water.ky.govwater.ky.gov/GIS/Documents/2010-12-21Digitizing the... · Web viewThis includes water quality assessments, tracer studies and cave mapping. Much of this work has been

Final Report

Pilot Study to Integrate Existing Karst Flow Data for Kentucky into the National Hydrography

Dataset

Kentucky Division of Water

Watershed Management Branch

GIS and Data Analysis Section

Groundwater Section

And

Kentucky Geological Survey

In cooperation with

U.S. Geological Survey

December 31, 2010

1

USGS/NGTOC Contacts KDOW Contact:

Jeff Simley James SeayNational Hydrography Dataset Partnership NHD Technical POCNational Geospatial Technical Operations Center Kentucky Division of WaterU.S. Geological Survey 200 Fair Oaks Drive303-202-4131 Frankfort, KY [email protected] [email protected]

Bruce BauchUS Geological SurveyUSGS Spatial Liaison for KYNational Geospatial Program Office9818 Bluegrass ParkwayLouisville, KY [email protected]

2

mailto:[email protected]


Table of Contents

Section 1 – Background

1.1 – Executive Summary 4

1.2 – Introduction 5

1.3 – Karst Assessments and Tracer Tests 6

1.4 – Pilot Study to Integrate Karst Atlas and NHD 7

1.5 – Field Work 10

Section 2 – Digitizing the Kentucky Karst Atlas into the NHD 12

2.1 – Updating the NHD 13

2.2 – Shortcomings and Recommended Improvements to the NHD Data Model 17

Literature Cited 19

Appendix A – Karst Glossary/Glossary of karst hydrography features used in KY Karst Atlas 21

Appendix B – NHD Issues Papers submitted by Kentucky Division of Water (KDOW) 23

Appendix C – Metadata for Kentucky Karst Atlas Dye Traces GIS Data 29

3

Section 1 – Background

Executive Summary

The U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) is a map layer depicting surface streams in the United States for use with geographic information systems (GIS). The NHD digital product was designed to also allow incorporation of various groundwater data.

The Kentucky Geological Survey (KGS) and Kentucky Division of Water (KDOW) have compiled and digitized karst flow data for more than half of the karst regions in Kentucky. These data, obtained from many investigators, have been published by KGS in the Kentucky Karst Atlas map series and are available as data files for use with GIS.

The USGS and KDOW have funded a pilot study, conducted by KDOW, to integrate existing karst data into the NHD. The pilot study area, located in the southwestern Mississippian Plateau Region of Kentucky, is the West Fork Red River watershed. This area was chosen because quality data covering a large percentage of the study area have been compiled and digitized. Further, the data provide good representation of a broad array of karst features present in Kentucky.

Karst flow data are being added to the NHD using the NHD Geo Edit toolset, which was developed by the USGS. Karst features are classified using Feature Types (FType) and Categories as defined within the NHD. Subsurface flow routes are added using the FType ‘Underground Conduit’. Category is then used to convey whether the subsurface flow route is inferred from dye tracing or based on cave surveys.

Incorporating previously omitted subsurface flow data into the NHD will provide several benefits, primarily: 1) demonstration of local deviation of karst drainage from topographic watershed divides, 2) establishing a baseline for mapping karst features and groundwater flow paths within the NHD, and 3) improving accuracy and applicability of information used for hydrologic modeling, research and field investigation.

One of the more notable advancements during this project was the development of a standard protocol to request updates to the NHD. This procedure is attributed to numerous requests by NHD stewards from various states and USGS identifying the need to streamline the process.

4

Introduction

Karst drainage is prevalent throughout Kentucky. Approximately 50% of the state is underlain by rocks with karst development potential, and roughly half of that has significant karst drainage (Figure 1). These are generally categorized as the Western Pennyroyal, Eastern Pennyroyal, Inner Bluegrass and Pine Mountain karst areas. The most extensive karst development occurs in the Mississippian Plateau Physiographic Region, which contains the Western and Eastern Pennyroyal karst areas. This area is most famous for Mammoth Cave, which is the longest mapped cave system in the world. The Inner Bluegrass Karst Region surrounding

Lexington has smaller springs and caves, but subsurface development is widespread. Long-mountain karst development occurs along the Pine Mountain Overthrust Fault in southeastern Kentucky. Another karst area that is not typically identified is a relatively small outcrop of limestone in central Jefferson and northern Bullitt counties, in and around Louisville. Several major cities are located in each of these karst areas, except the Pine Mountain area.

The Western Pennyroyal karst area lies within the Mississippian Plateau Physiographic Region, which is characterized by flat-lying Mississippian-aged carbonate rocks (Sable and Dever, 1990). This region occupies the area from Meade County along the Ohio River, south to Bowling Green and then west through Hopkinsville and back to the Ohio River in Crittenden County. Well-developed karst occurs primarily in the Ste. Genevieve and St. Louis limestones of the Meramacian Series of the Mississippian System. The purity and high solubility of the limestones make the terrane highly susceptible to karst development (Ray and others, 2006). Extensive tracer tests and cave surveys have been conducted in the eastern and southern portions of this area.

The Eastern Pennyroyal karst area also lies within the Mississippian Plateau and exhibits characteristics similar to the Western Pennyroyal. This area runs from the Tennessee border in Clinton and Wayne counties, through Somerset and then northeast to Carter County and the Carter Caves region. The same Mississippian-aged rocks occupy the southern extent, with Devonian-aged sandstones, dolostones and limestones in the north, which include the Boyle Dolomite and Sellersburg and Jeffersonville limestones (McDowell and others, 1988).

5

Figure 1. Karst Areas of Kentucky (Adapted from Currens, 2002 and Ray & Blair, 2005)

The Inner Bluegrass karst area (surrounding Lexington) is formed in the Ordovician-aged limestone units: Lexington Limestone and the Highbridge Group (Thrailkill, 1982). This area is in the Bluegrass Physiographic Region, which is characterized by gently rolling hills moderately dissected by surface streams (Webb and others, 2004).

The Pine Mountain karst area is located in southeastern Kentucky in the Eastern Coal Field Physiographic Region. The Pine Mountain Thrust Fault has forced Mississippian-aged limestone to the surface, where it is bounded by Pennsylvanian-aged shales and sandstones. In this part of the state the limestone unit is typically referred to as the Newman Limestone, but is equivalent to the Ste. Genevieve and St. Louis limestones (Sable and Dever, 1990). Karst development is controlled by the southeastern dip of the rocks and flow is mostly parallel to the strike, along the mountain direction. Springs generally discharge at large mountain gaps (Saunders, 1985; Currens, 2001).

The karst area around Louisville is formed in the Silurian-aged Louisville Limestone and the Devonian-aged Sellersburg and Jeffersonville Limestones (Kepferle, 1974). Ray and others (1994) rated this area as highly sensitive to groundwater pollution based on estimated infiltration capacity, flow velocity and dispersion rates. However, at that time only limited studies had been conducted. Later tracer studies (Ray and others, 2008) validated this assessment, and frequent cover-collapse sinkhole development and groundwater velocities exceeding 1.4 km/day were noted.

Karst Assessments and Tracer Tests

Numerous authors have investigated the karst areas of Kentucky over the years. This includes water quality assessments, tracer studies and cave mapping. Much of this work has been published in one fashion or another and has been compiled by Currens and McGrain (1979). Figure 2 illustrates karst development in Kentucky along with karst basins delineated through tracer tests that have been compiled and digitized. Some of these karst basin delineations include surveyed cave maps. However, many caves that have been mapped do not appear in the figure. The tracer tests and accompanying karst basin delineations shown were digitized as part of the Kentucky Karst Atlas, a collaborative effort

between the Kentucky Geological Survey (KGS) and the Kentucky Division of Water (KDOW). The Kentucky Karst Atlas Maps are published on 30 x 60 Minute Quadrangles. Thus far, data have been compiled and/or published for the following quadrangles: Lexington (Currens and others, 2002); Harrodsburg (Currens and others, 2003); Somerset (Currens and Ray, 1998); Campbellsville (Currens and Ray, 1998); Beaver

6Figure 2. Karst Areas, Tracer Delineated Karst Basins and Published Karst Atlas sheets in Kentucky

Dam (Ray and Currens, 1998); Bowling Green (Ray and Currens, 2000); Tell City (Ray and others, 2009) and Hopkinsville (Ray and others, DRAFT).

Tracer data digitized and illustrated in the Karst Atlas Map Series include: dye injection points such as sinkholes, swallets, wells and cave streams; intermediate monitoring points such as karst windows, wells and sinking springs; perennial and overflow springs and caves; inferred groundwater flow paths and surveyed cave passages; and inferred karst basin boundaries. Only those discrete karst features related to tracer tests such as dye injection and recovery points are shown. Karst features not assessed are not illustrated or digitized in this database. All karst features such as springs, caves, karst windows, etc. are documented in the Kentucky Groundwater Repository Database, maintained by KGS. These data are available as hard copy maps or they can be downloaded as GIS files.

Easy access to tracer data through the Kentucky Karst Atlas Maps is crucial to planning and development, groundwater monitoring and assessment, hydrologic modeling, and response to environmental incidents. Karst groundwater drainage commonly deviates from topographic boundaries (White and Schmidt, 1966 and Ray and others, 2005). Unless individuals are aware of karst development in Kentucky and this digital product, they may not account for karst drainage influence and completely misunderstand the hydrology of a particular area of interest. For example, Figure 3, clipped from the Harrodsburg 30 x 60 Minute Quadrangle (Currens and others, 2003), shows traced flow to Crawford Spring passing beneath three topographic divides.

Figure 3. Example of Karst Atlas Map Series and Legend-Harrodsburg 30 x 60 Minute Quadrangle

Pilot Study to Integrate Karst Data into the NHD

KDOW has taken on the stewardship of those portions of the NHD within Kentucky. The NHD data steward is granted permission to reserve any available NHD sub-basin that lies, in whole or in part,

7

within that state. The data steward must document planned edits to the NHD prior to reserving and downloading a particular sub-basin. Once complete, the edits are put through a quality assurance (QA) review and then uploaded to the USGS. NHD staff conduct their QA review and report any errors to the state data steward for correction. When edits have passed the QA review, they are merged into the National Map. Stewardship includes updates to the NHD based on field observations of surface water and the inclusion of previously omitted data.

A pilot project and partnership between KDOW, KGS and USGS was proposed to assess the feasibility of adding existing, digitized karst data to the NHD. The purpose of this is to improve the efficacy and applicability of hydrologic modeling, research, and field experimentation that is based on data in the NHD.

Integration of groundwater flow data will allow NHD users to account for the influence of karst drainage on the hydrography of a region. In particular, it will demonstrate local deviation of karst systems from topographic watershed divides. Additionally, this pilot study was devised to establish a baseline for mapping karst features and inferred groundwater flow paths and boundaries into the NHD. This required the establishment of preliminary standards for incorporating geospatial karst data and karst terminology into the NHD.

Work began with a review of available karst data and study area selection. The study area needed to contain quality karst data and provide representation of common as well as more unusual karst features present in Kentucky. Additionally, the study area needed to be of a manageable size such that work could be completed and assessed in a timely manner. The 10-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) for the West Fork Red River watershed was chosen (Figure 4). This 698 km2 watershed is located on the Kentucky-Tennessee border in the Western Pennyroyal Karst Area and is characterized by well-developed karst drainage. Extensive tracer studies have been conducted and the data digitized into a draft Karst Atlas sheet for the Hopkinsville 30 x 60 Minute Quadrangle. Figure 5 shows the study area with available tracer test data overlain on the NHD layers prior to integration.

8

Figure 4. NHD Flowline and Point data for West Fork of Red River watershed prior to karst data integration

9

Figure 5. Karst tracer data within and surrounding the West Fork of Red River watershed overlain on the NHD layers

Field Work to Verify Tracer Data Interpretation

The West Fork of Red River watershed was chosen for this pilot study, in part, for its representation of karst terrane typical of Kentucky. In particular, results of tracer tests south of Pembroke, Kentucky showed a perched karst aquifer exhibiting atypical crossing flow routes. These seemingly anomalous data were identified as potentially difficult to digitize into the NHD and a good test of methodology used to incorporate karst data. However, the original investigator claimed that these results and interpretation were suspect and that data verification was required prior to digitization.

10

In 1997, KDOW conducted a dye trace study to determine the recharge area for the municipal water well at Pembroke. The tracer test designed to delineate the southeastern portion of the groundwater basin originated with a sinkhole injection (A) during moderate flow conditions. This sinkhole dye injection was recovered at multiple springs to the south and southeast. Reconnaissance of the seasonally dry Montgomery Creek, east of the sinkhole, during low flow revealed a swallet that was active during moderate and high flow. A follow-up tracer test in 2002 confirmed that this swallet ( B) pirated Montgomery Creek westward to Hargrove Spring via a subterranean cutoff. Figure 6 illustrates the inferred hydrologic connections based on results of the initial and follow-up tracer tests. The crossing groundwater flow routes imply a perched karst aquifer overlying the regional karst drainage system.

In the summer of 2010 KDOW conducted a tracer study to verify the previous results discussed above. During low-flow reconnaissance of Montgomery Creek a second losing reach with multiple swallets was found. This losing reach (C) is located approximately 2 km downstream of the swallet tested in 2002. A tracer test confirmed the connection between this losing reach and Venable Spring through a separate subterranean cutoff. The results of this test showed two independent losing reaches on Montgomery Creek, draining to separate springs (Figure 6a). The initially interpreted crossing flow paths and perched aquifer were rejected by these new data. Appropriate corrections were made to the karst flow dataset prior to digitization into the NHD.

11

AB

AB

C

Figure 6. Initial interpretation of Pembroke tracer test results from 1997 and 2002 showing perched karst aquifer.

Figure 6a. Reinterpretation of Pembroke tracer test results rejecting perched aquifer based on 2010 data.

Section 2 - Digitizing the Kentucky Karst Atlas into the NHD

After selecting the West Fork of Red Creek watershed (HUC 0513020606), the data from the karst atlas needed to be digitized into the NHD. This required first documenting the planned edits to the NHD, then downloading the appropriate sub-basin used to implement edits for the karst elements. Once the edits were completed, they were put through a QA review, and updates were made as necessary. The data were then uploaded to the US Geological Survey for their QA review. Any errors were reported to KDOW for correction. Once the edits passed the USGS QA review, the updated dataset was merged into the National Map.

The process to digitize the Karst Atlas GIS data into the NHD began on February 12 th, 2010, when sub-basin 05130206 was checked out from the NHD, for editing by KDOW, through the NHD Stewardship website. This process involves an individual or agency (state data steward, USGS or other Federal agency) authorized to edit the NHD reserving a sub-basin for editing. The sub-basin is ‘checked in’ once the edits submitted by the reserving agency are successfully posted into the National Map. While this process does not prevent another agency from making their own edits to a sub-basin, this process ensures any edits submitted by the agency that reserved the sub-basin take precedence. At this time, the editor was using ArcGIS 9.2 and version 3.3.1 of the NHD Geo Edit tools.

The latest version of the karst geodatabase for the region (modified October 22, 2009) was obtained and used as the primary source of karst data for this project. These GIS data are broken up into three separate data sets:

1. Karst Dye Trace Sites – This data set contains the various sites (or points) used in dye trace studies conducted across Kentucky. The types of sites documented are: cave stream, karst window, perennial spring, overflow spring, sinking spring, swallet, water well and other injection sites. The term ‘other injection’ is used to denote sinkholes, injection wells and shallow borings.

2. Karst Dye Trace Flows – This data set tracks the results of tracer tests, connecting the dye injection site with all locations where dye was recovered. This data set also tracks surface streams that act as overflow. These flow paths are documented as: sinking stream, surface overflow, subsurface overflow, inferred trunk, inferred tributary and mapped trunk.

3. Karst Dye Trace Basins – This data set represents inferred karst basins delineated using tracer data, surveyed cave maps, geological maps and topography. Two types are represented, ‘basin’ and ‘sub-basin’.

The Kentucky Karst Atlas was digitized at varying scales, but was based on field maps at scales between 1:24000 and 1:100000. Since the high resolution NHD has been digitized at a scale of 1:24000 or better, the following supplemental imagery was used:

12

1. The USGS 7.5 minute topographic map

2. 2006 National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) aerial imagery provided by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). This series is at a scale of 2 feet.

3. 2008 NAIP aerial imagery, provided by the USDA NRCS. This series is at a scale of 2 meters.

Updating the NHD

The site locations from the Karst Atlas were digitized in the NHDPoint feature class as ‘SinkRise’, ‘SpringSeep’ or ‘Well’. The dye traces were digitized into the NHDFlowline feature class using the ‘Underground Conduit’ feature type. These were used in conjunction with the 2006 and 2008 NAIP imagery to improve the positional accuracy of the karst atlas sites. The NAIP imagery was very useful for mapping the karst atlas data. After digitizing the dye trace paths and the associated dye injection and recovery sites, the NAIP imagery was used to digitize spring runs, connecting documented springs to the appropriate surface stream. In addition, there are several sinking springs in the project area. For such sites where the distance between the spring and sink point is short, digitizing a point using the Ftype ‘SinkRise’ proved to be sufficient. Larger gaps such as karst windows were digitized as depicted in the data (with a ‘SpringSeep’ at the head of a short surface stream flowing toward a ‘SinkRise’ at the insurgence).

Time Spent to update NHD Time SpentNHD Edits 11.75 hours

1st Round QA 5.5 hoursQA fixes 4 hours

2nd Round QA 1.5 hoursQA fixes 1 hour

Table 1: Breakdown of time spent transcribing karst data into the NHD, as well as time spent on QA/QC reviews.

During this period, a series of problems was encountered, related to the NHD Geo Edit tool:

1. Version 3.3.1 of the NHD Geo Edit toolset would not permit NHDPoint locations of type ‘SinkRise’ or ‘SpringSeep’ to be anchored to any NHDFlowline feature type other than ‘StreamRiver’. This was reported to the US Geological Survey’s NHD office as a deficiency on August 6th, 2009 and was corrected in version 3.3.2 of the Geo Edit toolset.

13

2. In the event that two underground flowlines (either underground conduit or pipeline) cross, the NHD Geo Edit toolset prompts the user to specify the relative elevation of each. However, the tool does not zoom to the intersection location, making it difficult for the editor to make an informed decision. This was reported to the USGS as a deficiency on October 9th, 2009.

ArcGIS 9.3.1 became available to KDOW during the first round QA review. After the upgrade, the NHD Data steward upgraded the NHD Geo Edit toolset to 3.3.2. It was at this time the sinkholes and springs, which the previous version of the Geo Edit tools prohibited from being digitized, were transcribed into the NHD Point feature class.

Corrections in the NHDFlowline feature class were made to account for issues discovered during in-house QA. These included edits made to the NHD to incorporate the results of the field study. Once the QA review by personnel was complete, the edits were passed through automated QA checks. The project was exported and uploaded to the USGS, who conducted a final QA review before merging into the National Map. The automated QA checks involved:

1. Exporting the work copy (in Albers map projection) of the sub-basin to a copy in North American Datum 1983.

2. Building flow tables and generating a new flow network

3. Running the NHD Stream Level Attribute Releveler tool

4. Export edits to XML format, using the XMLExtract tool. If the export fails, the editor must fix any issues listed in the tool’s log file. This process may require repetition until the export process succeeds.

5. Use the XML2GDB tool to import the XML file generated in step 4 into a fresh copy of the original sub-basin geodatabase. If the import process fails, the editor must fix any issues listed in the tool’s log file. This process may also require repetition until the import process succeeds.

6. Upload the XML file, as well as a fresh copy of the original sub-basin geodatabase, to the USGS NHD FTP site.

14

Final QA Process Using XML tools Time Spent DateProject Albers work GDB to Geographic 6 minutes 8/5/2010

Run XML Extract on Geographic 1 minute, failedNumber of errors to fix 44

Fix errors in Albers work copy 10 minutesProject to Geographic 6 minutesRun XML Extract on Geographic 1 minute

Run XML2GDB on Geographic 5 minutes, failedNumber of errors to fix 3

Fix errors in Albers work copy 39 minutesProject to Geographic 6 minutes

Run XML Extract on Geographic 1 minuteRun XML2GDB on Geographic 2 minutes, failedNumber of errors to fix 1

Fix errors in Albers work copy 20 minutesProject to Geographic 6 minutes

Run XML Extract on Geographic 1 minuteRun XML2GDB on Geographic 2 minutes, failed

Number of errors to fix 1Fix errors in Geographic 5 minutes

Run XML Extract on Geographic 1 minuteRun XML2GDB on Geographic 5 minutesUpload Geographic to USGS FTP Site 5 minutes 8/5/2010GDB Post to National Map 6 minutes, failed 9/15/2010Number of errors to fix 1

Fix errors in Albers work copy 10 minutesProject to Geographic 6 minutesRun XML Extract on Geographic 1 minuteRun XML2GDB on Geographic 2 minutes, failed

Number of errors to fix 1Fix errors in Geographic 10 minutesRun XML Extract on Geographic 1 minuteRun XML2GDB on Geographic 6 minutesUpload Geographic to USGS FTP Site 5 minutes 9/16/2010

Table 2: Time and results for XMLExtract and XML2GDB tools on sub-basin 05130206 karst edits.

15

Figure 6: The pilot project area, after Kentucky karst data were incorporated into the NHD Flowline and Point feature classes.

16

Shortcomings and Recommended Improvements to the NHD Data Model

While reviewing the karst atlas GIS data and the NHD, prior to the implementation of this project, the project workgroup determined two possible shortcomings in the current NHD Ftype. Currently the Underground Conduit NHDFlowline Ftype can be defined by positional accuracy: Definite (used for conduits that pass through a mapped cave, tunnel or other channel), indefinite (used for groundwater flow paths inferred from tracer test) and approximate (a category that has no equivalent in the Kentucky Karst Atlas). At this time the NHD does not permit these conduits to be subdivided by perennial and overflow channels. Upon review, the workgroup concluded that the ability to categorize underground conduits as perennial or overflow was important for water quality and flow modeling applications.

The workgroup also determined that the ability to distinguish an underground conduit by specific type would make it more useful to other states. For example, states with significant karst drainage would conceivably use a ‘conduit type’ Fcode of ‘karst groundwater flow route’, whereas a state with groundwater flow related to volcanic rocks may use a conduit type of ‘lava tube’.

The workgroup has submitted several NHD Issues ‘white papers’ to the USGS, recommending the following changes to the NHD Feature Catalog (listed in order of priority):

1. Request the addition of a ‘Hydrographic Category’ to the list of FCodes for the Underground Conduit Ftype, with further sub-category of

a. Overflow (conduit that is active only during high flow that could be seasonal or storm-related in duration).

b. Perennial (conduit that is active during all flow conditions)

2. Request the addition of a ‘Conduit Type’ FCode for the Underground Conduit Ftype. This would allow users to differentiate between various types of underground conduits and denote aquifer types.

3. Request a revision to the NHD Feature Catalog, recommending definitions for the ‘Hydrographic Category’ FCodes, should item one (see above) be approved by the USGS.

4. Recommend a revision to the NHD Feature Catalog capture guidelines for ‘SpringSeep’ and ‘SinkRise’, to state these points must be captured if they coincide with an NHDFlowline type of ‘artificial path’ or ‘underground conduit’. This will bring the Feature Catalog in line with revisions made to the NHD Geo Edit Tool v3.3.2.

5. Request the USGS list and define the ‘Underground Conduit’ Fcode ‘Positional Accuracy: Approximate’.

Unfortunately, karst basin boundaries inferred from the Kentucky Karst Atlas GIS data cannot be incorporated into the NHD. Thus, there is high potential for end users, unfamiliar with karst, to

17

misunderstand the karst flow data. This could lead to the assumption that karst flows that deviate from topographic watershed boundaries are erroneous. Karst flow that deviates from surface boundaries can only be addressed in the metadata, as there is no FCode available.

One potential fix for most of these problems is the creation of Event Themes from each of the original karst datasets. This would link the original data table to karst data added to the NHD, providing necessary point and line feature attributes to the end user. However, without watershed boundary modifications, karst deviation cannot be readily identified to users unfamiliar with karst drainage. Ultimately, a watershed boundary database layer, which is linked to the point and line NHD layer, may be required to fully and adequately portray karst hydrologic information.

Perhaps the most important advancement that occurred during this pilot study was the creation of a standard protocol for all NHD stewards to request changes to the NHD. Prior to this study there was not a formal process to request new FTypes, FCodes or other necessary modifications. Along with KDOW, NHD stewards from other states made numerous requests relative to updates and changes to their portions of the NHD. In response, the USGS formalized the process by introducing NHD Issues Documents, which have a standardized format and process. This made all NHD steward requests uniform and streamlined the process used to address concerns.

18

Literature Cited

Currens, J. C. and McGrain, P., 1979, Bibliography of Karst Geology in Kentucky, Special Publication 1 (series 11), 59 p.

Currens, J. C. and Ray, J. A., 1998, Mapped Karst Ground-Water Basins in the Harrodsburg 30 x 60 Minute Quadrangle, Map and Chart 16 (Series XI), scale 1:100,000.

Currens, J. C. and Ray, J. A., 1998, Mapped Karst Ground-Water Basins in the Somerset 30 x 60 Minute Quadrangle, Map and Chart 18 (Series XI), scale 1:100,000.

Currens, J. C. and Ray, J. A., 1998, Mapped Karst Ground-Water Basins in the Campbellsville 30 x 60 Minute Quadrangle, Map and Chart 17 (Series XI), scale 1:100,000.

Currens, J.C., 2001, Generalized Block Diagram of Pine Mountain Karst, Kentucky Geological Survey, Lexington, KY, Map and Chart 18 (Series XII).

Currens, J.C., 2002, Kentucky is Karst Country: What You Should Know about Sinkholes and Springs, Kentucky Geological Survey, Lexington, KY, 29p.

Currens, J. C., Paylor, R. L. and Ray, J. A., 2002, Mapped Karst Ground-Water Basins in the Lexington 30 x 60 Minute Quadrangle, Map and Chart 35 (Series XII), scale 1:100,000.

Currens, J. C., Paylor, R. L. and Ray, J. A., 2003, Mapped Karst Ground-Water Basins in the Harrodsburg 30 x 60 Minute Quadrangle, Map and Chart 58 (Series XII), scale 1:100,000.

Currens, J.C., and Paylor, R.L., 2009, Karst groundwater basins in Kentucky; Kentucky Geological Survey, unpublished map, scale 1:500,000.

Kepferle, R.C., 1974, Geologic map of the Louisville East Quadrangle, Jefferson County, Kentucky: U.S. Geological Survey, GQ-1203, Washington, D.C.

McDowell, R.C., Grabowski, G.J., Jr, Moore, S.L., and Noger, M.C., 1988, Geologic Map of Kentucky, United States Geological Survey, scale 1:500,000.

Ray, J.A., Webb, J.S., and O'dell, P.W., 1994, Groundwater Sensitivity Regions of Kentucky. Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection, Frankfort, Kentucky; [1:500,000 map sheet].

Ray, J. A. and Currens, J. C., 1998, Mapped Karst Ground-Water Basins in the Beaver Dam 30 x 60 Minute Quadrangle, Map and Chart 16 (Series XI), scale 1:100,000.

Ray, J. A., and Currens, J. C., 2000, Mapped Karst Ground-Water Basins in the Bowling Green 30 x 60 Minute Quadrangle, Map and Chart 22 (Series XII), scale 1:100,000.

Ray, J.A. and Blair, R.J., 2005, Large perennial springs of Kentucky: Their identification, base flow, catchment, and classification, in Beck, B.F., ed., Sinkholes and the Engineering and Environmental

19

Impacts of Karst, Geotechnical Special Publication No. 144, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, VA.

Ray, J.A., Blair, R.J., and Nicotera, T.G., 2006, Little River Karst Watershed Boundary Delineation: Groundwater Tracing and Unit Base Flow, Kentucky Division of Water, Frankfort, 60 p.

Ray, J.A., Blair, R.J., and Webb, J.S., 2008, Karst Groundwater Infiltration of the Sanitary Sewer within the Beargrass Creek Watershed, Jefferson County, Kentucky, KWRRI Annual Symposium, Lexington, KY.

Ray, J. A., Moody, J., Blair, R. J , Currens, J. C., and Paylor, R., 2009, Mapped Karst Ground-Water Basins in the Tell City 30 x 60 Minute Quadrangle, Map and Chart 192 (Series XII), scale 1:100,000.

Ray, J. A., O’dell, P. W.,Blair, R. J., and Currens, J. C., Mapped Karst Ground-Water Basins in the Hopkinsville 30 x 60 Minute Quadrangle, Map and Chart number pending (Series pending), scale 1:100,000.

Sable, E.G., and Dever, G.R., Jr., 1990, Mississippian Rocks in Kentucky: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1503, Washington, D.C., 125 p.

Saunders, J.W., 1985, Pine mountain karst and caves, in Dougherty, P.H., ed., Caves and Karst of Kentucky, Kentucky Geological Survey, Special Publication 12, Series XI, p. 86-96.

Thrailkill, J.V., Spangler, L.E., Hopper, W.M., McCann, M.R., Troester, J.W., and Gouzie, D.R., 1982, Groundwater in the Inner Bluegrass Karst Region, Kentucky, University of Kentucky Water Resources Research Institute Report 136, 108 p.

USGS, cited 2010, National Hydrography Dataset Website, http://nhd.usgs.gov/index.html

Webb, J.S., Blanset, J.M., and Blair, R.J., 2004, Expanded Groundwater Monitoring for Nonpoint Source Pollution Assessment in the Kentucky River Basin: Final Report, Kentucky Division of Water, Frankfort, 126 p.

White, W.B., and Schmidt, V.A., 1966, Hydrology of a Karst Area in East-Central West Virginia, Water Resources Research, v. 2, no. 3, pp. 549-560.

20

http://nhd.usgs.gov/index.html

Appendix AGlossary of karst hydrographic features used in the Kentucky Karst Atlas

Dye trace sites terms:

Cave Stream – an intermediate groundwater monitoring point where a cave stream can be accessed

Karst Window – a section of cave or conduit where roof collapse and dissolution have exposed the subsurface stream

Other injection – dye injections points such as sinkholes, injection wells and shallow borings

Overflow Spring – groundwater discharge point that is active only during high flow events, which may be seasonal or storm-related in duration

Perennial Spring – a spring that flows continuously, regardless of hydrologic conditions. Also can be known as an underflow spring.

Sinking Spring – a natural point where groundwater discharges to the surface and then re-enters the subsurface at a lower elevation

Swallet – a point at which surface streams infiltrate into subsurface drainage

Dye trace flowline terms:

Inferred tributary –a stylized interpretation of the flow route from an injection point to a spring or conduit network with base flow of less than 3 cubic feet per second (85 liters per second).

Inferred trunk – a stylized interpretation of the flow route from the injection site to a spring with base flow greater than 3 cubic feet per second (85 liters per second).

Mapped trunk – subsurface stream passing through a mapped cave passage with base flow greater than 3 cubic feet per second (85 liters per second).

Subsurface overflow – a higher level flow route that only becomes active during high flow events and allows water from the basin to spill over to another spring, or in some cases to another karst basin. The flow route activity may be seasonal or storm-related in duration.

Surface overflow – a reach of surface stream that runs dry during base flow and maintains discharge only during high flow events. Activity may be seasonal or storm-related in duration.

21

Dye trace basins (aka groundwater basin, karst basin):

- Basin - recharge or catchment area for a spring

- Sub-basin – recharge or catchment area for a minor spring that contributes flow to a larger basin

22

Appendix B – NHD Issues Papers submitted by KDOW

NHD/WBD Topics to be Considered

Purpose: Topics and issues affecting the NHD and WBD program often need the attention of the NHD Management and/or NHD Advisory teams so that they can be resolved. This form allows anyone in the NHD and WBD communities to formalize a topic or issue to ensure it receives proper attention. Doing so is highly encouraged because these ideas are central to keeping the NHD and WBD continuously up-to-date and relevant to its customers. These topics and issues will be logged into a tracking system to make sure tracked from inception to resolution. Upon completing the form, rename to Issue_your last name_topic, such as “Issue_Simley_MValue.docx”. Then send it to Tracey Szajgin at [email protected].

Title of issue to be addressed:

Request the addition of a ‘hydrography category: Perennial/overflow’ Fcode for Underground Conduit

Date: 09/17/10

Submitted by: James Seay, Kentucky Division of Water

This issue affects the X NHD, __WBD, X NHDPlus

This issue relates to __Model Structure, X Data Standards, __Program Policy, __Stewardship, X Data, __ Data Delivery, __Applications, __Communication, __Other

This issue __provides a new capability, X fixes a problem in an existing capability

Overall this issue is X relatively simple, __moderately complex, __ of significant complexity

Abstract of issue:

The NHD currently lacks the ability to distinguish NHD Flowlines of the Ftype ‘Underground Conduit’ (ex. Karst dye traces) by hydrographic category.

Additional detail:

Many dye traces, identifying karst groundwater flow routes, have been conducted in Kentucky over the past 50 years. These have been catalogued not just by positional accuracy, but also by hydrographic category. Many of these underground flow routes are ‘perennial’, while others are considered ‘overflow’ (only show activity when the associated perennial flow route is at or above capacity due to storms or other high flow event).

Why this is needed:

The ability to distinguish between a perennial and an overflow underground conduit is as important as the distinction between perennial and intermittent surface streams.

23


Consequence of not addressing this:

Will impact the results of models that use the NHD, particularly flood modeling and environmental spill models.

Recommendation:

Add the Fcode categories of ‘Hydrographic Category: Perennial’ and ‘Hydrographic Category: Overflow’ to the Underground Conduit Ftype.

Tracking ID (To be entered by Tracey):

24


Request the addition of a ‘Conduit Type’ Fcode for Underground Conduit Ftype

Date: 09/24/10






Abstract of issue:

The NHD currently lacks the ability to distinguish NHD Flowlines of the Ftype ‘Underground Conduit’ (ex. Karst groundwater flow paths, abandoned mines, groundwater flow through lava tubes…).

Additional detail:

The Underground Conduit Ftype is a generic term for any conduit. Currently there is no method to distinguish between varying types, such as between a karst groundwater flow path versus a lava tube groundwater flow path.

Why this is needed:

Adding the ability to distinguish various types of underground conduit would be useful from a cartographic sense, but also make this more useful to other states with different aquifer types.


May result in features not being captured or being inappropriately attributed in the NHD, which otherwise meet capture guidelines.

Recommendation:

Add the Fcode category of ‘Conduit Type: Karst Groundwater Flow Path’ to the Underground Conduit Ftype in the NHDFlowline feature class.


25


Add the definitions for proposed ‘Hydrographic Category’ Fcode addition to the Underground Conduit Ftype to the NHD Feature Catalog

Date: 09/24/10






Abstract of issue:

A separate NHD Topic form was submitted with proposed additions to the available Fcodes for the Underground Conduit Flowline Ftype.

Additional detail:

Why this is needed:

If the proposed Underground Conduit revisions are approved, the NHD Feature Catalog will need to be updated with definitions.


May result in features not being captured in the NHD, which otherwise meet capture guidelines.

Recommendation:

Add the following definitions to the NHD Feature Catalog:

Hydrographic Category – Duration of time this feature contains water.

Overflow – Underground flow path that is active during excessively wet periods and commonly ceases to discharge upon recession.

Perennial – Underground flow path that is active during all hydrologic conditions


26


NHD Feature Catalog entry for ‘Underground Conduit’ is missing ‘Positional Accuracy: Approximate’

Date: 09/14/10



This issue relates to __Model Structure, X Data Standards, __Program Policy, __Stewardship, __ Data, __ Data Delivery, __Applications, __Communication, __Other

This issue _provides a new capability, X fixes a problem in an existing capability


Abstract of issue:

The NHD Feature Catalog is missing an NHD Flowline Feature code for Underground Conduit.

Additional detail:

The NHD Flowline type ‘Underground Conduit’ has a positional accuracy Fcode of ‘approximate’, but it remains unlisted and undefined in the NHD Feature Catalog.

Why this is needed:

While Kentucky will not be using this Fcode, there may be other Data Stewards who do wish to use this.


Data stewards will not be aware of when it is appropriate to use this Fcode.

Recommendation:

Add an entry for ‘Positional Accuracy: Approximate’ into the NHD Feature Catalog.


27


Revise capture conditions in NHD Feature Catalog for SINK/RISE and Spring/Seep NHDPoint features

Date: 09/14/10



This issue relates to __Model Structure, X Data Standards, __Program Policy, __Stewardship, __ Data, __ Data Delivery, __Applications, __Communication, __Other

This issue _provides a new capability, X fixes a problem in an existing capability


Abstract of issue:

The NHD Feature Catalog needs to be updated to reflect bug fixes made in the NHD Geo Edit tool.

Additional detail:

NHD Point features of type ‘SpringSeep’ and ‘SinkRise’ may now be captured are on a Flowline type of ‘Artificial Path’ or ‘Underground Conduit’.

Why this is needed:

There are many springs and sink holes which do not meet the current capture guidelines, but contribute to the area hydrography. This has been rectified in the NHD Geo Edit tool, but not in the NHD Feature Catalog.


The NHD Feature Catalog would no longer be up to date with the NHD Geo Edit tool’s capabilities.

Recommendation:

Update the capture conditions for ‘SinkRise’ and ‘SpringSeep’ in the NHD Feature Catalog to include NHDFlowline types ‘Artificial Path’ and ‘Underground Conduit’.


28

Appendix C: Metadata for Kentucky Karst Atlas**Metadata presented below are for published Karst Atlas Sheets, karst data utilized in this study are still in draft and are not represented here.

Identification_Information: Citation: Citation_Information: Originator: Kentucky Geological Survey Publication_Date: 2003 Title: Karst Dye Traces Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: remote-sensing image Publication_Information: Publication_Place: Lexington, KY Publisher: Kentucky Geological Survey Other_Citation_Details: This GIS data represents mapped ground-water basins in karst regions of Kentucky, determined primarily by ground-water tracer studies. It can be used to quickly identify the ground-water basins and springs to which a site may drain. Major springs and the relative size of their catchment areas can be evaluated for potential as water supplies. The data also serves as a geographic index to literature on karst ground water in the area.

This data is designed for regional and preliminary hydrologic investigations. Features such as springs and swallets are much too small to precisely locate on maps with a scale small enough to show regional relationships. The user is referred to the literature for detailed site descriptions. The information used to compile this GIS data was obtained by numerous investigators over the last 25 years. The underflow spring draining a ground-water basin is assigned a unique identification number, referred to as the AKGWA number (Assembled Kentucky Ground Water Database). Individual basins are identified by the underflow spring name and AKGWA number. The authors of tracer data are identified by number in the "Data Source" column of the key, and are listed in "References Cited" in order of publication or research date.

Although ground-water flow routes shown here have been established by tracer studies, with the exception of mapped cave streams, the precise flow paths are unknown and are inferred or interpreted using water-level data, geologic structure, or surface features. The locations of some ground-water basins are inferred, based on the existence of a significant spring system and the delineation of adjacent basins. The position of ground-water basin boundaries should be considered approximate because of the small-scale source and because boundaries can shift during high-water conditions. Also, excess flow may exit or enter a basin via surface or subsurface overflow routes. Additional overflow routes probably exist. Although most of the results of ground-water tracing were obtained during moderate- or high-flow conditions, the ground-water basins are illustrated in base flow because base flow is the most common flow condition. The main spring draining the basin is assumed to be an underflow spring that preferentially drains base flow. Overflow springs discharge during high flow.1 Generally, names of ground-water basins are derived from these main springs. Not all additional springs are included in the data set.

29

DISCLAIMER: This data is subject to revision upon receipt of new hydrologic data. This data was compiled for the Beaver Dam, Campbellsville, Somerset, Harrodsburg, Bowling Green, and Lexington U.S.G.S. 1:100,000 map areas. Karst ground-water basins at the edges of these maps may be truncated in the data set if the border was at an area not on one of these maps. The user should consult the "References Cited" for additional information. 1Worthington, S.R.H., 1991, Karst hydrogeology of the Canadian Rocky Mountains: Hamilton, Ontario, McMaster University, Ph.D. dissertation, 380 p. Online_Linkage: http://kgs.uky.edu/kgsweb/download/rivers/karstdye.ZIP Description: Abstract: Dye traces in karst areas of Kentucky. Purpose: Recognize the unique hydrology of karst areas in Kentucky. Associated layers include injection and recovery points, flow paths, inferred ground-water basins, sinking streams, and intermittent lakes. Created at a scale of 1:100,000. Should only be used for general guidance at larger scales. Time_Period_of_Content: Time_Period_Information: Single_Date/Time: Calendar_Date: 2003 Currentness_Reference: publication date Status: Progress: In work Maintenance_and_Update_Frequency: Irregular Spatial_Domain: Bounding_Coordinates: West_Bounding_Coordinate: -86.982604 East_Bounding_Coordinate: -84.188759 North_Bounding_Coordinate: 38.266941 South_Bounding_Coordinate: 36.629086 Keywords: Theme: Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus: ArcIMS Keyword Thesaurus Theme_Keyword: geoscientificInformation Theme_Keyword: karst Theme_Keyword: hydrogeology Theme_Keyword: water resources Theme_Keyword: geology Theme_Keyword: hydrology Theme_Keyword: pollution Theme_Keyword: groundwater Theme_Keyword: KGS Place: Place_Keyword: Kentucky Access_Constraints: None Use_Constraints: Created at a scale of 1:100,000. Should only be used for general guidance at larger scales. Point_of_Contact: Contact_Information: Contact_Person_Primary: Contact_Person: Jim Currens

30

Contact_Organization: Kentucky Geological Survey Contact_Address: Address_Type: mailing and physical address Address: Kentucky Geological Survey Address: 228 Mining and Mineral Resources Building Address: University of Kentucky City: Lexington State_or_Province: KY Postal_Code: 40506-0107 Contact_Facsimile_Telephone: 859-257-1147 Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: [email protected] Security_Information: Security_Classification: Unclassified Native_Data_Set_Environment: Microsoft Windows 2000 Version 5.0 (Build 2195) Service Pack 4; ESRI ArcCatalog 8.3.0.800 Cross_Reference: Citation_Information: Originator: Kentucky Geological Survey Publication_Date: 2003 Title: Karst Dye Traces Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: vector digital data Publication_Information: Publication_Place: Lexington, KY Publisher: Kentucky Geological Survey Other_Citation_Details: REFERENCES 1. Anderson, R.B., 1925, Investigation of a proposed dam site in the vicinity of Mammoth Cave, Kentucky, cited in Brown, R.F., 1966, Hydrology of the cavernous limestones of the Mammoth Cave area, Kentucky: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1837, 64 p. 2. Miotke, F.D., and Papenberg, Hans, 1972, Geomorphology and hydrology of the Sinkhole Plain and Glasgow Upland, central Kentucky karst: Caves and Karst, v. 14, no. 4, p. 25-32. 3. Wells, S.G., 1973, Geomorphology of the Sinkhole Plain in the Pennyroyal Plateau of the central Kentucky karst: Cincinnati, Ohio, University of Cincinnati, Master's thesis, 108 p. 4. Quinlan, J.F., 1974, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky. 5. Maegerlein, S.D., and Dillon, Clarence, 1976, Unpublished spring diving data (12-28-76): Graham Springs Complex, Kentucky. 6. Quinlan, J.F., and Rowe, D.R., 1977, Hydrology and water quality in the central Kentucky karst: Phase I: University of Kentucky, Kentucky Water Resources Research Institute, Research Report 101, 93 p. 7. Quinlan, J.F., and Rowe, D.R., 1978, Hydrology and water quality in the central Kentucky karst: Phase II, part A: Preliminary summary of the hydrogeology of the Mill Hole sub-basin of the Turnhole Spring groundwater basin: University of Kentucky, Kentucky Water Resources Research Institute, Research Report 109, 42 p. 8. Powell, R.L., 1979, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Warren County, Kentucky. 9. Saunders, J.W., 1980, Grady's Cave, in Baz-Dresh, John, and Mixon, Bill, eds., Speleo Digest 1973: National Speleological Society, p. 26-31.

31

10. Quinlan, J.F., and Ray, J.A., 1981, Groundwater basins in the Mammoth Cave region, Kentucky, showing springs, major caves, flow routes, and potentiometric surface: Friends of the Karst, Occasional Publication 1, scale 1:138,000. 11. Quinlan, J.F., and Ray, J.A., 1981-85, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky. 12. Saunders, J.W., 1984, Pruett Saltpeter Cave, Warren County, Kentucky: Central Kentucky Cave Survey, Bulletin 1, p. 208-209. 13. Schindel, G.M., 1984, Enteric contamination of an urban karstified carbonate aquifer: The Double Springs drainage basin, Bowling Green, Kentucky: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University, Master's thesis, 147 p. 14. Quinlan, J.F., 1986, Application of dye-tracing to dam-site evaluation in a Kentucky karst area, U.S.A.: International Symposium on Karst Water Resources, Ankara, Turkey, Proceedings, unpaginated. 15. Quinlan, J.F., and Schafstall, Tim, 1988, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky. 16. Quinlan, J.F., and Ray, J.A., 1989, Groundwater basins in the Mammoth Cave region, Kentucky, showing springs, major caves, flow routes, and potentiometric surface: Friends of the Karst, Occasional Publication 2, scale 1:138,000. 17. Quinlan, J.F., and Ray, J.A., 1989, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky. 18. Meiman, Joe, and Ryan, M.T., 1990-94, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky. 19. Murphy, J.D., 1992, Determining the hydrology of the Turnhole Spring groundwater basin of Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky, using quantitative dye tracing: Durham, England, University of Durham, undergraduate dissertation, 51 p. 20. Harmon, D.L., 1992, Hydrology and geology of the Buffalo Creek area on the north side of Mammoth Cave National Park: Richmond, Eastern Kentucky University, Master's thesis, 70 p. 21. Ryan, M.T., 1987, Using newly-developed quantitative dye tracing techniques to determine the karst hydrology of the Buffalo Spring groundwater basin of Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky: Richmond, Eastern Kentucky University, Master's thesis, 121 p. 22. Smith, J.H., and Crawford, N.C., 1989, Groundwater flow in the vicinity of the Curtis Peay Landfill, Warren County, Kentucky: Bowling Green, Ky., Unpublished consultant's report. 23. Uhlenbruch, C.R., 1993, Hydrogeology and groundwater quality of the Maple Springs area, Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky: Richmond, Eastern Kentucky University, master's thesis, 138 p. 24. Crawford, N.C., 1994, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Bowling Green, Ky., Crawford and Associates. 25. Meiman, Joe, and Capps, A.S., 1995, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky. 26. Ryan, M.T., and Meiman, Joe, 1996, An examination of short-term variations in water quality at a karst spring in Kentucky: Ground Water, v. 34, no. 1, p. 23-30. 27. Ray, J.A., Ewers, R.O., and Idstein, P.J., 1997, Mapping water-supply protection areas for eaky, perched karst groundwater systems, in Beck, B.F., ed., 6th Multidisciplinary Conference on Sinkholes and Engineering and Environmental Impacts of Karst, Springfield, Mo., Proceedings, p. 153-156.

32

28. Meiman, Joe, 1997, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Mammoth Cave National Park, Kentucky. 29. Saunders, J.W., 1981, Buckner Spring Cave, description and comparison to Grady's Cave, in Mixon, Bill, ed., Speleo Digest 1974: National Speleological Society, p. 76-77. 30. Ahlers, T.W., Cobb, William, Coons, Don, Knutson, S.M., O'Dell, P.W., Schwartz, R.A., and Taylor, R.L., 1976, Unpublished cave mapping data: Mammoth Cave National Park, Ky. 31. Ray, J.A., 1994, Surface and subsurface trunk flow, Mammoth Cave region: 3d Mammoth Cave National Park Science Conference, Proceedings, p. 175-187. 32. Schindel, G.M., Quinlan, J.F., and Ray, J.A., 1994, Determination of the recharge area for the Rio Springs groundwater basin, near Munfordville, Kentucky: An application of dye tracing and potentiometric mapping for determination of springhead and wellhead protection areas in carbonate aquifers and karst terranes: Project completion report, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Groundwater Branch, Atlanta, Ga., 25 p. 33. Quinlan, J.F., and Ray, J.A., 1995, Normalized base-flow discharge of groundwater basins: A useful parameter for estimating recharge areas of springs and for recognizing drainage anomalies in karst terranes, in Beck, B.F., ed., Karst geohazards: 5th Multidisciplinary Conference on Sinkholes and the Engineering and Environmental Impacts of Karst, Gatlinburg, Tenn., Proceedings, p. 149-164. 34. Thrailkill, John, Spangler, L.E., Hopper, W.M., Jr., McCann, M.R., Troester, J.W., and Gouzie, D.R., 1982, Groundwater in the Inner Bluegrass karst region, Kentucky: University of Kentucky Water Resources Research Institute, Research Report 136, 108 p. 35. Hopper, W.M., Jr., 1985, Karst hydrogeology of southeastern Mercer County and northeastern Boyle County, Kentucky: Lexington, University of Kentucky, M.S. thesis, 122 p. 36. Currens, J.C., 1989, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Kentucky Geological Survey. 37. Ewers, R.O., Onda, A.J., Estes, E.K., Idstein, P.J., and Johnson, K.M., 1991, The transmission of light hydrocarbon contaminants in limestone (karst) aquifers, in Proceedings of the Third Conference on Hydrogeology, Ecology, Monitoring and Management of Ground Water in Karst Terranes: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Association of Ground Water Scientists and Engineers, December 4-6, Nashville, Tenn., p. 287-306. 38. Ewers, R.O., 1992, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Ewers Water Consultants, Inc. 39. Currens, J.C., and Graham, C.D.R, 1993, Flooding of the Sinking Creek karst area in Jessamine and Woodford Counties, Kentucky: Kentucky Geological Survey, ser. 11, Report of Investigations 7, 33 p. 40. Hopper, W.M., 1995, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Lexington, Kentucky. 41. Leo, D.P., 1995, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Kentucky Division of Water. 42. Leo, D.P., 1997, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Kentucky Division of Water. 43. Morris, F.R., IV, 1983, Karst hydrogeology of Cedar Creek and adjacent basins in east-central Pulaski County, Kentucky: Richmond, Eastern Kentucky University, Master's thesis, 126 p.

33

44. Romanik, P.B., 1986, Delineation of a karst groundwater basin in Sinking Valley, Pulaski County, Kentucky: Richmond, Eastern Kentucky University, Master's thesis, 101 p. 45. Leo, D.P., 1990, Hydrogeology of a limestone spring and its recharge area in southeastern Rockcastle County, Kentucky: Richmond, Eastern Kentucky University, Master's thesis, 81 p. 46. Sendlein, L.V.A., Dinger, J.S., Minns, S.A., and Sahba, Arsin, 1990, Hydrogeology and groundwater monitoring of the John Sherman Cooper Power Station, Burnside, Kentucky: University of Kentucky, Department of Geological Sciences, 68 p. 47. Ray, J.A., 1994, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet, Division of Water. 48. Robertson, S.E., 1996, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Kenvirons, Frankfort, Ky. 49. Felton, G.K., Sendlein, L.V.A., Dowdy, T., and Hines, D., 1995, Groundwater study of the Toyota Motor Manufacturing USA Plant, Georgetown, Kentucky: Lexington, University of Kentucky Water Resources Research Institute, Report 194, 80 p. 50. Jillson, W.R., 1945, Geology of Roaring Spring: Frankfort, Ky., Roberts Printing Co., 29 p. 51. Keagy, D.M., Dinger, J.S., Fogle, A.W., and Sendlein, L.V.A., 1994, Interim report on the effect of pesticides, nitrate, and bacteria on groundwater quality in a karst terrane--The Inner Blue Grass Region, Woodford County, Kentucky: Kentucky Geological Survey, ser. 11, Open-File Report OF-93-04, 36 p. 52. Keagy, D.M., Dinger, J.S., Hampson, S.K., and Sendlein, L.V.A., 1994, Interim report on the effect of pesticides and nutrients in the epikarst of the Inner Blue Grass Region, Bourbon County, Kentucky: Kentucky Geological Survey, ser. 11, Open-File Report OF-93-05, 31 p. 53. McCann, M.R., 1978, Hydrogeology of northeast Woodford County, Kentucky: Lexington, University of Kentucky, M.S. Thesis, 101 p. 54. Mull, D.S., 1993, Use of dye tracing to determine the direction of groundwater flow in karst terrane at the Kentucky State University Research Farm near Frankfort, Kentucky: U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations Report 93-4063, 21 p. 55. Spalding, T.S., 1988, Hydrogeologic setting of a wastewater treatment lagoon in a karstified carbonate aquifer, Inner Bluegrass karst region, Franklin County, Kentucky: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University, unpublished report. 56. Spangler, L.E., 1982, Karst hydrogeology of northern Fayette and southern Scott Counties, Kentucky: Lexington, University of Kentucky, M.S. Thesis, 102 p. 57. Spangler, L.E., 1992, personal communication. 58. Thrailkill, John, 1989, Hydrogeologic evaluation of the Kentucky River Coal property: Lexington, Kentucky, unpublished report, 6 p. 59. Thrailkill, John, Dinger, J.S., Scanlon, B.R., and Kipp, J.A., 1985, Drainage determination for the Boone National Guard Center, Franklin County, Kentucky: University of Kentucky, unpublished report, 24 p. 60. Connor, D.G., 1976, The lower reaches of Long Creek, Kentucky: Karst anomaly in Allen County: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University, master's thesis, 146 pp.

34

61. Mylroie, J.E., 1979, Annual report: Western Kentucky speleological survey: Murray State University, 84 p. 62. Cubbage, J.C., 1981, The hydrology of the Sinking Creek system, Logan and Simpson Counties, Kentucky: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University, master's thesis, 83 p. 63. Quinlan, J.F., 1882, Interpretation of dye-tests and related studies, Caldwell Lace Leather Co. waste disposal sites, Logan Co., Kentucky: Mammoth Cave, Ky., unpublished consultant's report, 35 p. 64. Ewers, R.O., 1983, Groundwater flow directions in the vicinity of Caldwell Lace Leather Company, Inc., landspreading site: Richmond, Ky., unpublished consultant's report, 9 p. 65. Able, A.S., 1984, Subsurface drainage systems west of Bowling Green, Warren County, Kentucky: Unpublished ground-water tracing report: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University. 66. Able, A.S., 1985, Subsurface drainage systems of Brush Creek and Clear Fork Creek of Warren County, Kentucky: Unpublished ground-water tracing report: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University. 67. Arruda, J.K., 1985, Dye traces in the Mt. Ayre, Briarwood Manor Estates area: Unpublished ground-water tracing report: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University. 68. Crawford, N.C., 1985a, Groundwater flow and geologic structure, Lost River groundwater basin: Western Kentucky University, Center for Cave and Karst Studies, scale, 1:57,600. 69. Crawford, N.C., 1985b, Groundwater flow in the vicinity of Kentucky Stone Company, Simpson County, Kentucky: Bowling Green, Ky., Crawford and Associates, 6 p. 70. Frauenfelder, A., and Smith, D., 1985, Karst hydrologic study of the Woodburn, Kentucky area: Unpublished ground-water tracing report: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University. 71. Groves, C.G., 1985, Karst hydrogeology of the Sunken Spring drainage basin, Warren County, Kentucky: Unpublished ground-water tracing report: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University. 72. Hill, W.M., and Lopez, L.G., 1985, Subsurface drainage, Rockfield area, Kentucky: Unpublished ground-water tracing report: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University. 73. Quarles, M., and Beaven, A., 1985, Karst hydrologic features of the Plano, Kentucky area: Unpublished ground-water tracing report: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University. 74. Arruda, J.K., 1986, Groundwater flow routes of north Bowling Green, Kentucky: Unpublished ground-water tracing report: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University. 75. Butoryak, K., and Lassaline, E., 1986, Subsurface drainage, Petros/Browning area, Kentucky: Unpublished ground-water tracing report: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University. 76. Dyas, M., and Forsythe, P., 1988, Wilson-Stanley cave system: Central Kentucky Cave Survey, Bulletin 2 p. 143-144. 77. Crawford, N.C., 1989, Unpublished ground-water tracing report: Bowling Green, Kentucky, Crawford and Associates. 78. Stephenson, J.B., 1989, Karst hydrology of the Kelley Spring groundwater basin with emphasis on Copas Cave: Unpublished ground-water tracing report: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University. 79. Villa, R.L., 1990, Preliminary karst groundwater investigation of the area surrounding Auburn, Kentucky: Unpublished ground-water tracing report: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University.

35

80. Aley, T., 1992, Groundwater tracing at the former Rockwell International Facility, Russellville, Kentucky: Protem, Mo., unpublished consultant's report, 77 p. 81. Crawford, N.C., 1992, Investigation of karst groundwater flow and the discharge of PCBs from Arnamann Spring karst groundwater basin, Simpson County, Kentucky: Bowling Green, Ky., Crawford and Associates, 14 p. 82. Howcroft, W.D., and Crawford, N.C., 1993, Potential sources of additional water for Auburn, Kentucky, prepared for city of Auburn and Kentucky Division of Water: Bowling Green, Center for Cave and Karst Studies, Western Kentucky University, 131 p. 83. Bearden, K., 1993, Dye trace from Keith Pond Spring to Lost River Rise: Unpublished ground-water tracing report: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University. 84. Crawford, N.C., 1993, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Bowling Green, Kentucky, Crawford and Associates. 85. Currens, J.C., 1993, Characterization and quantification of nonpoint-source pollutant loads in the Pleasant Grove Spring Basin, Logan County, Kentucky: A conduit-flow-dominated karst aquifer underlying and intensive-use agricultural region: Kentucky Geological Survey, Report of Investigations 1, ser. 12, 151 p. 86. Mull, D.S., 1993, Use of dye tracing to define the direction of ground-water flow from a superfund waste-disposal site in karst terrane, near Auburn, Kentucky: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigation Report 92-4195, 28 p. 87. Crawford, N.C., 1994, Groundwater flow in the vicinity of Consumers 61 Service Station, Russellville, Kentucky: Bowling Green, Ky., Crawford and Associates, 16 p. 88. Crawford, N.C., and Capps, A.S., 1994, Groundwater flow in the vicinity of the Rad Chemical Company, Bowling Green, Kentucky; Unpublished ground-water tracing report: Bowling Green, Kentucky, Crawford and Associates. 89. Quinlan, J.F., 1994, Groundwater movement beneath and near Southern Sanitation, Inc, Russellville, Kentucky, as interpreted from results of tracer tests, with recommendations for groundwater monitoring: Nashville, Tenn., unpublished consultant's report, 19 p. 90. Paylor, R.L., 1995, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University, Department of Geology and Geography. 91. Crawford, N.C., 1997a, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Bowling Green, Kentucky, Crawford and Associates. 92. Crawford, N.C., 1997b, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University, Department of Geology and Geography. 93. Crawford, N.C., 1998, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Bowling Green, Kentucky, Crawford and Associates. 94. Crawford, N.C., 1999, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Bowling Green, Western Kentucky University, Department of Geology and Geography. 95. Ray, J.A., 1999, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Frankfort, Kentucky Division of Water. 96. Ray, J.A., and Nicotera, T.G., 1999, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Frankfort, Kentucky Division of Water.

36

97. Ray, J.A., 1999, Unpublished ground-water tracing data: Frankfort, Kentucky Division of Water. Online_Linkage: http://kgs.uky.edu/kgsweb/download/rivers/karstdye.ZIPData_Quality_Information: Positional_Accuracy: Horizontal_Positional_Accuracy: Horizontal_Positional_Accuracy_Report: Created at a scale of 1:100,000. Should not be used for larger scale applications. Lineage: Process_Step: Process_Description: Metadata imported. Source_Used_Citation_Abbreviation: C:\IMS\karst.xmlSpatial_Data_Organization_Information: Direct_Spatial_Reference_Method: vector Point_and_Vector_Object_Information: SDTS_Terms_Description: SDTS_Point_and_Vector_Object_Type: String Point_and_Vector_Object_Count: 1439Spatial_Reference_Information: Horizontal_Coordinate_System_Definition: Geographic: Latitude_Resolution: 0.000000 Longitude_Resolution: 0.000000 Geographic_Coordinate_Units: Decimal degrees Geodetic_Model: Horizontal_Datum_Name: North American Datum of 1983 Ellipsoid_Name: Geodetic Reference System 80 Semi-major_Axis: 6378206.400000 Denominator_of_Flattening_Ratio: 294.978698Entity_and_Attribute_Information: Detailed_Description: Entity_Type: Entity_Type_Label: Band_1 Attribute: Attribute_Label: ObjectID Attribute_Definition: Internal feature number. Attribute_Definition_Source: ESRI Attribute_Domain_Values: Unrepresentable_Domain: Sequential unique whole numbers that are automatically generated. Attribute: Attribute_Label: Value Attribute_Definition: Feature geometry. Attribute_Definition_Source: ESRI Attribute_Domain_Values: Unrepresentable_Domain: Coordinates defining the features. Attribute: Attribute_Label: Red Attribute: Attribute_Label: Green Attribute: Attribute_Label: Blue Attribute:

37

Attribute_Label: OpacityDistribution_Information: Resource_Description: Downloadable Data Standard_Order_Process: Digital_Form: Digital_Transfer_Information: Transfer_Size: 0.025Metadata_Reference_Information: Metadata_Date: 20100827 Metadata_Contact: Contact_Information: Contact_Person_Primary: Contact_Person: Tom Sparks Contact_Organization: Kentucky Geological Survey Contact_Address: Address_Type: mailing and physical address Address: Kentucky Geological Survey Address: 228 Mining and Mineral Resources Building Address: University of Kentucky City: Lexington State_or_Province: KY Postal_Code: 40506-0107 Contact_Voice_Telephone: 859-323-0552 Contact_Facsimile_Telephone: 859-257-1147 Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: [email protected] Hours_of_Service: 8-5 Metadata_Standard_Name: FGDC Content Standards for Digital Geospatial Metadata Metadata_Standard_Version: FGDC-STD-001-1998 Metadata_Time_Convention: local time Metadata_Extensions: Online_Linkage: http://www.esri.com/metadata/esriprof80.html Profile_Name: ESRI Metadata Profile

38

People contributing to this report include:

Robert Blair, P.G.Geologist, RegisteredKentucky Division of [email protected]

Deven CariganGeologist IIKentucky Division of [email protected]

Phillip O’dell, P.G.Groundwater Hydrologist IIIKentucky Division of WaterPhillip.O’[email protected]

Joseph Ray, P.G.Geologist Registered (retired)Kentucky Division of Water [email protected]

James C Currens, P.G.HydrogeologistKentucky Geological [email protected]

39


