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
GROUND WATER PROTECTION
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA