Citation
Ground-water resources of the Stuart area, Martin County, Florida ( FGS: Information circular 12 )

Material Information

Title:
Ground-water resources of the Stuart area, Martin County, Florida ( FGS: Information circular 12 )
Series Title:
FGS: Information circular
Creator:
Lichtler, W. F
Place of Publication:
Tallahassee
Publisher:
[s.n.]
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
iv, 47 p. : illus., tables., diagrs., maps ; 23 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Groundwater -- Florida -- Martin County ( lcsh )
Water-supply -- Florida -- Martin County ( lcsh )
City of Stuart ( local )
Martin County ( local )
City of Ocala ( local )
Lake City ( local )
City of Avon Park ( local )
City of Tallahassee ( local )
Aquifers ( jstor )
Water wells ( jstor )
Water tables ( jstor )
Chlorides ( jstor )
Pumping ( jstor )
Genre:
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Bibliography:
Bibliography: p. 45-47.
General Note:
Prepared by U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Central and Southern Florida Flood ControlDistrict and the Florida Geological Survey."
Funding:
Digitized as a collaborative project with the Florida Geological Survey, Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
Statement of Responsibility:
by W.F. Lichtler.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
The author dedicated the work to the public domain by waiving all of his or her rights to the work worldwide under copyright law and all related or neighboring legal rights he or she had in the work, to the extent allowable by law.
Resource Identifier:
022287905 ( aleph )
01719541 ( oclc )
AJA4781 ( notis )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
STATE OF FLORIDA
STATE BOARD OF CONSERVATION
Ernest Mitts, Director
FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Robert 0. Vernon, Director
INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 1Z
GROUND-WATER RESOURCES OF THE STUART AREA,
MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
W. F. Lichtler
Prepared by U. S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the
Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District
and the Florida Geological Survey
Tallahassee, Florida 1957







TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Introduction ........ ....................... Z....
Purpose and scope of investigation ........... Z...2
Previous investigations ....... ............... 3
Personnel and acknowledgments ..... .......... 3
Location and general features of the area .......... 4
Geography and topography ....... .............. 4
Climate ................................. 4
Geologic formations and their water-bearing
properties .......... ...................... 12
Eocene series ......... .................... 12
Lake City limestone ...... ................ 12
Avon Park limestone ..... ............... ...12
Ocala group .............. ............. 13
Oligocene series .......................... ..13
Miocene series ................... 13
Hawthorn formation ........ ... .......... 13
Tamiamni formation ............ ............ 14
Post-Miocene deposits ..... ................ ...14
Ground water ........ ...................... ...14
Principles of occurrence .... .............. ...14
Hydrologic properties of the aquifers ............ 15
Floridan aquifer ..... ................. ....15
Nonartesian aquifer ..... ............... ...16
Thickness and areal extent 6..........16 Lithology ...... ................... ....16
Shape and slope of the water table ........ ..18 Water-level fluctuations ............. ....18
Ground-water use ......................... ....19
Quantitative studies ....... ................... 21
Principles .......... ...................... 21
Descriptions of pumpingtests ..... ............ 23
Interpretation of'pumping-test data ............. 24
Salinity studie s ......... ..................... 26
Contamination from surface-water bodies 7.....27 Contamination from artesian aquifer .......... ...34
Summary and conclusions ..... ............... ...36
References ........ ....................... ...45
iii




ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure Page
1 Map of Florida showing the Stuart area
and Martin County ....... ................ 5
2 Map of the Stuart area showing the
locations of selected wells ...... ........... 6
3 Contour map of the water table in the
Stuart area, July 6, 1955 ...... ............ 7
4 Contour map of the water table in the
Stuart area, October 5, 1955 ..... .......... 8
5 Contour map of the water table within the
Stuart city limits, April 1, 1955 .... ........ 9
; Contour map of the water table within the
Stuart city limits, May 3, 1955 .... ......... 10
7 Hydrograph of well 147, in Stuart, and
daily rainfall at Stuart, 1954 ............. ...20
8 Drawdown observed in wells 658 and 658A
during pumping test in the new city well
field, May 27, 1955 ....... ............... 25
9 Map of the Stuart area showing the chloride
content of water from wells. 8...........8
Table
1 Average temperature and rainfall at Stuart 11
2 Pumpage from Stuart well field, in millions
of gallons per month ... .. ............ 22
3 Chloride concentration in water samples
from selected wells. ..... ........ .. ...29
4 Records of selected wells. ............ 38
iv




GROUND-WATER RESOURCES OF THE STUART AREA,
MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
W. F. Lichtler
ABSTRACT
A shallow, nonartesian aquifer is the principal source of water supplies in the Stuart area. This aquifer extends from the landsurface to a depth of about 130 feet. It is composed of the Pamlico sand and the Anastasia formation of Pleistocene age, the Caloosahatchee marl of Pliocene age, and possibly part or all of the Tarmiami formation of Miocene age.
The aquifer differs in lithology-and texture from place to place but, in general, wells less than 40 feet deep require screens. Consolidated beds of differing thicknesses usually occur between 40 and 130 feet below the land surface, and open-hole wells usually canbe completed somewhere' in this interval. At, depths below 130 feet the relatively impermeable sands and clays of the Hawthorn formation (Miocene) are encountered and' little 'water is- available. 'Beneath the Hawthorn formation, limestones in the Floridan' aquifer, 600 to 800 feet or more below mean sea level, contain water under pressure. The deep artesian water contains 800 to 4, 200 ppm of chloride in 'the Stuart area and is too salty for most purposes.
Periodic determinations of thechloride content' of water from wells indicate that there has been some salt-water encroachment into the shallow aquifer in the areas adjacent to the St. Lucie River and some contamination resulting from leakage through faulty 'casings of wells that penetrate the Floridan aquifer.
1




Z FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
The coefficient of transmissibility of the shallow aquifer as computed from pumping-test data by the Theis nonequilibrium method ranged from 18, 000 to 170, 000 gallons per day per foot (gpd/ft). The wide range in values is believed to indicate not an actual condition but that the aquifer is not suitable for a normal Theis analysis. Further analyses of the data by the leaky-aquifer method developed by Hantush and Jacob (1955, p. 95-100) and by use of an unpublished Leaky-aquifer "type curve" developed by H. H. Cooper, Jr., yielded a transmissibility value of about 20, 000 gpd/ft.
The average height above mean sea level of the water table in the shallow aquifer is enough, at the present time, to prevent extensive salt-water encroachment into the aquifer. Unless the water table is lowered excessively by drainage ditches or'heavy pumping, a permanent supply of fresh water is assured. Large quantities of fresh water are available for future development in the central part of the Stuart peninsula.
INTRODUCTION
Purpose and Scope of Investigation
Because the Stuart area is, at times, surrounded on three sides by saline water, the underlying fresh-water aquifer is vulnerable to salt-water encroachment. With progressively larger withdrawals of ground water for public and private supplies, the possibility of salt-water contamination of freshwater supplies is increased.
The Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District requested that the U. S. Geological Survey investigate the ground-water resources of the area and determine the extent of salt-water encroachment. The investigation was made as a part of the general studies in cooperation with the Flood Control District and the Florida Geological Survey. Prelininary work, including the inventorying of and collection of water samples from a large number of wells in Martin County. was done during 1953 by E. W. Bishop, formerly with the U. S. Geological Survey. Intensive field work by




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 3
the writer began in January 1955 and continued through August 1955. Samples of water from wells in the area were analyzed to determine their chloride content. Wells suitable for a program of periodic measurement of water levels were selected. A special effort was made to include in this program only wells that were not in use, so that all wells couldbe measured ina single dayto obtain an "instantaneous" picture of the water table. The altitudes of all measuring points in observation wells were determined by spirit level and referred to U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey mean-sealevel datum, and water-table contour maps were drawn from the data.
Previous Investigations
No detailed investigations of ground-water resources in Martin County had been made prior to the present investigation. Brief references to Martin County were made by Mansfield (1939), Parker and Cooke (1944), Cooke (1945), Matson and Sanford (1913), Collins and Howard (1928), Stringfield(1936), and Parker, Ferguson, Love, and others (1955). In addition, references were made to water levels in Water-Supply Papers 1166,1192, 1222; and to quality-ofwater data by Black and Brown (1951), and Black, Brown, and Pearce (1953).
Personnel and Acknowledgments
The writer wishes to express his appreciation for the assistance and cooperation of the residents of the Stuart area, who supplied many valuable data and permitted the sampling and measuring of wells. Joseph Greenlees, City Manager; Frederick Walton, Water Commissioner; Ernest Tyner, City Commissioner; and James Doyle, County Sanitarian, were helpful during the investigation. Douglas Arnold, well driller of Stuart, and Charles A. Black of Black and Associates, Gainesville, Florida, supplied much valuable geologic and hydrologic information.
The investigation was under the general supervision of A. N. Sayre, Chief, Ground Water Branch, and under the immediate supervision of N. D. Hoy, Geologist, and M. I. Rorabaugh, District Engineer, all of the U. S. Geological Survey.




4 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
LOCATION AND GENERAL FEATURES OF THE AREA
Geography and Topography
The area covered by this report includes most of the city of Stuart and adjacent parts of Martin Comity (fig. 1). Most of Stuart is on a peninsula formed by the South Fork of the St. Lucie River on the west, the St. Lucie River on the north, and the St. Lucie River and Manatee Pocket on the east (fig. 2). The peninsula is about four miles wide at its base, about three miles wide at its northern end, and about four miles long,
The land surface generally ranges from 10 to 20 feet in altitude in the central part of the peninsula. It slopes gently to the banks of the South Fork of the St. Lucie River on the western side and to relatively steep banks along the St. Lucie River on the northern and eastern sides.
The entire peninsula is covered by permeable quartz sand, about 40 feet thick. Drainage is predominantly underground. Rainfall infiltrates rapidly through the permeable surficial sand to the water table and flows approximately at right angles to the water-table contours (fig. 3-6) to points of discharge along the coast or into several small streams. The water table is near the surface inthe central part of the peninsula during much of the year, and during high groundwater stages surface lakes exist in depressions scattered throughout the area.
Climate
The climate at Stuart is subtropical, the average annual temperature being 75.40 F. Because of the moderating influence of the surrounding water, the temperature is usually two to four degrees higher during winter cold spells than in areas farther inland, and somewhat lower in the summer. Rainfall averages 56.3 inches per year. Table 1 shows that rainfall is greatest in late summer and early fall and least in the winter.




INFORMATIONCIRCULAR NO. 12 5
.... i 0; __L I o" GE X .... O RG' \I...A i i ...I I: To.. ---- ...1 .. t,,
-.___ I f::,o k r..-:
es,.,
30 -. s. z M,
Figure 1. Map of Florida showing the Stuart area and Martin
County.




6 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
OL KL I'l L0 lo
IN'
selMYe weels
EXPLANdATION
0
NOISPWWINO WELL PLOWING WILL ReCONDINO GA0E
Figure 2. Map of the Stuart area showing the locations of
selected wells.




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 7
- ~ ~STUART --ZD
EXPLANATION
LINE SHOWING APPROXIMATE ALTITUDE OF WATER TABLE. IN FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL. CONTOUR INTERVAL .0 FOOT
Figure 3. Contour map of the water table in the Stuart area,
July 6, 1955.




8 FLORIDA 'GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
w
I
Octobr 5,1955
I ONTO011~R41 R42II9ImL FO S T A R Te~ O o i ,I
P : I mn.i
Figue 4.Conour ap f th~waertale n th Start rea
Octobe 5, 195 3.0,




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 9
Sr. LUCIE RIVER
OLD WELL FIELDS WATER PLANT SALL PARK FIEL FIELD
1.0 O"e
81.6
gO 5 .oC)
UNESO3NO APPROXIMATE ALTITUDE OF WATER TABLEIN FEET ABOVE MEANE USEA LEV.L.NOTE ORANGE IN CONTOUR INTERVAL AT 0.0 FEET
'aIG A NEWLLL
-I 90 0 O OFWAERTALE,I FEET ABV MA
,0XO l Zow
Figure 5. Contour map of the water table within the Stuart
city limits, April 1, 1955.




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 11 Table .. Average Temperature and Rainfall at Stuart Month Tempe rature1 Rainfall2 (OF.) (inches) Jan. 66.9 1.92 Feb. 67.7 2.32 Mar. 70.9 2. 86 Apr. 74.4 3.15 May 77.6 4.52 June 81.4 6.75 July 82.4 6.30 Aug. 83.0 5.47 Sept. 81.7 9.81 Oct. 78. 1 8.73 Nov. 72.2 2.44 Dec. 68.4 2.03 Yearly average 75.4 56.30 1Discontinuous record 1936-1955, U.S. Weather Bureau. 2Discontinuous record 1935-1955, U.S. Weather Bureau.




12 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
GEOLOGIC FORMATIONS AND THEIR
WATER-BEARING PROPERTIES
The strata underlying the Stuart area to a depth of about 1, 000 feet range in age from Recent at the surface to middle Eocene at the bottom. Water in the formations older than Miocene is highly mineralized and is used very little in the Stuart area. The formations of Miocene age yield only small quantities of water. Most wells are developed in post -Miocene sediments.
Eocene Series
The oldest rocks penetrated by water wells in the Stuart area are of middle Eocene age. The Eocene rocks include the Lake City limestone and the Avon Park limestone of Claiborne age and the Ocala group of Jackson age; these form the lower and major part of the Floridan aquifer (p. 15).
Lake City Limestone
The Lake City limestone, as defined by Cooke (1945, p. 46-47), overlies the Oldsmar limestone of Wilcox age in northern Florida and is overlain by the Tallahassee limestone. The Tallahassee limestone apparently is missing in southern Florida. The Lake City limestone in northern and central Florida is described as alternating layers of dark brown chalky limestone with some gypsum and chert. It forms part of the Floridan aquifer, and in the central part of Martin County it is tapped for irrigation and stock-watering supplies.
Avon Park Limestone
The Avon Park limestone, also a part of the Floridan aquifer, overlies the Lake City limestone. It is a cream colored to white, chalky to granular, porous limestone that ranges in thickness from about 100 to 150 feet in central Florida.




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 13
Ocala Group1
The Ocala group unconformably overlies the Avon Park limestone and is another part of the Floridan 'aquifer. It is a cream colored, soft to hard, porous limestone, with beds of coquina at some localities.
Oligocene Series
The Oligocene series in Martin County has not been clearly defined. Sediments overlying the Ocala group and underlying the Hawthorn formation have been tentatively classified as of Vicksburg (middle Oligocene) age in the Stuart area and as of Suwannee (late Oligocene) age in southeastern Martin County. A correlation of cuttings from-wells in the area indicates that there may have been some postOligocene faulting. The Vicksburg group in the Stuart area is composed of cream colored, softtohard, granular, porous limestone and some sand and shells. It forms the upper part of the Floridan aquifer in this area.
Miocene Series
The Miocene series in the Stuart area includes 'the Hawthorn formation of middle Miocene age and the Tamiami formation of late Miocene age. The Tampa, limestone of early Miocene age may be present below the Hawthorn formation, but this has not been clearly established.
Hawthorn Formation
The Hawthorn formation is composed of olive-drab, relatively impermeable clay and sand and some thin lenses
IThe stratigraphic nomenclature used in this report conforms to the usage of the Florida Geological Survey. It also conforms to the usage of the U.S. Geological:'Survey with the exception of the Ocala group and its subdivisions.' The Florida Survey has adopted the Ocala group as described by Puri (1953). The Federal Survey regards the Ocala as a formation, the Ocala limestone.




14 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
of limestone. In the Stuart area it is about 350 feet thick. A test well in the new city well field penetrated greenish sand at a depth of about 150 feet that is believed to be part of the Hawthorn formation. The Hawthorn formation forms the major part of the upper confining bed of the Floridan aquifer.
Tamiami Formation
The Tamiami formation appears to be conformable with the underlying Hawthorn formation. In the Stuart area it is composedofabout 60 feet of sand, shell fragments and limestone. Part or all of the Tamiami formation may form an extension of the shallow nonartesian aquifer in the postMiocene deposits, and part may be included in the confining bed above the Floridan aquifer.
Post-Miocene Deposits
The post-Miocene deposits include the Caloosahatchee marl of Pliocene age and the Anastasia formation and Pamlico sand of Pleistocene age. The boundary between the Pliocene and Pleistocene in this area could not be determined, owing to the fact that the Caloosahatchee marl and the Anastasia formation are lithologically similar in Martin County. This boundary can be determined definitely only by detailed examination of the fossils of the formations.
A thin layer of quartz sand of the Pamlico sand covers the area and gradeS into the underlying Anastasia formation.
GROUND WATER
Principles of Occurrence
Ground water is stored in the joints, solution cavities, pore spaces, and other openings of the earth's crust below the water table. Ground water is the subsurface water in the zone, called the zone of saturation, in which all openings are completely filled with water under pressure greater than atmospheric. The water table is the top of this zone.




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 15
Only part of the water that falls as rain reaches the zone of saturation. The remainder runs off the land surface to open bodies of water such as rivers, lakes and bays, or is returned to the atmosphere by evaporation and transpiration. The amount of rain that reaches the water table depends on many factors. These include the rate. at which the rain occurs, the slope of the land on which it falls, the amount and type of vegetation cover, and the character of the surface materials throughwhich the water must infiltrate to reach the zone of saturation.
After the water reaches the zone of saturation it begins to move more or less laterally, under the influence of gravity, toward a point of discharge such as a spring or well. Ground water may occur under either artesian or nonarte sian (watertable) conditions. Where the water is confined in a permeable bed that is overlain by a relatively impermeable bed, its surface is not free to rise and fall. Water thus confined under pressure is said to be under artesian conditions. The term "artesian" is applied to ground water that is confined under pressure- sufficient to cause the water to rise above the top of the permeable bed that contains it, though not necessarily above the land surface. Where the upper surface of the water is free to rise and fall in a permeable formation, the water is said to be under nonartesian conditions, and the upper surface is called the water table. All gradations exist between artesian and nonartesian conditions.
Hydrologic Properties of the Aquifers
Ground water in the Stuart area occurs in two major aquifers, a deep artesian aquifer (Floridan aquifer), and a shallow nonartesian aquifer. The aquifers are separated by a thick section of relatively impervious clay and sand. The water inthe artesian aquifer is much more mineralized than that in the nonartesian aquifer.
Floridan Aquifer
Wells penetrating the Floridan aquifer in the Stuart area range in depth from 800 tol, 200 feet. The pressure head in these wells is about 40 feet above the land surface, or about




16 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
50 feet above mean sea level. Large flows are obtained from wells penetrating the aquifer, but the water is highly mineralized, ranging in chloride content from 800 to 4, 200 ppm. Because of its high mineral content, little use is made of the artesian water in the Stuart area. The availability and quality of the water from the Floridan aquifer in Martin County will be discussed more thoroughly in a later report.
Nonartesian Aquifer
Thickness and areal extent: The nonartesian aquifer is composed, from the surface down, of the Pamlico sand, the Anastasia formation, the Galoosahatchee marl, and possibly the Tamiami formation. The aquifer extends from the land surface to a depth of about 130 feet and is underlain by impermeable sand and clay which is probably part of the Hawthorn formation.
The bodies of salt water that bound the peninsula on the east, north and west are the boundaries of the nonartesian aquifer. Excessive lowering of the water table near these boundaries would cause salt water to move in laterally. To the south, however, the aquifer has a much greater areal extent.
Lithology: Data obtained from the inventory of wells in the area show a wide range in the depth of nonartesianwells, a fact which indicates that the lithology of the nonartesian aquifer differs from place to place. The heterogeneity of the aquifer is evident in well cuttings from a few wells drilled in the area during the course of this investigation. Permeable rock and shell are separated by less permeable fine sand or marl. Beds found at a given depth at one site may be found ata different depth or maybe missing entirely at another site close by. Sufficient information is not yet available to define accurately the various permeable zones, but a generalized geologic section of the area is shown in the following log:




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 17
Depth, in
feet, below
Description land surface
Sand, quartz, fine to coarse, cream colored, gray and brown, clear to frosted, rounded and subangular ............................. 0 20
"Hardpan"; sand, quartz, cream colored to brown, contains cream colored to brown clay ....................................... 20 23
Sand, quartz, fine to coarse, tan to dark gray 23 40
Sandstone, friable, loosely cemented, and some shell fragments ...................... 40-- 48
Sand, quartz, very fine to fine, dark gray, micaceous ................................. 48 58
Limestone and sandstone, tan- gray to bluish, hard, porous; contains some shells. Permeability relatively high. Many open-hole wells are finished in this section in the northern part of the Stuart area ............... 58 73
Sand, quartz, fine, tan to gray, some shell fragments ................................ 73 80
Limestone and sandstone, buff-brown, hard, inte'zbedded with medium quartz sand and shell fragments ........................... 80- 88
Sand, quartz, very fine to fine, tan to gray,
contains phosphatic nodules and some shells 88 103
Lime stone and sandstone, fine grained, dense,
hard;interbeddedwith fine to medium rounded quartz sand and shell beds ............... 103 123
Sand, quartz, fine to medium; few shell fragments ..................................... 123 133




18 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Limestone and sandstone, interbedded with medium quartz sand and shells ............ 133 144
Sand, very fine to fine, greenish-gray...... 144 151
The layers or lenses of fine sand retard the vertical movement of water.
Shape and slope of the water table: The water levels in observation wells were measured at various times to determine the altitude and shape of the water table in the area and to determine changes in ground-water storage in the aquifer.
The water table is highest in the south-central part of the peninsula and slopes east, north, and west toward points of ground-water discharge in the Manatee Pocket, the St. Lucie River, and the South Fork of the St. Lucie River (fig. 3,4). Because ground water flows approximately at right angles to the contour lines, it is apparent from figures 3 and 4 that practically all the recharge to the nonartesian aquifer in the peninsula is derived from local rainfall. Much of the rainfall is quickly absorbed by the permeable surface sands and infiltrates to the water table. Evidence for this lies in the fact that the water level in a well 144 feet deep rose 1. 11 feet within 12 hours after a rainfall of 1.09 inches was recorded at Stuart. Surface runoff is small, except locally after exceptionally heavy rainfall.
Figures 5 and 6 show how the water table was lowered by pumping in the city well fields. Figure 5 shows the water table on April 1, 1955, when the city wells at the old city well field, at the water plant and the ball park, were pumping. Figure 6 shows the water table on May 3, 1955, when wells were shut down in the old well field and wells were pumping in the new city well field, south of 10th Street and west of Palm Beach Road.
Water-level fluctuations: Threewells inthe eastern part of Martin County are equipped with automatic water-level gages which provide a continuous record of the fluctuations of the water table. Only one of these (well 147) is in the area




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 19
of this report (fig. 2). Figure 7 is a hydrograph showing fluctuations of the water level in well 147 during 1954. Well 147 is 74 feet deep and is about a quarter of a mile east of the new city well field. The maximum yearly range in water level in this well for the period 1952-1955 was 6. 3 feet in 1953. This compares with a maximum yearly range of 4. 8 feet in well 140, which is 16 miles south of well 147, and 5. 8 feet in well 125, which is 15 miles southeast of well 147, in Jonathan Dickinson State Park.
Figure 7 shows also the distribution of rainfall as recorded at radio station WSTU, at Stuart, in 1954. As a rule, the water level in well 147, which is about two miles from the rain gage, correlates fairly closely with rainfall, but a few exceptions are apparent. On February 2,_ 1954, for example, a 1. 85-inch rainfall produced only a very slight rise in the water level in well 147, but a 1. 48-inch rainfall on March 29 produced a rise of about 0. 3 foot. Doubtless some of the rain falls in short, local showers that do not wet all parts of the Stuart area. This would account for some of the lack of correlation shown in figure 7.
Figures 3 and4 show the configuration of the water table at high and low ground-water stages, respectively, in 1955. Ground-water stages are usually highest during September and October; however, rainfall in 1955 was exceptionally low from August to November, and the usual high stages did not occur. Thus, water levels on July 6, 1955 (fig. 3), were higher than those on October 5 (fig. 4).
GROUND-WATER USE
Practically all the water for public, irrigation, domestic, and industrial use in the Stuart area is obtained from ground-water sources. Since April 25, 1955, all the city supply has been obtained from three 4-inch wells (657, 723, 724), 125 feet deep, in the new city well field (fig. 2). The wells are spaced about 600 feet apart and each is equipped with a turbine pump having a capacity of 100 gpm. Prior to April 25, 1955, the city supply was obtained from one 4-inch and two 6-inch wells (97, 98, 99) about 65 feet deep, near the water-treatment plant, and two 4-inch wells (621, 623) 56 feet deep, at the ball park. Operation of these wells was




20 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
JAIL Pis.. MAN. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AU0. SEPT. Oct. NOV. DcO
3, .
.EN Figure 7. Hydrographofwell 147, inStuart, and daily rainfall at Stua-t, 1954.




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 21
discontinued because of an increase in the salinity of the water, but they are available for emergency use.
The pumpageby the city of Stuart has increased steadily during the last few years as new customers have been added (table 2). During 1955, 91 million gallons of water was pumped. Water usage is high during dry periods when lawns are irrigated.
The numerous flower farms in the vicinity of Stuart have their own irrigation wells and use large quantities of ground water duringthe growing season, from October to May. Some of this irrigationwater returns to the ground-water reservoir by infiltration through the surface sands.
In areas not serviced bycity water mains, private wells are used for both domestic supplies and irrigation. In addition, several hundred wells are used for lawn irrigation within the area served by the city. Their total pumpage is doubtless large, but no figures are available. Here, too, some of the water is returned to the ground-water reservoir by infiltration through the surface sands. The industrial use of ground water in the Stuart area is small.
QUANTITATIVE STUDIES
Principles
The ability of an aquifer totransmit water is expressed by the coefficient of transmissibility. In customary units, it is the quantity of water, in gallons per day, that will move through a vertical section of the aquifer one foot wide and extending the full saturated height, under a unit hydraulic gradient (Theis, 1938, p. 892), at the prevailing temperature of the water. The coefficient of storage is a measure of the capacity of the aquifer to store water and is defined as the volume of water released from or taken into storage per unit surface area of the aquifer per unit change in the component of head normal to that surface. These coefficients are generally determined by means of pumping tests on wells.




N
N
Table 2. Pumpage From Stuart Well Field, in Millions of Gallons Per Month
Year Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Total
1941 2.63 2.77 3.23 2.89 2.70 2.82 2.48 2.68 2.57 2.69 2.91 2.62 32.98
1942 3.26 3.54 3.29 3.26 3.67 3.24 3.40 3.30 3.06 3.47 3.48 3.53 40.51 0
1943 3.53 3.42 3.57 3.62 3.80 3.57 3.49 3.61 3.44 3.63 3.74 3.94 43.35
1944 3.93 4.04 4.41 4.36 4.38 4.29 3.88 3.50 3.40 3.23 3.28 3.63 46.31
1945 3.86 3.60 4.25 3.89 3.71 3.34 3.02 3.28 3.12 3.11 3.18 3.64 42.00 C)
1946 3.91 3.85 4.00 4.30 3.40 2.94 3.05 3.21 3.16 3.80 3.55 3.86 43.04 o
1947 4.14 3.74 3.98 3.61 3.77 3.11 3.48 3.50 3.10 3.27 3.29 3.50 42.47
1948 3.61 4.36 5.00 4.56 4.14 3.74 3.53 3.41 3.25 3.79 4.04 4.22 47.65 0
1949 4.32 4.17 4.77 4.27 3.94 3.13 3.34 2.83 3.96 3.58 3.74 4.01 46.05
1950 4.00 4.84 5.18 4.56 4.79 4.12 4.15 4.28 5.00 4.90 4.81 5.78 56.43 >
1951 6.08 5.71 6.73 5.30 6.73 5.18 4.27 5.43 4.19 3.68 4.55 5.01 62.86t"
1952 6.11 5.39 4.76 4.98 5.20 5.39 5.54 5.75 5.59 5.90 5.59 5.56 65.74 C
1953 6.34 5.85 6.35 6.18 6.47 5.37 5.93 5.34 5.44 5.03 5.23 5.90 69.42
1954 6.42 6.65 6.75 6.48 6.40 6.26 5.89 6.70 5.82 6.34 6.75 7.57 78.02 M
1955 8.32 7.23 8.21 7.54 8.15 7.91 6.85 7.11 6.67 7.55 7.95 7.57 91.07 14




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 23
Descriptions of Pumping Tests
Pumping tests were made at five places in the Stuart area, four in the new city well field and one in the ball park well field.
The first test was made in the new city well field on March 9, 1955, withwell 657 (city supply well No. 1) pumping at the rate of 135 gpm for 11 hours. Water-level measurements were made during the test in wells 656, 658 and 659, located 11, 100 and 300 feet, respectively, from the pumped well. All wells are cased to 115 feet with 10 feet of open hole in the underlying limestone, except well 656, which is cased to 144 feet with one foot of open hole. The water from well 657 was discharged into a ditch about 75 feet from the pumping well, but because the ditch was choked with vegetation and has only a slight gradient, water remained in the vicinity and recharged the aquifer during the test.
In the second test; made on March 23, 1955, also in the new city well field, well 724 (city supply well No. 3), was pumped at a rate of 140 gpm for five hours, and water levels were observed in wells 659, 658 and 657, located 300, 500 and 600 feet, respectively, from the pumped well. The wells are all cased to 115 feet, leaving 10 feet of open hole in the underlyinglimestone. The water was discharged into a ditch 200 feet from the pumpedwell and again remained in the area and recharged the aquifer, but this recharge did not affect the water levels as early as that in test No. 1.
The following day, March 24, 1955, the third test was made at the.same location as tests 1 and 2. Well 723 (city supply welNo, 2)was pumped at a rate of 112 gpm for five hours, and water levels were observed in wells 658 and 724, located 500 and 750 feet, respectively, from the pumping well. All wells are cased to 115 feet, leaving 10 feet of open hole in the underlying limestone. The water was discharged into a depression near the wells and remained-in the area, probably recharging the aquifer.
* The fourthtestwas made onMay 27, 1955, also inthe new well field, when thenew wells were in operation. Observation




24 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
well 658A, 13 feet deep, was installed 100 feet from well 657 (city supply well No. 1) and immediately adjac ent to observation well 658. Prior to the test the well field was shut down overnight to allow recovery of the water levels in the area. On the next morning the water levels in both the deep and shallow observation wells were measured and were 6.38 feet above mean sea level. Well 657 was pumped at a rate of 105 gpm for nine hours, at the end of which period the drawdowns in wells 658 and 658A were 3. 58 and 0. 34 feet, respectively (fig. 8). The water level in well 658 began to decline almost immediately after pumping started, and had fallen t1jree feet after 21 minutes. The water level in shallow well 658A began to decline eight minutes after the start of pumping, and had fallen 0. 07 foot after 21 minutes. Near the end of the test the water level in well 658 had neatly stabilized, whereas that in well 658A was still falling, but at a decreasing rate. The water was discharged into the city mains and so did not return to the aquifer.
The fifth test was made in the well field at the ball park on April 27, 1955. Well 621 (city well No. 2) was pumped at a rate of 130 gpm for five hours. Observation wells 620 and 623 were seven and 375 feet, respectively, from the pumped well. All wells are cased to 51 feet, leaving five feet of open hole in the underlying limestone. The water was discharged on the ground in the immediate vicinity of the pumped well and doubtless some returned to the aquifer during the test.
Interpretation of Pumping -Test Data
Theis (1935, p. 519-524), using basic heat-transfer formulas, developed a method to analyze the movement of water through an aquifer under the conditions that the aquifer is (1) homogeneous and isotropic, (Z) of infinite areal extent,
(3) of uniform thickness, (4) bounded above and below by impervious beds, (5) receiving no discharge, (6)-fully penetrated by the discharging well, and (7) losing water only through the discharging well. If an aquifer meets all these conditions, the Theis nonequilibrium method, as described by Wenzel (194Z, p. 87-90), will give a true transmissibility value for the aquifer regardless of the distance of the observation well from the pumped well or the rate of pumping.




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 25
TIME, IN MINUTES AFTER PUMPING STARTED 10 50 100 I5 00 20 300 350 400 450 500 550 0
\"658-A
0.5
I.
X2.0
4.01,
Figure 8. Drawdown observed in wells 658- and 658A during pumping test in the'new- city well field, May 27,
1955.




Z6 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Whenthe data from the tests in the city well fields were analyzed by the Theis method, the computed values of the coefficient of transmissibility ranged from 18, 000 to 170, 000 gpd per foot for the same area, indicating that the aquifer does not meet all the above conditions. The main producing zone, which is between 103 and 140 feet (see well log) in the new well field, is reasonably homogeneous, isotropic, and uniform in thickness, judging from well logs and cuttings and the performance of individual wells. For a test of short duration the aquifer is, in effect, of infinite areal extent, but it is not bounded above by an impermeable bed, as is shown by the fact that the water level in shallow well 658A (fig. 2) began to decline eight minutes after well 657 began pumping (fig. 8). Also, the water was discharged on the ground in the vicinity of the pumpedwells and, consequently, the aquifer was receiving recharge. In addition, the aquifer was not fully penetrated by the pumped wells. After corrections were made for the effects of partial penetration and also for the natural decline of the water table thatwas taking place the data were further analyzed by means of the leakyaquifer method of Hantush and Jacob (1955, p. 95-100) and a leaky-aquifer type curve developed by H.H. Cooper, Jr., of the U.S. Geological Survey, Tallahassee, Florida, (personal communication). This analysis produced values for the coefficient of transmissibility ranging from 15,000 to 25, 000 gpd per foot, with a probable average near 20, 000 gpd per foot. This seems to be a reasonable coefficient of transmissibilityfor the main producing zone of the aquifer. When considering long-term pumping, vertical leakage from the overlying beds is an important factor, and the coefficient of transmissibility of the overlying beds should be added to that of the main producing zone to obtain a realistic coefficient of transmissibility for the well field.
SALINITY STUDIES
The chloride content of ground water is generally a reliable index of the extent of contamination by salt water from the sea or other sources. Water samples were collected from severalhundred wells in the Stuart area for chloride analysis (fig. 9). Those wells yieldingwater having an appreciable chloride content were sampled periodically to detect any variations in the chloride content of the water (table 3).




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 27
In most cases the fluctuations are caused by variations in the amount of rainfall in the area or an increase or decrease in pumping. Usually it is a combination of the two, because more water is needed for irrigation during dry periods, as in 1955, and less during wet periods, as in 1947-1948.
Ina few cases, notably inwells 647 and 72Z, the chloride content of the water dropped during a dry period, owing to the cessation of pumping in the old city well field and the plugging of a leaky artesian well, No. 128 (fig. 2). Wells 619 and 654 showed an increase and then a decrease inthe chloride content of the water. The decrease was probably caused by the flushing of the salty artesian water from the aquifer.
Salt water may encroach into the Stuart area from either of two sources: (l)'bodies of seawater, including the St. Lucie River, the Manatee Pocket, and tidal creeks and canals, and
(2) the artesian aquifer.
Contamination from Surface-Water Bodies
Encroachment from the St. Lucie River and the Manatee Pocket is not extensive at the present time. It has occurred only in a-reas near the coast, and no proven encroachment has been found more than half a mile from the river. The fresh-water head is high close to the shoreline, and in many places fresh water canbe obtainedfrom wells within 100 feet
* of salt-water bodies. It is reported that fresh water has been obtained from wells driven in the river bottom, but the author has not confirmed this.
Heavy pumping in the areas adjacent to the river may cause sufficient lowering of thewater table to allow saltwater to invade the fresh-water zone. Water of high chloride content was detected in well 720, about 1, 500 feet from the St. Lucie River, about halfway between the river and the water plant well field. When the wellwas drilled, water containing 9, 180 ppm of chloride was encountered at a depth of 104 feet below the land surface. The well was immediately "pulled back" 20 feet, to a depth of 84 feet, where the chloride content of the water was only 19 ppm. A layer of fine sand between 84 and 104 feet apparently acts as a confining bed, because no




as FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
S T U A R T -Z-- T3
16 033
or Out sIO 0IN PPM
1440
0 b0$ so
313
'3
3a ao 00
#*
0 4 3*, 1
los0 ORE TIN 000 *
tt ofowater from.wells.
339 3t 31.3.o
HA SO GRN ,3t 11 34, I
Figu e 9 Map of he S uar are sh wingthechlo idecon
tentLNAI of 0a e r m w l s




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 29
Table 3. Chloride Concentration in Water
Samples from Selected Wells
Depth of well, Chloride in feet, below content Well No. land surface Date (ppm)
100 47 Sept. 20, 1946 110 Oct. 7, 1946 131 Dec. 19, 1946 138 Feb. 6, 1947 124 Mar. 13, 1947 153 Apr. 24, 1947 118 May 12, 1947 104 June Z5, 1947 il1 Mar. 10, 1948 104 June 10, 1948 89 Sept. 15, 1948 94 Dec. 10, 1948 74 Feb. 11, 1949 110 July 1, 1949 113 Apr. 27, 1952 185 Jan. Z8, 1955 161 May 11, 1955 166 June 29, 1955 148
105 88 Aug. 13, 1946 34 Sept. Z0, 1946 27 Nov. 7, 1946 41 Dec. 19, 1946 67 Feb. 6, 1947 53 Mar. 13, 1947 46 June Z5, 1947 49 Mar.. 10, 1948 37 June 10, 1948 61 Sept. 15, 1948 37 Dec. 10, 1948 27 Feb. 11, 1949 63 Apr. 7, 1950 188 Jan. 18, 1951 102 Aug. 21, 1951 109 Mar. 27, 1952 167




30 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Table 3. Chloride Concentration in Water
Samples from Selected Wells (continued)
Depth of well, Chloride in feet, below content Well No. land surface Date (ppm)
353 80 July 28, 1953 545 Jan. 20, 1955 670
June 30, 1955 580 Aug. 16, 1955 680
362 23 Aug. 4, 1953 35 Jan. 21, 1955 615 June 30, 1955 1,370 Aug. 16, 1955 2,020 Sept. 8, 1955 1,980
515 60 Oct. 6, 1953 106 Jan. 11, 1955 131 Apr. 20, 1955 123 June 29, 1955 121 Sept. 5, 1955 157 Oct. 5, 1955 117 518 57 Oct. 6, 1953 46 Jan. 10, 1955 160 Jan. 27, 1955 103 Apr. 20, 1955 87 May 11, 1955 80 June 29, 1955 96 Aug. 16, 1955 132
Sept. 7, 1955 136
520 35 Oct. 6, 1953 64 Jan. 10, 1955 66 Apr. 20, 1955 75 June 29, 1955 83 Sept. 7, 1955 79
523 45 Oct. 6, 1953 53 Jan. 10, 1955 36 Apr. 20, 1955 33 June 10, 1955 32 Sept. 7, 1955 36




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 31
Table 3., Chloride Concentration in Water
Samples from Selected Wells (continued)
Depth of well, Chloride in feet, below content Well No. land surface Date (ppm)
525 49 Oct. 6, 1953 91 Jan. 10, 1955 85 Apr. 20, 1955 95 Sept. 7, 1955 124
588 50 Oct. 22, 1953 265 Jan. 10, 1955 328 Apr. 20, 1955 258
June 29, 1955 400
590 20 Oct. 22, 1953 45 Jan. 10, 1955 67 Apr. 20, 1955 67 June 29, 1955 70
.597 15 Nov. 9, 1953 40 Jan. 10, 1955 36 Apr. 20, 1955 39 June 29, 1955 29
608 58 Nov. 23, 1953 100 Jan. 10, 1955 88 Apr. 20, 1955 87 June 29, 1955 80
619 57 Apr. 15, 1955 550 June 29, 1955 700 Aug. 16, 1955 650 Sept. 7, 1955 645 Oct. 7, 1955 650
620 56 May 11, 1955 4 June 29, 1955 43 Aug. 16, 1955 49 Sept. 7, 1955 47




32 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Table 3. Chloride Concentration in Water
Samples from Selected Wells (continued)
Depth of well, Chloride in feet, below content Well No. land surface Date (ppm)
622 56 Apr. Z0, 1955 20 May 11, 1955 16 June 29, 1955 18 Aug. 16, 1955 15 Sept. 7, 1955 43?
637 15 Jan. 11, 1955 :245 Apr. 29, 1955 48 June 30, 1955 32
638 38 Apr. 20, 1955 230 June 29, 1955 "272 Aug. 16, 1955 352
642 45 Apr. 20, 1955 56 June 29, 1955 76 Aug. 16, 1955 65
'647 113 Apr. 15, 1955 98
* June 29, 1955 40 Sept. 7, 1955 34
654 63 Feb. 3, 1955 197 Apr. 20, 1955 312 June 29, 1955 348 Sept. 7, 1955 348 Oct.' 5, 1955 280
687 60 Apr. 19, 1955 775 June 29, 1955 780 Aug. 16, 1955 810
720 104 Apr. 22, 1955 9,180 84 Apr. 23, 1955 19 May 11, 1955 14 May 23, 1955 15




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 33
Table 3. Chloride Concentration in Water
Samples from Selected Wells (continued)
Depth of well, Chloride in feet, below content Well No. land surface Date (ppm)
720 (continued) June 29, 1955 30 Aug. 16, 1955 15 Sept. 7, 1955 15
722 112 Apr. 20, 1955 78 May 26, 1955 61 June 29, 1955 37 Sept. 7, 1955 27
734 84 June 30, 1955 176 Aug. 16, 1955 940 Sept. 8, 1955 930 Oct. 7, 1955 1,430
735 69 June 30, 1955 34 Sept. 8, 1955 94 Oct. 7, 1955 185 Nov. 2,.1955 307




34 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
appreciable increase in the chloride content occurred after several months of intermittent pumping to irrigate a lawn. It is believed that the salinity of the water in well 7Z0 is the result of direct encroachment from the St. Lucie River, caused by the reduction of head induced by heavy pumping in the water plant and ball park well-fields. However, when well 622, in the cityball park well field, was deepened from 56 feet to 115 feet the chloride content of the waterdecreased slightly, from 36 ppm to 20 ppm, indicating that encroachment had not -reached the vicinity of the well field at the ball park. The water in well 722, 600 feet east of the city water plant and 600 feet from the river, contained 78 ppm of chloride at a depth of 112 feet below the land surface, indicating that encroachment of water of high chloride content had not reached the vicinity of the well field at the water plant. The salt front is probably now stationary or is being pushed back toward the river because of the increase. of fresh-water head following the cessation of pumping of the city water plant and ball park well fields. The position of the salt front cannot be determined accurately because of the lack of deep observation wells.
Some salt-water -.encroachment is occurring along the eastern side of the peninsula in areas immediately adjacent to the St. Lucie River and the Manatee Pocket. A relatively high, discontinuous ridge parallels the eastern shoreline. It is flanked on the west by low, swampy land. Streams and ditches draining the lowland flow parallel to the ridge until they reach gaps in the ridge where they discharge into the salt water of the river. They reduce the fresh-water head under the ridge during the dry season, so that even moderate pumping in some areas results in movement of salt water into the aquifer. The chloride content of the water inwell 362, in this area(fig. 2), increased from 35 ppm in 1953 to more than 2, 000 ppm in 1955 (table 3). This locality is especially vulnerable to contamination because of its proximity to a drainage canal.
Contamination from Artesian Aquifer
The beds of relatively impermeable clay and fine sand of the Hawthorn formation act as an effective barrier to the




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. .12 35
vertical migration of salt water from the. artesian aquifer, except where wells have punctured them. In the Stuart area, the artesian water contains between 800 and 4, 500 ppm of chloride and is under a pressure head of about40 feet above the land surface. If this water were allowed to flow freely at the surface it could contaminate the fresh water in the shallow aquifer. The artesian water is highly corrosive, and, after a period of years, may corrodethe casings of the wells and create perforations through which the salty water could escape into the fresh-water aquifer eventhough thetop of the well is tightly capped. An electric log made by the Florida Geological Survey of well 128, an artesian wellwithin 300 feet of the city water plant well field, indicated that there were probably many breaks in the casing at various intervals below the land surface. Saltwater escaping through holes in the casing of this well is believed to be the probable source of chloride contamination in the old city well field. This conclusionwas reached when it became evident that the contamination could not be direct encroachment from the river because wells of the same depth as the city wells and situated a few hundred feet from the river bank, directly between the well field and the river, yielded water whose chloride content was lower than that in the citywells.
Evidence to support this conclusion was noted after the water plant and ball park well fields were shut down. The water in certain wells in the area increased markedly in chloride content. When the data were plotted on a map, the wells in which an increase in chloride content had occurred formed a fan-shaped pattern extending downgradient from the artesian well, the axis of the pattern closely paralleling the direction of ground-water flow. The water in well 619, nearest the artesian well, had the greatest increase in chloride content, whereas that in wells farther away showed a smaller increase. Water in wells outside the area did not change appreciably. It is believed the observed changes in chloride concentrationwere causedby leakage of salty water from the artesian well. Prior to the shutting down of the water plant well field, most of the salty artesian water was being drawn into the city supply wells, where it was diluted by fresh water from within the area affected by pumping.
Well 128 was filled with cement on April 25, 1955, the day that pumping ceased in the water plant well field, and




36 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
the salty water in the aquifer after that time was artesian water which had not been flushed away. The residual artesian water, therefore, moved downgradient and was diluted by fresh water as it progressed. As the salty water was dispersed, the water from wells downgradient from the artesian well became fresher.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
All supplies of fresh ground water in the Stuart area are obtained from the shallow nonartesian aquifer. The deep (Floridan) artesian aquifer will yield large quantities of water to flowing wells, but the water is too highly mineralized for most purposes. The nonartesian aquifer, although it differs from area to area, is composed generally of Pleistocene, Pliocene andpossiblyMiocene deposits consisting of sand to a depth of about 40 feet and alternating layers of limestone or shell and sand from 40 feet to about 130 feet. Below 130 feet little or no water is available from the sands and clays that form the major part of the Hawthorn formation, the confining unit of the Floridan aquifer. The Floridan aquifer is composed of limestones of the Vicksburg group, the Ocala group, the Avon Park limestone, and the Lake City limestone.
Pumping tests reveal that the new city well field is far enough from the St. Lucie River that salt-water encroachment should not be a problem if hydrologic conditions remain substantially as they are at the present time.
So far, salt water has encroached in the Stuart area only in a relatively narrow area adjacent to the St. Lucie River and in areas near leaking artesian wells. Watertable contour maps indicate that the fresh-water head is sufficient to prevent extensive encroachment of salt water into the shallow aquifer. If drainage canals are dug to depths below sea level in the vicinity of the well field, however, they could become avenues through Which salt water may encroach during periods of low ground-water levelsand high tides. Also, drainage canals may lower the water table sufficiently to allow salt water to encroach at depth in the aquifer.




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 37
The increase in the chloride content of the old city wells was due largely to leaks in the casing of an artesian well in the vicinity; however, water of high chloride content discovered in a well about halfway between the old well field and the St. Lucie River indicated that salt-water encroachment from the direction of the river was occurring at depth inthe aquifer. With a steady increase in pumping this encroachment might eventually have reached the old well field, but with the cessation of pumping in the old well field the salt front should move back slowly toward the river. Moderate pumping in the old -well field could be resumed after the aquifer around ithas been cleared of the salt-water contamination.
Large additional water supplies can be developed in the vicinity of the new well field, provided the wells are adequately spaced and the pumping rates are not excessive. Additionalwells a quarter of a mile or more south of the new field would not seriously affect it. The wells would be in areas where the altitude of the water table is relatively high throughout the year, so there would be little danger of saltwater encroachment due to pumping.
A continuous record of the fluctuation of the water level, such as that obtained from the gage at well 147, provides a record of the changes in ground-water storage inthe aquifer throughout a given period. Determination of the chloride content of samples collected periodically from selected observation wells will reveal any further movement of salt water into the shallow aquifer.




00
Table 4. Records of Selected Wells
(1) 0, open hole; So screen; P, sandpoint.
(2) Doam., domestic; Ind., industrial; Irr., irrigation; Oba., observation; P.S., public supply.
* Well located in Hanson Grant; township and range projected.
Well Depth Diameter Well fin- 52 No. Location Owner (it.) (n.) ish (1) Use (2) Remirks 97 NW~ SW ,.ec 4, T. 38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 55 4 S S. 0 98 NW* SWI see. 4, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. City of Stuart 65 6 S P. S. 99 NWf SWI sec. 4, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. City of Stuart 75 6 S P. S.
100 SE4 NE sec. 5, T. 38 S., R.41 E. P. Pence 47 2 0 Ind. See table 3. 105 NW SE* sc. 2, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. A. M. Bauer 88 2 0 Irr. Do. C) 128 NWI SWI sec. 4, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. City of Stuart 852 6 0 P. S. Plugged. 147 NW NW* sec. 10, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. U.S. Geological Survey 74 6 S Obs. Recorder; see fig. 7. 0 295 *SW NE sec. 26, T. 38 S. R. 41 E. C. E. Beedle 98 2 0 Dora. L4 297 *sW SW4 sec. 27, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. R. Darling 57 1 0 Dora. 0 302 *SWI SW, sec. 27, T.38 S., f.. 41 E. E. D. Sohnson 32 it S Dorn. 303 *NEtI NE sec. 33, T. 38S, R. 41 E. L.O. Fosky 35 11 P Dora. 308 *NWf, W4 sec. 25, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. D. H. Harvey 43 11 p Dora. 309 *NW* NW* sec. 25, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. M. Whittle 36 11 P Dora. 313 *SF SW4 sec. 18, T. 38 S., R. 42 E. C.H. WilUams 38 2 0 Dora. 314 *SE, L SE sec. 24, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. P. Mispel 30 11 Dora. Cl) 315 *S2*SEA sec. 24, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. C. Pope 32 11 p Dora. 316 *SWJ SWI sec. 19, T. 38 S., R. 42 E, D. Steenken 28 11 P Dora. 320 NW* SEJ sec. 25, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. M. Marshal 20 a1 P Dorn. 321 *SEA4 NE sec. 25, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. R.F. Saunderson 24 11 P Dorn. LJ 322 *NW* NEf sec. 25, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. 3. F. Gaughan 43 l14 P Doam. 324 *SWJ SF sec. 24, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. A. Irwin 40 1* P Dorn. 325 *NW4 NE4 sec. 24, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. C. Stiller 25 11 P Dora. 326 *NWJ Ng sec. 24, T. 385.. R. 41 E. H. Stiller 26 11 P Dora. 327 *SE*4 SWJ sec. 13, T. 38 S., R.41 E. Csapo 80 2 P Dom. 328 *SW*J SE* sec. 13, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. 3. E. Friday 30 2 P Irr. 329 *NW+ SW* sec. 13, T. 38 S., R.41 E. H.L. Gerould 80 1 7 Dorn.




Table 4. Records of Selected Wells (continued)
Well Depth Diameter Well finNo. Location Owner (ft.) (in.) ish (1) Use (2) Remarks
330 *SEj SEJ sec; 14, T. 38S; R. 41 E. A. Nelson 97 2 0 Doam. 331 *SWI SE sec. 14, T.38S. ,R.41 E. 0. Mangil 26 1* P Dor. 332 *SE1 NEI sec. 23, T.38 S., R:41 E. C.M. Johnson 30 1 P Dom. 333 *SE NW, sec. 23, T. 38.S., R. 41 Z. B.R. Sword 45 11 P Doam. 334 *SE4. SW*4 sec. 14, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. R. M. Powell 90 0 Dom. 337 *NW NE seec. 26, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. E. 3. Florlntine 85 11 0 Dom. 338 *SW1 NWi sec. Z3, T.38 S., R. 41 E. C. Keck 100 1T 0 Doam. 33,9 *SEI SE* sec. 15, T.38 S., R. 41 E. P.W. Hickman' 65 11 0 Dom. .-] 340 *SW* SE* sec. 15, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. P.W. Hickman 72 2 0 Dom. 341 qSE* NW* sec. 15, T. 38 S., R.41 E. O.H. Cook 83 2 0 Doam. 342 NEI NWI sec. 15, T.38 S., R. 41 E. W.S. Walsh 90 2 0 Dom. 344 NEI SEJ sec. 9, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. R. L. Wall 18 I P Dom. 345 NW* SE* sec. 9, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. R. L. Wall 40 1* 0 Dom. I-I 346 SEI NW- sec. 9, T.38 S., R. 41 E. H.W. Tressler 63 2 0 Dom. 347 *SW. NW; sec. 14, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. T.0. Schreckengast 87 17 0 Dom. 349 *NE* SW. sec. 14,' T. 38 S., R.41 E. R. Allison 82 11 0 Doam. C 351 *SWI NE* sec 14, T. 38 S., R.41 E. T.B. Parish 56 IT 0 Dom. 352 *NE1 NEI sec. 14, T. 38 S., R.41 E. S. Nekrassoff 63 2 0 Dom. 353 *SE* NE ec. 14, T.'38 S. R. 41 E. S. Nekraosoff 80 2 0 Dom. See table 3. 354 *SEJ NWk sec. 13, T. 38 S., R.41 E. W.F. Lawson 38 2 P Dom. 355 *NE1 SW; sec. 13, T.38 S., R. 41 E. Unknown 25 2 P Dom. 358 *NEI SE* sec. 11, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. Martin County Golf Club 93 2 0 Dom. P 359 NE i SEI sec. 11, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. C. T. Kemble 42 2 0 Dom. 360 SW NE sec. I1, T.38S., R. 41 E. E. Svilokos 65 2 0 Dom. N 361 NW* NE* sec. 11, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. C.A. Lintell ? 2 ? Dom. 362 SW* SEf sec. 2, T.38 S., 41 E. C. Boxwell 23 1i P Dor, See table 3. 363 SW* SE* sec. 2, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. H. Thelosen ? 2 ? Dom. 365 SW* SE* sec. 2, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. E. B. Dugan 37 I 0 Doam. 366 NW* SEJ sec, 2, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. W.E. Oliver 52 2 0 Doam. 368 NW NW* sec, 2, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. 0. Sollltt 40 ? ? Dom.




Table 4, Records of Selected Wells (continued)
Well Depth Diameter Well fin. No. Location Owner (it.) (in.) Ish (1) Use () Remarks
371 NW* NW* sec. 2, T. 38 S,, R. 41 E. R. 0. Ross 91 2 0 Dom. 372 SW' NE* sec. 3, T, 38 S. R. 41 E. C. Allen 21 1 P Dom. hrI 375 NW4 SWI sec. 16, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. F. Blackstone 65 2 0 Doam. 376 NE- NE* sec. 17, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. H4 Clements 55 2 0 Dom. 0 380 *NE* NW* sec. 32, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. V. Brennan 52 1* P Dorn, 381 *cW 5Ef sec. 29, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. C.A. Lee. 38 1 P Doam. 383 *NE SEJ4 sec, 29, T. 38 8. R. 41 E. 3. B. Beach 40 1 P Dor. 385 *NW* NW* eec. 33, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. L. M. Johnson 68 2 0 Dom. 386 *SEf SW sec. 28, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. C. Green 15 1 P Dom. 0') 387 *NWJ SEi sec. 21, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. Quindly ? 1 P Dom. M 388 NW SW+ sec. 16, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. C.L. Bruce 52 2 0 Dor. 0 394 5W1 SWf sec, 9, T. 38 5., R. 41 E. C. Luce 80 2 0 Irr. Flower farm. 399 SW4 8W sec. 9, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. H. Burkey 20 2 P Irr. Do. 404 NE* NE ec. 17, T. 38 S,, R. 41 E. F. E. Glass 50 2 P Dom. 405 NW* $EI sec. 8, T. 38 8., R. 41 E. D. E. Andrews 90 2 0 Dor. 406 NW* NEI sec, 17, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. E.A. Wood 79 2 0 Dor. 469 SW NE sec.3, T.38 S., R. 41 E. D.B. Irons 18 it P Irr. 471 SWI NEf sec. 3, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. 3. Menninger 50 2 0 Irr. 474 SWJ NE$ sec: 3, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. R. L. Minnehan 16 2 P Irr. rn 475 NWj N ec. 3, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. A. 0. Kanner 80 2 0 Dorn. 476 NWf NE sec. 3, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. 3. B. Frazier 55 2 0 Irr. 478 NW4 NE* sec. 3, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. D.F. Hudson 88 2 0 Dorn. 479 NW* NEI eec. 3, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. C. R, Ashley 22 1 P Irr. 481 NWJ NE* sec. 3, T. 38 S., R.41 E. D, H. Gleason 100 1* 0 Dorn. 482 SW* NEI sec. 3, T. 38 S, R. 41 E. F. Stafford 63 1t 0 Irr. 486 NE* NW sec. 3, To 38 S., R. 41 E. Z. Mosley 30 1 P Irr. 487 E*j NW* aec. 3, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. H. M. Godfrey 22 2 P Irr. 488 SE NW* sec. 3, T. 388. R. 41 E. C. Dunscombe 16 1* P Dor. 492 SE* NW* sec. 3, T, 38 S., R. 41 E. R.D. Hauk 63 2 0 Dor, 493 SE NW* sec. 3, T.38 8., R. 41 E. E. Crary 80 2 0 Irr.




Table 4. Records of Selected Wells (continued)
Well Depth Diameter Well finNo. Location Owner (ft.) (in.) ish (1) Use (Z) Remarks
495 SWV NW sec. 3, T. 385., R. 41 E. S. Peabody 60 2 0 Irr. 497 SW NW sec. 3, T. 38 S., R.41 E. R. Risavy 18 1* P Irr. z 498 SW* NWI sec. 3, T.38 S., R.41 E. S.G. Burt 68 2 0 Irr. 500 SW4 NWJ sec. 3, T: 38 S., R. 41 E. E.V. Lawrence 69 2 0 Irr. 0 501 SE NE* sec. 4, T. 38 S., R.41 E. H. D. Stone 80 2 0 Irr. 502 SE NEI sec.4, T. 38 '., R.41 E. B.3. ox 20 ?P Dom. 503 SEI NEI sec.4, T.38 S., R. 41 E. B.J. Fox 72 11 0 Irr. Citrus grove. 505 SE NEI sec. 4, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. J. M. Spelner 23 1 P Dor. 510 SWI NEI sec. 4, T.38 S., R.41 E. W. Schumann 72 2 0 Irr. 511 s ec.4, T.38 S., R. 41 E. L T. Rembert 22 11 P Irr. 514 SEI NWi sec.4, T. 38 S., R.41 E. H. W. Bessey 80 2 0 Irr.
514S., *.W*
515 SE -NW* sec. 4, T.38 5., R.41 E. R. C. Johns 60 2 0 Irr. See table 3. 518 SWN sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. W. King 57 1 0 Irr. Do. "I 519 SW N* sec.4, T. 38 S., R.41 E. E. Cabre 63 2 0 Irr. 520 SW NW* sec. 4, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. H. W. Partlow 35 2 0 Dorn. See table 3. C) 521 SW NW sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. H.W. Partlow 60 2 0 Irr. 523 SW4 NW sec. 4, T. 38 5., S R. 41 E. A. Cepec 45 1j 0 Irr. See table 3. 525 SWJ NWJ iec.4, T. '38 S., R. 41 E. E. Tyner 49 2 0 Irr. Do. 527 NW1 SEf sec. 3, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. EJ., Brasgalle 76 It 0 Dora. 531 NW SE* sec, 3, T, 385., S R.41E. A.T. Compton 22 I a P Irr. 534 SW* SE sec. 3, T. 38 S. P.. 41 E. K. Krueger 16 11 P Doam. 537 SWI SW sec. 3, ,T. 38 S. R.41 E. A. Cleveland 20 ? P Doam. 539 NW* SW sec. 3, T. 38 S., R.41 E. F. 0. Button 74 2 0 Dom. 543 SWj SW' sec,3, T. 38 S., R..41 E. F. Sutton 45 2 ? Doam. N 544 SW SW sec.3, T. 38S,, S R.41 E. D. S, Richardson 20 1 P Dom. 546 SWj SWI sec, 3, T. 38 S, R. 41 E. A. Espenna 46 1* 7 Dom. 547 NW* NWJ aec, 10, T.38 S., R. 41E. J.W. Pegram 60 2 0 Doam. 550 NE SE sec. 4, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. R. S. Hill 46 1* ? Doam. 555 NEI SE sec.4, T.38 S., R..41 E. R. Hartman, Jr. 19 2 P Irr. 557 NWJ SE sec.4, T. 38 S,, R.41 E. R.W. Hartman, Sr. 17 1 P Irr. 558 NW* SE sec.4, T.38 S,, R.41 E. W.W. Meggett 60 2 0 Irr.




Table 4. Records of Selected Wells (continued) N
Well Depth Diameter Well finNo. Location Owner (ft.) (in.) ish (1) Use (2) Remarks
560 NEI NEI sec. 9, T, 38 S., R. 41 E. H. 0, Kindred 30 ? P Dom, 563 SE* NEI sec. 9, T, 38 S., R. 41 E. W. L. Sullivan 60 it 0 Irr. 565 NEI NEI*sec. 9, T, 38 S., R. 41 E. H. G. Harper 55 2 0 lrr. Flower farm. 566 NW* NWI aec. 10, T. 38 S. R. 41 E. D. Glesbright 26 2 P Dom. 571 NWI NEI sac. 9, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. E. McGee 78 1 0 Doam. 0 573 SWI SE* sec. 4. T. 38 S., R. 41 E. F. Thompson 30 11 P Dar. 575 SEI NE* sec. S, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. L. D. Burchard 107 1* 0 Dorn. 576 SWj NE saec. 8, T. 38 S., R.41 E. G. Zarnita 101 1 0 Doam. 577 SE NFJ sec. 8, T. 38 S., R.41 E. R.V. Johnson 120 0 Irr. 578 SE*'N saec. 8, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. H. Whalen 112 1 0 Doam. 580 SW NEf saec. 8, T. 30 S., R. 41 E. W.F. May 87 1 0 Doam. 583 NE*N sec. c,8, T. 38 S., R.41 E. 3. 0. Powell 103 It 0 Dora. 0 584 NW* NEf sec. 8, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. 0. F. Barber 98 0 0 Dora. 585 NW* NE*- sec. 8, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. P. B. Caster 26 2 P Dora. 0 587 NE* NE* sec. 8, T. 38 S, R. 41 E. I. Taylor 30 ? P Irr. 588 NW* NEI sec. 8, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. E. F. Bulla 50 2 0 Doam. See table 3. 590 SW* SEI sec. 5, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. K. S. Stimmell 20 1t P Irr. Do. 591 WNEI.-ec.8, T.38 S., R.41 E. R.H. Schwarz 22 If P Dom. 594 SW1 SE sec. 5, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. T. R. Pomeroy ? 2 ? Irr. 595 sw S4 sec. 5. T. 38 S., R. 41 E. G. Schleier 60 2 0 Irr. Efl 597 SW* SE sc. 5, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. A.H. Chappelka 15 48 0 Irr. See table 3. 598 NW* SF sec,.5, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. F. Schwarz 52 2 0 Irr. 605 SW* N~f soc.. T. 38 S., R. 41 E. C.M. Fogt 52 2 0 Irr. 606 SW* NE* sec. 5, T. 38 S., R. 41'E. H. Harper ? 11 ? Irr. 608 NE SE* sec. 5, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. D. L. Williams 58 2 0 Irr. See table 3. 611 NE* SE* sec. 5, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. D. W. Anderson 83 2 0 Irr. 612 NW* SWI sec. 4, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. R. Garner 46 11 0 Irr. 613 SE- SWI odc. 4, T. 38 S., R.41 E. B. Holmes 7 1 ? Dora. 614 SE-L SE*L sec. 5, T.38 S.,, R.41 E. C.H. Hardwick 85 11 0 Doam. 617 NWI NEJ eec. 14, T. 38 S., R.41 E. C. G. Bischoff 80 2 0 Doam. 618 *NW* NW* sec. 13, T. 38 ., R. 41 E. 3. Kuhn 85 2 0 Doam.




Table 4. Records of Selected Wells (continued)
Well Depth Diameter Well finNo. Location Owner (ft.) (in.) ish (1) Use (2) Remarks
619 NW*j SW* sec.4, T.38 S., R. 41 E. City of Stuart 57 2 C Obs. See table 3. 620 NE% SWj sec.4, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. City of Stuart 56 2 C Obs. Do. 621 NEI SWf sec. 4, T.38 S., 41 E. City of Stuart 56 4 C P.S. 622 NEt SW4 see.4, T.38 SR. 41 E. City of Stuart 56 2 C Obs. See table 3. 623 NE* SW sec. 4. T. 38 S. R. 41 E. City of Stuart 56 4 C P.S. 627 SWA NE sec. 9, T. 38 S, R. 41 Z. S. Smith 40 2 0 Irr. Flower farm. 629 SW1 SW sec. 9, T.38 S., R. 41 E. H.I. Burkey 103 4 C Irr. Do. 631 NW*' NE sec. 9, T. 38 S R 41 E. Martin County Garage 53 2 0 Dorn. 637 NW SE sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. R.W. Hartman, Sr. 15 1* P Irr. See table 3. 638 SWJ NW* sec. 4, T. 38 S. I. 41 E. E. Cabre 38 2 P Irr. 0 639 E SE sec. 4, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. City of Stuart 72 4 C Fire z 642 SE NEt sec. 5, T.38 S., R. 41 E. St. Lucle Hotel 46 2 0 Irr. Not in tie. See table 3. 643 NW NW* sec. 13, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. 3. Kuhn 26 2 P Dorn. 647 N E SWJ sec. 4, T. 38 S., R.41 E. American Legion 113 2 C Irr. Not in use. See table 3. 653 SW SW* sec. 10, T. 38 So I. 41 E. 0. Knouse 78 6 0 Irr. Flower farm.0 654 NW SW seec.4, T. 38 S, R. 41 E. F. E. Rue 63 1* 0 Irr. See table 3. 655 NE* NWI sec. 9, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. F. Rowell 63 2 0 Dorn. 656 NW*.NE sec. 9, T.38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 145 2 0 Obs. 657 NW* NE sec. 9, T.38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 125 4 C P.S. 658 NW* NE* sec. 9, T. 38 S a 41 E. City of Stuart 125 4 C Obs. Recorder 658A INWt NEt eec. 9, T. 38 S R t. 41 E. U.S. Geological Survey 13 1* P Obs. 659 NW NEI sec. 9, T. 38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 125 2 C Obs. O, 660 Sf NE* sec. 5, T.38 S., R.41 E. Casabooin 45 2 C Irr. Not in use. 666 SEt NE* see. 5, T. 38 S I41 E. A. Dehone 60 2 0 Irr. Do. 674 NW* SW* eec.9, T. 38 S. R.41 E. C. Luce 103 2 0 Irr. Do. N 687 NW* SE* sec.5, T.38 S., R,41 E. Sheppard Park 60 2 C Irr. See table 3. 720 SW* NWJ sec.4, T. 38 S., a. 41 E. E. Tyner 84 2 C Irr, Do. 721. SW NE uec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. H. P. Hudson 84 2 C Irr. 732 NW* SW* eec,4, T.38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 112 3 0 Irr. See table 3. 723 NW* NEt sec. 9, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. City of Stuart 125 4 PI.S. 724 NEt NEt sec.9, T. 38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 125 4 C P.S.
I"




Table 4, Recorde of Selected Wells (continued)
Well Depth Diameter Well finNo@ Location Owner ft. ) (in.) ish (1) Use (2) Remarks
731 NEI SWk eec. 4, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. Martin County School 35 2 P P, 732 *SEJ SWI sec. 12, T. 38 S., Rt, 41 E. Dutton z0 4 S Irr. 733 SW: NE4 sec. 4, T, 38 S., Rt, 41 E. Episcopal Church 105 3 0 Irr. 734 *NE SW sec. 13, T. 38 S., ft.41 E. Danforth 84 3 0 Dom. See table 3. o 735 *NEI SWI sec. 13, T. 38 S. R. 41 E. Metcalf 69 4 0 Doam. Do. 738 *NW N sec. 25, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. 3.3. O'Connor 25 2 P Doam. 753 *SWi SW eec. 12, T. 38 ., R.41 E. Andrew Berkey 68 2 0 Teat 755 '4N SWvleec. 12, T. 38 S., R.41 E. 3. Whiticar 65 1* O Irr. 766 *NW NW eec. 13, T. 38 S., R .41 E. 3. Whiticar 68 2 0 Irr. 767 *NW NW sec. 13, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. 3. Whiticar 74 2 0 Irr.
0
0
- iI
>~
CA4




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO.- 12 45
REFERENCES
Black, A. P.
1951 (and Brown, Eugene) Chemical character of
Florida's waters: Florida State Board Cons. Div. Water Survey and Research, Paper 6,
p. 13, 79.
1953 (and Brown, Eugene, and Pearce, J.M.) Salt
water intrusion in Florida: Florida State Board Cons. Div. Water SurveyandResearch,
Paper 9, p. 2, 5.
Brown, Eugene (see Black)
Collins, W.D.
19Z8 (and Howard, C. S.) Chemical character of
waters of Florida: U.S. Geol. Survey WaterSupply Paper 596-G, p. 193-195, 220-221.
Cooke, C. Wythe (see also Parker)
1945 Geology of Florida: Florida Geol. Survey
Bull. 29, p. 223-269.
Ferguson, G.E. (see Parker)
Hantush, M. S.
1955 (and Jacob, C. E.) Non-steady radial flow in
an infinite leaky aquifer: Am. Geophys. Union
Trans., vol. 36, no. 1, p. 95-100.
Howard, C.S. (see Collins)
Jacob, C.E. (see Hantush)
Love, S.K. (see Parker)
Mansfield, W.C.
1939 Notes on the upper Tertiary and Pleistocene
mollusks of peninsular Florida: Florida Geol.
Survey'Bull. 18, p. 29-34.




46 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
Matson, G. C.
1913 (and Sanford, Samuel) Geology and ground
waters of Florida: U.S. Geol. Survey WaterSupply Paper 319, p. 381-384.
Parker, G.G.
1944 (and Cooke, C. Wythe) Late Cenozoic geology
of southern Florida, with a discussion of the ground water: Florida Geol. Survey Bull. 27,
p. 41.
1955 (and Ferguson, G.E. Love, S.K. and others)
Water resources of southeastern Florida, with special reference to the geology and ground water of the Miami area: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 1255, p. 174-175, 814815.
Pearce, J.M. (see Black, 1953)
Sanford, Samuel (see Matson)
Stringfield, V. T.
1936 Artesian water in the Florida peninsula: U.S.
Geol. SurveyWater-SupplyPaper 773-C, p. 170,
183, 193.
Theis, C.V.
1935 The relation between the lowering of the piezometric surface and the rate and duration of discharge of a well using ground-water storage:
Am. Geophys. Union Trans., p. 519-524.
1938 The significance and nature of the cone of depression im ground water bodies:Econ. Geology, vol. 33, no. 8, p. 892, 894.
U.S. Geological Survey
Water levels and artesian pressures in observation wells in the United States; 1950, 1951, 1952, part 2, Southeastern'States: Water -Supply Papers 1166, p. 80-81, 1192, p. 65, and IZ22,
p. 77, respectively.




INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 47
Wenzel, L.K.
1942 Methods for determining permeability of waterbearing materials, with special reference to discharging-well methods: U.S. Geol. Survey
Water-Supply Paper 887, p. 87-90.




Full Text

PAGE 1

STATE OF FLORIDA STATE BOARD OF CONSERVATION Ernest Mitts, Director FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Robert O. Vernon, Director INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 GROUND-WATER RESOURCES OF THE STUART AREA, MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA By W. F. Lichtler Prepared by U. S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District and the Florida Geological Survey Tallahassee, Florida 1957

PAGE 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract ......................... 1 Introduction ....................... 2 Purpose and scope of investigation ......... 2 Previous investigations ...............3 Personnel and acknowledgments ..........3 Location and general features of the area .......4 Geography and topography. .............4 Clim ate .......................4 Geologic formations and their water-bearing properties ......................12 Eocene series ................... ... 12 Lake City limestone ...............12 Avon Park limestone ............... 12 Ocala group. ..................... .13 Oligocene series. .................... 13 Miocene series ................... 13 Hawthorn formation .... ... ......... .13 Tamiami formation................... 14 Post-Miocene deposits. ............... .14 Ground water ...................... 14 Principles of occurrence .............. 14 Hydrologic properties of the aquifers. ....... .15 Floridan aquifer ................. .15 Nonartesian aquifer ............... 16 Thickness and areal extent .. .. ...... 16 Lithology ... .... ..... .. ... .. 16 Shape and slope of the water table ...... .18 Water-level fluctuations ........... .18 Ground-water use .... ............... 19 Quantitative studies. ................... 21 Principles ................... ... .. 21 Descriptions of pumping tests. ............ 23 Interpretation of'pumping-test data. ......... 24 Salinity studies ..................... 26 Contamination from surface-water bodies ..... .27 Contamination from artesian aquifer ........ .34 Summary and conclusions ............... 36 References .......... ......... ... .45 iii

PAGE 4

ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1 Map of Florida showing the Stuart area and Martin County ................ 5 2 Map of the Stuart area showing the locations of selected wells ...........6 3 Contour map of the water table in the Stuart area, July 6, 1955. ...........7 4 Contour map of the water table in the Stuart area, October 5, 1955. .........8 5 Contour map of the water table within the Stuart city limits, April 1, 1955 ........9 6 Contour map of the water table within the Stuart city limits, May 3, 1955. ......... 10 7 Hydrograph of well 147, in Stuart, and daily rainfall at Stuart, 1954 .......... .20 8 Drawdown observed in wells 658 and 658A during pumping test in the new city well field, May 27, 1955. ............... 25 9 Map of the Stuart area showing the chloride content of water from wells .......... 28 Table 1 Average temperature and rainfall at Stuart .11 2 Pumpage from Stuart well field, in millions of gallons per month .............. 22 3 Chloride concentration in water samples from selected wells.. .... ... .. ....29 4 Records of selected wells ........... 38 iv

PAGE 5

SGROUND-WATER RESOURCES OF THE STUART AREA, MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA By W. F. Lichtler ABSTRACT A shallow, nonartesian aquifer is the principal source of water supplies in the Stuart area. This aquifer extends from the landsurface to a depth of about 130 feet. It is composed of the Pamlico sand and the Anastasia formation of Pleistocene age, the Caloosahatchee marl of Pliocene age, and possibly part or all of the Tamiami formation of Miocene age. The aquifer differs in lithology and texture from place to place but, in general, wells less than 40 feet deep require screens. Consolidated beds of differing thicknesses usually occur between 40 and 130 feet below the land surface, and open-hole wells usually canbe completed somewhere in this interval. At' depths below 130 feet the relatively impermieable sands and clays of the Hawthorn formation (Miocene) are encountered and little water is available. 'Beneath the Hawthorn formation, limestones in the Floridan aquifer, 600 to 800 feet or more below mean sea level, contain water under pressure. The deep artesian water contains 800 to 4, 200 ppm of chloride in the Stuart area and is too salty for most purposes. Periodic determinations of the chloride content' of water from wells indicate that there has been some salt-water encroachment into the shallow aquifer in the areas adjacent to the St. Lucie River and some contamination resulting from leakage through faulty 'casings of wells that penetrate the Floridan aquifer. 1

PAGE 6

2 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY The coefficient of transmissibility of the shallow aquifer as computed from pumping-test data by the Theis nonequilibrium method ranged from 18, 000 to 170, 000 gallons per day per foot (gpd/ft). The wide range in values is believed to indicate not an actual condition but that the aquifer is not suitable for a normal Theis analysis. Further analyses of the data by the leaky-aquifer method developed by Hantush and Jacob (1955, p. 95-100) and by use of an unpublished leaky-aquifer "type curve" developed by H. H. Cooper, Jr., yielded a transmissibility value of about 20, 000 gpd/ft. The average height above mean sea level of the water table in the shallow aquifer is enough, at the present time, to prevent extensive salt-water encroachment into the aquifer. Unless the water table is lowered excessively by drainage ditches or'heavy pumping, a permanent supply of fresh water is assured. Large quantities of fresh water are available for future development in the central part of the Stuart peninsula. INTRODUCTION Purpose and Scope of Investigation Because the Stuart area is, at times, surrounded on three sides by saline water, the underlying fresh-water aquifer is vulnerable to salt-water encroachment. With progressively larger withdrawals of ground water for public and private supplies, the possibility of salt-water contamination of freshwater supplies is increased. The Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District requested that the U. S. Geological Survey investigate the ground-water resources of the area and determine the extent of salt-water encroachment. The investigation was made as a part of the general-studies in cooperation with the Flood Control District and the Florida Geological Survey. Preliminary work, including the inventorying of and collection of water samples from a large number of wells in Martin County, was done during 1953 by E. W. Bishop, formerly with the U. S. Geological Survey. Intensive field work by

PAGE 7

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 3 the writer began in January 1955 and continued through August 1955. Samples of water from wells in the area were analyzed to determine their chloride content. Wells suitable for a program of periodic measurement of water levels were selected. A special effort was made to include in this program only wells that were not in use, so that all wells could be measured in a single day to obtain an "instantaneous" picture of the water table. The altitudes of all measuring points in observation wells were determined by spirit level and referred to U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey mean-sealeveldatum, and water-table contour maps were drawn from the data. Previous Investigations No detailed investigations of ground-water resources in Martin County had been made prior to the present investigation. Brief references to Martin County were made by Mansfield (1939), Parker and Cooke (1944), Cooke (1945), Matson and Sanford (1913), Collins and Howard (1928), Stringfield(1936), and Parker, Ferguson, Love, and others (1955). In addition, references were made to water levels in Water-Supply Papers 1166, 1192, 1222; and to quality-ofwater data by Black and Brown (1951), and Black, Brown, and Pearce (1953). Personnel and Acknowledgments The writer wishes to express his appreciation for the assistance and cooperation of the residents of the Stuart area, who supplied many valuable data and permitted the sampling and measuring of wells. Joseph Greenlees, City Manager; Frederick Walton, Water Commissioner; Ernest Tyner, City Commissioner; and James Doyle, County Sanitarian, were helpful during the investigation. Douglas Arnold, well driller of Stuart, and Charles A. Black of Black and Associates, Gainesville, Florida, supplied much valuable geologic and hydrologic information. The investigation was under the general supervision of A. N. Sayre, Chief, Ground Water Branch, and under the immediate supervision of N. D. Hoy, Geologist, and M. I. Rorabaugh, District Engineer, all of the U. S. Geological Survey.

PAGE 8

4 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY LOCATION AND GENERAL FEATURES OF THE AREA Geography and Topography The area covered by this report includes most of the city of Stuart and adjacent parts of Martin County (fig. 1). Most of Stuart is on a peninsula formed by the South Fork of the St. Lucie River on the west, the St. Lucie River on the north, and the St. Lucie River and Manatee Pocket on the east (fig. 2). The peninsula is about four miles wide at its base, about three miles wide at its northern end, and about four miles long, The land surface generally ranges from 10 to 20 feet in altitude in the central part of the peninsula. It slopes gently to the banks of the South Fork of the St. Lucie River on the western side and to relatively steep banks along the St. Lucie River on the northern and eastern sides. The entire peninsula is covered by permeable quartz sand, about 40 feet thick. Drainage is predominantly underground. Rainfall infiltrates rapidly through the permeable surficial sand to the water table and flows approximately at right angles to the water-table contours (fig. 3-6) to points of discharge along the coast or into several small streams. The water table is near the surface inthe central part of the peninsula during much of the year, and during high groundwater stages surface lakes exist in depressions scattered throughout the area. Climate The climate at Stuart is subtropical, the average annual temperature being 75.40 F. Because of the moderating influence of the surrounding water, the temperature is usually two to four degrees higher during winter cold spells than in areas farther inland, and somewhat lower in the summer. Rainfall averages 56. 3 inches per year. Table 1 shows that rainfall is greatest in late summer and early fall and least in the winter.

PAGE 9

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 5 ... 0 _L I^" J G GE ..ORG Io . A MOLWESýG G '* iL " " { 30 -.M. t o OWE A ._... . isono 50 , LEI I.T N. a s, CITRUS\1.' LAKE ------I coast -nowAR ts--Figure 1. Map of Florida showing the Stuart area and Martin County. zeh--"~t--f~~r Z5.County.

PAGE 10

6 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY "'S----------------------'--.--I I I .a Tau STUART L l N' Y set EXPLANATION 0 NOISWWI NO WELL * fLOWINI WELL RECORDINO OE GAE nH' I I « ) *'^rt«r Figure 2. Map of the Stuart area showing the locations of selected wells.

PAGE 11

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 7 STUART I R -F \ Z D EXPLANATION LINE SHOWINS APPROXIMATE ALTITUDE OF WATER TABLE, IN FEET ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL. IICON INTERVAL .0 FO Figure 3. Contour map of the water table in the Stuart area, July 6. 1955.

PAGE 12

8 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY w / cI I I INTtRVAL L0 F Figure 4. Contour map ofthe water table inthe Stuart area, October 5, 1955. iure .Cnormpo hraeral nteSur ra

PAGE 13

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 9 ST. LUCIE RIVER OLD WELL FIELDS WATER PLANT BALL PARK FIEL FIELD 00.8 1.0 O e UN SON APPROXIMATE ALTITUDE . INTERVAL AT 0 FEE 'aUNI L WENE WELL OF WATE F XO low Figure 5. Contour map of the water table within the Stuart city limits, April 1, 1955.

PAGE 14

10 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ST. LUCIE RIVER OLD WEu. riELDS WA Pugu aLL cAIM _ a SeaL mx em Figure 6. Contour map of the water table within the Stuart city limits. May 3, 1955. APPMUREUAI AASSR UMM" Ut"LI FRn ADWE %WM 1"TtiW aT LO m Et. Figure 6. Contour map of the water table within the Stuart city limits, May 3, 1955.

PAGE 15

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 11 Table .1. Average Temperature and Rainfall at Stuart Month Temperature1 Rainfall2 (OF.) (inches) Jan. 66.9 1.92 Feb. 67.7 2.32 Mar. 70.9 2.86 Apr. 74.4 3.15 May 77.6 4.52 June 81.4 6.75 July 82.4 6.30 Aug. 83.0 5.47 Sept. 81.7 9.81 Oct. 78. 1 8.73 Nov. 72.2 2.44 Dec. 68.4 2.03 Yearly average 75.4 56.30 1Discontinuous record 1936-1955, U.S. Weather Bureau. 2Discontinuous record 1935-1955, U.S. Weather Bureau.

PAGE 16

12 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GEOLOGIC FORMATIONS AND THEIR WATER-BEARING PROPERTIES The strata underlying the Stuart area to a depth of about 1, 000 feet range in age from Recent at the surface to middle Eocene at the bottom. Water in the formations older than Miocene is highly mineralized and is used very little in the Stuart area. The formations of Miocene age yield only small quantities of water. Most wells are developed in post-Miocene sediments. Eocene Series The oldest rocks penetratedby water wells in the Stuart area are of middle Eocene age. The Eocene rocks include the Lake City limestone and the Avon Park limestone of Claiborne age and the Ocala group of Jackson age; these form the lower and major part of the Floridan aquifer (p. 15). Lake City Limestone The Lake City limestone, as defined by Cooke (1945, p. 46-47), overlies the Oldsmar limestone of Wilcox age in northern Florida and is overlain by the Tallahassee limestone. The Tallahassee limestone apparently is missing in southern Florida. The Lake City limestone in northern and central Florida is described as alternating layers of dark brown chalky limestone with some gypsum and chert. It forms part of the Floridan aquifer, and in the central part of Martin County it is tapped for irrigation and stock-watering supplies. Avon Park Limestone The Avon Park limestone, also a part of the Floridan aquifer, overlies the Lake City limestone. It is a cream colored to white, chalky to granular, porous limestone that ranges in thickness from about 100 to 150 feet in central Florida.

PAGE 17

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 13 Ocala Groupl The Ocala group unconformably overlies the Avon Park limestone and is another part of the Floridan aquifer. It is a cream colored, soft to hard, porous limestone, with beds of coquina at some localities. Oligocene Series The Oligocene series in Martin County has not been clearly defined. Sediments overlying the Ocala group and underlying the Hawthorn formation have been tentatively classified as of Vicksburg (middle Oligocene) age in the Stuart area and as of Suwannee (late Oligocene) age in southeastern Martin County. A correlation of cuttings from wells in the area indicates that there may have been some postOligocene faulting. The Vicksburg group in the Stuart area is composed of cream colored, softtohard, granular, porous limestone and some sand and shells. It forms the upper part of the Floridan aquifer in this area. Miocene Series The Miocene series in the Stuart area includes 'the Hawthorn formation of middle Miocene age and the Tamiami formation of late Miocene age. The Tampa limestone of early Miocene age may be present below the Hawthorn formation, but this has not been clearly established. Hawthorn Formation The Hawthorn formation is composed of olive-drab, relatively impermeable clay and sand and some thin lenses IThe stratigraphic nomenclature used in this report conforms to the usage of the Florida Geological Survey. It also conforms to the usage of the U.S. Geological-Survey with the exception of the Ocala group and its subdivisions.' The Florida Survey has adopted the Ocala group as described by Puri (1953). The Federal Survey regards the Ocala as a formation, the Ocala limestone.

PAGE 18

14 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY of limestone. In the Stuart area it is about 350 feet thick. A test well in the new city well field penetrated greenish sand at a depth of about 150 feet that is believed to be part of the Hawthorn formation. The Hawthorn formation forms the major part of the upper confining bed of the Floridan aquifer. Tamiami Formation The Tamiami formation appears to be conformable with the underlying Hawthorn formation. In the Stuart area it is composed of about 60 feet of sand, shell fragments and limestone. Part or all of the Tamiami formation may form an extension of the shallow nonartesian aquifer in the postMiocene deposits, and part may be included in the confining bed above the Floridan aquifer. Post-Miocene Deposits The post-Miocene deposits include the Caloosahatchee marl of Pliocene age and the Anastasia formation and Pamlico sand of Pleistocene age. The boundary between the Pliocene and Pleistocene in this area could not be determined, owing to the fact that the Caloosahatchee marl and the Anastasia formation are lithologically similar in Martin County. This boundary can be determined definitely only by detailed examination of the fossils of the formations. A thin layer of quartz sand of the Pamlico sand covers the area and grades into the underlying Anastasia formation. GROUND WATER Principles of Occurrence Ground water is stored in the joints, solution cavities, pore spaces, and other openings of the earth's crust below the water table. Ground water is the subsurface water in the zone, called the zone of saturation, in which all openings are completely filled with water under pressure greater than atmospheric. The water table is the top of this zone.

PAGE 19

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 15 Only part of the water that falls as rain reaches the zone of saturation. The remainder runs off the land surface to open bodies of water such as rivers, lakes and bays, or is returned to the atmosphere by evaporation and transpiration. The amount of rain that reaches the water table depends on many factors. These include the rate at which the rain occurs, the slope of the land on which it falls, the amount and type of vegetation cover, and the character of the surface materials throughwhich the water must infiltrate to reach the zone of saturation. After the water reaches the zone of saturation it begins to move more or less laterally, under the influence of gravity, toward a point of discharge such as a spring or well. Ground water may occur under either artesian or nonartesian (watertable) conditions. Where the water is confined in a permeable bed that is overlain by a relatively impermeable bed, its surface is not free to rise and fall. Water thus confined under pressure is said to be under artesian conditions. The term "artesian" is applied to ground water that is confined under pressure sufficient to cause the water to rise above the top of the permeable bed that contains it, though not necessarily above the land surface. Where the upper surface of the water is free to rise and fall in a permeable formation, the water is said to be under nonartesian conditions, and the upper surface is called the water table. All gradations exist between artesian and nonartesian conditions. Hydrologic Properties of the Aquifers Ground water in the Stuart area occurs in two major aquifers, a deep artesian aquifer (Floridan aquifer), and a shallow nonartesian aquifer. The aquifers are separated by a thick section of relatively impervious clay and sand. The water inthe artesian aquifer is much more mineralized than that in the nonartesian aquifer. Floridan Aquifer Wells penetrating the Floridan aquifer in the Stuart area range in depth from 800 tol, 200 feet. The pressure head in these wells is about 40 feet above the land surface, or about

PAGE 20

16 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 50 feet above mean sea level. Large flows are obtained from wells penetrating the aquifer, but the water is highly mineralized, ranging in chloride content from 800 to 4, 200 ppm. Because of its high mineral content, little use is made of the artesian water in the Stuart area. The availability and quality of the water from the Floridan aquifer in Martin County will be discussed more thoroughly in a later report. Nonartesian Aquifer Thickness and areal extent: The nonartesian aquifer is composed, from the surface down, of the Pamlico sand, the Anastasia formation, the Caloosahatchee marl, and possibly the Tamiami formation. The aquifer extends from the land surface to a depth of about 130 feet and is underlain by impermeable sand and clay which is probably part of the Hawthorn formation. The bodies of salt water that bound the peninsula on the east, north and west are the boundaries of the nonartesian aquifer. Excessive lowering of the water table near these boundaries would cause salt water to move in laterally. To the south, however, the aquifer has a much greater areal extent. Lithology: Data obtained from the inventory of wells in the area show a wide range in the depth of nonartesianwells, a fact which indicates that the lithology of the nonartesian aquifer differs from place to place. The heterogeneity of the aquifer is evident in well cuttings from a few wells drilled in the area during the course of this investigation. Permeable rock and shell are separated by less permeable fine sand or marl. Beds found at a given depth'at one site may be found at a different depth or maybe missing entirely at another site close by. Sufficient information is not yet available to define accurately the various permeable zones, but a generalized geologic section of the area is shown in the following log:

PAGE 21

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 17 Depth, in feet, below Description land surface Sand, quartz, fine to coarse, cream colored, gray and brown, clear to frosted, rounded and subangular. ................. ....... 0 -20 "Hardpan"; sand, quartz, cream colored to brown, contains cream colored to brown clay.................. .................. 20 -23 Sand, quartz, fine to coarse, tan to dark gray 23 -40 Sandstone, friable, loosely cemented, and some shell fragments ................... 40 -48 Sand, quartz, very fine to fine, dark gray, micaceous ................. ............ 48 -58 Limestone and sandstone, tan-graytobluish, hard, porous; contains some shells. Permeability relatively high. Many open-hole wells are finished in this section in the northern part of the Stuart area............... 58 -73 Sand, quartz, fine, tan to gray, some shell fragments ..... ........................ 73 -80 Limestone and sandstone, buff-brown, hard, interbedded with medium quartz sand and shell fragments ........................ 80 -88 Sand, quartz, very fine to fine, tan to gray, contains phosphatic nodules and some shells 88 -103 Limestone and sandstone, fine grained, dense, hard;interbeddedwith fine to medium rounded quartz sand and shell beds.............. 103 -123 Sand, quartz, fine to medium; few shell fragm ents .................................. 123 -133

PAGE 22

18 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Limestone and sandstone, interbedded with medium quartz sand and shells ............ 133 -144 Sand, very fine to fine, greenish-gray...... 144 -151 The layers or lenses of fine sand retard the vertical movement of water. Shape and slope of the water table: The water levels in observation wells were measured at various times to determine the altitude and shape of the water table in the area and to determine changes in ground-water storage in the aquifer. The water table is highest in the south-central part of the peninsula and slopes east, north, and west toward points of ground-water discharge in the Manatee Pocket, the St. Lucie River, and the South Fork of the St. Lucie River (fig. 3,4). Because ground water flows approximately at right angles to the contour lines, it is apparent from figures 3 and 4 that practically all the recharge to the nonartesian aquifer in the peninsula is derived from local rainfall. Much of the rainfall is quickly absorbed by the permeable surface sands and infiltrates to the water table. Evidence for this lies in the fact that the water level in a well 144 feet deep rose 1. 11 feet within 12 hours after a rainfall of 1.09 inches was recorded at Stuart. Surface runoff is small, except locally after exceptionally heavy rainfall. Figures 5 and 6 show how the water table was lowered by pumping in the city well fields. Figure 5 shows the water table on April 1, 1955, when the city wells at the old city well field, at the water plant and the ball park, were pumping. Figure 6 shows the water table on May 3, 1955, when wells were shut down in the old well field and wells were pumping in the new city well field, south of 10th Street and west of Palm Beach Road. Water-level fluctuations: Threewells in the eastern part of Martin County are equipped with automatic water-level gages which provide a continuous record of the fluctuations of the water table. Only one of these (well 147) is in the area

PAGE 23

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 19 of this report (fig. 2). Figure 7 is a hydrograph showing fluctuations of the water level in well 147 during 1954. Well 147 is 74 feet deep and is about a quarter of a mile east of the new city well field. The maximum yearly range in water level in this well for the period 1952-1955 was 6. 3 feet in 1953. This compares with a maximum yearly range of 4. 8 feet in well 140, which is 16 miles south of well 147, and 5.8 feet in well 125, which is 15 miles southeast of well 147, in Jonathan Dickinson State Park. Figure 7 shows also the distribution of rainfall as recorded at radio station WSTU, at Stuart, in 1954. As a rule, the water level in well 147, which is about two miles from the rain gage, correlates fairly closely with rainfall, but a few exceptions are apparent. On February 2, 1954, for example, a 1. 85-inch rainfall produced only a very slight rise in the water level in well 147, but a 1.48-inch rainfall on March 29 produced a rise of about 0. 3 foot. Doubtless some of the rain falls in short, local showers that do not wet all parts of the Stuart area. This would account for some of the lack of correlation shown in figure 7. Figures 3 and4 show the configuration ofthewater table at high and low ground-water stages, respectively, in 1955. Ground-water stages are usually highest during September and October; however, rainfall in 1955 was exceptionally low from August to November, and the usual high stages did not occur. Thus, water levels on July 6, 1955 (fig. 3), were higher than those on October 5 (fig. 4). GROUND-WATER USE Practically all the water for public, irrigation, domestic, and industrial use in the Stuart area is obtained from ground-water sources. Since April 25, 1955, all the city supply has been obtained from three 4-inch wells (657, 723, 724), 125 feet deep, in the new city well field (fig. 2). The wells are spaced about 600 feet apart and each is equipped with a turbine pump having a capacity of 100 gpm. Prior to April 25, 1955, the city supply was obtained from one 4-inch and two 6-inch wells (97, 98, 99) about 65 feet deep, near the water-treatment plant, and two 4-inch wells (621, 623) 56 feet deep, at the ball park. Operation of these wells was

PAGE 24

20 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY JAIL PiC. MAN. APR. MAY JUNE JULY AU0. SEPT. OT. NOV. DeO. -3, • go .I-II_ .l------------Figure 7. Hydrographofwell 147, inStuart, and daily rainfall at Stuart, 1954.

PAGE 25

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 21 discontinued because of an increase in the salinity of the water, but they are available for emergency use. The pumpageby the city of Stuart has increased steadily during the last few years as new customers have been added (table 2). During 1955, 91 million gallons of water was pumped. Water usage is high during dry periods when lawns are irrigated. The numerous flower farms in the vicinity of Stuart have their own irrigation wells and use large quantities of ground water during the growing season, from October to May. Some of this irrigationwater returns to the ground-water reservoir by infiltration through the surface sands. In areas not serviced by city water mains, private wells are used for both domestic supplies and irrigation. In addition, several hundred wells are used for lawn irrigation within the area served by the city. Their total pumpage is doubtless large, but no figures are available. Here, too, some of the water is returned to the ground-water reservoir by infiltration through the surface sands. The industrial use of ground water in the Stuart area is small. QUANTITATIVE STUDIES Principles The ability of an aquifer to transmit water is expressed by the coefficient of transmissibility. In customary units, it is the quantity of water, in gallons per day, that will move through a vertical section of the aquifer one foot wide and extending the full saturated height, under a unit hydraulic gradient (Theis, 1938, p. 892), at the prevailing temperature of the water. The coefficient of storage is a measure of the capacity of the aquifer to store water and is defined as the volume of water released from or taken into storage per unit surface area of the aquifer per unit change in the component of head normal to that surface. These coefficients are generally determined by means of pumping tests on wells.

PAGE 26

N N Table 2. Pumpage From Stuart Well Field, in Millions of Gallons Per Month Year Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug, Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Total 1941 2.63 2.77 3.23 2.89 2.70 2.82 2.48 2.68 2.57 2.69 2.91 2.62 32.98 1942 3.26 3.54 3.29 3.26 3.67 3.24 3.40 3.30 3.06 3.47 3.48 3.53 40.51 0 1943 3.53 3.42 3.57 3.62 3.80 3.57 3.49 3.61 3.44 3.63 3.74 3.94 43.35 1944 3.93 4.04 4.41 4.36 4.38 4.29 3.88 3.50 3.40 3.23 3.28 3.63 46.31 1945 3.86 3.60 4.25 3.89 3.71 3.34 3.02 3.28 3.12 3.11 3.18 3.64 42.00 0 1946 3.91 3.85 4.00 4.30 3.40 2.94 3.05 3.21 3.16 3.80 3.55 3.86 43.04 1947 4.14 3.74 3.98 3.61 3.77 3.11 3.48 3.50 3.10 3.27 3.29 3.50 42.47 I 1948 3.61 4.36 5.00 4.56 4.14 3.74 3.53 3.41 3.25 3.79 4.04 4.22 47.65 1949 4.32 4.17 4.77 4.27 3.94 3.13 3.34 2.83 3.96 3.58 3.74 4.01 46.05 1950 4.00 4.84 5.18 4.56 4.79 4.12 4.15 4.28 5.00 4.90 4.81 5.78 56.43 1951 6.08 5.71 6.73 5.30 6.73 5.18 4.27 5.43 4.19 3.68 4.55 5.01 62.86 1952 6.11 5.39 4.76 4.98 5.20 5.39 5.54 5.75 5.59 5.90 5.59 5.56 65.74 C 1953 6.34 5.85 6.35 6.18 6.47 5.37 5.93 5.34 5.44 5.03 5.23 5.90 69.42 1954 6.42 6.65 6.75 6.48 6.40 6.26 5.89 6.70 5.82 6.34 6.75 7.57 78.02 M 1955 8.32 7.23 8.21 7.54 8.15 7.91 6.85 7.11 6.67 7.55 7.95 7.57 91.07

PAGE 27

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 23 Descriptions of Pumping Tests Pumping tests were made at five places in the Stuart area, four in the new city well field and one in the ball park well field. The first test was made in the new city well field on March9, 1955, withwell 657 (city supply well No. 1) pumping at the rate of 135 gpm for 11 hours. Water-level measurements were made during the test in wells 656, 658 and 659, located 11, 100 and 300 feet, respectively, from the pumped well. All wells are cased to 115 feet with 10 feet of open hole in the underlying limestone, except well 656, which is cased to 144 feet with one foot of open hole. The water from well 657 was discharged into a ditch about 75 feet from the pumping well, but because the ditchwas choked with vegetation and has onlya slight gradient, water remained inthe vicinity and recharged the aquifer during the test. In the second test; made on March 23, 1955, also in the new city well field, well 724 (city supply well No. 3), was pumped at a rate of 140 gpm for five hours, and water levels were observed in wells 659, 658 and 657, located 300, 500 and 600 feet, respectively, from the pumped well. The wells are all cased to 115 feet, leaving 10 feet of open hole in the underlying limestone. The water was discharged into a ditch 200 feet from the pumpedwell and again remained in the area and recharged the aquifer, but this recharge did not affect the water levels as early as that in test No. 1. The following day, March 24, 1955, the third test was made at: the same location as tests 1 and 2. Well 723 (city supply wellNo, 2)was pumped at a rate of 112 gpm for five hours, and water levels were observed in wells 658 and 724, located 500 and 750 feet, respectively, from the pumping well. All wells are cased to 115 feet, leaving 10 feet of open hole in the underlying limestone. The water was discharged into a depression near the wells and remained in the area, probably recharging the aquifer. SThe fourth testwas made on May 27, 1955, also in the new well field, when the new wells were in operation. Observation

PAGE 28

24 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY well 658A, 13 feet deep, was installed 100 feet from well 657 (city supply well No. 1) and immediately adjacent to observation well 658. Prior to the test the well field was shut down overnight to allow recovery of the water levels in the area. On the next morning the water levels in both the deep and shallow observation wells were measured and were 6.38 feet above mean sea level. Well 657 was pumped at a rate of 105 gpm for nine hours, at the end of which period the drawdowns in wells 658 and 658A were 3. 58 and 0. 34 feet, respectively (fig. 8). The water level in well 658 began to decline almost immediately after pumping started, and had fallen three feet after 21 minutes. The water level in shallow well 658A began to decline eight minutes after the start of pumping, and had fallen 0. 07 foot after 21 minutes. Near the end of the test the water level in well 658 had neatly stabilized, whereas that in well 658A was still falling, but at a decreasing rate. The water was discharged into the city mains and so did not return to the aquifer. The fifth test was made in the well field at the ball park on April 27, 1955. Well 621 (city well No. 2) was pumped at a rate of 130 gpm for five hours. Observation wells 620 and 623 were seven and 375 feet, respectively, from the pumped well. All wells are cased to 51 feet, leaving five feet of open hole in the underlying limestone. The water was discharged on the ground in the immediate vicinity of the pumped well and doubtless some returned to the aquifer during the test. Interpretation of Pumping -Test Data Theis (1935, p. 519-524), using basic heat-transfer formulas, developed a method to analyze the movement of water through an aquifer under the conditions that the aquifer is (1) homogeneous and isotropic, (2) of infinite areal extent, (3) of uniform thickness, (4) bounded above and below by impervious beds, (5) receiving no discharge, (6) fully penetrated by the discharging well, and (7) losing water only through the discharging well. If an aquifer meets all these conditions, the Theis nonequilibrium method, as described by Wenzel (1942, p. 87-90), will give a true transmissibility value for the aquifer regardless of the distance of the observation well from the pumped well or the rate of pumping.

PAGE 29

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 25 TIME, IN MINUTES AFTER PUMPING STARTED S 50 100110 I 2 300 30 400 450 500 550 00.54.0 1 Figuire 8. Drawdown observed in wells 658 and 658A during pumping test in the'new city well field, May 27, 1955.

PAGE 30

26 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Whenthe data from the tests in the city well fields were analyzed by the Theis method, the computed values of the coefficient of transmissibility ranged from 18, 000 to 170, 000 gpd per foot for the same area, indicating that the aquifer does not meet all the above conditions. The main producing zone, which is between 103 and 140 feet (see well log) in the new well field, is reasonably homogeneous, isotropic, and uniform in thickness, judging from well logs and cuttings and the performance of individual wells. For a test of short duration the aquifer is, in effect, of infinite areal extent, but it is not bounded above by an impermeable bed, as is shown by the fact that the water level in shallow well 658A (fig. 2) began to decline eight minutes after well 657 began pumping (fig. 8). Also, the water was discharged on the ground in the vicinity of the pumpedwells and, consequently, the aquifer was receiving recharge. In addition, the aquifer was not fully penetrated by the pumped wells. After corrections were made for the effects of partial penetration and also for the natural decline of the water table thatwas taking place the data were further analyzed by means of the leakyaquifer method of Hantush and Jacob (1955, p. 95-100) and a leaky-aquifer type curve developed by H.H. Cooper, Jr., of the U. S. Geological Survey, Tallahassee, Florida, (personal communication). This analysis produced values for the coefficient of transmissibility ranging from 15,000 to 25, 000 gpd per foot, with a probable average near 20, 000 gpd per foot. This seems to be a reasonable coefficient of transmissibilityfor the main producing zone of the aquifer. When considering long-term pumping, vertical leakage from the overlying beds is an important factor, and the coefficient of transmissibility of the overlying beds should be added to that of the main producing zone to obtain a realistic coefficient of transmissibility for the well field. SALINITY STUDIES The chloride content of ground water is generally a reliable index of the extent of contamination by salt water from the sea or other sources. Water samples were collected from severalhundred wells in the Stuart area for chloride analysis (fig. 9). Those wells yieldingwater having anappreciable chloride content were sampled periodically to detect any variations in the chloride content of the water (table 3).

PAGE 31

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 27 In most cases the fluctuations are caused by variations in the amount of rainfall in the area or an increase or decrease in pumping. Usually it is a combination of the two, because more water is needed for irrigation during dry periods, as in 1955, and less during wet periods, as in 1947-1948. In a few cases, notably inwells 647 and 722, the chloride content of the water dropped during a dry period, owing to the cessation of pumping in the old city well field and the plugging of a leaky artesian well, No. 128 (fig. 2). Wells 619 and 654 showed an increase and then a decrease in the chloride content of the water. The decrease was probably caused by the flushing of the salty artesian water from the aquifer. Salt water may encroach into the Stuart area from either of two sources: (1) bodies of seawater, including the St. Lucie River, the Manatee Pocket, and tidal creeks and canals, and (2) the artesian aquifer. Contamination from Surface-Water Bodies Encroachment from the St. Lucie River and the Manatee Pocket is not extensive at the present time. It has occurred only in areas near the coast, and no proven encroachment has been found more than half a mile from the river. The fresh-water head is high close to the shoreline, and in many places fresh water canbe obtained from wells within 100 feet of salt-water bodies. It is reported that fresh water has been obtainedfrom wells driven in the river bottom, but the author has not confirmed this. Heavy pumping in the areas adjacent to the river may cause sufficient lowering of thewater table to allow saltwater to invade the fresh-water zone. Water of high chloride content was detected in well 720, about 1,500 feet from the St. Lucie River, about halfway between the river and the water plant well field. When the wellwas drilled, water containing 9, 180 ppm of chloride was encountered at a depth of 104 feet below the land surface. The well was immediately "pulled back" 20 feet, to a depth of 84 feet, where the chloride content of the water was only 19 ppm. A layer of fine sand between 84 and 104 feet apparently acts as a confining bed, because no

PAGE 32

28 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY STUART _-/-T3 team"; \ T " S1 Io*is 3o 00 3 0 * 0y$ so 31 ii Iol To " -o { so O 101I TO 1000 ' 14OR IE THAN 1000 . tent of water from wells. , .9 3313 moo .. tento o w r tent of water -from wells.

PAGE 33

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 29 Table 3. Chloride Concentration in Water Samples from Selected Wells Depth of well, Chloride in feet, below content Well No. land surface Date (ppm) 100 47 Sept. 20, 1946 110 Oct. 7, 1946 131 Dec. 19, 1946 138 Feb. 6, 1947 124 Mar. 13, 1947 153 Apr. 24, 1947 118 May 12, 1947 104 June 25, 1947 111 Mar. 10, 1948 104 June 10, 1948 89 Sept. 15, 1948 94 Dec. 10, 1948 74 Feb. 11, 1949 110 July 1, 1949 113 Apr. 27, 1952 185 Jan. 28, 1955 161 May 11, 1955 166 June 29, 1955 148 105 88 Aug. 13, 1946 34 Sept. 20, 1946 27 Nov. 7, 1946 41 Dec. 19, 1946 67 Feb. 6, 1947 53 Mar. 13, 1947 46 June 25, 1947 49 Mar. 10, 1948 37 June 10, 1948 61 Sept. 15, 1948 37 Dec. 10, 1948 27 Feb. 11, 1949 63 Apr. 7, 1950 188 Jan. 18, 1951 102 Aug. 21, 1951 109 Mar. 27, 1952 167

PAGE 34

30 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Table 3. Chloride Concentration in Water Samples from Selected Wells (continued) Depth of well, Chloride in feet, below content Well No. land surface Date (ppm) 353 80 July 28, 1953 545 Jan. 20, 1955 670 June 30, 1955 580 Aug. 16, 1955 680 362 23 Aug. 4, 1953 35 Jan. 21, 1955 615 June 30, 1955 1,370 Aug. 16, 1955 2,020 Sept. 8, 1955 1,980 515 60 Oct. 6, 1953 106 Jan. 11, 1955 131 Apr. 20, 1955 123 June 29, 1955 121 Sept. 5, 1955 157 Oct. 5, 1955 117 518 57 Oct. 6, 1953 46 Jan. 10, 1955 160 Jan. 27, 1955 103 Apr. 20, 1955 87 May 11, 1955 80 June 29, 1955 96 Aug. 16, 1955 132 Sept. 7, 1955 136 520 35 Oct. 6, 1953 64 Jan. 10, 1955 66 Apr. 20, 1955 75 June 29, 1955 83 Sept. 7, 1955 79 523 45 Oct. 6, 1953 53 Jan. 10, 1955 36 Apr. 20, 1955 33 June 10, 1955 32 Sept. 7, 1955 36

PAGE 35

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 31 Table 3. Chloride Concentration in Water Samples from Selected Wells (continued) Depth of well, Chloride in feet, below content Well No. land surface Date (ppm) 525 49 Oct. 6, 1953 91 Jan. 10, 1955 85 Apr. 20, 1955 95 Sept. 7, 1955 124 588 50 Oct. 22, 1953 265 Jan. 10, 1955 328 Apr. 20, 1955 258 June 29, 1955 400 590 20 Oct. 22, 1953 45 Jan. 10, 1955 67 Apr. 20, 1955 67 June 29, 1955 70 597 15 Nov. 9, 1953 40 Jan. 10, 1955 36 Apr. 20, 1955 39 June 29, 1955 29 608 58 Nov. 23, 1953 100 Jan. 10, 1955 88 Apr. 20, 1955 87 June 29, 1955 80 619 57 Apr. 15, 1955 550 June 29, 1955 700 Aug. 16, 1955 650 Sept. 7, 1955 645 Oct. 7, 1955 650 620 56 .May 11, 1955 42 June 29, 1955 43 Aug. 16, 1955 49 Sept. 7, 1955 47

PAGE 36

32 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL* SURVEY Table 3. Chloride Concentration in Water Samples from Selected Wells (continued) Depth of well, Chloride in feet, below content Well No. land surface Date .(ppm) 622 56 Apr. 20, 1955 20 May 11, 1955 16 June 29, 1955 18 Aug. 16, 1955 15 Sept. 7, 1955 43? 637 15 Jan. 11, 1955 :245 Apr. 29, 1955 48 June 30, 1955 32 638 38 Apr. 20, 1955 230 June 29, 1955 272 Aug. 16, 1955 352 642 45 Apr. 20, 1955 56 June 29, 1955 76 Aug. 16, 1955 65 '647 113 Apr. 15, 1955 98 June 29, 1955 40 Sept. 7, 1955 34 654 63 Feb. 3, 1955 197 Apr. 20, 1955 312 June 29, 1955 348 Sept.. 7, 1955 348 Oct. 5, 1955 280 687 60 Apr. 19, 1955 775 June 29, 1955 780 Aug. 16, 1955 810 720 104 ' Apr. 22, 1955 9,180 84 Apr. 23, 1955 19 May 11, 1955 14 May 23, 1955 15

PAGE 37

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 33 Table 3. Chloride Concentration in Water Samples from Selected Wells (continued) Depth of well, Chloride in feet, below content Well No. land surface Date (ppm) 720 (continued) June 29, 1955 30 Aug. 16, 1955 15 Sept. 7, 1955 15 722 112 Apr. 20, 1955 78 May 26, 1955 61 June 29, 1955 37 Sept. 7, 1955 27 734 84 June 30, 1955 176 Aug. 16, 1955 940 Sept. 8, 1955 930 Oct. 7, 1955 1,430 735 69 June 30, 1955 34 Sept. 8, 1955 94 Oct. 7, 1955 185 Nov. 2, 1955 307

PAGE 38

34 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY appreciable increase in the chloride content occurred after several months of intermittent pumping to irrigate a lawn. It is believed that the salinity of the water in well 720 is the result of direct encroachment from the St. Lucie River, caused by the reduction of head induced by heavy pumping in the water plant and ball park well fields. However, when well 622, in the cityball park well field, was deepened from 56 feet to 115 feet the chloride content of the water decreased slightly, from 36 ppm to 20 ppm, indicating that encroachment had not reached the vicinity of the well field at the ball park. The water in well 722, 600 feet east of the city water plant and 600 feet from the river, contained 78 ppm of chloride at a depth of 112 feet below the land surface, indicating that encroachment of water of high chloride content had not reached the vicinity of the well field at the water plant. The salt front is probably now stationary or is being pushed back toward the river because of the increase. of fresh-water head following the c'essation of pumping of the city water plant and ball park well fields. The position of the salt front cannot be determined accurately because of the lack of deep observation wells. Some salt-water .encroachment is occurring along the eastern side of the peninsula in areas immediately adjacent to the St. Lucie River and the Manatee Pocket. A relatively high, discontinuous ridge parallels the eastern shoreline. It is flanked on the west by low, swampy land. Streams and ditches draining the lowland flow parallel to the ridge until they reach gaps in the ridge where they discharge into the salt water of the river. They reduce the fresh-water head under the ridge during the dry season, so that even moderate pumping in some areas results in movement of salt water into the aquifer. The chloride content of the water inwell 362, in this area(fig. 2), increased from 35 ppm in 1953 to more than 2, 000 ppm in 1955 (table 3). This locality is especially vulnerable to contamination because of its proximity to a drainage canal. Contamination from Artesian Aquifer The beds of relatively impermeable clay and fine sand of the Hawthorn formation act as an effective barrier to the

PAGE 39

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 35 vertical migration of salt water from the. artesian aquifer, except where wells have punctured them. In the Stuart area, the artesian water contains between 800 and 4, 500 ppm of chloride and is under a pressure head of about40 feet above the land surface. If this water were allowed to flow freely at the surface it could contaminate the fresh water in the shallow aquifer. The artesian water is highly corrosive, and, after a period of years, may corrodethe casings of the wells and create perforations through which the salty water could escape into the fresh-water aquifer eventhough thetop of the well is tightly capped. An electric log made by the Florida Geological Survey of well 128, an artesian wellwithin 300 feet of the city water plant well field, indicated that there were probably many breaks in the casing at various intervals below the land surface. Saltwater escaping through holes in the casing of this well is believed to be the probable source of chloride contamination in the old city well field. This conclusionwas reached when it became evident that the contamination could not be direct encroachment from the river because wells of the same depth as the city wells and situated a few hundred feet from the river bank, directly between the well field and the river, yielded water whose chloride content was lower than that in the city.wells. Evidence to support this conclusion was noted after the water plant and ball park well fields were shut down. The water in certain wells in the area increased markedly in chloride content. When the data were plotted on a map, the wells in which an increase in chloride content had occurred formed a fan-shaped pattern extending downgradient from the artesian well, the axis of the pattern closely paralleling the direction of ground-water flow. The water in well 619, nearest the artesian well, had the greatest increase in chloride content, whereas that in wells farther away showed a smaller increase. Water in wells outside the area did not change appreciably. It is believed the observed changes in chloride concentrationwere causedby leakage of salty water from the artesian well. Prior to the shutting down of the water plant well field, most of the salty artesian water was being drawn into the city supply wells, where it was diluted by fresh water from within the area affected by pumping. Well 128 was filled with cement on April 25, 1955, the day that pumping ceased in the water plant well field, and

PAGE 40

36 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY the salty water in the aquifer.after that time was artesian water which had not been flushed away. The residual artesian water, therefore, moved downgradient and was diluted by fresh water as it progressed. As the salty water was dispersed, the water from wells downgradient from the artesian well became fresher. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS All supplies of fresh ground water in the Stuart area are obtained from the shallow nonartesian aquifer. The deep (Floridan) artesian aquifer will yield large quantities of water to flowing wells, but the water is too highly mineralized for most purposes. The nonartesian aquifer, although it differs from area to area, is composed generally of Pleistocene, Pliocene andpossiblyMiocene deposits consisting of sand to a depth of about 40 feet and alternating layers of limestone or shell and sand from 40 feet to about 130 feet. Below 130 feet little or no water is available from the sands and clays that form the major part of the Hawthorn formation, the confining unit of the Floridan aquifer. The Floridan aquifer is composed of limestones of the Vicksburg group, the Ocala group, the Avon Park limestone, and the Lake City limestone. Pumping tests reveal that the new city well field is far enough from the St. Lucie River that salt-water encroachment should not be a problem if hydrologic conditions remain substantially as they are at the present time. So far, salt water has encroached in the Stuart area only in a relatively narrow area adjacent to the St. Lucie River and in areas near leaking artesian wells. Watertable contour maps indicate that the fresh-water head is sufficient to prevent extensive encroachment of salt water into the shallow aquifer. If drainage canals are dug to depths below sea level in the vicinity of the well field, however, they could become avenues through which salt water may encroach during periods of low ground-water levelsand high tides. Also, drainage canals may lower the water table sufficiently to allow salt water to encroach at depth in the aquifer.

PAGE 41

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 37 The increase in the chloride content of the old city wells was due largely to leaks in the casing of an artesian well in the vicinity; however, water of high chloride content discovered in a well about halfway between the old well field and the St. Lucie River indicated that salt-water encroachment from the direction of the river was occurring at depth inthe aquifer. With a steady increase in pumping this encroachment might eventually have reached the old well field, but with the cessation of pumping in the old well field the salt front should move back slowly toward the river. Moderate pumping in the old well field could be resumed after the aquifer around ithas been cleared of the salt-water contamination. Large additional water supplies can be developed in the vicinity of the new well field, provided the wells are adequately spaced and the pumping rates are not excessive. Additionalwells a quarter of a mile or more south of the new field would not seriously affect it. The wells would be in areas where the altitude of the water table is relatively high throughout the year, so there would be little danger of saltwater encroachment due to pumping. A continuous record of the fluctuation of the water level, such as that obtained from the gage at well 147, provides a recordof the changes inground-water storage inthe aquifer throughout a given period. Determination of the chloride content of samples collected periodically from selected observation wells will reveal any further movement of salt water into the shallow aquifer.

PAGE 42

W 00 Table 4, Records of Selected Wells (1) 0, open hole; So screen; P, sandpoint. (2) Dom., domestic; Ind., industrial; Irr., irrigation; Obs., observation; P.S., public supply. * Well located in Hanson Grant; township and range projected. Well Depth Diameter Well fin. k] No. Location Owner (it.) (in.) ish (1) Use (2) Remqrks 0 97 NW SW, sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 55 4 S P. S. 98 NWf SWI sec. 4, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. City of Stuart 65 6 S P.S. 99 NW4 SWI sec. 4, T. 38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 75 6 S P.S. 100 SE4 NE sec. 5, T. 38 S., R.41 E. P. Pence 47 2 O Ind. See table 3. 105 NW SE* sec. 2, T. 38 S., R.41 E. A.M. Bauer 88 2 O Irr. Do. 128 NWI SWI sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 852 6 O P. S. Plugged. 147 NW` NW} sec. 10, T. 38 S., R.41 E. U.S. Geological Survey 74 6 S Obs. Recorder; see fig. 7. 295 *SW; NE sec. 26, T. 38 S., R.41 E. C.E. Beedle 98 2 O Dom. 297 *SW" SW sec. 27, T. 38 S., R.41 E. R. Darling 57 1i O Dom. O 302 *SWI SW, sec. 27, T.38 S., R.41 E. E. D. Johnson 32 i1 S Dom. 303 *NEJ NEI sec. 33, T. 38S., R.41 E. L. O. Fosky 35 1i P Dom. 308 *NWf NW+ sec. 25, T. 38 S., R.41 E. D.H. Harvey 43 1i P Dom. 309 *NW I NW* sec. 25, T.38 S., R.41 E. M. Whittle 36 11 P Dom. 313 *SEF SW4 sec. 18, T.38 S., R.42 E. C.H. WilUams 38 2 O Dom. 314 *SE, SE sec. 24, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. P. Mispel 30 11 P Dom. Cl 315 *SE2 SEsec. 24, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. C. Pope 32 11 P Dom. 316 *SWJ SWI sec. 19, T. 38 S., R. 42 E D. Steenken 28 11 P Dom. 320 NW SEJ sec. 25, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. M. Marshal 20 a1 P Dom. 321 *SE4 NEf sec. 25, T. 38 S., R.41 E. R.F. Saunderson 24 11 P Dom. M 322 *NWJ NEa sec. 25, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. J. F. Gaughan 43 1 P Dom. 324 *SWS SE sec. 24, T.38 S., R.41 E. A. Irwin 40 11 P Dom. 325 *NW4 NE4 sec. 24, T. 38 S., R.41 E. C. Stiller 25 11 P Dom. 326 *NWr NE sec. 24, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. H. Stiller 26 11 P Dom. 327 *SE4 SWW sec. 13, T.38 S., R.41 E. .Csapo 80 2 P Dom. 328 *SW} SEF sec. 13, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. J. E. Friday 30 2 P Irr. 329 *NW+ SW* sec. 13, T.38 S., R.41 E. H.L. Gerould 80 s1 ? ' Dom.

PAGE 43

Table 4. Records of Selected Wells (continued) Well Depth Diameter Well finNo. Location Owner (ft.) (in.) ish (1) Use (2) Remarks 330 *SEj SEJ sec. 14, T.38 S., R.41 E. A. Nelson 97 2 O Dom. 331 *SWI SEi sec. 14, T.38S.,' R.41 E. O. Mangil 26 11 P Dom. 332 *SE1 NEI sec. 23, T. 38 S., R.41 E. C.M. Johnson 30 1 P Dom. 333 *SE NW, sec. 23, T.38 S., R.41 E. B.R. Sword 45 11 P Dom. 334 *SE' SW4 sec. 14, T. 38 S., R.41 E. R. M. Powell 90 1 -O Dom. 337 *NW NEI sec. 26, T.38 S., R.41 E. E.J. Florintine 85 1 O Dom. 338 *SW1 NWi sec. 23, T.38 S., R.41 E. C. Keck 100 I1 O Dom. 33,9 *SE SE* sec. 15, T.38 S., R.41 E. P.W. Hickman' 65 11 0 Dom. 340 *SW* SE* sec. 15, T. 38 S., R.41 E. P.W. Hickman 72 2 O Dom. 341 *SE* NW* sec. 15, T. 38 S., R.41 E. G.H. Cook 83 2 O Dom. O 342 NEI NWI sec. 15, T.38 S., R.41 E. W.S. Walsh 90 2 O Dom. 344 NEI SEJ sec. 9, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. R. L. Wall 18 1I P Dom. 345 NW* SE* sec. 9, T. 38 S. , R. 41 E. R. L. Wall 40 1* O Dom. 346 SEl NW; sec.9, T.38 S., R.41 E. H.W. Tressler 63 2 O Dom. 347 *SW4 NWi sec. 14, T.38 S., R.41 E. T.G. Schreckengast 87 1I O Dom. 349 *NE SWW sec. 14, T.38 S., R.41 E R.R. Allison 82 1 0 Dom. 351 *SWI NEi sec.14, T.38 S., R.41 E. T.B. Parish 56 Il O Dom. 352 *NE1 NEI sec. 14, T.38 S., R.41 E. S. Nekrassoff 63 2 O Dom. 353 *SE* NE sec. 14, T.38 S. .R.41 E. S. Nekrassoff 80 2 O Dom. See table 3. 354 *SEj NWk sec. 13, T. 38 S., R.41 E. W.F. Lawson 38 2 P Dom. 355 *NE1 SW; sec. 13, T.38 S., R.41 E. Unknown 25 2 P Dom. 0 358 *NEI SE* sec. 11, T.38 S., R.41 E. Martin County Golf Club 93 2 O Dom. 359 NEi SEI sec. 11, T. 38 S., R.41 E. C. T. Kemble 42 2 O Dom. 360 SW NE sec. 11, T.38 S., R.41 E. E. Svilokos 65 2 0 Dom. 361 NW NE* sec. 11, T. 38 S., R.41 E. C.A. Lintell ? 2 ? Dom. 362 SW* SEi sec. 2, T.38 S., R.41 E. C. Boxwell 23 11 P Dom, See table 3. 363 .SW* SE* sec. 2, T. 38 S., R.41 E. H. Thelosen -? 2 ? Dom. 365 SW* SE* sec. 2, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. E. B. Dugan 37 1i O Dom. 366 NW} SE sec.,2, T.38 S., R.41 E. W.E. Oliver 52 2 O Dom. 368 NWj NWs sec. 2, T. 38 S., R.41 E. G. Sollitt 40 ? ? Dom.

PAGE 44

0 Table 4, Records of Selected Wells (continued) Well Depth Diameter Well finNo. Location Owner (ft,) (in.) ish (1) Use (2) Remarks 371 NWI NW* sec. 2, T. 38 S,, R. 41 E. R. G. Ross 91 2 O Dom, 372 SW; NEi sec. 3, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. C. Allen 21 1i P Dom. r 375 NW4 SWI sec. 16, T.38 S., R.41 E. F. Blackstone 65 2 O Dom. 376 NEI NEi sec. 17, T. 38 S., R,41 E. H. Clements 55 2 O Dom. 380 *NE* NW* sec. 32, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. V. Brennan 52 1* P Dom.r 381 *SWc SEf sec. 29, T.38 S., R.41 E. C.A. Lees 38 1 P Dom. 383 *NEI SEJ sec, 29, T. 38 S. , R. 41 E. J. B. Beach 40 1 P Dom. 385 *NW* NW* sec. 33, T. 38 S., R, 41 E. L.M. Johnson 68 2 O Dom. 386 *SEf SWj sec, 28, T. 38 S.,, R.41 E. C. Green 15 1) P Dom. 0 387 *NWI SEi sec. 21, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. Quindly ? 1I P Dom. M 388 NW` SW) sec.16, T.38 S., R.41 E. C.L. Bruce 52 2 O Dom. 0 394 SW SW1 sec, 9, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. C. Luce 80 2 O Irr, Flower farm. 399 SW SW sec. 9, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. H.I, Burkey 20 2 P Irr. Do. 404 NE* NE sec. 17, T. 38 S,, R. 41 E. F. E. Glass 50 2 P Dom. 405 NW* SE4 sec. 8, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. D.E. Andrews 90 2 O Dom. 406 NW* NEI sec. 17, T.38 S., R.41 E. E. A. Wood 79 2 O Dom. 469 SWS NE sec.3, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. D.B. Irons 18 1i P Irr. 471 SWI NE; sec. 3, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. J. Menninger 50 2 O Irr. 474 SWJ NE sec. 3, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. R. L. Minnehan 16 2 P Irr. 475 NW NE aec. 3, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. A. O. Kanner 80 2 O Dom. 476 NW NE; sec. 3, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. J.B. Frazier 55 2 O Irr. 478 NW E NE sec. 3, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. D.F. Hudson 88 2 O Dom. 479 NW* NEI sec. 3, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. C.R, Ashley 22 1* P Irr. 481 NW; NE* sec. 3, T. 38 S., R.41 E. D. H. Gleason 100 1* 0 Dom. . 482 SW NE, sec.3, T.38 S., R.41 E. F. Stafford 63 1 0 Irr. 486 NE* NW sec. 3, T 38 S., R.41 E. Z. Mosley 30 1 P Irr. 487 SEj NW sec. 3, T. 38 S., R.41 E. H.M. Godfrey 22 2 P Irr. 488 SE) NW* sec. 3, T. 38 S., R.41 E. C. Dunscombe 16 1* P Dom. 492 SE* NW* sec.3, T.38 S., R.41 E. R.D. Hauk 63 2 O Dom, 493 .SEN NW* sec. 3, T.38 8., -R. 41 E. E. Crary 80 2 O Irr.

PAGE 45

Table 4. Records of Selected Wells (continued) Well Depth Diameter Well finNo. Location Owner (ft.) (in.) ish (1) Use (2) Remarks 495 SWi a NW sec. 3, T.38 S., R. 41 E. S. Peabody 60 2 0 Irr. 497 SWj NW sec. 3, T 38 S., R.41 E. R. Risavy 18 1* P Irr. Z 498 SW NW sec. 3, T.38 S., R.41 E. S.G. Burt 68 2 0 Irr. 500 SW4 NW sec. 3, T, 38 S., R.41 E. E.V. Lawrence 69 2 0 Irr. 501 SE NE4 sec. 4, T 38 S., R.41 E. H.D. Stone 80 2 O Irr. 502 SE NE sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. B.J. Fox 20 ? P Dom. 503 SEI NEI sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. B.J. Fox 72 11 0 Irr. Citrus grove. 505 SE NEI sec. 4, T. 38 S., R.41 E. J. M. Speiner 23 1 P Dom. 510 SW NEsec. 4, T.38 S., R.41 E. W. Schumann 72 2 O Irr. 511 SE NW sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. I. T. Rembert 22 1 P Irr. 514 SEI NWi sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. H. W. Bessey 80 2 O Irr. 515 SEi NW sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. R.C. Johns 60 2 O Irr. See table 3. 518 SWNW sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. W. King 57 1 0 Irr. Do. " 519 SW NW*sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. E. Cabre 63 2 O Irr. 520 SW NW* sec.4, T. 38 S., R.41 E. H. W. Partlow 35 2 0 Dom. See table 3. 521 SW NW sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. H.W. Partlow 60 2 O Irr. 523 SWNW sec.4, T. 38 S., R.41 E. A. Cepec 45 1i O Irr. See table 3. 525 SW NWJ iec.4, T. 38 S., R.41 E. E. Tyner 49 2 0 Irr. Do. 527 NW SE sec. 3, T.38 S., R.41 E. E.J., Brasgalle 76 1i 0 Dom. 531 NW SE sec.3, T.38 S., R.41 E. A. T. Compton 22 1 P Irr. 534 SW* SE sec. 3, T. 38 S., R.41 E. K. Krueger 16 1 P Dom. 537 SWI SWt sec. 3, ,T. 38 S. R.41 E. A. Cleveland 20 ? P Dom. 539 NW* SW sec. 3, T. 38 S., R.41 E. F. O. Button 74 2 O Dom. 543 SWj SW sec. 3, T. 38 S., R.41 E. F. Sutton 45 2 ? Dom. N 544 SW SWS sec.3, T.38 S,, R.41 E. D.S. Richardson 20 li P Dom. 546 SWj SWI sec. 3, T. 38 S., R.41 E. A. Espenna 46 1) ? Dom. 547 NW* NW sec, 10, T.38 S,, R.41 E. J.W. Pegram 60 2 0 Dom. 550 NE SE sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. R.S. Hill 46 1* ? Dom. 555 NEI SE sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. R. Hartman, Jr. 19 2 P Irr. 557 NW} SE sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. R.W. Hartman, Sr. 17 1i P Irr. 558 NW* SE* sec.4, T.38 S,, R.41 E. W.W. Meggett 60 2 0 Irr.

PAGE 46

Table 4, Records of Selected Wells (continued) N Well Depth Diameter Well finNo, Location Owner (ft.) (in.) ish (1) Use (2) Remarks 560 NEI NE) sec. 9, T. 38 S., R, 41 E. H. G, Kindred 30 ? P Dom, 563 SE) NEi sec. 9, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. W. L. Sullivan 60 1i O Irr, 565 NEI NEI sec. 9, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. H. G. Harper 55 2 0 Irr. Flower farm. 566 NW* NWI sec. 10, T. 38 S., R.41 E. D. Giesbright 26 2 P Dom. 571 NWI NEI sec. 9, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. E. McGee 78 1i O Dom. 0 573 SWI SE* sec. 4, T. 38 S., R.41 E. F. Thompson 30 11 P Dom. 575 SEI NE* sec.8, T. 38 S., R.41 E. L. D. Burchard 107 1 O Dom. 576 SW NEI sec.8, T.38 S., R.41 E. G. Zarnits 101 1 0 Dom. 577 SE NE sec. 8, T.38 S., R.41 E. R. V. Johnson 120 O Irr. 578 SENE sec. 8, T. 38 S., R.41 E. H. Whalen 112 1 0 Dom. 0 580 SW NEf sec. 8, T.38 S., R.41 E. W.F. May 87 1 0 Dom. M 583 NE*NEZN sec.8, T.38 S., R.41 E. J.O. Powell 103 1 0 Dom. O 584 NW* NE sec. 8, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. G. F. Barber 98 2 O Dom. 585 NW* NE sec. 8, T. 38 S., R.41 E. P.B. Caster 26 2 P Dom. O 587 NE* NE* sec.8, T. 38 S., R.41 E. I. Taylor 30 ? P Irr. 588 NW* NE sec,8, T. 38 S., R.41 E. E. F. Bulla 50 2 O Dom. See table 3. 590 SW* SEI sec. 5, T.38 S., R.41 E. K. S. Stimmell 20 li P Irr. Do. 591 NW NE-sec. 8, T.38 S., R.41 E. R.H. Schwarz 22 1P Dom. 594 SW S sec. 5, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. J. R. Pomeroy ? 2 ? Irr. 595 SW' SE sec. 5, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. G. Schlesier 60 2 0 Irr. CEl 597 SW* SEB sec. 5, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. A.H. Chappelka 15 48 0 Irr. See table 3. 598 NW S sec. 5, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. F. Schwarz 52 2 O Irr. 605 SW N ec. 5, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. C. M. Fogt 52 2 O Irr. 606 SW NE* sec. 5, T.38 S., R.41 E. H. Harper ? 1) ? Irr. 608 NE SE* sec. 5, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. D. L. Williams 58 2 O Irr. See table 3. 611 NE) SE* sec. 5, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. D. W. Anderson 83 2 O Irr. 612 NW* SWI sec. 4, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. R. Garner 46 11 O Irr. 613 SESW sc. 4, T. 38 S., R.41 E. B. Holmes ? 1? ? Dom. 614 SE* SEL sec.5, T.38 S., R.41 E. C.H. Hardwick 85 1 O Dom. 617 *NWI NEJ sec. 14, T. 38 S., R.41 E. C. G. Bischoff 80 2 0 Dom. 618 *NW* NW* sec. 13, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. J. Kuhn 85 2 O Dom.

PAGE 47

Table 4. Records of Selected Wells (continued) Well Depth Diameter Well finNo. Location Owner (ft.) (in.) ish (1) Use (2) Remarks 619 NWi SW* sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 57 2 O Obs. See table 3. 620 NEi SWj sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 56 2 O Obs. Do. 621 NEI SW sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 56 4 O P.S. 622 NE SW sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 56 2 O Obs. See table 3. 623 NE* SW sec. 4, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. City of Stuart 56 4 O P.S. 627 SW s NE sec. 9, T.38 S., R.41 E. S. Smith 40 2 O Irr. Flower farm. 629 SW SW sec.9, T.38 S., R.41 E. H.I. Burkey 103 4 O Irr. Do. 631 NWNE sec.9, T.38 S., R.41 E. Martin County Garage 53 2 O Dorm. 637 NW SE* sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. R.W. Hartman, Sr. 15 1* P Irr. See table 3. 638 SW NW e sec. 4, T.38 S., R.41 E. E. Cabre 38 2 P Irr. 0 639 SE SE* sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 72 4 O Fire 642 S NEt sec. 5, T.38 S., R. 41 E. St. Lucie Hotel 46 2 O Irr. Not in use. See table 3. 643 W NW* sec. 13, T. 38 S., R.41 E. J. Kuhn 26 2 P Dorm. 647 NE SWJ sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. American Legion 113 2 O Irr. Not in use. See table 3. 653 'SW SW. sec. 10, T.38 S., R.41 E. G. Knouse 78 6 O Irr. Flower farm. , 654 NW SW* sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. F. E. Rue 63 1) O Irr. See table 3. 655 NE NWI sec. 9, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. F. Rowell 63 2 O Dorm. 656 NW.NE sec. 9, T.38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 145 2 O Obs. 657 NWVNE sec. 9, T.38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 125 4 O P.S. 658 NW NE sec. 9, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. City of Stuart 125 4 O Obe. Recorder 658A NW NEt sec. 9, T. 38 S., R.41 E. U.S. Geological Survey 13 1* P Obe. 659 NW NE sec. 9, T. 38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 125 2 O Obe. 660 SE NE* sec.5, T.38 S., R.41 E. Casaboom 45 2 O Irr. Not in use. 666 SEt NE* ee. 5, T.38 S., R.41 E. A. Dehone 60 2 O Irr. Do. 674 NW SW* sec.9, T. 38 S., R.41 E. C. Luce 103 2 O Irr. Do. N 687 NW' SE* sec.5, T.38 S., R.41 E. Sheppard Park 60 2 O Irr. See table 3. 720 SW* NWJ sec.4, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. E. Tyner 84 2 O Irr, Do. 721. SW NE sec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. H.P. Hudson 84 2 O Irr, 722 NW SW* eec.4, T.38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 112 3 O Irr. See table 3. 723 NW* NE sec. 9, T.38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 125 4 O P.S. 724 NEt NEt sec.9, T.38 S., R.41 E. City of Stuart 125 4 0 P.S. OJ

PAGE 48

Table 4, Records of Selected Wells (continued) Well Depth Diameter Well finNo. Location Owner (ft.) (in,) ish (1) Use (2) Remirks 731 NEI SWk sec,4, T, 38 S., R.41 E. Martin County School 35 2 P P.S. 732 *SEi SWI sec. 12, T. 38 S., R.41 E. Dutton 20 4 S Irr. 733 SWt NE4 sec.4, T, 38 S., R, 41 E. Episcopal Church 105 3 O Irr. 734 *NE SW sec. 13, T. 38 S., R.41 E. Danforth 84 3 O Dom. See table 3. o 735 *NEI SW e sec. 13, T. 38 S., R. 41 E. Metcalf 69 4 O Dom. Do. 738 *NW NE) sec. 25, T. 38 S. , R. 41 E. J.J. O'Connor 25 2 P Dom. 753 *SWi SW eec.12, T. 38 S., R.41 E, Andrew Berkey 68 2 O Test 755 *NW SW eec. 12, T.38 S., R.41 E. J. Whiticar 65 1i O Irr. 766 *NW NW sec. 13, T. 38 S., R, 41 E. J. Whiticar 68 2 O Irr. 767 *NW NW sec. 13, T. 38 S., R.41 E. J. Whiticar 74 2 O Irr. 0 O I: '.4

PAGE 49

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 45 REFERENCES Black, A. P. 1951 (and Brown, Eugene) Chemical character of Florida's waters: Florida State Board Cons. , Div. Water Survey and Research, Paper 6, p. 13, 79. 1953 (and Brown, Eugene, and Pearce, J.M.) Salt water intrusion in Florida: Florida State Board Cons. , Div. Water Survey and Research, Paper 9, p. 2, 5. Brown, Eugene (see Black) Collins, W.D. 1928 (and Howard, C. S.) Chemical character of waters of Florida: U.S. Geol. Survey WaterSupply Paper 596-G, p. 193-195, 220-221. Cooke, C. Wythe (see also Parker) 1945 Geology of Florida: Florida Geol. Survey Bull. 29, p. 223-269. Ferguson, G. E. (see Parker) Hantush, M. S. 1955 (and Jacob, C. E.) Non-steady radial flow in an infinite leaky aquifer: Am. Geophys. Union Trans., vol. 36, no. 1, p. 95-100. Howard, C.S. (see Collins) Jacob, C.E. (see Hantush) Love, S.K. (see Parker) Mansfield, W. C. 1939 Notes on the upper Tertiary and Pleistocene mollusks of peninsular Florida: Florida Geol. Survey Bull. 18, p. 29-34.

PAGE 50

46 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Matson, G. C. 1913 (and Sanford, Samuel) Geology and ground waters of Florida: U.S. Geol. Survey WaterSupply Paper 319, p. 381-384. Parker, G.G. 1944 (and Cooke, C. Wythe) Late Cenozoic geology of southern Florida, with a discussion of the ground water: Florida Geol. Survey Bull. 27, p. 41. 1955 (and Ferguson, G. E. , Love, S. K. , and others) Water resources of southeastern Florida, with special reference to the geology and ground water of the Miami area: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 1255, p. 174-175, 814815. Pearce, J.M. (see Black, 1953) Sanford, Samuel (see Matson) Stringfield, V. T. 1936 Artesian water in the Florida peninsula: U.S. Geol. SurveyWater-SupplyPaper 773-C, p. 170, 183, 193. Theis, C.V. 1935 The relation between the lowering of the piezometric surface and the rate and duration of discharge of a well using ground-water storage: Am. Geophys. Union Trans., p. 519-524. 1938 The significance and nature of the cone of depression in ground water bodies: Econ. Geology, vol. 33, no. 8, p. 892, 894. U. S. Geological Survey Water levels and artesian pressures in observation wells in the United States; 1950, 1951, 1952, part 2, Southeastern States: Water -Supply Papers 1166, p. 80-81, 1192, p. 65, and 1222, p. 77, respectively.

PAGE 51

INFORMATION CIRCULAR NO. 12 47 Wenzel, L.K. 1942 Methods for determining permeability of waterbearing materials, with special reference to discharging-well methods: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 887, p. 87-90.

PAGE 52

-FLORIDA-GEOLOGICAL-SURVEY COPYRIGHT NOTICE © [year of publication as printed] Florida Geological Survey [source text] The Florida Geological Survey holds all rights to the source text of this electronic resource on behalf of the State of Florida. The Florida Geological Survey shall be considered the copyright holder for the text of this publication. Under the Statutes of the State of Florida (FS 257.05; 257.105, and 377.075), the Florida Geologic Survey (Tallahassee, FL), publisher of the Florida Geologic Survey, as a division of state government, makes its documents public (i.e., published) and extends to the state's official agencies and libraries, including the University of Florida's Smathers Libraries, rights of reproduction. The Florida Geological Survey has made its publications available to the University of Florida, on behalf of the State University System of Florida, for the purpose of digitization and Internet distribution. The Florida Geological Survey reserves all rights to its publications. All uses, excluding those made under "fair use" provisions of U.S. copyright legislation (U.S. Code, Title 17, Section 107), are restricted. Contact the Florida Geological Survey for additional information and permissions.


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E2O133JWZ_I8D58W INGEST_TIME 2017-04-07T20:34:47Z PACKAGE UF00001072_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES