Table of Contents

This report has been reformatted for presentation on the World Wide Web. The official text of WRIR 01-4275 (6.3 MB download) is available in PDF format. The Adobe PDF Reader program is available, at no cost, from Adobe.

FIGURES

Figure 1.

Map showing location of study area

48K

Figure 2.

Column showing comparison of hydrogeologic nomenclature for southern Florida

50K

Figure 3.

Graphs showing population and ground-water use in the southeastern (Miami-Dade and Broward Counties), southwestern (Collier, Lee, and Hendry Counties), and northeastern (Palm Beach, Martin, and St. Lucie Counties) parts of the study area

91K

Figure 4.

Map showing locations of continuous ground-water level monitoring wells that were considered for the real-time ground-water level monitoring network in Collier, Lee, and Hendry Counties

96K

Figure 5.

Map showing locations of continuous ground-water level monitoring wells that were considered for the real-time ground-water level monitoring network in Palm Beach, Martin, and St. Lucie Counties

146K

Figure 6.

Map showing locations of continuous ground-water level monitoring wells that were considered for the real-time ground-water level monitoring network in Miami-Dade and Broward Counties

132K

Figure 7.

Graph showing effect of long-term trends on correlation analyses of water level in well and rainfall at well

54K

Figure 8.

Graphs showing comparison of smoothed average rainfall deviations and trend adjusted water-level deviations in well G-3264A

55K

Figure 9.

Graphs showing steps used in computation of rainfall model

75K

Figure 10.

Map showing locations of salinity monitoring wells

98K

Figure 11.

Box plot showing seasonal variation in chloride concentration in well G-1351

17K

Figure 12.

Map showing network coverage defined by R² analysis using index wells in the water table aquifer

81K

Figure 13.

Graphs showing comparison of smoothed average rainfall deviations (f-value = 1/26) and trend adjusted water-level deviations in well C-392

58K

Figure 14.

Plots showing general and statistically significant trends in water level at selected wells in the lower Tamiami aquifer

105K

Figure 15.

Graph showing chloride concentration trends at wells C-489, C-525, C-528, and L-738

71K

Figure 16.

Map showing network coverage defined by R² analysis using index wells in the lower Tamiami aquifer

85K

Figure 17.

Plots showing general and statistically significant trends in water level at selected wells in the sandstone aquifer

98K

Figure 18.

Graph showing comparison of water levels at well L-2215 and water levels estimated at well L-2215 using water-level data from well L-729

32K

Figure 19.

Graph showing comparison of water levels at well L-727 and water levels estimated at well L-727 using water-level data from well L-2186

68K

Figure 20.

Graphs showing comparison of smoothed average rainfall deviations (f-value = 1/26) and trend adjusted water-level deviations in well HE-517

59K

Figure 21.

Map showing network coverage defined by R² analysis using index wells in the sandstone aquifer

120K

Figure 22.

Plots showing general and statistically significant trends in water level at selected wells in the mid-Hawthorn aquifer

146K

Figure 23.

Graphs showing chloride concentration trends at wells L-735, L-2820, L-2702, L-1109 and L-2640 in the mid-Hawthorn aquifer

91K

Figure 24.

Map showing network coverage defined by R² analysis using index wells in the mid-Hawthorn aquifer

81K

Figure 25.

Map showing network coverage defined by R² analysis using index wells in the surficial aquifer system

169K

Figure 26.

Graph showing comparison between water-level data from well STL-175 and estimation of water levels using data from well M-1004

30K

Figure 27.

Map showing comparison of minimum monthly means of maximum daily water levels and long-term trends in water level and chloride concentration in the Biscayne aquifer

157K

Figure 28.

Graphs showing water-level and chloride concentration trends in selected wells in the Hialeah-Miami Springs Area

87K

Figure 29.

Graph showing chloride concentration in wells G-432 and G-901

27K

Figure 30.

Graphs showing chloride concentration in wells G-1241, G-1435, G-2410 and G-2478 near the Hallandale Well Field

70K

Figure 31.

Graphs showing chloride concentration in wells G-854, G-2352, G-1343, G-2125, and G-2130 near Fort Lauderdale

102K

Figure 32.

Map showing network coverage defined by R² analysis using index wells in the Biscayne aquifer

162K

Figure 33.

Map showing locations of surface-water monitoring sites as depicted on the real-time prototype website

96K

Figure 34.

Graph showing long-term chloride concentrations in well L-738, March 24, 1976, July 11, 2000

25K

Figure 35.

Graphs showing water-level data for the previous 30 days, 90 days, and current year and comparison with the long-term data of well L-581 in the mid-Hawthorn aquifer, September 27, 2000

149K

Figure 36.

Graph showing daily maximum water level in well L-581, September 28, 1975, to September 27, 2000

44K

Figure 37.

Graph showing current and historical water levels in well L-581, September 16, 1999, to September 27, 2000

56K

Figure 38.

Graph showing water levels in selected wells in Lee County, September 27, 2000

74K

TABLES

Table 1.

Rainfall stations used for the southeastern and southwestern rainfall models

Table 2.

Rainfall and water-level minimum comparison for aquifers in southern Florida

Table 3.

Statistically significant Seasonal Kendall trend test results for chloride concentrations in water at selected wells in southern Florida based on two seasons per year

Table 4.

Statistically significant correlation between chloride concentrations and instantaneous water levels for selected wells in southern Florida

Table 5.

Potential index wells and well groupings based on regression analysis of aquifers in southern Florida

Table 6.

Subnetwork regression characteristics by aquifer

Table 7.

Basic well construction and statistical information for potential index wells in southern Florida

Conversion Factors and Datum

Multiply	By	To obtain
inch (in.)	2.54	centimeter (cm)
foot (ft)	0.3048	meter (m)
foot squared per day (ft2/d)	0.09290	meter squared per day (m2/d)
foot per year (ft/y)	0.3048	meter per year (m/y)
mile (mi)	1.609	kilometer (km)

Multiply

To obtain

inch (in.)

2.54

centimeter (cm)

foot (ft)

0.3048

meter (m)

foot squared per day (ft2/d)

0.09290

meter squared per day (m2/d)

foot per year (ft/y)

0.3048

meter per year (m/y)

mile (mi)

1.609

kilometer (km)

Sea level: In this report, "sea level" refers to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929--a geodetic datum derived from a general adjustment of the first-order level nets of both the United States and Canada, formerly called Sea Level Datum of 1929.

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).

Water level in this report refers to daily maximum water level. Mean water level refers to mean daily maximum water level.

Abstract

Funding for the USGS to design and maintain this site has been provided through a cooperative agreement with the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). Water-level conditions are monitored by the USGS with support from Federal, State, and local cooperators.

Real-time conditions
(de-trended data)

End-of-month conditions
(de-trended data)

FISC-WRS, home page

Page Contact Information:: WWW Administration: GS-W-FL_Webmasters@usgs.gov; WWW maintenance and data requests: R.B. Irvin - rbirvin@usgs.gov; Statistical methods: S.T. Prinos - stprinos@usgs.gov

Page Last Modified: Tuesday, 14-Sep-2004 08:17:43 EDT

WRIR 01-4275

Design of a Real-Time Ground-Water Level Monitoring Network and Portrayal of Hydrologic Data in Southern Florida

By Scott T. Prinos, A.C. Lietz, and R.B. Irvin

FIGURES

TABLES

Conversion Factors and Datum

Abstract