(ANW), RlClick here to return to USGS publications · 2003. 1. 21. · Hampshire. 0 0. mar! 20 '' MILES 20 KILOMETERS. 5 Ground-Water Resourcesin NewHampshire:Stratified-Drift Aquifers

U.S . GEOLOGICAL SURVEYWATER-RESOURCES INVESTIGATIONS REPORT 95-4100

Prepared in cooperation with

NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES,

WATERRESOURCES DIVISION

(ANW"),

Rl

http://www.usgs.gov

njestes

njestes

Click here to return to USGS publications

../index.html

Moat Mountain viewed from NorthConway, New Hampshire. Foregroundof painting shows sand deposit and flatstratified-drift outwash deposit of theSaco River Valley, now known to beunderlain by up to 100 feet of layeredsand and gravel. Albert Bierstadtpainting reprinted with permissionfrom the Currier Gallery of Art,Manchester, New Hampshire: CurrierFunds, 1947.3 .

GROUND-WATER RESOURCES IN NEW HAMPSHIRE:STRATIFIED-DRIFT AQUIFERSBy Laura Medalie and Richard Bridge Moore

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEYWater-Resources Investigations Report 95-4100

Prepared in cooperation withNEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES,WATER RESOURCES DIVISION

Bow, New Hampshire1995

For additional information write to:

Chief, New Hampshire-Vermont DistrictU.S . Geological SurveyWater Resources Division525 Clinton StreetBow, NH 03304

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIORBRUCE BABBITT, Secretary

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEYGordon P Eaton, Director

Copies of this report can be purchased from :

U.S . Geological SurveyEarth Science Information CenterOpen-File Reports SectionBox 25286, MS 517Denver Federal CenterDenver, CO 80225

ForewordNew Hampshire's scenic landscape, from the peaks of the White Mountains to

the sands of its beaches, was formed as a result of geologic processes over hundredsof millions of years . In relatively recent geologic history, advancing glaciers roundedthe domes of the mountain summits, carved deep ravines, such as the famous Tuck-erman Ravine on Mount Washington, and scoured the broad valleys common in thesouthern sections of the "Notches"-Crawford, Franconia, Evans, Pinkham, andZealand . A testament to the tremendous scouring power of the glaciers is the wide-spread sand and gravel deposits in the valleys, where fragments of bedrock weretransported and dropped by glacial meltwater. Today, these deposits, known as strat-ified drift, form major aquifer systems, holding one of New Hampshire's most valu-able resources-ground water.

Assisting States in evaluating their water resources is a major part of the missionof the U.S . Geological Survey (USGS) . A program of cooperative water-resources datacollection between the State of New Hampshire and the USGS was instituted in 1903to measure streamflows in the White Mountains. Today, the cooperative programencompasses a broad range of data collection and investigative studies involving theState's surface- and ground-water resources .

In 1983, the New Hampshire Legislature enacted Chapters 361 and 402 of theState Statutes, which authorized development of the New Hampshire WaterResources Management Plan and an intensive assessment of the State's ground-waterresources . Following development of the Plan, in 1985 Governor John Sununu signedChapter 77, which provided $2 million to fund the State's share of a 10-year-longground-water-assessment program to be performed by the USGS in cooperation withthe New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (NHDES). The goals ofthis program were to (1) determine the extent and hydrologic characteristics of strat-ified-drift aquifers, (2) assess potential water-yielding capabilities of selected aqui-fers, and (3) define general quality of water in the major aquifers . After extensive datacollection and analysis, results of these investigations are being published in a seriesof technical reports for the 13 study areas that cover the entire State. Each reportincludes a set of map plates showing aquifer locations and important aquifer charac-teristics in addition to written text . These technical reports are directed primarilytoward planners, engineers, and scientists who are engaged in ground-water-resources development and management.

Reliable and comprehensive information about aquifers benefits all citizens bycontributing towards informed decisions concerning water resources . By increasingknowledge and awareness about New Hampshire's ground-water resources, we seekto encourage and support their responsible use and management.

Robert M. Hirsch, Chief Hydrologist

RobertW. Varney, CommissionerUnited States Geological Survey

New Hampshire Department ofEnvironmental Services

CONTENTS

Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IIIIntroduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1Ground Water in the Hydrologic Cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2Ground-Water Use in New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4Glaciers and Stratified-Drift Deposits in the New Hampshire Landscape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6Stratified-Drift Aquifers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10Characteristics of Aquifers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11Methods for Evaluating Stratified-Drift Aquifers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12Major Stratified-Drift Aquifers in New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16Upper Connecticut and Androscoggin River Basins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

17Middle Connecticut River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

17Pemigewasset River Basin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

17Saco and Ossipee River Basins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

17Winnipesaukee River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

20Lower Connecticut River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

20Contoocook River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

20Upper Merrimack River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

20Bellamy, Cocheco, and Salmon Falls River Basins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

20Middle Merrimack River Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21Exeter, Lamprey, and Oyster River Basins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21Lower Merrimack and Coastal River Basins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21Nashua Regional Planning Commission Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21Quality of Water from Stratified-Drift Aquifers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

22How Stratified-Drift-Aquifer Data are Used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

25Summary. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29Selected References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

30

FIGURES

IV Contents

1 . Map showing study areas, major rivers, and town boundaries for U.S. Geological Survey stratified-drift-aquifer investigations in New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2 . Block diagram showing generalized hydrologic cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 . Photograph showing Chocorua Lake in Tamworth viewed from the south, east-central

New Hampshire, a surface-water body fed primarily by ground-water discharge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 . Bar diagram showing ground-water withdrawals in New Hampshire by category in 1990 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 . Photograph showing gravel-packed public-supply well in stratified-drift aquifer in the

town of Plymouth, central New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 . Map showing locations of high-capacity public-supply wells from which more than 20,000

or more than 500,000 gallons of water per day are withdrawn from stratified-driftaquifers in New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

7. Sketch showing south-facing view of Crawford Notch from Mount Willard in Hart'sLocation, the heart of the White Mountains in north-central New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

8 . Block diagrams showing depositional processes and features of typical stratified-driftdeposits in New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

9 . Aerial photograph taken in the 1940's of the Pine River Esker in Ossipee, east-centralNew Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

CONTENTS-Continued

CONVERSION FACTORS AND ABBREVIATIONS

ABBREVIATED WATER-QUALITY UNITS USED IN REPORT

ABBREVIATIONSNHDESNRCSUSEPAUSGS

Multiply

foot (ft)foot per day (ft/d)

foot per second (ft/s)foot squared per day (ft2/d)

gallon per day (gal/d)mile (mi)

square mile (mi'- )million gallons per day (Mgal/d)

By

To Obtain

0.3048 meter0.3048

meter per day0.3048

meter per second0.0929

square meter per day0.003785

cubic meter per day1.609 kilometer2.590

square kilometer0.04381

cubic meter per second

New Hampshire Department of Environmental ServicesU.S . Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation ServiceU.S . Environmental Protection AgencyU.S . Geological Survey

In this report, the concentration of a chemical in water is expressed in milligrams per liter (mg/L) or micrograms per liter (Pg/L) .Milligrams per liter is a unit expressing the concentration ofchemical constituents in solution as weight (milligrams) of solute per unit volume(liter) of water ; 1,000 pg/L is equivalent to 1 mg/L.

Conversion Factors and Abbreviations V

10,11 . Photographs showing :10 . Delta deposits in Newmarket, southeastern New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 911 . Well-sorted sand layers sandwiched between boulder and cobble layers

at a site in Francestown, south-central New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012 . Diagram demonstrating shape, size, and sorting of sediments determine aquifer

characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1113 . Photographs showing :

13 . A hollow-stem auger drill rig and operator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1314 . Split-spoon sampler and sediment from a drilled test hole in Greenfield, south-central

New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1415 . Photograph and diagram showing seismic-refraction survey field work in Sugar Hill,

northwestern New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1516 . Photograph showing typical setup for sampling water quality at a well in Concord,

south-central New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1617 . Map showing major stratified-drift aquifers and zones of transmissivity greater than

2,000 feet squared per day in New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1918,19 . Photographs showing :

18 . Sand deposits from a former river channel stained red from iron inground-water seepage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

19 . A boy collects drinking water from a spring that flows from a stratified-driftaquifer in Sanbornton, central New Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

TABLES

1 . Summary of selected analyses of ground water from stratified-drift aquifers in New Hampshire . . . . . . 242 . List of towns in New Hampshire, U.S . Geological Survey aquifer-assessment study areas,

and areas of town and percentage of total town areas underlain by stratified-drift aquifers . . . . . . . . . . 26

GROUND-WATER RESOURCESIN NEW HAMPSHIRE:STRATIFIED-DRIFT AQUIFERS

By Laura Medalie and Richard Bridge Moore

INTRODUCTION

Stratified-drift aquifersunderlie about 14 percent ofthe land surface in NewHampshire and are an impor-tant source of ground waterfor commercial, industrial,domestic, and public-watersupplies in the State.

This report introducesterms and concepts relevantto ground-water resources,summarizes some of theimportant informationderived from a statewidestratified-drift-aquifer inves-tigation, and provides exam-ples of how the findings areused . The purpose of thisreport is to provide an over-view of the stratified-driftaquifer assessment program,thus making summary infor-mation accessible to a broad

audience, including legisla-tors, State and local officials,and the public.

Different audiences willuse the report in differentways . To accommodate thevaried audiences, some dataare summarized statewide,some are presented by majorriver basin, and some are pro-vided by town. During datacollection, care was taken touse consistent methods foreach of the 13 study areas(fig . 1) so that results wouldbe comparable throughoutthe State . If more specific ordetailed information about aparticular area of interest isneeded, the reader is directedto one or more of the techni-cal reports listed in theSelected References section ofthis report.

EXPLANATION

MAJOR RIVERS

------- TOWN BOUNDARY

- RIVER BASIN BOUNDARY

STUDYAREAS

1

Upper Connecticut River Basin2

Middle Connecticut River Basin3

Pemigewasset River Basin4

Saco and Ossipee River Basins5

Winnipesaukee River Basin6

Lower Connecticut River Basin7

Contoocook River Basin8

Upper Merrimack River Basin9

Bellamy, Cocheco, and Salmon Falls River Basins10

Middle Merrimack River Basin11

Exeter, Lamprey, and Oyster River Basins12

Lower Merrimack and coastal River Basins13

Nashua Regional Planning Commission Area

44° -

Figure 1 . Study areas, major rivers, and town boundaries for U.S . Geological Survey stratified-drift-aquiferinvestigations in New Hampshire.

Introduction 1

GROUND WATER IN THE HYDROLOGIC CYCLE

An illustration of the hydrologic cycle (fig . 2) shows howground water relates to other components and processes in thenatural environment. Discussion of the hydrologic cycle usuallybegins with precipitation, which occurs primarily as rain andsnow. Some precipitation evaporates from leaf, soil, or otherintercepting surfaces before even reaching the ground. Depend-ing on soil characteristics, such as porosity, permeability, anddegree of saturation, precipitation either infiltrates the ground orflows along the top of the ground as surface runoff before reach-ing streams or lakes. Some of the precipitation that infiltrates theground is retained in the root zone, where it is used by plants andsubsequently lost from leaf surfaces through transpiration. Therest of the infiltrating water continues to flow downwards underthe force of gravity and recharges ground water.

Eventually, a depth is reached below which all spacesbetween unconsolidated particles in sediment are filled, or satu-rated with water; this water is called ground water. The top of

1 Words in bold type are defined in sidebars .

Figure 2 . Generalized hydrologic cycle . Infiltrating water rechargesground water, which eventually discharges into streams and othersurface-water bodies . Arrows show flow of water . (Modified fromWaller, 1989.)

2 Ground-Water Resources in New Hampshire: Stratified-Drift Aquifers

this saturated zone is known asthe water table. If the saturated,subsurface zone is capable ofyielding a significant volume ofground water through wells orsprings, that zone is commonlyreferred to as an aquifer. Groundwater in an aquifer continues toflow downward and laterally,until it reaches surface water anddischarges into a swamp, stream,lake (fig . 3), or ocean. Water evap-orates from the surface waterbody to form clouds, thus com-pleting the hydrologic cycle.

Withdrawal of ground waterfrom wells interrupts this naturalcycle and alters ground-waterflow patterns . The well becomes adischarge point, interceptingground water that, if not pumped,would have discharged else-where. If pumping from a wellcauses surface water to infiltratethe ground and recharge the aqui-fer at a greater rate than if nowater were being pumped, theaquifer is said to be recharged byinduced infiltration .

The natural hydrologic cycleis also disrupted when large tractsof land are paved or otherwisemade impervious, which can leadto a decrease in the quantity ofground-water recharge . In theseareas, precipitation either runs offthe land surface to nearby streamsor evaporates directly from thepaved ground, and, therefore, isdiverted from the infiltration andground-water recharge phase ofthe cycle.

Figure 3 . Chocorua Lake in Tamworth viewed from the south,east-central New Hampshire, a surface-water body fed primarilyby ground-water discharge . (Photograph taken by B.R . Mrazik,U.S . Geological Survey.)

The ground-water discharge phase of the hydrologiccycle performs an important function by contributing to themaintenance of streamflow volumes. Streamflow is composed of base flow and stormflow. Compared to stormflow,base flow is less susceptible to large fluctuations over time .For selected segments of streams throughout the State,USGS hydrologists make measurements to determine thevolumes contributed by base flow and stormflow. With thisinformation, the minimum flow of the stream during peri-ods of little or no precipitation (drought) can be calculated .Planners use this information to make assessments as to theavailability of water for water supply, recreation, fish habi-tats, and other instream and off-stream uses of water.

Aquifer - Ageologic unit or formation thatcontains a usable supply ofwater

Baseflow - thepart ofa stream's totalflow thatis sustained by ground-water discharge into thestream

Ground water - subsurface water below thewater table in soils and geologic formations thatarefully saturated

Ground-water discharge - ground water thatemerges at the land surface, either into surfacewater or in theform of springs or seepage areas

Ground-water recharge - replenishment ofwater to aquifers, usually where a layer ofpermeable material is close to the land surface

Induced infiltration - the entry of waterfroma stream or lake into an adjacent aquifer as aconsequence of pumping waterfrom a wellcompleted in the aquifer

Permeability - interconnectedness ofporespaces; permeability provides a measure of therelative ease offluidflow

Porosity - the ratio ofthe total volume ofporespace to the total volume ofsediment

Runoff - waterfrom precipitation thatflowsdownhill along the top ofthe ground surfacebefore it either infiltrates the soil orflows into astream or lake

Saturation - wetness of the soil

Storm/low - that part ofstreamflow fed byprecipitation and surface runoff

Surface water - waterflowing or stored on theearth's surface, such as in streams, lakes, orswamps

Unconsolidated - refers to a deposit in whichthe particles are not firmly cemented together,such as sand in contrast to sandstone

Watertable - the top ofthe zone in which all porespaces orfractures are saturated with water

Ground Water in the Hydrologic Cycle 3

GROUND-WATER USE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE

Ground water is a major source of water forhouseholds, industries, and commercial enter-prises in New Hampshire. In 1990, ground-waterwithdrawals totalled about 63 Mgal/d andaccounted for about 38 percent (surface wateraccounted for about 62 percent) of total waterwithdrawals, excluding water used for cooling atthermoelectric powerplants (Medalie and Horn,1994). About 415,000 people (or 38 percent of theState's population) pump ground water from theirown wells because their homes are not connectedto a public-supply system . Throughout the State,ground water withdrawn by public suppliers isdelivered to domestic customers; industries; andcommercial enterprises including hotels, restau-rants, office buildings, hospitals, and schools.Ground water is also withdrawn from privatewells for many uses (fig . 4) .

Approximately 3,000 individual wells orsprings are registered with the NHDES WaterSupply Engineering Bureau as active sources ofground water for public supply (Rene Pelletier,New Hampshire Department of Environmental

Public Supply

Domestic

ThermoelectricPowerplants

Agricultural

Commercial

Industrial

Mining

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

GROUND-WATER WITHDRAWALS INMILLION GALLONS PER DAY

Figure 4. Ground-water withdrawals in NewHampshire by category in 1990 . Bars shown above fordomestic, thermoelectric powerplants, agricultural,commercial, industrial, and mining water usesrepresent the proportion for those categories that areself supplied-not from a public supplier .

4 Ground-Water Resources in New Hampshire : Stratified-Drift Aquifers

Figure 5 . Gravel-packed public-supply well instratified-drift aquifer in the town of Plymouth, centralNew Hampshire . (Photograph taken by B.R . Mrazik,U.S . Geological Survey.)

Services, written commun., 1993). Of thesesources, about 2,400 are wells drilled in bedrockand about 600 are in stratified-drift aquifers(fig . 5) . Although there are fewer public-supplywells in stratified-drift aquifers than in bedrock,wells in stratified-drift aquifers are usually moreproductive and yield a higher quantity of waterthan wells in bedrock aquifers . The NHDES,Water Resources Division, maintains a data baseof all registered water users that withdraw anaverage of more than 20,000 gal/ d over any 7-dayperiod (fig . 6) . Of the registered public suppliers,the sum of withdrawals from bedrock wells aver-ages less than 2 Mgal/d, whereas the sum ofwithdrawals from stratified-drift aquifersaverages around 18 Mgal/d (Frederick H. Chor-mann, Jr., New Hampshire Department ofEnvironmental Services, written commun.,1993) .

Figure 6. Locationsof high-capacitypublic-supply wellsfrom which morethan 20,000 ormore than 500,000gallons of water perday are withdrawnfrom stratified-driftaquifers in NewHampshire.

0

0

20 MILESmar!''

20 KILOMETERS


EXPLANATION

-- TOWN BOUNDARY

PUBLIC-SUPPLY WELLS

o

Withdraws more than 20,000 gallons per day

o

Withdraws more than 500,000 gallons per day

GLACIERS AND STRATIFIED-DRIFT DEPOSITS IN THENEW HAMPSHIRE LANDSCAPE

During The Great Ice Ageor Pleistocene Epoch, the land-scape of New Hampshire wassignificantly shaped and carvedwhen thick glacial ice alter-nately advanced southward,covered the State, and retreatednorthward by melting. Beforethe Ice Age, the climate waswarm, soils were deep, and thevalleys were cut by stream ero-sion-conditions similar tothose in the southern UnitedStates today. Starting about 2million years ago, the climatecooled and continental glaciersformed . Over time, snow in

northern Canada accumulated,was compacted by its ownweight into glacial ice,advanced southward, andeventually covered NewHampshire with ice as much asa mile thick. As the glaciermoved, it picked up loose rockand soil and plucked hugepieces of bedrock along its way.This ice and debris mixturescoured the landscape, stream-lined hills, and transformed thestream-eroded valleys into gla-cially eroded "U"-shaped val-leys with rounded valley walls(fig . 7) .

Glaciers left two majortypes of deposits : till and strati-fied drift . Till consists ofunsorted sediments depositedin place directly by melting ice.Sediment sizes generally rangefrom very small to very large-from clays to boulders . Becauseglaciers covered New Hamp-shire, till was depositedthroughout the State . In today'slandscape, till is commonlyseen at or near the ground sur-face in upland areas but it is alsofound buried beneath otherunconsolidated deposits invalleys.

Figure 7 . South-facing view of Crawford Notch from Mount Willard in Hart's Location, the heart of the WhiteMountains in north-central New Hampshire . Twenty-thousand years ago, the broad valley was filled with glacial iceand debris . Now, a glacially scoured U-shaped valley remains . [Sketch reproduced with permission from the NewHampshire Historical Society . (#F 128)]


The other major type of glacial deposit, strati-fied drift, began to form during late stages of theGreat Ice Age, about 14,000 years ago . At that time,the southernmost extent of the most recent conti-nental glacier had melted back, or retreated, frompositions on Long Island, New York, to positionsin New Hampshire. Throughout New Hampshireand the rest of New England, this glacial retreat isbelieved to have progressed in a stepwise fashion,with minor local readvances . How this meltingoccurred affected the location, size, and character-istics of the unconsolidated, stratified-driftdeposits that are found today.

Many familiar landscape features composedof stratified-drift deposits were formed during theretreat of the glacier. Eskers, kame terraces, outwash plains, and deltas are good examples of thisglacial deposition (fig . 8) . Eskers are long sinuousridges of sand and gravel deposited either in melt-water channels or streams within the glacier or atthe ice margin, where the glacier retreated steadily

Carl Koteff, a geologist with the U.S. Geologi-cal Survey, in 1974 introduced the "dirt

machine" concept to account for the enor-mous quantities of sand, gravel, silt, and clayfound in valleys throughout New England.According to this analogy, moving ice is con-tinually sheared up onto the stagnant end sec-tion of ice, depositing loose debris that the icehad carried which becomes available for trans-port by meltwater. This process of depositionkeeps repeating itself, like a conveyor belt in amanufacturing plant that continually providesraw material to an assembly station.

in contact with a glacial lake . As they formed,esker deposits were surrounded by the glacier;when the surrounding ice melted, the eskerdeposit remained (fig . 9) . Kame terraces are ter-race-like ridges consisting of sand and graveldeposited by glacial meltwater that flowedbetween the melting glacial ice and a high valleywall . The kame terraces were left standing afterthe disappearance of the ice . Outwash plains aregently sloping plains composed chiefly of sandand gravel that was "washed out" from the

A MARGINAL MELTWATER

8

MELTWATERDELTA DEPOSITS

Figure 8 . Depositional processes and features oftypical stratified-drift deposits in New Hampshire .(A) Meltwater has formed a channel beneath the icealong the valley floor . A glacial lake has formed inlow-lying areas fed by glacial streams . A delta hasformed where the sediment-laden glacial streamflows into the still water of the lake . (B) Ice is com-pletely melted, leaving various deposits of glacialorigin : an esker, a kame terrace, a delta, and lakedeposits . (Modified from Chapman, 1974, figs . 8and 9.)

glacier by meltwater streams. Deltas formedwhere meltwater streams flowed into a glaciallake or the ocean, in much the same way thatpresent-day rivers form fan-shaped deltas at theirmouths (fig . 10) . Some glacial deltas formedwhere glacial ice extended into open water; otherdeltas formed at some distance from the retreat-ing glacial ice where meltwater streams flowed

Glaciers and Stratified-Drift Deposits in the New Hampshire Landscape 7

Figure 9 . Aerial photograph taken in the 1940's of thePine River Esker in Ossipee, east-central NewHampshire . Sand and gravel from this esker was usedto build the road seen next to the esker in thephotograph . Since the photograph was taken, much ofthe Pine River Esker has been mined for largeconstruction projects . (From Goldthwait and others,1951, fig . 20 .)

into open water . Also, some deltas were formedsoon after retreat of the glaciers by transport andredeposition of materials eroded from the initiallybarren land surface . In the modern-day landscape,stratified-drift deposits are found primarily in rel-atively flat or hummocky low-lying areas in streamvalleys or near coastal lowlands .

Glacial lakes that ponded in front of the melt-ing ice margin played an important role in the for-mation o£ stratified-drift aquifers in NewHampshire. These lakes, which were natural sedi-ment traps, formed in many areas throughout theState during deglaciation, or glacial retreat . The for-mation of glacial lakes was enhanced where theunderlying bedrock surface had been deeplyscoured during multiple glaciations . Erosion of the


bedrock by the glacier was extensive where thebedrock was already weak or fractured .

The largest of the glacial lakes, called glacialLake Hitchcock, formed in the present-dayConnecticut River Valley. Here, sediment carriedby meltwater streams from the uplands accumu-lated in a long narrow lake that eventuallyextended 550 mi from central Connecticut to north-

in the mid-1800s, bricks made from clay(that originated from a glacial lake) in Hook-sett were floated down the Merrimack River

to Manchester to build "the largest set of tex-

tile mills in the world."Similarly, bricks made

from Bedford clay deposits were floatedthrough the canal system down the Merri-mack River to build mills in Lowell, Massa-chusetts . Brickmaking was also extensive inDover, Rochester, Exeter, Epping, and intowns along the Connecticut River.

ern New Hampshire and Vermont . The deepestpart of this lake was at least 560 ft deep before thedeposition of more than 430 ft of layered sedi-ments . A series of small glacial lakes formed alongthe Merrimack and Pemigewasset River Valley asthe glacier retreated northward . Each lake wasslightly higher in elevation than the lake to thesouth and was dammed by sediments that accu-mulated locally across the valley. Other glaciallakes formed in the Contoocook, Saco, Ossipee,Connecticut, and Androscoggin River Basins(fig . 1) . Of these, the lake in the Ossipee area wasthe deepest ; it was greater than 300 ft deep in thecenter and eventually was filled with more than280 ft of stratified (layered) glacial deposits .

"Good fences make good neighbors'; a line

from Robert's Frost poem The Mending Wall(1981), symbolizes a practical use for ubiqui-tous stony soils, such as those found in NewHampshire. Cobbles and boulders, commonin glacial till and ice-contact deposits, are afact of life for New Hampshire residents.

Figure 10 . Delta deposits in Newmarket, southeastern New Hampshire . Ice-marginal deltas, such as this one, formed where sediment carried by themeltwater streams was deposited into the ocean at the edge of the glacier. Theflat and sandy land surface shown here is typical of deltaic deposits . The angledlayers were deposited as the stream unloaded sediments in gradual incrementsover time . (Photograph taken by R.B . Moore, U .S . Geological Survey .)

Present-day stratified-driftlake deposits typically are dis-tinguishable by their flat topography and fine-grained sand,

A 1921 student at the Amos TuckSchool of Administration andFinance recognized that most ofNew Hampshire's demographicand geographical developmentwas related to glacial processesand the resulting landscape. Thestudent's analysis relatedeverything from the location ofsettlements, roads, railroads, andcanals; the growth of forests andrelated industries; and thedevelopment of agriculture,water power, manufacturing,and tourism to the most recentglacial episode.

silt, or clay composition. Glacial-lake deposits, such as thosefound in the Connecticut RiverValley, can provide high-qualitycropland because the fine-grained soils retain water forcrops in contrast to sandy soilsfrom which water drains moreeasily and is lost to plants .

Some glacial lakes formedwhere the natural drainage tothe north was obstructed by themargin of the melting glacier. Asthe glacier retreated northward,lower drainage outlets wereexposed, causing a suddendraining of these ice-dammedglacial lakes and a redepositionof glacial-lake sediments(Moore, 1993) . The largevolumes of sediment-ladenmeltwaters that were released

sometimes carved deep chan-nels in till and bedrock thatbecame exposed below the newoutlets.

The erosive energy of melt-waterwas so great that in placesthe underlying rock wassmoothed and sculptured intointeresting and unusual forms.Evidence of former meltwaterchannels can be observed insuch places as the SculpturedRocks Natural Area in Hebron,the Lost River Gorge, KinsmanNotch in Woodstock, and PulpitRock in Bedford.

Construction sand and graveldeposited by glacial meltwaterwas valued at $20.7 million inNew Hampshire in 1993. Thesand and gravel industryemployed an average of 252workers in the State according tothe U.S. Bureau of Mines.

Erosion and redistributionof glacial deposits by stream pro-cesses after the glacial age hassignificantly reshaped NewHampshire's landscape . Postgla-cial (after the glacial period) ero-sion by rivers and tributaries hasformed erosional channels . Dep-osition of materials has formedalluvial fans at the base of moun-tains and has formed stream ter-races, flood plains, and deltas inall the major valleys . Eoliandeposits were formed by winderosion of largely unvegetatedglacial deposits and redeposi-tion . Wind-borne materials wereredeposited as either a layer ofvery fine sand and silt up to 2-feet thick over much of the strat-ified drift in New Hampshire oras thick dune deposits typicallyfound on the eastern flanks ofexpansive glacial-lake deposits .

Glaciers and Stratified-Drift Deposits in the NewHampshire Landscape 9

STRATIFIED-DRIFT AQUIFERS

Stratified-drift aquifers consist mainly oflayers of sand and gravel, parts of which are satu-rated and can yield water to wells or springs . Thedistribution and hydraulic characteristics of strati-fied-drift aquifers are related to the original envi-ronment in which the sediments were deposited .A variety of "depositional environments" are rep-resented by the stratified-drift deposits foundstatewide including eskers, kame terraces, deltas,and glacial-lake deposits .

Most sand and gravel found in New Hamp-shire was deposited by water from melting gla-ciers . Each distinct layer in sand and graveldeposits was caused by a distinct depositionalenvironment and distinguished by different grain-size distributions (fig . 11) . Characteristics of themeltwater flow, such as the speed and the turbu-lence of the current, determined the size of the par-ticles that were transported and deposited . Forexample, swiftly moving sections of meltwaterstreams could carry coarse-grained materials . Asthe slope of the streambed decreased farther awayfrom the source, strearnflow velocity decreasedand the coarse materials were dropped . Thesecoarse-grained deposits have large pore spacesand, if saturated, generally form high-yieldingaquifers . Fine-grained materials, including veryfine sands, silts, and clays, were deposited by slowflowing sections of streams and in stagnant waterbodies such as lakes and ponds . These deposits donot transmit water freely because pore spaces areminute and the interconnections between porespaces are small .

Figure 11 . Well-sorted sand layers sandwiched betweenboulder and cobble layers at a site in Francestown,south-central New Hampshire. (Photograph taken byJ.D . Ayotte, U.S . Geological Survey.)

Stratified drift - sorted and layered unconsolidated

material deposited in meltwater streamsflowingfrom

glaciers or settledfrom suspension in quiet-water

bodies fed by meltwater streams

Bedrock, which universally underlies the unconsolidated deposits at or near the land surface, containswater-filled fractures of varying size, number, and extent that constitute the bedrock aquifer. Because

not all towns include areas of stratified-drift aquifer within their borders, the bedrock aquifer represents

the only potentially significant source of ground water for some towns. The U.S. Geological Survey is

presently (1995) involved in a cooperative program with the New Hampshire Department of Environ-

mental Services to map high-yield zones in the bedrock aquifer throughout the State. When completed,

this effort will complement the results of the stratified-drift-aquifer investigations presented here and

enhance the statewide picture of ground-water availability.


Types of stratified-drift aquifers found in NewHampshire include: eskers, kame terraces, anddeltas formed in contact with the glacial ice;outwash and deltas deposited by meltwater streamsflowing in front of the glacier; alluvial fans anddeltas formed from flooding after glacial dams werebreached ; as well as alluvial fans and deltas formedfrom erosion of the postglacial barren land surface .In some locations, exposed till and other glacial sed-iments were eroded after the glaciers receded andwere redeposited as sand and gravel by streams .Deposits that settled out at or near the glaciermargin ice tend to include large materials, such asboulders and cobbles. Deposits that were trans-ported away from the ice by meltwater tend to con-sist of fine- or small-grained materials. Regardlessof the circumstances of deposition, sand and graveldeposits commonly form high-yielding aquifers ifthere is a significant thickness of saturated material .

Characteristics of Aquifers

The size and arrangement of voids or porespaces between sediment particles determine theability of the aquifer material to store and transmitground water. Porosity is a measure of the spaceavailable for ground-water storage. A more usefulmeasure of the ground water available for use isspecific yield. Porosity is always greater thanspecific yield for a given section of aquifer becausesome waterremains on the grain surfaces as a resultof surface tension and will not drain by gravity. Thelarge, interconnected pore spaces of sand and graveldeposits provide a large volume of ground-waterstorage and also readily transmit ground water;these deposits are highly permeable. In contrast,silts and clays provide a large volume of ground-water storage but do not readily transmit groundwater because surface-tension forces predominatein the small pore spaces. These types of deposits arerelatively impermeable.

Theability of aquifer material to transmit wateris described quantitatively by its hydraulic conduc-tivity. Hydraulic conductivity can be illustrated bya comparative example: fine-grained sand can havehydraulic conductivities between 2 and 15 ft/d ;whereas well-sorted, coarse-grained sand can havehydraulic conductivities that range from 50 togreater than 200ft/d . Thevariation depends largelyupon uniformity and shape of the grains (fig . 12).

Figure 12. Shape, size, and sorting of sedimentsdetermine aquifer characteristics. (A) Rounded,coarse-grained, well-sorted material (uniform size)has high porosity and high hydraulic conductivity .(B) Angular, poorly sorted material (mixed sizes) haslow porosity and low hydraulic conductivity . Smallparticles "plug up" pores between large particles,impeding flow . (C) Flat, fine-grained, well-sortedmaterial has high porosity but low hydraulicconductivity . Because pore spaces are very small,water adheres to the grains by surface-tension force;in other words, by the same natural force of attractionthat causes drops of water to cling to a downward- orsideways-facing object seemingly in defiance ofgravity.

Stratified-Drift Aquifers 1 1

in the American water-well industry,hydraulic conductivity (k) is com-monly expressed in units of gallonsper day per foot squared(galldaylft2). This expression, per-haps more intuitive than the equiva-lent U.S. Geological Survey conven-tion of expressing k in feet per day(ftld), conveys that k is the rate atwhich water (gallons per day), orother fluid, moves through a cross-sectional area of aquifer (footsquared). Likewise, transmissivity,being the product of hydraulic con-ductivity times saturated thickness infeet, is expressed as gallons per dayper foot (galldaylft) by the water-wellindustry.

Hydraulic conductivity - ameasure of the ability of a porousmedium to transmit~afluid,expressed in unit length per unittime

Saturated thickness (of strati-fied drift) - thickness, infeet, ofstratified-drift extending downfrom the water table to the till orbedrock surface

Specific yield - the ratio of thevolume of water that can bedrained by gravity to the total vol-ume ofsediment

Transmissivity - the rate atwhich water is transmittedthrough a unit width ofaquiferunder a unit hydraulic gradient

Conversions :To convert hydraulic conductivity ingalldaylft2 to ft/d, rnultiply by 0.1137

To convert transtnissivity ingal/day/ft to ft 2/d, nuiltiply by 0.1137 .

Aquifer transmissivityquantifies the ability of the entirethickness of the aquifer to transmit water. The term is used oftenby hydrologists to describe thewater-producing capability ofan aquifer. Technically, the trans-missivity of an aquifer is equalto the hydraulic conductivity ofits materials multiplied by itssaturated thickness, in feet . Inthis report, transmissivity isexpressed in units of footsquared per day (ft 2 /d) .

To summarize, the higherthe value of hydraulic conduc-tivity, the more readily water canflow through the aquifer mate-rial . Aquifers that have a largesaturated thickness, and arecomposed of material with highhydraulic conductivity, willhave a high transmissivity andcan readily transmit water towells .

Methods for EvaluatingStratified-Drift Aquifers

For the assessment of NewHampshire's stratified-driftaquifers, the State was subdivided into 13 study areas thatgenerally corresponded to majorwatersheds. Many thousands ofdata records were compiledfrom existing sources, and addi-tional thousands were addedduring the course of the study.

For each of the study areas,the evaluation of stratified-driftaquifers began with a compilation and assessment of all perti-nent information from manysources. Existing data sourcesincluded hydrologic mapreports from a USGS statewidereconnaissance study (Cotton,1975a, b, c, and d, 1976a and b,


1977a, b, and c), county NaturalResources Conservation Service(NRCS) soils maps (Latimer andothers, 1939 ; Winkley, 1965;Kelsey and Vieira, 1968 ; Vieiraand Bond, 1973; Diers and Vie-ira, 1977 ; U.S . Soil ConservationService, 1981,1985a,1985b), wellrecords registered with theNHDES Water Resources Divi-sion, and bridge-boring recordsfrom the New HampshireDepartment of Transportation .The NHDES, Water ResourcesDivision and New HampshireDepartment of Transportationprovided more than 20,000records of subsurface informa-tion at specific sites . Surficial-geology maps from the Cooper-ative Geologic MappingProgram (COGEOMAP-acooperative program betweenvarious states and the USGS)were used when available . Inaddition, any available informa-tion from engineering firms,environmental consultants, andwell drillers were compiled .

The first objective of theaquifer study was to determinethe extent and hydrologic characteristics of stratified-driftaquifers . Field-data collectionusually began with mapping thegeographic location of sand andgravel deposits . Using informa-tion from USGS topographic andhydrologic-reconnaissancemaps, county NRCS maps, andfield investigations, the locationof the contacts or boundary linesbetween areas of stratified driftand areas of till and bedrock

Stratified-drift aquifer-A coarse-grained sand or sand and graveldeposit that contains a usable supplyof water

were determined . For this aquiferstudy, the contact between sand andgravel and all other materials at theground surface defined the mappedaquifer boundary. Thus, stratified-driftboundaries are the same as aquiferboundaries . Next, the thickness of thedeposits and how much water theystored, were measured .

Depth to the water table and satu-rated thickness of the aquifer weredetermined in two ways: drilling(wells, test borings, and bridge bor-ings) and surface-geophysical tech-niques . Drilling is used to determinecertain aquifer parameters such as sat-urated thickness or depth to the watertable and to collect samples of theaquifer materials for analysis . How-ever, drilling is slow, expensive, andprovides data at only one location onthe ground . Seismic refraction, asurface-geophysical technique thatdepends on the generation and detec-tion of sound waves below ground,generally yields results faster thandrilling and provides a cross-sectionalview of the aquifer. The major disad-vantages of seismic refraction are thatthe technique is not usable under allconditions and the interpretation ofthe data can be variable .

USGS crews drilled wells or testholes at 674 sites to supplement exist-ing data (fig . 13) . As each hole was

Regarding the theory of seismic-refrac-tion, a simple analogy can help to illus-trate the phenomenon that sound wavesrefract at boundaries of earth layers .Stick a pencil in a glass of water. Thepencil will appear to bend at the bound-ary between the air and water layers .This happens because light waves, likesound waves, refract at the boundariesof distinct layers.

Figure 13 . A hollow-stem auger drill rig and operator . This U.S .Geological Survey drill rig was used to drill 674 test holesstatewide to collect data on aquifer characteristics and to installobservation wells . (Photograph taken by J .R . Olimpio, U .S .Geological Surrey.)

drilled, the depth to the water table was measured as thepoint where the drilling augers first reached saturated mate-rials . Drilling continued until the augers reached bedrock or"refusal" . Refusal marks the depth at which the drill augercould not penetrate the underlying bedrock, a large boulder,or till . The vertical distance between the water table and thebottom of the aquifer is the saturated thickness . Samples ofthe saturated aquifer sands and gravels were collected at 5-or 10-foot intervals for each drilled hole using a split-spoonsampler (fig . 14), which was inserted down through thehollow part of the augers to the bottom of the hole . Aquiferhydraulic conductivities for materials collected at theseintervals were estimated from measurements of the propor-tion of grains that fell into specific size ranges when passedthrough a series of sieves of different sizes . Transmissivity

Stratified-Drift Aquifers 13

Figure 14 . Split-spoon sampler and sediment from a drilled test hole . Thesampler was used to retrieve aquifer material from drilled test holes andwells at 5- or 10-foot intervals . Once the sample is obtained, it is stored inthe plastic bag for further analysis . (Photograph taken by J .D . Ayotte,U.S . Geological Survey.)

values for the entire saturatedthickness of the aquifer wereestimated by multiplying thehydraulic conductivity valuefor an interval by the saturatedthickness of that interval andsumming the results for eachhole . Transmissivity values alsowere obtained from consultantreports when available .

Seismic refraction provides ashallow cross-sectional view, orslice, through the upper layers ofthe earth. Specifically, seismicrefraction results can be used todetermine depth to the watertable and depth to bedrock froma line along the surface of theground. This method utilizes theproperty that sound waves travelthrough layers of distinct earthmaterials at different and knownvelocities . For example, soundtravels through dry sediments at900 to 2,000 ft/s, through

saturated sediments at about5,000 ft/s, and through bedrockat 10,000 to 20,000 ft/s . In theseismic refraction method(fig . 15), a sound wave is createdby detonating a small explosiveburied just below the ground sur-face . The resulting waves arebent (refracted) at the boundariesbetween distinct layers . By mea-suring the time it takes for therefracted sound waves to travelto receivers called geophones,which are located at fixed inter-vals along a line at the groundsurface, the rate at which thesound waves traveled can be cal-culated and matched to the mate-rial from which it was refracted .Geophones are so sensitive thatthey can detect the vibrations ofpassing traffic and even themotion of roots as trees sway instrong winds . The techniquetherefore works best under"quiet" conditions . Seismic

14 Ground-Water Resources in NewHampshire: Stratified-Drift Aquifers

refraction can be used to deter-mine the thickness of the uncon-solidated dry layer and theunconsolidated saturated layer,and the depth to the top of thebedrock layer. Seismic-refractionsurveys were conducted at 651sites for the aquifer studies.

Seismic-reflection surveys,another geophysical method,were conducted in areasthroughout the State where largerivers or lakes overlie sand andgravel deposits . This method,which is conducted from a boattraversing the water body,provided data on the thickness ofthe aquifer below the waterbody.

Data compiled from previ-ously existing sources and col-lected from drilling, seismicrefraction, and seismic reflectionwere analyzed andinterpreted toproduce a set of maps withhydrologic information for eachof the study areas . The mapspresent hydrologic data super-imposed on USGS topographicmaps at scales of 1:24,0001 and1 :48,0002 . Maps of aquiferboundaries were produced fromUSGS topographic and hydro-logic reconnaissance maps,NRCS maps, and field explora-tions . Maps showing contourlines of equal water-table alti-tudes were produced using datafrom drilling, seismic-refractionsurveys, water-level measure-ments at wells drilled by theUSGS for this project, altitudes ofsurface-water bodies and otherwell, test hole, or bridge-boringdata when available . The water-table maps are presented as alti-tude contours in feet above sealevel to make the data consistentwith topographic contour lineson standard USGS topographic

'One inch on the map represents2,000 feet on the ground .

2One inch on the map represents4,000 feet on the ground .

Figure 15. Seismic-refraction survey field work in Sugar Hill, northwestern New Hampshire. (A) Technician onthe left side is drilling a "shot hole" for the explosive being prepared by the hydrologist on the right. (8) Acarefully calculated amount of explosive material is used to generate enough sound energy to travel up to1,100 feet underground and still register a signal . (C) Resulting seismic waves are detected by geophonereceivers buried 2 inches in the ground . (D) A 12-channel seismograph, like an extremely accurate stopwatch,records the time of arrival in fractions of seconds of the first seismic wave detected by each geophone .(Photograph taken by S.M . Flanagan, U.S . Geological Survey).

maps. Maps showing contour lines of equal satu-rated thickness, in feet, and zones representingranges of transmissivity values, in foot squared perday (ft2/d), were produced using data from USGSdrill holes, seismic refraction, and other well, testhole, or bridge-boring data if available .

The second objective of the aquifer study wasto assess potential water-yielding capabilities forselected aquifers in each study area . These resultsprovide planners with information on potentialvolumes of water that could be withdrawn from

aquifers to supplement existing water supplies orto develop new ones . Aquifers were chosen for thisevaluation to represent different types of local aqui-fer systems. Most of these analyses were done usingcomputer-simulation models based on estimates ofhydrologic and other aquifer properties and testedwith data collected in the field. Forty-two aquiferswere modeled to obtain potential-yield estimates .Potential-yield estimates are included in the sectionof this report titled "Major Aquifers in NewHampshire."


Figure 16 . Typical setup for sampling water quality at a well in Concord,south-central New Hampshire .

The third objective of theaquifer study was to broadlydefine the ground-water qualityof the major aquifers . Theapproach used for meeting thisobjective was to collect and ana-lyze samples of ground waterfrom springs and wells (fig . 16) .This assessment of ground-water quality focused on natu-ral or near-natural conditions inaquifers considered representa-tive of the study area and didnot attempt to identify or evalu-ate sites of possible ground-water contamination . Groundwater was sampled in a varietyof environments, including for-ested, agricultural, or residen-tial areas . Samples of groundwater from 240 wells and 20springs were analyzed for avariety of substances includingcommon inorganic, organic, andvolatile organic constituents .The assessment of generalground-water quality is

discussed in the section of thisreport titled "Quality of Waterfrom Stratified-Drift Aquifers."

Major Stratified-DriftAquifers in New Hampshire

General information aboutstratified-drift aquifers state-wide is summarized in figure 17and below :

" About 14 percent, or 1,299 ofthe 9,282 mil of NewHampshire, is underlainby stratified-drift aquifers .

The largest stratified-driftaquifer is in the OssipeeRiver Basin in the towns ofTamworth, Madison,Ossipee, Freedom, andEffingham .

" Saturated thicknesses rangefrom 0 to more than 500 ft,the thickest being alongthe Connecticut River inOrford and Haverhill .

1 6 Ground-Water Resources in New Hampshire: Stratified-Drift Aquifers

" Transmissivity values rangefrom 0 to 26,000 ft2/d orgreater.

" Depth to the water tableranges from 0 to 150 ftbelow the land surface .Depth to the water tablefor 50 percent of the wellsinventoried is 9 ft or less .

" In general, the most trans-missive aquifers are foundin localized areas of thecentral and southern partsof the State .

" Aquifers along the main sec-tions of major rivers tendto be continuous, whilethose elsewhere tend to besmall and discontinuous .

The following pointsshould be kept in mind whilereading this discussion of highlights from the individual studyareas : (1) All study area bound-aries are major watersheddivides except for the NashuaRegional Planning CommissionArea, whose boundary isdefined by town boundaries,and parts of the two adjacentstudy areas, the Middle Merri-mack and Lower MerrimackRiver Basins. (2) Because aqui-fers do not end at State bound-aries, parts of some NewHampshire aquifers extend intoMaine, Massachusetts, Ver-mont, or Canada . (3) Sometowns, such as Dover, may bementioned in more than onesection of this report becauseseparate aquifers are in differentstudy areas . (4) As a generalguideline for interpreting thediscussion on transmissivities, atransmissivity value above2,000 ft2 /d constitutes a majoraquifer. (5) Thick stratified-driftdeposits are not necessarily

highly transmissive . Forinstance, the thick saturateddeposits along the ConnecticutRiver are primarily clays fromthe bottom deposits of glacialLake Hitchcock that have lowpermeability and transmissivity.

Upper Connecticut andAndroscoggin River Basins

The Upper Connecticut andAndroscoggin River Basins innorthern New Hampshire havea combined drainage area of1,629 mil, of which 137 mil, orabout 8 percent of the basin, areunderlain by stratified-driftaquifers . Parts of stratified-driftaquifers in the towns of Cole-brook, Shelburne, Stark, Strat-ford, and West Milan havesaturated thicknesses greaterthan 200 ft and transmissivitiesgreater than 4,000 ft2/d . Strati-fied-drift aquifers in the townsof Berlin, Colebrook, andGorham supplied a total of 4.5Mgal/d of water for municipalpublic-supply wells in 1990 .Results of computer model sim-ulations indicate that stratified-drift aquifers in Colebrook andShelburne can yield up to 7.7and 23 .2 Mgal/d, respectively(J .R . Olimpio, U.S . GeologicalSurvey, written commun.,1995) .

Middle Connecticut River Basin

The Middle ConnecticutRiver Basin in western NewHampshire has a drainage areaof 987 mil, of which 123 mil , orabout 12 percent of the basin, areunderlain by stratified-driftaquifers . Although saturatedthickness of stratified driftexceeds 500 ft in northwesternOrford and western Haverhill,saturated thickness generally isless than 100 ft . High transmis-sivity values (exceeding 4,000

ft2/d) were measured in parts ofstratified-drift aquifers in south-western Carroll, northwesternBethlehem, western Franconia,western Orford, eastern Haver-hill, central Easton, and south-western Lisbon. Transmissivityexceeds 1,000 ft2/d in 17.5 mil ofthe study area . In 1990, ground-water withdrawals from strati-fied-drift aquifers for municipalpublic-supply wells totalledabout 1 .5 Mgal/d in Carroll,Enfield, Hanover, Haverhill,Lisbon, Monroe, and Orford . Acomputer simulation of poten-tial ground-water withdrawalsindicated that additional yieldsof 1 .4 to 2.9 Mgal/d could bepumped from aquifers in west-ern Lisbon, central Haverhill,northern Easton, southern Fran-conia, and western Franconia .Parts of aquifers in Hanover,Haverhill, and Orford extendinto Vermont (Flanagan, inpress) .

Pemigewasset River Basin

The Pemigewasset RiverBasin in central New Hampshirehas a drainage area of 1,022 mil,of which 91 mil, or about 9 per-cent of the basin, are underlainby stratified-drift aquifers . Partsof aquifers in Campton, Alexan-dria, Hebron, and Rumney havesaturated thicknesses greaterthan 100 ft and transmissivitygreater than 8,000 ft2 /d . Strati-fied-drift aquifers in Bristol,Hill, Franklin, Sanbornton (forFranklin), Plymouth, Campton,Woodstock, Lincoln, and Water-ville Valley supply groundwater for municipal public-supply wells . Many other areasin the basin are potential sitesfor public-supply wells (Cottonand Olimpio, in press) .

Saco and Ossipee River Basins

The Saco and Ossipee RiverBasins in east-central NewHampshire have a drainage areaof 869 mil , of which 153 mil, orabout 18 percent of thebasin, areunderlain by stratified-driftaquifers . The area contains sev-eral large, productive, andpotentially productive aquifers .About 11 percent of the area hastransmissivity values greaterthan 1,000 ft2 /d . Transmissivityvalues equal to or greater than8,000 ft 2/d have been calculatedfor aquifers along the Saco Riverin Carroll, Hart's Location, Bar-tlett and Conway, and in tribu-tary valleys in Chatham,northeastern Conway, centralMadison, eastern Sandwich,western Tamworth, and in sec-tions of Ossipee, Effingham, andWakefield . The central part ofthe largest stratified-drift aqui-fer in New Hampshire underliesthe Ossipee River Valley in Tam-worth, Madison, Ossipee, Free-dom, and Effingham . Saturatedthickness in one section of theOssipee River Valley stratifieddrift exceeds 280 ft . Sections ofaquifers in Chatham, Conway,Effingham, and Wakefieldextend into Maine. Water ispumped from municipal public-supply wells in stratified-driftaquifers in Bartlett, Conway,Freedom, Gorham, Jackson, andMadison . Results of model-sim-ulated ground-water flow forthe Ossipee River Valley aquiferindicate that more than 7Mgal/d of water could bepumped from four wells withminimal impact on flows in theOssipee River (Moore and Med-alie, in press) .


EXPLANATION

MAJOR STRATIFIED-DRIFT AQUIFER

ZONE OF TRANSMISSIVITY GREATERTHAN 2,000 FEET SQUAREDPERDAY

STUDYAREA BOUNDARY

TOWN BOUNDARY

0

5 10MILES

0

5

10KILOMETERS

Stewartstown

Clarksville

_ _

_1

k JColebroo

Pittsburg

I Di .sille_ _

f r

i

Erlin&sLocaAon ' \- ,

I

I Atkinsorr &r Gilmanton

II Dixs f1 Grant~eenaa College

'WcntwoAhs Location

1 Millsfield I

Erml

t

I

II Odell I

IStratford

I- _ _ _ _ _

S

I1

name, I Cambridge14

11 ~

L_1

mark J~ t l

i JJ

Milan

JT«humberlalrd

SuccessIxilkeady Berlin

LancakterJ

efferson

e`

Randolph

i corR3m j Shelburne

1

I

/I_

I

�,mOsi `J-r" M1ins1-.-e

44- -~

r

BeansPurchase

VWI tiiJ "

IS/

Jackson

1I Chatham

720

45°

Dalton

1hitefielk I

i 1 --1

1

Momoe/

Littleton

/ Lyman ;

( \/

TXraban `/

..~.

/

SugarHivJ

BathJ

IILanaafe J

J/ Easton

1 J

Francon

Carroll

JJ

Lincoln

>y

A

d

Plainfield

- - - _ /

/d Grantham /

J SpdngfilCornish

I Croydon

i

~7 _

f

1Claremont

I

I SunapeeNewport I

._ 7

" j,

S unity \_ Goshen

\

_

-- r

It

Charlestowti

{

-' j_ _

1

1 Lempster tAcworth 1

I_ 1

S 1 _L

,-~angd°= i -

"r

L

k

Marlow -1 Alstead 11

1

r

Waipole { _

_..1 _ -i

SfJ_\ Gil-- I

_r 1Hinsdalel ..

1

1 /1 Winches ter

1

{ Richmond 1 FUwdliam ' dge{

1

1

I \

--------- 1

1

1

1

wilm°\- An7

London / \

\

'

\ , I Salisbury

I\\ Sutton

\bury \\ y

\- ~

\ Webeter tWa^K \ \

i \ \shington 1 \ Heartxwr\

\Hillsborough

l1\yindsa\ i ,c

r

__~

Hanegck

isvill=_~,~

I

1lin

Peterlmough 1

Jaffrey r,

~ 1 Sharon

Hopkin

J Gilmanton/

1 Wake'

ookfieldi

'vl { J

iddletoi~ V,~w {rham

1

J/

Milton

Y;

Farmington /I Canterbury r

yC Bamstead r

Q oudoni

I

/

`Vittsfeld \ \/ /

R

letlr

afford\

/ `

^ Chichest~~

^~ J / \

fNswort

Concord /~L/ / Barrington

~pllinwfo\

Epsom

~/ Not("

Y

/ \ /

. e

pke / _

DoverPembro

rv \Bow

~)All-stow . /

Deeheld

" I/ r`/Nottingham , Lee Durham v

Dunbarton

_

Ejgpksett

~'L ._

.- _ L _ -F ^wNewmarket,_andia

~

/~ Epping

ALewfrÌdsJ\

R.,Rrood

SGoffstown

I

t . m

f

t

-

r _ _ I

I SmithI

1Fmncestown 1

1,

11

y

Auburn 1Mht_New Boston anceser

Temple

k

/ r

s

r

Id

--

1 BedfordI

ew lpswictir~en TIMason1

r'

Lyndeborough Mint 11 r'- e on

a

{

_1

rst lMerrim

Wiljgn

-1 `r r

a ~lollis~ y

Tremont IBreniwoo(, Exeter `

nesteq

.L T_ _1

Ji."singi s

an~°w1

nvtnd{

~ to

Lyme

Orf°ra

L

Lebanon /

lEnfield

. /f

~' Dories.

GL°n

D Hill

eC

shland

Sanb

Mooltonbomogh /

`~}r1oftonbor

Tilton

f 'Belmont

e ~~à\ ffield

MeredJlr,< �/

1)

f1~

1

1~ <Lacoma -

`^ J

/

Gilford

} J

rWindham

/

O41pee~~& Effrngham.~

y

Londonderry Demy- Hampstead/

S`\ *tkineo=MOM11

Gseea4nd

//4t_~`- .iRye

òrth

ampto,,_c.

vIn ^Ha n~iamptod.

ingstori Fallsfls_ ` \

Hamptog eabrook

43'

-rL!/}

EBaworth ~\

LWentworth J/

C

r

r T

Groton

r

) plymouth~-_ Holderness

\

1a

~jBridgewa

i t

Alexandriafw

/N6`HamptoBristol /-4 J\ \~ 7

fi_~ r/ \ \ J ,t

Jr lYr\~~\,//

Sandwich

1- --` '17,

w

1 n~ai,°n 1- Wait'1

_1

IV

tiTamwgtth y

Figure 17. Major stratified-drift aquifers and zones of transmissivity greater than 2,000 square feet per day in New Hampshire.

Winnipesaukee River Basin

The Winnipesaukee RiverBasin in central New Hampshirehas a drainav area of 484 mi2, ofwhich66 mi-, or 14 percent of thebasin, are underlain by strati-fied-drift aquifers . Saturatedthickness of parts of an aquiferin Belmont exceeds 100 ft,although generally it is less than50 ft . Transmissivity, generallyless than 1,000 ft2 /d, exceeds6,000 ft 2 /d in areas of Belmont,Alton, and New Durham. Bel-mont and Alton withdrawground water from stratified-drift aquifers for municipalpublic-supply wells. Inducedinfiltration from nearby riverscould provide additional waterfor municipal public supplies inTilton, Belmont, Gilford, Alton,and Meredith . Results of com-puter model simulations indi-cate that aquifers in Alton andBelmont can yield up to 1.1 and1 .8 Mgal/d of water, respec-tively (Ayotte, in press) .

Lower Connecticut River Basin

The Lower ConnecticutRiver Basin in southwesternNew Hampshire has a drainagearea of 1,163 mil, of which 116mil, or 10 percent of the basin,are underlain by stratified-driftaquifers . Saturated thickness isgreater than 400 ft in parts ofCharlestown and Westmore-land . Transmissivity exceeds4,000 ft2 /d in some aquifers inNewport, Walpole, Charles-town, Grantham, Keene, Hins-dale, and Chesterfield but is lessthan 1,000 ft 2/d in 80 percent ofthe aquifers in the area . Munici-pal public-supply wells with-draw water from stratified-driftaquifers to supply parts ofCharlestown, Hinsdale, Keene,Marlborough, Newport, Plain-

field, Chesterfield, Troy, Wal-pole, and Winchester .Additional water is potentiallyavailable from stratified-driftaquifers in many towns in thestudy area (Moore and others,1994).

Contoocook River Basin

The Contoocook RiverBasin in southwestern NewHampshire has a drainage areaof 766 mil, of which 123 mil, or16 percent of the basin, areunderlain by stratified-driftaquifers . Saturated thicknessexceeds 200 ft in Hancocknext toNorway Pond, and in centralAndover, but generally is lessthan 80 ft . Estimated transmis-sivity was at least 22,000 ft2/dalong the Contoocook River inBennington . Transmissivity isgreater than 8,000 ft2 /d in theContoocook River valley in partof Peterborough and in NewIpswich, in Antrim, Bennington,Greenfield and Hillsborough,northwestern Henniker, Warner,central Andover, and centralHopkinton, although it gener-ally is less than 2,000 ft2 /d .Public-supply wells in stratified-drift aquifers provide municipalwater to Bennington (forAntrim), Henniker, Hillsbor-ough, Hopkinton, Jaffrey, Peter-borough, and Warner. Inducedinfiltration from rivers couldprovide a source of additionalground water in several towns,including Harrisville, Hillsbor-ough, and Antrim. Results fromthis study indicate that Peterbor-ough, Hancock, Henniker, Hop-kinton, Warner, Bradford,Andover, and Salisbury couldpotentially derive additionalsupplies of ground water fromstratified-drift aquifers if needed(Harte andJohnson, 1995).

2 0 Ground-Water Resources in New Hampshire : Stratified-Drift Aquifers

Upper Merrimack River BasinThe Upper Merrimack

River Basin in south-centralNew Hampshire has a drainagearea of 519 mil, of which 80 mil,or 15 percent of the basin, areunderlain by stratified-driftaquifers . Parts of aquifers inCanterbury, Concord, andLoudon have transmissivities ofat least 5,000 ft2 /d . Saturatedthicknesses of aquifers in thisriver basin are generally lessthan 80 ft . Additional water ispotentially available from strati-fied-drift aquifers in Bow, Pem-broke, Chichester, Loudon,Northfield, Franklin, Allen-stown, Epsom, and Concord .Induced infiltration from theMerrimack, Soucook, and Sun-cook Rivers may provide addi-tional water to aquifers .Municipal public-supply wellscurrently (1995) provide waterfrom stratified-drift aquifers toBarnstead, Concord, Epsom, andPembroke (P.J . Stekl, U.S . Geo-logical Survey, written com-mun., 1994).

Bellamy, Cocheco, and SalmonFalls River Basins

The Bellamy, Cocheco, andSalmon Falls River Basins insoutheastern New Hampshirehave a drainage area of 330 mil,of which 50 mil, or 15 percent ofthe basin, are underlain by strat-ified-drift aquifers . Aquifersscattered throughout Dover,Farmington, Rochester, andSomersworth have transmissivi-ties that range from 2,400 to26,700 ft2 /d, and saturatedthicknesses greater than 100 ft .Municipal public-supply wellsin Dover, Farmington, Rollins-ford, Somersworth, Milton, andWakefield withdraw water fromstratified-drift aquifers . Strati-fied-drift aquifers in Milton,

Union, Rochester, Farmington,and New Durham can poten-tially yield significantquantities of water throughinduced infiltration fromnearby rivers and ponds. Partsof aquifers in Milton, Rochesterand Somersworth extend intoMaine (Mack and Lawlor,1992) .

Middle Merrimack River Basin

The Middle MerrimackRiver Basin in south-centralNew Hampshire has a drainagearea of 469 mil, of which 98 mil,or 21 percent of the basin, areunderlain by stratified-driftaquifers . The southern and east-ern boundaries of this studyarea are formed by politicaldivisions rather than by drain-age basins . Saturated thicknessexceeds 100 ft in Hooksett, andtransmissivities exceed 4,000ft2/d in parts of Bow and Goffs-town but are generally less than2,000 ft2 /d . Water from munici-pal public-supply wells ispumped from stratified-driftaquifers in Goffstown andHooksett . Stratified-drift aqui-fers in New Ipswich, Green-field, and New Bostonpotentially could yield water tosmall municipal systems . Theaquifer in Goffstown couldsupply significantly larger vol-umes of water than are cur-rently (1995) being pumped(Ayotte and Toppin, 1995) .

Exeter, Lamprey, and OysterRiver Basins

The Exeter, Lamprey, andOyster River Basins in south-eastern New Hampshire have adrainage area of 351 mil, ofwhich 56 mil, or 16 percent ofthe basin, are underlain bystratified-drift aquifers . Trans-

missivities greater than 3,000ft2 /d have been measured inthe Madbury-Dover area, theDurham-Lee area, and theNewmarket-Durham area .Water from municipal public-supply wells in Dover, Durham,Epping, Lee, Madbury, New-market, and Raymond ispumped from aquifers withtransmissivities that exceed1,000 ft2/d . Water from munici-pal public-supply wells inExeter, Madbury (for Ports-mouth), Newfields, andStratham is pumped from strat-ified-drift aquifers that are lesstransmissive than 1,000 ft 2/d. Acomputer model of ground-water flow indicated that fourwells in an aquifer in Eppingcould yield 2 Mgal/d, and thattwo wells in an aquifer inNewmarket could yield 0.26Mgal/d (Moore,1990) .

Lower Merrimack and CoastalRiver Basins

The Lower Merrimack andCoastal River Basins in south-eastern New Hampshire have adrainage area of 327 mil, ofwhich 78 mil, or 24 percent ofthe basin, are underlain bystratified-drift aquifers . Thewestern and southern edges ofthis study area are formed bypolitical rather than drainage-basin boundaries . Althoughsaturated thickness is 100 ft inone section of Kingston, it isgenerally 20 to 40 ft throughoutthe rest of the basin . Transmis-sivity exceeds 4,000 ft2 /d inparts of aquifers in Kingston,North Hampton, Rye, Green-land, and Portsmouth. Munici-pal public-supply wellsprovide water from stratified-drift aquifers to customers inHampton, Portsmouth, Rye,

Salem, and Seabrook. Strati-fied-drift aquifers in the studyarea can potentially yield addi-tional water for public watersupplies in Derry, Greenland,Kingston, North Hampton, andWindham. Some aquifers in thesouthern part of this study areaextend into Massachusetts(Stekl and Flanagan,1992) .

Nashua Regional PlanningCommission Area

The Nashua Regional Plan-ning Commission area insouth-central New Hampshirehas a drainage area of 322 mil,of which 129 mil, or 40 percentof the basin, are underlain bystratified-drift aquifers . Thisstudy area is entirely definedby political boundaries . Satu-rated thickness of stratifieddrift is greater than 100 ft inareas of Amherst, Litchfield,Merrimack, and Pelham. Trans-missivities exceed 8,000 ft 2/d inparts of aquifers in Amherst,Brookline, Hollis, Hudson,Litchfield, Merrimack, Milford,Nashua, and Pelham . Morethan 30 municipal public-supply wells in stratified-driftaquifers in Amherst, Hollis,Hudson, Litchfield, Merrimack,Milford, Nashua, Pelham, andWilton withdraw at least 100gallons of water per minute(0.14 Mgal/d); many of thesepump at a rate of more than 500gallons per minute (0 .72Mgal/d) . Several stratified-drift aquifers, particularly inAmherst, Litchfield, Merri-mack, Milford, and Pelham,could supplement municipalpublic-supply wells (Toppin,1987).


Quality of Water fromStratified-Drift Aquifers

For water-resources planners, it is notenough to know where the productive aqui-fers are located or how much water theymight yield. The quality of water and its suit-ability for various uses such as drinking, irri-gation, or industry, is equally important .

Ground-water quality is influencedpartly by natural processes and partly byhuman activity. Water quality between aquifers or even within a single aquifer can differbecause of influences from the biologicalcommunities, aquifer materials, and under-lying bedrock that are in contact with theground water . Natural weathering of rocksand minerals contributes most of the dis-solved substances found in uncontaminatedground water and can produce high concen-trations of dissolved iron (fig. 18) and man-ganese, especially in acidic environments .Stratified-drift aquifers near coastal areascan contain higher levels of chloride than thelevels found in inland areas . Arsenic, an ele-ment derived from earth materials, is some-times identified in ground water. Radon inground water from bedrock wells is causedby natural weathering of uranium mineralsin a type of granite commonly found in NewHampshire.

The more persistent threats to ground-water quality in New Hampshire are causedby human activity, such as road salting, fertilizing, industrial waste discharge, anddetergent discharge . For instance, sodiumand chloride are not abundant elements inthe types of rocks found in New Hampshire,yet tests on water samples from throughoutthe State indicate their presence . Sodiumchloride is a compound commonly used forwinter road salting . Excess nitrate in groundwater can be the result of poorly designed orfaulty septic systems or other waste-disposalsites, or inappropriate fertilization rates .Infiltration of solvents from industrialwastes can result in ground-water contami-nation (Morrissey and Regan, 1987) . Arsenic


Figure 18. Sand deposits from aformer river channel stainedred from iron in ground-water seepage. High concentrationsof iron are common in New Hampshire ground water. Stick inthe upper right corner of the photograph is approximately 1 .5feet long . (Photograph taken by J.D . Ayotte, U.S . GeologicalSurvey.)

also has been found in ground water associated withdetergents in septic wastes (Boudette and others, 1985) .

Commonly, the potential for ground-water contam-ination is assessed by analyzing land use for the areathat contributes ground-water recharge to an aquifer.Certain land uses can adversely affect the quality ofground water by contributing to nonpoint source pol-lution . In an attempt to account for sources of ground-water pollution in the State, the NHDES maintains astatewide Groundwater Hazards Inventory, which in

November 1991, documentedmore than 2,000 sites of ground-water contamination . Accordingto this inventory, the mostcommon and serious threats toground-water quality in NewHampshire include hazardouswaste sites, unlined landfills,leaking underground storagetanks, oil spills or releases, andseptage or sludge lagoons(Flanders, 1992, p . IV-1) .

Maximum levels for con-taminants in public-water sup-plies were established by theU .S . Environmental ProtectionAgency (USEPA) under the SafeDrinking Water Act of 1986 . Twogeneral categories of regulationswere created : National PrimaryDrinking-Water Regulations forcontaminants that couldadversely affect human health;and National SecondaryDrinking-Water Regulations

Nonpoint sourcepollution is caused byrainfall or snowmelt run-off that carries unnaturaland natural pollutantsinto lakes, rivers, wet-lands, and aquifers . Cer-tain land uses have beentargeted by the NonpointSource Program adminis-tered by the NewHamp-shire Department ofEnvironmental Servicesand listed as existing andpotential sources ofground- or surface-watercontamination (Flanders,1992). Targeted land usesinclude landfills, septicsystems,junkyards, urbanareas, agricultural and sil-vicultural areas, and roadsthat are salted in thewinter.

primarily for contaminants thatcan adversely affect the odor,taste, or appearance of water.Under the National PrimaryDrinking-Water Regulations,enforceable Maximum Contami-nant Levels (MCL, U.S . Environ-mental Protection Agency, 1992)are established for contaminantssuch as arsenic, cadmium, lead,atrazine, and toluene . Under theNational Secondary Drinking-Water Regulations, advisory Sec-ondary Maximum ContaminantLevels (SMCL, U .S . Environ-mental Protection Agency, 1992)are established for contaminantssuch as chloride, iron, and man-ganese . Similarly, the NHDESWater Supply EngineeringBureau has established MCLsand SMCLs for certaincontaminants such as sodium,cadmium, and lead (New

Hampshire Department ofEnvironmental Services, WaterSupply Engineering Bureau,written common., 1987).

On the basis of the results ofthis statewide assessment, thequality of ground water fromstratified-drift aquifers in NewHampshire generally meets alldrinking-water regulations(fig . 19) . Analyses of water sam-ples from wells and springsreveal that the most commonwater-quality problems are thehigh concentrations of iron ormanganese. Although neither ofthese elements poses a threat tohuman health, excessiveamounts of either in water willstain laundry or plumbing fix-tures . Of the 257 samples ana-lyzed (table 1), 51 samples (20percent) had higher dissolvediron levels than the SMCL of 300

Figure 19 . A boy collects drinking water from a spring that flows from a stratified-driftaquifer in Sanbornton, central New Hampshire . (Photograph taken by B .R . Mrazik,U .S . Geological Survey .)


Table 1 . Summary of selected analyses of ground water from stratified-drift aquifers in New Hampshire

[MCL, Maximum Contaminant Levels are enforceable U.S . Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) primary drinking-waterregulations (U .S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992) . SMCL, Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels are established bythe USEPA to provide advisory levels for certain contaminants in public water supplies . At higher concentrations, some of theseconstituents may be associated with adverse health effects (U.S . Environmental Protection Agency, 1992) . <, actual value is lessthan value shown; --, not applicable; micrograms per liter is one in one billion parts; milligrams per liter is one thousand timesthat amount, or one in one million parts]

'New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (NHDES) MCL for sodium is 250 mg/L; SMCL is 100-250 mg/L .'`NHDES MCL for cadmium is 5 Vg/L .NNHDES SMCL for lead is 20 Fig/L .

flg/L (micrograms per liter), and 136 samples (53percent) had higher dissolved manganese concen-trations than the SMCL of 50 leg/L. Chloride con-centrations for 1 percent of the sampled wells andsprings exceeded the SMCL of 250 mg/L


(milligrams per liter) ; however, chloride concen-trations in 94 percent of the samples of groundwater were less than 100 mg/L. The SMCL forsodium is 20 mg/L and is established for peoplewith cardiac or kidney problems or hypertension .

Chemical constituentand abbreviation

Number ofsamplesanalyzed

MCL SMCL Minimumvalue

Median Maximumvalue value

parts per million, milligrams per liter (mg/L)Dissolved oxygen, DO 144 -- 0 6 13.1

pH, measured in the field 229 6.5-8 .5 5.1 6.3 8.5Alkalinity as calcium carbonate,

as CaC03 139 -- -- 1 22 158

Total hardness as CaC03 255 -- -- 3 26 280

Total dissolved solids, TDS 252 -- 500 17 77 612

Calcium, Ca 256 -- -- .04 7.6 87

Magnesium, Mg 256 -- -- .11 1 .5 18

Chloride, Cl 256 -- 250 .3 10 300

Sodium', Na 256 _- 20 .3 6.4 220

Potassium, K 255 -- -- .2 1 .6 17

Nitrite plus nitrate, N02+NO3 155 10 __ <.05 .22 7.2

Sulfate, S04 255 -- 250 <.1 7.8 79

Fluoride, F 255 4 2 <.1 .1 2.9

Silicate, Si02 256 -- -- <.01 12 40

parts per billion, micrograms per liter (gg/L)Aluminum, Al 173 -- 50 <10 <10 790

Cadmium'`, Cd 247 10 5 <1 <1 4

Copper, Cu 246 -- 1,000 <1 <10 80

Iron, Fe 257 -- 300 <3 10 19,000

Lead3 , Pb 246 50 -- <1 <10 110

Manganese, Mn 257 -- 50 <1 63 3,500

Zinc, Zn 247 -- 5,000 <3 4 300

Because this SMCL has beenestablished at such a low con-centration, it was exceeded in 18percent of the samples . Aciditylevels, or pH, in 66 percent of theground-water samples were less(more acidic) than the minimumlimit (6.5) of the range recom-mended by the USEPA . OtherNew Hampshire studies alsohave found that ground waterfrom stratified-drift depositswas slightly acidic, and couldcause corrosion problems inmetal pipes (Cotton, 1989, p.16) .Nineteen of the 173 samplesanalyzed exceeded the SMCL(50 Vg/L) for aluminum. These19 samples with high aluminummay be associated with low pHbecause aluminum dissolvesmore readily as pH decreases .

Cleaning up contaminatedground water can be costly interms of time and money.Ground-water contamination iscommonly not detected until itbecomes widespread . Thesource of pollution and the mosteffective method of clean up isnot always obvious . Recogniz-ing the economical benefits ofmaintaining high-quality water,in 1991, New Hampshireenacted legislation (RSA 485-C)to protect the State's groundwaters .

How Stratified-Drift AquiferData are Used

The NHDES, the stewardfor water resources in the State,has several uses for maps anddata pertaining to stratified-

drift aquifers in New Hamp-shire . Most importantly, theGroundwater Protection Act(RSA 485-C) authorized localgovernments to implementground-water-protection pro-grams through classification ofground water. Under this Act,one of the four designatedclasses of ground water isGA2- "stratified-drift aquifersmapped by the USGS that arepotentially valuable aquifers"(New Hampshire Departmentof Environmental Services, 1991,p.10) . In addition, Phase 1 delin-eations of wellhead protectionareas (WHPA) for public-supply

A WHPA (wellhead protec-tion area) delineation identi-fies the part of the mappedaquifer that actually supplieswater to a particular public-supply well. This delineationdefines the area throughwhich contaminants are rea-sonably likely to movetoward and potentially reachthe public-supply well.

wells are based on availabledata, such as the "hydrogeologicinformation from the USGSstratified-drift aquifer maps ."Stratified-drift aquifer maps arecommonly used in theadministration of excavationregulations (RSA 155-E) by localgovernments .

The aquifer mapping anddata collection by the USGS arevaluable resources to local government and the private sectoras well. For example, municipal-ities and their consultants usethe information as the basis forexploring potentially new orexpanded town water suppliesand in siting waste disposal orstorage sites to avoid ground-water contamination . In assess-ing plume migration from a con-taminated site, all aquifers in thearea need to be identified as towhether or not they are cur-rently being tapped for a watersupply. Conservation commis-sions evaluate wetlands anddesignate areas as Prime Wet-lands (RSA 482-A:15) accordingto the standardized method ofAmmann and Stone (1991) . Partof this evaluation requiresknowledge of the position of thewetland relative to the locationof stratified-drift aquifers . Envi-ronmental educators use theaquifer maps to complementand enhance their lessons onwatersheds .

Because many potentialusers of the stratified-drift-aqui-fer reports are town residentsand local governments, table 2provides an index of the USGSaquifer-assessment study areasthat pertain to each town inNew Hampshire . The geo-graphic area covered by eachreport is shown on the map infigure 1, and complete citationsfor each report are included inthe Selected References section .


Table 2 . List of towns in New Hampshire, U .S . Geological Survey aquifer-assessment study areas, and areas oftown and percentage of total town areas underlain by stratified-drift aquifers

[USGS, U.S . Geological Survey; UC, Upper Connecticut; MC, Middle Connecticut; PE, Pemigewasset ; SA, Saco and Ossipee; Wl,Winnipesaukee; LC, Lower Connecticut; CK, Contoocook; UM, Upper Merrimack; CO, Cocheco; MM, Middle Merrimack; LA,Lamprey; LM, Lower Merrimack and coastal; NS, Nashua Regional Planning Commission area]

USGS

Area of town under-aquifer-

lain by stratified-


USGS


lain by stratified-Town assessment

studyarea(s)

drift(squaremiles)

aquifersPercentageof total

Town assessmentstudyarea(s)

drift(squaremiles)

aquifersPercentage

of totalACWORTH LC 1 .5 4 CLAREMONT LC 9.4 22ALBANY SA 8 .3 11 CLARKSVILLE UC 1.7 3ALEXANDRIA PE 4 .2 10 COLEBROOK UC 6.7 16ALLENSTOWN UM, MM 5.4 27 COLUMBIA UC 2.4 4ALSTEAD LC 1 .3 3 CONCORD UM, CK 34.8 54ALTON WI, UM, CO 7.2 12 CONWAY SA 22.2 32AMHERST NS 13 .1 39 CORNISH LC 2.7 6ANDOVER CK, UM, PE 6 .9 17 CRAWFORDSANTRIM CK 3.5 10 PURCHASE MC .1 2ASHLAND PE 2 .9 27 CROYDON LC .9 3ATKINSON LM .7 7 CUTTS GRANT SA 0 0ATKINSON AND DALTON MC, UC 4.1 15GILMANTON DANBURY PE, CK 4.9 13ACADEMY GRANT UC 2.1 11 DANVILLE LM, LA 2.2 19AUBURN MM 7.4 30 DEERFIELD LA, UM 5.2 10BARNSTEAD UM 5.7 14 DEERING MM, CK 4.1 13BARRINGTON CO, LA 10.7 23 DERRY LM, LA 5.2 15BARTLETT SA 8 .6 11 DIXS GRANT UC 0.5 2BATH MC 8.7 23 DIXVILLE UC 1.4 3BEANS GRANT SA 0 0 DORCHESTER MC, PE .8 2BEANS PURCHASE UC 0 0 DOVER CO, LA 26.7 99BEDFORD MM 9.5 29 DUBLIN CK, LC 1.4 5BELMONT WI 12 .0 39 DUMMER UC 2.3 5BENNINGTON CK 4.3 39 DUNBARTON MM, UM 1.7 6BENTON MC .9 2 DURHAM LA, CO 1.2 5BERLIN UC 3.7 6 EAST KINGSTON LM, LA 1 .1 11BETHLEHEM MC 9.8 11 EASTON MC 3.4 11BOSCAWEN UM, CK 6.3 25 EATON SA 2.1 9BOW UM, MM 6.0 22 EFFINGHAM SA 15.8 41BRADFORD CK 4.0 11 ELLSWORTH PE 0 0BRENTWOOD LA 5.6 33 ENFIELD MC 3.3 8BRIDGEWATER PE 2 .7 13 EPPING LA 4.0 15BRISTOL PE 3 .8 22 EPSOM UM 4.9 14BROOKFIELD CO, WI, SA 1 .7 7 ERROL UC 14.1 23BROOKLINE NS 6.5 33 ERVINGS LOCATION UC 0 0CAMBRIDGE UC 7.9 16 EXETER LA, LM 2.9 15CAMPTON PE 6 .8 13 FARMINGTON CO 4.2 12CANAAN MC 8.4 16 FITZWILLIAM LC 2.7 8CANDIA MM, LA 3 .0 10 FRANCESTOWN MM 4.4 15CANTERBURY UM 7.1 16 FRANCONIA MC, PE 4.6 7CARROLL MC, UC, SA 10 .6 21 FRANKLIN UM, PE, WI 10.2 37CENTER HARBOR WI, PE .6 4 FREEDOM SA 9.3 26CHANDLERS FREMONT LA 6.7 39PURCHASE MC, SA 0 0 GILFORD WI 5.7 15

CHARLESTOWN LC 9 .5 26 GILMANTON UM, WI 2.5 4CHATHAM SA 4 .1 7 GILSUM LC 1 .1 7CHESTER LA, MM 4.8 18 GOFFSTOWN MM 5.6 15CHESTERFIELD LC 2 .1 5 GORHAM UC 5.3 17CHICHESTER UM 1.2 6 GOSHEN LC 2.3 10

Table 2 .

List of towns in New Hampshire, U.S . Geological Survey aquifer-assessment study areas, and areas oftown and percentage of total town areas underlain by stratified-drift aquifers--Continued

USGSaquifer-

Area of town under-lain by stratified-

USGS


lain by stratified-

Stratified-Drift Aquifers 2 7


drift(squaremiles)



drift(squaremiles)

aquifersPercentage

of totalGRAFTON PE, MC 2.9 7 MADBURY CO, LA 5 .5 46GRANTHAM LC, MC .8 3 MADISON SA 9.0 23GREENFIELD CK, MM 8.3 33 MANCHESTER MM 19.7 60GREENLAND LM 2.8 28 MARLBOROUGH LC .5 3GREENS GRANT UC .3 8 MARLOW LC 1.6 6GREENVILLE MM .3 4 MARTINS LOCATION UC .6 14GROTON PE 1 .0 2 MASON MM 3.5 15HADLEY'S PURCHASE SA 0 0 MEREDITH WI, PE 2 .8 7HALE'S LOCATION SA .5 27 MERRIMACK NS 18 .8 59HAMPSTEAD LM, LA 2 .4 19 MIDDLETON CO, WI .2 1HAMPTON LM 2.5 19 MILAN UC 7.3 12HAMPTON FALLS LM, LA .3 3 MILFORD NS 9.3 37HANCOCK CK 3.9 13 MILLSFIELD UC .4 1HANOVER MC 5.3 11 MILTON CO 3.7 11HARRISVILLE CK, LC 1 .3 7 MONROE MC 4.8 22HART'S LOCATION SA 2 .4 13 MONTVERNON NS .4 2HAVERHILL MC 14 .6 29 MOULTONBORO WI, SA, PE 7 .9 13HEBRON PE 1 .5 9 NASHUA NS 22 .1 71HENNIKER CK, MM 6.2 14 NELSON LC, CK .7 3HILL PE, CK 1 .9 7 NEW DURHAM CO, WI 5 .8 14HILLSBOROUGH CK 6.1 14 NEW HAMPTON PE, WI 6.2 17HINSDALE LC 7.3 35 NEW IPSWICH MM, CK, LC 6.1 19HOLDERNESS PE 4.0 14 NEW LONDON CK, LC 1 .3 6HOLLIS NS 11 .4 36 NEWBURY CK, LC 2 .1 6HOOKSETT MM 9.0 25 NEWFIELDS LA .8 11HOPKINTON CK, UM 17 .3 40 NEWINGTON LM 3.3 41HUDSON NS 11 .1 40 NEWMARKET LA 1 .1 9JACKSON SA, UC 1.8 3 NEWPORT LC 6 .1 14JAFFREY CK, LC 6.8 18 NEWTON LM 4.0 40JEFFERSON UC, MC 2.9 6 NORTH HAMPTON LM 3.2 23KEENE LC 10 .3 28 NORTHFIELD WI, UM 4.4 15KENSINGTON LM, LA 2.3 19 NORTHUMBERLAND UC 7.6 21KILKENNY UC 0 0 NORTHWOOD UM, LA, CO .4 2KINGSTON LM, LA 11 .3 57 NOTTINGHAM LA 3.4 7LACONIA WI 2.6 13 ODELL UC 0 0LANCASTER UC, MC 8.1 16 ORANGE MC, PE 1.0 4LANDAFF MC 1 .2 4 ORFORD MC, PE 5.8 12LANGDON LC 2.8 18 OSSIPEE SA 24.5 35LEBANON MC, LC 7 .1 18 PELHAM NS 9.8 38LEE LA 4.3 22 PEMBROKE UM 5.7 25LEMPSTER LC 3.2 10 PETERBOROUGH CK 10.1 27LINCOLN PE 4.3 3 PIERMONT MC 4.0 10LISBON MC 6.5 24 PINKHAM'S GRANT UC, SA 0 0LITCHFIELD NS 14.1 94 PITTSBURG UC 20.7 7LITTLETON MC 6.5 13 PITTSFIELD UM .4 2LIVERMORE PE, SA 0 0 PLAINFIELD LC, MC 3.2 6LONDONDERRY LM 10.3 25 PLAISTOW LM 5.1 47LONDON UM 6.0 13 PLYMOUTH PE 6 .5 23LOW AND BURBANK'S PORTSMOUTH LM 5.2 32GRANT UC, MC 0 0 RANDOLPH UC 1.2 3

LYMAN MC 1.6 6 RAYMOND LA 6.2 22LYME MC 5.3 10 RICHMOND LC 1.1 3LYNDEBOROUGH NS 2 .4 8 RINDGE LC, CK 5 .5 15

Table 2 . List of towns in New Hampshire, U.S . Geological Survey aquifer-assessment study areas, and areas of townand percentage of total town areas underlain by stratified-drift aquifers--Continued

USGS


lain by stratified-


USGS


lain by stratified-Town assessment

studyarea(s)

drift(squaremiles)



drift(squaremiles)


ROCHESTER CO 20 .2 45 TAMWORTH SA 15 .3 26ROLLINSFORD CO 7.2 99 TEMPLE MM, CK 3.3 14ROXBURY LC .1 1 THOMPSON ANDRUMNEY PE 6 .6 16 MESERVESRYE LM 2.7 20 PURCHASE UC, MC 0 0SALEM LM 8.3 33 THORNTON PE 9 .0 18SALISBURY CK, UM 5.6 14 TILTON WI 3.7 33SANBORNTON PE, WI 6.9 14 TROY LC 1 .1 6SANDOWN LA, LM 3.9 28 TUFTONBORO WI, SA 8.7 21SANDWICH SA, PE, WI 7.6 8 UNITY LC 1 .1 3SARGENT'S PURCHASE SA, MC, UC 0 0 WAKEFIELD CO, SA 9.2 24SEABROOK LM 1.0 11 WALPOLE LC 7.9 22SECOND COLLEGE WARNER CK 7.0 12GRANT UC 4.9 12 WARREN PE, MC 2.6 5SHARON CK 4.2 28 WASHINGTON CK, LC .7 2SHELBURNE UC 6.8 14 WATERVILLE VALLEY PE, SA 2.6 4SOMERSWORTH CO 7.3 73 WEARE MM, CK 8.1 14SOUTH HAMPTON LM .8 10 WEBSTER CK 6.9 25SPRINGFIELD LC, CK, PE .9 2 WENTWORTH PE 4.2 10STARK UC 6.9 12 WENTWORTHSTEWARTSTOWN UC 3.4 7 LOCATION UC 2.2 11STODDARD CK, LC .7 1 WESTMORELAND LC 3.3 9STRAFFORD CO, UM 2.2 4 WHITEFIELD MC, UC 5.1 15STRATFORD UC 6.6 8 WILMOT CK 3.0 10SUGAR HILL MC .5 3 WILTON NS 5.3 20SULLIVAN LC .1 1 WINCHESTER LC 8.3 15SUNAPEE LC .6 3 WINDHAM LM 3.5 13SURRY LC 2.2 14 WINDSOR CK 1 .4 17SUTTON CK 6.9 16 WOLFEBORO WI, SA 6.4 13SWANZEY LC 11.7 26 WOODSTOCK PE, MC 4.1 7

SUMMARY

New Hampshire is fortu-nate to have numerous strati-fied-drift aquifers that providegenerally clean and plentifulground water for a multitudeof uses . TheseNew Hampshireaquifers are products of glacialmeltwater deposition fromabout 14,000 years ago and arescattered primarily in river val-leys and other low-lying areasthroughout the State. Aquiferscomposed of coarse sand andgravel materials, with large,interconnected pore spaces, aregenerally the most transmis-

sive aquifers and yield themost water. These high-yield-ing aquifers were deposited aseskers, kame terraces, outwashplains, anddeltas by meltwaterduring glacial retreat. Undernatural or near-natural condi-tions, water quality fromstratified-drift aquifers is gen-erally good, although threatsfrom natural and human-derived sources of contamina-tion have been identified .

The public is encouragedto seek more informationabout any of the material

presented in this report fromthe USGS office in Bow or theNHDES, Water ResourcesDivision, in Concord.

USGSWater Resources Division525 Clinton StreetBow, NH 03304(603) 225-4681

NHDESWater Resources Division64 North Main StreetP.O . Box 2008Concord, NH 03302-2008603) 271-3406

Summary 29

SELECTED REFERENCES

Titles of reports that were published as part ofthe cooperative USGS and NHDES stratified-driftaquifer mapping study are in bold print.

Ammann, A.P., and Stone, A.L.,1991, Method for the com-parative evaluation of nontidal wetlands in NewHampshire: Concord, New Hampshire Department ofEnvironmental Services, Water Resources Division,NHDES-WRD-1991-3, 229 p .

Ayotte, J.D ., in press, Geohydrology and water quality ofstratified-drift aquifers in the Winnipesaukee RiverBasin, central New Hampshire : U.S . GeologicalSurvey Water-Resources Investigations Report 94-4150,121 p ., 12 pls .

Ayotte, J.D ., and Toppin, K.W., 1995, Geohydrology andwater quality of stratified-drift aquifers in theMiddle Merrimack River Basin, south-central NewHampshire : U.S. Geological Survey Water-ResourcesInvestigations Report 92-4192, 52 p., 8 pls.

Baldwin, H.L ., and McGuinness, C.L., 1963, A primer onground water : U.S. Geological Survey, 26 p .

Boudette, E.L ., Canney F.C ., Cotton, J.E ., Davis, R.I ., Fick-lin, W.H ., and Mootooka, J.M., 1985, High levels ofarsenic in the ground waters of southeastern NewHampshire-a geochemical reconnaissance : U.S . Geo-logical Survey Open-File Report 85-202, 25 p .

Chapman, D.H.,1974, New Hampshire's landscape-howit was formed : New Hampshire Profiles, v . 23, no.l,p 41-56 .

Cotton, J.E ., 1975a, Availability of ground water in theAndroscoggin River Basin, northern New Hampshire :U.S . Geological Survey Water-Resources InvestigationsReport 75-0022,1 pl .

1975b, Availability of ground water in thePemigewasset and Winnipesaukee River Basins, cen-tral New Hampshire : U.S . Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 75-0047, 1 pl .-1975c, Availability of ground water in the Saco RiverBasin, east-central New Hampshire : U.S . GeologicalSurvey Water-Resources Investigations Report 74-0039, 1 pl .__1975d, Availability of ground water in the upperConnecticut River Basin, northern New Hampshire :U.S . Geological Survey Water-Resources InvestigationsReport 75-0053, 1 pl ._1976a, Availability of ground water in the middleConnecticut River Basin, southern New Hampshire :U.S . Geological Survey Water-Resources InvestigationsReport 76-0018, 1 pl .

1976b, Availability of ground water in the middleMerrimack River Basin, central and southern NewHampshire : U.S . Geological Survey Water-ResourcesInvestigations Report 76-0039, 1 pl .


1977a, Availability of ground water in the lower Con-necticut River Basin, southwestern New Hampshire:U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources InvestigationsReport 77-0079,1 pl .

--_1977b, Availability of ground water in the lowerMerrimack River Basin, southern New Hampshire :U.S . Geological Survey Water-Resources InvestigationsReport 77-0069, 1 pl .-1977c, Availability of ground water in thePiscataqua and other coastal river basins, southeasternNew Hampshire : U.S . Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 77-0070, 1 pl .

Cotton, J.E.,1988, Ground-water resources of the LampreyRiver Basin, southeastern New Hampshire : U.S. Geo-logical Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report84-4252, 46 p .,1 pl .

Cotton, J.E ., 1989, Hydrogeology of the Cocheco RiverBasin, southeastern New Hampshire : U.S. GeologicalSurvey Water-Resources Investigations Report 87-4130,47 p., l pl .

Cotton, J.E ., and Olimpio, J.R ., in press, Geohydrology,yield, and water quality of stratified-drift aquifers inthe Pemigewasset River Basin, central New Hamp-shire : U.S . Geological Survey Water-Resources Investi-gations Report 94-4083, 258 p ., 10 pls .

Diers, R.W., and Vieira, F.J ., 1977, Soil survey of CarrollCounty, New Hampshire, U.S. Department of Agricul-ture, 63 map sheets, scale 1:24,000, 161 p .

Flanagan, S.M., in press, Geohydrology and water qualityof stratified-drift aquifers in the Middle ConnecticutRiver Basin, west-central New Hampshire : U.S . Geo-logical Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report94-4181, 149 p ., 4 p1s .

Flanders, R.A., 1992, New Hampshire Water QualityReport to Congress - 305(b) : Concord, New HampshireDepartment of Environmental Services, Water Supplyand Pollution Control Division, NHDES-WSPCD-92-8,247 p .

Frost, Robert, 1981, Mending Wall, in Early Poems : NewYork, Avenel Books, p . 80 .

Goldthwait, J.W., Goldthwait, Lawrence, and Goldthwait,R.P., 1951, The geology of New Hampshire, part 1-surficial geology : Concord, New Hampshire StatePlanning and Development Commission, 83 p., 1 pl.

Harte, PT., and Johnson, William, 1995, Geohydrologyand water quality of stratified-drift aquifers in theContoocook River Basin, south-central New Hamp-shire : U.S . Geological Survey Water-Resources Investi-gations Report 92-4154, 72 p., 4 pls .

Johnson, C.D ., Tepper, D.M., and Morrissey, D .J ., 1987,Geohydrologic and surface-water data for the SacoRiver Valley glacial aquifer from Bartlett, New Hampshire, to Fryeburg, Maine: October, 1983, through Janu-ary, 1986 : U.S . Geological Survey Open-File Report 87-44, 80 p .

Kelsey, T.L ., and Vieira, F.J ., 1968, Soil survey of BelknapCounty, New Hampshire, U.S . Department of Agricul-ture, 62 map sheets, scale 1:15,840, 68 p .

Koteff, Carl, 1974, The morphologic sequence concept anddeglaciation of southern New England, in Coates, D.R .,ed ., Glacial geomorphology: Binghamton, State Uni-versity of New York, Publications in Geomorphology,p . 121-144 .

Latimer, W.J ., Layton, N.H., Lyford, W.H., Coates, W.H.,Scripture, P.N., 1939, Soil survey of Grafton County,New Hampshire : Washington D.C ., U.S . Department ofAgriculture, Bureau of Chemistry and Soils, Series1935, no . 6, 2 map sheets, scale 1 :62,500, 79 p .

Lawlor, S.M., and Mack, T.J ., 1992, Geohydrologic,ground-water quality, and streamflow data for thestratified-drift aquifers in the Bellamy, Cocheco, andSalmon Falls River Basins, southeastern New Hamp-shire : U.S . Geological Survey Open-File Report 89-583,137 p ., 3 pls .

Mack, T.J ., and Lawlor, S.M ., 1992, Geohydrology andwater quality of stratified-drift aquifers in the Bel-lamy, Cocheco, and Salmon Falls River Basins, southeastern New Hampshire : U.S . Geological SurveyWater-Resources Investigations Report 90-4161, 65 .,6 pls.

Medalie, Laura and Horn, M .A., 1994, Estimatedwithdrawals and use of freshwater in New Hampshire :U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources InvestigationsReport 93-4096, 1p1 .

Moore, R.B ., 1990, Geohydrology and water quality ofstratified-drift aquifers in the Exeter, Lamprey, andOyster River Basins, southeastern New Hampshire :U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources InvestigationsReport 88-4128, 61 p ., 8 pls .

1992, Geohydrologic and ground-water-quality datafor stratified-drift aquifers in the Exeter, Lamprey, andOyster River Basins, southeastern New Hampshire :U.S . Geological Survey Open-File Report 92-95, 136 p .,4 pls.

1993, Geologic evidence for catastrophic draining ofglacial lakes in the Contoocook, Souhegan, and Piscat-aquog River Basins, south-central New Hampshire[abs .] : Geological Society of America Abstracts withPrograms, v. 25, no. 6, p . 157.

Moore, R.B ., Johnson, C.D., and Douglas, E.M.,1994, Geo-hydrology and water quality of stratified-drift aqui-fers in the Lower Connecticut River Basin,southwestern New Hampshire : U.S . GeologicalSurvey Water-Resources Investigations Report 92-4013,187 p., 4 pls .

Moore, R.B., and Medalie, Laura, in press, Geohydrologyand water quality of stratified-drift aquifers in theSaco and Ossipee River Basins, east-central NewHampshire : U.S . Geological Survey Water-ResourcesInvestigations Report 94-4182, 133 p .

Morrissey, D.J. and Regan, J.M., 1987, New Hampshireground-water quality : U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 87-0739, 8 p.

New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services,1991, Phase I wellhead protection area delineationguidance : Water Supply and Pollution Control Divi-sion, NHDES-WSPCD-91-9,13 p .

New Hampshire Water Resources Board, 1984, Waterresources management plan : Concord, New Hamp-shire Water Resources Board, 47 p .

Stekl, P.J ., and Flanagan, S.M., 1992, Geohydrology andwater quality of stratified-drift aquifers in the LowerMerrimack and coastal River Basins, southeasternNew Hampshire : U.S . Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 91-4025, 93 p., 6 pls .

Tepper, D.H., Morrissey, D.J ., Johnson, C.D., and Maloney,T.J ., 1990, Hydrogeology, water quality, and effects ofincreased municipal pumpage of the Saco River Valleyglacial aquifer; Bartlett, New Hampshire, to Fryeburg,Maine: U.S . Geological Survey Water-Resources Inves-tigations Report 88-4179,113 p .

Toppin, K.W,1987, Hydrogeology of stratified-drift aqui-fers and water quality in the Nashua Regional Plan-ning Commission area, south-central NewHampshire : U.S. Geological Survey Water-ResourcesInvestigations Report 86-4358, 101 p ., 6 pls .

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992, Final Rule,National primary and secondary drinking-water regu-lations-Synthetic organic chemicals and inorganicchemicals (sections 141 .12, 141 .32, 141 .50, 141 .51,141.61, and 141.62 of part 141 and 143.3 of part 143) :U.S . Federal Register, v. 57, no . 138, July 17, 1992, p .31,776-31,849 .

U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1981, Soil survey of Hills-borough County, eastern part, New Hampshire, U.S .Department of Agriculture, 152 p .

1985a, Soil survey of Hillsborough County,western part, New Hampshire, U.S . Department ofAgriculture, 141 p .

_____1985b, Soil survey of Merrimack County, NewHampshire, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 141 p .

Vieira, F.J ., and Bond, R.W., 1973, Soil survey of StraffordCounty, New Hampshire, U.S . Department of Agricul-ture, 152 p .

Waller, R.M ., 1989, Ground water and the ruralhomeowner: U.S . Geological Survey General InterestPublication, 36 p .

Winkley, H.E ., 1965, Soil survey of Merrimack County,New Hampshire : Washington D.C ., U.S. Department ofAgriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Series 1961,no . 22, 76 map sheets, scale 1 :20,000, 94 p .

Selected References 31

Documents

(ANW), RlClick here to return to USGS publications · 2003. 1. 21. · Hampshire. 0 0. mar! 20 '' MILES 20 KILOMETERS. 5 Ground-Water Resourcesin NewHampshire:Stratified-Drift Aquifers