kansas and Missouri as well as large portions of Nebraska and Oklahoma had monthly precipitation totaling 200 percent of normal in May, 300 percent in June, and 400 percent in July of 1951.
    [Show full text]
  • Swedes in the 1880 Census of Dickinson County, Kansas
    Swedish American Genealogist Volume 14 Number 1 Article 2 3-1-1994 Swedes in the 1880 Census of Dickinson County, Kansas Thomas Branigar Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.augustana.edu/swensonsag Part of the Genealogy Commons, and the Scandinavian Studies Commons Recommended Citation Branigar, Thomas (1994) "Swedes in the 1880 Census of Dickinson County, Kansas," Swedish American Genealogist: Vol. 14 : No. 1 , Article 2. Available at: https://digitalcommons.augustana.edu/swensonsag/vol14/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Swenson Swedish Immigration Research Center at Augustana Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Swedish American Genealogist by an authorized editor of Augustana Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Swedes in the 1880 Census of Dickinson County, Kansas Thomas Branigar* Swedes formed one of the earliest ethnic groups in Dickinson County, KS. The first immigrants arrived in the late 1850s, shortly after the territory was opened to settlement and settled south of the Smoky Hill River in what is today Center Township. By the time of the 1880 census the Center Township group had grown to several dozen families and had overflowed into Logan and Liberty Townships. A much smaller group df Swedes had settled in Fragrant Hill Township in the 1870s, anda few isolated Swedish families were scattered around the rest of the county. Extensive information is available on the Swedes of Center Township. Two churches were established by the immigrants - the Bethlehem Lutheran Church, based upon the state religion of Sweden and the Swedish Mission Church, later known as the Pleasant Hill Church, which was independent.
    [Show full text]
  • R:\TMDL\New Tmdls\Kanopoliscl.Wpd
    SMOKY HILL/SALINE RIVER BASIN TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD Water Body/Assessment Unit: Kanopolis Lake, Smoky Hill River (Ellsworth, Wilson, and Russell), Beaver Creek, North Fork Big Creek, Fossil Creek, Goose Creek, Landon Creek, and Sellens Creek Water Quality Impairment: Chloride 1. INTRODUCTION AND PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION Subbasin: Big and Middle Smoky Hill Counties: Barton, Ellis, Ellsworth, Gove, Lincoln, Ness, Rice, Rush, Russell, Sheridan, and Trego HUC 8: 10260006 HUC 11 (14): 010 (010, 020, 030, 040, 050, 060) (Figure 1) 020 (010, 020, 030, 040) 030 (010, 020, 030, 040) 040 (010, 020, 030, 040, 050, 060, 070) 050 (010, 020, 030, 040, 050, 060, 070) 060 (010, 020, 030, 040, 050, 060, 070, 080) 10260007 010 (010, 020, 030, 040) 020 (010, 020, 030, 040) 030 (010, 020, 030, 040, 050) 040 (010, 020, 030, 040, 050) Ecoregion: Central Great Plains, Smoky Hills (27a) Central Great Plains, Rolling Plains and Breaks (27b) Drainage Area: Approximately 2,327 square miles between Kanopolis Dam and Cedar Bluff Dam Kanopolis Lake Conservation Pool: Area = 3,742 acres Watershed Area: Lake Surface Area = 413:1 Maximum Depth = 10.0 meters (32.8 feet) Mean Depth = 4.0 meters (13.1 feet) Retention Time = 0.12 years (1.4 months) Designated Uses: Primary and Secondary Contact Recreation; Expected Aquatic Life Support; Drinking Water; Food Procurement; Irrigation Authority: Federal (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers), State (Kansas Water Office) 1 Smoky Hill River Main Stem Segment: WQLS: 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, &18 (Smoky Hill River) starting at Kanopolis Lake and traveling upstream to station 539 near Schoenchen.
    [Show full text]
  • Lower Solomon River Subbasin
    Lower Solomon River Subbasin 2008 - Field Analysis Summary Subbasin Water Resource Management Program Division of Water Resources Kansas Department of Agriculture nd 109 SW Ninth Street – 2 Floor Topeka, KS 66612-1283 785-296-6087 Table of Contents I. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................3 II. Precipitation ................................................................................................................................5 III. Surface Water.............................................................................................................................6 IV. Groundwater ............................................................................................................................10 V. Water Use ..................................................................................................................................16 VI. Conclusions..............................................................................................................................17 VII. Appendix ................................................................................................................................17 Figures Figure 1: Solomon River Basin divided into subbasins .................................................................. 4 Figure 2: Lower Solomon Subbasin precipitation 1900-2007 ........................................................ 5 Figure 3: 2008 Monthly Average Precipitation .............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Smoky Hill-Headwaters
    KANSAS Rapid Watershed Assessment Smoky Hill Headwaters Watershed Hydrologic Unit Code – 10260001 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 Smoky Hill Headwaters - 10260001 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 Smoky Hill Headwaters - 10260001 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
    [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]
  • Geologic Construction-Material Resources in Mitchell ^County, Kansas
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 106 June 1951 GEOLOGIC CONSTRUCTION-MATERIAL RESOURCES IN MITCHELL ^COUNTY, KANSAS Frank E. Byrne, Wendell B. Johnson, and Denzil W. Bergman PREPARED IN COOPERATION WITH THE STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION OF KANSAS R. C. Keeling, State Highway Engineer S. E. Horner, Chie* Geologist R. D. Finney, Chief Engineer Prepared as Part of a Program of the Department of the Interior for Development of the Missouri River Basin UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Oscar L. Chapman, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. E. Wrather, Director Washington, D. C. Free on application to the Geological Survey, Washington 25, D. C. CONTENTS Page Page Introduction. .............. l Sanborn formation ......... 15 Purpose of the investigation ..... 1 Areal distribution ....... 15 Geography ............./1 General description ...... 16 Area covered by the investigation. 1 Representative measured section 16 Topography .......... 1 Thickness ........... 16 Drainage. ........... 1 Construction materials ..... 16 Climate ............ 1 Terrace deposits. ......... 16 Transportation routes ...... 3 Areal distribution ....... 16 Investigation procedure ....... 3 General description ...... 16 Acknowledgments .......... 3 Representative measured section 17 Characteristics of the outcropping Thickness ........... 17 stratigraphic units ........... 4 Construction materials ..... 17 General .............. 4 Alluvium ............. 17 Dakota sandstone .......... 4 Areal distribution ........ 17 Areal distribution. ....... 4 General description ...... 17 General
    [Show full text]
  • A Long, Long Time Ago
    a long, long time ago... Elliott West is a professor of history at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville, Arkansas. Greg Ruark is the director of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Agroforestry Center in Lincoln, Nebraska. Historical evidence of riparian forests in the Great Plains and how that knowledge can aid with restoration and management. Riparian areas—land adja- transcontinental railroad spur lines in the 1860’s; before the 1859 Denver gold cent to a streambank or rush; and before the Great Westward other water body—filtering Movement of the 1840’s along the nonpoint source pollution. Oregon Trail (Ambrose, 2000; West, Unfortunately the riparian 1998). These defining events drew many people into and through the Great Plains areas of today, include only on their way to seek their fortunes and narrow bands of forests, or build their futures. no woody vegetation. This This, then, is a story of the Great Plains greatly minimizes their eco- and how riparian areas along major rivers and their tributaries were once signifi- logical function. In deciding cantly forested. They came under great how to manage these areas, pressure beginning in the mid 1800’s knowing the natural ripari- from the simultaneous and cumulative an makeup before humans impact of Indians, gold seekers, soldiers, railroad crews, and settlers who all played settled in the area is vital. important roles in determining the way Management essentially is riparian areas look today. then restoration. The Story… The Great Plains as a whole hosted far hile some argue that the Great fewer trees than the Missouri valley to Plains were dominated by the east and the Rocky Mountains to the W grasslands and that riparian west.
    [Show full text]
  • Kansas Freshwater Mussel Populations of the Upper Saline And
    TRANSACTIONS OF THE KANSAS Vol. 119, no. 3 ACADEMY OF SCIENCE p. 325-335 (2016) Kansas freshwater mussel populations of the upper Saline and Smoky Hill rivers with emphasis on the status of the Cylindrical Papershell (Anodontoides ferussacianus) BRYAN J. SOWARDS, RYAN L. PINKALL, WESTON L. FLEMING, JORDAN R. HOFMEIER AND WILLIAM J. STARK Fort Hays State University, Hays, Kansas [email protected] The Cylindrical Papershell (Anodontoides ferussacianus) is a fast-growing, short-lived freshwater mussel that occurs throughout the northeastern United States and southeastern Canada but appears to be declining in portions of its range. Its distribution in Kansas, once encompassing most of the Kansas and Missouri river basins, is now limited to the upper Saline and Smoky Hill rivers in the west-central portion of the state. We qualitatively surveyed freshwater mussels at 19 sites on both the Saline and Smoky Hill rivers, with emphasis on assessing the status of A. ferussacianus. We collected 28 live mussels in the Saline River, including eight A. ferussacianus, and 503 live mussels in the Smoky Hill River, including 12 A. ferussacianus. We also estimated mussel density at five sites with the highest relative abundances of A. ferussacianus. Densities of A. ferussacianus ranged from 0.01 to 0.03 individuals per m2. Most A. ferussacianus were collected in run habitats near riffles, beaver dams, and lowhead dams. In addition to A. ferussacianus, we collected three other mussel species in the Saline River, and six other species in the Smoky Hill River. Total mussel density ranged from 0.08 to 0.13 individuals per m2 at sites in the Saline River, and 0.48 to 2.00 individuals per m2 at sites in the Smoky Hill River.
    [Show full text]
  • Glen Elder SP
    YOU CAN HELP GLEN ELDER Help Glen Elder Shine! If you’re in a developed camp- ground please put all of your trash in one of the centrally- located trash dumpsters. In other camp and day-use areas, please take all of your trash with you. n the shores of the 13,000- buildings are open in all camp- on the weather. len acre Waconda Lake Glen grounds April–September. The A full service Marina provides THINGS TO REMEMBER GG OElder State Park offers Kanza shower building may be fuel, boat and slip rental, as well For permits, visit either the area office or one of the self- unmatched recreational opportu- open, beginning in April, to as boating, fishing and camping pay stations at each park entrance. Vehicle, camping, and nities. With its rural setting, Glen accommodate early season camp- supplies. (Apr. 1 – Oct. 31). utility permits are required year-round. Elder is a perfect place to relax. ing through the opening weekend lder Office hours are 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through E Modern restroom/shower of upland bird season, depending E Friday throughout the year. From Memorial Day to Labor Day weekend the office extends its hours and is open DAY USE seven days a week. In an emergency, contact the area State Park office or call the Mitchell County Sheriff at (785) 738-3523. The new Waconda Visitor & Education Center is a lent view. A modern, handicap-accessible fish cleaning must see. The Center’s highlights include Native station (open Apr.–Oct.), is located at the east dump sta- American history, the Waconda Springs, history of the tion.
    [Show full text]
  • He Horrific Flood of 1903 Was Likely Still on the Minds Suspended in 1942
    By Douglas Helmke, P.G., Water Rights/Source Water Specialist he horrific flood of 1903 was likely still on the minds suspended in 1942. After the war ended, work resumed in of many Kansans in the 1930's. The national 1946 and the gates were closed in May of 1948. The lake economy was in poor shape, low prices for pools reached normal levels only a few moths later in July agricultural commodities were the norm, and higher than of 1948. normalT temperatures with lower than normal rainfall Much of this “domestic” use of water was likely resulted in poor harvests. Much of Kansas had experienced envisioned by the Corps to be used by an irrigation district. at least one dust storm. With the conditions of the current This irrigation district may have been created on paper, but day, one might think that flooding was the last thing on their it never became a functional entity. minds. In 1979, Rural Water District No. 1, Ellsworth County, The Kansas State Historical Society has made available a also more commonly known at Post Rock Rural Water report on the 1903 Smoky Hill - Kansas River Flood. It says District, was established. It was designed with the idea that the flood of ‘03 claimed the lives of 57 people (most of water from the reservoir could be treated and used by the them in Shawnee County) and six of seven railroad bridges residents of Ellsworth County and beyond. It is by far, in over the river in Kansas City were washed away. It was terms of area, the largest rural water district in Kansas.
    [Show full text]