Debra Harrington and Debra Harrington and Haizhi ChenHaizhi Chen

FDEP Groundwater FDEP Groundwater ProtectionProtection

March, 2005March, 2005

PROTOTYPE FOR SPRING SYSTEM ASSESSMENTS

WATERSHED MANAGEMENT and WATERSHED MANAGEMENT and BASIN ASSESSMENTSBASIN ASSESSMENTS

IDENTIFY IDENTIFY

WATER QUALITY ISSUESWATER QUALITY ISSUES

IWRGRI

BASIN

ASSESSMENTS

SRA

Surface Water

Ground Water

Interaction

Spring Spring WaterWater

SPRING SCREENING TOOLSSPRING SCREENING TOOLS

GW/ SW RELATIONAL ASSESSMENT (SRA)

Base flow

Baseflow that supports aquatic life.

Uses surface water criteria and reference values to evaluate ground water flowing from spring vents.

The SRA is based on the percent of samples that exceed a threshold related to the environmental conditions necessary to support aquatic life.

The SRA is used to assess samples obtained from spring vents, boils, seeps, runs and other surface water bodies associated with springs.

Other integrated information such as topography, hydrology, stratigraphy, percent baseflow, and microlanduse are also considered.

GROUND WATER RESOURCE INDEX (GRI)

Potable water

Highest designated use of ground water.

Uses ground water standards for contaminant groups such as BIOLOGICAL, NUTRIENTS, ORGANICS, INORGANICS AND SALTWATER INTRUSION.

The GRI is based on the percent of wells that exceed a ground water standard and is calculated with and without aquifer stratification.

The GRI is used to assess spring samples obtained from conduits, monitor wells and drinking water wells located in the springshed. Important areas are identified that may need further investigation.

GW STANDARDS – SURFACE WATER CRITERIA

WORK GROUPSPUBLIC

INVOLVEMENT

MONITORINGMONITORING

IWR ASSESSMENTIWR ASSESSMENT

HOT SPOT &HOT SPOT &LAND USE LAND USE

IDENTIFICATIONIDENTIFICATION

DATA ANALYSESDATA ANALYSESSPATIAL MAPPINGSPATIAL MAPPING

SPRINGSHED SPRINGSHED

DELINEATIONDELINEATION

ACTION PLANACTION PLAN

SPRINGSSPRINGS

PROTECTIONPROTECTION

SPRING ASSESSMENT MODEL

NEW ASSESSMENT TERMSNEW ASSESSMENT TERMS

Spring Classification SystemSpring Classification System

SPRING GROUPSPRING GROUP – A collection of individual spring vents and seeps that lie – A collection of individual spring vents and seeps that lie within a discrete spring recharge basin (or springshed (defined as group in within a discrete spring recharge basin (or springshed (defined as group in Bulletin 66).Bulletin 66).

SPRING SYSTEM - SPRING SYSTEM - System is defined as a collection of interconnected System is defined as a collection of interconnected springs that have demonstrated hydraulic connections by scientific springs that have demonstrated hydraulic connections by scientific evaluation (i.e., diving, hydrology, water chemistry, dye tracing).evaluation (i.e., diving, hydrology, water chemistry, dye tracing).

SPRING CLUSTERSPRING CLUSTER – An informal term used to describe a number of springs in – An informal term used to describe a number of springs in the general vicinity of each other. Whether or not the springs are the general vicinity of each other. Whether or not the springs are interconnected is unknown.interconnected is unknown.

Springshed NamesSpringshed Names

Named after particular Named after particular SPRINGSPRING if springshed has only one identified spring. if springshed has only one identified spring.

Named as Named as CLUSTERCLUSTER if > one spring that are not defined as a group in Bulletin if > one spring that are not defined as a group in Bulletin 66 with unknown hydrologic connections.66 with unknown hydrologic connections.

Named as Named as GROUPGROUP after established “group” of springs defined exclusively in after established “group” of springs defined exclusively in Bulletin 66.Bulletin 66.

Named as Named as SYSTEMSYSTEM if collection of springs have demonstrated hydrologic if collection of springs have demonstrated hydrologic connections.connections.

SPRINGSHEDS

SPRINGSHED NAMES

SPRING GROUPSPRING GROUP – Ichetucknee Group Springshed – Ichetucknee Group Springshed

SPRING SYSTEM – SPRING SYSTEM – Gum System SpringshedGum System Springshed

SPRING CLUSTERSPRING CLUSTER – Aripeka Cluster Springshed – Aripeka Cluster Springshed

INDIVIDUAL SPRINGINDIVIDUAL SPRING – Buckhorn Springshed – Buckhorn Springshed

SPRINGSHED EXAMPLES

ICHETUCKNEE GROUP SPRINGSHED

GUM SYSTEM SPRINGSHED

ARIPEKA CLUSTER SPRINGSHED

BUCKHORN SPRINGSHED

Existing Springshed Boundaries EvaluatedExisting Springshed Boundaries Evaluated• FGS Repository for all springshed delineationsFGS Repository for all springshed delineations• Proper methodology establishedProper methodology established• Uncertainty estimated for various methodsUncertainty estimated for various methods

Hydrologic Studies (dye tracing, natural tracers)Hydrologic Studies (dye tracing, natural tracers)

Springshed Wells IdentifiedSpringshed Wells Identified

GW/SW Geochemistry EvaluatedGW/SW Geochemistry Evaluated

Potential Spring Systems RecommendationsPotential Spring Systems Recommendations• DEP, WMD and FGS Review DEP, WMD and FGS Review

SPRING SYSTEM ASSESSMENTS

GROUND WATER SITESGROUND WATER SITES Conduit (grab samples)Conduit (grab samples) Conduit TubingConduit Tubing Monitor WellMonitor Well

SURFACE WATER SITESSURFACE WATER SITES VentVent SeepSeep BoilBoil RunRun Open Drain (siphon, pjole, karst window etc.)Open Drain (siphon, pjole, karst window etc.)

SPRING SAMPLE CLASSIFICATION

TYPES OF SAMPLING SITESTYPES OF SAMPLING SITES

Low Flow Regimes High Flow Regimes

NEW ASSESSMENT TOOLSNEW ASSESSMENT TOOLS

www.floridagroundwater.org

HYDROPORT RETRIEVAL APPLICATIONHYDROPORT RETRIEVAL APPLICATION

HYDROPORT STATISTICS REPORTHYDROPORT STATISTICS REPORT

ICHETUCKNEE SPRING CLUSTER ASSESSMENT STUDY SITE

SPRING RUN DATA AND GROUND WATER

STATIONS TYPED AS STREAMS

GROUND WATER DATA GROUND WATER DATA COMBINED WITH SPRING COMBINED WITH SPRING RUN DATA CAN PRODUCE RUN DATA CAN PRODUCE ERRONEOUS STATISTICS ERRONEOUS STATISTICS FOR IWRFOR IWR

Lower DO mediansLower DO medians

Lower or Elevated nitrateLower or Elevated nitrate

ICHETUCKNEE LAND USE ASSESSMENT

Ground Water Travel Time

7 miles in 6 days

DYE TRACE STUDIES

LAKE CITY SPRAYFIELDS

AND SINK HOLES

ICHETUCKNEE SPRING CLUSTER BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

BIOLOGICALBIOLOGICAL

Document specific ecosystem Document specific ecosystem damagedamage

Quantify biological deteriorationQuantify biological deterioration

Research special projectsResearch special projects

Provide results to IWR staffProvide results to IWR staff

ICHETUCKNEE SPRING CLUSTER NUTRIENT ASSESSMENT

Spring Nitrate TrendsIchetucknee Springs Cluster

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

9/1

/01

11

/1/0

1

1/1

/02

3/1

/02

5/1

/02

7/1

/02

9/1

/02

11

/1/0

2

1/1

/03

3/1

/03

5/1

/03

7/1

/03

9/1

/03

11

/1/0

3

1/1

/04

3/1

/04

5/1

/04

7/1

/04

9/1

/04

Collection Date

Nitr

ate

s (N

itra

te+

Nitr

ite)

(mg

/L)

Blue Hole Cedar Head Ichetucknee Head Mission Mill Pond SRA Threshold

Spring Ammonia TrendsIchetucknee Springs Cluster

0.000

0.010

0.020

0.030

0.040

0.050

0.060

0.070

0.080

0.090

9/1/

01

11/1

/01

1/1/

02

3/1/

02

5/1/

02

7/1/

02

9/1/

02

11/1

/02

1/1/

03

3/1/

03

5/1/

03

7/1/

03

9/1/

03

11/1

/03

1/1/

04

3/1/

04

5/1/

04

7/1/

04

9/1/

04

Collection Date

Am

mon

ia (

mg/

L)

Blue Hole Cedar Head Ichetucknee Head Mill Pond Mission Median Value

Spring Phosphorus TrendsIchetucknee Springs Cluster

0.0000

0.0100

0.0200

0.0300

0.0400

0.0500

0.0600

0.0700

9/1/

01

11/1

/01

1/1/

02

3/1/

02

5/1/

02

7/1/

02

9/1/

02

11/1

/02

1/1/

03

3/1/

03

5/1/

03

7/1/

03

9/1/

03

11/1

/03

1/1/

04

3/1/

04

5/1/

04

7/1/

04

9/1/

04

Collection Date

Pho

spho

rus

(Tot

al,

Dis

solv

ed, O

rthop

hosp

hate

) (m

g/L

)

Blue Hole Cedar Head Ichetucknee Head Mill Pond Mission SRA Value

COMPARE NUTRIENT EMPIRICAL TRENDS IN

SPRINGS

Ground Water Phosphorus TrendsIchetucknee Springshed Wells

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

1.80

3/1

/86

3/1

/87

3/1

/88

3/1

/89

3/1

/90

3/1

/91

3/1

/92

3/1

/93

3/1

/94

3/1

/95

3/1

/96

3/1

/97

3/1

/98

3/1

/99

3/1

/00

3/1

/01

3/1

/02

3/1

/03

3/1

/04

3/1

/05

Collection Date

Ph

osp

ho

rus

(To

tal,

Dis

solv

ed

, Ort

ho

ph

osp

ha

te)

(mg

/L)

SRA ValueLinear Trend

Outliers atStations 2397, 2399, 2343

Ground Water Nitrate TrendsIchetucknee Springshed Wells

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.001

/1/8

6

1/1

/87

1/1

/88

1/1

/89

1/1

/90

1/1

/91

1/1

/92

1/1

/93

1/1

/94

1/1

/95

1/1

/96

1/1

/97

1/1

/98

1/1

/99

1/1

/00

1/1

/01

1/1

/02

1/1

/03

1/1

/04

1/1

/05

Collection Date

Nitra

tes (

Nitra

te+

Nitri

te)

(mg

/L)

SRA ValueLinear Trend

Ground Water Ammonia TrendsIchetucknee Springshed Wells

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

10

/1/9

0

10

/1/9

1

10

/1/9

2

10

/1/9

3

10

/1/9

4

10

/1/9

5

10

/1/9

6

10

/1/9

7

10

/1/9

8

10

/1/9

9

10

/1/0

0

10

/1/0

1

10

/1/0

2

10

/1/0

3

10

/1/0

4

Collection Date

Am

mo

nia

(m

g/L

)

Median ValueLinear Trend

COMPARE NUTRIENT EMPIRICAL TRENDS IN

GROUND WATER

ICHETUCKNEE SPRING CLUSTER NITRATE TREND ASSESSMENT

Spring Nitrate TrendsIchetucknee Springs Cluster

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

9/1

/01

11

/1/0

1

1/1

/02

3/1

/02

5/1

/02

7/1

/02

9/1

/02

11

/1/0

2

1/1

/03

3/1

/03

5/1

/03

7/1

/03

9/1

/03

11

/1/0

3

1/1

/04

3/1

/04

5/1

/04

7/1

/04

9/1

/04

Collection Date

Nitr

ate

s (N

itra

te+

Nitr

ite)

(mg

/L)

Blue Hole Cedar Head Ichetucknee Head Mission Mill Pond SRA Threshold

Ground Water Nitrate TrendsIchetucknee Springshed Wells

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

1/1

/86

1/1

/87

1/1

/88

1/1

/89

1/1

/90

1/1

/91

1/1

/92

1/1

/93

1/1

/94

1/1

/95

1/1

/96

1/1

/97

1/1

/98

1/1

/99

1/1

/00

1/1

/01

1/1

/02

1/1

/03

1/1

/04

1/1

/05

Collection Date

Nitra

tes (

Nitra

te+

Nitri

te)

(mg

/L)

SRA ValueLinear Trend

COMPARE NITRATES IN SPRINGS TO GROUND

WATER

Spring Nitrate TrendsIchetucknee Springs Cluster

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

9/1

/01

11

/1/0

1

1/1

/02

3/1

/02

5/1

/02

7/1

/02

9/1

/02

11

/1/0

2

1/1

/03

3/1

/03

5/1

/03

7/1

/03

9/1

/03

11

/1/0

3

1/1

/04

3/1

/04

5/1

/04

7/1

/04

9/1

/04

Collection Date

Nitr

ate

s (N

itra

te+

Nitr

ite)

(mg

/L)

Blue Hole Cedar Head Ichetucknee Head Mission Mill Pond SRA Threshold

Unconfined Ground Water Nitrate TrendsIchetucknee Springshed Wells

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3/1

/86

3/1

/87

3/1

/88

3/1

/89

3/1

/90

3/1

/91

3/1

/92

3/1

/93

3/1

/94

3/1

/95

3/1

/96

3/1

/97

3/1

/98

3/1

/99

3/1

/00

3/1

/01

3/1

/02

3/1

/03

3/1

/04

3/1

/05

Collection Date

Nitr

ate

s (N

itra

te+

Nitr

ite)

(mg

/L)

SRA ValueLinear Trend

Confined Ground Water Nitrate TrendsIchetucknee Springshed Wells

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3/1

/86

3/1

/87

3/1

/88

3/1

/89

3/1

/90

3/1

/91

3/1

/92

3/1

/93

3/1

/94

3/1

/95

3/1

/96

3/1

/97

3/1

/98

3/1

/99

3/1

/00

3/1

/01

3/1

/02

3/1

/03

3/1

/04

3/1

/05

Collection Date

Nitr

ate

s (N

itra

te+

Nitr

ite)

(mg

/L)

SRA ValueLinear Trend

COMPARE NITRATES IN UNCONFINED & CONFINED

GROUND WATER

Unconfined Ground Water Nitrate TrendsIchetucknee Springshed Wells

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

3/1

/86

3/1

/87

3/1

/88

3/1

/89

3/1

/90

3/1

/91

3/1

/92

3/1

/93

3/1

/94

3/1

/95

3/1

/96

3/1

/97

3/1

/98

3/1

/99

3/1

/00

3/1

/01

3/1

/02

3/1

/03

3/1

/04

3/1

/05

Collection Date

Nitr

ate

s (N

itra

te+

Nitr

ite)

(mg

/L)

SRA ValueLinear Trend

Trimmed Outlier

Confined Ground Water Nitrate TrendsIchetucknee Springshed Wells

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

3/1

/86

3/1

/87

3/1

/88

3/1

/89

3/1

/90

3/1

/91

3/1

/92

3/1

/93

3/1

/94

3/1

/95

3/1

/96

3/1

/97

3/1

/98

3/1

/99

3/1

/00

3/1

/01

3/1

/02

3/1

/03

3/1

/04

3/1

/05

Collection Date

Nitr

ate

s (N

itra

te+

Nitr

ite)

(mg

/L)

SRA ValueLinear Trend

TRIM OUTLIERS AND COMPARE NITRATES IN

UNCONFINED & CONFINED GROUND WATER

ICHETUCKNEE SPRING CLUSTER PHOSPHORUS TREND ASSESSMENT

Spring Phosphorus TrendsIchetucknee Springs Cluster

0.0000

0.0100

0.0200

0.0300

0.0400

0.0500

0.0600

0.07009/

1/01

11/1

/01

1/1/

02

3/1/

02

5/1/

02

7/1/

02

9/1/

02

11/1

/02

1/1/

03

3/1/

03

5/1/

03

7/1/

03

9/1/

03

11/1

/03

1/1/

04

3/1/

04

5/1/

04

7/1/

04

9/1/

04

Collection Date

Pho

spho

rus

(Tot

al, D

isso

lved

, Ort

hoph

osph

ate)

(m

g/L)

Blue Hole Cedar Head Ichetucknee Head Mill Pond Mission SRA Value

Ground Water Phosphorus TrendsIchetucknee Springshed Wells

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

1.80

3/1

/86

3/1

/87

3/1

/88

3/1

/89

3/1

/90

3/1

/91

3/1

/92

3/1

/93

3/1

/94

3/1

/95

3/1

/96

3/1

/97

3/1

/98

3/1

/99

3/1

/00

3/1

/01

3/1

/02

3/1

/03

3/1

/04

3/1

/05

Collection Date

Ph

osp

ho

rus

(To

tal,

Dis

solv

ed

, Ort

ho

ph

osp

ha

te)

(mg

/L)

SRA ValueLinear Trend

Outliers atStations 2397, 2399, 2343

COMPARE PHOSPHORUS IN SPRINGS TO GROUND WATER

Spring Phosphorus TrendsIchetucknee Springs Cluster

0.0000

0.0100

0.0200

0.0300

0.0400

0.0500

0.0600

0.07009/

1/01

11/1

/01

1/1/

02

3/1/

02

5/1/

02

7/1/

02

9/1/

02

11/1

/02

1/1/

03

3/1/

03

5/1/

03

7/1/

03

9/1/

03

11/1

/03

1/1/

04

3/1/

04

5/1/

04

7/1/

04

9/1/

04

Collection Date

Pho

spho

rus

(Tot

al, D

isso

lved

, Ort

hoph

osph

ate)

(m

g/L)

Blue Hole Cedar Head Ichetucknee Head Mill Pond Mission SRA Value

Confined Ground Water Phosphorus TrendsIchetucknee Springshed Wells

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

3/1

/86

3/1

/87

3/1

/88

3/1

/89

3/1

/90

3/1

/91

3/1

/92

3/1

/93

3/1

/94

3/1

/95

3/1

/96

3/1

/97

3/1

/98

3/1

/99

3/1

/00

3/1

/01

3/1

/02

3/1

/03

3/1

/04

3/1

/05

Collection Date

Ph

osp

ho

rus

(To

tal,

Dis

solv

ed

, Ort

ho

ph

osp

ha

te)

(mg

/L)

SRA ValueLinear Trend

Outliers Trimmed for Station 2399Station 2399

Unconfined Ground Water Phosphorus TrendsIchetucknee Springshed Wells

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.403

/1/8

6

3/1

/87

3/1

/88

3/1

/89

3/1

/90

3/1

/91

3/1

/92

3/1

/93

3/1

/94

3/1

/95

3/1

/96

3/1

/97

3/1

/98

3/1

/99

3/1

/00

3/1

/01

3/1

/02

3/1

/03

3/1

/04

3/1

/05

Collection Date

Ph

osp

ho

rus

(To

tal,

Dis

solv

ed

, Ort

ho

ph

osp

ha

te)

(mg

/L)

SRA ValueLinear Trend

Outliers Trimmed forStations 2397 and 2343

COMPARE PHOSPHORUS IN UNCONFINED & CONFINED

GROUND WATER(TRIMMED OUTLIERS)

ICHETUCKNEE SPRING CLUSTER AMMONIA TREND ASSESSMENT

Spring Ammonia TrendsIchetucknee Springs Cluster

0.000

0.010

0.020

0.030

0.040

0.050

0.060

0.070

0.080

0.090

9/1/

01

11/1

/01

1/1/

02

3/1/

02

5/1/

02

7/1/

02

9/1/

02

11/1

/02

1/1/

03

3/1/

03

5/1/

03

7/1/

03

9/1/

03

11/1

/03

1/1/

04

3/1/

04

5/1/

04

7/1/

04

9/1/

04

Collection Date

Am

mon

ia (

mg/

L)

Blue Hole Cedar Head Ichetucknee Head Mill Pond Mission Median Value

Ground Water Ammonia TrendsIchetucknee Springshed Wells

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

10

/1/9

0

10

/1/9

1

10

/1/9

2

10

/1/9

3

10

/1/9

4

10

/1/9

5

10

/1/9

6

10

/1/9

7

10

/1/9

8

10

/1/9

9

10

/1/0

0

10

/1/0

1

10

/1/0

2

10

/1/0

3

10

/1/0

4

Collection Date

Am

mo

nia

(m

g/L

)

Median ValueLinear Trend

COMPARE AMMONIA IN SPRINGS TO GROUND

WATER

Spring Ammonia TrendsIchetucknee Springs Cluster

0.000

0.010

0.020

0.030

0.040

0.050

0.060

0.070

0.080

0.090

9/1

/01

11/1

/01

1/1

/02

3/1

/02

5/1

/02

7/1

/02

9/1

/02

11/1

/02

1/1

/03

3/1

/03

5/1

/03

7/1

/03

9/1

/03

11/1

/03

1/1

/04

3/1

/04

5/1

/04

7/1

/04

9/1

/04

Collection Date

Am

monia

(m

g/L

)

Blue Hole Cedar Head Ichetucknee Head Mill Pond Mission Median Value

Confined Ground Water Ammonia TrendsIchetucknee Springshed Wells

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

10

/1/9

0

10

/1/9

1

10

/1/9

2

10

/1/9

3

10

/1/9

4

10

/1/9

5

10

/1/9

6

10

/1/9

7

10

/1/9

8

10

/1/9

9

10

/1/0

0

10

/1/0

1

10

/1/0

2

10

/1/0

3

10

/1/0

4

Collection Date

Am

mo

nia

(m

g/L

)

Median ValueLinear Trend

COMPARE AMMONIA IN UNCONFINED & CONFINED

GROUND WATER

Ground Water Ammonia TrendsIchetucknee Springshed Wells

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

10

/1/9

0

10

/1/9

1

10

/1/9

2

10

/1/9

3

10

/1/9

4

10

/1/9

5

10

/1/9

6

10

/1/9

7

10

/1/9

8

10

/1/9

9

10

/1/0

0

10

/1/0

1

10

/1/0

2

10

/1/0

3

10

/1/0

4

Collection Date

Am

mo

nia

(m

g/L

)

Median ValueLinear Trend

Ground Water Nitrate TrendsIchetucknee Springshed Wells

0.00

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

1/1

/86

1/1

/87

1/1

/88

1/1

/89

1/1

/90

1/1

/91

1/1

/92

1/1

/93

1/1

/94

1/1

/95

1/1

/96

1/1

/97

1/1

/98

1/1

/99

1/1

/00

1/1

/01

1/1

/02

1/1

/03

1/1

/04

1/1

/05

Collection Date

Nitra

tes (

Nitra

te+

Nitri

te)

(mg

/L)

SRA ValueLinear Trend

COMPARE AMMONIA AND NITRATE EMPIRICAL TRENDS

IN GROUND WATER

SUMMARY OF NUTRIENT EMPIRICAL TRENDS IN SPRINGS AND GROUND

WATER

Spearman correlation matrix

Number of observations: 222

NI T

RA

TE

_V

AL

NITRATE_VAL

WE

LL

_D

EP

TH

WELL_DEPTH

Nitrate Values

Well Depth

Nitrate Values

Well Depth

NITRATE_VAL WELL_DEPTH NITRATE_VAL 1.000 WELL_DEPTH -0.234 1.000

Group IGroup IIchetucknee HeadIchetucknee HeadCoffeeCoffeeCedar Head?Cedar Head?Blue Hole?Blue Hole?

Group IIGroup IIMission SpringMission SpringDevils EyeDevils EyeGrassy HoleGrassy HoleMill PondMill PondBlue Hole?Blue Hole?Cedar Head?Cedar Head?

HYDROLOGIC RELATIONSHIPS

DEVELOP ACTION PLANSDEVELOP ACTION PLANS

GW Wells Hot Spots – Land UseGW Wells Hot Spots – Land Use• Develop targeted samplingDevelop targeted sampling• Educate public on IssuesEducate public on Issues

Locate Sink Holes – Dye Trace StudiesLocate Sink Holes – Dye Trace Studies

Sample Sediments Near VentsSample Sediments Near Vents

Community InvolvementCommunity Involvement

DEVELOP ACTION PLANS FOR AREAS IN SPRINGSHED

CONCLUSIONS FOR NUTRIENTS

Nitrate levels are distinctive for springs in the Ichetucknee Cluster. Data should Nitrate levels are distinctive for springs in the Ichetucknee Cluster. Data should not be compiled to determine overall median values or trends for springs. not be compiled to determine overall median values or trends for springs.

Nitrate levels are over the SRA threshold (0.45 mg/L) for Blue Hole, Cedar Head, Nitrate levels are over the SRA threshold (0.45 mg/L) for Blue Hole, Cedar Head, Ichetucknee Head, and Mission Springs. Ichetucknee Head, and Mission Springs.

Increasing and similar nitrate empirical trends exist for Blue Hole and Ichetucknee Increasing and similar nitrate empirical trends exist for Blue Hole and Ichetucknee Head Springs. Ammonia levels were higher in Blue Hole Spring. Head Springs. Ammonia levels were higher in Blue Hole Spring.

Stable nitrate empirical trends exist for Mission and Mill Pond Springs.Stable nitrate empirical trends exist for Mission and Mill Pond Springs.

Elevated nitrates exist in the ground water in the springshed at “hot spots”. Elevated nitrates exist in the ground water in the springshed at “hot spots”. Nitrates were not correlated to well depths.Nitrates were not correlated to well depths.

Dye studies suggested shallow ground water flow may account for the elevated Dye studies suggested shallow ground water flow may account for the elevated nitrates found in Ichetucknee Head and Cedar Head Springs. Deeper regional nitrates found in Ichetucknee Head and Cedar Head Springs. Deeper regional ground water flow may account for the relatively stable trends found in Mission ground water flow may account for the relatively stable trends found in Mission and Mill Pond Springs.and Mill Pond Springs.

Decreasing ammonia and increasing nitrate empirical trends may be due to Decreasing ammonia and increasing nitrate empirical trends may be due to mineralization and nitrification and/or land use changes.mineralization and nitrification and/or land use changes.

Spring run data will be assessed for further investigation.Spring run data will be assessed for further investigation.

Empirical trends shown in this prototype will be assessed for statistical Empirical trends shown in this prototype will be assessed for statistical significance.significance.

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACTDebra Harrington

850-245-8232

Debra.Harrington@dep.state.fl.us

GROUND WATER PROTECTION

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA