Equus Beds Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) Project Active
The water supply for the city of Wichita, south-central Kansas, currently comes from the Equus Beds aquifer and Cheney Reservoir. Because these sources are not expected to meet projected city water needs into the 21st century (Warren and others, 1995), artificial recharge of the Equus Beds aquifer was investigated as one alternative to meet future water-supply demands. An additional potential benefit of artificial recharge includes preventing degradation of the water quality of the aquifer by saltwater plumes from the Arkansas River to the southwest and the Burrton oil field to the northwest (Ziegler and others, 1999). Phase I of the full-scale artificial recharge project began in 2007 and continued through 2012. Phase II became operational in April 2013 and has a design capacity of 30 Mgal/day.
Real-time Data:
Surface-water and groundwater sites:
National Real-Time Water Quality
National Water Dashboard
The Equus Beds ASR Project is a recent part of an 80-year cooperative water science effort with the city of Wichita, Kansas that began in the 1920s as the city began its water-supply development (Stone, 2017). Current (2023) water-quality monitoring efforts provides data to characterize real-time and changing water-quality measurements and allows the city of Wichita to make informed municipal water-supply decisions.
The city of Wichita, Kansas, uses the Equus Beds aquifer as a primary municipal water-supply source. Equus Beds aquifer water levels have decreased substantially (Hansen and others, 2014; Whisnant and others, 2015; Klager, 2016) because historically, irrigator, industrial, and municipal pumpage volumes exceeded the natural aquifer recharge rate. The Wichita well field is susceptible to saltwater (including chloride) contamination from the Arkansas River and intrusion from existing upgradient plumes near Burrton, Kansas, caused by oil field evaporation pits remaining from the 1930s (Klager and others, 2014). The Equus Beds ASR project was created by the city of Wichita to help meet future water demands.
The Equus Beds ASR project currently (2023) consists of two coexisting phases:
-
Phase I began in 2007 and has the capacity to capture 10 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) of Little Arkansas River water and indirect streambank-diversion well water for recharge activity with water injection in four wells and two recharge basins. Directly diverted stream water is treated using membrane filtration and advanced oxidation to reduce sediment and remove organic material before being recharged through the two recharge basins; streambank-diversion well pumped water is not treated further before recharge through the injection wells or basins (Garinger and others, 2011).
-
Phase II began in 2013 and includes a 30-Mgal/d surface-water treatment facility, a 60-Mgal/d river intake facility equipped to divert 30 Mgal/d and treat 15 Mgal/d, eight recharge-injection wells, and a recharge basin. The facility capacity of 30 Mgal/d requires a streamflow of about 100 cubic feet per second (ft3/s) or greater at the Little Arkansas River near Sedgwick, Kans., streamgage (USGS station 07144100; fig. 1) to operate. Water is directly diverted from the Little Arkansas River at the intake structure when streamflow exceeds about 100 ft3/s at this site. The city of Wichita has a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit (Kansas Permit number I-LA24-PO01; Federal Permit number KS0099694) to discharge waste from the ASR phase II surface-water treatment facility to the Little Arkansas River.
Figure 1. Location of the Equus Beds ASR project study area near Wichita, south-central Kansas.
Equus Beds ASR project study highlights:
-
The amount of aquifer water volume has recovered since the historic 1993 low because of less pumping, more natural recharge, and ASR (Klager, 2016).
-
The chloride plume near Burrton, Kans. (figs 1, 2, and 3), moves about 0.6 foot per day eastward toward the Wichita well field regardless of pumping (fig. 2; Klager and others, 2014).
Figure 2. Animation showing simulated chloride transport in the deep layer of the Equus Beds aquifer under existing pumping conditions from 1990 through 2008 (Klager and others, 2014).
Figure 3. Equus Beds ASR Project study area map showing shallow aquifer water-level changes from predevelopment to 1993 and chloride plume in deep wells that exceed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency drinking water criterion (>250 milligrams per liter) during 2006–12 moving eastward.
-
Water-quality constituents of concern collected during 1995 through 2012 did not increase substantially during and concurrent with Phase I activity and were likely more affected by climatological and natural processes than artificial recharge (Tappa and others, 2015).
-
A Hydrobiological Monitoring Project (HBMP) study using data collected during 2011–2014 showed that Phase II recharge activities did not result in substantial changes in Little Arkansas River or Equus Beds aquifer water quality; most Little Arkansas River water chemistry and biology (macroinvertebrates and fish) changes were largely attributable to hydrology (Stone and others, 2016).
-
Little Arkansas River water-quality constituent concentrations collected during 2001 through 2016 did not increase in comparison to sampling that preceded (1995 through 2012; Tappa and others, 2015) the study. Constituents of concern in the Equus Beds aquifer exceeded their respective Federal criteria throughout the study period and included chloride, sulfate, nitrate plus nitrite, Escherichia coli bacteria, total coliforms, and dissolved iron and arsenic species. (table 1; Stone and others, 2019).
Water-quality constituent or mineral phase | Federal MCL or SMCL or MCLG |
USGS pcode | n | Min | Max | Mean | Median | Percent exceeding MCL or SMCL |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Surface Water | ||||||||
Chloride, in mg/L | 250mg/L | 00940 | 387 | <5 | 530 | 84.3 | 60.0 | <1 |
Sulfate, in mg/L | 250mg/L | 00945 | 387 | <5 | 170 | 39 | 38 | 0 |
Nitrate plus nitrite as nitrogen, in mg/L | 10mg/L | 00631 | 389 | <0.02 | 11.7 | 1.11 | 0.85 | <1 |
Total coliform bacteria, in cfu/100 mL | 0 cfu/100 mL | 31504 | 181 | 30 | 360,000 | 14,351 | 2,440 | 100 |
Iron, in µg/L | 300 µg/L | 01046 | 370 | <4 | 620 | 81 | 50 | 7 |
Manganese, in µg/L | 50 µg/L | 01056 | 291 | <1 | 826 | 129 | 42 | 48 |
Arsenic, in µg/L | 10 µg/L | 01000 | 376 | <1 | 16.2 | 5.77 | 5.00 | 12 |
Atrazine, in µg/L | 3.0 µg/L | 39632 | 358 | <0.025 | 48.0 | 4.73 | 1.61 | 39 |
Shallow index wells | ||||||||
Chloride, in mg/L | 250mg/L | 00940 | 705 | <5 | 773 | 67.0 | 36 | 5 |
Sulfate, in mg/L | 250mg/L | 00945 | 699 | <5 | 770 | 152 | 100 | 18 |
Nitrate plus nitrite as nitrogen, in mg/L | 10mg/L | 00631 | 705 | <0.02 | 42.6 | 3.79 | 0.70 | 15 |
Total coliform bacteria, in cfu/100 mL | 0 cfu/100 mL | 31504 | 441 | <1 | 368 | 7 | 1 | 3 |
Iron, in µg/L | 300 µg/L | 01046 | 695 | <5 | 40,700 | 2,437 | 107 | 38 |
Manganese, in µg/L | 50 µg/L | 01056 | 692 | <1 | 1,660 | 279 | 90 | 55 |
Arsenic, in µg/L | 10 µg/L | 01000 | 703 | <1.0 | 55.0 | 3.83 | 1.50 | 12 |
Atrazine, in µg/L | 3.0 µg/L | 39632 | 246 | <0.006 | 2.280 | 0.062 | 0.009 | 0 |
Calcite, SI | - | - | 679 | -3.60 | 0.27 | -0.71 | -0.51 | - |
Iron (III) hydroxide, SI | - | - | 679 | -4.75 | 4.34 | 0.72 | 0.60 | - |
Iron hydroxide, SI | - | - | 679 | -13.69 | 6.88 | -2.52 | -1.92 | - |
Deep index wells | ||||||||
Chloride, in mg/L | 250mg/L | 00940 | 708 | <5 | 1,460 | 110.0 | 65 | 7 |
Sulfate, in mg/L | 250mg/L | 00945 | 705 | <5 | 720 | 1.11 | 69 | 13 |
Nitrate plus nitrite as nitrogen, in mg/L | 10mg/L | 00631 | 713 | <0.02 | 11.3 | 0.48 | 0.01 | <1 |
Total coliform bacteria, in cfu/100 mL | 0 cfu/100 mL | 31504 | 442 | <1 | 84 | - | - | 3 |
Iron, in µg/L | 300 µg/L | 01046 | 702 | <5 | 17,900 | 1,441 | 150 | 46 |
Manganese, in µg/L | 50 µg/L | 01056 | 707 | <1 | 1,640 | 440 | 310 | 92 |
Arsenic, in µg/L | 10 µg/L | 01000 | 705 | <1.0 | 23.9 | 7.43 | 6.00 | 34 |
Atrazine, in µg/L | 3.0 µg/L | 39632 | 183 | <0.007 | 0.090 | 0.009 | 0.004 | 0 |
Calcite, SI | - | - | 655 | -1.33 | 0.84 | -0.21 | -0.16 | - |
Iron (III) hydroxide, SI | - | - | 655 | -4.69 | 4.63 | 0.71 | 0.63 | - |
Iron hydroxide, SI | - | - | 655 | -13.49 | 7.89 | -1.35 | -0.90 | - |
Table 1. Little Arkansas River surface-water and Equus Beds index well groundwater water-quality summary statistics during 2001–16.
Figure 4. Average A, nitrate plus nitrite and B, dissolved arsenic concentrations in the shallow parts (depths below land surface equal to or less than 80 feet) of the Equus Beds aquifer 2001–16.
-
Little Arkansas River real-time computations of water-quality constituents for three Little Arkansas sites are available at the USGS National Real-Time Water Quality website (https:// nrtwq.usgs.gov) and include dissolved solids, primary ions (including bromide), nutrients, sediment, dissolved arsenic, and pesticides (including atrazine; Stone and Klager, 2022; Stone and Klager, 2023).
-
Little Arkansas River long-term (1995–2021) trend analyses showed that, generally, flow-normalized bromide, nitrate, and total phosphorus concentrations decreased; total organic carbon increased; and sediment concentrations neither increased or decreased. About one-quarter to one-half of the river loads, including nutrients and sediment, were transported during 1 percent of the time during the study (Stone and Klager, 2023).
Below are publications associated with this project.
Irrigation trends in Kansas, 1991-2011
Simulation of groundwater flow, effects of artificial recharge, and storage volume changes in the Equus Beds aquifer near the city of Wichita, Kansas well field, 1935–2008
Protocols for collection of streamflow, water-quality, streambed-sediment, periphyton, macroinvertebrate, fish, and habitat data to describe stream quality for the Hydrobiological Monitoring Program, Equus Beds Aquifer Storage and Recovery Program, city o
Determination of streamflow of the Arkansas River near Bentley in south-central Kansas
Effects of experimental passive artificial recharge of treated surface water on water quality in the Equus Beds Aquifer, 2009-2010
Water Quality in the Equus Beds Aquifer and the Little Arkansas River Before Implementation of Large-Scale Artificial Recharge, South-Central Kansas, 1995-2005
Status of groundwater levels and storage volume in the Equus Beds aquifer near Wichita, Kansas, January 2006 to January 2010
Sediment Quality and Comparison to Historical Water Quality, Little Arkansas River Basin, South-Central Kansas, 2007
Geochemical effects of induced stream-water and artificial recharge on the Equus Beds Aquifer, South-Central Kansas, 1995-2004
Status of ground-water levels and storage volume in the Equus Beds aquifer Near Wichita, Kansas, January 2003-January 2006
Status of ground-water levels and storage volume in the Equus Beds aquifer near Wichita, Kansas, January 2000-January 2003
Status of ground-water levels and storage volume in the Wichita well field area, south-central Kansas, 1998-2000
Below are partners associated with this project.
- Overview
The water supply for the city of Wichita, south-central Kansas, currently comes from the Equus Beds aquifer and Cheney Reservoir. Because these sources are not expected to meet projected city water needs into the 21st century (Warren and others, 1995), artificial recharge of the Equus Beds aquifer was investigated as one alternative to meet future water-supply demands. An additional potential benefit of artificial recharge includes preventing degradation of the water quality of the aquifer by saltwater plumes from the Arkansas River to the southwest and the Burrton oil field to the northwest (Ziegler and others, 1999). Phase I of the full-scale artificial recharge project began in 2007 and continued through 2012. Phase II became operational in April 2013 and has a design capacity of 30 Mgal/day.
Real-time Data:Surface-water and groundwater sites:
National Real-Time Water QualityNational Water DashboardThe Equus Beds ASR Project is a recent part of an 80-year cooperative water science effort with the city of Wichita, Kansas that began in the 1920s as the city began its water-supply development (Stone, 2017). Current (2023) water-quality monitoring efforts provides data to characterize real-time and changing water-quality measurements and allows the city of Wichita to make informed municipal water-supply decisions.
The city of Wichita, Kansas, uses the Equus Beds aquifer as a primary municipal water-supply source. Equus Beds aquifer water levels have decreased substantially (Hansen and others, 2014; Whisnant and others, 2015; Klager, 2016) because historically, irrigator, industrial, and municipal pumpage volumes exceeded the natural aquifer recharge rate. The Wichita well field is susceptible to saltwater (including chloride) contamination from the Arkansas River and intrusion from existing upgradient plumes near Burrton, Kansas, caused by oil field evaporation pits remaining from the 1930s (Klager and others, 2014). The Equus Beds ASR project was created by the city of Wichita to help meet future water demands.
The Equus Beds ASR project currently (2023) consists of two coexisting phases:
-
Phase I began in 2007 and has the capacity to capture 10 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) of Little Arkansas River water and indirect streambank-diversion well water for recharge activity with water injection in four wells and two recharge basins. Directly diverted stream water is treated using membrane filtration and advanced oxidation to reduce sediment and remove organic material before being recharged through the two recharge basins; streambank-diversion well pumped water is not treated further before recharge through the injection wells or basins (Garinger and others, 2011).
-
Phase II began in 2013 and includes a 30-Mgal/d surface-water treatment facility, a 60-Mgal/d river intake facility equipped to divert 30 Mgal/d and treat 15 Mgal/d, eight recharge-injection wells, and a recharge basin. The facility capacity of 30 Mgal/d requires a streamflow of about 100 cubic feet per second (ft3/s) or greater at the Little Arkansas River near Sedgwick, Kans., streamgage (USGS station 07144100; fig. 1) to operate. Water is directly diverted from the Little Arkansas River at the intake structure when streamflow exceeds about 100 ft3/s at this site. The city of Wichita has a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit (Kansas Permit number I-LA24-PO01; Federal Permit number KS0099694) to discharge waste from the ASR phase II surface-water treatment facility to the Little Arkansas River.
Figure 1. Location of the Equus Beds ASR project study area near Wichita, south-central Kansas.
Equus Beds ASR project study highlights:
-
The amount of aquifer water volume has recovered since the historic 1993 low because of less pumping, more natural recharge, and ASR (Klager, 2016).
-
The chloride plume near Burrton, Kans. (figs 1, 2, and 3), moves about 0.6 foot per day eastward toward the Wichita well field regardless of pumping (fig. 2; Klager and others, 2014).
Figure 2. Animation showing simulated chloride transport in the deep layer of the Equus Beds aquifer under existing pumping conditions from 1990 through 2008 (Klager and others, 2014).
Figure 3. Equus Beds ASR Project study area map showing shallow aquifer water-level changes from predevelopment to 1993 and chloride plume in deep wells that exceed U.S. Environmental Protection Agency drinking water criterion (>250 milligrams per liter) during 2006–12 moving eastward.
-
Water-quality constituents of concern collected during 1995 through 2012 did not increase substantially during and concurrent with Phase I activity and were likely more affected by climatological and natural processes than artificial recharge (Tappa and others, 2015).
-
A Hydrobiological Monitoring Project (HBMP) study using data collected during 2011–2014 showed that Phase II recharge activities did not result in substantial changes in Little Arkansas River or Equus Beds aquifer water quality; most Little Arkansas River water chemistry and biology (macroinvertebrates and fish) changes were largely attributable to hydrology (Stone and others, 2016).
-
Little Arkansas River water-quality constituent concentrations collected during 2001 through 2016 did not increase in comparison to sampling that preceded (1995 through 2012; Tappa and others, 2015) the study. Constituents of concern in the Equus Beds aquifer exceeded their respective Federal criteria throughout the study period and included chloride, sulfate, nitrate plus nitrite, Escherichia coli bacteria, total coliforms, and dissolved iron and arsenic species. (table 1; Stone and others, 2019).
Water-quality constituent or mineral phase Federal MCL or
SMCL or MCLGUSGS pcode n Min Max Mean Median Percent exceeding MCL or SMCL Surface Water Chloride, in mg/L 250mg/L 00940 387 <5 530 84.3 60.0 <1 Sulfate, in mg/L 250mg/L 00945 387 <5 170 39 38 0 Nitrate plus nitrite as nitrogen, in mg/L 10mg/L 00631 389 <0.02 11.7 1.11 0.85 <1 Total coliform bacteria, in cfu/100 mL 0 cfu/100 mL 31504 181 30 360,000 14,351 2,440 100 Iron, in µg/L 300 µg/L 01046 370 <4 620 81 50 7 Manganese, in µg/L 50 µg/L 01056 291 <1 826 129 42 48 Arsenic, in µg/L 10 µg/L 01000 376 <1 16.2 5.77 5.00 12 Atrazine, in µg/L 3.0 µg/L 39632 358 <0.025 48.0 4.73 1.61 39 Shallow index wells Chloride, in mg/L 250mg/L 00940 705 <5 773 67.0 36 5 Sulfate, in mg/L 250mg/L 00945 699 <5 770 152 100 18 Nitrate plus nitrite as nitrogen, in mg/L 10mg/L 00631 705 <0.02 42.6 3.79 0.70 15 Total coliform bacteria, in cfu/100 mL 0 cfu/100 mL 31504 441 <1 368 7 1 3 Iron, in µg/L 300 µg/L 01046 695 <5 40,700 2,437 107 38 Manganese, in µg/L 50 µg/L 01056 692 <1 1,660 279 90 55 Arsenic, in µg/L 10 µg/L 01000 703 <1.0 55.0 3.83 1.50 12 Atrazine, in µg/L 3.0 µg/L 39632 246 <0.006 2.280 0.062 0.009 0 Calcite, SI - - 679 -3.60 0.27 -0.71 -0.51 - Iron (III) hydroxide, SI - - 679 -4.75 4.34 0.72 0.60 - Iron hydroxide, SI - - 679 -13.69 6.88 -2.52 -1.92 - Deep index wells Chloride, in mg/L 250mg/L 00940 708 <5 1,460 110.0 65 7 Sulfate, in mg/L 250mg/L 00945 705 <5 720 1.11 69 13 Nitrate plus nitrite as nitrogen, in mg/L 10mg/L 00631 713 <0.02 11.3 0.48 0.01 <1 Total coliform bacteria, in cfu/100 mL 0 cfu/100 mL 31504 442 <1 84 - - 3 Iron, in µg/L 300 µg/L 01046 702 <5 17,900 1,441 150 46 Manganese, in µg/L 50 µg/L 01056 707 <1 1,640 440 310 92 Arsenic, in µg/L 10 µg/L 01000 705 <1.0 23.9 7.43 6.00 34 Atrazine, in µg/L 3.0 µg/L 39632 183 <0.007 0.090 0.009 0.004 0 Calcite, SI - - 655 -1.33 0.84 -0.21 -0.16 - Iron (III) hydroxide, SI - - 655 -4.69 4.63 0.71 0.63 - Iron hydroxide, SI - - 655 -13.49 7.89 -1.35 -0.90 - Table 1. Little Arkansas River surface-water and Equus Beds index well groundwater water-quality summary statistics during 2001–16.
Figure 4. Average A, nitrate plus nitrite and B, dissolved arsenic concentrations in the shallow parts (depths below land surface equal to or less than 80 feet) of the Equus Beds aquifer 2001–16.
-
Little Arkansas River real-time computations of water-quality constituents for three Little Arkansas sites are available at the USGS National Real-Time Water Quality website (https:// nrtwq.usgs.gov) and include dissolved solids, primary ions (including bromide), nutrients, sediment, dissolved arsenic, and pesticides (including atrazine; Stone and Klager, 2022; Stone and Klager, 2023).
-
Little Arkansas River long-term (1995–2021) trend analyses showed that, generally, flow-normalized bromide, nitrate, and total phosphorus concentrations decreased; total organic carbon increased; and sediment concentrations neither increased or decreased. About one-quarter to one-half of the river loads, including nutrients and sediment, were transported during 1 percent of the time during the study (Stone and Klager, 2023).
-
- Publications
Below are publications associated with this project.
Filter Total Items: 39Irrigation trends in Kansas, 1991-2011
This fact sheet examines trends in total reported irrigation water use and acres irrigated as well as irrigation water use by crop type and system type in Kansas for the years 1991 through 2011. During the 21-year period, total reported irrigation water diversions varied substantially from year to year as affected primarily by climatic fluctuations. Total reported acres irrigated remained comparatAuthorsJoan F. Kenny, Kyle E. JuracekSimulation of groundwater flow, effects of artificial recharge, and storage volume changes in the Equus Beds aquifer near the city of Wichita, Kansas well field, 1935–2008
The Equus Beds aquifer is a primary water-supply source for Wichita, Kansas and the surrounding area because of shallow depth to water, large saturated thickness, and generally good water quality. Substantial water-level declines in the Equus Beds aquifer have resulted from pumping groundwater for agricultural and municipal needs, as well as periodic drought conditions. In March 2006, the city ofAuthorsBrian P. Kelly, Linda L. Pickett, Cristi V. Hansen, Andrew C. ZieglerProtocols for collection of streamflow, water-quality, streambed-sediment, periphyton, macroinvertebrate, fish, and habitat data to describe stream quality for the Hydrobiological Monitoring Program, Equus Beds Aquifer Storage and Recovery Program, city o
The city of Wichita, Kansas uses the Equus Beds aquifer, one of two sources, for municipal water supply. To meet future water needs, plans for artificial recharge of the aquifer have been implemented in several phases. Phase I of the Equus Beds Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) Program began with injection of water from the Little Arkansas River into the aquifer for storage and subsequent recoverAuthorsMandy L. Stone, Teresa J. Rasmussen, Trudy J. Bennett, Barry C. Poulton, Andrew C. ZieglerDetermination of streamflow of the Arkansas River near Bentley in south-central Kansas
The Kansas Department of Agriculture, Division of Water Resources, requires that the streamflow of the Arkansas River just upstream from Bentley in south-central Kansas be measured or calculated before groundwater can be pumped from the well field. When the daily streamflow of the Arkansas River near Bentley is less than 165 cubic feet per second (ft3/s), pumping must be curtailed. Daily streamfloAuthorsCharles A. PerryEffects of experimental passive artificial recharge of treated surface water on water quality in the Equus Beds Aquifer, 2009-2010
Declining water levels and concerns about the migration of a known saltwater plume upgradient from public supply wells prompted the City of Wichita to investigate the feasibility of using artificial recharge to replenish the water supply in the Equus Beds aquifer. After preliminary testing, the City of Wichita began Phase I of the Equus Beds Aquifer Storage and Recovery Project in 2006. In 2009, tAuthorsLinda Pickett Garinger, Aaron S. King, Andrew C. ZieglerWater Quality in the Equus Beds Aquifer and the Little Arkansas River Before Implementation of Large-Scale Artificial Recharge, South-Central Kansas, 1995-2005
Artificial recharge of the Equus Beds aquifer using runoff from the Little Arkansas River in south-central Kansas was first proposed in 1956 and was one of many options considered by the city of Wichita to preserve its water supply. Declining aquifer water levels of as much as 50 feet exacerbated concerns about future water availability and enhanced migration of saltwater into the aquifer from pasAuthorsAndrew C. Ziegler, Cristi V. Hansen, Daniel A. FinnStatus of groundwater levels and storage volume in the Equus Beds aquifer near Wichita, Kansas, January 2006 to January 2010
A part of the Equus Beds aquifer in southwestern Harvey County and northwestern Sedgwick County was developed to supply water to residents of Wichita and for irrigation in south-central Kansas. Groundwater pumping for city and agricultural use caused water levels to decline in a large part of the aquifer northwest of Wichita. In 1965, the city of Wichita began using water from Cheney Reservoir inAuthorsCristi V. Hansen, Walter R. AucottSediment Quality and Comparison to Historical Water Quality, Little Arkansas River Basin, South-Central Kansas, 2007
The spatial and temporal variability in streambed-sediment quality and its relation to historical water quality was assessed to provide guidance for the development of total maximum daily loads and the implementation of best-management practices in the Little Arkansas River Basin, south-central Kansas. Streambed-sediment samples were collected at 26 sites in 2007, sieved to isolate the less than 6AuthorsKyle E. Juracek, Patrick P. RasmussenGeochemical effects of induced stream-water and artificial recharge on the Equus Beds Aquifer, South-Central Kansas, 1995-2004
Artificial recharge of the Equus Beds aquifer is part of a strategy implemented by the city of Wichita, Kansas, to preserve future water supply and address declining water levels in the aquifer of as much as 30 feet caused by withdrawals for water supply and irrigation since the 1940s. Water-level declines represent a diminished water supply and also may accelerate migration of saltwater from theAuthorsHeather C. Ross Schmidt, Andrew C. Ziegler, David L. ParkhurstStatus of ground-water levels and storage volume in the Equus Beds aquifer Near Wichita, Kansas, January 2003-January 2006
The Equus Beds aquifer northwest of Wichita, Kansas, was developed to supply water to Wichita residents and for irrigation in south-central Kansas. Ground-water pumping for city and agricultural use from the aquifer caused water levels to decline in a large part of the aquifer northwest of Wichita. Irrigation pumpage in the area increased substantially during the 1970s and 1980s and accelerated waAuthorsCristi V. HansenStatus of ground-water levels and storage volume in the Equus Beds aquifer near Wichita, Kansas, January 2000-January 2003
The Equus Beds aquifer northwest of Wichita, Kansas, was developed to supply water to Wichita residents and for irrigation in south-central Kansas beginning on September 1, 1940. Ground-water pumping for city and agricultural use from the aquifer caused water levels to decline in a large part of the area. Irrigation pumpage in the area increased substantially during the 1970s and 1980s and accelerAuthorsCristi V. Hansen, Walter R. AucottStatus of ground-water levels and storage volume in the Wichita well field area, south-central Kansas, 1998-2000
No abstract available.AuthorsCristi V. Hansen, Walter R. Aucott - Partners
Below are partners associated with this project.