Title: Evidentiary Evaluation, Renewal of CUP No. 200004
CITATION PAGE IMAGE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00051208/00001
 Material Information
Title: Evidentiary Evaluation, Renewal of CUP No. 200004
Alternate Title: Evidentiary Evaluation, Renewal of CUP No. 200004 Cosme-Odessa Well Field
Physical Description: 154p.
Language: English
Publication Date: August 19, 1982
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
General Note: Box 2, Folder 5C ( COSME-ODESSA SFWMD - SWFWMD ), Item 48
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00051208
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text




L N I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
00 HL


C -

CD c.


WI L

0 I ', ' I I' .





.W.. W


., , I t I I I .
S'-


ILl
'I I I I I I ",I '-' I 'I)
UDL
* -"-

S 1 I I I I- I I I I I I I
0 '-- I- I- I- 1- 1-I- -!- -I- -!- -1- --00 LL i






03 L




0 0
f CO

l 0 00 C
... .." r-
















O


-'--',----,- n-
TI L.









cT o a





Figure 2. Location of Co a-Odessa, Section 21, and Soutbasco Well Fields








LAND O'LAKES








S C SOUTH PASCO
PASCO CO.
587 00

002
* oi o7




go W










to TA.MPA
Z J






0n 1 2ie 3
J 0cl i mil e s
SCOSMEDESSA .


Q)
rl l ,, ,, ., 1,




mA
I

I I -- I I I I I -




W 0 0

-



7 -
lD il- c- w
mCD o
m <
LLCI > -% >
0 V-4 rY
0 O -- 2:::

S r s
LJi. 0, N---- ~-^ "


ZW

> T ---"-- I




1- ---- rL


- o-- i


...J ___
W -






Oi





. '-80



CO -80








>-- .. ---7--.- ,-------_ ---
Sz-00




CD ------------_>---------- H |
Q~L ----------- '---------- --L
CD



H J) 0




CD CCD


z 0 S


r< c .. O..jF lb
z- z <



.OH cO1
<--CO -O -
0 CD O-- CO













c- -o- :3 c <




to
- wz > -Hz -... ~ Z<

W .. |c



0 c -- wL -
I-- cr )







S. -i
W -U -CO L2 i

=O 00





i






1 ---J>-H---40Z _ZLLW
______..-________-_r0- 90
IT, r(
L LC)
C0-90









July 20, 1982



TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

TO: A. Wiley, Hydrologist, Resource Regulation Department

FROM: M. Dooris, Environmental Manager, Resource Regulation Department

RE: CUP No. 200004, Cosme-Odessa Well Field

Attached is the evaluation of the impacts on surface water of pumpage at Cosme-
Odessa Well Field. The evaluation, which included 15 lakes and 2 streams in
the Cosme-Odessa area, is divided into two parts. First, a description of the
history and current status of lake levels and stream flow is presented. Second,
the impacts of pumpage are described. This analysis of impacts was done using
a stepwise regression technique, an accepted statistical method. The results
of the analysis demonstrate that, along with other hydrologic parameters, the
groundwater withdrawal associated with well field operation is an important
factor influencing lake levels. The attached report indicates the magnitude
of jhe influence of pumpage.










-i


r







-U








Attachment F


C-60
CO-60













0- "- (] (1,** *** ) 0.e











* "- ,- -
,, ,






cu a*









S.








-i ) w.QI;

** r I :

4,m !l

LI*C 4 K


S- i-o *
U C









































S I.4I
014A Vl t0 4
0EW 4 0 ,c
Sa t i C ll
SM I Ir
0i I N i i












0IO 0 0 a
49 C)3 4-> v,



























K i M i I
41 4 c : 4 iK













emPM1 0O
Ci P i ,f 3 *














: Inc C M .
;- j, :
U, I ID 0) a







Im i. 0: 0i






















0 49
-- I 0 :

: ii i I< i i i '





I 1 4 (U

I S 4 I iII

* 1 1 -4 Q
j '* i








S : 4 i ; ; *



4 I i:



I I O !. iI
t 1 I : 1 i
I I Iti I






jji .




Summary on Lake Levels

INTRODUCTION

PumpageHistor The operation of the Cosine-Odessa Well Field began in 1931.
During the first 13 years of operation, pumpage at the well field steadily
-increased, but did not exceed 5.0 MGD (Figure la). This steady increase con-
tinued through 1960-61, when average annual pumpage reached peaks of over 19
MGD. Since that time, pumpage generally declined as other well fields became
operational (Figures la-lc). Average annual pumpage for the period 1962-81
was 10 MGD or less in 11 of those 20 years. Only in 1972 did pumpage reach
levels reminiscent of 1960-61 (Figure la).
While pumpage at Cosme-Odessa has been less than 10 MGD in the last four years
for which data exist (1978-81), municipal pumpage from the Hillsborough/Pinellas
County area has increased (Figure le). The combined pumpage for the four major
- well fields currently pumping (Cosme-Odessa, Section 21, South Pasco and
Eldridge-Wilde) has averaged over 50 MGD since the early 1960s, which repre-
sents a twenty-fold increase since pumping first began from Cosme-Odessa in
1931. Total area pumpage is important since lake levels may be affected by
more than one well field and by the total regional municipal pumpage. There-
fore, it should be remembered that, although this report is restricted to
lake level impacts related to Cosme-Odessa, the lakes discussed are influenced
by the other large-scale ground water withdrawals in Hillsborough and Pinellas
Counties.
Data Base The lakes included in the well field impact analysis are in the
Brooker Creek and Rocky Creek watersheds (Figure 2). Approximately 50 named
lakes lie in the area. Of these 50, data are available on 34 lakes. These
Sdata include (1) stage and discharge measurements by the United State Geological
Survey (USGS) (32 lakes) and by the city of St. Petersburg (2 lakes), (2) offi-
cial lake levels adopted by the District Governing Board, and (3) other specific
information on lakes (e.g., presence of inlets, outlets, culverts, control struc-
tures, augmentation or withdrawal facilities, elevations of lakeshore vegetation,
record high and low elevations, etc.). All of this information was used in
making the present analysis of well field effects on surface water bodies. The
analysis includes an evaluation of stage and discharge hydrographs using statis-
tical methods. For this work, particular attention was paid to the long-term
hydrologic records of the USGS on a total of 15 lakes and 2 streams (Table 1).
For this analysis, the lakes were divided into categories based on the presence
of augmentation facilities or control structures (Table 1).

Category #1 lakes, both inside and outside of the well field, having
no control structures or augmentation facilities which
are used on a routine basis.
Category #2 lakes having control structures, and

Category #3 lakes having augmentation facilities.
Methods This evaluation was conducted in two parts. First, an analysis of
available data was done in order to identify past trends in lake levels and
streamflow. This analysis is discussed in the next sections of this report
dealing with lake stage and streamflow histories. Second, a statistical anal-
ysis of data was done (specific methods described later) in order to identify
the relationship between lake stage and pumpage and to predict the effects of
future pumpage on lakes.


CO-61









CO ---- C

< .-. C
rY




00"
*l- -
D000


IO _





WO J >. J
S- -




-D u co co Co
w .... 0 H -
---- >
_JQ I 71

0 LO





WN W-- i
O- LLC
-I :
Z



LL> r- H




-- CD>


1---------. _3---------------
- IE< 0



LU7 I
.. LU ~ H,



C-




U0-7








[ i iI I IC





CCL
c w H___
D m a) n
Z


Cf 0 H




1
-ow -K '

-C < I- "-



_53 [, ,, _






y -J^U1-- -i-C
.. ^ .. .. <
., ._, <- L- -- -







y -
-- ------------------- r C




r -)




- -I 00 00 CD ID t r Q



S,-J


C0O-81










coJ 0











o z 0
CD N-
S- C
"C 3 C




OOH
L0d m---- '-4
- ZI
















r*2
mI) I- 1
S., W. CD DL

- OS) 5)0 ,'-


H( _1 )


ZIO CCD 0. C
W "-M _O



LW.JW> ,- 1. C






OCO-91
- Y --.--. .......-- -. CO






" ,






CO-91















SOUThWEST FLORIOA WATER IMAIAGEMENI T DISTRICT
(SWFW4O)
COISUMPTIVE USE PERMIT

PERMIT GRAMTEO TO: PERMIT ;O. 7SGOC04
DATE PERMIT G.i;.FEO:
_City of .St. Petersbursg DATE PERPMIT APPLICA0T-O .--
FILED: Seotember 4. 1975
P. 0. oax 2842 PEPRMIT EXPIRES 0:1: oeccra'r 3 i-lis
SOURCE CVSSLFICATl1:t: Forin AcuiFer
St. Petersburl Florida USE CLASSIFICATIO4: Publtcc S'j:=lv
i-ega i 11ame a.4 SriS z .........
TLa1 ame and Address)

TERMS ANO COIOITIOIS OF THIS PERMIT ARE AS FOLLOWS:

1. That all statements in the application and in supporting dat; are
true and accurate and based upon the best information available,
and that all conditions set forth herein will be complied with. If
any of the statements in the application and in the supporting data
are found to be untrue and inaccurate, or if applicant fails to comply
IW with all of the conditions set forth herein, then this Permit shall
automatically become null and void.
2. This Permit is predicated upon the assertion by applicant that the
use of water applied for and granted is and continues to be a reison-
O able beneficial use as defined in Section 379.019(S), Florida
Statutes, is and continues to be consistent with the public int.rast,
and will not interfere with any legal use of .atcr existing cn the
date thick Permit is granted.

3. In granting this Permit, SUFIl.O has, by regulation, reserved from use
by applicant, water in such locations and quantities, for such. seasons
of the year, as it determines may be required for the protection of
fish and wildlife and the public health and safety. Such reser'-tions
are subject to periodic review and revision in light of changed
conditions.
4. Based upon the application and supporting documents, S':F'.10 finis
that the applicant's use of water was in existence before January 1,
1975 at the rate of 9 million gallons per day
5. nothing in this Permit should be construed to linit the authority of
Southwest Florida hater Mlanagement District to declare water shortages
and issue orders pursuant to Section 373.175, Florida Statutes, or to
formulate a plan for implementation during periods of water shortage
pursuant to Section 373.246, Florida Statutes..
6. This Permit authorizes the applicant named above to make a ,maxtxita
combined average annual withdrawal of 19 million gallons of water
per day with a rMximum combined wicnedrawal rate not to
-.. exceed 22 rod during a single day. Wi thdrawals are
authorized as shown in the table below.
7. W/ITIHORAAL POUIT GALLOfNS PE DOAY GALLC::S PER c.iY
LATITUDE LO;:G ITUOE .AXJ -U_ AVERAGE

Production Wel ls
2805' S0 82o35'49" 120000CO0 943480
2805'50" 823;5'4'.3" 5 S75C00 563480
2806' 6" 82035'29*g: 500CO 443430
2806'11" 02035'16" 1ZCOO00CO 998480
2806'22" 82035'14" 120C00CO 993430
2806' 1" 235' 3' 8 1200OCO 953480
2806'43" 82034' 25" 1000CO 943380
28o6''" 12034'Z20. 12CCC00 100CO 000
2806'35" 8235' 4" 1CO0000 90440
2Ro, .52. 2ol3t7' 17" 170l0r10 lnn ton







Attachment C

CO-51




mm



TABLE 1. Lakes and streams included in the evaluation of the impacts of
Cosme-Odessa Well Field on surface waters.


Category #1 Lakes having no control structures or augmentation facilities
used routinely
Low Management Level (ft. msl)

Alice 40.25 Mound 48.00
Buck 32.00 Rainbow 37.50
Calm 47.50 Raleigh 38.00
Church 34.00 Rogers Recommended levels
Echo 34.00 Turkey Ford 51.50
Juanita 40.00

Category #2 Lakes having control structures


Crescent 40.00
Keystone 39.75
Pretty 42.75

Category #3 Lakes having augmentation facilities


Sunset 32.50





























CO-102






LAKE STAGE HISTORY

Category #1 Stages of Lakes Alice, Buck, Calm, Church, Echo, Juanita, and
Rainbow have not changed significantly from the beginning to the end of their
periods of record; however, only Lake Church has a record exceeding 20 years.
Hydrographs for each of these lakes appear in Figures 3 through 10. Records
on the remaining lakes begin no earlier than 1971. Available records are
sufficient to indicate recent lake stage patterns. Each of the seven lakes
has shown peaks as well as declines in elevation. Major periods of lake
decline occurred in 1961-62, in 1968, and in 1973. High lake stage periods
were observed in 1959-60, in 1974, and in 1979. These peaks were associated
with abnormally high rainfall in 1959, 1960, 1974, and 1979. Since 1979, lake -
levels have shown a gradual drop, and Lakes Alice, Buck, Calm, Church, Juanita,
and Rainbow remain below their adopted low management elevations at this time.

Historical lake levels on short-record lakes could be determined from the
studies done for the District's Lake Level Regulation Project. Vegetational
and cultural features around the lakes indicate that, at the start of the
period of record, stages on Lakes Alice, Buck, Echo, Juanita, and Rainbow
were already depressed 3 to 5 feet below normal elevations. Therefore, the
stage records on these five lakes represent a lower-than-normal condition.
Frequency analysis supports this statement. The lakes have been at or below
the adopted low-management level (considered a normal seasonal low) for most
of each year since 1971 (Figure 11). In the case of Lakes Alice and Buck, the
low-management level has been exceeded, on the average, only in 1974, in 1976
(for Lake Alice), and in 1979.

Because of the longer record on Lake Church, additional evaluation of the lake
stage history was done (Figure 6). From 1957 (beginning of the period of record)
through 1973, the level of Lake Church declined gradually from a mean annual
stage of 34.34 feet msl to a mean annual stage of 30.40 feet msl. In 1974, in
response to an unusually heavy rainfall, the lake stage increased approximately
5.5 feet. Following that, the lake stage stabilized within 1.5 feet on either
side of 30.0 feet msl until 1979 when a peak stage of over 36 feet msl was
reached. Since 1979, a gradual decline in lake stage has occurred, as previously
described for other lakes. On the average, a period of lower levels occurred
between 1961 and 1973 (Figure 11) when Lake Church stages were at or below the
low management level the majority of the time.
The seven lakes just discussed exhibited similar stage history patterns. How-
ever, Mound Lake, which has neither an augmentation facility nor a control
structure showed a stage record characterized by less than two feet of fluctu-
ation (Figure 9). Further, the mean annual lake stage has not dropped below
the adopted low management level during the period of record (1973-82) (Figure 11).
Mound Lake is, apparently, a more stable surface water system.
Two other lakes fall in Category #1, but these lakes are located inside the
well field. Stages on these lakes, Rogers and Raleigh, have shown a signi-
ficant decline since well field pumping began in the early 1930s. Stage
declines between 1931 and 1978 totaled approximately 11 feet on Lake Rogers
and 8 feet on Lake Raleigh. Although data are somewhat fragmentary, it appears
that the decline became most pronounced since 1961. Both lakes rose approxi-
mately 5 feet as a result of the rainfall of 1974, and stages stabilized at
somewhat higher elevations through the remainder of the period of record
(Figures 12 and 13).



CO-62









,. CO I



..0 0 LU .. .,



C C> )




L0
m 0 .. .. ......

-- <


-- L





L U .. .... L
Z W -- -">i----0Z --. LLW




) eCO -- 7




























- I I O \ I I I \ I -














,
0 \0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
*I I i












W

t;1





\








U --
S. 0

I -














00
____ C





CO-82










>_ L


So

W 03 H

< um
Z<- O--------- -




SiD N
CmZ CD ~


UJO..
Y 00

Sr
... J -.....-...- 3 .



co -- -
S-- '- z I,.
4J Lli

S..
0O



OLi-
_ Li_ y





L i ,,! ,-.i--,0Z -CD L TW L-
-J I _I>- J
> or---- ^r^--- i ----- i-













CO-92























28o7'13" 82o34'13" / 1200000 993480
2806' 0O 82035' 3"/6 1000000 873480
2006' 1" 82035'18"/' 575000 543480
"28o6' 8" 8235' 3"/9 100000 983480
28o6'14" 8235'30" 1200000 963480
2896'22" 82035' 33r 1150000 100C000
28o7'14" 82034'20" A 575000 566950
2807'21" 82034'21 Z' 850000 723480
2807'33 82034'21"n 1000000 783480
2807'44" 82034*29. 575000 543480
287'52" 82034'30"-; 750000 643480
2807'58" 82034'33 4" 850000 763480
280812" 82034'40"3 1000000 789960

.8. The use of said water is restricted to the use classification set forth
above. Any change in the use of said water will require a ncdification
of this Permit.
9.. In the event an emergency water shortage should be declared, the
District may alter, modify or declare to be inactive, all or parts of
thisPermit. An authorized District Representative cay, at any
reasonable time, enter the property to inspect the facilities and may
require that this Permit be shown.
10. Applicant shall comply with the following items, and if Applicant
fails to comply with them, then this Permit shall automatically
become null and void:
A. That the City, its agents and employees, shall not withdraw or cause
to be withdrawn, from the wells in the aforesaid Cos.e-Cdassa :ell
Field, IHillsborough County, Florida, any amount of water which will
cause the weekly average elevation of the potentiometrit surface of
the Floridan Aquifer as determined cumulatively to be less than:
(a) Twenty (20) feet above mean sea level as measured at Grace 3
Observation Well (280607:823530:).
(b) Twenty-five (25) feet above mean sea level as measured at tha
"James II" Observation 1Wall (280703::C323417).
(c) Twenty-four (24) feet above mean sea level as measured at the
"Calm 33A" Otservation W.'ll (28083i032343e).

B. In connection with the operation of the Cosae-Odessa Well Field:
(a) At no time shall the weekly average elevations of the ,otenticmetric
surface of the Floridan Aquifer be more than 3 feet below the
elevations set forth in Paragraph 1 above.
(b) Weekly average elevations shall be calculated by adding together
the high reading for each day and the low reading for each day,
then dividing the sum thereof by 14.; each weekly period shall
commence at 12:01 a.m. on Saturda.y of each week.
(c) The weekly average elevations shall be determined cumulatively.
from November 1, 1973 through Saptr.ber 30, 1974. A new
production year shall start on October 1, 1974 and each Occ:ber
1 thereafter. Cumulative weekly average elevations shall not
carry over from one production year to another.
C. Reports of weekly average elevations for each weekly period shall be
made by City to District by telephone on the following tlonday and
confirmed in writing in a form to be provided by District: such weekly
periods shall cornrence at 12:01 a.m. on Saturday of each *ee k.






CO-52










Table 2. Departure from Average Flow (cfs) for Rocky Creek and Brooker Creek
Brooker Creek

Year Rocky Creek at Sulfur Springs at Lake Fern at Tarpon Springs
1952 4.01
1953 19.25 23.13
1954 4.73 6.91
1955 -25.41 7.56
1956 -31.24 -15.81
1957 20.08 22.66
1958 1.11 5.95
1959 75.02 67.49
1960 57.87 49.67
1961 -19.67 -17.95
1962 10.06 -11.72
1963 -10.73 7.0
1964 30.81 16.81
1965 4.67 6.19
1966 8.31 7.95
1967 -15.48 -17.28
1968 -13.67 8.22
1969 4.94 15.86
1970 -11.07 7.26 1.02
1971 -10.49 2.08 6.02
1972 -28.98 6.96 -19.35
1973 -18.55 6.96 -18.7
1974 4.52 13.81 7.51
1975 8.75 1.02 7.7
1976 -13.44 1.91 -11.09
1977 -22.32 4.99 -17.51
1978 6.24 0.12 8.58
1979 47.63 9.18 8.02
1980 8.57 5.02 -17.1
1981 -15.53 6.91 -15.3







Data from USGS











CO-103







Category #2 Stages on these three lakes have not declined significantly
from the beginning to the end of the period of record (Figure 14 through 16).
Lake Crescent did undergo one serious stage decline in 1972-73, but, after that
time, the average annual lake stage has been maintained above the adopted low
management level of 40.0 feet msl the majority of the time (Figure 11). Average
annual stages of Lake Keystone and Lake Pretty have generally been above the
adopted low management level (Figure 11).

Category #3 Lake Sunset showed stage declines in 1973 as well as stage peaks
in 1974 and 1979 as just described for Category #1 lakes (Figure 17). With
the exception of 1973, the lake has been at or above the adopted low management
level for the majority of the period of record as a result of augmentation
(Figure 11).

STREAMFLOW HISTORY

Information was collected on the following stations:

1. Rocky Creek near Sulfur Springs,

2. Brooker Creek near Lake Fern, and

3. Brooker Creek near Tarpon Springs.
Discharge hydrographs for these three stations are presented in Figures 18
through 20.

Mean discharge at the Rocky Creek station has ranged between 4.36 cfs and
110.62 cfs over the 29-year period of record. The median daily discharge
is 9.9 cfs, while the average annual discharge is 35.6 cfs. Flow has not
changed significantly from the beginning to the end of the record; however,
a prolonged period of generally below average discharge occurred from 1965
to 1979 (Table 2) when annual flow exceeded the average in only two years,
1969 and 1974. In total, flow for 20 years of the 28-year record period
was below the average.
Data for two stations on Brooker Creek were examined. Longer record is avail-
able for the Lake Fern station at which the average discharge is 21.5 cfs,
and annual flow has varied from 2.15 cfs to 88.99 cfs. A slight decline in
average flow has occurred during the period of record, and flow in 20 years
of the 31-year record has been below average (Table 2).

FACTORS INFLUENCING LAKE LEVELS AND STREAMFLOW

The foregoing discussion describes the recent and historical status of lake
levels and streamflow in northwest Hillsborough County. This section of the
report will identify and assess the importance of those factors which have
affected lake levels and streamflow.
Model Development and Reliability In order to determine which factors influence
lake levels and streamflow, available stage and discharge data for each water
body were evaluated statistically using stepwise regression analysis. Using this




CO-63








SI I I I
C- a-

mco





H CO
o-----------""m----"7 com *-

0 = G0







CO
S0 1 ...
Q = ^ I








l- 0




mow 2: C L

CL i.LJ


W >,.- -1

- > L-







CO
00
C0-7


0 H

















Ce Ces s Ce Ce













.. \





S- I I I I I I


0 I 0
0















3-- 3
4) 4) 3a





3. 3O 0









4


,,1



I I ,.. -
-( S S3



U 0






























CO-83









CO -'" CO
--- CDI
Cr ., I I I
C ..--- _- -
0a.




... .. ...--.---. -






CD cG CD

.|-j -

< 0


S- CD
PWW ..n T
IoU





r-






00-W
- ^ H
COI I_------" -O


-,I r D






-I )
I -








- CH 5)
I .. i

C.OW














C0-93


























0. Well E-100 shall he modified or replaced with a well to serve as a
Chloride monitoring well. Specifications for such modification or
replacement shall be submitted to the District within thirty (30)
days following the date of this Order.
E. The total maximum withdrawal from the Cos=e-Odessa and Section 21
Well Fields shall not exceed 168 million gallons per week, which
amount shall not be figured cumulatively; provided that during any six
(6) weeks in the production year 1976, the City can pump an additional
21 million gallons per week in excess of 168 million gallons per week.
However, all production by the City shall be reasonably balanced between
the two well fields.
F. This permit is issued pursuant to Part 2 of Chapter 16J, F.A.C. and
authorizes the consumptive use of water.





AUTHORIZED SIGfLATURE: i .r______
CO'NSUIPTIVE USE SECTION
WATER RESOURCES OVIStO:!
S14FW40
SWOW




Applicant hereby certified that applicant is the owner of the property covered
by this application, that the information contained in this application is true
and accurate and, if applicant is a corporation or a partnership. that th3
undersigned has the legal authority to execute this application and affidavit on
behalf of said corporation or partnership.

signature of Applicant

Sworn to and subscribed before
me this day of ___


-- FtAo Y A-USLI
fy Coanuission Expires:














CO-53








TABLE 3. Equation for the Model Describing the Relationship Among Lake
Stage or Stream Discharge, Rainfall and Pumpage.


Category # 1
Intercept Lag X R Lag R Q T RME(% P
Alice X = .84 +.99 +.039 +0.64 -.03 -.002 95.6 .001
Buck X = 5.4 +.82 +.039 +.06 -.032 85.1 .006
Calm X = 1.16 +.98 +.033 +.065 -.028 -.0007 97.3 .00O
Church X = 1.86 +.95 +.037 +.071 -.026 -.0007 93.5 .0001
Echo X = 0.85 +.96 +.046 +.066 -.018 96.2 .027
Juanita X = 2.13 +.93 +.043 +.109 88.8 NA
Mound X = 14.67 +.7 +.033 +.043 -.033 83.1 .0002
Rainbow X = 4.09 +.89 +.033 +.063 -.045 81.9 .030
Raleigh X = -.39 +1.0 +.052 +.071 -.023 97.6 .001
Rogers X = 0.084 +.99 +.05 +.063 -.031 97.3 .000
Turkey Ford X = 20.14 +.6 +.051 +.07 -.03 74.0 .0068


Category # 2

Crescent X = 3.74 +.89 +.12 +.049 75.9 NA
Keystone X = 7.89 +.79 +.043 +.053 -.009 80.1 .0169
Pretty X = 15.9 +.619 +.033 +.048 47.0 NA


Category # 3

Sunset X = 4.4 +.80 +.066 +.053 +.0036 84.6 NA


Streams
Intercept X' R Lag R T
Rocky Creek X' = 23.25 +.34 +8.02 +2.29 59.8 NA"
Brooker Creek
at Lake Fern X' = 8.03 +.47 +1.34 +1.25 61.5 NA
Brooker Creek
at Tarpon
Springs X' = 8.77 +.38 +4.74 +1.84 -.031 54.5 NA

X = Average monthly stage
Lag X = Previous month's average stage
R = Monthly rainfall at Cosme
Lag R = Previous month's rainfall at Cosme "
Q = Monthly pumpage at Cosme-Odessa Well Field
T = Time
X' = Average monthly discharge -
Lag X' = Previous month's average discharge
RME = "Reliability" of the model equation
P = probability





CO-104







method, a computer-derived equation was generated for each lake and stream indi-
cating (1) which hydrologic parameters effect lake levels and streamflow and (2)
the relative importance of each parameter (Table 3). The equations in Table 3
can be viewed as statistical models describing the complex interaction of hydro-
logic factors and their effect on lake levels. The lake models, in general,
have a high degree of reliability (see "RME" column in Table 3), and the rela-
tionships expressed by the models are believed valid. Figure 21 demonstrates
the closeness of fit between actual and predicted lake stages using the model
for Lake Church.

It is important to realize that the models require data from one month to
predict the average monthly stage for the following month. The further into
the future one attempts to predict, the greater the probability of signifi-
cant error. The model is most useful, then, in predicting short-term (one
month to two years) changes in stages based on proposed changes in pumpage
and in showing the relative importance of the various hydrologic parameters
to stages.

INTERACTION OF LAKE LEVELS AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS

The following parameters were determined to have significant effects upon the
average monthly stage of lakes (previous average monthly stage, monthly stage,
monthly rainfall at the Cosme station, previous monthly rainfall at Cosme
station, monthly pumpage at Cosme-Odessa Well Field, and time). For streams,
average monthly discharge replaces average stage, and the previous month's
average discharge replaces previous average monthly stage in the models. -

All of the parameters do not have a significant effect on particular lakes
or streams. Also, some parameters are more important than others. An example
will best explain how the models can be used to describe the relationships
among the hydrologic parameters investigated and to predict future pumpage
impacts on lake levels.

Lake Church will serve in this explanation. From Table 3, the model equation
for Lake Church is:

X = 1.86+.95 Lag X+.037 R+07 Lag R-.026 Q-.0007T, where
X = average monthly stage (ft msl),

Lag X = previous month's average stage (ft msl),
R = monthly rainfall at Cosme,

Lag R = previous month's rainfall at Cosme,
Q = monthly pumpage at Cosme-Odessa Well Field, and

t = time.







CO-64







>-


00







IIN III I
C-- H1




co -Ij





~ aCO
S- C

< i- CO -1
< 0z

coIor ------'-'-'-^-'- -- i
CO. QL --L .



Z -- -D C 2
m _1



L > .- F .
r< <


E . ... ......i r i .. ... ... ...-----...--..

E 00-
LitD i
-^ ^L










- Cw CO DD LD 1O C
= W






C0-74
oo (



tC-



CO-74























r.L





S-








-
z











00 -8
IS I. -- r ^










I 1 I I y

U )



4) u

z -


COp8
b~~ O







___________________0 8 4 __








CO 1
Co


H _
co-------------'-----------


0- I- ,




SH
cC>o

r . .



J-- -
m -o co
DfC D

L L


I o > H




< --- d w
..(1 -
17 W >


co ?- r / <


wD OD D
co L L





4-3
N L



S.-





LLJ






_CO-94







Attachment D



>1 >*> >>
r- r- r' r"-f r- F- F* r- r- r- I r- r- rF F- F- F- r- F- F- F- F- F- F- P -r r- r F- r- r- r- I, rF-F rFF- r- F- F-
0.0.L. L S. S... S. S. 0. S S. S. S. S. L L S. S S. S. I SI S.I .I S.- S. S. S.
n -P4-4J4 +J -W-W4--)4+0+44-3 V + 4-- +J4-)44 V J 00 4J 4J +J +J +J 4J 4J +J 4J 4 4-) P 4 + 4J4 -r-
Fr F- F- F- F- Fr F- F- F- F F- F- F- F- r- F,- Fr- *r- *r- **rF- F-F- F-* -*F- F- F F F F -S--"
LU U 3 3 3 333333333 U 333333U3
V).-.r- U UO U U U U U U UUU o f U UU U U U*U U U U U U u u U u U U U U )
S. S. S. S. S.. S.. S. S.. L. L. S S. S. S..0 S. M S. S. S. S. S. L. L. L S.. S. s.. L. S. LS


,n
4-.




M O V-,C\- .-4 ,k ,.OM "4 -qM -4 1-4 -4 V 44 1-4"." 4 .4 9 fr-4 s (%% M i V4 1 -4 r4V"4 "qV-4 "-I 1-4 r-4(Cn)1-I en -4C JC\-
to C OcJ -] ..rw c Dj
o. 0= -
cvo
C" rr.% r-44r--4


















r--4 --4 rqI--
LOJ ocO oo a.o C'om 0 ollO'.CoOrO CO


CC r( U) a)LCJin)-4C'














S
t.- r I- O 0 0 r" O CM CM
L. Lj n -c~ ", 'C ( 0 0> U



















,- *( "2 *: -- F

Mr 0 C* C CO T O C-5
in oLJ roo i^ oro o


















I- a) -J a)(n ( (1o ) O 00 > 9*00 O)OCKO&
0*. 0 *1 *.. . > L CO ......
0 S. UO CO UjD *>
S. C.. L J




*U" S- *v a) 0 0) 0
0=*J*- I* C L+ 0 a) 3 *O
C.. L- UU .- i O n3



I"." QM *. C *4,) L L .>ma ... Q
UJ *r 0 *S *J Cd Q _**(J O* J *

I-. 9 ( 4) s m)) 0' -C0.- *> 4^a 0a)0 3 O'~
Or >, .. .4.). C.) .. J4- OS.C O M A4.) a)0 .C 0 0C ..F .
(COM ON aU O O "OC CO N.)>MOa a)00. Oi lO
0.4.)' S. (0 () > 0 0U &C 00 0 a) O OO 3 1 CO C>


0 CONC O a)S..0 CCO O -.4O1SjO >' +ww >U S < s
0- 0 0 *30S.. O 3 *-- .00 0 00 fS L 0 SE 0' U
(' .. 4. 0= S 4 CO CO 4- / ) ( / ) (3 La- . 1--C a)* >(o I0 4. i- ca Ua3 a) C.. ) o a ) .J *I C
COO O .1- a ) S. *) U U"T 04a > (^COr- *0. r OC O-u
Ofl^ >> -(f r0 3v) a )3 S) 3C. .O C C O C S.4 >' O 3 a *-3 4 S O (0. *. CO- CO *-




04m ininC O O C~ r~cv~r~.in -0 >* t^ >r 3 S










CO-54








TABLE 4. Hypothetical Monthly Data Used for Comparing Effects on Church Lake
of Several Pumpage Rates


Case 1: Dry Conditions


Average pumpage (Q) 8 MGD 12 MGD 13 MGD 22 MGD (for 4 weeks onl
Previous month's level (Lag X) 32.0' 32.0' 32.0' 32.0'
Rainfall (R) 0.0" 0.0" 0.0" 0.0"
Previous month's rainfall (Lag R) 0.75" 0.75" 0.75" 0.75"
Time (observation No.) 494 494 494 494
Predicted lake level (X) 31.75' 31.65' 31.63' 31.39'
- Monthly decline due to pumpage .208' .31' .338' .572'
Total change in lake level -.25' -.35' -.37' -.61'


Case 2: Wet Conditions

Average pumpage (Q) 8 MGD 12 MGD 13 MGD
Previous month's level (Lag X) 32.5' 32.5' 32.5'
Rainfall (R) 10.0" 10.0" 10.0"
Previous month's rainfall (Lag R) 9.0" 9.0" 9.0"
Time (observation No.) 498 498 498
Predicted lake level (X) 33.18' 33.07' 33.05'
Monthly decline due to pumpage .208' .312' .338'
Total change in lake level +.68' +..57' +.55'













Notes: 8 MGD Actual pumpage
12 MGD Permitted average pumpage
13 MGD Requested average pumpage
22 MGD Maximum permitted daily pumpage












CO-105







The model tells us that the average monthly stage for Lake Church is deter-
mined by adding the previous month's stage (Lag X) and the rainfall for the
previous (Lag R) and the current month (R), then subtracting the pumpage at
the well field and time. Basically, it means that (1) the average monthly
stage on the lake has declined over time, (2) that pumpage does cause stage
declines on the lakes, and (3) that rainfall and antecedent stage conditions
are very important in determining future lake stages.

It is useful to examine the relative effects of rainfall and pumpage on
average monthly stages. Again, the example from Lake Church will serve
this purpose using actual data from May 1981. Using the model described
above, rainfall would have been expected to produce a 0.04 fQot rise in
average monthly stage. However, the decline due to pumpage would have
been expected to be 0.25 feet, resulting in a cancellation of the rise
in level due to rainfall. Thus, an overall decline of 0.21 feet in May
alone would have been expected. It should be remembered from the model
equation that the previous month's lake level is an important factor in
the current lake level. Consequently, a stage decline in May will act
to produce further decline in June unless abnormally high rainfall occurs
in June to make up for the expected decline.

The May 1981 condition just discussed was one of very low rainfall and
higher-than-average pumpage; therefore, a comparison with a condition of
-. high rainfall and lower-than-average pumpage is also presented for Lake
Church. In this example, data from August 1981 will be used. At this
time, rainfall would have been expected to produce a rise of 0.94 feet
in average monthly stage, while pumpage would have been expected to
produce a decline of 0.16 feet. The result which would have been
expected is an overall rise in lake level of 0.78 feet.
This brief discussion illustrates that the direct influence of pumpage
on lake stages varies with conditions of rainfall and well field activity,
and it is clear that pumpage can affect lake levels, at time, more than
rainfall. Because 13 years during the period 1961-81 have ended in rain-
fall deficits, it can be concluded that pumpage has been a more important
influence on lake stages then would have been expected under normal
mo rainfall conditions.
Category #2 Two of the three lakes in this group (Crescent, Pretty)
appeared to be primarily affected by rainfall; pumpage did not appear
in the model equation describing lake levels (Table 3). The reliability
for the Lake Crescent and Lake Pretty models was 76% and 74%, respectively,
indicating that factors other than those in the equation affect these lakes
- more than the hydrologic parameters addressed in the models.

Lake Keystone, also in this group, is affected by pumpage, but it is more
sensitive to rainfall. However, under conditions of high pumpage and low
rainfall, pumpage would assume more importance to lake stages. The reli-
ability of the model for Lake Keystone is 80%, and it is very likely that
at times, structure operations exert more influence on the lake than
ordinary hydrologic parameters.

Category #3 The statistical model for Lake Sunset stages was found to be
reliable at the 85% level (Table 3). The model indicates that the lake does
not respond to pumpage and, in fact, lake stages have increased over time.


CO-65














,1 .I
ouo







< H
CL)
F.-


CD I I I
H I ..




... J O

:DO --- a>




- D <






SC D.. ... .... .
L.-W 0






-- CDOC ^ L
z M c







Y. W

S--C W H
--- 0-




coCD -
S.-

o W Do
fIf)





"iw CD -

^ < '--4

-c IO- CD LID ND ; CDI








CO-75









GD
) -




cI -


.- o

I c0


t- LJ-


< CD


_ maW 00 <-H
0 0
Cr3
7 CO 0











wow^
^^ < --^ -
0 0








W ....... UJ-- ......-----------,------------- LW
n W00
-- -C C
S< 3

-w -
H


G- DJ -- 0 In
L L LLW
WT 0

- t I ^o ,, W .. ,, .



>--
-- _JW>



00-85 ________













I I I I I I I I I I

Ci- --D "







pI o I I I I I I I I
I I I I I .

- o

LI "--,-- II



H ,,, CD, I IH
- 10 (J) Z


I 7 I I I i I t I I I i i




cco
II i Ir I L






4 -
w 14


- 1

S I





o 0 .. .
O I II -1 i I





a, sS (




-5 -O CN < Q- 0n o "- -D LD Lr IO ) W







00-95
O CCO-95


















*r- *r- r -- -r *- *- *- *- r- *- F- o F F- F, @ F- F- F- aF F- *, F-,. *. F- *, F- F*,., Fj- F- F- F- F* o- Fe F- F- F, F, F,-m
S. S. S. S. S. S. S..0 S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. SL. S. SL. L. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S.





0o*
.,J

) C l l l I I I l I I l I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I l I I I I I I I I I I I I










o0"4 C% 1 .=








S00
u0Ln%03 0 0C*OOOOC'J 0000 *coO *m C%%o"MP400 CD O O0 t0 *






= C 0- CD 0 C Q = CM *CD D
* ^0000 X *Z 0 ^ IC ^






















UJ &3 o)\0EuE ox >oO --0 @
-, F-




















(O.A, o CL
C')> >UL0 >
2=. Cu00






















=000000 000000 000000 0000DS0000000 4>r ( lf -r4 -&. & T rSO O 00000QL
UJ O~-OS^C UO'JC& '- JOE> l 0<^<3~r 00C J <^S. 4 fOCO









-0 N o - It O N .- ( .. -
00 0 0 0 C 0 0 r-C' 0-0 0 0,- CM"

S O00C I M N CM I NC 00 00 +
0
CO r

>c omo Nn womo % oc c %
0) i-l = - T3= = = -
> oo o oC oc cn o n oo0'^or^cCM cooo oo
w r- v-4 o r-4i M i r-4 o C '-tO Corf i C D M Mn

03 ^ McMm s -t I





,. r ., M O r nr-, C, O O rD, o .,-
0) N N omaT + N c")n + N 0000 +
4r Y) c r) cn C) -4 -t


c0 o




C0-106




00 3S --< : : - - -
0. 0 C 1 -Or4 r-4 0HmM





go . *
0 m m0 N Of oI c cn 00 00 4
CL 4 M C cn cn -t N N N
r-4
cz






a)) r4 -




0 : 3 : '-0- T ::---- 0::----
w)4 4.4 CM cn CV) C- m CI C11
"*- I 4O4I I



0 *4 <-
44 r. 0 O-
(D ) .Y .e)
4C O n cn r- Cn C%1 r-4 -I


*r-4 0) t$ r-i








w or-4 '::0: : 0: 0
oC40 o C 0 3 n *0 1 % 1 0- I t *w .0 % 0 0 = -- T *




** 4 r C m.Oc r-..* r 'OoncN r- rCDO\ cn --t
0 g* CM4 CM4 : o^ I CM4 o |o
r c)4 co / -i C. cn i. Cn r- -.t..
0
. 44-4
0 r-- r t$ m A 0 A -




to C) 0oo _:T to C)LnooIDc -o0 moN M


0M 4J 0& 0 0) 0 0 0) .0 0 0 *)
S100 r-. .4 0 00 C 00 %C
4J 00 0) 0





4.J 4> 3 Uit> 3 (Ur^> 3 C






This condition is due to the augmentation facility on the lake, a factor
which did not quantitatively enter the model.

Streamflow Statistical models developed for Rocky Creek and Brooker Creek
had a lower reliability than those for the lakes (Table 3). This lowered
model sensitivity is very likely due, in part, to man-made perturbations
of the creeks and their watersheds. Nevertheless, the basic relationships
of stream discharge, rainfall, and antecedent discharge were significant
variables, therefore, rainfall appeared to be the single most important
factor. It should be mentioned that Brooker Creek at East Lake Road
station (downstream of the well field) has shown a decline in discharge
over time.

PREDICTED EFFECT OF INCREASED PUMPAGE ON LAKE LEVELS

The above discussion refers to lake stage conditions as affected by the
past and existing pumpage regimes. Because actual withdrawals will
increase, it is necessary to evaluate the potential impact of additional
pumpage on lake levels.
During the life of the current permit, average monthly pumpage at Cosme-
Odessa has ranged from 7.4 MGD to 11.2 MGD; in the last four years, average
pumpage has been between 7.4 MGD and 8.7 MGD. The current permit allows
an average pumpage of 12 MGD on a yearly basis. The new requested quantities
would raise the average allowable pumpage (on a yearly basis) to 13 MGD. A
permit granting the requested 13 MGD average would, then, represent an increase
of 1 MGD (average) over the current permitted quantities and an increase of
approximately 4-5 MGD over actual pumpage.

The impacts on lake levels of the increase in permitted and actual quantities
can be assessed in a comparison with impacts associated with current per-
mitted and actual quantities. For the purpose of this comparison, the
model equation for Lake Church will serve again. In the comparison, the
first case to consider is a hypothetical dry season condition. Assuming
the conditions for pumpage, lake stage, rainfall, and time shown in Table
4, the change in lake level and the stage declines due to pumpage can be
predicted.
Under dry conditions, Lake Church can be expected to decline 0.25 feet
under an 8 MGD pumpage rate (current actual pumpage) and 0.35 feet under "
a 12 MGD pumpage rate (current average permitted rate). The requested
average pumpage rate of 13 MGD would cause an additional decline of 0.12
feet over that induced by an 8 MGD rate and an additional decline of 0.02 -
feet over that induced by a 12 MGD rate.
Under wet conditions (Table 4), the impact of increased pumpage is mani- -
fest in a decrease in the amount of vertical rise expected in the lake
level. Under wet conditions and a pumpage rate of 8 MGD, the lake level
would be expected to rise 0.68 feet, while under a pumpage rate of 12 MGD,
that rise would amount to 0.57 feet. A combination of wet conditions and
a pumpage rate of 13 MGD would result in a stage rise of 0.55 feet, 0.13
feet less than that under the 8 MGD pumpage condition (Table 4).





CO-66












DH1
m H
S- L I
.lI



o C


coco 00 0



< rQ
.DC\J J n L

L .J

CCO
lOT. CD <




o._ 03 C


fI W



-J

o Cc)




LL

o w
SWJW>



CO-76









00
co


II mm

H 0 0





o 0 0






< H
0-



S I -I I
oWCOW
CDI >O



o j C LJ m-n
I ~ rW
W







0


C\J LCO





V L

f L0-8


S -J



0O-86










^~ --------------I--.I-j-


I I ...i-..... 1 I I .
CD'C





W I I I I I -I |
r--







II i -"j J .. ..
_D
YI2









I ,I I I I I I
o_ --' -------------------- ^ If J.
H 0r *o iH




IC-
(I,,









o I .
Uo i



I -', ... ,. .. ,I ...I I I
-- i
a> -I







' .... ... ... ..... .. .. ''C D.
= CO



I I



a owwCO01 < rK r OL

S(.-








C = C C C
0 0 0 0 0
.. e ... op.
















( to (a >
4-. 0 +.I 4 4 r--'-- ,- r












--
4) .- t 5- 5.. Ci. 5 $ L. L. Q ) r.L S. S .. 5.. CL S. S. -. .. .















,- Z = == J 4J 4=












S.. . . . .. .
4- c



V)





U <






C) I,- q m r,--. ,--','.- -- C. C C C 0 C. 0) C M qt Cj

LU 0 0 0
"- 4-- 0 .-



U. C W D C % a a- C *5 % m M

- O C -4 4. a a C- a 4. C C =
--0 C".q-' C (=) (=) 00 C ( C m 0 r%% 5C (0 ( 0 Q C 0 0 C.*.-- 0



2- C-
..,) LUoLS-. 0 LIA >IA 4--) 0C000( 4-.) ) 0C 4J


















4-3-
____' __ '3) 9- >^,34)u (^ 0).. S..u'3 '3) C'3 I^ >^0L (.).)3 < )WC. D .0.C










a a as o a o 3 o -d -
ar 0 0 0' O O C O b0 0 0 0 L n o0 m C 0 r-i Ow 0 0 ^0 O r O
0 rl 0 r-4 0 00 C? C) 00 M r-- 0 C14 LV CM
C Ln L + CM 00 -%I I CN +
CN n n) ( CM Lm -T CM C) CNf C C) Ce




4J to 0 cm r- .. r+0 00D ) e I0 oo 0 00 C0 C0 C1. 0 C 0 r-_ 0 r-+
e-i F .-. o C C C EC C. o a 0 o CM CC C- L-r oC ms e f
A NA n + m c n 0 o oo + I* +C)n
0o r C CY C) rn in 4ir CY) CYc r-i CY) CYc
u
4)
o = = = = = a -
0)






00 u'w + 00m 00 + o + 000 + 00 0;b +C
CM CM4 mm + 4M C C CM ootoo + CM 9 9 _
wl CY) Cn -l Irt cn CY) C4c) CYi ) CY
0)





to N CoN) L 000 I N C I N 0






r= o Como o CnM rzC 0Como cnon 0oo r OLno o-t0womo r- L

00)L L0L('_;0000 (=; 00_; 00 \ 00
sU *) . .* *




o CM L C aC ON 4n f4 cq cn



o r 00e0N -t w e0 r- cL r-0o0n r-c o- ) -r) 0 o 0


00 o omo0 00 n 0o0 0o os 0rcn O L0 IoOLno o
c noc OLn -4T T ro a %c n -< r--oc ns
















O.. co C * *









o 0 0 0 0 0
0 r cn cn 4) r) Y) -4 ) cn




wow 4 00 O O 00
r-- c -,t 3; r- 8 a C= c r-- m 00 Cn rl r- c -t rq -
0 o C0 C0 .1 0) o 0o 0 0 0o 0) ) 0)
M Cl CM ) CM -It CV) CM) oC) COM0






The above evaluation is ased on monthly average pumpag,. The permit would
( allow a pumpage rate of 22 MGD for a limited time. The impact of this with-
i drawal can be predicted. Assuming that the 22 MGD rate were held for four
weeks during the dry season, a decline in lake stage of 0.61 feet would be
S expected by the end of the period under the conditions specified in Table 4.
i Such a decline represents an additional 0.36 foot decrease in lake stage
over that predicted at the 8 MGD pumpage rate.

The above evaluation has been done using Lake Church as an example. How-
ever, the results of the evaluation are applicable to most lakes which do
not have control structures or augmentation facilities. This would include
lakes in Category #1 except Lake Juanita. Other non-controlled, non-
augmented lakes in the area of influence of the well field can be expected
to respond in a manner similar to that described for Lake Church. The results of
similar analyses on other lakes are in Table 5.
SIGNIFICANCE OF LOW LAKE LEVELS

The significance of depressed lake stages is based on the physical and biological
changes which occur in a lake basin in response to low levels. Of primary concern
is the loss of water from a lake as a result of low levels. This loss can
represent a substantial volume of water in a lake. For example, if an 80-acre
lake declines 1.0' below normal, it is estimated that approximately 25 million
gallons of water is lost from the lake. Even a small decline, i.e. 0.1', can
- result in the loss of a considerable quantity of water or about 2 1/2 million
gallons.

- Another concern is the effect on the shoreline emergent zone habitats as a
result of additional beach exposure due to lowered lake levels. On a lake
having a shallow slope (as do most Florida lakes), it is estimated that a
o decline of 0.1' beyond usual stage fluctuations results in the exposure of
an additional 1' 3' (horizontal) of beach. If emergent vegetation is left
stranded by this decline, an important component of the lake habitat became
unavailable for wildlife utilization. Further, if lake declines occur rapidly,
" the plants of the emergent zone, not having the time to respond, will be destroyed
and their habitat value diminished.
Excessive shoreline exposure imergent zone dissection have consequences for the
fishery of a lake as well. The absence of an emergent zone can decrease the
survival of young fish because of a lack of cover and a reduction of surface
area for the attainment of desirable food organisms. Also, excessive exposure
reduces the area of the lake shallows available for fish bedding. Should lake
stages drop below the shallow-sloping zone of the lake basin during the breeding
season, successful fish bedding could be completely eliminated for that year.
Vegetation lost can influence the lakes nutrient assimilation ability.

Low stages can influence the water quality of a lake, particularly with respect
to dissolved oxygen concentrations and temperature. Water depth reduction in a
lake can promote temperature increases associated with direct insolation. Lake water,
at higher-than-normal temperatures, can undergo conditionsof oxygen depletion.
Low dissolved oxygen concentrations can produce undesirable effects on fish and
other wildlife ranging from physiological stress and death.

The above discussion refers to prolonged low lake stages not to normal stage
fluctuations associated with seasonal weather patterns.



CO-67








I I I I i









00


CD
- O O



nw




00
^co...J--->--------0-------L-- M
CD .~



r- >L- L7
00














C0-7
w 2




2- 0 ^














CO-77









(NO







C 0



COO

W
Now---- ^ ^ i --------i -- ory



Cf f L' J >
-7-
--Z h --' ^-----------------
'- iD








0z
WD






S C
w I
4- W D
L) LClD
o -^ CD WC






WH Z ~LLLL0W







CO-8
t/l tv- I`() K) Fo ^o ^ lo ^ ^ )




CO-87










00


>- J



CD


Cli


,' I I I I







o a
SI I i I
onoCL



f% CD)


rm <




0 0 -


o >
a cn o
SJ I Ii I ni 1 I I








-- ----^-. J -


0"
- I _f )
'C I ~------~-~3--t---------1-. in











Ih ^
t~)IIa











=
0


4 i *e *R *e- *er *e *e r- *Re- ** r- *. *- *r *- * -* -- *r r *r
c0 000 0 00 0(0 00 0 00 000 0( 0 00 0 00000 0 000 00 t 0(t0 0 t 0000 O


W N.. S S .. S S.. S. S. S.. S. .. S. S. S.. .. ... S.. S.. .. S .. S.. S .. S. ... .. S. .. .. .. S- S.. S., S.
Cn0 4- 4J 44) 44J4-4 4 J 4-J V() 4 04-)4-)0 -#-) 40-4V) 4-) 4-) 4-) 4-) 0J 4-) V) 4-0) + ) +J 4-) ) 04J4-4) 4))

Q0 UU Q U(U










- r- ",
Cn I





I'-3- C0r 0 .. 0 0 O ,. ) (


Z r-4 <









































S C CO CD *d C CC-..2 m L- O
"- M r-- 0,0. -., -4 M (M* M C)"-I d r4J N q* .J L -










.A f .,.c o -, c C- "j h '-- c

















CA S>
















L O 0 > > 3 t 0 0 0 I 3 0 9 "='," "
-Q , C0 0 5
0a ) 41* 0 .) 0 o C


a) 1 (17
JOM C07 P
















(/ ) a) O U C OUON3*OMNNNA

< > 4.2 C C 5 7-* IIC
D 2* C O1 < So .V a)L l3 +* CO 4. 2t .


- E0 C >>J c0QLU4r) 4U V1a) <0 SO ^ O S O
IP ^j^ TIf )3~ u ^^ < e uc a :^ < & -< >E a e





C3 33^31-L.O-l ~ ~ CP 3PIO- V (Y t-1 1
*I

MMI O ^ on~rc o ^ -l ^ < 0 ^ ^ o B < P ^ c '^~^r c l C^O ^ ^ ^ o
z<)^Ino7

r' 't^ ^^~t^-<^ t O <^oc~<'cJ^n ^^J^ o ^ cJ^ ~ ^
CL CJ =3000000000000000000000000
<^CS C\C^CJC~i\JCJC\CNJ^CsJSJCJ<^ \JCJC\^^ CJC^ \J<



a~C po *cs ccj~cj~cj^^^^^^^r<<> <<^ ^ ^ ^r~~~^ 0r








r:-= = 3 = --- : -
0 0' W0 CM 00CM l 0 0 CM 00 C- 0 'W 0 00 a* o 0
E r r O r i 0 0 Cl a)- i C0) 0 r-I 0
CM In Cn 4- M CM e. I CM 1j rl h
CM eM cn CM V) Ln CM It -It

C
o -
-q( 1a = a- a am so so a o-

0
4 ,- OI 0- 0 0 04 O Oa* ON w ON 0 0 CI
or. r-4 C -It-I-I r-. o Co C) o r-i 0 -iH O r
SC L ) + c CM + n +
O i-I cY c) p i.- i oU


51s Ct? s = rd = tW ap
6000 0 m -- C Y o) a* 0i Cl*imr 0g O01 m OD CY)







S* CC %. a .








00 0 C U 0 4 + 0000 4 0

0)





C 0l 0LoLI +0 0 + 0 0 9 0
C.) 4 r- M Ln .. Y)
0) Cm I o- 00' 1 0 0 1
O Om Cm -HI C C OCm t gi4 O C I
( r CnM LC Cl < f) f




0)


O oN sc so OWCc)

>r C= = - = =






00000 @100L00 00 00 0
-r) cn Cl Cr) c-I c01 ICn

00
,0
o C C











0 C*0 '0


oW r-i c c. r-i m O cn cn


.z cM C' c CM C' c l CM 0^ 00 1 C' )-0
Z < cn m r)i m 0)I-I cn c0 mm



^ C H .



p a) H ___________________________ CO- >08







CONCLUSION

The primary point to recognize in this evaluation is that many factors inter-
act to influence lake stages. Consequently, one cannot assign the total
decline observed on lakes in Hillsborough County to a single factor. The
fact is that, depending on conditions, various factors assume a greater or
lesser degree of importance to the status of lake levels. For example,
agricultural pumpage and changes in drainage patterns resulting from
development and road construction activities may also affect local lake
levels. It follows then that there are situations in which ground water
pumpage can induce lake stages lower than those to be expected in the absence
of pumping. Further, such pumping can cause lake stages to fall below the
Board-adopted minimum lake level in a single month. This can happen.on lakes
on which levels are very close to approaching the low management level prior
to the dry season. In such lakes, drawdowns caused by pumpage can result in
a decline in lake level below the low management level very early in the dry
season. Then, under the usual dry season low rainfall pattern, these lakes decline
further, making recovery to normal levels in the wet season unlikely in the absence
of exceptionally high rainfall. Essentially, this was the general situation
in 1974 and 1979. Before the unseasonally heavy rain of early June 1974,
and May 1979, most of the lakes included in this evaluation, with the excep-
tion of Keystone and Mound, were at very low elevations. Heavy rains in
1974 brought about a temporary recovery in the lakes, lasting through early
1977. After this time, most lakes underwent another decline until the rain
of 1979 allowed another recovery. Severely depressed lakes then, would not
have recovered to normal levels without the massive rainfall. Therefore,
actions which contribute to a lake's decline (e.g., large-scale ground water
pumpage, direct surface withdrawals) assume more importance as lake levels
progressively decrease.

A judgment regarding the impact of ground water pumping must be made with
the knowledge that the lake system is a dynamic one which responds to
several interacting factors on a continuing basis. Pumpage is an extremely
important factor in determining lake levels, particularly at times during
which lakes are subject to the stress of low rainfall.

PD:ML:wp2


















CO-68







I I I





4-
W OO
0





O Co
S. .. I I





CD 1. ry C
OCO



-,,< CC

U z [n
z ) C- .- a r-.-






H-







Or LL L _^
_1 o 0 0 1 '-







"I ^ L
WI Z



* W-0 L
4 _) N)- C) .. N)


W -W


OL













.J


-i'- -



C I


<0C cL
ryr-

c -<
WQQD z
LJD,
03 0 -Z r--






O=
CD -







CJ W-
>


< -

_W- LL0 L- -

-


008
o w)
-4









<-> LJ











- I I I j I I I


:3 -- l--- --- i ---------l--l_---"---------
In


CCD Co
co





".f 2-
0
CL

LL.
SCD





F" Uj
4---4


z u -r <
- I I I I I I I I





o_ w
cmo
o ---------- ( -
4-










I I I I I t I I
. CD
(u co o an n -





s- w |


SSC CD D D







. J
^ CD I




r --
SQC-98
L-b-J










.CO-98











0000 -
*9- *f r *r" *r,

(03 to tol (0
*- *- r- *r- ~r- -r.- *r- r- -r- C ~I) 4) iC
r 3 rO rT3 S. .. S.. S. .S S. S. S .S. ,. L ) a -
4,'4 4.4 4J4-)4-JJ .4J J M 4J > 4-) V)...4-J+- 0.--M



O O



LD 'D =.-i ,-- *- *( *-$ *- *r r% -4 ) *. *r -4, =4
4- 0C 0D 0) 0 0) 00 0(D -, 0) 0) 0 0 3 0^ f




cn Vm )ON




10 V
926 < I I






L. ((D "4n (CDC0 C 0 f (

IC) --






"0 ]
2- 4- C J













S LLJ~rCD0C%%D0C 0D00C 40 C




Lo m L :o ;4c*-. V 4 L -. tL N
-- *0 0 4 =* 0 0*10 0-
-CV






--- CD .. ",C > 0
-t a cn coV4m4 C)V m" C% LO ) Ln M, LO- C- .St
tZ CD CD CD CD CD r10








0 > 0-
CCl



ro


luL 10 00


S C C.) "*4- ) (OO) C r









*-..r. .o / O NC
*- C L LJ0 0 _- (
*0 0 a)*(n r., CY)


*+0 $ a V
3;m > (InLC 0. L O U




Q.( >- N *1 N S *
1 C7 C) O ) C0















*5-f a~ C. .) *-0 S.3
S.. *w C) ( ) ( -.
00 0r C)r
OLC7C"04 L 3) 0. >-







*r- (T <: <^ Oi C L r +3.)
UJ U O)O SI -~ Q)- *~1~ g

r L C (0 r- 10 CU () Or .0 O



--I4 S- 4 s- 0 00 s s s.
(- ~~~~ ~ ~ r ro (0L e=< oc3* >=
h- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O EL 'a' a --o






< .D1~ .l C3t S1- C+->1 S-T4- I(T3- >OC CL< r -














Attachment G








Regulatory Wells





















Legend

- Regulatory Level
--- With 3 ft. Swing

9A- Weekly Average Water Levels

SCumulative Weekly Average
Water Level for Water Year










CO-109




,.Figure 1. Individual average pumpage of the four major well fields (a-d) and the total average pumpage (e).
20 Cosmne-Odes" A










S:80


Section 21
wpm







70
b MGD 10 0





0 a -a 60
'1 '41 '51 '61 '71 8

South Pasco
0% 60 5 : ::m .:.mM GD 50Qs a'x 0se















:4 e40

'31 '41 '51 '61 '71 '81

Eldridge-Wilde


30 -30






MGD 20 20
10 10



'31 '41 '51 '61 '71 '81'1 1 '51 '61 '71 '8
Y South Pasco
Eldr RdY-WlR
--------- ---------







.i I I I "
03 --_ 03
N-

DC-- O


0I

o <
nZH

C D- C0 C
Nis" :D < (2.


S< r%% --
D w -
z^o--------------- ot
co .03 -J-
< _.10 .. ... .



>-C
"-4 LO


< w -
.. ,3 2
oD W CD D
soft LJZ



4-J
'--



-- --> -

(,,
1CO-7
-, '" -


^_________________










co c_,-,-


< "" L :






->
03


Cf)



i --~w D 0



P m
F-





O H> -
J : .-. LJ






O- ,, O, 0








z LJ-

>
C)- 11-- H
1.- ,,., |-------------------" J









- S I- CO

t(- LJ


o ._ I



N "4 0) 00 b" cD LID :
^- L)J

- Z W




C0O-89











CD


D I I I I I I I










mow


.I I I i I .
--- i i----i----- I-. ,
- w -



Homo0"0
V) II










m o
Ir I III







4H





SI I I I I I I i
C CD








>C











SI I I I I .I I I
cm



o
- a _. C
s- 0 -












" 00-9 D 9
- 0-




c H-





- 0
-o C -

-- co







- -J U


U- U_





May 21, 1982
Revised: June 23, 1982


MEMORANDUM

TO: David A. Wiley, Hydrologist, Resource Regulation Department
John W. Heuer, Hydrologist, Resource Regulation Department
Robert R. Gordon, Hydrologist, Resource Regulation Department

FROM: Robert G. Perry, Hydrologist, Resource Regulation Department

RE: Cosme-Odessa/Section 21/South Pasco Water Quality
Consumptive Use Permit Nos. 200003, 200004, 203647

In order to determine the effects of pumpage on water quality a time series
analysis was performed upon the chloride concentration of five regional
monitor wells, TR12-1, E100, E101,-E102, E21-7, and E105 (see Figure 8).

If well field pumping was resulting in either upwelling or intrusion of
saltwater the monitor wells should detect the increasing chloride over time.
A straight line regression was fitted for each well using time as the indepen-
dent variable and chloride as the dependent variable. The raw data supplied by
the USGS was first tested for outliers by application of chauvenets Rejection
Test. Data points which were thus tagged as suspect were removed from the data
set when the USGS verified that they had been derived by sampling methods incon-
sistent with the body of the data, i.e. sampling at different depths by use of
S probes. The results are summarized below.

Number Correlation
SWell Regression of Data Coefficient Period
TR12-1 C1 = 898 .1 x M N = 44 R = -.064 9/77-3/82
TR13/E101 C1 = 11638 + .4 x M N = 64 R = .055 6/73-4/82
E102 C1 = 65.3 .9 x M N = 40 R = -.42* 1/77-4/82
E100 C1 = 2406 .7 x M N = 48 R = -.044 4/76-4/82
E21-7 C1 = 24.4 + .1 x M N = 44 R = .120 11/73-4/82
E105 Cl = 8806 .3 x M N = 33 R = .50* 4/76-4/82

Where: C1 = Chloride concentration in mg/1
M = Time in months
N = Number of data points
- R = Correlation coefficient

Significant linear relationship in excess of 99%.
Only wells E102 and E105 had significant linear correlation over time and each
of these indicated a decreasing chloride concentration of less than 1 mg/l per
month. All the rest were not statistically significant and therefore we are
unable to give any credance to the regression over a simple averaging of the
data. We have not addressed seasonality of the data but rather the long term
average trend of the data.

It is therefore concluded that in spite of the well field pumpage and seasonal
variations the water quality has either stablized or improved for these wells.

RGP:eab
CO-59
cc: L. M. Blain J. E. Curren L. H. Holtkamp
A4*2r hman F ________________





COSMN-ODESSA JAME TII WELL
CUP NO.=1 WELL NO.=25 '.STIPULATION. CODE=100 WFTER YEAR=1967






w1-0-



35-


E


E




L
T

A
W 0

T
E -
E
F 25
L
V
E


M
E

L










15. ... .. ..-------

O 13 26 39 52

WEEK OF WNTER TEIRR


co-110





COSME-.ODESSA JAMES R WELL
CUP NO.=4 WELL IK =25 STIPULRTION COOE=IOL W-TER YEAR=1973

40-











V






E i
E
R






L




-R 2
.E -



















R 2--------------------------^---------










- E OF ~.VFF *F E i



co-ill
E
L













0 13 26 3. 52
I0 11




COSME-ODESSA JAMES II WELL
CUP NO. =4 WELL t =25 STIPULRTION CO3E=1 W1TER YERR=1974

LO








35.-




E

E
W 30\



T _,__ ."
Ft




L
E
L
M
S -









15-
0 13 25 33 52

WEEK OF NRTER TERR



CO-112





COSME-ODESSA JAMES J WELL
CUP NO. =4 WELL ,d.=25 STIPULATION CODE=1.ju WATER YERR=1975

40-






I m I A .
35-


v 21




E .

A \ r







V




20-






1--
1i I- !-- I----
0 13 26 39 5
WEEK .F NRTER TERR



CO-113





COSMF-ODESSA JAMEH II WELL
CUP NO.=t4 NEL. N0.=25 STIPULATION CODE .00 WATER YERR=1976

4O-









S \ I I, \ //
35








E -

L



E
R 25
LT

V
E
M -

L
mT

20-







15
L --------- - 1 i--------
O 13 26 35 52
NEEK OF WATER TERf



CO-114






COSfE-ODESSA JAMFh II WELL
M CUP NO.=4 WELL NO.=25 STIPULATION CODE=100 'WRTER YERR=1977

40-








35-



-
E




N 3E


L

T
T
E
R 25-
L
E
E
-- L

.M L
20-















CO-115





COSIE-ODESSA JAiJ S II WELL
CUP NO. =4 ILL NO.=25 STIPULATION 3 JE=100 NWTER YTER=1978

l0-



4O
4 A1



35-

A







E "
V






L


R 25

L
E
V
E
L









EE -F TE TE
L16
20








tS-

0 13 26 39 52

WEEK OF WRTER iEAR



CO-116






COS)E-ODESSA JAMF3 11 WELL
SCUP N-0.=4 WtLL NO.=25 STIPULRTIUN tO13Oc=00 WRTER TEFR=1979

40-








35-



A ..




W30
- E

T


T
R 25.;

L
E
V
E
L


20-








t15-

0 13 26 33 52
NEEK OF NRTER TERRY



CO-1 1 7




COSME-ODESSA JAMES II WELL
CUP NO.=i4 .L NO.=25 STIPULATION C"F=100 NATER YEAR=1980











-35


V
E
H-
R
A
E
W 30-
E
E
K
L
T

A
T
E
R .25-
L
E
V .
E
L
M
5
L
20-
E -m

















WEEK OF WATER TERR



CO-118





COSM-O-ODESSA JAMESJ.I WELL
CUP NO.=4 WELL NO.=25 STIPULATIONN CODE=.0 N WRTER TERR=1981

40-








35-

A
V
E
A



E



T -
E




E
L





M
T
E




S20-
L
E
V
E
L
M













0 13 26 39 52
NEEK OF NRTER TERRY



CO-119





COSM~ -ODESSA J5AMFo II WELL
CUP NO.=4 NELL NtO.=25 STIPULATIONON CODE=100 WfTER -YERR=1982

40-










GR q
V
E
R
R


N 30-
E

L
T

R
T
E
R 25
L
E
V .-
E

-
L
M
S
L
20-








15 -
0 13 26 39 52

NEEK OF WRTER TERR -


CO-120







COSME-JDESSA CALM 3`C WELL ..
CUP NO.=14 WELL NO.=26 STIPULATION CODE=100 WATER YERR=1967

i 0-








- 35-


V .
E
R /
-- G A ./
G
E
- O30-
E -

















20-
E



























0 13 26 3. 52
L



T
E
- R 25-
L
E
- VOF
E
L
Mm
5
L
- 20-









o 13 26 33 52
-EEK OF MATER TEAR

CO-1 21




COSME-ODESSA CALM 33A WELL
CUP NO.=4' WELL^"o.=26 STIPULRTE3ON CODE="O NWTER TEFRR=1973

0-.








35-

A

R
V ,

E



E .




T -
L
T




R 25-
L
E
V
E
L

M "

20-








15-

0 13 26 39 52

WEEK OF WRTER TEARR




CO-122








COSIMIE-ODESSA CALM 33A WELL
CUP NO.=L4 WELL N0=26 STIPULATION CODE=100 WN TER YEAR=197'4

40-








35

A



G
E

E
W 30
E
L











M -
T
E
R 25-
L
E
V
E
L
M
S
20








t5
0 13 26 39 52

WEEK OF WRTER TERR





COSME-ODESSA CALM 33A WELL
CUP NO.=4 WELL N =26 STTPULATriN CO1DE=IC NWTER YEAR=1975

.40-









35








L -
R



E
N 30
E
E
K "

L
T


T
E




L
E -

L












15-

0 13 26 39 52

NEEK (F WATER TEAR



CO -124





COSME-EDESSA CALM 33A WELL
CUP NO.=4 WELL N. -26 STIPULATION CODE=tOO NWPTER YERR=1976











35




30
-0-











E
E

L
T
W M

T -



- E
V
E
L

3
20








-.15 ,

O 13 26 39 52
WEEK OF WRTER TERA



CO-125





S COSME-,ODESSA CALM 3,A WELL
CUP NO.=~y WELL ..j.=26 STIPULATTION CODE=1 J WRTER YEt=R=1977


"0--









E.
;35





K-
Ft "














R 25-

L
E


E
L
T











L
20-





15-



0 13 25 39 52

WEEK OF WRTER TERR



GO-1 26






COME "ODESSA CALM 3"A WELL
CUP NO.=i WELL NO.=26 STIPULATION COUE=100 WF1TER YERR=1978

:40-








35-

A
V
E
A

G
E-

W -30
E
E
K




* N :t-----------------------
L
T


T20
CO-127
R 25-
L
E
E
L

M
5










tS
0 13 26 33 52

NEE. OF NRTE9 YER,



CO-127




COSME-ODESSA CALM 33A WELL
CUP NO. =4 WELNO.=26 STIPULATION CODE'O00 WATER TERR=1979










S.










V
E

















rE *
A



E











20-
E






R151

E
E














0 13 26 39 52

WEEK OF NRTER TERR



CO-128
CO -1 2 8






COSME-hODESSA CALM 3-A WELL
CUP NO.=4 WELL NO.=26 -STIPULATION CODE=LuuJ WATER YERR=1980

40-
















E
- E




T .







" L
E
E
K




S0-
E






















WEEK OF WATER TERRY
R 25-

E

E
L


S










15






CO-i29





COSM -ODESSA CALM 33A WELL
CUP NO.=4 WEL NO.=26 STIPULATION COOL 100 N TER TYER=1981

0 -
uGo-







, 35-





E --
A
iU




N 30





E
E
L







M -
T
E

L ,
E
V





20-










0 13 26 39 52

WEEK OF WATER TERR



CO-1 30






COSME--ODESSA CALM 3?-. WELL
CUP NO.=4 WELL NO.=26 STIPULATION CODE=100 WATER YERR=1982

40-








35-




R
V






E

L
A


G- T


E
R 25-
w 30



E


E
L
T











M T
- L






L
20-








15

0 13 26 39 52
WEEK OF WATER TERR



CO-1 31





COSME-QDESSA COME WELL
CUP NO.=I WELL NO.-24 STIPULATION COOE=IOO0 WATER TERR=1974

40-









35

R ,
V
E
R

G-
E

W 30
E -
E

L
T

Ea
R "
T
E -


E
V

L



20










0 13 26 39 52

WEEK CF WRTER TERRY .


CO-132







SCOSME -DESSA COME :WELL
.. CUP NO.=. WELL NO.=2 ST IPULATION CODE= 100 WATER TYEAR 1975

40-








35

A
S E
9 ,




SE
R







E
R 25-
L
E

L
M
L
t 25



















C 13 26 39

NEEK OF WATER TERRY



CO-133
G0-1 33







S Sd-- "s CON. NL
CUP NO.s. NELL NO,.=2 STIPULATION C0E=-O00 WATE rE 7











V



E -
R




A -,
V 30























WEE OF TER TER 52


Co-734






COSME-)DESSA COSME TWELL -
SCUP NO=4 WELL NO.=2-4 STIPULRTION CODE= 100 WtTER TYER= 1977











w 0-
-- ..3--
..o












V-,
.
R
G -

N 30-
E






R 25-



E
L
E
- L



















NEE 5- H-TE9 TE3R





COSME-QDESSA COME 3. WELL
CUP. NO. =4L WELL- NO. .-2 STIPULATION CODE=10 WATER TEAR=1978

40









35-


V
E
R

G
E

w 30-
E .


T


T
E .




E
L

5- -
L -
20








151

C 13 26 39 52

WEEK OF WRTER TEhR


CO-1 36







,: COSML-ODESSA COSME 3 WELL
"CUP NO.=4 WELL NO.=29 STIPULATION C WDE100 WATER TEAR=1979

'1 40








35-




R
V
- E




W 30
E









L
E
E
L




,L
20








15-

O 13 26 39 52
WEEK OF WRITER TERRY



CO-1 37





S.I COSMvE-ODESSA COME 3 'WELL-
'i CUP NO.=4 W NO.=24. STIPULATION COC100 WRITER YERR=1980










35
A -..
- R ...-






E


E
W 30-
E
L
T


T
E
R 25-
L
E
V
E
L



20










0 13 26 39 52

WEEK OF WATER TEARR




CO-138






COSNF-ODESSA COSMt" 3 WELL
CUP NO=.4 WELL NO.=24 STIPULATION CODEt100 WATER YERR=1981

40


...






35-

A .



G
- E
W 30
E -
- E
K

T



E
R 25-

L
E
V
E
L

M
S
- L
20









15-
0 13 26 3Q 5
WEEK OF WRTER TERRY



CO-1 39






SCOSIMv-ODESSA COSM: 3 WELL
CUP-NO.=4- NELL NO.=24J 5TIPULRTEION COOE=100 WATER ER=1982

40-








35-

A .
V
E
R
R "
G
E
E -
W 30
E
E
K
L
T








L
T -
E






L -
E




20-






15-



0 13 26 39 52

WEEK OF NRTER TERR



CO-140











August 2, 1982


TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

* TO: D. A. Wiley, Hydrologist, Resource Regulation Department
R. R. Gordon, Hydrologist, Resource Regulation Department
J. W. Heuer, Hydrologist, Resource Regulation Department

FROM: P. M. Dooris, Environmental Manager, Resource Regulation Department

RE: Lake Augmentation in Northwest Hillsborough County

The following is a summary of the history and current status of lake augmentation
in northwest Hillsborough County.

Background

In the late 1960's and early 1970's, augmentation facilities were constructed
on several lakes in order to provide a means of raising lake stages from the
low elevations to which they had dropped beginning in the mid- to late-1960's.
Vertical stage declines on many lakes were on the order of three or more feet,
resulting in the exposure of significant shoreline area, the strandingof emergent
aquatic vegetation, and in large reductions of lake surface area.

The problems of low lake levels and augmentation became sufficiently important
that several technical investigations into these matters were done. It is the
information contained in these studies, together with information from District
records and from the District's Lake Level Project, which was used in preparing
this Memorandum.

Augmented Lakes

Twelve lakes have augmentation facilities in northwest Hillborough County (Table 1).
Of these, nine lakes have SWFWMD permits. Total permitted average pumpage for
the nine lakes is approximately 680,000 gpd, while total maximum permitted pumpage
is approximately 4.5 mgd.
Results of Augmentation
The use of augmentation facilities has returned most lakes to levels more in keeping
with those normally expected. As a result, lake emergent habitat and lakes' recrea-
tional value has been restored.

The introduction of ground water to lakes has been associated with other changes in
lake environment. Such changes include an alteration of the chemical characteristics
of the lake as well as the proliferation of Hydrilla verticillata in some of the lakes.
The aquatic weed problem is serious in some of the lakes, and chemical and biological
methods have been used in control efforts.
Further explanation of the aspects of augmentation mentioned above may be found in
the attached bibliography.
PMD:kk Attachment H

CO-141







Table 1. Lakes being augmented from groundwater facilities in Northwest
Hillsborough County.

Permitted Well
Permit # AVg/Max (gpd) Diameter (in.)

Lutz 200139 18,600/288,000 6


Strawberry
(N. Crystal) 201898 39,452/720,000 8

Crystal 202845 30,000/432,000 6

Magdalene 203024 426,082/1,728,000 8

Crenshaw 203375 22,190/90,000 8

Chapman 203419 50,000/120,000 8

Charles 204549 60,000/400,000 8

Bird 205327 20,000/500,000 8

Morely 206334 16,000/240,000 6

Round ---- 6

Saddleback 8

Starvation
Sunset, Garden, 200354 164,000/1,000,000 16
and Jackson






















__-~_______ CO-I142 ___ ____








BIBLIOGRAPHY


Dooris, P. M., G. M. Dooris, and D. F. Martin. Effects of ground water
addition on the phytoplankton of central Florida lakes. Water
Resources Bull. 18:335.

Dooris, P. M. and D. F. Martin. 1979. Ground water-induced changes in
lake chemistry. Ground Water 17:324-327.

Dooris, P. M. and R. J. Moresi. 1975. Evaluation of lake augmentation
practices in northwest Hillsborough County, Florida. Technical
report prepared by the Southwest Florida Water Management District,
Brooksville, Florida.

Martin, D., D. Victor, and P. M. Dooris. 1976. Effects of artificially
introduced ground water on the chemical and biochemical characteristics
of six Hillsborough County (Florida) lakes. Water Res. 10:65-69.

S__. 1976. Implications of lake augmentation on the growth
of Hydrilla. Environ. Sci. Eng. All:245-253.

Stewart, J. W. and G. H. Hughes. 1974. Hydrologic Consequences of Using
Ground Water to Maintain Lake Levels Affected by Water Wells Near
Tampa, Florida. OPR #74006 U.S. Geol. Surv. Tallahassee, Florida.






























CO-143







July 21, 1982

MEMORANDUM

TO: DAVID WILEY, Hydrologist, Resource Regulation Department
BOB GORDON, Engineer, Resource Regulation Department
JOHN HEUER, Senior Hydrologist, Resource Regulation Department

FROM: BOB PERRY, Hydrologist, Resource Regulation Department /k -

RE: Aquifer Levels Analysis for Section 21, Cosme-Odessa,
South Pasco Well Fields, (CUP Nos. 200004, 200003, and 203647)

OBJECTIVE: To determine the multiple-variable affects of applicable hydrologic
variables on water-stage elevations and discharges at specific monitor sites.

Methods Used: In order to determine the effect of these well fields on
the aquifer, monthly average water levels for the period of record for
the following listed wells were retrieved from USGS WATSTORE.

Sheldon Road Deep Dundee Road BM Pasco BM
ROMP TR 13-3 Deep/ElO E102 Harry Matts Deep & Shallow
E100 Pasco 205 Deep Doyles Ranch Deep
1-C6 Pasco 210 Deep Pasco 207 Deep
Berger Road Deep Siratowitz Highway 54 Shallow
21-7 Deep Lutz Lake Fern Deep Pasco 305 Deep & Shallow
Van Dyke Shallow Bexley
(Figure No. 8 shows the location of all data points.)

In addition water level for Camp Lake near Denhem, and discharge for the Anclote
River near Elfers and South Branch of the Anclote River near Odessa were also
retrieved.

The monthly average water level or discharge from these sites are the dependent
variable which are to be explained by a set of suitable independent variables.
Proposed independent variable for this set were monthly total rainfall (averaged
for the area using Tampa, Tarpon Springs and Cosme-Odessa rainfall), individual
monthly average well field pumpages of Section 21, Cosme-Odessa, South Pasco,
Eldridge-Wilde, monthly average water table elevation and time. These were
acquired and merged into a data set for statistical analysis using standard -
statistical programs. Two other independent variables were created, one month
lagged water level or discharge and one month lagged rainfall, which were used
to describe the antecedent conditions. -.
The objective now it to separate and determine the effects of each of these
variables on the potentiometric levels. While a controlled experiment is
impossible the available collected data has been used in the multiple linear
regression technique. The following equation was proposed:







Attachment I

CO-144





Wiley, Gordon, Heuer --
July 21, 1982
- Page Two

y = a + by.1 + cR + dR-1 + eQ1 + fQ2 + gQ3 + hQ4 + ixl + jX2 + kT

Where:

y = Average monthly water level of a well, lake or stream discharge
y-'1 = y the prior month
R = Month total rainfall
R.I = R for the prior month
^ Q1 = Monthly average pumpage from Cosme-Odessa Well Field
Q2 = Monthly average pumpage from Section 21 Well Field
Q3 = Monthly average pumpage from South Pasco Well Field
Q4 = Monthly average pumpage from Eldridge-Wilde Well Field
XI = Surface water table elevation at Cosme-Odessa Well Field
X2 = Surface water table elevation at Section 21
T = Sequential time in months

Lower case (a-k) constant (a) and coefficients (b to k) determined from the data.

This equation fits the present month average potentiometric water level or
stream discharge to an equation that takes into account not only the individual
monthly average well field pumpages but also total monthly rainfall for the
present and prior months, monthly average water table elevation, time dependent
trend and the last months water elevation or stream discharge.

Results

An equation was determined for each of the sites which included a unique set
of coefficients for each of the independent variables; the equation can be
used to determine the dependent variable. The equations developed for each
of the sites are shown in Table 1.

Discussion

In this table the R2 values indicate the degree of correlation between the
dependent variable and the equation. For example, the first equation for
Sheldon Road well the R2 is 0.878. This indicates that 87.8% of the variability
of the potentiometric data at this site is explained by a combination of all
independent variables in the equation. Also the entire equation is statistically
significant in excess of 90%. These calculated coefficients indicate realistic
and logical hydrologic relationships although not of equal value or significance
in each equation. Equations marked with a asterisk were derived from sparse
data, often only one value per month and generally have lower R' values. The
derived coefficients are each statistically significant at a minimum of 90%
otherwise it was dropped from the equation and was equated to zero.












CO-145







Wiley, Gordon, Heuer
July 21, 1982
Page Three

Conclusions.

1. The antecedent conditions y-1 are significant for all wells except two
wells (305 Deep and Shallow) and indicated a positive relationship with
respect to antecedent conditions as expected.
2. At many artesian wells the correlation with total monthly rainfall and
antecedent total monthly rainfall are significant with positive values.
This indicates a positive response of the potentiometric surface to
rainfall.

3. At many artesian wells the correlation with water table elevation is
significant with positive values. This shows a positive response of the
potentiometric surface to increase in water table elevation. This may
be a result of leakage, reduced pumpage or loading effects during periods
of high water table; all of which are related to rainfall.
4. Many artesian wells and one water table well reveal a significant negative
time dependent trend indicating a declining potentiometric surface of up
to 1.99 feet over the last 7-8 years. This could be caused by several
factors, first reduced rainfall over that interval, secondly increases in
withdrawals and finally increased drainage of the surface waters thereby
reducing the elevation of the recharge head in the area.
5. In many artesian wells with long-term data, well field pumpage in various
combinations had negative coefficients depicting a declining potentiometric
surface with increased pumpage. The shallow wells coefficients were
substantially smaller;(1 to 2 orders of magnitude) indicating smaller
but still significant relations to pumpage.
6. Several artesian wells with sparse data failed to show significant
relationships to more than a few of the independent variables. This most
likely is due to the sparseness of the record and the length of record.
7. Camp Lake water elevation has significant relationship to antecedent, water
level, rainfall and antecedent rainfall, pumpage of the South Pasco Well A
Field, water table elevation and time.

8. Discharge of the Anclote River at both stations had significant relationship
to antecedent discharge, rainfall, water table elevation and time however
only 65-76% of the variation is explained by the data and pumpage did not
enter the equations and was therefore less than 90% significant.











CO-146







Wiley, Gordon, Heuer
July 21, 1982
Page Four

Summary

We have been able to identify and separate the significant factors affecting
water table and potentiometric levels in this area but because of their
inter-dependence single variable studies will not provide as much information
as the multiple linear technique used here. These equations were derived
from data sets, which describe a limited period of real operational ranges,
therefore all possible combinations of extreme ranges of data are not represented.
Even with that limited data base the equations have high correlation coefficients
and statistical significance. They are valuable for use in the regulation of
the resource, as predictive tools with the constraint of being subject to an
increasing uncertainty proportional to the departure of the data outside the
range of that used to their derivation.

RGP:eab:wp2

cc: L. M. Blain
J. E. Curren


































CO-147








0rft C D00f o LL C )') 0 C') C') 4 0 cy')" r%. (OP. N-%%) 00
o c O o co co cO c m co c' i ^ I o o : o co





S4 -) 4- -4). .- 44-



, I + I I + + + + + + + + + + +
SCSS CMj CSJ






S + + + + + + + + + + + + "+








I .- + + + + +"
:





^-4 I o I I I I io I r I I I -4 I I oI I5








SX N N N N I N I N I
N N N N X C a X c X X O oC Nm ro N N
00 0 a 0a o a a










S ; ; ; + "! "- -1 "
- 0 0o 00 c o f 1 0 00 4 0 1% '4 'o -
c** 0 0 0 C 0 0 0cr 0 c c c c c cr







S. * * d a a *
























+ +"14" + + + + + + +1 + + + 1 + + + + +

I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I
cj 0' 0' 0' 0' 'r 0' 0 c o' -r 0' 0' 0'
o' S0 Lt r 00 0 CC0 -







4- 0 j ro C0 N co rU I N C' r '
0 0 0 t- 0 0r 0o 0 0' 0' c0 0 0' 0' 0' 0'

. . *



+ I I i I 3 + + + a + + + + +-
C' C C C) N N C0 C" C ) N MC CV
c r cr C0r r C0 0' C 0cr 0' 0' C0
0r ) Ln (.0 o0 CO 0C V U- Ln 10 N NC0"U)



C) a C' ) 0 N N N CV- 4 t D m N





o 0 - -t Cr 0
S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M
+ + +I + + + + + + +
'4) c a a a a a r a a '4' r I Ir +r + '4' I



















0 3 m
N 0 0' m0'o 0 0 0 o0 0 C %0 0 O
0 0 ft .0 0 00 0 U' ) 0 N U) N '. f %0 N Nm










0 0 0 0 0 i6
CD 0'C 0 0' 0'& CD 0 aC 0 r 0'0'






SS 0 0L 0 0 0 0S m ML ^ L
+ a a a a a a a a + a + + a a I + + + +








C^ j csi >! >s >v CN >
>^ Co C co u^ Cr r c c) N U- c 0 0t o0 o O "' L -I N 0 L O-to r LO4 p
4- Nm e- QI 0) C. a N 0 I I I I Imr*a1a
0) 0m 0 4 0r 0c r >s >C O

+ + + + + + + + + + + '4 4 + + + + '


w D CD) 0) CD. cr 0) Cr CU)r 0 N

m 0 0 M 0 0 M M





+ 4 +I ++ 4'+ 4' '4 + + 4 4 4 4
aWO a a a a a I alar%%a a a a a






Q C-)= C0 0 >- 3 4 0 ) 0 0 -









'.0 00 tO N 0 0) '. N 00 '.0 0 ) 0 N '.0
U U) U)O LU' CJ 0Q 0o U N N 0 U 1. C' 0) c C"










So CM C C) 0






4-J 4-J 4J 4-) .40 -

CBL 0 0 0 0 V



CM Cl C C
mC I I I I r

x CM x No r Cr

en LO I-L M -

+~ + c+ +.




+ + + + + +


cn c S






0 0 C ~



-I I + + +
S i 1 + +
Scr '
CD r) c4 l C
M LC) CLin 0' 0'
WP or) M o cr cr





* *


I I I + + +
Ln rV 9o-4
0' o' cr c-
nCr CM U.) -. -. -
o ool c- 0' 0' 0'
9 * M L





ISL 0
I-


++ + + + +

c- < M
co o1 S 9c
S + + + + +
Oi CYI
I I I I0 I I.




+ + + 4 + +
1t 1L I) 1


'. CM 0 CO) 0M OCM



* 0 0 n 0

S Cr)0 0 Ot- 0 P







U 3 4-



i-. I >> -1 4^
-I/. ) 0 ) 0 0


I= 0 ^ ( '
CO-149




SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WAI IL MANAGLIMNT D1S i RIL: 6/15/82 /
l SWFWMD) 6/16/82 8/21/82
CONSUMPTIVE USE PERMIT 6/1/82 /23/82
6/18/82


PERM IT GRANTED TO: PERMIT NO.: 200004 (Cosme-Odessa)
West Coast Regional Water Supply DATE PERMIT GRANTED: September 1. 1982
Authority/City of St. Petersburg DATE PERMIT APPLICATION
FILED: December 28, 1981
2280 US Hwy 19 North, Suite 121 PERMIT EXPIRES ON: September 1, 1992
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION: Groundwater
Clearwater, Florida 33515 USE CLASSIFICATION: Public Supply
(Legal Name and Address)
Sections 11,14,23,26,27,34, T27S, R17E

TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS PERMIT ARE AS FOLLOWS:

1. That all statements in the application and in supporting data are true and accurate and based
upon the best information available, and that all conditions set forth herein will be complied
with. If any of the statements in the application and in the supporting data are found to be
untrue and inaccurate, or if applicant fails to comply witl all of the conditions set forth herein,
then this Permit shall become null and void.

2. This Permit is predicated upon the assertion by applicant that the use of water applied for and
granted is and continues to be a reasonable beneficial use as defined in Section 373.019(5),
Florida Statutes, is and continues to be consistent with the public interest, and will not interfere
with any legal use of water existing on the date this Permit is granted.

3. In granting this Permit, SWFWMD has, by regulation, reserved from use by applicant, water in
such locations and quantities, for such seasons of the year, as it determines may be required
for the protection of fish and wildlife and the public health and safety. Such reservations are
subject to periodic review and revision in light of changed conditions.

4. Based upon the application and supporting documents, SWFWMD finds that the applicant's
consumptive use of water of 9,000. 000- gallons per day was in existence before
january 1, 1975 at the average annual withdrawal rate of 9 .000. 000 gallons per day.

5. Nothing in this Permit should be construed to limit the authority of Southwest Florida Water
Management District to declare water shortages and issue orders pursuant to Section 373.175,
Florida Statutes, or to formulate a plan for implementation during periods of water shortage
pursuant to Section 373.246, Florida Statutes.

6. This Permit authorizes the applicant named above to make a combined average annual with-
drawal of 13, 000.000 gallons of water per ya... with a maximum combined
withdrawal rate not to exceed 22,000,000 during a single day. Withdrawals are
authorized as shown in the table below.

SER 7. WITHDRAWAL POINT GALLONS PER DAY GALLONS PER DAY
0D # LATITUDE LONGITUDE AVERAGE MAXIMUM
C 1. 28 05 50 82 35 49 945,000 1,200,000
2. 28 05 50 82 35 43 565,000 575,000
3. 28 06 06 82 35 29 445,000 500,000
4. 28 06 11 82 35 16 1,000,000 1,200,000
5. 28 06 22 82 35 14 1,000,000 1,200,000
6. 28 06 01 82 35 08 965,000 1,200,000
7. 28 06 43 82 34 26 945,000 1,000,000
8. 28 06 49 82 34 20 1,000,000 1,200,000
9 9. 28 06 35 82 35 04 980,000 1,000,000
) 10. 28 06 52 82 34 17 995,000 1,200,000
A 11. 28 07 13 82 34 13 995,000 1,200,000
) 12. 28 06 00 82 35 03 875,000 1,000,000
GCO-150




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs