•

TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD

REPORT 87

RECONNAISSANCE OF THE CHEMICAL

QUALITY OF SURFACE WATERS OF

THE SULPHUR RIVER AND CYPRESS CREEK BASINS, TEXAS

8y

Donald K. LeifesteUnited States Geological Survey

Prepared by the U.S. Geological Surveyin cooperation with the

Texas Water Development Board

December 1968

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT .

INTRODUCTION .

SULPHUR RIVER AND CYPRESS CREEK DRAINAGE BASINS

General Description

Population and Municipalities .

Economic Development

Development of Surface-Water Resources .

CHEMICAL OUALITY OF THE WATER

Chemical-Quality Records.

Streamflow Records .

Environmental Factors and Their Effects on the Chemical Quality of the Water

Geology

Stream flow

Activities of Man

Relation of Ouality of Water to Use

Domestic Purposes.

Industrial Use

Irrigation

Geographic Variations in Water Quality

Dissolved Solids.

Chloride.

Hardness

Other Constituents

Water Quality in Reservoirs . .

Texarkana Reservoir ..

iii

Page

2

2

2

5

5

5

6

6

8

8

8

10

11

11

13

13

13

16

16

'717

17

17

17

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.)

Page

Ellison Creek and Johnson Creek Reservoirs

Lake 0' the Pines .

................................

.....................................

17

17

Water Quality at Potential Reservoir Sites .

Cooper .

Sulphur Bluff 1

Sulphur Bluff 2

Naples 1 ................•.........••.•.•....

Naples 2 .........................................................•..........

Texarkana Enlargement

Franklin County and Titus County

Marshall .

Black Cypress .

Problems Needing Additional Investigation.

REFERENCES ...

TABLES

17

17

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

18

19

1. Reservoirs with Capacities of 5,000 Acre·Feet or More in the Sulphur River andCypress Creek Basins, December 31,1967 6

2.

3.

Source and Significance of Dissolved Mineral Constituents and Properties of Water

Water-Quality Tolerances for Industrial Applications _ .

14

15

4. Index of Surface-Water Records in the Sulphur River and Cypress Creek Basins . .

5. Summary of Chemical Analyses at Daily Stations on Streams in the Sulphur River and

Cypress Creek Basins . .. , .

6. Chemical Analyses of Streams and Reservoirs for Locations Other Than Daily Stations

FIGURES

1. Index Map Showing River Basins and Coastal Areas . ..

22

23

24

3

2.

3.

4.

Map Showing Precipitation and Runoff _ .

Graph Showing Average Annual Runoff, Drainage Area, and 1960 Populations ofMajor River Basins as Percentages of State Totals . ..........................•.....•.... _

Map Showing Major Reservoirs and Potential Damsites _..................•........

iv

4

5

7

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cant'd.)

Page

5. Map Showing Geology and Chemical Composition Of Surface Water .........•........•.•.•.•. 9

6. Graph Showing Relation of Dissolved Solids to Water Discharge for SouthSulphur River Near Cooper .............................................•......... 10

7.

8.

Duration Curves for Dissolved Solids and Water Discharge for South Sulphur RiverNear Cooper. Water Years 1959-66 . .

Photographs Showing Effects of Oil·Field Pollution in the Little Cypress Creek Watershed

11

12

9. Diagram for Classification of Irrigation Waters ... 16

10. Map Showing Oil Fields and Location of Streamflow and Chemical·Quality Data-Collection Sites. . . . 29

11.

12.

Map Showing Dissolved-Solids Concentration of Surface Water .

Map Showing Chloride Concentration of Surface Water .............•...... _...•...........

30

31

13. Map Showing Hardness of Surface Water ...................................•.•........• 32

v

RECONNAISSANCE OF THE CHEMICAL

QUALITY OF SURFAC-E WATERS OF THE

SULPHUR RIVER AND CYPRESS CREEK BASINS, TEXAS

ABSTRACT

The Sulphur Aiver and Cypress Creek basins areadjacent basins in the northeast corner of Texas. Thecombined drainage area in Texas is 6,370 square miles.Both basins are completely within the West Gulf CoastalPlain section of the Coastal Plain physiographic prov­ince. The topography is characterized by irregular rollingand hilly uplands and flat flood plains.

The climate of the study basins ranges from moistsubhumid to humid. The average annual precipitationranges from 42 inches in the west to 48 inches in theeast and averages about 45 inches. About one-fourth ofthe precipitation appears in the streams as runoff.

Surface water in the Sulphur River and CypressCreek basins is generally of good chemical quality and issuitable for most municipal, industrial, and agriculturalpurposes.

The kinds and quantities of minerals dissolved insurface waters of the basins are related principally to thegeology of the runoff area and to rainfall and streamflowcharacteristics, but is also affected by industrialactivities.

The rocks exposed in the basins are sedimentarydeposits of Cretaceous and Tertiary age, composedmainly of sand, marl, chalk, limestone, and clay.Throughout much of the basins, abundant rainfall hasleached much of the readily soluble material from theexposed rocks and soils. and the water in streams isusually low in concentration of dissolved materials.Water from the Cretaceous and Tertiary rocks in theSulphur River basin is generally of a mixed typecontaining less than 250 ppm (parts per million)

dissolved solids, except in the White Oak Creek subbasinwhere oil-field drainage intermittently degrades thequality of the water. In the Cypress Creek basin, theCretaceous rocks contribute a sodium chloride typewater that generally contains less than 250 ppmdissolved solids.

The chloride content of the surface waters isgenerally less than 25 ppm_ Higher concentrations arefound in White Oak Creek near the Talco oil field and inGlade Creek, a tributary to Little Cypress Creek, whereoil-field drainage is affecting the quality of the water.

Surface water of the basins ranges from soft tohard. The South Sulphur, North Sulphur, and SulphurRivers usually contain moderately hard water and WhiteOak Creek has hard water. Cypress Creek has moderatelyhard water in its upper reaches and soft water down­stream_

All the reservoirs in the basins contain water ofvery good quality. The dissolved-solids concentration isusually less than 150 ppm. Water available for storage atpotential reservoirs is also of very good quality.

The Sulphur River and Cypress Creek basins arefree of serious water-quality problems. Continuedmunicipal and industrial growth will increase the waste­disposal burdens of the streams, and planned impound­ments will cause a reduction in the streamflow whichnow aids in waste assimilation. As the water resources ofthe basins are developed, the magnitude and significanceof the probable changes in water quality will necessitatestudies of the resulting problems.

RECONNAISSANCE OF THE CHEMICAL

QUALITY OF SURFACE WATERS OF THE

SULPHUR RIVER AND CYPRESS CREEK BASINS, TEXAS

INTRODUCTION

The investigation of the chemical quality of thesurface waters of the Sulphur River and Cypress Creekbasins is part of a statewide reconnaissance study. Eachmajor river basin in the State is being studied and areport prepared presenting the results of the study and asummary of all available chemical-Quality data. The areaof this report and the river basins for which reports arepublished are shown on Figure 1.

The purpose of this report is to present theavailable information on the water Quality of theSulphur River and Cypress Creek basins that will furtherproper development, control, and use of the waterresources of the area. In the study the following itemswere considered: the nature and amounts of mineralconstituents in solution; the geologic, hydrologic, andcultural influences that determine water quality; theamount and probable source of the salt discharged bythe streams; and the suitability of the water fordomestic, industrial, and irrigation use.

A network of daily chemical·quality stations onprincipal streams in Texas is operated by the U.S.Geological Survey in cooperation with the Texas WaterDevelopment Board and with other federal and localagencies. This network has not been adequate toinventory completely the chemical quality of the surfacewaters of the State_ To supplement the informationbeing obtained by the network, a cooperative statewidereconnaissance by the U.S. Geological Survey and theTexas Water Development Board was begun in Septem­ber 1961. In this reconnaissance, samples for chemicalanalysis are collected periodically at numerous sitesthroughout Texas so that some quality-of.water infor­mation will be available for locations where water·development projects are likely to be built. These dataaid in the delineation of areas having water-qualityproblems and in the identification of probable sources ofpollution, thus indicating areas where more detailedinvestigations are needed.

·2·

SULPHUR RIVER AND CYPRESS CREEKDRAINAGE BASINS

General Description

The Sulphur River and Cypress Creek basins areadjacent basins in the northeast corner of Texas. Thecombined area is bordered on the east by the states ofArkansas and Louisiana, on the south and west by theSabine River basin, and on the north by the Red Riverbasin (Figure n.

The Sulphur River is formed at the extremeeastern edge of Delta County by the junction of theNorth and South Sulphur Rivers. The South SulphurRiver has its source in south·central Fannin County andflows eastward about 60 miles to its junction with theNorth Sulphur River. The North Sulphur River has itssource in southeastern Fannin County and flows east­ward about 50 miles to its junction with the SouthSulphur River.

The Sulphur River, thus formed, flows eastwardabout 75 miles and crosses the Arkansas boundary at theCass-Bowie County line, joining the Red River about 15miles southeast of the Texas·Arkansas boundary. TheSulphur River, which drains 3,558 square miles in Texas,has two major tributaries, Cuthand Creek and White OakCreek.

Cypress Creek has its source in southeasternHopkins County and flows eastward into Caddo Lake atthe Louisiana boundary. Little Cypress Creek, the majortributary, rises in northeastern Wood County and flowseastward about 70 miles before joining Cypress Creekabout 12 miles west of the Texas-Louisiana boundary.Of the many small tributaries, Black Cypress Bayou,Frazier Creek. and Black Bayou are the most significant.The drainage area in Texas of the Cypress Creek basintotals 2,812 square miles.

The study area is completely within the West GulfCoastal Plain section of the Coastal Plain physiographicprovince. Low relief and a gentle gulf ward slope of theland surface characterize this section. Local topographic

RIO GRANO£

E:XPl.-ANATION

[]So..... 10' .nocll On.. , '.<""""'UO"".

'Ipot" 0" I". <n."'..... IlUCIIII, 01.udo<. WGII,. no.. boln puDllt""d

FIgure 1.--lndex Map Showing River BasIns and Coastal ATeas

features are irregular rolling and hilly uplands and flatflood plains and terraces. The streams have wide, nearlyflat flood plains bounded by a series of terraces, whichmay be more than 100 feet higher than the streamchannel.

The climate of the study basins ranges from moistsubhumid to humid (Thornthwaite, 1952, p. 321. Theboundary between the moist sub humid and humid beltsextends across Camp and Titus Counties; east of theboundary the climate is humid. The average annualprecipitation ranges from 42 inches in the west to 48inches in the east and averages about 45 inches_ Meanannual precipitation in the study basins and average(normal) monthly precipitation at two U.S. WeatherBureau stations are shown on Figure 2. Precipitation isfairly evenly distributed throughout the year with Apriland May usually the wettest months and August,September, and October the driest.

- 3-

Runoff is defined as that part of the precipitationappearing in surface streams, and is the same asstreamflow unaffected by artificial storage or diversion(Langbein and Iseri, 1960, p. 17). Temperature, seasonaldistribution of rainfall, storm intensity, infiltration rates,channel configuration, and types and density of vegeta­tion affect the amount of runoff from a drainage basin.

About one-fourth of the precipitation in theSulphur River and Cypress Creek basins appears in thestreams as runoff. The average annual runoff in theSulphur River basin ranges from about 9 inches at theheadwaters in Fannin County to about 13 inches at theTexas-Arkansas line. Annual runoff measured at theformer gaging station Sulphur River near Darden fer the33·year period 1924-56 is given on Figure 2 as meandischarge in cubic feet per second and as inches per year.The average annual runoff was 1,670,000 acre·feet (11.2inches) and ranged from a minimum of 353,100

acre-feet (2.4 inches) in 1925 to a maximum of4,025,000 acre·feet (27.2 inches) in 1945.

The average annual runoff in the Cypress Creekbasin ranges from about 11 to 16 inches but due todifferences in physiography and surface geology doesnot vary in proportion to annual average rainfall. Annualrunoff measured at the former gaging station CypressCreek near Jefferson for the 35-year period 1925-59 isgiven on Figure 2 as mean discharge in cubic feet persecond and as inches per year. The average annual runoffwas 501,600 acre·feet (11.1 inches) and ranged from aminimum of 110,000 acre·feet (2.4 inches) in 1925 to amaximum of 1,346,000 acre·feet (29.7 inches) in 1958.

Population and Municipalities

The Sulphur River and Cypress Creek basinsconstitute about 2.4 percent of the area of Texas andhave about 2.2 percent of the State's population, Thepopulation of the study basins in 1965 was about222,000; 130,000 in the Sulphur River basin and 92,000in the Cypress Creek basin. More than half of the peoplein the basins live in urban areas. The cities in the basinwith populations of more than 2,500 are listed in thefollowing table.

Cypress Creek basi n

CITY POPULATION· CITY POPULATION"

Mt. Pleasant 10,450 Atlanta 4,100

Gilmer 4,560 Daingerfield 3,600

Pittsburg 4,120 Jefferson 2,900

• Population estimates for 1965, from Texas Almanac, 1966-67edition.

Economic Development

Agriculture in the Sulphur River and CypressCreek basins is limited chiefly to livestock raising andtruck farming, Some cotton, grain, and livestock feed isgrown mainly in the extreme western part of theSulphur River basin.

Oil production and processing, lumbering andassociated lumber processing plants, and various lightmanufacturing plants form the economic base in thecentral and eastern parts of the study basin. Hunting,fishing, and associated recreational activities have devel·oped into substantial income producing activities,especially in the vicinity of Texarkana Reservoir, Lake0' the Pines, and Caddo Lake.

Sulphur River basinDevelopment of Surface·Water Resources

CITY

Texarkana,Texas

Sulphur Springs

Commerce

POPULATION"

31,490

10,400

6,200

CITY

New Boston

Clarksville

POPULATION·

3,750

3,700

The Sulphur River and Cypress Creek basinsconstitute only 2.4 percent of the total area of Texasbut have 10 percent of the total runoff for the State.Figure 3 gives the average annual runoff, drainage area,and population of each major river basin in Texas, aspercentages of the State totals. Only the Sabine and

24,-------------------------------------------,

-

EXPLANATION

2­

o ~

4HVI---l

"1---- -----_.~ ~.~-------------------.~-

201--0 Runoll tfrom or.o In ruol onl)'}_--c.,---__>::-n_,,__ _ ~_... ~:s --eJ OroinoQ' or.o Un Tt_OI) ~ <;:: ~ .g18 r--- 0 Populotlon (in rnol) ----~- r-~--<li--i-------------~~

~ ~~161-------------.---1:,1--=-I- §--0-----------------l

E,41------------a-i! ~i::: ~ .~ ...~ 12 1_--,---,,;:-------_1)1--)- I_-t:j---------~--~- -

jl:_~ ~c-c-,n,J_-' f-- i "_~ 6 -~- U--.,....-----li~~~1-- ::; - :' "," . ~ .:. I_---f-

e- ~- ~- Ic-i ••• •••• f- f-~--l- - -e- ~~- f- - - -~ H I~ II ~ 1 11

Figure 3,·-Average Annual Runoff, Drainage Area, and 1960 Populationsof Major River Basins in Texas, as Percentages of State Totals

·5·

Neches River basins have runoff-population ratios asfavorable as the Sulphur River and Cypress Creek basins.

The surface·water resources of the study basins,especially the Sulphur River basin, are to a great extentundeveloped. Texarkana Reservoir, owned by the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers, is the largest reservoir in thearea. A.lthough the 2,654,300 acre·feet capacity reservoirwas built primarily for flood control, it serves as a sourceof municipal supply for the cities of Texarkana, Texas,and Texarkana, Arkansas. Lake 0' the Pines and CaddoLake, both on Cypress Creek, are the only other largereservoirs. Table 1 lists all the reservoirs with more than5,000 acre·feet capacity and gives their capacities anduses. Figure 4 shows the locations of the existingreservoirs, of Cooper Reservoir which Congress hasauthorized for construction, and a number of potentialdamsites which have been considered by various agen­cies.

The Soil Conservation Service of the U.S. Depart­ment of Agriculture administers a program designed todevelop flood·prevention and land· treatment measureson subwatersheds having less than 250,000 acres indrainage area. In the Sulphur River basin, 24 floodwater­retarding structures partly controlling runoff from56,700 acres have been constructed. Because of thesmall direct monetary damage from flooding, nofloodwater·retarding structures have been constructed inthe Cypress Creek basin.

CHEMICAL QUALITY OF THE WATER

Chemical-Quality Records

The collection of chemical·quality data on surfacewater of the Sulphur River and Cypress Creek basins bythe U.S. Geological Survey began in 1947 when asampling station was established on the Sulphur Rivernear Darden. This station was discontinued in 1950, andno daily stations were operated until 1957 when astation was established on the South Sulphur River nearCooper. The Cooper station was discontinued inSeptember 1966 and a new station, Sulphur River nearTalco, was established.

Collection of chemical-quality data for thisreconnaissance began in 1964 and continued throughJuly 1967. Samples were collected periodically frommost of the principal streams and reservoirs. Numerousmiscellaneous samples have been collected by the U.S.Geological Survey in earlier years and the results of theanalyses of these samples are included in this report.Discharge measurements were usually made when asample was collected.

The periods of record of all data-collection sitesare shown in Table 4 and the locations are shown onFigure 10. The chemical-quality data for the dailystations are summarized in Table 5, and the completerecords are published in an annual series of U,S.Geological Survey Water·Supply Papers and in reports of

Table 1.--Reservoirs with Capacities of 5,000 Acre-Feet or More in the Sulphur Riverand Cypress Creek Basins, December 31, 1967

(The purpose for which the impounded waters are used is indicated by the following symbols:M, municipal; I, industflal; FC, flood control; R, recreation.)

RESERVOIR DATE STREAM CAPACITya OWNER COUNTY USECOMPLETED !ACAE·FEETI

A iver Crest 1953 Sulphur 7.200 Texas Power & Light Co. Red Rive,(off channell

Tell,lrkana 1957 Sulphur River 2,654.300 U.S. Army Corps Bowie. Casso M,FCof Engineers Morris. Thus,

Red River

E1I150n Creek 1943 Ellison Creek 24,700 Lone SliJr Ste~1 Co. MOHIS

Johnson Creek 1961 Johnson Creek 10,100 Southwestern Electric Manon I.APower Co

Lake 0' the Pines 1959 Cypress Creek 842,100 U.S. Army Corps Marlon, Camp, M.I.of Engineers Morris, Upshur, FC,R

Harrison

Caddo Lake 1914 Cypress Creek 175.000 do Harrison, AMarion

it Total capacity is lhat capacity belOW the lowest uncontrolled outlet or spillway a"d I' based on the mOSI recenl reservOIrsurvey available.

- 6·

the Texas Water Development Board (see table inreferences). Results of all the periodic and miscellaneousanalyses are given in Table 6.

The Texas State Department of Health makesavailable to the U.S. Geological Survey the data col­lected in its statewide stream-sampling program. Thedata-collection sites are listed in the following table.Most of them are at U.S. Geological Survey gagingstations and the numbers refer to locations on Figure 10.

REFERENCE TEXAS STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTHNO. DATA·COLLECTION SITE

Environmental Factors and Their Effectson the Chemical Quality of the Water

All water from natural sources oontains mineralconstituents dissolved from the rocks and minerals ofthe earth's crust. The water may run into streamsquickly and dissolve only a small amount of material orinfiltrate to ground-water reservoirs and eventually' bedischarged to a stream and thereby be more mineralized.Many environmental factors determine the chemicalquality of a water, the most important of which aregeology, patterns and characteristics of streamflow, andthe activities of man.

3

10

11

17

21

24

27

Sulphur River near Talco

While Oak Creek near Omaha

Sulphur River near Darden

Sulphur River near Maud

Cypress Creek near Pittsburg

Cypress Creek near Jefferson

Cypress Creek I!lt Jefferson

Black Cypress Beyou near Jefferson

Little Cypress Creek near Jefferson

Streamflow Records

Waters usually are classified in various ways toillustrate similarities and differences in composition. Inthe following discussions which relate chemical qualityof water to environmental factors, water is classified onthe basis of geochemical type (principal chemical con·stituents) and hardness.

Waters are classified as to geochemical type on thebasis of the predominant cations and anions in equiva­lents per million. For example, water is referred to as asodium chloride type if the sodium ion constitutes 50percent or more of the cations (positively charged ions)and the chloride ion constitutes 50 percent or more ofthe anions (negatively charged ions). Waters in whichone cation and one anion are not clearly predominantare classified as mixed types and are identified by thenames of all the major ions.

Streamflow in the Sulphur River and CypressCreek basins was measured as early as 1924 when theU.S. Geological Survey established streamflow stationson the Sulphur River near Darden and on Cypress Creeknear Jefferson. Over 30 years of continuous record wascollected at both sites before the oonstruction ofreservoirs forced the discontinuance of both stations. In1966 the Geological Survey operated 9 streamflowstations in the study basins, 5 of which have beenoperated for over 15 years. The U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers maintains reservoir-content gages onTexarkana Reservoir and Lake 0' the Pines and hasmade numerous discharge measurements at various sitesin the study basins.

The periods of record for all the streamflowstations are given in Table 4 and the locations are shownon Figure 10. Records of discharge and stage of streams,and stage and contents of lakes and reservoirs from 1924to 1960 have been published in the annual series of U.S.Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers (see table inreferencesl. Beginning with the 1960 water year, stream­flow records have been released by the GeologicalSurvey in annual reports on a State boundary basis (U.S.Geological Survey, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964b, 1965,1966). Summaries of discharge records giving monthlyand annual totals have been published (U.S. GeologicalSurvey, 1960, 1964a; Texas Board of Water Engineers,1958),

·8-

On the basis of hardness, waters are classified asfollows: Soft, 0 to 60 ppm (parts per million) hardn<!ss;moderately hard, 61 to 120 ppm; hard, 121 to 180 ppm;and very hard, more than 180 ppm.

Geology

When industrial and municipal influences aresmall, the chemical character of a river water isdependent primarily on the mineral and physical proper·ties of the geologic formations that are traversed and thetime the water is in contact with the rocks.

The amount of minerals in the rocks and soilsavailable for solution is decreased by leaching; therefore,in areas of high rainfall such as the Sulphur River andCypress Creek basins, much of the readily solublematerials have been removed from the surface rocks andsoils, and surface runoff usually contains less than 250ppm dissolved solids. Ground-water inflow is morehighly mineralized than surface runoff, but the base flowof most streams in the Sulphur River and Cypress Creekbasins seldom exceeds 500 ppm dissolved solids.

Some streams in the Sulphur River and CypressCreek basins drain outcrops of more than one geologicformation and the water is therefore a composite of

several geochemical types. Also the mineral compositionof a particular formation may differ from area to area.

Figure 5 shows the geochemical character andionic concentration of some surface waters in the studybasins. The equiaxial quadrilaterals depict the concen­tration of the ions in solution. The total ionic concen·tration in equivalents per million is equal to twice thelength of either the vertical or horizontal axis. If themajor part of the quadrilateral is in the lower leftquarter, sulfate or chloride predominate among theanions and sodium or potassium among the cations. Ifthe major part is in the upper right quarter, calcium ormagnesium and carbonate or bicarbonate are predomi­nant.

quality, probably because of oil-field waste disposal inthe watershed. The quality of the water in TexarkanaReservoir, however, has not been seriously affected bythe sometimes poor-quality water from White OakCreek.

Cypress Creek rises on Tertiary rocks composedmainly of sand, silt, clay, lignite, and glauconite. Limiteddata for Cypress Creek north of Pittsburg Isite 16)indicate that the low flow is a sodium chloride typewater usually containing near 250 ppm dissolved solids.Little Cypress Creek, which drains Tertiary rocks similarto those drained by Cypress Creek, contributes waterthat is lower in dissolved-solids content, but also of thesodium chloride type.

The patterns and characteristics of streamflowusually affect the chemical character of water in streams.In most streams where the flow is not regulated byupstream reservoirs, the concentrations of dissolved­mineral constituents vary inversely with the stage of thestream. The base flow, or sustained low flow, of a streamis predominantly water that has entered as ground-watereffluent. Usually this water has been in contact withrocks and soils for a sufficient time to dissolve part oftheir soluble materials. Conversely, at high stages mostof the flow of a stream consists of surface runoff thathas been in contact with exposed rocks and soils foronlya short time. Therefore, the dissolved-solids contentof a stream is usually lowest during periods of high flow.This relationship is generally applicable to the water ofthe Sulphur River and Cypress Creek basins. Figure 6shows the relationship of dissolved solids to water

Streamflow

0 , J " , ,•• EXPLANATION

• Composite or doily somple

• Average for selected discharge0 range

• -·• •

0 •.... •

- • •• • ~ •• •

• • --• •~.• • •

• .• • ••

0•• •

~ 30

'"'t.~

.,;o~200~

ow>-'o~

i5 10

The North Sulphur River rises on sedimentaryrocks of Late Cretaceous age composed mainly offossiliferous sand, marl, and chalk. Water from this areais generally d:lute and of a mixed type; calcium, sodium,bicarbonate, and sulfate are the principal ions anddissolved-solids content is usually near 250 ppm. TheSouth Sulphur River rises on sedimentary rocks of LateCretaceous age composed mainly of calcareous clay andlimestone. Runoff from these rocks is a dilute, calciumbicarbonate type water. Downstream from the conflu­ence of the North and South Forks, the Sulphur Riverdrains Cretaceous and Tertiary rocks similar to those inthe headwater reaches. Near Talco (site 3) the water is amixed type, with calcium and bicarbonate the principalions. Between Talco (site 3) and Darden (site 11) twolarge tributaries, Cuthand Creek and White Oak Creek,enter the river. Cuthand Creek drains Cretaceous andTertiary rocks and contributes a relatively dilute waterof a mixed type. White Oak Creek, which also drainsCretaceous and Tertiary rocks, is highly variable in

50

10 100DISCHARGE, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND

1000 10.000

Figure 6.--Relation of Dissolved Solids to Water Discharge for South Sulphur River Near Cooper

. 10·

Quality-of-water studies usually are concernedwith determining the suitability of water-judged by thechemical, physical, and biological characteristics-for itsproposed use. In the Sulphur River and Cypress Creekbasins, surface water is used primarily for municipal andindustrial supplies and a limited amount is used forirrigation. This report considers only the chemicalcharacter of the water and its relation to the principaluses.

Relation of Quality of Water to Use

The activities of man often have a deteriorativeeffect on the chemical quality of water. Oil-field brine,municipal and industrial wastes, and irrigation returnflows increase the concentration of dissolved materials instreams.

Activities of Man

Brine is produced in nearly all oil field:i and itmay, if improperly handled, eventually reach thestreams. The composition of oil-field brine varies; butthe principal chemical constituents in order of magni­tude of their concentration (in ppm) are generallychloride, sodium, calcium, and sulfate. The Texas WaterCommission and Texas Water Pollution Control Board(1963) compiled an inventory conducted by the TexasRailroad Commission which showed that approximately80 million barrels (10,800 acre-feetl of brine wasproduced in 1961 in the Sulphur River and CypressCreek basins. Oil is produced in several areas in the studybasins (see Figure 10), but most of the brine reported bythe Texas Water Commission was produced in the Talcofield in northern Franklin and Titus Counties and in theEast Texas field in southeastern Upshur County.Althou9h almost 99 percent of the brine in both fields isreinjected into the subsurface, some deterioration ofwater quality is occurring in both areas. Chemicalanalyses of samples from White Oak Creek near MountVernon (site 8) and near Omaha (site 10) stronglyindicate that oil-field brines are reaching that stream.The Sulphur River also receives runoff from the Talcofield but is not affected as seriously as White Oak Creek.Smith, Montgomery, and Blakey (19661 reported thatsaline inflows to Little Cypress Creek apparentlyresulted from oil-field activity in that watershed. Thephotographs in Figure 8 show the effects of oil-fieldbrines in the Glade Creek subbasin. Glade Creek emptiesinto Little Cypress Creek just downstream from the OreCity streamflow station (site 25).

All natural water contains dissolved-mineral mat­ter. Most of this mineral matter in water is dissociatedinto charged particles, or ions. Principal cations (positivecharged) in natural water are calcium (Ca), magnesium(Mgl. potassium (KI, sodium (Na), and iron (Fel. Theprincipal anions (negative charged) are carbonate (C03),bicarbonate (HC031, sulfate (5°4), chloride (CII,

1./

/,/-

--------~~-,

/" IJ....4Tl:R OIS0\4RG(

, /~

, 1/, , ,'" " , "

'"

F fgure 7.--Duration Curves for Dissolved Solids and WaterDischarge for South Sulphur River Near Cooper

Water Years 1959-66

PERCEN1b-GE OF TIME 11141 O~SOLVEO- SOLIDS CONCENTRb-TIONEOUb-LEO OR EXCEEDED 11141 SHOWN

PERCENT4GE OF Tlt.lE 11141 WUER DISClj4RGE EQUALED OR ....ASLESS THAN 1ljAT SHOWN

10,000

"

discharge for the South Sulphur River near Cooper (site1). Obviously the salt content has varied over relativelywide ranges, and the probability of accurately estimatingchemical quality from water discharge is poor. However,the mean concentration within selected discharge rangesshows a definite trend in quality. Because ground-waterinflow is small and the stream is subject to periods of noflow, the points are very scattered during low flows.Many of the low-flow values plotted occurred after a riseand do not represent ground-water inflow. Figure 7shows duration curves of dissolved solids and waterdischarge for the same site (site 1). The duration curvesare cumulative frequency curves that show percent oftime which specified concentrations were equaled orexceeded and percent of time that water discharge wasequal to or less than a specified discharge during aspecified period. The steep slope of the flow-durationcurve denotes a highly variable stream whose flow islargely from direct runoff. The curves also show theinverse relationship of rates of water discharge to theconcentration of dissolved solids.

- 11 -

Oil-well site showing brine pOllution which Is killingvegetation and contributing to soli erosion.

Brine disposal pOnd adjacent to Glade Creek showIngthe devastating effects of polluted surface water.

Figure B.--Effects of Oil-Field Pollution in the Little Cypress Creek Watershed

- 12-

fluoride IF!, and nitrate IN03). Other constituents andproperties are often determined to help define thechemical and physical quality of water. Table 2 lists theconstituents and properties commonly determined bythe U.S. Geological Survey. and includes a resume' oftheir sources and significance.

Domestic Purposes

Because of differences in individuals, varyingamounts of water used, and other factors, it is difficultto define the safe limits for the mineral constituentsusually found in water. The limits usually accepted inthe United States for drinking water are the drinking.water standards established by the U.S. Public HealthService. Originally established in 1914 to oontrol theQuality of water used on interstate carriers for drinkingand culinary purposes, these standards have been revisedseveral times. The latest revision was in 1962 (U.S.Public Health Service, 19621. These standards have beenaccepted by the American Water Works Association andby most of the state departments of public health asminimum standards for all public water supplies.

The maximum concentrations permined by thesestandards are given for selected constituents in thefollowing table:

CONSTITUENT MAXIMUM CONCENTRATION(PPM)

Sulfate 250

Chloride 250

Nitrate 45

Fluoride .9a

Dissolved solids 500

a Based on temperature records for Clarksville

In the Sulphur River and Cypress Creek basins theconcentrations of these constituents are considerablylower than the maximum concentrations recommended.

Industrial Use

The quality requirements vary greatly for almostevery industrial application, as is indicated by thewater·quality tolerances given in Table 3. One require·ment of most industries is that the concentrations of thevarious constituents in the water remain relativelyconstant. When concentrations of undesirable substancesin water vary, constant monitoring is required.

Hardness is one of the more important propertiesof water that affects its utility for industrial purposes.

·13 -

Excessive hardness is objectionable because it contri·butes to the formation of scale in steam boilers, pipes,water heaters, radiators, and various other equipmentwhere water is heated, evaporated, or treated withalkaline materials. The accumulation of scale increasescosts for fuel, labor, repairs, and replacement, andlowers the quality of many wet·processed products.However, some calcium hardness may be desirablebecause calcium carbonate sometimes forms protectivecoatings on pipes and other equipment and reducescorrosion.

The corrosive property of a water receives con·siderable attention in industrial water supplies. A highconcentration of dissolved solids in a water may beclosely associated with the corrosive property of thewater especially if chloride is present in appreciablequantities. Water that contains a high concentration ofmagnesium chloride may be highly corrosive because thehydrolysis of this salt yields hydrochloric acid.

Surface water of the Sulphur River and CypressCreek basins is relatively low in dissolved solids and onlymoderately hard, therefore very little treatment isnecessary to make it suitable for use by many industries.

Irrigation

The chemical composition of a water is animportant factor in determining its usefulness for irriga·tion because the irrigation water should not adverselyaffect the productivity of the land. The extent to whichchemical quality limits the suitability of a water forirrigation depends on factors such as: the nature,composition, and drainage of the soil and subsoil; theamounts of water used and the methods of application;the kind of crops grown; and the climate of the region,including the amounts and distribution of rainfall.Because these factors are highly variable, every methodof classifying water for irrigation is somewhat arbitrary.

The most important characteristics in determiningthe quality of irrigation water, according to the U.S.Salinity Laboratory Staff (1954, p. 69!, are: (1) totalconcentration of soluble salts, (21 relative proportion ofsodium to other cations, (3) concentration of boron orother elements that may be toxic, and (41 the excess ofequivalents of bicarbonate over equivalents of calciumplus magnesium.

High concentration of dissolved salts in irrigationwater may cause a buildup of salts in the soil solution,and may make the soil saline. The increased salinity ofthe soil may drastically reduce crop yields by decreasingthe ability of the plants to take up water and essentialplant nutrients from the soil solution. The tendency ofirrigation water to cause a high buildup of salts in thesoil is called the salinity ha2ard of the water. Thespecific conductance of the water is used as an index ofthe salinity hazard.

Tab~ 2.-Source and Significance of OiDOlved Mineral Constituenu and Properties of Water

CONSTITUENTOR

PROPERTY

SlIu:a (Si02)

Iron (F.)

Calcium (Ca) andmagnesium (Mgl

SOdium (Nal andpotassIum CKI

Blca,bonale CHC0 3 1and carbon8le (C03)

Cnlo,lde (Cll

Fluoride (F)

Oinolv.d soltds

SpeCIllC conductancelmlc,omnos" 25 0 CI

Hvdrogen Ionconc.ntrat,on (pH)

SOURCE OR CAUSE

Dissolved from prectlcallv allfocks and lOils, cOmmon Iv I.ssIhan 30 PPm. Hlgn conc.ntrl·tlons, "mucn" 100 Ppm.o-nl'·altv occur In hlgnlV alkilin.wet.".

Dissol....d from prectlcallv allrocks Ind soils. Mav also bed.rlv.d ffOm Iron pipes. pumps,and olner 'Qulpm.nt. More Inan1 or 2 ppm of iron In surfacIwalln gln.rallv indicate Icldwutes from mine drainage orOlher sou,cn.

Dlssol....d Irom practicallv all so Usand rocks. but especiallv fromIlmeSlone. dolomlt., and gypsum.Calcium and megneslum ar.found in la,ge Quant;lies In somebrines Magnesium is present Inlarge QUlntitlls ,n sea water

Dlssol ...ed from practicallv allrocks and soils. Found aho In,nc,.nt bftn.s. Sl' wall'. indusIflal brines. and sewage

ActIon of carbon dloxld. In wateron carbonall rocks such IS 11m.Slone and dolomite.

Dissolv.d from rocks and soilscontaining gYPSUm, I,on sulfides,and Otnl, sulfur compounds.Common Iv pr",ent in mlna watersand In 'lOme InduS!r1al waul'

Olssol....d f,om rocks and soilsPrlsent In sewage and lound In.....ge lImounts ,n ancienl b"nes,s.a water. and induu,iai brones

Dissol....d In small 10 minul'Quantllies hom mou rocks andsolh Add.d 10 many Willen bVfluofldat,on of munlc,pal suPplies

O.caVlng organic m,t1er. Slwa~,

flrtllllllS and nluates ,n soU

Chlelly mlneflll constituents dissol....d from rocks and SallsIncludes some wate, of crvslltlillllion

In mOSl waters nearlv Ill! In.nll,dness Is due 10 calcium andmagnesium. All Ih. m.lalliccations Olhe, Inan the alkalimllals alsO cause nardness

Acids. aCId generating Silts. andhlMl carbon dlox,de lower thl pHCarbon".s. blcarbon8les. hvdrol<ides. and phOsph8l". SIlicates.Ind borates raisa Ine pH

. 14 -

SIGNIFICANCE

Forms nard Kil. in pipes and boilen. C,r,ied over In st.am ofnlgh preuur. bolllls to form deposits on bladl$ of turbines.Inhibits deterlorallon of zeolite·tvp. W8ler sohen.rs.

On exposure to lir, iron in gfound wat.r oxidizes to reddish.brown preclplt"•. Mar. tnan about 0.3 ppmnaln laundrvandu.tenslls fllddish brown. Obj.ctionable for fOOd processing, tex.tile processing, b,vlreges. Ice manufacture, brewing, and otherprOC.UIS. U.S. PUblic Heallh S.,vlce (1962) drlnking.watlrstandllrdl st8le that Iron snould nOI Ixceld 0.3 ppm. LargerQuanlitles cause unpl."ant t8511 and favor growth of i,onbllctlrill.

Cause mOSl of tnl na,dness and sClle·fo,ming prOPI.. i'$ ofwater. soap consuming (lie nardness!. Waters low in calcium andmagnesium deslfed in electroplatlllg, tanning. dyeing. and intelltile milnufacturing.

Large amounlS. ,n combination w'lh chloride, 91.... a sally taste.Mod."t. Quantities nave littl. effecl on In. usefulness of Wlllllffo, most purposes. Sodium salts mav cause 10aminQ in steamboilers and I high conllnl may limit the ule of waur for"r,gatlon

Bicarbonate and carbonate produce alkalinity. Bicarbonates ofcalcium 'nd mlgneSlum decompose ,n st.,m boilers and nOtwater fac,IiIIIS 10 form Kale and release corroSIve ca,bon diollidegu. In combinatIon w'lh calc'um and magnes,um, cause ca,bon·ate hardness

Sulfate in Wlller containing calc'um lorms hard scale in Slelmboilers. In largl amOUnlS. sullale In combination Wllh other ionsgives bltt.r IUle to water Some Cillcium IUlfat. is consideredb.nelicial in Ih. brewing process. U.S. Publ,c H'lIlln Ser... ice119621 dtlnklng wlltllr sundards recommend thlll the sullateconlent snould nOI Illceed 250 ppm.

In IMge Ilmounu in combInation With sodium. gives sllllV taste todrinking w,,"r I" large Quantllies. inc,eases the corrosiveness ofwat.r. US Public Hllliln Ser... ,ce (1962) drinking waler SIandards ,ecommend tnat lne cnlOrlde conlent should nOI ellceed250 ppm.

Fluo'id. III d'inking wall, reduces Ine ,ncldence of 100tn decaywhen tne water il consum.d durong Ii'll p ...od of enamelcalcif'cat,on However. 'I mav cause mOttlong 01 Ihe teeth,dep.nding on Ine concentfilllOn of fluorid•. Ine Ige of Ihe child,amounl 01 dronk,ng wate, consumed. and suscePliblll,V of theInd,v,dual (Maier. 19501

Cone.nual,on much gr.ale, Ihan Ihe local ""erage mav suggeslpollution US PUbtoc Health Serv,c. (19621 drinkong wate<slandMds wggeS! a "m,1 of 45 PDm. Walers 01 h,gh ",Iralecon lent have be.n reported 10 b. Ihe cause of melh.moglobin.mia (an oltln lalal disease In infanul and Iherelore snouldnOI be used in ,nlanl f.edmg. Nlulle hIlS bun shown 10 beh.lplul III f.duClllg Inllr crVSlattone cracking of boiler st.el. IIencourages growth oj algae and Olne, organISms wnlcn p,oduceundesirabl. lastes a"d OdO,s

US. Public Heallh Service (19621 d'lnklng water standa,dsrecommend In", wate,s conlllilling mOfe than 500 ppm dissolvedsolids nOI be used ,I Olher less mIneralized supplies are aVlllilbleWlIIers containing more 11'1." 1.000 ppm dissolved solids ilreunsuitllble fo' many pu,poses

Consumes SOllP befole a lalner Will lo,m. Deposils soap curd onbatl1lubs Hard WlUe. fo,ms sCllle in boilers. WlIlllO heaters. andpipos. H",dn.ss eQu,valenl to Ihe bica,bonate and carbonate "catlld carbonale nlllrdness Anv nardn.ss III lI11cess ot tnls 'scatted non carbonale ha,dness. Waters of ha,dness as much as 60ppm .re conlidered sofl. 61 120 ppm, moderately nll,d. 121.180ppm hard, mO'1 than 180 ppm. very hard.

Indicates degree 01 mlnerallzallon SplCd,c condUClance is (I

measu,e 01 Ihe CllpaCllV 01 Ine water to conduCI an eleclrlccur,en1 Var,es with concentfllll10n and deg,ee 01 ,onlz,t,on ofthl conSlitulnlS

A pH of 7.0 mdicales neutralltV 01 iI Solullon Values nlgner Ihan7.0 d.noll incre"mg alkalinllY, values lower than 70 IndIca I.increasing acidilV pH IS a measure 01 the aCtlVltV of thenvdrog.n Ions Coftosiv.ness 01 water g.n•• ,llv ,"creases wltndecrlasing pH. However. exce",v.lv alkalln. waten mav alsOanack mltals

.~

!".i

, ,, ,

:of~--

o­,

•

: ~1,. -. -.;) ..............':'i~i.. ::l .. ::l

~J;;;

..

-u : ~U

•uu

00

o

.,

000~.~

goo

o~~~ ~,cO"';"': ~~. ,

~N

o·

~N

o·

~..;~.-

u.-

.u

.,."

."•;;"

·15·

The concentration of dissolved solids in surfacewater of the Sulphur River and Cypress Creek basins isgenerally less than 250 ppm (Figure 11). The NorthSulphur River generally has dissolved-solids concen­trations of near 250 ppm. The South Sulphur Riverusually has concentrations of between 100 and 150ppm. The weighted-average concentration for the period1959-65 was 140 ppm. Drainage from the Talco oil fieldslightly degrades the water of the Sulphur River andWhite Oak Creek, but good-quality inflow downstreamfrom the oil field, and flood runoff, is of sufficientquantity so that the dissolved-solids content ofTexarkana Reservoir is usually less than 150 ppm.

Dissolved Solids

Representative data from analyses of water fromdifferent sources in the Sulphur River and Cypress Creekbasins are plotted in Figure 9. The data show that thesodium and salinity hazards are low or medium for allsurface water in the basins.

Geographic Variations in Water Quality

In the upper reaches of Cypress Creek, low andmoderate flows frequently contain more than 250 ppmdissolved solids. Chemical-quality data on flood flowsare lacking, but Lake 0' the Pines usually contains about100 ppm dissolved solids indicating that high flows areof excellent quality. Little Cypress Creek generallycontains less than 150 ppm dissolved solids. Oil-fielddrainage is degrading Little Cypress Creek in northernGregg County but the effect is minor when consideringweighted averages. Tributary inflow in the eastern partof the Cypress Creek basin usually contains less than 100ppm dissolved solids.

Variations in dissolved solids, hardness, and chlo­ride in the streams in the Sulphur River and CypressCreek basins are shown in Figures 11, 12, and 13. Thesevalues are based on the discharge-weighted averageooncentrations as calculated from chemical-quality data.The discharge-weighted average represents approximate­ly the chemical character of the water if all thewater passing a point in the stream were impounded in areservoir and mixed, with no adjustments for evapora­tion, rainfall, or chemical changes that might occurduring storage. For many of the streams chemical­quality data are limited, especially data on flood flows.All the streams will at times have concentrationsexceeding those shown, but the averages shown on themaps at a potential reservoir site are indicative of thetype of water that would be stored in a reservoir.

SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE. IN MICRO MHOS AT 2S·C

100 2 , • S 67 8 1000 2 , • 5000

B; <T '0 EXPLANATION 50, ~2.

.. L..... 0' The P,.....

• T..ot~1lG A.H''o01f

2. • SlrJph", A' ........0. Omol'lcl

• A Lltlle crp,'" C,••k MO' J.Il.,..",i ~ 2' 0 Caddo lJIk.~

0 Crpr... C'lIk ... eo, P,Il'bII,g22

00

20~ 520

• ~

~ z: 18 -xQ

~ ! "~~ ~16

3 ~ 0

~~

~14

~,

~~'2

~'O 10

•• - •,~

•A 0

20 .. •• 0

250 150 22~0

CI C2 C' C.,,. IIUMUllI ,,~ V(flY ..,,,,,

The U.S. Salinity Laboratory Staff has prepared aclassification for irrigation waters in terms of salinityand sodium hazards. Empirical equations were used indeveloping a diagram, reproduced in modified form asFigure 9, which uses SAR and specific conductance inclassifying irrigation waters. With respect to salinity andsodium hazards, waters are divided into four classes:low, medium, high, and very high. The classificationrange encompasses those waters which can be used forirrigation of most crops on most soils as well as thosewhich are generally unsuitable for irrigation.

where the concentrations of the ions are expressed inequivalents per million.

Na'SAR

~ca++; Mg"·

High concentrations of sodium relative to theconcentrations of calcium and magnesium in irrigationwater can adversely affect soil structure. Cations in thesoil solution become fixed on the surface of the soilparticles; calcium and magnesium tend to flocculate theparticles, whereas sodium tends to deflocculate them.This adverse effect on soil structure caused by highsodium concentrations in an irrigation water is called thesodium hazard of the water. An index used for pre­dicting the sodium hazard is the sodium-adsorption ratio(SARI. which is defined by the equation:

SALINITY HAZARD

Figure 9.--Classificatlon of Irrigation Waters

- 16·

Chloride

The chloride content of surface waters of theSulphur River and Cypress Creek basins is generally lessthan 25 ppm (Figure 121. The North Sulphur andSulphur Rivers contain less than 25 ppm chloridethroughout their reach and the South Sulphur Rivercontains less than 10 ppm. White Oak Creek containsless than 25 ppm chloride upstream from the Talco oilfield and between 50 and 100 ppm downstream. Theheadwater reaches of Cypress Creek contain slightlymore than 25 ppm chloride but downstream fromPittsburg better quality inflow decreases the conCen·tration to less than 25 ppm. Little Cypress Creekcontains less than 25 ppm upstream from the oil field innorthern Gregg County and more than 50 ppm down·stream. Tributary streams in the eastern part of the basingenerally contain less than 25 ppm chloride.

Hardness

Surface water of the study basins generally rangesfrom soh to hard (Figure 13). The South Sulphur, NorthSulphur, and Sulphur Rivers are moderately hardthroughout most of their course. White Oak Creekcontains hard water throughout its course. CypressCreek has moderately hard water in its upper reaches,but downstream from Pittsburg, Cypress Creek and allits tributaries have soft water.

Other Constituents

Other constituents of importance in the evaluationof the quality of a water include silica, sodium.bicarbonate. sulfate. fluoride. and nitrate.

Most of the streams in the Sulphur River basincontain less than 10 ppm silica and most of the streamsin the Cypress Creek basin contain less than 20 ppm.

Sodium concentrations are generally less than 50ppm in most of the streams. In those waters having highchloride concentrations. sodium occurs in larger quanti·ties. It is, therefore, present in highest concentrations inthose areas affected by oil·field brine.

Bicarbonate is the principal anion in most watersof the Sulphur River basin. Bicarbonate concentrationsare subject to considerable variation and althoughconcentrations of over 200 ppm are not uncommon. theweighted·average concentration is usually less than 150ppm. In the Cypress Creek basin. bicarbonate concen·trations are much lower. always averaging less than 50ppm.

Sulfate concentrations are generally less than 50ppm in both basins, although higher concentrations arefound in those streams receiving oil-field drainage.

. 17·

Tributary inflow in the eastern part of the basins usuallycontains less than 10 ppm sulfate.

Fluoride and nitrate concentrations are lowthroughout the study basins; fluoride concentrationsseldom exceed 0.5 ppm. and nitrate concentrations aregenerally less than 2.0 ppm.

Water Quality in Reservoirs

The principal reservoirs in the basins were sampledduring the reconnaissance and the chemical analyses aregiven in Table 6. Analyses are also available for some ofthe small reservoirs used for public supply (Sundstromand others, 1948).

Texarkana Reservoir.- Texarkana Reservoir wasbuilt primarily for flood-control purposes. but alsoprovides municipal water for the cities of Texarkana.Texas, and Texarkana, Arkansas. Three analyses during1966 show that the water usually contains between 100and 150 ppm dissolved solids, is moderately hard (61 to120 ppml. and usually contains about 15 to 20 ppmchloride and about 20 ppm sulfate.

Ellison Creek and Johnson Creek Reservoirs.­These privately owned reservoirs supply industrial waterfor the Lone Star Steel plant and cooling water for twosteam-etf'ctric plants. Chemical analyses of the storedwater are not available, but the water should be similarto that stored in Lake 0' the Pines.

Lake O' the Pines.-The water in Lake O' the Pinesis of good quality as shown in one analysis in 1965 andtwo in 1966. In August 1965 and January 1966, thewater contained about 100 ppm dissolved solids, but inJuly 1966, the dissolved·solids content was 60 ppm andmost constituents were only about half the Januaryconcentrations.

Water Quality at Potential Reservoir Sites

One of the purposes of the r'econnaissance was toappraise the quality of the water which will be availablefor storage in future reservoirs. These evaluations arebased on present conditions. Population growth, indus·trial expansion, and the continuing development ofwater resources will cause significant changes in thequality of the water that can be impounded.

Cooper. -A reservoir on the South Sulphur Riverat the Cooper site would impound water of excellentquality. Records for the daily sampling station SouthSulphur River near Cooper indicate that the impoundedwater would be a calcium bicarbonate type and containless than 150 ppm dissolved solids, less than 10 ppmchloride, less than 20 ppm sulfate. and be moderatelyhard .

REFERENCES

American Water Works Association, 1950. Water qualityand treatment: Am. Water Works Assoc. Manual, 2ded., tables 3·4, p. 66·67.

Baker, E. T., Long, A. T., Reeves, R. D., and Wood, L.A .• 1963, Reconnaissance investigation of the ground­water resources of the Red River, Sulphur River, andCypress Creek basins, Texas: Texas Water Comm.Bull. 6306, 127 p.

Darton, N. H.. Stephenson, L. W.• and Gardner, Julia,1937, Geologic map of Texas: U.S. Geo!. Surveymap.

Hughes, l. S., and Leifeste, O. K.. 1965, Reconnaissanceof the chemical quality of surface waters of theSabine River basin, Texas and Louisiana: U.S. Geo!.Survey Water·Supply Paper 1B09·H, 71 p.

__ 1967, Reconnaissance of the chemical quality ofsurface waters of the Neches River basin, Texas: U.S.Geol. Survey Water·Supply Paper 1B39·A. 72 p.

Hughes, L. 5., and Rawson, Jack, 1965, Reconnaissanceof the chemical Quality of surface waters of the SanJacinto River basin, Texas: Texas Water Deve!. BoardRept. 13, 45 p.

Kunze, H. L., and Lee, J. N., 1968, Reconnaissance ofthe chemical Quality of surface waters of theCanadian River basin, Texas: Texas Water Devel.Board Rept. B6, 33 p.

Langbein, W. B., and Iseri, K. T., 1960, Generalintroduction and hydrologic definitions: U.S. Geo!.Survey Water·Supply Paper 154·A, p. 1·29.

Leifeste, D. K., and Hughes, L. S., 1967, Reconnaissanceof the chemical Quality of surface waters of theTrinity River basin. Texas: Texas Water Deve!. BoardRept. 67, 65 p.

Leifeste. D. K., and Lansford, M. W.• 1968, Recon­naissance of the chemical Quality of surface waters ofthe Colorado River basin, Texas: Texas Water Devel.Board Rept. 71. 7B. p.

Maier, F. J.• 1950. Fluondation of public water supplies:Jour. Am. Water Works Assoc .• v. 42, pI. 1, p.1120·1132.

Rawson. Jack. 1967, Study and interpretation of chemi·cal Quality of surface waters in the Brazos Riverbasin, Texas: Texas Water Devel. Board Rept. 55, 113p.

Smith, J. T., Montgomery, J. H.. and Blakey, J. F.,1966, Base·flow studies, Little Cypress Creek,

. 19·

Upshur. Gregg. and Harrison Counties. Texas. Quan­tity and Quality. January and June 1964: TexasWater Deve!. Board Rept. 25. 23 p.

Sundstrom. R. W., Hastings, W. W.• and Broadhurst. W.L., 1948, Public Water supplies in eastern Texas: U.S.Geol. Survey Water·Supply Paper 1047, 2B3 p.

Texas Almanac, 1966, A. H. Belco Corp.• Dallas. Texas.736 p.

Texas Board of Water Engineers, 1958, Compilation ofsurface water records in Texas through September1957: Texas Board Water Engineers Bull. 580l-A,503 p.

Texas Water CommiSSion and Texas Water PollutionControl Board, 1963, A statistical analysis of data onoil-field brine production in Texas for the year 1961from an inventory conducted by the Texas RailroadCommission: Summary volume, 81 p.

Thornthwaite, C. W., 1952, Evapotranspiration in thehydrologic cycle, '" The physical and economicfoundation of natural resources, v. II, The physicalbasis of water supply and its principal uses: U.S.Cong., House of Representatives, Committee onInterior and Insular Affairs, p. 25·35.

U.S. Geological Survey, 1960, Compilation of records ofsurface waters of the United States through Septem­ber 1950, Part 7, Lower Mississippi River basin: U.S.Geol. Survey Water·Supply Paper 1311, 606 p.

__1961, Surface water records of Texas, 1961: U.S.Geo!. Survey open-file rept.

__1962, Surface water records of Texas, 1962: U.S.Geol. Survey open-file rept.

__1963, Surface water records of Texas, 1963: U.S.Geo!. Survey open-file rept.

__1964a, Comoilatlon of records of surface waters ofthe United States, October 1950 to September 1960,Part 7, Lower MississippI River basin: U.S. Geol.Survey Water·Supply Paper 1731, 552 p.

__1964b, Surface water records of Texas. 1964: U.S_Geo!. Survey open-file rept.

__1964c, Water quality records in Texas, 1964: U.S.Geo!. Survey open-file repL

__1965, Water resources data for Texas, 1965--Part1, Surface water records; Part 2. Water qualityrecords: U.S. Gool. Survey open-file rept.

Sulphur B/ulf 1. -Sulphur Bluff 1 would beimmediately downstream from Cooper Reservoir andshould store water of generally the same quality as thatimpounded in Cooper Reservoir.

Sulphur B/ulf 2. -The waters of the North SulphurRiver impounded at Sulphur Bluff 2 would be moder­ately hard and contain about 250 ppm dissolved solids.

Naples 1.-A reservoir on the Sulphur River at theNaples 1 site would store water containing less than 250ppm dissolved solids. The water would be hard and of amixed type.

Naples 2. -The Naples 2 site is on White Oak Creekwhich is receiving oil-field drainage. Water stored at thissite would be of acceptable quality for municipal uses ifnatural runoff from the area continues to be ofsufficient quantity to dilute the oil-field wastes.

Texarkana Enlargement. -The enlargement ofTexarkana Reservoir should not cause significant changein the quality of the water stored. The water should stillbe moderately hard and contain less than 150 ppmdissolved solids.

Franklin County and Titus County. -These adjoin­ing reservoirs on Cypress Creek would store a sodiumsulfate chloride type water containing less than 250 ppmdissolved solids.

Marshall. -A reservoir on Little Cypress Creek atthe Marshall site would store a sodium chloride typewater containing less than 150 ppm dissolved solids.

Black Cypress. -According to periodic chemical·quality data for Black Cypress Bayou near Jefferson,water impounded at the Black Cypress site would be lowin all dissolved constituents and contain less than 100ppm dissolved solids.

. 18·

Problems Needing Additional Investigation

This reconnaissance of the chemical quality ofsurface water in the Sulphur River and Cypress Creekbasins has shown that, in general, the basins areremarkably free of water-quality problems. Specifically,two streams-White Oak Creek near Talco, and LittleCypress Creek downstream from the Ore City stream­flow station-show indications of pollution. Highchloride concentrations in low-flow waters in thesestreams indicate that oil fields may be contributing brineto the watersheds.

Most of the brine produced in the Sulphur Riverand Cypress Creek basins is reportedly reinjected intowells. Waterflooding in oil fields and reinjection of brinesshould be carefully watched to ensure that brine doesnot enter fresh ground-water supplies or surface streams.

Continued municipal and industrial use in thelarger cities in the basins will cause an increase in thewaste·disposal burdens of the streams and impoundmentof water in reservoirs will cause a reduction of stream­flow now utilized for the assimilation of wastes.

Impoundment of water will result in some changesof water quality. Beneficial effects will include: thereduction of turbidity, silica, color, and coliform bac­teria; the evening out of sharp variations in chemicalquality; the entrapment of sediment; and a reduction intemperature. On the other hand, detrimental effects willinclude an increased growth of algae and a reduction ofdissolved oxygen. As the water resources of the basinsare extensively developed, the magnitude and signifi·cance of the probable changes in water quality willnecessitate studies of the resulting problems.

__1966, Water resources data for Texas, 1966-Part1, Surface water records: U.S. Geo1. Survey open·filerept.

U.S. Public Health Service. 1962, Public Health Servicedrinking water standards: U.S. Public Health ServicePub. 956, 61, p.

·20

U.S. Salinity Laboratory Staff, 1954, Diagnosis andimprovement of saline and alkali soils: U.S. Dept.Agriculture Handb. 60, 160 p.

The following U.S. Geological Survey Water-SupplyPapers contain results of stream measurements in theSulphur River and Cypress Creek basins, 1924-60:

YEAR WATER·SUPPLYPAPER NO.

1924 587

1925 607

1926 627

1927 647

1928 667

1929 687

1930 702

1931 717

1932 732

1933 747

1934 762

1935 787

1936 807

1937 827

1938 857

1939 877

1940 897

1941 927

1942 957

1943 977

1944 '007

1945 1037

1946 1057

1947 1087

1948 1117

1949 1147

1950 1177

1951 1211

1952 1241

1953 1281

1954 1341

1955 '391

1956 1441

1957 1511

1958 1561

1959 1631

'960 1711

Quality-ot-water records for the Sulphur River andCypress Creek basins are published in the following U.S.Geological Survey Water·Supply Papers and Texas WaterDevelopment Board reports (including reports formerlypublished by the Texas Water Commission and TexasBoard of Water Engineers):

WATER U.S.G.S. TWUBYEAR WATER-5UPPLY REPORT NO.

PAPER NO.

1947 1102 ·1947

1948 1133 ·1948

1949 1163 ·,949

1950 1188 ·1950

1951 1199 ·,951

1952 1252 ·,952

1953 1292 ·1953

1954 1352 ·1954

1955 1402 '1955

1956 1452 8ull.5905

1957 1522 Bull. 5915

1958 1573 a..11.6104

1959 1644 BuH. 6205

1960 1744 Bull. 6215

1961 1884 Bull. 6304

1962 1944 Bull. 6501

1963 1950 Aept.7

. ·'ChenHc.ll COlnl)OS,IIOn of Texas Surface Waters"was ,lesl'IIl<lled only by wale, year prior 10 1956.

·21 -

~~

Tabit C_·-Index 01 S4lrf_W.I.er R_lh in me S4llphur Rw. .100 CVpnu Cr" B.IUm

RC'lcl'- UI'''IJlagc T}'PI' and IWI'iod fir 1','I.'cJI'CI

cncc SII'cam and l.i''U':tllun :11'1.'0na11)' ~hl'lllil'al P(,l'lodl ... 'wmi. 111

" (Sq. Ilutes) OlJo<ch:ll"j.:L' Pl'l- iod lt~ d Isch:Il'~(' Rl'!il'l'voi l' Wall'l'qua 1 i I) '1 ual ll) lIIl':IHUI-('lIIl'nIS conlenlS I l'lllp('ra I ur('

SULPHUR RIVER BASIS

I South Sulphul' Rive" nelli' Coopel' 527 1!:l58-66 1942-66 1949_66

2 NOI'lh Sulphul' Rivcl' neal' COOpt'l' 276 1949_66 1950, 195A 1949-66

3 Sulphul' Rivcl' ncar Talt'o 1,365 1956-66 196~-66 1c}~6_66

I CUlhand CI'cck I1car Bol(allol 6. 1963_66 Iq63-66, CUlh:and Crcek soulh 01 Clarksville -- 1965_66 1965-66

6 Kt~kapoo Cl'eek SOUlh 01 Clal'ksvtlle -- 196~_66 196~66

7 SulphuI' River north of Omaha -- 1960, 1965-66 196~66

• \I/hlle Oak Creek near MOUnl Vernon -- 1965-66 196~66

• While Oak Creek near Talco ... 1949_66 1949-66

, 10 White Oak Creek near Omaha -- 196~66 1965-66

II Sulphur River near Darden 2,774 1947-50 1923-54 1949_54

12 Call1') Cn'ek Rt'IH'rvoil' near Redwatel' -- 1952, 19621964_65

13 Calley Cl'eck near Redwater 18,0 1961-62 19~8-62

II T('xlll'kal1ll Reservoir near Texarkana 3,443 1957, 1966 1953-66

15 Alkcn Creek neal' T('xarkana 12,2 1958_61.-

CYPRESS CREEK BASIN

16 Cypress Creek north of Pltlsbul'l( -- 1965-66 1965_66

" C~ PI't'SS Cl'cek Ileal' Pi IISbul'/l: 366 1943_63 1949-63

lo 1)<'>1-:1;) CI'ct'k neal' Dalnj(el'fleld 72 1943-66 1941)-66

" Ell ison Creek Reservati' Ileal' Dalnj(errteld 37 1943_62

20 l.akp 0' the Pines neal' Jel ferson 850 1965_66 1957_66

21 Cypress Creek n('ar Jcfferson 850 1924-61

22 Kel1} Cret-'k ncar Marlt-'tta 50,S 1942 1958-621961_62

23 Itt..J.thl's C,eek ncar AVlngcr '9 1961-62 1958-62

21 Blat;k C) pI'ells Ba)ou near J('l ferson 3.> 1965_66 1964_66

25 l.lllle C)'pl'eSIl Creek near Ore Cit)' 3.3 1962-66 1965_66

26 !tIoccallln CI'eek near Itarlelon 30 1961_62 1958-62

27 Llttle C)'press Creek neal' Jef'-erson 675 1946-66 1964-66 1949_66

2. Prewitt CI'eek neal" Karnack 19 1961_62 1958_62

2. Kitchens Creek nt!ar Smlthlam..l 27 1958-62

30 JI~s Ba~ou near Kildare 82,9 1958-62

31 FI-a:-ler Creek neal' L1nden 47,9 1958_62

32 FI aL1el' Creek neal' McLt"od 199 1964-65

33 BlaCk Bayou neal' Allanla 52, I 1961-62 1958_62

J.I Caddo Lake -- 1952_561958-63

r.,1e 5.··Summwr 01 Chemtcal Analy_ n Daily 51Miom on 51,..,,1 in me Sulphur R...., lW1d CVpreu Creek B.ins

(.lol1l1l\~('s lil-Il'd ,." 1Il1lxlhl\11II ,.ud mil1lmUIII ... ,·r." 1;1,;,;"iflf"(lull hl h::a .. l .. ul tIl(> \allJ('~ lUI' di"solll('d snliu .. unl\': val\ll'" 01 uII1"" ,"On",tiIU('IlI" 11I3\ not b(' ('xll'('",l'S," H""IIII" in pal'l!:> Pll" million ('xc-cpt :IS Inult'at,,(I.1

Oillol...d ...lid.

0.1, of coll.ctto..

M~. I C.,. IM~~'I S0-

I,. Bic.,. Sill· Chlo- Flllo- Ni· e..

di..

I'"k'I'~ diu..,..

Do... la f... ride ride P.rt, Ton'ch.,... (5iO,1 (h)COil",

Nllmtrala ...

IT...

(d.) (Co) ;;;) (Na) ") (HCO,) (SO,) (CI) (F) (NO,) (8) .... ,.. ,..mil. acre·,... (-

d.,

I. SOUTII SULPllUR RIVER SEAR COOPER

Speci6cH.n:l_So-

coadlld.•• CoCO, Per. dillm .- I ,H,~,

.d-ol""P' (micro-C.I.

Non. - ,...mh_.tcillm,

urioon. dillm ..Iio25' C)m••_· .,.

• illm

~

W

1I;1tCI' )'I'al 1959\laXlmum,

'UII. Its-20.195tl IL.7 10 " 6.7 103 13. 60 \48 0.6 1.2 452 o 61 11 3 164 '0 '8 :1 . .5 815 7.6\Iinlmlllll,

\.6.loPI· 17-21,1959. '83 12 23 2 • 15 78 23 7.' ..\ 3.2 12' 17 "7 6. , 32 .8 208\If'illhl ('d allel"a!:{' ., 2 13 32 3.2 21 '06 26 14 ., 3 7 187 23 11 1 93 6 " .. 28' --

Io:ot<.'"l· y('al' 1960\1."'lmulII, Su\", '.

1959 19.0 '6 88 • 1 328 182 36 '" -- 2 2 1120 1 52 57 , 257 108 11 8 • 2040 8.2.\11111.1'11111I,

-1.111 6_8, 1960. 3396 • • "2 , 12 " 13 4.0 .6 1 0 .8 13 8" 57 0 31 .7 164 7 .•

Ioell.. htco aVl'I"31:(' 339 11 '" 2.' 17 '8 21 '.7 4 3.1 143 19 131 82 1 31 8 236 --\latll )"cal' 1961

\laXlmulII.F.b 1-5, 1961 Itl,2 12 113 11 " 36\ 112 6\ 3 2.' 592 .81 291 340 44 32 1.8 .11 7.6

\III1II'1UIII.0\·, tl-I I 1~60" 6225 • • 18 2.3 6. 2.' 64 • 2 4.0 4 \.0 84 11 1410 54 2 21 .4 141 7.0

II, I\..hl(·d :\\'('1':110;(' 387• 7

27 2 8 14 92 18 8.' .4 1 4 129 18 \35 79 3 28 7 220 --\1.'1('1 )1':11- 1962

\1:Lxlmum,",n 11-21.1961 4 ·\

54 6.7 127 240 110 99 6 I., '29 .72 ., 162 0 63 4.3 877 6.'11111IIllUIII,

)(1111' 2ri.30, 1962 3603 11 11 1 1 • 2 61 8 2 2 8 -- 2.8 84 .11 817 47 0 28 ., 124 7.2\\l-il..!ll('d :lIICI'alU" 331 13 27 2.' 14 .3 18 8 1 -- 3.2 134 .18 120 7' 6 28 7 220 7.0

11.11,'1 ~l'al' 1963\l:l'\imulII,

""JI" •• 1962 7 3 12 IOU '0 326 168 41 590 -- .8 1150 l. 56 22.7 290 153 71 8.3 2130 7.6\lllllrrlUIII.'''\i 26-30 3668 11 26 2 2 11 6' 17 6.' -- 2.0 118 '6 1170 74 4 25 .6 204 6.4\I"ll:htf'd aV('l"alo(f' 156 12 32 J 2 17 '03 26 12 -- 3.2 15' 22 770 92 • '0 8 258 6 7

\1;ilt'l" y.·a I 1:161\I.IXllIlUIII,

\1;01 J, 19b,1 lij6 11 103 ., 17' 164 46 335 -- 1.8 770 1 0' 345 292 141 " 4.4 1400 7 7'.Iln(mum,\l:l~ 30-31 39-15 6 I 21 2 • 11 70 17 7.4 -- 2 0 101 .11 1076 64 7 27 .6 176 6.8\I"I>;hlC"d al"('ral:\ 13-1 9 • 26 3 3 14 '3 19 7.' -- I 3 134 .18 il2.0 84 3 38 .7 227 7.2

"'.,tCI· )cal" 1965jhxllllum,

)!a r 10-31 1965 21 2 9 2 100 11 '6 340 7. 48 -- I 0 173 6' 27 , 307 28 28 \.\ 781 7 7\]tnlmUIll, Feb. tl_14 6717 7 •

" 2 7 6.3 2 , 66 10 2.8 -- 3.8 86 12 1~60 '6 2 22 , 144 7 6IoI'll:hll~d av("nq;t· .30 J 0 , I 2 • 62 82 15 '.0 -- , 8 111 15 142 70 2 23 ., 188 6 •

II SULPllUR RIVER "E.loR DARDEN

\latc!" ycal' 19'18Slaxllllum,Au!:.I,19'18 152 10 111 33 11.50 7. 177 1670 4.0 3570 I 75 1<130 412 350 86 5910 --\llnllllulII,

1)(<:: 16-27,1917 11910 -- 20 , 1 13 6' 30 7.0 1 2 '07 .15 345tJ 67 11 29 160 --"'l'll:htcd alll'I':II:(', 2905 -- 27 3 • 21 81 26 22 \.. \71 .23 1340 83 17 35 253 --

"'aler )l'ar 1919i1ax[mul'I, O'.l 2'1,

27_31, 194tl, 23 7 7.' n).l " 1970 15. 733 2900 -- 5930 tL06 379 6.8 '68 86 10000 --)11 n lmulII,

Jan, ~l'j-31 ..... , 2~75n, , 17 1 , I·. 66 10 10 \.0 122 .17 9470 '19 0 39 1'0 --

WelKhtcd I\IICI'I1I:C .. 2225 7.3 2\ 3.' 22 8\ 20 25 \.1 168 .23 1010 74 8 3. 252 --

Table 6.·-ehemical AnelyW1 of SU'NmJ end R~ir, for LOC8'1ions Other Thin Deily Stations

Di...,lnd ...lid.

0.1. 01 ~nectOoa

(Rl",;ults ill p3rls pt·,' million ('",·t'pt :IS lndin,'('d)

M_.Co'_ M••• ... p~ Biur. S"_ ChI... F1.~ I N._ I B0-

d... SilK. ,~

dum - dNm~ .....,. f.le ride ride lrat•

IP.rt.

cn.r.e (SiO,1 (Fe) .NID "ulD...

(chi (Co, (M.> (N.> (K) (HCO,l (SO.l (ClI (FI (NO,) 'B' ~

...il.,..2. SORTII SULPHUR RIVER SEAR COOPER

T_.~.

.~­

f_

T_...d.,

Speci6cHu'li_ ...coadud·•• CaCO. p" diu... .- I oN

._,.d_rp-

(micro-Co'-N__ - ....

mh....tc;urn, ._- dium r.t'" 25' C)

rn••_ ..."UID

~A

Jul~ 20. 1950 -- '.6 6 .., - - II 3.a 32 94 17 21 -- 0.0 ,<4 033 liB II 37 1.3 391) 7.8Jul\ 22 ... 1t\20 9.a · - .. '.0 23 120 II 13 -- '.S '09 _2H 110 12 37 1.0 322 7.7Jul~ 21 ... .... 3770 II -- 53 I.' 26 158 6' 8_0 -- 3_0 '5' .3-1 150 '0 28 .9 39' 7.BAUI"' 7. ._. 5.' II -- 53 5.' '12 146 79 30 -- .0 '9' . '0 ,S< 3< 37 1.5 <8S 7.'S"pt. 26. 195d .8 13 -- 70 8. , 73 a, 210 57 -- _5 <7, .6' '08 ,<2 " '_2 751 7.B

J:l1I '6. 1967. 2.73 3 9 -- 95 9. , 75 2.' 19' 190 62 O. :1 .0 53' _73 '76 115 37 '.0 853 7.'F. b· 21- 6.33 '.2 -- a, 7 , 60 '_5 162 17' " .5 '.0 <5, .62 2<0 107 35 1.7 72< 7_'Api' 7 3.56 3. , · - 6' 6.5 60 ,." 126 1010 <2 .3 .0 378 _51 178 75 <2 2_0 622 7.3\1.,)' :; 139 10 .- 67 , _0 " 2_" 182 " '6 .6 1.2 280 .38 ,S< 3< 23 _8 <56 '.0

3. SULPIIUR RIVER NEAR TALCO

1.'11 6 1965 62.5 7.7 -- 52 7 , 23 '<9 58 19 0.' 0.2 2<1 0.33 '6O 38 2< ° 8 <1O 7 •\1.,,' 17 60 6.5 _. 90 9 6 51 230 12' <I .. 1.0 ". .59 '6' 76 30 I., 742 7.'\p,' 22 136 .1. 9 -- '00 9.·' 63 2" 133 <9 -, .0 <90 .67 288 72 32 I., ", 7_'\1.,~ 26 638 II -- 68 '_0 33 199 69 21 _3 _2 30' -<2 '94 31 27 1.0 526 ,.,1,.1\ 1'1 2.2 10 -. 73 5 , <4 220 72 31 5 .2 3<4 .<7 205 2< 32 1.3 585 7_2

S"pl '5 8<3 7 , - - 37 ,- , 13 118 22 5 :l _3 1.2 1<7 .20 101 • 22 ., ?!'5 ,-,,,, 3fl .. 1.0 ".0 · - " 8 9 '0 3 8 270 '0' '16 .-, 0 <52 81 "8 3< 33 I., 758 7. 1.l.'" ,. 1906 II , 2 _7 -- 68 9 1 100 3 , 230 191 "0 -, _0 598 .81 282 91 " ,., 986 7_'fdl 15 .. 193 , , -- '10 3 , I< 3 3 126 31 7.7 2 '_0 170 .23 115 II 20 -, 299 6_'\1",' 16 .- 33.1 6.8 -- 7' '.5 51 3 9 196 113 33 .5 .8 388 53 216 56 33 1.5 63< 8_0

5. CUTllAND CREEK SOUTH Of' CLARKSVILLE

.Ju I \ 7. 1965 , II -- 90 5.5 39 '03 99 <3 o , o 2 388 n 53 247 80 " 1.1 6<6 7.35"lll 23. 27 3 5_ , -- 21 9 6.6 '.9 59 17 5.3 _1 2 'B _12 56 8 19 .4 ,S< 6.3Jan I- 1!l66 3 , 9 3 -- 27 , 9 65 , 9 130 <5 -13 3 II 271 _37 75 0 63 3_3 'BO 6.7F('h " 3. , , 5 -- -II 3.1 3. 2 9 1·11 15 27 .3 ., 229 .31 115 0 <I 1.5 '09 7 5Api' 13 , 6 , 7 -- 119 6.6 '67 1 0 .. 8 159 ,3< .7 -a 803 l. 09 324 0 " 4.0 1340 7 2.Iul \ 20 ., 12 -- 122 , 6 116 3.3 196 230 130 .J .0 718 .98 310 '80 <2 '_7 1110 7 4

.J"II 17_ 1967 1 75 '0 -- 93 5.2 53 '1. ·1 198 125 " ., ., .<2 .60 ,S< 91 31 I., 719 7 0

". 8 I ~7 7.5 -- 99 6.2 92 5 0 306 114 70 6 ., 54·1 " '72 22 <2 , 4 '85 7.5

6. KICKAPOO CREEK SOUTt! Of' CLARKSVILLE

Jul) 7. 1965 9 , "-. ·13 '_6 " 137 26 22 0,3 0_5 199 0.27 118 6 31 \.0 329 7.3

S('pt. 2-1 .. -8 8 6 -- " 1,'1 23 60 21 33 -, _5'" _19 68 19 <2 \., "B 6.3

Jan. '. 1966 .. 7.0 6 9 -- 17 1.6 13 4.' 'Iij 13 20 _5 _5 '0' -I< .. 10 3< -, 188 6 .•feb. 8 .......... ., 8.6 -- 32 '.6 17 3.' 75 33 ,-. -, -8 "8 .21 91 29 28 _8 278 6.5ApI'. 19_ -. '0 -- 6. '1.7 ·12 3.8 122 86 58 _3 .8 330 .'15 179 79 33 \.. 564 6_9

'0". a. .11 ij .. ' -- 72 '.6 3' 5.' ,7< 60 58 ., .5 33. _45 198 56 29 '.2 570 7.3Jail. 17_ 1967 ...... l. 4ij 17 - 48 " ,0 '8 '1.5 '02 6' 38 -, _, 251 .3< 136 53 30 \.0 417 6.8ApI'. 8 ............. .7< 15 -- 65 5.8 -\7 'I. 3 '6' 6' 6-' .3 .2 3<6 .<7 186 53 35 \.5 591 7.1Apr. 27. ..... 219 8.' -- 22 1.6 5.3 3.0 68 '0 5 B -, _5 90 .12 62 6 15 _3 154 6.6

~

~

TatHe 6.·-CtMmfcal AnIty_ of Str.-,m -.:I R..-roirs for loationl Other T"-n O.ly Stltiol'll-eontinued

(R{'sull!'C III pal'!s pt'r 1II.llion eXI:C'pl as Indical('d)

DiMOl.ecl ....id.H..._

-'''MM. ..... •• MCaCO, p~.

50- .......h.ott•Col. 50- B;""'. ..... ""... fl ..... 1'41. Bo- ,...,.. Sitica l_ena... - .... 0-

"MOo f•• rid. ride P.... T_ .~. .,,-?-.~ .Ho.w'" eon.d'" ....... (5iO,1 (fe) ,... ... _.

roo T_ Co• .- - (-~

(eh) ,Co) (M.) (Na) ,.) (MOO.) (SO.I 'el) IFI (NO,) ,.) ~ ~ ci"'m. ._. ,... ... ......."",iI. .- ~ ratio,., mar_ ... 1S'C)I... f_ ...

7. SULPHUR RIVER NORTH OF OMAHA

)131' . I •. 1960. -- 6 .• · . '11 4.0 22 115 45 17 0.' 0.' '" 0.26 "' 24 2. o • 32. 7.2J.n. 12. 1965 ..... 3·120 7.3 · . 32

"10 10. 17 .., .. .2 13. .I. •• • 19 .. 233 7 .•

\13 I'. 18 ..... 304 7.' -- 64 '.7 2. 16. 6' 25 .3 .. 2'0 .3. 17. 45 26 •• 490 7.0Apr. 23. 32.1 ·1 • -- •• 7.3 50 237 102 42 .4 .2 413 .56 252 58 30 I., 711 7.3~l:l.~ 27. ..... '.2 12 " '.2 17 167 30 II .3 .2 20. .2. 147 10 20 .6 365 6.7

S('pl 26 ... 1630 7.' --" 2.' '0 12. 33 •• .. I., 17. .2' 112 7 2. .. 315 6.5

Jan. 6. 1966 .... 50.0 6. I .. 30 .. 29 4.0 B4 16 41 .3 1.0 16. .23 7B • .3 I., 310 6.7Api'. 21 .. ... 18.4 2 .• -- 92 7. I 5' .. , 23' II. 54 .4 0 4<18 .61 258 66 33 1.6 763 7.3June 17. -- ••• -- 60 3 • 10 3.6 19' 13 7.0 .. 1.0 '06 .2' 16' 1 11 .3 36) 7 .•Jul)' 22 ......... 10.4 3 .• -- 6. 3 2 52 3.3 15. 112 41 .0 1.0 36. .50 19. 64 36 1.6 621 7.0

AUI:: 25. 25.4 6.5 -- 46 , 7 13 3.' 1<16 24 7 2 .. I.. 177 .2' 126 6 18 .5 311 6.'Jan 20. 1967 .. 13.9 7.' - . 67 5.' 79 '.7 152 58 126 2 .0 .23 58 18. 6. 47 2.5 751 7.5

8. WHITE OAI{ CREEK NEAR YOUNT VERNON

fob 25. 1965 10 • 7.3 -- 13 ••• 22 3' 31 2. 1.0 3.2 l2J .17 52 2. 47 1.3 223 6 7.\la I'. I •. .. .... . 43.9 1.3 - . 22 10 <2 .2 .3 '6 .6 .. 227 .31 '6 62 •• I.' .22 6 3,\pl' 23. ... 22.1 7.3 .. 22 • 0 44 59 66 .0 2.0 10 299 .41 '2 44 51 2.0 .07 6.'113}' 27 ......... .6 7 16 -- 25 12 42 57 B5 46 .7 1.2 256 .35 112 65 45 1.7 44. 6.3Stpl. '6. 6' • 7.' -- 6 8 2.7 14 23 18 14 .5 1.0 76 .2' 2B • 53 1.2 133 6.2

Oct 29. .2 6.6 -- 1·1 6.8 26 58 34 25 .. .0 142 .1' 63 15 -- I., 270 6.5

10. WHITE OAI{ CREEK NEAR OIiAHA

,Ju I ~ 20. 1950 .. 23.9 6.8 .. 17 6.2 171 37 Bl 230 -- 0.5 558 0.76 68 38 85 '.0 1010 7. IAu~. 7 .... 20.2 II -- 14 6.5 97 45 4B 132 -- .0 360 ... 62 25 77 5.' 616 7.3\13 I" I •. 1960. ... -- 6.' -- 14 5 • .2 27 58 4B 0.1 .2 188 .26 59 37 61 2.' 323 6.5Fe-h .1. 1965. 38 8 •. 8 -- 16 7.6 51 35 7l 56 .3 .8 228 .31 7l .2 61 2.6 378 6.8\lal' 18. 41. 8.5 ·- 18 10 41 32 67 56 .3 .2 217 .30 86 60 51 I., .07 6.8

'\pl" . '3 .... 2. 8 6.6 -- 35 17 106 6. 126 140 .8 .2 '66 .63 158 101 59 3.7 850 6.5.\Iar 27. 891 ••• .. 13 '.8 21 51 21 23 .3 .8 "' .16 52 10 .6 1.3 212 6.5S{·pt. 26 ........ 12. ••• -- 41 12 351 38 150 515 .2 1.0 1090 I. 48 15' 121 83 12 2050 6.1Oct. 28 ........... .. 7.6 -- 17 6.5 77 6. 41 .6 .. .2 280 .38 6. 12 7l '.0 533 6.'O('C. I .. 1.6 7.0 · - 25 7.' 146 ••• 80 62 208 .. .2 500 .68 .5 30 76 6.5 953 6 .•.Jan. 6. 1966. 225 5 .• -- 36 14 70 6 8 .3 122 418 .7 .2 894 1.22 148 112 7. '.6 1700 6.2Apr. 21 ....... 41.5 6 0 · - .2 17 150 5. I 68 141 223 .0 1.0 618 .8' 175 120 6' 4.' 1120 6.8June 17. ....... -- -- -- -- -- -- 5. -- 6. -- -- -- -- 80 32 -- -- 425 6 .•June 22. 26.3 1.0 -- " 8 • 62 '.7 88 53 78 .. .2 275 .37 .6 2. 57 '.8 513 6.'J3n. 20. 1967 ..... 29.4 14 -- 30 13 78 5 6 28 "' "' .1 .0 383 .52 128 106 56 3.0 674 6.2

12. CANEY CREEl{ RESERVOIR NEAR REDWATER

July 11. 1952. -- 7.4 0.09 3 6 2.5 9.8 '8 8.7 5.2 o 2 o 8 52 0.07"

0 52 1.0 70 7.'Apr. 20. 1962 ..... .. • 7 .51 2.2 1.2 3.6 • 6.' 3.0 .1 .0 25 .03 10 3 .3 .5 '3 5.6Yar. 3. 1964 ......

_.8.3 .70 3.5 1.5 6.6 12 II ..7 .. .2 .2 .06 IS 5 49 .7 67 6.8

Apr. 8. 1965 ...... - . 6.1 .62 3.0 .. 5.' II 8.6 3 0 .2 .2 33 .04 II 2 51 .7 47 6.'

T~1e 6.··Chemical ANlI'fWI of 5t'Nm5 .-:I AeMr\'Olrs 10' LOClItIO'U Othel' Than O.ily StlItion..-eontinu.:l

(R(':sultS til p:tl'ts pt>,' million except as indlcat('d)

Di._I_d _lid.

Dale of collectioa

M_.IC"IM~"I

So-

IP~I"-"Sui. Chlo- Fluo- Ni. Bo·

di.. I'"~ 1'- dium ::::.. boo....l. ,.~ ride rid. P..... Ton.och....e (SiO,1 (Fe)

clum tr&t. ...I

T_.(och) (Ca) ;;;) (N.) (K) (HCO,I (SO,) (el) 'F) (HO,I 'OJ ... p" ...

mil. .~.,.... ,- do,

13 . CASEY CREEK SEAR REDWATER

Specific:H...._

So-ocOIldud.

_ CaCO,Per. dium ..- I pHocenl adoorp-

tlnieno.Co,.

Non. - .....ftlhoo .1

ciulD,c.l"bon. dium ...tio

2S" C)m.,ne- ...

.ium

~

.\13)' 23. 1961. 6,5St>pt. 18, 1962. 6.3

14, TEXARKANA RESERVOIR NEAR TEXARKANA

Dt>c. 20, 1957.!' .... -- 6.'1 0.55 20 1.6 7.4 3.6 66 12 7.5 o 2 0.2 91 0.12 56 0 21 0.' 160 7.3Jan. 7. 1966, .. 4.2 .. 32 3.0 11 3.' 105 10 19 .3 .2 149 .20 92 , 28 .0 270 6 8Api'. 20. ..... .. 3.' . - 25 2.4 I' 3.0 72 21 16 .3 .2 120 .16 72 13 29 .7 223 6 8:\0\1. 6 ............ .. 5.8 -- 2'1 2.3 12 3.4 78 16 13 .1 1.0 115 .18 69 7 28 .8 199 7.7Api' 9. 1967, .. .0 -- 25 3.0 24 3 .• ;; 38 ,. .1 .5 I;; .21 " 30 '0 1.2 286 ,.

16. CYPRESS CREEK NORTH OF PITTSBURG

\1 .. ". )H. 1965, ..... 309 10 .. 15 8.7 31 22 58 45 0.2 0.5 177 0.24 73 ;; .8 I. , 331 5.9ApI'. 23. 20. I 15 .. 22 12 ;; .2 71 79 .3 3.2 278 .38 10' 70 53 2.3 500 '.0\la~ 27, .......... , 72.01 18 .. 19 9.6 39 33 61 56 .3 1.8 221 .30 87 80 '9 1.8 393 8.1.Jul} 9. 5.8 17 .. 22 8.5 86 52 52 116 .. 20 348 .47 90 .8 '8 3.9 8.0 ,..S('pt. 26. 10.9 12 .. 10 4.01 2. 17 38 27 .2 5.0 127 .11 43 29 54 1.8 223 5.8

0" 28. ..... , 2.9 15 .. 25 8.' 159 " 56 230 .5 ,. 546 .74 97 88 78 7.0 1050 8.0[)\ C, I . . , , , . , . . . . 4,6 17 -- 15 3.' 70 5 3 33 36 97 .7 14 274 ." 51 2' 72 '.3 5\1 '.2Api' 21, 1966, 29 2 II .. 22 \I 45 3 , 28 66 80 .3 .0 253 .,. 100 77 .8 2.0 462 ,..June 15, ..... , ... 10 7 19 -- 19 8.1 45 3. I ·10 '" '8 .5 2.8 232 .32 81 '8 54 2 2 .11 7.0f{·h. 21L 1967 ..... ·14..6 12 -- 2. 12 46 2.7 2' 87 70 .1 2 .• 2'8 .36 109 90 47 19 '80 ,.,\1:1\ 9 .............. 2'0 12 .. 15 6 9 2'1 3.' 31 43 36 .. 1.2 157 .21 66 .0 43 1.3 271 7.0

20, LAKE 0' TIlE PINES NEAR JEFFERSON

Aug. 18. 1965 ...... -- '.4 .. 12 3.4 Ii 32 2. 2. 0.2 0.2 105 0.14 .. 18 .9 1.2 19' ,..Jan. 7. 1966, .. 7.5 .. 12 3.9 18 3.7 ,. 22 25 .3 .0 109 .15 46 18 44 1.2 198 , 8Jul} 7 ............. -- I.. -- 8.5 1.9 7 , 3.3 2. 13 \I .0 .8 '0 .08 29 9 33 ., \17 , 8\(:11', 7, 1967, -- '.3 .. 9 0 2.7 8 8 3.2 28 I' 12 .3 .5 '9 .09 ,. 11 34 .7 122 , 9

22, KELLY CREEK NEAR MARIETTA

liar. 17, 1942.

"')'231961. ····1 ,.21 1'1 1.0012.911"13.71131'2 1 5 '1 3.51 0 . 2 12 '1 1.0 1.05 1 I "I '1--/ "1 .91,·1Seplo is, 1962..... .'1 29 .01 6.2 2,5 4.9 28 2 28 6.0.1.0 81 ,II 26 24 27 .4 93 5.4

23. HUGHES CREEK NEAR AVINGER

:.Ia}' 23, 1961....... 5,8S('pt, 18, 1962, 5,8

.J!l Boron 0,05 ppm.

~~

Table 6.·.cMmIUI Anlly.. 01 SUNIl''' .ro RnetYO+.J lOt LOCI1ions Ot...... Thin OIIIV Slillon,·.conhnoed

lR,,"ull" in P:lll~ Ill' I' million ,''(.cpt 3" inlll":IINIl

Oi....I....d ""lid.H..._

Sp.Kific,,_. ..... •• _CoCO..~.

So- c_dllcl-Cal. So- 8Our. S..I. Chlo- FI.. ,> Ni. Bo- di..",<Ii.. Sila 1- ei..", - <IN'" - boo....l. 'at.. rid .. rid .. U'at. Paf1. T... Cal·

..., .d-.- .... .HOal. '" coU.ct_ ....... (SIO,1 (Fal .i..", .i"m~. T... No... - (",i~

'Cal (N.) (HCO I (SO.) leI) IF) (NO,I (B' ... ... ci....., ,,,"ld.1 (MI) '" mil. ..' earl>on• di..m ratio

mho. ataC""· d., maine· ... 15' CI

'''" ,- .i.....

2\ ULACK CYPRESS BAYOU SEAR JEFfERSON

\1:1 r 22. 1965. ... 355 12 - 2.0 2 ., , 1 1.1 • 9.0 6.5 0.2 0.2 ·12 0.06 IS , 35 0.5 .. 6.'"'Pl' 2'1- ..... 99.ij 13 , , 2.d 5.9 I I 21 6.0 , 7 .2 ,

" 07 22 5 36 5 78 6.7\13) 29 ... '22 17 _ . 3.5 1 3 1.0 I 5 II 5 , 5.0 I ., dS 06 Id 3 35 .5 55 6.1Ju 1\ 10. 16 , 22 5 , 1 7 5 • 1 , 21 .1. 6 ,., I ., 60 0' ,. 3 '6 6 77 6. dSI'pt. 27 .. 2.2 12 .. ,., 2 •

"15 5.6 , I .0 2 .6 .13 3d 22 55 I.d "0 6.0

01 I. 29 I 13 .. II d 0 35 " 50 70 ., 3 117 .'0 old 2. " '.3 28~ 6.01)(" 2 3.' " .. 6 0 2.2 '.6 3. I 10 17 16 .1 .2 77 10 24 16 d3 9 123 6.1lui \ 7. HJ66 .. li 9 16 .. 6.' I I

" 02. I '0 6.' 10 ., .2 59 .0' 23 6 3d .5 109 6.5

,\u k 2 1.6 _. .. -- -- II 2. I .. 1 6 21 .1 1.2 -- _. .. .. .. .. 1;l7 ..Sl'pl , ... II 5 17 .. .. , I.' .. 2 I., II 6 , 7.2 .1 5 " .07 l' 6 31 .. 6' 6.6

1.1 n. 26. 1967 136 ".. 3.5 I 3 5.2 I 6 7 9.0 '.3 .0 .2 50 .07 14 , 41 .6 63 5.9

\1,,\ 17 .. ... 366 17 .. d.5 1.7 3.9 2.0 " '1-4 5.6 , .. "9 .07 " ., '9 .. 6' 6.1

25. LITTLE CYPRESS CREEK SEAR ORE CITY

S'III 12. 1961 0.1 II .. 9 2 J. I '0 II 3' " 0.2 0.2 160 0.22 37 76 70 '.9 ,., 6 .•0" 27 .. ,j.1 19 .. II 3' 70 , 29 111 .2 .' 249 3d d3 37 78 'I. 6 .44 6.dfill 13 IHi5 1600 II .. '.2 I., 15 , 10 24 .1 .5 71 10 " II 65 1.5 137 5.7\pI 21 110 21 .. 10 , I 35 20 21 54 2 5 16' 22 12 25 65 '.3 279 6.0

11.• \ 30 1260 17 .. 7.0 2 , IS " IS 'I 2 .5 ,. 12 '9 Id " I.' Idl 6.6

~, III 27 3 , II . 9 5 3 7 55 53 17 6' .1 I. , 192 .'6 39 0 75 3.' 356 6.3110, 2 I 6 16 .. 10 2.2 " '.3 I 93 31 .1 .5 207 .2M 3d 31 73 3.6 35' 5.6J"11 l. 1!.I66 20 , 21 9 3 2.6 19 3.0 0 52 19 .0 ., 126 17 34 31 52 I.d 216 '.4htl 15 ... . ... 56.3 19 .. 6.7 3.0 22 2.7 6 25 32 .0 ., 114 .16 '9 " 60 I., 190 6.6\1:11 :w 39 I 13 .. '.5 2.9 17 2.' 13 30 22 .2 .5 103 14 33 22 50 1.3 176 6.3

.J,," " 1~67 , 63 2 2J .. 6.0 ,. I 14 2. I 6 2' 17 0 .2 96 13 25 '0 52 1.2 1,12 5.7\1,11' 6 .. .. 13 0- , 0 , , 22 2 5 II 30 2. ., .'1 112 .15 31 " 58 1.7 187 6.1AI" 211 ... 295 17 .. 7.5 2.9 9.0 'I. 4 7 31 12 , .5 ., 12 31 25 35 .7 129 5.4\l;l\ " '9 2 25 , 0 3 2 17 29 16 26 2J ., .. 11'1 .16 33 20 50 1.3 172 6.0

26 !tIOCCASlS CREEK SEAR IIARLETON

\l,l~ 23, 1961 5.8Stpt 19. 1962 5.7Jura' 10, 1961 .. 5.7

27. LITTLE CYPRESS CREEK SEAR JEffERSON

lunt' 12. 1962 ... 10.6 22 .. 12 3 7 52 20 22 .3 o 2 0.5 '0' Il. 2101 d5 29 71 3.d 373 5.8S<,pt. 13 1961 .... 5 14 .. 21 10 165 2 45 2.5 .1 ., 542 .7'1 9. 92 79 7.,1 104" 5.'Oet 22 2 0 16 .. 9.5 3 7 56 6 46 76 .1 0 210 .'9 39 34 76 3.9 378 5.'h'b. 14. 1965 ..... 643 II .. , 2 I • II In I. 9 , .1 ., 61 0' 18 10 56 1.1 100 5.'ApI' '6. .. .. " , IS .. 9.5 I I ,. 11 32 57 ., 1.5 166 23 42 30 67 '.6 '92 B.'\l3} 31 .. 636 16 5.5 2 3 II 16 17 II .5 ., 72 10 23 10 52 1.0 106 5.'St'pl 29 ... 1.2 14 .. 14 3.2 31 0 " 24 0 '.2 173 .24 d8 " 60 2. I 303 '.61)('(; 2 ••. .......... , 0 6.1 10 2.9 53

II I 2M ." 67 2 ., 19' ." 37 I" 73 3.' 379 6.7

J .. ". 7. 13uo ... " /U 7 2U .. 9 • 2.' 52 3 3 5 22 '9 .0 .0 '01 .27 36 32 7d 3.' 370 6.4Feb 13. ..... 211 19 .. 9 , 3.4 :ltl 2.' I 17 75 .1 ., 167 .'3 3' 35 66 '.7 303 5.6

~

'"

TMtte e.-Chemical A"*Y'" of S1rNmI ...R~ lor Loc:atiorn 01het' Than Dafly S11't1OnS-Con111'IUed

(R('sults In pal'l" P'-'" mi II ion ('xl-'Cpl 3 .. ind"'nll'dlOi__I..eel ..lid_ H...._

S~ific

".. M••• P. _c.co,p~.

s.- c.oduct_Co,· s.- B.... 5..1. 0.,. fl..o- N. o. di.. .,.di.. Sila ,- d ..... - .... .... .....~ ,.~ ride ride

_..P.rt_ T_. Co,. cent .d-.- .- pH0.,. 01 coIlad_ ~........ (SIO,1 (f.) .i... NIII. T_.

ei.. .,.,Non_ - .... ( ...~

(eh) ,Co)(M.I (N.) (K) OICO,I (SO,) (CI) (F) (NO,I 'B) ... ... ... c........ dium .,.he» .t

mil. .~. d., .,.........~

ratio:U'C),... ,... ....

27. LITTLE CYPRESS CREEK NEAR JEFFERSO~--Contlnucd

.\1:1'" " . 1966...... 122 16 ,. 3.2 42 2.' • 23 75 .2 .. 177 0.24 J8 n .9 3.' 332 •••Api'. 27. ....... -- 2.7 .. 2.' .2 I., I.. • ,.. 1.3 .1 .2 17 .•2 • 1 28 . 3 3• '.7J:l1l 2'. 1961 .... .. 7 -- -- -- " -- • 27 .. -- -- -- -- ,. 33 -- 3 .• J73 •. 3Mill'. 6 ........ ... 118 Id ••• 3.1 40 2.3 10 23 ., .3 .2 1.3 .22 J7 2. .8 2 .• 2•• ..1Api'. 19 .......... -15·1 Id .. 7.2 2 .• 28 3 .• • I. " .2 ., 127 .17 2. 22 ., 2.3 22' ,.,\I:I) 17. ........ 50. .. .. 8.' 3 I 18 3.2 18 I. 30 ., ., "' ." " 1. " 1.3 '". ..1

28. PREWITT CREEK NEAR KARNAK

\Ill) 23. 1961.. .... 6.2S<,pt 19. 1962.... 6.2

33. BLACK BAYOU ~EAR ATLANTA

11:1\ 23, 1961....... 6.1Sept. lB. 1962..... 6.2

34. CADDO LAKE

t·t'h. 26. 1952 .....

" 0.16 ••• 3.' 17 I 3 .• I. 2. 27 '.3 .. , 127 0.11 31 '" " 1.3 1.8 ..,JUIl~ 21 ............ .. 28 '.2 •. 2 3 .• 22 23 I. 27 .2 l.5 11. .1. n 13 •• 1.7 172 7.1Au~. 25, 1953 ...... .. 22 .., 7.' 3.' 23 2' Id 31 .2 .2 125 .17 30 • .2 1.7 178 •••\0\1. 2. 1954. ..... .. " ." 7.' 3.7 24 3. 13 28 .3 .2 12. .1. " 2 .1 I.. '"' 7.1Au~. 20. 1956 ..... .. Id .1. ..2 ••• 28 33 11 J8 .. .2 118 .1. 32 , •• 2.2 203 ..8

Ju:y 22, 1959 ...... .." .13 8.' 2.7 23 2. Id 31 .2 .2 ,.7 ." 31 10 .1 1.8 177 •. 2

\1:1)' 18. 1960 ....... .. '8 L.8 ,.. 3.7 1. I. 12 30 ., .8 .7 . 13 28 " •• I.. 157 •••Jun<, 14, 1962 .. ... .. 17 '.8 ,., 2.2 21 12 11 33 .1 I., .7 . 13 23 13 67 I.. ". '.8June 23. 1963. ... .. 13 • •• ••• 3.2 24 2. 17 3. .2 .2 112 ." 33 17 .1 1.8 18. •••