Hydrogeology of the Clayton and Claiborne aquifers in southwestern Georgia

HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE CLAYTON AND CLAIBORNE AQUIFERS IN SOUTHWESTERN GEORGIA
by
Stephen S. McFadden and P. Dennis Perriello
Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division
Georgia Geologic Survey
5 5 INFORMATION
CIRCULAR

For convenience in selecting our reports from your bookshelves, they are color-keyed across the spine by subject as follows:

Red
Dk. Purple
Maroon
Lt. Green Lt. Blue Dk. Green
Olive
Dk. Blue Yellow
Dk. Orange
Brown Black Dk. Brown

Valley and Ridge mapping and structural geology
Piedmont and Blue Ridge mapping and structural geology
Coastal Plain mapping and stratigraphy
Paleontology Coastal Zone stu dies Geochemical and geophyscial
studies Economic geology Mining directory Hydrology Environmental studies Engineering studies Bibliographies and lists of
publications Petroleum and natural gas Field trip guidebooks Collections of papers

Colors have been selected at random and will be augmented as new subjects are published.

Publications Editor: Eleanore Morrow

The Department of Natural Resources is an Equal Opportunity employer and employs without regard to race or color, sex, religion, and national origin.
COVER PHOTO: Center pivot irrigation system in Randolph County, Georgia.

HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE CLAYTON AND CLAIBORNE AQUIFERS IN SOUTHWESTERN GEORGIA
by
Stephen S, McFadden and
P, Dennis Perrlel lo
Information Circular 55
Prepared os part of the Accelerated Ground~Woter Program
GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Joe D, Tenner, Commissioner
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION J. Leonerd Ledbetter, Director GEORGIA GEOLOGIC SURVEY
WI I Item H. Mclemore, State Geologist ATLANTA
1983

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract Introduction
Scope of Study. Previous Investigations Acknowledgements. Geography of the Study Area. Location and Demography Physiography and Drainage Climate Geology. Stratigraphy.
Providence Sand and Providence Sand Equivalent Clayton Formation. Wilcox Group Claiborne Group. Ocala Limestone. Structure Aquifers In the study area Cretaceous Aquifers Clayton Aquifer Claiborne Aquifer Principal Artesian Aquifer. Ground-Water Use General Clayton Aquifer Claiborne Aquifer Wei I Construction In the Study Area Ground-Water Qual lty Clayton Aquifer Claiborne Aquifer Potentiometric Trends. General Long-Term Potentiometric Trends Clayton Aquifer. Claiborne Aquifer. Short-Term Potentiometric Fluctuations. Clayton Aquifer. Claiborne Aquifer. Ground-Water Ava I labl I lty. General Clayton Aquifer Hydraulic Properties Recharge Analysis of ground-water aval labll lty. Claiborne Aquifer Hydraul lc Properties Recharge An a Iy s I s of ground-water a v a I I a b I I I t y
I II

PAGE
2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 12 12 12 17 19 19 20 20 22 22 22 22 22 24 30 30 35 36 36 37 37 37 39 39 39 41 41

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont 'd):

Summary and Recommendations. Clayton Aquifer. Claiborne Aquifer. Recommendations.
References Appendices Wei I Location, Construction, and Water-level
Appendix A Clayton Aquifer, 1950-1959. Appendix B Claiborne Aquifer, 1950-1959. Appendix C Clayton Aquifer, 1979-1982. Appendix 0 Claiborne Aquifer, 1979-1982.

Data

PAGE
42 42 42 42 43 46 47 48-49 50-54 55-59

I v

ILLUSTRATIONS

Plate

1. Geologic Sections of the Clayton Aquifer 2. Geologic Sections of the Claiborne Aquifer

~ (Plates are
In Pocket)

Figure 1. Location of the Study Area

3

2. Population Growth of Albany and Dawson, 1920-1980.

3

3. Physiographic Districts and Stre8ms of Southwest

Georgia

4

4. Ralnfal I Departure Curves -Cities In Study Area

5

5. Structure Contour Map of the Top of the Clayton

Aquifer

9

6. Isopach Map of the C I ayton AquIfer

10

7. Structure Contour Map of the Base of the Clayton

Aquifer

11

8. Structure Contour Map of the Top of the Claiborne

Aquifer

13

9. Isopach M8p of the Claiborne Aquifer

14

10. Structure Contour Map of the Base of the Claiborne

Aquifer

1 5

11. Irrigation Trends In Georgia and the Study Area.

16

12. Ground-Water Use In the Study Area

17

13. Typical Wei I Construction In the Study Area.

20

14. Water Quality In the Clayton Aquifer

21

15. Water Quality In the Claiborne Aquifer.

23

16. Potentiometric Surface of the Clayton Aquifer, 1950-

1959.

25

17. Potentiometric Surface of the Clayton Aquifer,

December, 1979.

26

18. Potentiometric Surface of the Clayton Aquifer,

October-November, 1981.

27

19. Potentiometric Surface of the Clayton Aquifer,

March, 1982

28

20. Long-Term Hydrographs of Clayton Aquifer Wells

29

21. Potentiometric Surface of the Cl8lborne Aquifer,

1950-1959

31

22. Potentiometric Surface of the Claiborne Aquifer,

December, 1979.

32

23. Potentiometric Surface of the Claiborne Aquifer,

October-November, 1981.

33

24. Potentiometric Surface of the Claiborne Aquifer,

March, 1982.

34

25. Hydrographs of Clayton Aquifer Wells

35

26. Hydrographs of Claiborne Aquifer Wei Is

36

27. Transmissivity of the Clayton Aquifer.

38

28. Tr8nsmlsslvlty of the Claiborne Aquifer.

40

Table 1. Stratigraphic Column of the Study Area

6

2. Water Use from the Clayton and Claiborne Aquifers.

18

v

FACTORS FOR CONVERTING INCH-POUND UNITS TO METRIC (51) UNITS

MULTIPLY Inch ( I n ) foot ( f t) mile ( mI ) square mile (ml 2 > ge I I on per minute (gpm) mI I I I on gallons per
day (Mgal/d)

BY 2. 54 0.3048 1. 609 2.589 0.06309
0.04381

foot squared per day (ft 2 /d)

0.0929

TO OBTAIN centimeter (em) meter ( m) k I Iometer ( km) square k I Iometer (km 2 > I Iter per second (L/s)
cubic meters per second ( m3 /s )
meter squared per day < m2 I d >

vi

ABSTRACT The Clayton and Claiborne aquifers of southwestern Georg Ia are Ioca I Iy Important sources of ground water In a fifteen-county study area. With the exception of the Dougherty Plain district, these aquifers are more productive than the Principal Artesian Aquifer and are the major sources of municipal, Industrial, agricultural, and domestic water for the area. ComparIson of hIstorIc and recent waterlevel measurements Indicates declines of hydrau11 c head In the CIayton aquIfer. Our Ing the period from 1885 to 1981, the hydraulic head In the city of Albany declined approximately 170 teet. Potentiometric maps of the Clayton aquifer show that a cone of depress Ion centered at Albany existed as early as the 1950 1s. As of March, 1982, this cone had deepened and Its radius of Influence had spread Into neighboring counties. Records from throughout the area show that the dec II nes In hydrau II c head are wIdespread, and hydrographs Indicate that the rate of decline has Increased In recent years. Reasons for the dec II ne are Increased mun Ic Ipa I, Industrial, and agricultural withdrawals; limited recharge; and the time-Independent hydraulic propertIes of the aquIfer. Growth In agr Icu 1tural usage has been especially rapid with the number of Irrigation wells In the study area more than doubling since 1977. Total water use from the Clayton aquifer Is estimated to be 26 Mgal/d whl le recharge from rainfall Infiltration averages about 14.7 Mgal/d. The area over which the hydraulic properties of the Clayton aquifer are conducive to the construction of high-yieldIng wells Is relatively small. Because of these factors, the declining potentiometric levels In the Clayton aquifer can be expected to continue. Problems associated with these declines can also be expected to continue or worsen.
Measurements of water levels In Ctal borne aquifer wells Indicate that some localized declines In hydraulic head have occurred. A cone of depression Is present around the city of Albany, where the hydraulic head has declined 70 feet from the 1950 1s to 1981. Lesser declines have occurred In the vicinity of the city of Cordele. Declines In this aquifer are due mostly to local municipal, Industrial, and agrlcu ltura I wlthdraw Is, coup led wlth the hydrau lie propertIes of the aquIfer. Recharge to the Claiborne aquifer Is greater and more uniformly
distributed than recharge 'to the Clayton aqu Jfer. Tota I water use from the CIa I borne

aquifer Is estimated to be 36 Mgal/d while recharge from rainfall Infiltration Is estimated to average 100-133 Mgal/d. Hydraulic properties of the aquifer are such that large withdrawals concentrated In relatively small areas can cause large declines In the potentiometric surface. Although potentiometric declines have as yet not been widespread, the rate of decline and area affected are Increasing. Such declines In areas where the Claiborne aquifer crops out along streams could cause reduced base flow In streams.
No single aquifer In the study area Is capable of producing the water necessary to meet current and future demands. In order to reduce continued potentiometric dec II nes and the problems associated with them, particularly In the Clayton aquifer, It Is recommended that future high-yielding wells In the area be of multlaqulfer design and that concentrations of wells producing from a single aquifer be avoided.
INTRODUCTION
SCOPE OF STUDY This Investigation of the Clayton and
Claiborne aquifers In southwestern Georgia Is a part of the Governor's Accelerated Ground-water Program. In the late 1970's, water-level declines as a result of Increased municipal, Industrial, and agricultural ground-water use prompted this study. A survey of available data IndIcated ttie need for an organ Ized and comprehensive study of water-level trends, groundwater quality, ground-water use, aquIfer geometry, lithologic and hydrologic characteristics, recharge and dlscharge mechanIsms, and groundwater budgets.
The goa Is of the study were to ass ImII ate existing knowledge, to produce new hydrogeologic data, to Interpret water-level trends In the Clayton and Claiborne aquifers, and to present these data In a usef u I format. PrIor to thIs study, Information on these aquifers was limited and scattered In various fl les and publications. Unpublished data were obtained from flies of the Georgia Geologic Survey (GGS>; Georgia Environmenta I Protection DIvis Ion (EPD); GeorgIa Game and Fish Division; Georgia Parks, Recreation,
and Historic Sites Division; u.s. Geological

Survey (U. S.G. S.); U.S. So I I Conser vat I on Service; Georgia Cooperative Extension Service; and rrunlclpal governments. Additional Information was obtained from the fl les of well drl tIers, consulting engineers, farmers, Industries, and domestic-well owners.
HIs tor I ca I water-1 eve I data were obtaI ned from fl les of the u.s.G.s., GGS, and other flies. Maps of the potentiometric surfaces of the C I ayton and CIa I borne aquIfers were constructed using these data.
An observation well network consisting of over 100 municipal, Industrial, Irrigation, domestic, and test wells (some of which were constructed especially for this study) was establIshed to!" both the Clayton and CIa I borne aqu I fers. Water-! eve I measurements were made semll!lnnua lly during periods of approximate seasonal potentiometric highs and lows. The test wells were drilled at selected sites In order to continuously monitor Wl!lter-level fluctuations both In areas remote from pumpIng as we II as near areas of large ground-wl!lter withdrawals. The test wells were constructed In order to compute quantitative aquifer characteristics
(I.e., transmissivity, storage coefficient, specific capacity, and others>.
Test-well cuttings and other GGS well cuttings and cores were examined to define the I Jthology and geometry of the aquifers and confining units. Where aval table, geophysical logs were used In conjunction with lithologic descriptions to estimate the vertical limits of the aquifers. Specific capacity and aquifer test data were used to estimate transmissivity.
Existing ground-water chemistry data were collected and analyzed for significant areal trends. Maps showing the distribution of water quality In the Clayton and Claiborne aquifers were prepared.
An analysts was made of water use and recharge to the aqu I tars. Water-use data were supplied by the Georgia Geologic Survey's WaterUse Data Col taction Project. Recharge was estimated from flow-net analysis and by rainfall and surface discharge analysts In areas of aquifer outcrop. Water losses and gal ns from Interaquifer leakage, while discussed In this report, were not quantIfIed. Water-use and recharge patterns coupled with a knowledge of the variations In hydraulic properties were used to analyze the ground-water aval lab I I tty from the Clayton and Claiborne aquifers.

PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS Several reports have discussed ground-water
aval lab II tty In the Coasta I Plain of Georgia. Limited hydrogeologic Information and historic water-level measurements of the Clayton and Claiborne t~qulters are Included In reports by McCa lite ( 1908), Stephenson and Veatch ( 1915), and Thomson and others (1956). Owen (1963) t~nd Walt (1963t~) publ Jshed datal led geologic and ground-water studies of Lee and Sumter, and Dougherty Counties, respectively. These reports Include historic water-level and stratigraphic data. Walt (1958, 1960t~, 1960b, 1960c) also brIef Iy descrIbed the ground-water resources of Clay, Calhoun, Crisp, and Terrell Counties. A separate report by Walt (1960d) discussed the source and quality of municipal ground-water supplies In southwestern Georgia. Vorhls (1972) contrIbuted In format I on on outcrop gao I ogy and structure of the Tallahatta Formation (Claiborne Group) and C I ayton I Jmestone, composIte water levels, and general hydrologic characteristics of aquifers In Crisp, Lee, Dooly, and Sumter
Counties. Stewart (1973) discussed aquifer characteristics of the Clayton Formation In the Ft. Gaines area, near the Chattahoochee River. More recently, Hicks and others (1981) discussed the Clayton and Claiborne aquifers In the Albany area.
In addition to the above ground-water studies, several other reports have advanced the knowledge of the geologic framework In southwest Georgia. Geologic and paleontologic Jogging by Herrick (1961) establIshed rruch of the baseline control for the subsurface stratigraphy of the Coastal Plain. Toulmln and LaMoreaux (1963) described classic exposures of Tertiary rocks along the Chattahoochee River prior to the Impoundment of the WaIter F. George ReservoIr. Recent contributions by MarsalIs and Frlddell (1975), Swann and Poort (1979), Gibson (1980), Cramer and Arden ( 1980), and RIce ( 1980) have added to the understanding of the geologic history of the area.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We wou I d II ke to express our thanks to the
many Individuals, those representing Industries and municipalities as well as private landowners In the study area, who have helped by supplying Information and allowing access to their wells. Without their Interest and cooperation, this study would not have been possible. The cooper-

2

atlon of county agents, Agricultural Stabili-
zation and Conservation employees, and u.s. Soli
Conservation Service personnel Is also deeply appreciated.
We thank Harry Blanchard, Frank Boucher,
John s. Clarke, Robert E. Faye, and David W. Hicks of the u.s. Geological Survey. Mr.
Blanchard was very helpful with historical records, water-level measurement techniques, and water- Ieve I recorder operatIons. Mr. Boucher assisted In pump tests of the wei Is drilled tor this project. Mr. Clarke and Mr. Faye shared va Iuab Ie data and know Iedge of the study area and Mr. Clarke's review of this report resulted In numerous Improvements. Mr. Hicks loaned equipment to our field efforts and also shared Important data and knowledge of the Clayton and Claiborne aquifers In the Albany area. Without the he Ip of these peop Ie, comp Iet Ion of thIs study would have been more difficult.
GEOGRAPHY OF THE STUDY AREA
LOCATION AND DEMOGRAPHY Figure 1 shows the 15-county area In south-
western GeorgIa Inc Iuded In the study. These counties are: Calhoun, Clay, Crisp, Dooly, Dougherty, Early, Lee, Macon, Quitman, Randolph, Sch Iey, Stewart, Sumter, Terre II, and Webster. In this area, the Clayton and Claiborne aquifers are used tor municipal, Industrial, and agricultural water supplies. The population of the
area was about 245,000 In 1980 cu.s. Bureau of
Census, 1981). AIbany, AmerIcus, and Corde Ie are the only cities with populations greater than 10,000. AI bany (popu latlon 78,000) Is the largest city In the study area and the commercia I center of southwestern Georgia. The city of Dawson (popu latlon 5, 700) Is the center of much of the agricultural activity In the area. Flgure 2 Illustrates the popu latlon growth of Albany and Dawson from 1920 to 1980. During this time period, the population of Albany Increased over 6 times, whl le the population of Dawson remained relatively stable.
PHYSIOGRAPHY AND DRAINAGE Most of the study area lies within the
Dougherty Plain and Fall Line Hills Districts of the Coastal Plain Physiographic Province (Fig. 3). The Fall Line Hills District Is highly dissected by stream erosion. Relief ranges from 50 to 250 ft, with lower values occurring In the south and southeastern areas adjacent to the Dougherty PI a In. The Dougherty P Ia In DIstrIct

0

50

100 miles

Figure 1. Location of the Study Area

80

10

<azn 80

"'(/)

::1
~

00

t:

z 40

0

i=

"' 30
..J
c::.1.

c0.. 20

10 DAWSON

1920

1!130

J'l40

19~0

1860

1970

1!1110

TIME (YEARS)

Figure 2. Population Growth of Albany and Dawson, 1920 - 1980.

Is generally gently rol I lng to nearly flat. This district Is an area of karst topography, where sinkholes are often the sites of ponds and marshes.

3

Figure 3 also shows the drainage pattern of surface streams In southwestern Georgia. Two of Georgia's largest rivers flow through the study area. The Chattahoochee River, which has been dal!ll'led at Ft. GaInes to form the WaIter F. George Reservoir, forms the western boundary of the study area. The Flint River, which has been dammed at the Juncture of Crisp, Lee, and Worth Counties to form Lake Blackshear and at Albany to form a Georgia Power Company reservoir, flows through the eastern counties of the study area. In general, drainage density Is greater In the Fall Line Hills than In the Dougherty Plain.

CLIMATE

The climate of southwestern Georgia Is

Influenced by the Gulf of Mexico. Winters are

generally mild while summers are warm and humid.

The mean monthly temperature tor the period of

record 1941-1970 was 67.1F (19.5C) at the

Albany station of the National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Admin lstratlon (NOAA>. The mean

annual precipitation was 48.84 ln. for the same

period. March and July are generally the

wettest months of the year; the fall months are

the driest.

Evapotranspiration rates are

highest In spring and summer.

Southwest Georgia experienced a period of

below normal rainfall In the late 1970's through

1981, Including short-term agricultural droughts

during the growing seasons of some recent years.

Rainfall departure curves (monthly departure

from the 30-year norm) for the NOAA ra I nfa II

stations within the study area are shown In

Figure 4.

0

10 20 MILES

+ 31
84

FLH Fall Line Hills District

FVP Fort Valley Plateau District

DP Dougherty Plain District

A

Test well sites (completed)

Figure 3. Physiographic Districts and Streams of Southwest Georgia.

GEOLOGY STRATIGRAPHY
Table I Is a generalized upper Cretaceous and Paleogene stratigraphic column of the study area. Units In this area generally strike along a NE-SW line and dip to the southeast. Although the upper Cretaceous Tuscaloosa, Eutaw, Blufftown, Cusseta, and Ripley Formations and lower Miocene Hawthorne Group (Huddlestun, 1981) are present In the study area, these strata are not relevant to this paper and will not be discussed.
Pro vi dance Sand and Prov I dance Sand Egu Iva I ent The Providence Sand Is divided Into two
members, the lower Perote Member and an upper unnamed member. The Perote Member Is a darkgray, highly micaceous, carbonaceous slIt to very fine sand of marine origin (Eargle, 1955, p. 70). The Perote Member thins to the east and Is not recognized east of the Flint River (Huddlestun, personal collll'lunlcatlon, 1982). Updlp, the upper member consists of medium to coarse-grained, micaceous, feldspathlc, crossbedded sands (Marsalis and Frlddell, 1975, p. 9). Downd I p, the stratIgraphIc equ Iva I ent of the upper member consists of Interbedded sand, clay, chalk, and limestone, which represents a more open-marine depositional environment.

4

.~.. +6
~ +4 w ~0 +2
u 0I

' I I\ Ir \< n Pi

I ~

I
j

-2

-4 +15.65
-6

+11.14

r \ ..

IIi

I " It;I

r.-' ....., 1 r' r s I I
\ ,1

\
II

1 i

I,
I 1

f '

(I

r/ \ I

, i

I
I

, i

,

1

\

p i

-0.13

+4.93 '

-4.36

1A\

h "

fI,..-_/ I

-8.16

a:> "l ;1;+6
~ +4 ~
:5 +2
Ill
o 1'I
-2

\ : \ :~ 1 \ /

-4
+16.38 -6

V\ /1

v ' r n ~' " 11

1 1 ,I ~ '- /\ J ~ !~ 1 \ 1\ H

. 11

NR '

0

U1

ci

... +6

aCll
a: +4
:<w:;(; +2

0I \ A /\

-2
-4 +3.43
-6

J ' \ 'I'.,. ~ l ~ ! 1 } ! } ! !

\ 1 r

r \j \

I '.

h.:'

1
r

J /

\

NR

-1.14

'

-1.14

,._
'4
<(+6
~
t~j+4
i>S- +2
::;;
Of
-2
-4
-6

\A 1\
+8.47

,1 \ /\{\ l \ /~ r, A 1 \j ~ ! 1r:\}\ f !Y'\

I

NR

-2.64

-9.16

+6.34

-6.63

NR

,

I

...
",;' "'Cll +6
z w
<C +4
~ +2 ~
e oI

. I /\ J; !, : '. I I /1 ! \

-2

-4 +5.69
-6

!v \.1\1 \ t. ! \ ,1 \ !1I I . A I \ ! \ .-. !I A /\ I I

-8.97

+2.40

-4.57

!

I

-8.02

+6

... +4

aq+2

a:>

>~ -

o l1l rj

. ~r

\ ,

....

J 1

z<(

Ill -2
<...(J

-4

-6 +5.41

J \ ', ,

V \,r11,

I
J

\, rI.\t l tI

," \ /1

J \ I I l I \ JI I L \

I I 1\

fitlltrii\Jir tl \ 1 1 r"

I I~J
rllilll

NR

+1.83

-2.25

+5.44

-2.77

-3.30

1975

1977

1981

0> 0
o+6
"'
i5+4 Cll
3<(: +2
0
0
-2
-4
-6

Figure 4. Rainfall Departure Curves- Cities In Study Area. Plotted are the monthly rainfall departures from the 30-year norm. Annual departures are shown below the curve for each city.

\

+14.93

NR

' 1975

1\

-2.58

+3.63

-Q.85

-4.52

NR

I

1981

The 30-year norm Is shown next to the city name. All numbers are In Inches. Data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Table I. Stratigraphic Column of the Study Area.

SYSTEM

EPOCH RADIOMETRIC /SERIES AGE(M.Y.)/STAGE

GROUP and FORMATION

25.0

TERTIARY

Oligocene

Chickasawhayan
33.0 Vicksburgian
38.0

Eocene

Jacksonian 41 .0
Claibornian 50.0

55.0 Sabinian

58.0
Paleocene

Midwayan

67.0

72.0

Navarroan

UPPER CRETACEOUS

Gulf ian

Tayloran +79.0
Austinian +90.0
Eagle Fordian +94.0

(Modified from Huddlestun, 1981)

Woodbinian +95.0

Unnamed Oligocene Limestone

Ocala Limestone

Clinchfield Sand

Claiborne Group

Lisbon Formation Tallahatta Formation

xo.
0::::1
=~0= "0~

Hatchetigbee Formation
Tuscahoma Sand Nanafalia Formation

Clayton Formation
Providence Sand Ripley Formation
Cusseta Sand

Blufftown Formation

Eutaw Formation

Tuscaloosa Formation
~

Atkinson Formation

6

Clayton Formation The Clayton Formation of Paleocene age
unconformably overlies the Providence Sand. The lithology of the Clayton Formation varies consIderably. It ranges from a white to gray, glauconitic, recrystallized limestone to a gray, calcareous clay In the Porters Creek Clay facies (Huddlestun, personal communication, 1981). The Clayton Formation Is divided Into three lithologic units (Toulmln and LaMoreaux, 1963, p. 394). The lower division of the Clayton Formation consists of a base I conglomerate and overlying beds of firm calcareous sand and sandstone. The middle division of the Clayton Formation Is a coqulnold limestone containing abundant mollusk shells and bryozoans. The upper division Is a grayish-yellow to white, silty, mlcrofosslllferous, marine, soft limestone. Although sand may be present locally, the Clayton Formation Is generally sand-starved and consists mainly of limestone and clay. In updlp areas the limestone has weathered to an Iron-rich sandy clay.
Deposition on an Irregular surface and post-depositional erosion and solutlonlng have caused the thickness of the Clayton Formation to vary considerably within the study area. Thickness ranges from less than 50 ft In eastern Dooly and Crisp Counties to approximately 450 ft In southern Early and Ml ller Counties.

WI Icox Group

The Wilcox Group of late Paleocene and

early Eocene age consists of the Nanafalia

Formation, the Tuscahoma Formation, and the

Hatchetlgbee Formation. The Nanafalia Formation

Is a massively bedded fine- grained, glauconitic

sand and sandy clay. The Tuscahoma Formation

consists of a basal quartz sand overlain by

olive-gray, thinly bedded,

laminated,

carbonaceous slit and clay Interbedded with fine

quartzose sand <Toulmln and LaMoreaux, 1963, p.

396, 401, 402). The lower Eocene Bashl Marl

Member of the Hatchetlgbee Formation consists of

massively bedded, olive-gray, glauconitic,

fossl llferous, calcareous sand (Marsalis and

Frlddell, 1975, p. 20). The Bashl Marl Is

discontinuous In outcrop; the overlying

Hatchetlgbee sands also are sporadic In

occurrence.

Claiborne Group The CIa Iborne Group of mIdd Ie Eocene age
unconformably overlies the Wilcox Group. The

CIa Iborne Group consIsts of the Ta II ahatta and Lisbon Formations. Along the Chattahoochee River, the Tallahatta Formation Is a light-gray, foss! llferous, slightly calcareous, glauconitic, clayey sand (Marsalis and Frlddell, 1975, p. 20-22). The Lisbon Formation unconformably over I les the Tal lahatta Formation. The Lisbon Formation consists of calcareous, foss! llferous, g lauconltlc sands; I lmestone; sandy limestone; and clayey sands. Locally some of the sands are Indurated. In updlp areas, the Tallahatta Formation and the Lisbon Formation are difficult to distinguish from one another; and they are, therefore, mapped as Claiborne undifferentiated (Georgia Geologic Survey, 1976). The Tallahatta and Lisbon Formations crop out along streams In the western and northern parts of the study area. The Claiborne Group generally thickens toward the south and southwest. Thickness ranges from 50 ft In the northeast part of the study area to about 200 ft In southwestern Calhoun County and Early County.
Oca Ia Ll mestone The Ocala Limestone of late Eocene age
over I Ies the CIa Iborne Group throughout most of the study area. In the extreme northeast corner of the study area the CII nchf Ie Id Sand of Iate Eocene age unconformably overlies the Claiborne Group. The Ocala Limestone Is a white to yellow, soft, foss I llferous, porous limestone. It crops out on the banks of the Flint River In Dougherty County and along the northern edge of the Dougherty PI a In. Oca Ia LImestone resIduum crops out as clays along hilltops and uplands In the southern Fall Line Hills District and throughout the Dougherty PI a In DIstrIct. An unnamed 01 lgocene limestone residuum overlies the Ocala Limestone In eastern Dooly and Crisp Counties (Huddlestun, personal communication, 1981).
STRUCTURE The Clayton Formation has been cut by an
east-west trending normal fault near Andersonville In the northeast part of the study area (Zapp, 1965). South of the fau It the CIayton Formation has been displaced upward by 100ft relative to the north side. Cramer and Arden (1980) postulate a fault trending about N75W from southern Ear Iy County eastward to Co IquI tt County based on the possible absence of the Clayton Formation In south Early County.

7

AQUIFERS IN THE STUDY AREA An aquifer Is a body of rock which stores a significant amount of water and Is able to transmit that water In usable quantities to municipal, Industrial, agricultural, or domestic wells. An artesian aquifer Is confined between relatively Impermeable layers; consequently, the water level In a well penetrating the upper confining unit wl II rise above the top of the aquifer due to hydraulic head. Several artesian aquifers are present In the study ~ea Including the Providence, Clayton, Claiborne, and Principal Artesian Aquifers.
CRETACEOUS AQUIFERS Underlying the Clayton Formation In the
study area are saturated, permeable sands of the upper Cretaceous Providence Sand. Other Cretaceous aquifers exist In deeper formations, but the greater expense of constructing wells In these aquifers and problems of water quality restrict their use. These deeper aquifers may offer a viable future source of ground water, but their evaluation Is beyond the scope of this project. The Providence Sand aquifer, however, Is an Important source ot ground water. It Is utilized In rrultlaqulfer wells In Albany and In the updlp part of the study area where the C I ayton and CIa I borne aquIfers are not product! ve.
CLAYTON AQUIFER The Clayton aquifer consists mostly of
saturated, permeable limestone within the middle limestone unit of the Clayton Formation. In some areas, saturated, permeable sands In the upper and lower Clayton Formation are In hydraulic continuity with the I lmestone and are considered part of the aquifer. The Clayton aquifer Is confined above by relatively Impermeable clay-rich layers In the upper Clayton Formation and Nanatal Ia Formation and below by slit and clay layers In the lower Clayton Formation and upper Providence Sand. In the updlp part of the study area, the C I ayton I I mestone Is reduced In thickness or missing entirely as a result of solution and erosion. Here the Clayton Formation crops out as a sandy clay residuum along streams and on hillsides. In the extreme updlp
portions of the study area, the confln lng units are more sandy and permeable; as a resu It, the Clayton aquifer may be unconfined and Include parts of adjacent formations.
FIgures 5 through 7 are maps Ill ustratl ng the geometry of the C I ayton aquIfer In the study

area. Figure 5 Is a structure contour map showing the elevation of the top of the Clayton aquifer In feet ~:~bove or below mean sea level. This contact Is the top of the permeable Clayton limestone or contiguous permeable sand as determined by well cuttings, cores, and geophysical logs. The top of the aquifer dips to the southeast at a rate of approximately 20 tt/ml, with a more southerly dip along the Chattahoochee River In the extreme western part of the study erea. This map e~:~n be used to estlmete the depth to the top of the Clayton aquifer by subtr~:~ctlng the elevation Indicated by the map from the land surface elevation at a given location.
Figure 6 Is an Isopach map of the Clayton aquIfer In the study area and shows the thIckness of the aquIfer In teet. The thIckness of the aquifer generally Increases from the outcrop aree to the south, elthough due to the eroslon~:~l nature ot the Clayton Formation, thicknesses m~:~y vary considerably over reletlvely short distances In the study aree.
Figure 7 Is a structure contour map showing the elevation of the base of the Clayton aquifer I n feet above or be I ow mean see I eve I ThIs contact Is the bottom of the permeeb I e C leyton limestone or contiguous permeable sand as determined by well cuttings, cores, end geophys I ca I logs. The b!!se of the C leyton aquIfer a I so dIps to the southeest, but et e s II ght I y greater rate than the top of the ~:~quI fer. Figure 7 e~:~n be used to determine the maxI mum depth at whIch the C I ayton aquIfer wI I I be encountered by subtracting the elevation Indicated by the map from the land surface elevetlon at a given location.
The relationship of the Cleyton aquifer to the C I ayton For matt on and . other strati greph lc unIts In the study area Is Illustrated by the three geologic sections In Plate 1. The southeasterly dip and the general southwesterly thickening are apparent In these sections. Facies changes through the study area are Illustrated by changing lithologies recorded In the well togs.
CLAIBORNE AQUIFER The Claiborne aquifer generally consists of
saturated, permeable sands In the Tel tehetta Formation, but In some areas may Include saturated permeable sands of the lower Lisbon Format I on and Hatchett gbee Format! on whIch are In hydraulic continuity. These sands may be separated by less permeable sequences of tine sand, slit end clay. The aquifer Is confined above by

8

0

10

20

30

40 Miles

/ /
32
/

MILLER

EXPLANATION
- 1 0 0 - - STRUCTURE CONTOUR - Shows altitude of top of aquifer. Dashed where approximately located. Datum is mean sea level. Contour interval 100 feet.

AREA OF OUTCROP - Includes Clayton undifferentiated, Nanafalia, and Porters Creek Formations.

WELL - Number represents altitude of top of the Clayton aquifer.



WELL - Location of well which penetrates Cretaceous strata. No Clayton strata

encountered.

- - - FAULT -Dashed where approximately located. D indicates downthrown side. ? indicates possible fault.

Figure 5. Structure Contour Map of the Top of the Clayton Aquifer (from Tuohy, M.A., 1983b).

9

0

10

20

30

40 Miles

8!1"

0 0 LY

L E E

250

- 1 o o - - LINE OF EQUAL THICKNESS - Shows thickness of entire aquifer. Dashed where approximately located. Contour interval 50 feet.

AREA OF OUTCROP - Includes Clayton undifferentiated, Nanafalia, and Porters Creek Formations.

WELL - Number represents thickness of aquifer.

WELL - Number represents minimum thickness of aquifer for well which did not penetrate base of Clayton aquifer.



WELL- Location of well which penetrated Cretaceous strata. No Clayton

strata encountered.

- - - FAULT -Dashed where approximately located. D indicates downthrown side. ? indicates possible fault.

Figure 6. Isopach Map of the Clayton Aquifer (from Tuohy, M.A., t983cl.

10

0

10

20

30

40 Miles

ea

\\

/ 0/L. y/
/ /
32
/

EXPLANATION -1oo-- STRUCTURE CONTOUR - Shows altitude of base of aquifer. Dashed where
approximately located. Datum is mean sea level Contour interval 100 feet.

AREA OF OUTCROP - Includes Clayton undifferentiated, Nanafalia, and Porters Creek Formations.

~.21 WELL - Number represents altitude of base of the Clayton aquifer.

6533 WELL - Number represents altitude of bottom of well which did not penetrate the base of the Clayton aquifer.



WELL - Location of well which penetrated Cretaceous strata. No Clayton strata

encountered.

- - - FAULT- Dashed where approximately located. D indicates downthrown side. ? indicates possible fault.

Figure 7. Structure Contour Map of the Base of the Clayton Aquifer (from Tuohy, M.A., 1983d>.
11

relatl vely Impermeable clay layers In the upper Lisbon Formation and below by the clay-rich Tuscahoma Sand and Nanafa Ita Formation. The aquIfer crops out a tong streams In a band runn lng from southwest to northeast through the central and north-central parts of the study area, and Is locally Influenced by stream flow there.
Fl gures 8 through 10 are maps I II ustratlng the geometry of the CIa I borne aquIfer In the study area. Figure 8 Is a structure contour map showing the elevation of the top of the Claiborne aquifer, In feet above or below mean sea level. This contact Is the top of the uppermost saturated, permeable sand In the upper Ta I lahatta Formation or the lower LIs bon Formation as determined by well cuttings, cores, and geophysical logs. The top of the aquifer dips to the southeast at a rate of about 14 tt/ml with a more southerly dip along the Chattahoochee RIver In the western part of the study area. This map can be used to estimate the depth to the top of the CIa I borne aquIfer by subtracting the elevation Indicated by the map with the land surface elevation at a given location.
Figure 9, an Isopach map cit the Claiborne aquIfer, shows the thIckness of the aquIfer In feet. The thIckness of the aquIfer genera II y Increases from the outcrop area to the southeast and east of the Flint River In Crisp and. Dooly Counties. Note that the thickness Indicated on this map Is from the top of the uppermost saturated, permeable sand to the bottom of the lowermost saturated, permeable sand in the aquifer
e and therefore may not represent actua I per.meab I
thickness. FIgure 10 Is a structure contour map show-
1ng the e I evat I on of the base of the C I a I borne aquIfer, In feet above or be Iow mean sea Ieve I. This contact Is the . bottom of the lowermost saturated, permeable sand In the lower Tallahatta Formation or upper Hatchetlgbee Formation as determined by well cuttings, cores, and geophysical logs. The base of the aquifer a I so dIps to the southeast. ThIs map may be used to estimate the maximum depth at which the aquIfer wI II be encountered by su btractl ng the elevation Indicated by the map from the la~d surface elevation at a given location.
The relatlon!;hJp of the Claiborne aquifer to the CIa I borne Group and other stratIgraphIc units In the study area Is Illustrated by three geologic sections shown In Plate 2. The southeasterly dip and general southerly thickening

are shown. Lithologic descriptions of wells used tor the sections tnd lcate facies changes occurring In the study area.
PRINCIPAL ARTESIAN AQUIFER Overlying the Claiborne Group In the
southern part of the study area Is the saturated, permeable Ocala Limestone. The Ocala Limestone almost exclusively constitutes the Principal Artesian Aquifer In this area. South of A I bany, thIs aquIfer Is the rna In source of ground water for all purposes. North of Albany, however, It thins and becomes less productive, necessitating the use of the deeper Claiborne and Clayton aquifers tor high-yielding wells. Neverthe I ess, In the southern part of the study area, particularly In Dougherty County, the Principal Arte'stan Aquifer suppl les large quantities of water tor Industry and Irrigation.
GROUND-wATER USE GENERAL
Ground-water use patterns In southwestern Georg I a have undergone rapId change s I nee the turn of the century and particularly In the last 5 to 10 years. During the early 1900's, munlclpa I I ties were the major ground-water users. By the 1950's, Industrial ground-water use had become significant. The use of ground water tor Irrigation began during the 1960's, but did not become common untl I the late 1970's. The majorIty of Irrigation systems were Installed after 1975.
Irrigation systems reduce the risk of crop loss due to drought and significantly Increase crop yields. Several, years of below normal rainfall In the mid-1970's through 1981 combined with development of , affordable Irrigation systems have led to rapid growth In their use. Figure 11 II lustrates this growth. Figure I Ia shows that the pumber of ground-water Irrigation systems In the State Increased from less than 300 wells In 1955 to over 4,000 wells In 1981. FIgure I I b shows the Increase In the number of Irrigation wells In the 39 counties of southwestern Georgia and In the 15-county study area from 1977 through 1981. During this period, the number of Irrigation wells In the study area grew from less th~n ?00 to about 800.
Water-use data In this report were supplied by the Georgia Geologic Survey Water-Use Data Collection Project. When the project Is complete, water-use data wll I be catalogued according to type of use (I.e., municipal, Industrial, Irrigation, etc.) as well as being subdivided by

12

0

10

20

30

40 Miles

I I
I I /

/
M I L L~ R

EXPLANATION

-too--

STRUCTURE CONTOUR - Shows altitude of top of aquifer. Datum is mean sea level. Dashed where approximately loca ted.Contour interval 100 feet.

AREA OF OUTCROP - Includes Claiborne undiffferentiated, Lisbon, and Tallahatta Formations.

-105

WELL - Number represents altitude of top of the Claiborne aquifer.

Figure 8. Structure Contour Map of the Top of the Claiborne Aquifer (from McKoy, M.L., and Mack, D.M.,, 1983c>.

13

0

10

20

30

40 Miles

L __ _ _ __ L_ __ __ _J--~1----~

Ill!

STEWART

/

DOUGH

/
M.-f L L E R /

MITCHELL

' \

170

EXPLANATION

-

100-- LINE OF EQUAL THICKNESS - Shows thickness of entire

aquifer. Dashed where approximately located. Contour

interval 100 feet.

[]

AREA OF OUTCROP - Includes Claiborne undifferentiated, Lisbon, and Tallahatta Formations.

167

WELL - Number represents thickness of aquifer.

Figure 9. Isopach Map of the Claiborne Aquifer (from McKoy, M.L., and Mack, D.M., 1983a).
14

0

10

20

30

40 Miles

STEWART

I

/

/

EXPLANATION

-

100-- STRUCTURE CONTOUR - Shows altitude of base of

aquifer. Datum is mean sea level. Dashed where

approximately located. Contour interval 100 feet.

AREA OF OUTCROP - Includes Claiborne undifferentiated, Lisbon, and Tallahatta Formations.

272

WELL - Number represents altitude of base of the

Claiborne aquifer.

Figure 10. Structure Contour Map of the Base of the Claiborne Aquifer (from McKoy, M.L., and Mack, D.M., 1983bl.
15

both county and water source (aquifer or surface water). Only municipal, Industrial, and lrrlgatl on uses are cons I dared here. Data for domestic and other categories of use are Jacking s lnce few records are kept by State and loca I governments or drillers. Water use by domestic and other categorIes, however, Is est I mated to be small when compared to municipal, Industrial, and Irrigation use. Munlclpa I and Industria I ground-water use data are more accurate because large users (over 100,000 gal/d) In these categorIes are requIred under the Georg I a Ground Water Use Act of 1972 to supp I y quarter I y reports of water use to the Georgi~:~ EPD. Irrigation use, however, was exempted from this act and accurate, current data are not available. Irrigation use tor 1980 was estimated by the Georgia Geologic Survey Water-use Data Collection Project using known acreage under Irrigation and type of crop planted (Pierce and

Barber, 1981, 1982). A listing of Irrigation wells Is also available from the Water Use Data Col lectlon Project'
This listing Is unavoidably Incomplete; also, It Is sometimes not possible to determine the aquifer used due to Jack of well construction Information. The Irrigation estimates used In this report are, therefore, divided Into two groups: (a) use from wells of known construction and therefore known aquifer utllltzatlon and (b) use from wells of uncertain construction. Use In thIs latter category was est I mated by assumIng that the group of wells of unknown construction utilized the aquifers In the study area In the same ratio as the group of wells of known construction.

4200

4000

3800
- 3600

3400

3200

3000

:3

uJ 2800

3

z
~
~ag:;

2600 2400 2200

u..

0
cw r

2000

:1:0; 1800

z:::;) 1600

1400

1200

1000

800

600

n400
200 1965

r--
rr-r-,....------
r-
No da la
1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 TIME (Years)

3300 3150
- 3000
2850
2700

D Southwest Georgia
Study Area [[[I]
r--

2550
.----
2400

2250

2100

(f) 1950 --~--'' 1800
u.. 0 1650
cr
~ 1500
z 1350
1200

,....-

,...---

1050

900 750

600

450

300
M 150 1977

1978

1979

1980

TIME (Years)

r--
1981

Figure 11.

Irrigation Trends In Georgia and the Study Area. a). Number of ground-water Irrigation systems In Georgia, 1955, 19751981. b). Number of ground-water Irrigation systems In southwest Georgia and the study area. (Data from Skinner, R.E., 1977, 1978, 1979, and Harrison, K.A., 1980, 1981).

16

The rrunlclpal, Industrial, end Irrigation water-use data reported here are genera I Iy tor the year 1980. However, where aval table, municipal and Industrial water-use figures were updated with 1981 and 1982 data from the Georgia EPD flies. Figure 12 shows ground-water use In the study area by aquifer, and the municipal, Industrial, and Irrigation withdrawals from the Clayton and Claiborne aquifers. The Clayton and CIa I borne aquIfers supp I y about 50 percent of the ground water used In the study area. Table 2 lists water use from the Clayton and Claiborne aquifers by category of use and by county In the study area. Note that these figures are average dally use and do not reflect the highly seasonal nature of water use, partlcu tar ly for Irrigation. During the spring and summer seasons, dally Irrigation withdrawals are

much larger than those shown In Table 2, whl le In the fa I I and winter months they approach zero. Municipal withdrawals, although not as variable as Irrigation withdrawals, are also greatest In summer and lowest In winter.
CLAYTON AQUIFER The largest municipal and Industrial with-
drawals of ground water from the Clayton aquifer occur In the A I bany area. The popu latlon of Albany had grown to 78,000 In 1980 (Fig. 2). Table 2 shows that 7.69 million gallons per day (Mgal/d) were withdrawn from the Clayton aquifer In Dougherty County, coming almost entirely from Albany's municipal wei Is. Industrial use of the C I ayton aquIfer In Dougherty County was about 0.10 Mgal/d, a figure which Is somewhat misleading because some Industries In Albany use

Others (mostly Ocala Ls and Providence Sand)
53% 69.59 mgd

GROUND WATER USE BY AQUIFER IN STUDY AREA

Municipal

Irrigation
61% 15.51 mgd

Irrigation
63% 22.73 mgd

USE OF CLAYTON AQUIFER

USE OF CLAIBORNE AQUIFER

Figure 12.

Ground'"'l'later Use In the Study Area. Irrigation use Is from 1980 data. Municipal and Industrial use are from 1981-82 data.

17

Table 2. Water Use from the Clayton and Claiborne Aquifers.

ifers in th~ Stu Area

COUNTY

AQUIFER

Calhoun Clay Crisp Dooly Dougherty Early
Lee
Macon Quitman Randolph Schley Stewart Sumter Terrell Webster

Claiborne Clayton
Claiborne Clayton
Claiborne Clayton
Claiborne Clayton
Claiborne Clayton
Claiborne Clayton
Claiborne Clayton
Claiborne Clayton
claiborne Clayton
Claiborne Clayton
Claiborne Clayton
Claiborne Clayton
Claiborne Clayton
Claiborne Clayton
Claiborne Clayton

INDUSTRIA!.

IRRIGATION

known1 extrapolated2

0

0

1.42

0

0

0

1. 01

0

0.45

o. 12

0

0

0.01 4.99

1.37

0.06

0

1. 71 0.24

0

o. 10 0.24

0

o. 10 3.04

1.22

1.06

0.15

0.14

0

1.42

0

1. 58

0.23

0.33

0.07

0.03

0.47

0

4.53

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2.43

4.31

0,002 0.24

0.51

1.43

o. 71

1.22

1. 73

0

0

0.41

1. 11

MUNICIPAL 0.03 0.35 0.01 0.71 0.13 9.40 7.69 0.79 0.76
0.10 0.33
0.23
0.79 0.15

'IDTAL
0.03 1. 77
1.02 1.28
6.50 0.06 11.35 8.03 4.36 2.00 0.90 1.42 1. 81 0.40
0.03 0.57 4.86
6.97 0.75 2.14 3.74
o. 15
1.52

St udy

Area

Claiborne

1.82 14.77

7.96

Totals

Clayton

0.13 11.94

3.57

11.51 9.96

36.06 27.60

Use of 0:
. Use of

Information an file indicates zero consumption in this category and aquifer.
No record of aquifer use in this category exists, but use may not be ruled out.

1) Known irrigation figures were calculated assuming that individual system consumption is directly proportional to acres irrigated.

2) These irrigation figures are based on the assumption that the group of wells with unidentified aqtlifers have an identical ratio of Clayton:Claiborne:other aquifer wells as the group of wells with aqt~ifer identification.

18

the city's water. In addition to Albany, other municipal users of the Clayton aquifer Include: Arl lngton, Edison, Leary, and Morgan In Calhoun County; Bluffton and Ft. Gaines In Clay County; Cordele In Crisp County; Blakely In Early County; Cuthbert In Randolph County; Sasser, Parrott, Bronwood, and Dawson In Terrell County; and Weston In Webster County. Total municipal and Industrial use from the Clayton aquifer In the study area was about 10. 1 Mga I /d for the time period reported In Table 2.
Irrigation systems using the Clayton aquifer are scattered throughout the study area, but they are most concentrated In northern Ca I houn, southern Clay, northeastern Early, eastern and southern Randolph, southern .Terrell, and southern Lee Counties. Yields from the Clayton aquifer are generally highest In these areas. Table 2 shows the total Irrigation use from the Clayton aquifer was about 15.5 Mgal/d. Because 1980 data were used and ground-water use for Irrigation Is constantly Increasing, this number Is probably less than actual current use.
CLAIBORNE AQUIFER The largest municipal and Industrial with-
drawals from the Claiborne aquifer also occur In the Albany area. The city of Albany withdrew about 9.4 Mgal/d from the Claiborne aquifer during the period reported. In 1979, the Miller Brewing Company constructed a plant In Albany and received a permit to withdraw 3.0 Mgal/d from their three supply wells. Two of these wells tap only the Claiborne aquifer; the third produces water from both the CI ayton and Claiborne aquifers. The Miller Plant currently (1982) withdraws about 1.5 Mgal/d. A Georgia Pacific Corporation plant located near VIenna In Dooly County Is another Industrial user of the Claiborne aquifer, although Its use has been great I y reduced by conservatIon efforts. The company's permit for 2.5 Mgal/d was dropped by the Georgia EPD because Its withdrawals fell below 100,000 gal/d, an Indication of what effective conservation measures can accomplish.
Other municipal users of the Claiborne aquifer Include: Leesburg and Smithville In Lee County; Plains, Lest le, and DeSoto In Sumter County; VIenna In Dooly County; Cordele In Crisp County; and Shellman In Randolph County. Total municipal and Industrial use of the Claiborne aquifer In the study area was about 13.3 Mgal/d.
In the past, the high cost of constructing large-capacity, screened wells In the sandy Claiborne aquifer restricted Its use. However,

the Claiborne aquifer has been heavl ly developed for Irrigation In areas where yields from the Clayton aquifer are not adequate for Irrigation supply. These areas Include southern Early, eastern Terrell, Sumter, Lee, Crisp, Dooly, and southeastern Macon Counties. Yields from the Claiborne aquifer are especially high In Crisp and Dooly Counties. Total Irrigation use of the CIa I borne aquIfer In the study area was about 22.7 Mgal/d during the period reported In Table
2.

WELL CONSTRUCTION IN THE STUDY AREA Typical well construction of Clayton and
Claiborne aquifer wells and a multlaqulfer well In the study area are shown In FIgure 13. A1though the CIayton aquIfer Is deeper than the

Claiborne aquifer, wei Is tapping the Clayton aquifer may be of simple construction and are generally less costly than Claiborne aquifer wells. Typically, a wei I tapping the Clayton aquifer Is constructed by drilling to the top of

the aqulter, Instal ling and grouting casing, and then drl I ling Into the aquifer, leaving the bottom of the well as an open hole. The dense, fractured Clayton limestone usually wll I remain

open. After drilling Is completed, the well Is dave I oped to remove dr I II I ng f I u Ids from the we I I and aquIfer.
Construction of a Claiborne aquifer well Is more complex because the loose sands of the aquIfer norma II y must be screened to prevent collapse of the well. A typical Claiborne aquifer well Is first drilled to the top of the aquifer and casing Is Installed and grouted. A hole Is then drilled Into the aquifer and screens are Installed opposite water-producing

sands, which are best determined from geophyslca I logs. The screened I nterva I may or may not be gravel packed depending on the Intended use of the well. Yields generally will be higher In

gravel packed wells. After drilling Is comPI eted the we II Is deve I oped to remove drIll I ng fluids from the well and aquifer.
The construction of a Clayton and Claiborne multlaqulfer well also Is shown In Figure 13. The well Is screened In the Claiborne aquifer and completed open-hole In the Clayton aquIfer. Multlaqulfer construction has the advantage of the Increasing well yields whl le reducing the

Impact on each aquifer and can, In addition,

serve to act as a pol nt of recharge from one

aquIfer to the other.

Note that only the

Clayton and Claiborne aquifers have been con-

sidered here. In parts of the study area where

19

PRINCIPAL ARTESIAN AQUIFER CONFINING UNIT
CLAIBORNE AQUIFEfl

CLAIBORNE AQUIFER
WELL

CLAYTON AQUIFER
WELL

MUL TIAQUIFER WELL

CONFINING UNIT
CLAYTON AQUIFER CONFINING UNIT CRETACOUS AQUIFERS

..
.;
EXPLANATION
Screened Interval Open-.hole Interval
Cement Grout
[Jill Annular Space bmeayGroarvemla~acnkoet d

Figure 13. Typical Well construction In the Study Area.

they are viable aquifers, the Principal Artesian and/or Cretaceous aqu I tars a I so may be Inc I uded In multlaqulter wells. In order to make the best use of multlaqulter wells, It Is recommended that these we II s be geophys I ca II y Jogged prIor to comp I et I on so that the we I I can be desIgned to take advantage of the water-bearIng units encountered.
The many poss I b I e varIatIons and a I ternatlves to the constructions shown In Figure 13 are beyond the scope of thIs study. DependIng on conditions encountered In drilling and the Intended use of the well, construction may vary consIderably.
GROUND-wATER QUALITY CLAYTON AQUIFER
Ground water from the C I ayton aquIfer In the study area Is a soft to moderately hard, calcium bicarbonate to sodium-calcium bicarbonate type. The qua llty Is genera Jly very good, and meets all standards established by the Georgia EPD In Its 1977 "Rules for Safe Drinking Water". Figure 14 shows the distribution of

total dissolved solids <TDS) and carbonate hardness In the Clayton aquifer. TDS concentrations are generally less than 200 mil llgrams per liter (mg/1) and nowhere In the study area exceed 250 mg/1.
The sodium content from some Clayton aquifer wells Is not typ I ca I of II mestone aquIfers, which generally contain little or no sodium. Upper Cretaceous sands, which contain sodium feldspar, are known as having sod lum blcar.bonate water (Walt, 1960d, p. 20). This discrepancy has been cited as evidence that water Is leaking from the upper Cretaceous Providence Sand aquifer to the Clayton aquifer (Hicks and others, 1981, p. 13>. Leakage has been documented through Idle multlaqulfer wells In the Albany area (Hicks and others, 1981, p. 19-20) and may also occur through the confining unit separating the Clayton aquifer from the Providence Sand aquifer. Feldspathlc basal sands In the Clayton Formation which may be In hydrologic continuity with the limestone aquifer also may be the source of the sodium In water from Clayton aquifer wells (Walt, 1960d, p. 12>.

20

0

10

20

30

40 Miles

0 0 L. Y

162 1146) 146
)126)

_____, ______ CRISP

32

_ [

I
~

L E E \.,
I

\

I

,

l '
164



;-

-

~

....

:..,_ 1120
illn.L

_

_

_

)

"l.J ~ 184

11361

'

I
'1 __ _ _L

____

~OJ~

'--"' r: I---200~_/'~;!

18~ 1 6)!l Oti

164 l
t36l '

CALHOUN\

:5

172. .179 I

~ .
0 0 U G H Er T y 199 )16)

I ~
I
I

~N

~

_ Po~

~

~

r -- - ~,..r l!.(__ ___ __ _,_~- - - -,

----- 1... _

1941..,

III

; ---"''--"1.1'-

i I I

MILLER

; BAKER~ , r-)
_,/ M I T C H E L L
,-. (
r' (
'

I
~--------~r-~

EXPLANATION

- 2 0 0 - LINE OF EQUAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS CONCENTRATION shows concentration in milligrams per liter dissolved solids. Hardness values are not contoured.

~

AREA OF OUTCROP - Includes Nanafalia, Porters Creek, and Clayton Formations, undifferentiated.

1'4c9aJ WELL - Number represents dissolved-solids concentration. Subscript represents carbonate hardness value.

Figure 14. Water Quality In the Clayton Aquifer (from Crews, P.A.,
1983c).
21

CLAIBORNE AQUIFER

Ground water from the Claiborne aquifer In

the study area Is genera I Iy a moderate I y hard to hard calcium bicarbonate type. The quality Is

good, meeting the drinking water standards of

the Georgia EPO. Figure 15 shows the distri-

bution of TDS and carbonate hardness In the

Claiborne aquifer.

TDS concentrations are

generally less than 200 mg/1 and nowhere In the

study area exceed 250 mg/ 1. South of the study

area, however, the chloride content of the

CIa I borne aquIfer Increases and the water Is no

I onger of good qua llty. ChlorIdes of 11,900 parts per million (ppm) and TDS of 22,200 ppm

have been reported In Thomasville, Thomas County

(Walt, 1960d, p. 13>.

Calcium bicarbonate water Is not typical of a pure sand aquIfer and, In the case of the

CIa I borne aquIfer, has been attrIbuted to co-

quina and sandy I lmestone beds lnterlayered with the sands of the Claiborne Group and upper

Hatchetlgbee Formation. This atypical chemistry

has also been cited as evidence of possible leakage to the Claiborne aquifer from the over-

lying Principal Artesian Aquifer (Hicks and others, 1981, p. 13).

POTENTIOMETRIC TRENDS GENERAL
A potentiometric surface Is the level to which water In a properly constructed well (one which Is tightly cased from the water-bearing zone to the surface) wIll rl se due to hydrau II c head. 1 Contour maps of thIs surface were constructed tor the Clayton and Claiborne aquifers by plotting and contouring water-level measurements from a network of observation wells. Potentiometric maps tor different time periods were constructed to Illustrate long-term trends In the potentiometric surface. The direction of ground-water f Iow genera II y Is per pend I cuI ar to the potentiometric contours, from higher to

Hydrau lie head Is the sum of pressure head and elevation head. It Is a measure of the potent! a I energy of a unIt mass of water In an aquifer expressed In terms of length. For a more complete discussion of this term, see Freeze and Cherry, 1979, p. 18-26.
I n thIs report, hydrau II c head Is assumed equal to the altitude of the static water surface In wells completed In the Clayton or Claiborne Aquifers.

lower heads, and Is lnd I cated by t low arrows on the potentiometric maps.
A ground-water divide Is a ridge on the potentiometric surface from which ground water flows In both directions and Is represented on the maps by a patterned line. Ground-water divides often coincide with or roughly parallel surface water divides.
The configuration of the potentiometric surface of an aquIfer Is affected by groundwater withdrawals. A cone of depression may develop In the vicinity of pumping wells and Is represented on potentiometric maps by closed contour lines with hatch marks pointing Inward. Water levels are successIvely lower toward the center of the cone, and ground-water flow Is toward the center. When there Is a concentration of pumping wells In an area, a cone of depression may become evident on a regional scale.
Water-level changes In aquifers are determined by several Interrelated factors. These Include the hydraulic properties of the aquifer, the recharge to the aquifer, and the discharge from the aquifer. The hydraulic properties of the aquifer, such as transmissivity, storage coefficient, and gradient affect the quantity and rate of groundwater movement through an aquifer. The recharge to an aquifer depends on the hydraulic properties listed above, cl lmate (precipitation, evapotranspiration, and streamflow conditions), Infiltration rate (which depends on outcrop area, slope, and permeability), and relationship to other aquifers (head potential and effectiveness of confining units). Discharge can be eIther natura I (Into su rtace streams or through Intervening confining zones Into other aqu I tars) or art If I cIa I (through wells constructed by man). Discharge also depends on the hydraulic properties of the aquifer, climatic conditions, stream base flow, relationships to other aquifers, and withdrawals from wells.

LONG-TERM POTENTIOMETRIC TRENDS

C I ayton agu I fer

Maps of the potentiometric surface of the

C I ayton aquIfer have been constructed for tour

tIme per I ods:

1950-1959; December 1979;

October-November, 1981; and March, 1982. These

maps Illustrate the Impact of development on the

Clayton aquifer.

22

0

10

20

30

40 Miles

STEWART
-1'- -~
~---~~iifJ
I '

160
(l

3

0)

179

C R I 51' 11391

172(131)

A R LY
------J~-~- 1'_ -~ '
MILLER

w
183 (1 5 5)

EXPLANATION

-200-
rJl l12d
250 (144)

LINE OF EQUAL DISSOLVED-SOLIDS CONCENTRATION Shows concentration in milligrams per liter dissolved solids. Hardness values are not contoured.
AREA OF OUTCROP - Includes Claiborne undifferentiated, Lisbon and Tallahatta Formations.
WELL - Number represents dissolved-soli,ds concentration. Subscript represents carbonate hardness value.

Figure 15. Water Quality In the Claiborne Aquifer (from Crews, P.~. ,
1983b).

23

Figure 16 Is a map showing the potentiometric surface of the Clayton aquifer during the period 1950-1959. The Impact of withdrawals can be seen even during this time of comparatively little development. Municipal use of the aquifer was becoming significant and Industrial users were developing the aquifer In Albany and Dawson at thIs tl me. A cone of depress I on had developed around Albany, where the lowest hydraulic head, 92 tt, was measured In 1955 at the VIrginia-carolina Chemical Company well near the center of the cone. CI ayton aquIfer we II s In the Albany area which were tree-flowing In the late 1800's and early 1900's, with hydraulic heads up to 220 tt, had stopped t lowIng by the 1950's. The hydraulic head In the city of Dawson was 225 tt, compared with 324 ft In the early 1900 1s. Contours Indicate two groundwater divides which generally coincide with surface water divides. Along the westernmost ground-water divide, flow was to the southwest toward the Chattahoochee RIver and to the south toward MIller County. The other ground-water divide separated water moving to the southw.est from water moving to the southeast toward Dougherty County.
F lgure 17 Is a map of the potentiometric surface of the Clayton aquifer In December, 1979. This map shows the heavy Impact of development on the aqul fer. In addition to Increased municipal and Industrial withdrawals, agricultural withdrawals had become significant by 1979. The cone of depress I on at A I bany had deepened and Its radius of Influence had spread to severa I nearby counties. The cone Is elongated toward the northwest In part because of heavy agricultural withdrawals In Calhoun, Randolph, Terrel I, and Lee Counties. The lowest measured hydraulic head was 57 tt at the VIrginia-carolina Chemical Company well In Albany. The hydraulic head In Dawson had dropped to 155 ft. Reductions In the elevation of the potentiometric surface were significant throughout most of the study area, except In areas of outcrop and stream control.
Figure 18 Is a map showing the potentiometric surface of the Clayton aquifer In October-November, 1981. Hydrau II c heads measured at thIs tl me were the lowest encountered to date. The tall of 1981 followed a winter of below normal rainfall (see Fig. 4) and a dry summer during which Irrigation withdrawals probably were greater than any previously. The

Albany cone of depression had extended northwest and merged with a smaller cone around Dawson. The lowest measured hydraulic head, 37 tt, was measured at the center of the Albany cone, whl le In Dawson the hydraulic head had declined to 125 ft.
Figure 19 Is the most recent potentiometric map of the C I ayton aquIfer and was constructed from measurements taken In March, 1982. Compared to the October~ovember, 1981 map, sIgn Itlcant Increases In hydraulic heads were encountered. Most of thIs Increase can be traced to the highly seasonal nature of withdrawals. In an area of high lrrl gatlon use, the potentiometric surface of the aquifer will rebound when pumps are shut ott at the end of the Irrigation season. In addition, rainfall during the winter of 1981-82 was slightly above normal following several years of comparative drought and the water-level rise may, In some areas, ret lect an Increase In recharge from this rainfall. The hydrau II c head at the center of the A I bany cone
of depress I on was 50 tt, wh II e In Dawson It was
148 ft. Long-term hydrographs aI so serve to Ill us-
trate the changes In water levels In the Clayton aquifer. Long-term hydrographs show trends over a per I od of years but do not ref I ect seasona I fluctuations In hydraulic heads. Figure 20 shows three such hydrographs. Figure 20a Is a composite hydrograph of three wells In the city of Dawson for the tl me per I od 1903 to 1981. In 1981, the hydraulic head In Dawson well No. 4 was 125 ft, compared to 324 ft In well No. 1 In 1903. ThIs represents a dec I I ne of 199 ft, an average of 25 tt per decade. FIgure 20b Is a composite hydrograph of two wells In the city of Edison spanning the years from 1910 to 1981. It shows a decline of 100 tt, an average of 14 tt per decade. FIgure 20c Is a hydrograph of the Atlantic Ice and Coal Company well In Albany from 1885 to 1955, after which the well was destroyed. During the period shown, the hydrau11 c head dec I I ned 88 tt, an average of 14 tt per decade.
Claiborne aquifer Maps of the potentiometric surface of the
Clalbqrne aquifer have been constructed tor tour periods: 1950-1959; December, 1979; OctoberNovember, 1981; and March, 1982. This sequence Illustrates trends In the potentiometric surface. Although withdrawals have caused some

24

84
- ,.,__f
""';~~. 'l,
, I
~J es
32

lj,o iMII.! II
"'~,.,....

/ E A R Ly

0

, /'"""

lttlluol

10

20

EXPlANATION

84
30 MILES

AREA OF OUTCROP AND STREAM CONTROL- Outcrop includes Clayton and Nanafalia Formations

FAULT- Dashed where approximately located. D indicates downthrown side, U indicates upthrown side

POTENTIOMETRIC CONTOUR- Shows altitude at which water level would have stood in tightly cased wells.1950- 1959. Dashed where approximately located. Contour interval 50 feet. Arrow indicates direction of ground-water flow . Datum is mean sea level ,

tttttttuttlttttttttttttlttlttttttlttt!lll

GR0UN0-WAT ER DIV IDE

e 39

DATA POINT- Numbers correspond to field numbers in Appendix A.

Figure 16. Potentiometric Surface of the Clayton Aquifer, 1950-1959 (modified from Rlpy and others, 1981).

25

84' 85'
32

84'

L y

0

10

20

30 MI LES

r-:- -- .rJ::~~J

EXPLANATION

'""''! K~ih1z:j

AREA OF OUTCROP AND STREAM CONTROl- Outcrop includes Clayton and Nanafalia Formations.

I _..Y__

J

D

Jl + 150-
~':

FAUlT- Dashed where approximately located . D indicates downthrown side, U indicates upthrown side.
POTENTIOMETRIC CONTOUR-Shows altitude at which water level would have stood in tightly cased wells, December 1979. Dashed where approximately located. Contour interval 25 feet. Arrow indicates direction of ground -water flow. Datum is mean sea level.

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUIIIIIIIIII
e84

GROUND-WATER DIVIDE DATA POINT-Numbers correspond to field numbers in Appendix C.

Figure 17. Potentiometric Surface of the Clayton Aquifer, December 1979 (modified from Rlpy and others, 1981).
26

s:s
32"

84" 32"

0

10

20

30 MILES

.1 --- '""''~ ~ r.~:-

t Sitrll'll~

D

1 -+1~0-

_j

EXPLANATION
AREA OF OUTCROP AND STREAM CONTROL- Outcrop includes Clayton and Nanafalia Formations. FAULT Dashed whore approximately located . D indicates downthrown side . U indicates upthrown
POTENTIOMETRIC CONTOUR . Shows altitude at which water level would have stood in tightly cased wells. October-November, 1981. Dashed where approximately located . Contour interval 25 feet. Arrqy.~ indicates direction of groundwater flow. Datum is mean sea level.

IUPIIIIIIIIO!tll
84

GROUNDWATER DIVIDE DATA POINT Numbers correspond to field numbers in Appendix C.

Figure 18. Potentiometric Surface of the Clayton Aquifer, OctoberNovember, 1981.
27

64" 85 32

64

A R LY

0

10

20

30 MILES

___ JJ::;j

EXPLANATION

'""~~ ~:::<<iH AREA OF OUTCROP AND STREAM CONTROL- Outcrop includes Clayton and Nanafalia Formations.

,
I
I
~"":._ J

---
u +150--

FAULT- Dashed where approximately located , 0 indicates downthrown side . U indicates upthrown side.
POTENTIOMETRIC CONTOUR- Shows altitude at which water level would have stood in tightly cased wells, March, 1982. Dashed where approximately located. Contour interval 25 feet. Arrow indicates direc.tion of ground-water flow. Datum is mean sea level.

"""""""""" GROUND -WATER DIVIDE

ea4

DATA POINT- Numbers correspond to field numbers in Appendix C.

Figure 19. Potentiometric Surface of the Clayton Aquifer, March 1982. 28

340

320

~
UJ 300
.Uu....J..

UJ 280

0

~ a:

260

::J
en 240

a:
~ 220
< 3: u.. 200
0

UJ 180

0

::J

I-
i=

160

..J
< 140

Average Decline 25 feet/decade
A Dawson Well No. 1
Dawson Well No. 3 Dawson Well No. 4

1900

I 0

1940

1960

1980

TIME (YEARS)

Sources: Stevenson and Veatch, 1915; Wa~, 1960 (c); U.S. Geological Survey, unpublished data.

260

~
UJ UJ

!:;. 240

UJ
a0<u.:. e::nJ 220 a:
UJ 1-
< 3: u.. 200
0

UJ

0

::J

1-
i=

18 0

..J

<

Average Decline 14 feet/decade
A Edison Well No. 1
Edison Well No. 2

1910

193 0

1950

1970

19 90

TIME (YEARS)

Sources: Stevenson and Veatch, 1915; Wait, 1969 (a); Georgia Geologic Survey open -file data.

~ 220
UJ UJ
~
UJ
<0ua.:. 200 e::nJ a:
~ 180
< 3: u..
0
UJ 180
0
.:.:.J.
i= <..J
140

Average Decline 14 feel/decade

120 ' - - . . - - - . . -- ..---.---- .----.---- .-----,

1880

19 D

19 0

IO ~ D

TIME (YEARS)

Sources: Stevenson and Veatch, 1915; Walt, 1963; U.S. Geological Survey, unpublished data.

Figure 20.

Long-term Hydrographs of Clayton Aquifer Wells. a>. Composite hydrograph of Dawson City wei Is. b). Composite hydrograph of Edison City wells. c). Hydrograph of Atlantic Ice and Coal Co. well. (Modified from Rlpy and others, 1981 )

29

local declines, the Cl11lborne aquifer has remained relatively stable throughout most of the study area.
Figure 21 Is a map of the potentiometric surface of the CIa I borne aquIfer tor the tl me period 1950-1959, when the aquifer was relatively unaffected by development. Hydraulic heads ranged from approximately 500 tt In the extreme northern section of the study area to 163 tt In Albany. The map shows the Influence of surface streams on the potentiometric surface. The CIa I borne aquIfer crops out a long many streams In the western and northern parts of the study area. Under most streamflow conditions, the aquifer discharges Into these streams.
F I gu re 22 Is a map of the potentIometrIc surface of the C 111 I borne aquIfer for December, 1979. Impact on the aquIfer by thIs date had been mostly local. The most prominent change was the cone of depression which had developed around the city of Albany due primarily to municipal withdrawals. Approximately 49 percent of withdrawals from Albany city wells In 1978 w11s from the Claiborne aquifer (Hicks and others, 1981). The hydraulic head In Albany City Well No. 17 was 95 tt In 1979 compared to 163 tt In 1951, a decline of 68ft In 28 years. The only other area of significant decline from the 1950's to 1979 was near the city of Cordele, where the Claiborne aquifer Is used extensively due to low yields from the Clayton aquifer. The hydraulic head In Cordele City Well No.4 WIIS 239 ft In 1979 compared to 266 tt In 1954, a decline rate of II tt per decade. In most other parts of the study area, declines In the Claiborne aquifer were less than 10 tt tor this time period.
F lgure 23 Is a map of the potentiometric surface of the CIa I borne aquIfer tor OctoberNovember, 1981. Some of the lowest hydrau II c heads measured to date were recorded In the fall of 1981. The radius of Influence of the cone of depression around Albany had spread Into neighboring counties. In Albany, the hydrau lie head had declined to 95ft; In Cordele It was 238ft.
Figure 24 Is the most recent potentiometric map of the CIa I borne aquIfer, constructed from measurements taken In March, 1982. As with the Clayton aquifer, the seasonal nature of withdrawals 11nd Its effect on water levels Is Illustrated. Significant Increases In hydraulic head were observed throughout most of the study area In the March, 1982 measurements. However, the

hydraulic he11d In Albany declined slightly to 93 ft. In Cordele the hydr11ullc head was 247 tt, up 9ft from the previous tall. Comparison with earlier potentiometric maps again shows that throughout most of the study area the CIll I borne aquifer has remained relatively st11ble.
SHORT-TERM POTENTIOMETRIC FLUCTUATIONS Potentiometric levels In aquifers vary sea-
sona II y because of f I uctu11tl ons In recharge and discharge. Munlclplll and agricultural wlthdrllwals are greatest during the dry months of July through October. More th11n 25 continuously operating water-level recorders have been In-
stalled on observation wells by the u.s. Geo-
logical Survey and the Georgia Geologic Survey to monitor water-level fluctuations In the Clayton and Claiborne aquifers. Although the greatest rainfall amounts occur In spring and early summer months, this Is also a period of h lgh evapotranspiration. This I lmlts the rlllntall aval table tor recharge to aquifers. Winter Is the season when most recharge to the aquifers occurs. Rainfall events are steady and evenly distributed and evapotranspiration r11tes low. Fall Is generally the driest season and &lso tol lows the season of greatest ground-water use. Therefore, potentiometric levels are usually highest In early spring 11nd lowest In tall.
Clayton aquifer FIgure 25a Is a hydrograph of an unused
municipal well located In Cuthbert, 45 ml northwest of Albany, tor the period 1972 to 1981. This hydrograph reflects both the Increased seasonal fluctuation and the long-term decline In potentiometric levels due to variations In rainfa II and pumpage. Potentiometric lows occur during the dry months of late summer and early fa I I while highs occur during the peak recharge months of winter and e~~rly spring. Since 19~5, the seasona I lows have been be low those of each preceding year while seasonal highs have not returned to former levels. This Is due to D combination of reduced rainfall and Increased wlthdrawa Is, partIcularly for lrr I gatlon, resulting In a net loss In 11qulter storage (see Fig. 4, rainfall departure curve tor Cuthbert>.
FIgure 25b Is a hydrograph of a CI ayton aquifer observation well located near the center of the Albany cone of depression. A record low hydrau II c head of 63 ft was observed In August 1981. This hydrograph also shows the Increased seasonal fluctuations and long-term declines.

30

85' 32'

84' 32 '

R LY

0

84'

10

20

30 MILES

I
I lui I S:.oo..g'lo
jI -uD---
~:. J t-200-

EXPLANATION
AREA OF OUTCROP AND STREAM CONTROL- Outcrop includes Tallahatta and Lisbon Formations
FAULT- Dashed where approximately located . D indicates downthrown side, U indicates upthrown side .
POTENTIOMETRIC CONTOUR- Shows altitude at which water level would have stood in tightly cased wells, 1950 1959 . Dashed where approximately located. Contour interval 50 feet . Arrow indicates direction of ground-water flow . Datum is mean sea level.

GROUND-WATER DIVIDE

6

DATA POINT Numbers corn!spond to field numbers in Appendix B.

Figure 21. Potentiometric Surface of the Claiborne Aquifer, 1950-1959. (Modified from Rlpy and others, 1981).
31

es
32"

84"

r--"-,

I

I

~~ ~
I u

L_-1,-...

_

/

I

.. M

'l,
J ( _lI __ _

32 "

R Ly

0

10

20

30 MILES

EXPLANATION

+--

AREA OF OUTCROP AND STREAM CONTROl- Outcrop includes Tallahatta and lisbon Formations. FAUlT- Dashed where approximately located. D indicates down1hrown side, U indicates upthrown side.

+200--

POTENTIOMETRIC CONTOUR- Shows altitude at which water level would have stood in tightly cased wells , December,1979, Dashed where appro xim ately located. Contour interval 50 feet. Arrow indicates direction of ground-water flow . Datum is mean sea level

77

DATA POINT-Numbers correspond to field numbers in Appendix D.

Figure 22. Potentiometric Surface of the Claiborne Aquifer, December 1979. (Modified from Rlpy and others, 1981).

32

'l.
cj
( lI __ _

l

I

______ .._.....,...

, I
I

~~~~~~~~ ~

I I

32"

L y

0

84

10

20

30 MILES

/ JD_m,_m,--"J ~ -- ---1

EXPLANATION

Lu,.fe,

i [l(~i3 l

AREA Of OUTCROP AND STREAM CONTROL- Outcrop includes Tallahatta and Lisbon formations .

I1 - - - FAULT Dashed where approximately located. D indicates downthrown side , U indicates upthrown side. u

1 i-200-- POTENTIOMETRIC CONTOUR Shows altitude at which water level would have stood in tightly cased wells.

_j

October -November. 1981 Dashed where approximately located. Contour interval 50 feet. Arrow indicates direction of ground-water flow. Datum is mean sea level.

DATA POINT Numbers correspond to field numbers in Appendix D.

Figure 23. Potentiometric Surface of the Claiborne Aquifer, OctoberNovember, 1981.

33

85 32

84'

l,

cd
~

_lI __ _

...r-----,
I
l
I '
I
I
I
I

32"

0

10

20

30 MILES

EXPLANATION

AREA OF OUTCROP AND STREAM CONTROL- Outcrop includes Tallahatta and Lisbon Formations.

FAULT - Dashed where approximately located . D indicates downthrown side. U indicates upthrown side .

POTENTIOMETRIC CONTOUR - Shows altitude at which water level would have stood in tightly cased wetls .
March 1982. Dashed where approximately located . Contour interval 50 feet. Arrow indicates direction of ground -water flow . Datum is mean sea level.

se

DATA POINT- Numbers correspond to field numbers in Appendix D.

Figure 24. Potentiometric Surface of the Claiborne Aquifer, March 1982.

34

LIJ
~
~ -125

CLAYTON AQUIFER CUTHBERT, GEORGIA

~ -130
g-140 ~ <...Jt - 135 -
LIJ cil

...J
~
L..I.JJ
<[
w 320 (/)
g w
31 5 <t
3 10 tft-l IJ..
305 ~

fww

-145

IJ..

300 ~
::J

6 -150
_j
>w -155 ~

295 I~::
290 <uwt

a:: -160
~ 1972 1973 1974

1975

1976

1977 1978 1979 1980

1981

285 Lt
~
(/)
a::
LIJ

t:i:

3:

~
Lt
~ -70

CLAYTON AQUIFER TURNER CITY , GA. 2

0
~
~ -90 -

!l:l - 100 -

t;:j -1 10
LIJ IJ..
~ -120
d
Gj -130 -
...J
ffi -140 -

!::(

;:

1972

1973

1974

1975

1976

1977

w
Gj
...J

<(

- 133 l:l

LIJ
123 l>il

<[

- 113 t;:j

~ 103 ~

w 93 0

::J

5 83 f-

73 < LIJ

63 ~

!3

1
19 78 -:1:9:::7::c9::-LI:9::-8::--0::-'-:-1:9::-8::-;I-...J

(/)
a::
~

;&:

Figure 25.

Hydrogrephs of Clayton Aquifer Wells. e>. City of

Cuthbert, Randolph County. b). Turner City, Dougherty

u.s. County. (Source of data

Geological Survey>.

Claiborne agulfer Prior to 1977, water levels In the Clai-
borne aquifer were essentially unmonltored. The
u.s. Geological Survey now maintains several ob-
servation wells In and near Albany. Seasonal f luctuatlons of 10 to 16 tt have been observed wlth In the A I bany cone of depress I on. Fl gure 26e Is a hydrograph of Test Well 2, located east of the Flint River and within the Albany cone of depression. Seasona I lows occur In the dry months of late summer and fe II wh II e season a I h1ghs occur In the early spring. Seasonal fluctuet Ions very from 7 to 16 ft; however, the

period ot record ls too short to establish any long-term trends. Figure 26b Is a hydrograph of a Claiborne aquifer wei I located In Kolomokl State Park In Ear I y County. Seasona I f I uctuatlons are 1 to 3 ft although, again, the period of record Is too short to establish any longterm trends. ThIs hydrograph II I ustrates the effect of below- normal rainfall at this site, which Is near the outcrop of the Claiborne aquifer. Recovery of water levels was very slight during the relatively dry winter of 1980-81. Water levels then dropped sharply during the spring and summer of 1981.

35

Uu J

~

a:: ~

-55

0z -60 j

g~ -65

UJ ID

-70

1-
UJ -7 Uu.J. ~ -80
_j
w>UJ - 85
__J
ffi -90 ti -95
~

CLAIBORNE AQUIFER USGS T.W. 2 DOUGHERTY CO.
'\.._
1977 1978 1979 1980

t
1981 1982

__J
U> J
UJ
__J

<[

UJ

140 >w"'

135

0
II)

ct.

130

1UJ

125

Uu.J.
~

120

u.i
0

:::>

115 :I:;:

110 <[ uUJ
105 ~ a::
100 ~ a::
UJ
i

CLAIBORNE AQUIFER

Uu J ~

~

(/)
0

-74

~

__J

KOLOMOKI PARK

g~ -7 5

UJ
II)

1UJ
Uu.J. -76

~

_j

>UJ

UJ
__J

-77

a::

UJ

1-
3i -78 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981

1982

__J
>UJ
UJ
__J
ct.
UJ
236 eU";J'

II) <[

1UJ
235 Uu.J.
~

u.i
0
234 ~

5
<[

233 tJ

~

a::

::::>

C/l

232

a::
UJ

!;i

3:'

Figure 26.

u.s. Hydrographs of Claiborne Aquifer Wells. a).
Geological Survey TW 2, located south of Albany, Dougherty County. b). Georgia Geologic Survey test well located In Kolomokl Park, Early County.

GROUND-wATER AVAILABILITY GENERAL
The ava I I ab I II ty of water from an aquIfer Is dependent on the complex Interaction of many factors Including volume of the aquifer, hydraulic properties, relatlonshl p to overlying and underlying aquifers and surface streams, the amount and distribution of recharge and the amount and distribution of withdrawals. While It Is not possible to evaluate all these relationships In this report, the following sections will discuss some of these relationships and provide some Insight Into the availability of ground water from the Clayton and Claiborne aquifers.
The hydrau II c propertIes of aquIfers are quantified In terms of transmissivity and storage coefficient. Transmissivity Is the rate at whIch water wIll move through a unIt wIdth of aquifer under a unit hydraulic gradient. It Is, therefore, an lnd I cat I on of how an aquIfer wIll transmit water and Is commonly expressed In units of teet squared per day (tt2/d). Aquifers with transmissivity values of less than 150 tt2/d are suited only tor domestic or other use not .requiring high yields. Transmissivity
v~ I ues of 1500 tt2/d or greater are adequate

tor most municipal, Industrial, or agricultural

purposes (Johnson, Inc., 1975, p. 102). Storage

coefficient Is the volume of water which an

aquifer releases from storage per unit surface

area of aquifer per unit change In head. It Is,

therefore, a measure of the quantity of us,able

water stored In an aquifer and Is a dimension-

less number. Values of this coefficient vary

greatly In nature and range from 10-5 to

lo-2 In confined aquifers.

There Is no

direct relationship between storage coefficient

a.nd availability of water from an aquifer.

Another usetu I term In discussIng ground-

water aval lability Is specific capacity. Speci-

fic capacity Is defined as the rate of withdraw-

al (volume per unit time) per unit drop In water

level In a pumping well. Specific capacity Is

therefore a measure of the yield of a pumping

well In a given aquifer. Units are commonly

gallons per minute per toot of drawdown

(gpm/ft). Note that specific capacity Is depen-

dent not only on the hydraulic properties of the

aquifer but also on the construction of the

well. Variations In specific capacity may or

may not Indicate changes In the hydrau lie prop-

erties of the aquifer.

36

CLAYTON AQUIFER Hydraulic properties
The range and dlstrl button of transmissivity and specific capacity within the Clayton aquIfer are shown In FIgure 27. 1 The transmissivity of the Clayton aquifer varies greatly In the study area. Low values (200-600 tt 2/d) occur south of Albany and east of the Flint River In Crisp and Dooly Counties. The yield of the C I ayton aquIfer In tl'lese areas Is too low tor municipal, Industrial, or Irrigation use. High values (5,000-12,000 tt2/d) occur In the relatively small area of central Clay County, central and southern Randolph and Terrell Counties, and southern Lee County. Intermediate values of 1000-5000 f1,2/d are present In the A I bany area west through Ca Umun and northern Early Counties. The areas of greatest use of the aquIfer correspond to areas of In termed late
+o high transmlssl vlty. Note that the bound-
aries of the areas Indicated In Figure 27 are Indefinite. It Is possible that for an Individual well In any given location, transmlsslvltles and specific capacities may differ from the range gIven.
The large range of transmissivity values In the Clayton aquifer Is the result of several factors. Because the Clayton Formation was deposited on an erosional surface and was Itself eroded after deposition, Its thickness varies greatly over relatively short distances. Facies changes also occur In the Clayton Formation. East of the F II nt RIver and south of AI bany the limestone which makes up the aquifer thins and Increases In clay content, greatly reducing transmlsslv,lty. In the northern part of the stu.dy area, the limestone has been partly or completely removed through solution and erosion, leaving a sandy clay residuum which also has a relatively low transmissivity. Only In the
The transmlsslvltles within the Clayton and C 1a 1borne aqu I tars gIven In FIgures 27 and 28 were calculated by several different methods, depending on the amount of data available. The accuracy of these methods varIes; a I though due to the Iarge number of variables Involved, It Is not possible to place numerlca I limits on the error. A II methods lnvol ve some error, depending on the degree to which the assumptions of the method are met In nature. The reader may study the references cl ted on FIgures 27 and 28 tor a more complete discussion of the assumptIons and errors of the d I tferent methods used for calculating transmissivity.
37

relatively small area Indicated In Figure 27 as having Intermediate to high (for the Clayton aquifer) transmissivity Is the aquifer suitable for high-yielding wells.
Few va I ues of storage coetf I c I ent In the Clayton aquifer have been calculated due to a lack of complete aquifer tests. An aquifer test performed on the Clayton aquifer during con-
struction of the Walter F. George Dam near Ft. GaInes resu I ted In ca I cuI ated storage coeff 1clents of 2.5 x 10-3 to 2.8 x 10-5 (Stewart, 1973). At the Georgia Department of Natura I Resources fIsh hatchery west of Dawson, an aquifer test yielded a storage coefficient of 1. 3 x 10-4 One of the test we I Is dr I I I ed for thIs study, I ocated on the C. T. Mart In farm In southeastern Randol ph County, recorded the drawdown produced by a nearby Irrigation well. The calculated storage coefficient from this record was 1.7 x to-4.

Recharge

Recharge to the Clayton aquifer occurs In

the outcrop area by Infiltration of rainfall and

by I eakage of ground water Into the C I ayton

aquifer from other aquifers In the study area.

Recharge due to rainfall Inti ltratlon Is

I lmlted for several reasons. The outcrop area

of the Clayton aquIfer Is of I lmlted extent.

Estimating from a geologic map of the area

(Georgia Geologic Survey, 1976) and cross
sections <Plate t>, the outcrop area Is only
about 70/80 m1 2 Also, the relatively low

permeabl llty of the weathered residuum of the

C I ayton II mestone coup I ed wIth reI at I ve I y steep

s I opes a Iong stream va I I eys where the outcrops

occur results In most of the rainfall which Is

not evapotransplred leaving the outcrop area as

surface runoff. It Is possible that the outcrop

areas of adjacent formations, which are confin-

Ing units downdlp but are sandy and relatively

permeable In the updlp areas, also contribute

recharge to the Clayton aquifer.

A t low-net analysIs of the CIayton aquIfer

was conducted using the 1950's potentiometric

map (Fig. 16) and the transmissivity data avail-

able for the aquifer (fig. 27). The analysis

Indicates that 16.6 Mgal/d flow south out of the

outcrop area of the CI ayton aquIfer Into the

area of greatest use. About 1.9 Mgal/d of this

flows to the Chattahoochee River, leaving only

14.7 Mgal/d effectively recharging the aquifer.

The accuracy of a flow-net analysis Is deter-

mined by the accuracy of the transmissivity data

and the potentiometric map as well as by the

assumptions Inherent In the method.

(See

Bennett, 1962 for a more complete discussion).

84 85

0

5

I II I I I 1

10
I I

20 miles I

EXPLANATION

E1Z] Generalized Outcrop Area

~ Transmissivity 5000 ft 2/day to 13,000 ft 2/day Specific Capacity greater than 15 gpm/ft

~ Transmissivity 1000 ft 2/day to 5000 It 2/day Specific Capacity 1 gpm/lt to 15 gpm/ft

IJIIII] Transmissivity less than 1000 ft 2/day Specific Capacity less than 2 gpm/ft

D No data


2500 A B
c
o

Well location
Transmissivity in tt 2/day
Transmissivity estimated from a specific capacity. (Source: Brown et al. 1963, pg. 337)
Transmissivity estimated from a specific capacity using an estimated pumping time of 12 hours. (Sou~ce: Brown et al., 1963 , pg, 337)
Transmissivity estimated from Jacob's approximation of the Theis Nonequilibrium Equation (Source: U.S. Department of the Interior, 1977, pg 113)
Transmissivity estimated from a pumping test with an observation well using the Theis Nonequilibrium Equation

E Transmissivity from Hicks, Krause. and Clarke,

84

1981, pg. 15.

Transmissivity from Stewart, 1973, pg 1.

Anomalous transmissivity values which may be the result of well construction.

Figure 27. Transmissivity of the Clayton Aquifer.

38

Recharge to the Clayton aquIfer may also occur from other aquifers In the study area. Where potentiometric heads of other aquifers are higher than those of the Clayton aquifer, water can move from the other aquifers Into the Clayton aquifer If some pathway exists. This can occur through leaky confining units, Improperly constructed wei Is, or multlaqulfer wells which are not pumping. Potentiometric head relationships are such that leakage to the Clayton aquifer from the Principal Artesian, Claiborne, and Providence Sand aquifers Is poss I b I e. However, the Pr Inc I pa I ArtesIan and Claiborne aquifers are effectively confined from the Clayton aquifer and It Is unlikely that any significant amount of leakage occurs. The confining unit separating the Clayton and Providence Sand aquifers, on the other hand, may permit significant amounts of ground water to move from the Providence Sand Into the Clayton aquifer. As mentioned previously, some water quality data suggest that leakage occurs (page 12>. The amount of this leakage Is not known.
Leakage through Idle multlaqulter wells has been documented In the Albany area. Hicks and other~ ( 1981, p. 20) estimated that 1.1 Mgal/d flows from the CIa I borne and Providence Sand aquifers Into the Clayton aquifer through Idle multlaqulter wells In the Albany area. Added to the 14.7 Mgal/d from rainfall Infiltration, the known recharge to the Clayton aquifer Is at least 15.8 Mgal/d.
Analysis of ground-water aval lability The area In which the Clayton aquifer Is
productive Is relatively small and has been extensively developed tor municipal and Irrigation use. Withdrawals total about 26 Mgal/d, probably a conservative number, whl le known recharge to the aquifer Is only about 15.8 Mgal/d. Although leakage to the Clayton aquifer from the Providence Sand aquifer may be significant, It Is stl II probable that withdrawals from the C I ayton aquIfer exceed recharge. ThIs explains the rapidly declining potentiometric surface In the Clayton aquifer Illustrated by hydrographs and potentiometric maps. The highest concentratIon of wI thdrawa Is from the Clayton Aquifer, the Albany area, Is located at the extreme southeastern edge of the productive area of the aquifer. Albany also Is removed from recharge from the outcrop area because the most dIrect II ne of recharge, through northern Terrell and southern Webster Counties, Is restricted by relatl vely low transmlss I vltles.

The elongate cone of depression centered at Albany Is the result not only of Albany's large withdrawals, but of higher transmlsslvltles and large Irrigation withdrawals In the more productive area of the Clayton aquifer to the northwest of A I bany.
It Is not possible at this time to predict the future of the Clayton aquifer. Future rainfa II and growth In ground-water use are not known and, as the aquifers In the study area are further developed, potentiometric relationships may change to eIther Increase or decrease the amount of leakage to the Clayton aquifer. However, It Is unlikely that the long-term declines In water levels will cease. Declines In potentiometric levels can be expected to cause problems of reduction In well yields while pumping costs Increase. Users In some areas may find It necessary to reset pumps, Increase the depth of existing wells, or drill new wells.

CLAIBORNE AQUIFER

Hydraulic properties

The range and distribution of transmissivi-

ty within the Claiborne aquifer are shown In

Figure 28. Ranges of specific capacity also are

Indicated. Transmissivity In the Claiborne

aquifer Is more evenly distributed than In the

Clayton aquifer, although significant variations

can be seen. Transmissivity values throughout

most of the study area are In the 2000-6000

ft2/d range. In A I bany, the range Is 2800-

6000 tt2 /d. HIghest va I ues occur east of the

Flint RIver In Crisp and Dooly Counties, where

transmissivity values In excess of 10,000

ft2/d have been calculated.

The Claiborne

aquifer Is widely used In these two counties to

supply municipal and Irrigation wells. For a

I arge part of the study area II tt I e or no data

are available. Note that the boundaries Indi-

cated In Figure 28 are Indefinite. It Is possi-

ble that tor an Individual wei I In a given

location transmlsslvltles and specific capaci-

ties may differ from the range given.

The unl form dlstrl button of transmlssl vlty

In the CIa I borne aquIfer when compared to the

Clayton aquifer Is the result of a more uniform

thickness and lithology. The thickness of the

CIa I borne aquIfer does not vary as great I y over

short distances as that of the Clayton aquifer.

East of the Flint River In Crisp and Dooly Coun-

ties, the saturated, permeable thickness of sand

units within the Claiborne aquifer Increases to

over 100ft. Transmissivity and wei I yields In-

39

84"
-,,-,_ _f
""""'"
l i ~'
85
32

A R LY
31" 85"

0

10

I 11 d t , 1 l I

20 Miles

EXPLANATION

ETI Generalized Outcrop Area

~ Transmissivity 5000 tt 2/day to 15,000 tt 2tday Specific Capacity 15 gpmlft to 50 gpm/ft



Transmissivity 2000 tt 2/day to 5000 ft 2/day

Specific Capacity 8 gpm/ft to 15 gpm/ft

D

1700

Insufficient data t9 give a range in transmissivity
Well location
Transmissivity in tt 2/day

A Transmissivity estimated from a specific capacity. (Source: Brown et al., 1963, pg. 337)

B Transmissrvity estimated from a specific capacity using an estimated pumping time of 12 hours. (Source: Brown et al., 1963, pg_ 337)

C Transmissivity estimated from Jacob's approximation of the Theis Nonequilibrium Equation,
(Source: U.S. Department of the Interior, 1977, pg. 113)

D Transmissivity from Sverdrup and Parcel and Associates. Inc. 1979.
* Anomalous transmissivity values which may be the result of well construction.

84

Figure 28. Transmissivity of the Claiborne Aquifer.

40

crease In the same area. Throughout most of the

study area, It Is possible that properly con-

structed wells can be relatively high-yielding

(several hundred to 1000-2000 gpm), although

large drawdowns are to be expected.

The value of storage coefficient In the

Claiborne aquifer Is known In only two loca-

tions. An aquifer test at the Miller Brewing

Company plant In Albany resulted In storage

coefficients calculated In the range of 2.84 x

10-4

to

1. 12

X

10-3

(data

from

Severdrup, Parcel and Associates, 1979). During

construction of the Columbia lock and dam on the

Chattahoochee River In Early County, an aquifer

test resulted In storage coefficients within the range of 4.3 X 10-4 to 9.9 X 10-4

Recharge Recharge to the CIa 1borne aqu 1fer occurs
mostly as Infiltration of rainfall In areas of outcrop. The area of outcrop of the CIa 1borne aquifer has been estimated from a geologic map of the area (Georgia Geologic Survey, 1976) and cross sections <Plate 2) to be about 350 m1 2
u.s. Geological Survey computer models of aqui-
fers near this area Indicate . that of the 48 to 52 ln. of annual rainfall, 30 to 35 ln. are lost through evapotranspiration whl le about 12 ln. go to the runoff of surface streams. This leaves approximately 6 to 8 ln. of rainfall annually to
recharge the aquifer (L.R. Hayes, u.s. Geologi-
cal Survey, oral communication, 1982). In the case of the Claiborne aquifer, this would amount to an average recharge of 100-133 Mgal/d. Note that this Is a very rough estimate.
Recharge to the Claiborne aquifer also may occur from other aquifers In the study area when potentiometric head relationships are favorable and pathways exist. It Is possible that signifIcant quantities of water are roovlng from the Principal Artesian Aquifer to the Claiborne aquifer In this manner, particularly In the A I bany area where the potentIometrIc head dIfterence between these two aquifers has been Increased by heavy use of the Claiborne aquifer. Hicks and others (1981) have cited water quality evidence Indicating possible leakage from the Principal Artesian Aquifer to the Claiborne aquifer In the Albany area. The amount of this leakage Is not known, although It Is probably not large when compared to recharge through lnfl ltratlon of rainfall. The Principal Artesian Aquifer does not ex'tend over exactly the same area as the Claiborne aquifer and only In the A I bany area are head dIt ferences hIgh I y favorable to leakage.

Analysts of ground-water avallabl llty Ground water Is distributed more uniformly
In the CIa I borne aquIfer than f.n the , CI ayton aquifer. Although a conservative estimate of ground-water withdrawals from the Claiborne aquifer In the study area Is 36 Mgal/d, this estimate Is still only about one-third to onequarter of the estimated recharge of 100-133 Mgal/d. However, the hydraulic properties of the aquifer are such that large withdrawals concentrated In relatively smal I areas can be expected to cause locally severe potentiometric declines, as can be seen on the recent potentlometr I c maps In the A I bany area.
Before extensive development, It Is probable that a large part of the 100-133 Mgal/d recharge to the CIa I borne aquIfer supported the base flow of the many streams In the study area along which the aquifer crops out. If the 7day, 10-year recurrence- I nterva I ml n I mum stream flow Is taken as an estimate of base flow <Thomson and Carter, 1963; Carter and Putman, 1978), then the estimated discharge of the Claiborne aquIfer Into surface streams In the study area Is an average 45 to 68 Mga I /d. In the undeve Ioped aquIfer, the rest of the recharge either leaked to other aquifers or flowed out of the study area. It Is therefore poss I b I e that development of the aquifer could adversely affect the base t low of streams In the study area. Potentiometric heads of the aquifer In the outcrop area have thus tar remained stable, as this Is not the most heavily developed area of the aquifer. Potentiometric heads are stabilized by rapid recharge from rainfall lntlltrat 1on and the ef feet of the streams themse I ves. However, If potentiometric levels In the Claiborne aquifer are lowered through withdrawals, base flow of streams could be reduced.
This study Indicates that the Claiborne aqu fer can sustain current withdrawals and pos~lbly sustain even greater withdrawals It they were evenly distributed throughout the aquifer. The Claiborne aquifer has the advantage of unIform dl str I but I on of hydrau II c properties and rapid recharge from a relatively I arge outcrop area. Large wI thdrawa Is concentrated Into small areas can be expected to cause rapidly declining potentiometric levels (and the associated problems) and reduced aquifer discharge to surface streams.

41

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
CLAYTON AQUIFER The Clayton aquifer consists mostly of
saturated II mestone whIch makes up the ml dd Ie unit of the Clayton Formation. The aquifer dips southeast In the study area. Because of the erosional nature of the upper and lower contacts of the formation, the thickness of the aquifer varies greatly over relatively short distances.
The Clayton aquifer Is used extensively In the study area tor municipal, Industrial, and agrlcu ltura I ground-water supplies. Water use In these three categories has Increased In recent years, but the most dramatl c Increases have been tor Irrigation. Total water use from the Clayton aquifer Is estimated to be 26 Mgal/d.
Severe potentiometric declines have occurred In the Clayton aquifer. A cone of depress Ion has formed around AIbany, where the potentIometrIc head has dec I Ined about 170 tt s lnce 1885. The rate of decline has Increased since the 1950's and the Albany cone of depression has spread Into nearby counties.
The area In which the hydrau lie properties of the Clayton aquifer will support large withdrawals Is relatively small. In addition, r~ charge to the Clayton aqu Iter from ralnfa II Inti ltratlon Is restricted for several reasons, and Is estimated to average only about 14.7 Mgal/d. While recharge from other sources, particularly leakage from the underlying Providence aquifer, may be significant, It Is apparent that wlthdrawa Is from the CIayton aquIfer exceed recharge. In light of this condition and the distribution of hydraulic properties, the rapid potentiometric dec I lnes which have occurred In the past In the Clayton aqu 1fer can be expected to continue In the future. The rate of this decline will depend on several factors, the combined effects of which are not known.
CLAIBORNE AQUIFER The Claiborne aquifer consists mostly of
saturated sands and sandy limestones within the Claiborne Group and the Hatchetlgbee Formation. The aquifer dips to the southeast In the study area i!!nd genera II y thIckens to the south and southeast.
Within the study area, the Claiborne aquifer Is used for municipal, Industrial, agriculture I, and domestIc ground-water supp II es. Use of the Claiborne aquifer for Irrigation Is limited mo!;t.ly to areas where yields from the

Clayton aquifer are Insufficient for Irrigation wells. Total water use from the Claiborne aquifer Is estimated to be 36 Mgal/d.
Potentiometric decl lnes In the Claiborne aquifer are less widespread than In the Clayton aquifer, and are due mostly to local municipal, Industrial, and agricultural withdrawals. The hydrau II c head dropped 70 ft In AIbany and 28 ft In Cordele from the 1950's to 1981. Declines throughout the rest of the study area have been smal I, but have Increased In recent years.
Hydraulic properties of the Claiborne aquifer are more evenly distributed than In the Clayton aquifer. However, large withdrawals concentrated In sma I I areas can be expected to cause large potentiometric declines. Recharge to the Claiborne aquifer from rainfall Infiltration Is well distributed throughout the study area and Is estimated to average 100-133 Mgal/d, far In excess of current withdrawals. The Claiborne aquifer Is able to sustain current withdrawals; however, significant potentiometric declines could adversely affect stream base flow.
RECCM-1ENDA T1 ONS Declining potentiometric levels In the
Clayton and Claiborne aquifers have already caused some of the problems listed below. These problems can be expected to continue or worsen, whl le others listed may arise, It potentiometric levels continue to decline.
(1) Well yields may be reduced and pumping costs Increased.
(2) Shallow wells may go dry, requiring that the well be drll led deeper or a new well be drilled.
(3) Ground-water levels may drop below the level of pumps, necessitating the expense of resetting pumps or possibly causing damage to the pumps.
(4) Wei Is may col lapse It water levels drop below the well casing.
(5) Ground-water levels may be reduced to a depth at which It will no longer be economical to pump the water.
(6) Flow In some streams and springs may be reduced or cease altogether.
It Is apparent that, a Ithough the groundwater resources In the study area are adequate to sustain current withdrawals and provide tor some future growth, no single aquifer In the study area can supply all the ground water needed. In order to make the best use of the ground-water resources available In the study area, the tol lowing recommendations are made.

42

(1) The use of multlaqulfer construction should be encouraged for municipal, Industrial, and Irrigation wells requiring high yields. This will Increase well yields and reduce the Impact on each aquifer. Multlaqulfer wells may Include any advantageous combination of the aquifers In the study area <Principal Artesian, Clayton, Claiborne, and Providence) where they are productive and where water quality problems are not a possibility. These wells would relieve some of the stress on the most heavily Impacted aquifer, the Clayton, and may also serve as points of recharge to the Clayton aquifer.
(2) Construction of new high-yielding wells should avoid concentrating heavy ground-water demand In relatively small areas, particularly If these wei Is would be producing from the same aquifer.
(3) Long-range ground-water monitoring Is recommended so that effects of future development of the Clayton and Claiborne aquifers can be evaluated continuously. The test wells equipped wIth contInuous water-1 eve I recorders whIch were constructed for thIs proJect will serve part of this function.
(4) Maintain records of water use. Evaluation of the ground-water resources of this or any area Is not possible without accurate, up-to-date know Iedge of the distribution and amount of groundwater withdrawals.
(5) Assess the posslbl I tty of using deeper Cretaceous aquifers as possible future sources of ground water In the area. Developing deeper aquifers may have a detrimental effect on the quality of water from shallower aquifers.
REFERENCES
Bennett, R.R., 1962, Flow-net analysis, In Ferris, J.G., Knowles, D.B., Brown, R.H., and Stallman, R.W., Theory of aquifer tests: u.s. Geologica I Survey Water Supply Paper 1536-E, p. 139-144.
Brown, R.H., 1963, Estimating the transmissibility of an artesian aquifer from the specific capacity of a well: u.s. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper, 1536-1, p. 336338.

Carter, R.T ., and Putnam, S.A., 1978, Low-flow frequency of Georgia streams: u.s. GeologIcal Survey Water-Resources Investigations Open-File Report 77-127, 104 p.

Clarke, J.s., Hester, W.G., and 0 1Byrne, M.P., 1979, Ground-water levels and quality data for Georgia, 1978: u.s. Geological Survey Open-File Report 79. 1290.
Clark, w.z., and Zlsa, A.c., 1976, Physiographic
map of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey. 1:2,000,000.

Cooke, c.w., 1943, Geology of the Coastal Plain of Georgia: u.s. Geological Survey Bulletin 941, p. 7.

Cramer, H.R., and Arden, D.D., 1980, Subsurface Cretaceous and Paleocene geology of the Coasta I Plain of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Open-File Report 80-8, 184 p.

Crews, P.A., 1983(a), Geologic sections of the
Claiborne aquifer, J!!.. Arora, R., editor,
Hydrologic Evaluation for Underground In-
Jection Control In Georgia: Georgia Geo-
logic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 10, In p.rep.

Crews, P.A., 1983(b), Water quality In the Clai-
borne Aquifer, J!!.. Arora, R., editor, Hydro-
logic Evaluation for Underground Injection Control In Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey
Hydrologic Atlas 10, In prep.

Crews, P.A., 1983(c), Water quality In the Clayton Aquifer, In Arora, R., editor, Hydrologic Evaluation for Underground Injection Control In Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 10, In prep.

Environmental Protection Division, 1949, 1953, F II es of the Water Supp Iy Sect! on of the Ground-water Program: Georgia Environmental Protection Division, Atlanta.

Eargle, D.H., 1955, Stratigraphy of the outcropping Cretaceous rocks of Georgia: u.s. Geological Survey Bulletin 1014, 101 p.

Freeze, R.A., and Cherry, J.A., 1979, Ground-

water:

Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood

Cliffs, N.J., 604 p.

Georgia Geologic Survey, 1949-1959, 1978-1980, Open-File Data of the Hydrology Program, Atlanta.

43

Georgia Geologic Survey, 1976, Geologic map of Georgia: Atlanta. 1:500,000.

Gibson, T.G., 1982, Paleocene to Middle Eocene depositional cycles In eastern Alabama and western Georgia, ~Arden, D.D., Beck, B.F., and Morrow, E.F., eds., Second symposium on the geology of the southeastern Coastal Plain: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 53, 219 p.
Harrison, K.A., 1980, Irrigation Survey, 1980: University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service, Athens.

Harrison, K.A., 1981, Irrigation Survey, 1981; University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service, Athens.

Herrick, S.M., 1961, Well logs of the Coastal Plain of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 70, 462 p.

Hicks, o.w., Krause, R.E., and Clarke, J.s., 1981, Geohydrology of the Albany area, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 57, 31 p.

Huddlestun, P.F., 1981, Correlation Georgia Coastal Plain: Georgia Survey Open-File Report 82-1.

chart Geologic

Johnson, Inc., Edward E., Pub., 1975, Ground-water and wei Is: Johnson Division, UOP Inc.,
, Saint Paul, Minn., 440 p.

Lohman, s.w., 1972, Ground-water hydraulics: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 708, 70 p.
Marsalis, W.E., Jr., and Frlddell, M.s., 1975, A guide to selected Upper Cretaceous and Lower Tertiary outcrops In the Lower Chattachoochee River Valley of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Guidebook 15, 79 p.
Mathews, s.w., Hester, W.G., and 0 1Bryne, M.P., 1980, Ground-water data for Georgia, 1979: u.s. Geologica I Survey Open-F lie Report 80501, 93 p.
McCallie, s.w., 1908, A preliminary report on the underground waters of Georgia: Georgia Geological Survey Bulletin 15, 370 p.

McKoy, M.L., and Mack, D.M., 1983(a), Isopach map of the Claiborne aquifer, ~Arora, R., editor, Hydrologic Evaluation tor Underground Injection Control In Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 10, In prep.
McKoy, M.L., and Mack, D.M., 1983(b), Structure contour map of the base of the CIa I borne aquifer, In Arora, R., editor, Hydrologic Evaluatlo;-for Underground Injection Control In Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 10, In prep.
McKoy, M.L., and Mack, D.M., 1983(c), Structure contour map of the top of the Claiborne aquifer, In Arora, R., editor, Hydrologic Evaluatlo;-for Underground Injection Control In Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 10, In prep.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: Climatological data: Annual Summary, 1970: v. 74, no. 13, Asheville, N.C.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: Climatological data: Annual Summary, 1975: vol. 79, no. 13, Asheville, N.C.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: C llmatologlcal data: Annual Summary, 1976: v. 80, no. 13, Asheville, N.c.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: Climatological data: Annual Summary, 1977: v. 81, no. 13, Asheville, N.c.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: C llmatologlcal data: Annual Summary, 1978: v. 82, no. 13, Ashevll le, N.C.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: Climatological data: Annual Summary, 1979: v. 83, no. 13, Asheville, N.C.

Owen, Vaux, 1963, Geology and ground-water re-

sources of Lee and Sumter Counties, south-

u.s. west Georgia:

Geological Survey Water

Supply Paper 1666, 70 p.

Pierce, R.R., and Barber, N.L., 1981, Water use In Georgia 1980: A preliminary report: Georgia Geologic Survey Circular 4, 15 p.

44

Pierce, R.R., Barber, N.L., and Stiles, H.R., 1982, Water use In Georgia by county In 1980: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 59, 180 p.
Pollard, L.D., Grantham, R.G., and Blanchard, H.E., Jr., 1978, Preliminary appraisal of the Impact of agriculture on ground-water aval lability and quality In southwest Georgia: u.s. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigation 79-7, 22 p.
Rice, T.E., Jr., 1980, The Sabine Stage In the Georgia Coastal Plain, unpublished M.s. thesis, Emory UAlversity, 122 p.
RIpy, B. J., McFadden, S. S, PerrI e I Io, P. D , and Gernazlan, A.M., 1981, An Interim report on the hydrogeology of the Clayton and CIa Iborne Aqu lfers In southwestern Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Open-Fl le Report 822.
Severdrup, Parcel, and Associates, 1979, Pumping test report wells I, 2 & 3, Miller Brewing Co., Southeast Brewery, St. Louts, Mo.
Skinner, R.E., 1977, Irrigation Survey, 1977: University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service, Athens.
SkInner, R.E., 1978, 1rr Igat Ion Survey, 1978: University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service, Athens.
Skinner, R.E., 1979, Irrigation Survey, 1979: University of Georgia Cooperative Extension Service, Athens.
Stephenson, L.W., and Veatch, J.O., 1915, Underground waters of the Coastal Plain of Georgia: u.s. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 341, 463 p.
Stewart, J.W., 1973, Dewatering of the Clayton Formation during construction of the Walter F. George Lock and Dam, Ft. Ga 1nes, CIay County, Georgia: u.s. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations, 2-73.
Swann, Charles, and Poort, J.M., 1979, Early Tertiary lithostratigraphic Interpretation of southwest Georgia: Gulf Coast Assoc. Geol. Socs. Trans., v. 29, p. 386-395.

Thomson, M.T., and Carter, R.J., 1963, Effect of a severe drought (1954) on streamflow In Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 73, 97 p.
Thomson, M.T., Herrick, S.M., and Brown, E., 1956, The availability and use of water In Georgia: Georgia Geological Survey Bulletin 65, 329 p.
Tuohy, M.A., 1983(a), Geologic sections of the Clayton aquifer, ~ Arora, R., editor, Hydro Iog Ic Eva Iuat Ion for Underground Injectlon Control In Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 10, In prep.
Tuohy, M.A., l983(b), Structure contour map of the top of the Claytpn aquifer, In Arora, R., editor, Hydrologic Evaluation for Underground Injection Control In Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 10, In prep.
Tuohy, M.A., 1983(c), Isopach map of the Clayton aquifer, In Arora, R., editor, Hydrologic Evaluation for Underground Injection Control In Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 10, In prep.
Tuohy, M.A., 1983(d), Structure contour map of the base of the Clayton aquifer, ~Arora, R., editor, Hydrologic Evaluation for Underground 1njectlon Control In Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Hydrologic Atlas 10, In prep.
Toulmln, L.D., and LaMoreaux, P.E., 1963, Stratigraphy along the Chattahoochee River connecting link between the Atlantic and Gu If Coasta I PI a Ins: Am. Assoc. Petro Ieum Geologists, Bul 1., v. 47, p. 385-404.
u.s. Army Corps of Engineers, 1956, Chattahoochee RIver, AI abama, and GeorgIa: DesIgn Memorandum No. 10: Fort Gaines Lock and Dam, near Fort Gaines, Georgia.
u.s. Bureau of the Census, 1972, Census of Population: 1970, Vol. I, Char. of the population, pt. 12, Georgia: U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.c.
u.s. Bureau of the Census, 1981, Unpublished advance population counts: 1980, Washington, D.c.

45

u.s. Geological Survey, 1941, 1945, 1949-1960,
1963, 1976, 1979-1980, unpublished data on f lie at the Doraville, Georgia office.
Vorhls, R.E., 1972, Geohydrology of Sumter, Dooly, Pulaski, Lee, Crisp, and WIlcox coun-
ties, Georgia: u.s. Geological Survey
Hydrologic Investigations Atlas HA-435.
Walt, R.L., 1957, History of the Water-Supply at AIbany, Georgia: Georgia Mlnera I Newsletter, v. 10, no. 4, p. 143-147.
Walt, R.L., 1958, Summary of the ground-water resources of Crisp County, Georgia: Georgia Mineral Newsletter, v. II, no. I, p. 44-47.
Walt, R.L., 1960(a), Summary of the ground-water resources of Calhoun County, Georgia: Georgia Mineral Newsletter, v. 13, no. I, p. 26-31.
Walt, R.L., 1960(b), Summary of the geology and ground-water resources of CIay County, Georgia: Georgia Mineral Newsletter, v. 13, no. 2, p. 93-101.

Wait, R.L., l960(c), Summary of the ground-water resources of Terrell County, Georgia: Georgia Mineral Newsletter, v. 13, no. 3, p. 117-122.
Walt, R.L., 1960(d), Source and quality of ground water In southwestern Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Information Circular 18, 74 p.
~lalt, R.L., 1963(a), Geology and ground-water resources of Dougherty County, Georgia:
u.s. Geological Survey Water Supply Paper
1539-P, 102 p.

Zapp, A.D., 1965, Bauxite deposits of the

Andersonville district, Georgia:

u.s.

Geological Survey Bulletin 1199-G, 37 p.

APPENDICES

The latitude, longitude, land surface elevation, total depth, casing depth, static water
level, and date measured In Appendices A through Dare from the following list of references:
a. Herrick (1961)
b. Water Supply Section, Environmental Protection Division Georgia Deparment of Natural Resources
c. Georgia Geologic Survey open-fl le data
d. u.s. Geological Survey unpubl !shed data
e. Owen ( 1963) f. Walt (1957), (1958), (1960a) g. Stephenson and Veatch (1915)
h. u.s. Army Corps of Engineers (1956) 1. Land surface elevations from u.s.
Geological Survey 7 1/2 -minute topographic map series j MeGa I I Ie ( I 908)

The same alphabet symbol will be used In
Appendices A through D.
GC No. Is a field number assigned to a well .
by Mr. George w. Chase. GGS Is an abbreviation
for Georgia Geologic Survey. Many of the data points used In A and B were
f 1e Id located by Mr. George w. Chase and Mr. Robert L. Walt while working for the u.s.
Geological Survey. The data points were located on Georgia Department of Transportation county
road maps or located on a grid system on a field Inventory form. Locations of those wei Is checked are accurate.
Locations of wells In Appendices C and D have been field checked by personnel from the
Georgia Geologic Survey and/or the u.s.
Geological Survey.

46

APPENDIX A -WELL DATA FOR THE POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE OF THE CLAYTON AQUIFER (1950-1959)

FIELD NO.

OWNER

GGS GC NO. NO.

COUNTY

QUAD

LAT. -LONG.

LAND SURFACE ELEVATION (feet)

TOTAL DEPTH (teet)

CASING DEPTH (feet l

STATIC WATER LEVEL (feet
below land surface)

DATE MEASURED

4 John Fort

6 Atlantic Ice &

Coal

16 Morgan #1

331

17 Edison #2

353

18 Arlington #2

330

Dougherty
Dougherty Calhoun Calhoun Calhoun

Holt
Albany W. Morgan Edison Arlington

3131'53 11 - 8424 1 42"

31 35'08 11 3132'21 11 3133 1 34 11 3126 1 22 11 -

8409 1 03" 8436 1 00" 8444 1 15" 8443 1 37 11

220
197 245a 289d 306d

20 J.D. Cowarts 21 Harvey Jordan

Calhoun Calhoun

Edison Leary

31 37 1 01" - 8438'52"

31 9

31"29 132" - 8432'40"

220

23 Speight School

402

C I ay

Ft Gaines

3136 1 37" - 8502 1 06"

390

24 W.F. George

Dam TW 2
25 H.B. Hightower 26 Fort Gaines 27 E.R. Gray 28 J.R. Carroll
29 w.s. Stuckey

464 435
124 305 164

Clay C I ay Clay Clay Dooly Dooly

Ft. Gaines N.E.

3137 1 33" - 8503 1 48"

145

Bluffton

3135 1 08 11 - 8450'30"

410

Ft. Gaines

3136'29" - 8502 125"

400

Ft. GaInes N.E.

3137 1 33 11 - 8502'43 11

160

Drayton

3206'07 11 - 8356 1 43"

300

Unadilla

3217 1 03 11 - 8344 1 38"

412

33 L i I I y

155

Dooly

Byromville

3208 1 33 11 - 8352 1 43"

352

34 Va. -Carolina

Cheml ca I Co.

Dougherty

Albany W.

3134'48 11 - 8410 1 06"

1 97

..,.

35 Turner City #2

-...J

38 E.R. Graham

39 Kolomokl CCC

Dougherty Dougherty Early

Albany E. Pretoria Blakely N.

3135153 11 31 3 4 I 2 8 11 3127144 11 -

8406'26" 84 1 9 I 2 6 n 8455 137"

213 222 270

40 Cuthbert #3

552

Randolph

Cuthbert

31"46108" - 8447'43"

445

41 Co. Prison Farm

Randolph

Cuthbert

31"47 1 37 11 - 8445 1 21"

477

42 Rock of Ages

281 187

Sumter

AmerIcus

3202 1 4811 - 8413 1 28 11

391

43 D.A. Garrison 45 C.E. Reeves 46 Henry Williams 47 R.D. McNeill

247 16 72
100

Sumter Sumter Sumter Sumter

Americus Andersonvlll e
Smithville w.
Americus

3202117"3207 1 38 11 -
3156 1 07 11 3205 1 18 11 -

8409'27" 84091 17" 8415 1 35 11 84"10'33"

3 95 42 9 331 474

48 Olive Woodruff

101

Sumter

Americus

3205 1 08 11 - 84"10 1 37"

461

49 V.R. Murphy

106

Sumter

Americus

3204 1 43" - 8408 1 32"

422

50 Geo. L. Mathews

109

Sumter

Methvins

32"05 1 53 11 - 8404 1 12"

424

51 G.B. Howard 52 Peter Bahnsen 53 Ford Reddick

116

Sumter

137

Sumter

141

Sumter

Americus Americus Smithvlll a E.

3204'13" - 8411'18"

425

3202 155" - 8413 1 13"

394

3159 102 11 - 84"12 1 50"

350

55 T.J. Suggs

98

Sumter

Smlthvi lie W.

31"55 1 46" - 8418'23"

385

57 Brown's Dairy

Terrell

Chickasawhatchee

31"44'11'!- 84"24 1 23"

31 5

58 Terre I I Co.
Grain & Elev.

Terre I I

Dawson

3145 1 55 11 - 84"25 1 12"

330

60 Mathew Williams 407

Terrell

Dawson

31"46 1 15" - 8426'07"

345

61 Circle J. Ranch 710

Terrell

Dawson

*3146 1 32 11 - 8424 1 33"

330

62 Stevens Ind.

352

64 Graves School

350

Terrell Terrell

Dawson
Shellman

31"46'58" - 8426 1 54"

342

3146 1 08 11 - 84"31 1 07"

351

66 Julian Lay

614

Terrell

Chlckasawhatchee

31"43 1 04 11 - 8425 1 36"

341

67 Steve Cocke

503

Terrell

Dawson

3146'18 11 - 83"28 1 50"

388

F .H. #1

139 Dawson #3

213

Terre I I

Dawson

31 4 6 I 52 n - 84 2 6 I 4 7 n

34 9

547d
710d 667a 515d 757d 430d 500d 500a
75h 555d 455a 130d 320d 408d 350d
594d 760t 650d 548d 350d 329c 190c 312d 210d 357c 297d 300d 332d 318d 180d 175d 300d 337d 4 96d 445c
434a 470c 433c 433d 494d 597d
475d

485d 395t 600b 340c
436d 313c 373d 300d
713f 505 270c I SOc 320c
391c
334c 440c 369 345t

- 27d
- 64d 6d
- 53t -103d - 20d -.28d -250d
- 25h -169d -266d - 18d - 13d - BOd - 42d
-105d - 43f - 25d - 85d -135d -146d - 77d - 70d - 69d - 34.8d -11 9d -120d - 91 d - 59d - 99d - 89d - 39. 5d - 59. 7 d - 95d -103c
-140c -125c -116c - 83c -127d -127d
-124. 9t

1 957
1957 1 952 1 953 1 953 1959 1 959 1954
1954 1 955 1955 1 956 1951 1 951 1951
1955 1 953 1 957 1 951 1958 1 951 1952 1 951 1953 1 951 1 951 1 951 1951 1 951 1 951 1951 1 951 1951 1 956 1959
1954 1 959 1953 1 953 1958 1 950
1950

* We I I I ocat I on may not be accurate

Appendix B. -Well Data for the Potentiometric Surface of the Claiborne Aquifer (1950-1959)
(land surface elevations are from u.s. Geological Survey 7 1/2 -minute topographic map series, except as Indicated),

FIELD NO.

OWNER

GGS GC NO, NO,

COUNTY

QUAD

LAT. - LONG,

LAND SURFACE ELEVATION (feat)

TOTAL DEPTH (feat J

CASING DEPTH (feet)

STATIC WATER LEVEL (feet
be I ow I and surface)

DATE MEASURED

A,J, Eubanks

2 Raymond Bonner

3 B. R. Ba I I ey

4 J.R. Durr

5 Ed Chaney

6 J,A. Calhoun

7 Tom Sinquefield

9 R,M. McKinney

11 Cordele 12

14 c.c. Raper

c~o

17 J.D. Lester

18 J,D. Lester

19 J.D. Lester

21 M. T. Brown

23 Byromville

25 Tax Summerford

Calhoun

Calhoun

Calhoun

Calhoun

Calhoun

Calhoun

Calhoun

51

Crisp

168

Crisp

108

Dooly

111

Dooly

112

Dooly

113

Dooly

12 7

Dooly

146

Dooly

156

Dooly

Bluffton Edison Edison Edison Morgan Morgan Morgan Cordele Cordele By romv I I I e Byromville Byromville Byromville Drayton Byromville Byromv1 II e

3132'13 11 - 8446 152"

330

3133 127 11 - 8442101"

283

3134 123 11 - 8440'12"

302

3135 108 11 - 8439122"

295

3135 149 11 - 8436 121"

285

3133 11811- 8436 113"

254

3134 152 11 - 8435'18"

2 70

3155144 11 - 8350 129"

294

3158'13 11 - 8347 110"

303

3211107 11 - 8359127"

320

3213112 11 - 8358 11911

360

321313611 - 8357 149"

382

3213159 11 - 8357 133"

362

3204 127 11 - 8357 118"

298

3212 114 11 - 8354 130 11

380

3208155 11 - 8352 145"

346

26 Albany 117 29 H.N. Sml th

Dougherty Lee

Albany E. Sasser

3135 1 55"-~ 840612611 3143 11911- 8415 113"

208d 250d

30 Haley Bros. Farm 31 Smithville 32 City of Shellman

Lee Lee Randolph

Leesburg
Smithville w.
Shellman

3141'1711- 8413107" 31 54 I ( 4 II - 84 ( 5 I Q7 II 3145 131 11 - 8436 158 11

245d 326 393

12 33 W. Perry 34 M, Shakleford 35 A.A. Ellis #2 36 J, Deriso 37 F. Wa!tsman #1 38 E.N. Grant 39 Tharpe Grant

50 335 229 284 189 326 222 282 188
14 19

Sumter Sumter Sumter Sumter Sumter Sumter Sumter

Americus Smithville W. Smithville E.
Americus Americus Amari cus Andersonvlll e

3203 133"- 84121(611

403

3155 104 11 - 8415 114 11

313

3156 124 11 - 8410 146"

334

3202117 11 - 8410 131

395

3201148 11 - 8413 105"

373

3207 112"- 8409147"

423

3207159 11 - 8408159"

446

40 Alex Harden
41 w.w. Revell

21

Sumter

22

Sumter

Andersonvl lie Lake Collins

3208 110 11 - 8408 149"

449

3203119" - 8419116"

472

1 75d 260d 200d 114d 1 DOd 140d 1 59d 31 5d 396d
38d 1 ODd 105d
9Bd 65d 1 50d 260d 700d 300d 300d 180e 135c
65d 11 Od I ODd
BOd 12 9d
75d 114c
97d 78d

1 BOd
100d 140d 170e
SOd 106d

- 35,07d

1 959

- 15. 53d

1959

- 51,08d

1 959

- 20d

1959

8,3

1 959

- 1Od

1959

- 25d

1 959

- 32,5d(avg.J1950

- 1 Bd

1 952

- 18d

1951

- 84,3d

1 951

- 84d

1 951

- 85,4d

1 951

- 20d

1951

- 50d

1 951

- 30d

1951

- 45d

1 951

- 20d

1951

- 12d

1 945

- 33e

1950

- 33b

1 949

- 49d - 17c
27. 9d - 30,2d - 49d - 31. 7d - 79,6c
- 66,68d - 39,2d

1950 1 953 1952 1 952 1952 1 950 1 950
1 950 1950

Appendix B. -Wei I Data tor the Potentiometric Surface ot the Claiborne Aquifer (1950-1959)

(Continued)

FIELD NO.

OWNER

GGS GC NO. NO.

COUNTY

QUAD

LAT. - LONG.

LAND SURFACE ELEVATION (teat l

TOTAL DEPTH (teet l

CASING DEPTH (feet)

STATIC WATER LEVEL <teet
be low I and surface)

DATE MEASURED

42 Claude Harvey 43 Brown Sma II #I

25

Sumter

218

Sumter

Lake Collins Methvlns

32"02'30 11 - 84"17 1 58" 32"04 1 03 11 - 84"00'39"

451 304

44 M. Turner

27

Sumter

Lake Collins

32"02'28 11 - 84"18'22"

434

45 Thad Jones 46 Dave Murray 47 M.H. Grant

30

Sumter

32

Sumter

47

Sumter

Plains Plains Dranevlll e

32"02 1 05"- 84"24 1 10"

505

32"03 1 00 11 - 84"23 1 25"

506

32"08 1 30 11 - 84"23 1 13"

548

48 Pleasant Grove Church

76

Sumter

Americus

32"01 1 00" - 84"08'21"

369

49 w.L. Duprls

51

Sumter

AmerIcus

32"03 1 33 11 - 84"12'23 11

398

50 H. T. WI I I I a ms 51 John Ferguson

56

Sumter

62

Sumter

Lake Collins Cobb

32"02 1 55 11 - 84"16'26" *31"55 1 53 11 - 84"55 1 54 11

469 250+10

52 J.B. Dorsey

53 F.S. Sheppard

54 F.s. Sheppard

c.j>o.

55 J.F. Hartsfield

57 R.D. McNeil

58 Albert Adams

59 G.B. Howard

60 E.A. Drew

61 W.R. Veatch
62 c. Roy Wade

66

Sumter

69

Sumter

70

Sumter

99

Sumter

104

Sumter

112

Sumter

117

Sumter

123

Sumter

125

Sumter

127

Sumter

Dray ton Methvlns Methvlns Americus Americus Methvins Americus AmerIcus Methvins Methvlns

32"00 1 01 11 - 83"57'15" 32"03'00"- 84"01 1 18 11 32"02 1 45 11 - 84"00 1 56 11 32"04'50" - 84"12'26 11 32"05 1 20 11 - 84"10'23" 32"06 1 44 11 - 84"04'09" 32"04 1 17 11 - 84"11'10 11 32"03 1 19 11 - 84"11'33 11 32"01'50 11 - 84"06'44" 32"00 1 58 11 - 84"04'17"

245 314 321 435+5 474 442 434 374 357 325+4

63 Standard Elev. 64 A.L. Cheek 6 5 T. M F u r I ow 66 W.B. Perry 67 Powe I I Farms
K.G. KIndred

130 132 135 298 192 310 200

Sumter Sumter Sumter Sumter Sumter

Les I I e Les I I e Americus Drayton Smithvlll e E.

31"59'18"31"59'43 11 32"02 1 49 11 32"00 1 06 11 31"59 1 57 11 -

84"01'47" 84"03 1 21" 84"13'23" 83"57 1 24" 84"11'59"

322 31 8 390 245 357

69 Deseret Farm #1

70 s.w. Ga. Exp.

701

Station

Sumter Sumter

Les I I e Lake Collins

31"56 1 12 11 - 84"00 1 33" 32"02 1 10 11 - 84"22 1 02 11

300 4 98

71 John 0 'Hearn 72 Highland Gate 73 A.P. Lane

207 87
285

Sumter Sumter Terrell

Americus Smithville w.
Bronwood

32"05 1 37 11 31"59 1 53 11 31"49 1 04" -

84"13'46 11 84"15 1 01" 84"18 144"

458 405 311

74 Steve Cocke Fish 683

Terrell

Dawson

31"46 1 21 11 - 84"28 1 54 11

388

Hatchery #2

75 City ot Sasser #1 368

Terre I I

Sasser

31"43 1 08 11 - 84"20 1 52"

31 5

103d 220d
86d 65d 63d 75d 132d
64 d 135d 260d 1 84c 160d 1 ODd
93d 107c 12 7d
BOd 62d BOd 85d 125d 140d BOd I ODd 85d
179d 88d
105d 111d 12 7c 202c
201d

200d
64c 68e 78c

- 59.23d - 40d - 43.4d - 40d - 45d - 49.3d - 14. 7d
- 51 d -129.3d - 11.85d + 5. 6d - 29.2d - 28.3d - 63. 9d - 74. 5d - 79. 2 d - 49.2d - 15. 7d - 24d - 18. Bd - 34.2d - 16. 5d - 19. 3d + 7d - 44.6d
- 43d - 50d
- 69.5d - 35d - 19. fie - 45.6c
- 40d

1 950 1952 1 950 1950 1 950 1950 1 951
1950 1 950 1951 1 950 1951 1 951 1 951 1 951 1951 1 951 1951 1 951 1951 1 951 1 951 1 951 1951 1 952
1958 1 958
I 952 1 951 1952 1 954
1955

* Approximate Location: Latitude+ 1'

Longitude..:!:_ 5"

APPENDIX C -WELL DATA FOR ltjE POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE OF ltjE CLAYTON AQUIFER (1979-1982)

FIELD NO.

OWNER

GGS GC NO. NO.

COUNTY

QUAD

LAT. - LONG.

LAND SURFACE ELEVATION (teet)

TOTAL DEPTH (feet)

CASING DEP"ftj (teet)

STATIC WATER LEVEL (SWL)
DATE MEASURED

SWL DATE

SWL DATE

SWL DATE

17 City at Edison 353 #2

Calhoun

Edison

3133 134"- 8444'15"

289

515

395

- 103.3 12/79

-104.0 3/81

-121.2 11/81

-104.5 3/82

23 (Speight School) 402 Clay Co. E\em. School

29 w.s. Stuckey

305 164

Clay Dooly

Ft. Gaines Unadilla

3136 137 - 85.02'06"

390

3217 103"- 8344 138"

412

500

340

408

373

- 270.3 11/81

-259.6 3/82

- 68.8
4/81

- 93.0 3/82

34 Sw Itt & Co. (VI rgl n la-caro I Ina Cheml ca I Co. J

Dougherty

Albany w.

3134 148"- 8410'06"

197

594

- 151 3/81

-159.8 10/8:

-146.9 3/82

35 Turner City #2

Dougherty

Albany E.

3135 153"- 8406 126"

213

760

713

- 134.0 11/79

-123.0 3/81

-146.0 10/81

-127.6 3/82

38 <E.R. Graham)

Dougherty

Pretoria

3134'28"- 841926"

222

650

- 96.0

-118.6

-104.5

I.TI

Graham Angus #1

0

3/81

10/81

3/82

57 Brown 1s DaIry

Terre II

Chickasawhatchee

3144 111"- 8424'23"

315

496

- 161.2 12/79

-171.5 3/81

-197.2 10/81

-164.4 3/82

64 Graves School

350

Terrell

Shellman

31 46 1 08" - 8431'07"

351

433

332

- 152.5 3/82

65 City at Bronwood 406 #1
68 Calvin Eubanks #1

Terrell Calhoun

Bronwood B I uftton

3149'48" - 8421'49"

368

31"31'56"- 8446 12411

292

453

390

647

424

- 204.0 12/79
- 112.8 12/79

-226.2 10/81
-117.1 3/81

-207.3 3/82
-130.5 10/81

-120.5 3/82

69 H.T. Mclendon #I

Calhoun

B luttton

3134'5811- 8447'34"

365

480

440

- 160.9 12/79

-160.1 3/81

-174.21 10.81

-161.7 3/82

70 H.T. Mclendon #2
72 (E.R. Graham) Graham Angus #2
73 C I ty at Morgan #2
74 Adams Brothers #1

Calhoun Calhoun Calhoun Calhoun

B luttton Holt Morgan Morgan

3135'13 11 - 8447 140"

352

3135 128 11 - 8428'2511

230

3131 1 56" - 8436'02 11

240

3135 1 17 11 - 8431 13211

260

565

450

580

636

485

540

440

- 144.4 12/79
- 71.0
12/79
- 61.3 12/79
- 92.1
12/79

- 75.1 3/81
- 64.4 3/81
-95.8 3/81

- 97.3 10/81
- 85.4 11/81
-119.0 10/81

- 75.8 3/82
- 67.2 3/82
- 97.6 3/82

APPENDIX C -WELL DATA FOR THE POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE OF THE CLAYTON AQUIFER (1979-1982)

FIELD NO. OI'INER

GGS G;; NO. NO.

COUNTY

QUAD

LAT. - LONG.

LAND

STATIC WATER

SURFACE TOTAL CASING LEVEL (SWL)

ELEVATION DEPTH DEPTH

DATE

SWL

SWL

SWL

(feet)

(feet) (feet) MEASURED DATE

DATE

DATE

75 Alvin Sudderth
#3

76 WII dmeade

997

Plantation

Calhoun Calhoun

Morgan Morgan

3136146" - 8431 108"

281

3131'26 - 8430 111 11

211

520

420

676

534

- 113.5 12/79

-117.4 3/81

- 40.3 12/79

- 45.7 3/81

-142.3 10/81
- 73.8 10/81

-119. 1 3/82
- 47.2 3/82

77 City of Bluftton

Clay

Bluffton

31.31'16"- 8552101"

325

555

480

- 133.0 12/79

-136.7 3/81

-144.5 11/81

-139.7 3/82

78 E.E. Watson

Clay

Ft. Gaines N.E. 31"43128" - 8so1 126"

275

100

85

- 28.2 - 31.6

- 32.9

- 31.0

12/79

3/81

11/81

!/82

79 Giles Brothers #1
80 Bill Lindsey

Clay Clay

Ft. Gaines N.E. 31"3715911- 850211711

252

Zetto

3135 139" - 845613511

390

215

126

560

450

- 74.5 12/79

- 75.7 3/81

- 180.8 12/79

-180.5 3/81

- 78.2 11/81
-188.1 10/81

- 74.9 3/82
-161.2 3/82

01

81 Randal

Richardson

82 Kolomokl Plantation

Clay Early

Bluff ton Bancroft

3134144" - 845014611

395

31"29146 11 - 845212011

310

555

435

635

472

- 185.1 12/79

-185.0 3/81

- 114.7 12/79

-196.2 10/81

-186.2 3/82

83 Singletary

3152

Farms Fairfield

84 City of Blakely
n

87 City of Sasser 3100
#3

88 Bob Locke

91 John Daniels 13

92 Bill Whitaker 12
94 Di'R F l sh and Game Well
95 Piedmont Plant Co.

Early

Bancroft

Early

Blakely N.

Terrell

Sasser

Terrell Chlckasawhatchee

Terrell Chlckasawhatchee

Terrell Chlckasawhatchee

Dougherty

Pretoria

Terrell

Sasser

3126 157"- 84"48'16"

230

3122 143" - 84 ss 157"

250

3143'16 11 - 8421 10011

312

31"43121 II - 84"23'1511

290

31"41'26 11 - 8423 14511

280

3140 153 11 - 8423 13811

268

31 "35 129" - 84 2o 132"

220

31"40101 II - 84"18 10411

270

675

509

792

620

475

530

420

430

520

400

656

542

625

515

- 74.0 12/79
- 102.0 12/79
- 172.6 3/81
- 148.1 12/79
- 139.2 12/79
- 128.5 12/79
- 87.0 12/79
- 141.0 12/79

- 78.1 3/81

- 90.9 11/81

-100.7 3/81

-107.3 11/81

-199.5 10/81

-172.5 3/82

-174.1 10/81

-153.0 3/82

-155.4 10/81

-134.7 3/82

-136.0 3/81

- 92.0 3/81

-110.7 10/81

-146.0 3/81

-164.6 10/81

- 83.0 3/62
-105.1 3/82
- 91.76 3/82
-146.5 3/82

APPENDIX C -WELL DATA FOR THE POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE OF THE CLAYTON AQUIFER (1979-19821

FIELD NO. OWNER
96 T.w. #12
97 T.w. #9

GGS oc
NO. NO.

COUNTY

QUAD

3390

Dougherty Lee

Red Store Crossroads
Leesburg

LAT. - LONG. 3126'54 11 - 8421'01 11 31 38'12 11 - 8412 15011

LAND SURFACE ELEVATION (feet)

TOTAL DEPTH (feet)

184

690

238

650

CASING DEPTH (feet)

STATIC WATER LEVEL (SWL l
DATE MEASURED

SWL DATE

630

- 27.0

- 33.0

12/79

3/81

567

- 131.0

-148.3

3/81

10/81

SWL DATE
- 34.5 10/81
-131.7 3/82

SWL DATF.
- 36.88 3/82

98 Fowl town

969

Plantation #3

99 (Lee High Acres) 3142 Creekwood Apts.#2

100 T.w. #6

102 T.w. rn

Lee

Leesburg

Lee

leesburg

Dougherty

AI bany

Dougherty

Albany E.

3140 102 11 - 8412'2511

245

31"38 101 II - 841014911

204

3135 135 11 - 8410 13011

198

3131'05 11 - 84-06 14211

195

680

560

668

560

690

619

882

716

- 122.7 12/79
- 120.3 12/79
- 141.0 12/79
- 88.0
12/79

-140.0 3/81
-124.5 10/81
-135.0 3/81
-104.5 3/81

-150.1 10/81
-113.5 3/82
-148.5 10/81
-114.1 10/81

-131.0 3/82
-135.9 3/82
-115.98 3/82

104 James Grubbs #2

Randolph

Carnegie

3141'11 11 - 8445'2411

385

440

330

- 142.0

-143.2 -155.6

-147.2

(J'1

12/79

3/81

11/81

3/82

1\.)

105 James Grubbs and sons #1

Randolph

Martins Crossroad

3139 133 11 - 8442 14011

370

470

350

- 158.5 12/79

-158.3 3/81

-180.1 11/81

-163.7 3/82

106 C.T. Martin #2

Randolph

Doverel

31 40'12 11 - 8437 121"

330

415

330

- 140.4 12/79

107 C. T. Mart In #1

Randolph

Doverel

3139 152 11 - 8436 11011

322

430

360

- 124.3 12/79

108 T.E. AI Ien, I II

~andolph

Doverel

31"42 137 11 - 8437' 1411

370

475

338

- 165.7 12/79

-159.7 3/81

-178.2 10/81

-158.2 3/82

109 Bob Lovett

Randolph

Martins Crossroads

3143'53 11 - 8442 151 11

410

405

297

- 143.8 12/79

-132.7 3/81

-150.2 11/81

-143.7 3/82

110 City of Cuthbert USGS Recorder

Randolph

Cuthbert

3146 109 11 - 8447 142 11

445

309

- 145.0 12/79

-144.0 3/81

-149.1 10/81

-147.27 3/82

111 Bruce Bynum

3069

Randolph

Doverel

3144 106 11 - 8435'4411

375

435

320

- 158.8 12/79

-156.9 3/81

-176.5 10/81

-155.2 3/82

112 Me Ivi n Peavay #1

Randolph

Brooksville

31 46'47 11 - 8439 137"

435

410

315

- 162.8 12/79

-162.0 3/81

-180.0 10/81

-172.8 3/82

113 Earl Nisley

Randolph

Brooksville

3147 143 11 - 8441 '42"

463

350

290

- 163.4 12/79

-162.1 3/81

-174.3 10/81

-164.5 3/82

APPENDIX C -WELL DATA FOR lHE POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE DF lHE CLAYTON AQUIFER (1979-1982)

FIELD NO. {JfjNER

GGS oc
NO. NO.

COUNTY

QUAD

LAT. - LONG.

LAND SURFACE ELEVATION (feet)

TOTAL DEPlH (feet)

CASING DEPlH (feet)

STATIC WATER LEVEL CSWL)
DATE MEASURED

SWL DATE

SWL DATE

SWL DATE

115 Don Foster

Terrell

Botts ford

31 53'25" - 8423'39"

360

305

225

- 103.8 3/81

-129.2 10/81

-109.7 3/82

116 Dick & Jack
Hammer

Terre II

Botts ford

31 55'44" - 84.25'42"

400

340

280

- 112.0 12/79

117 C lty of Dawson 944 #4

Terrell

Dawson

3146 106"- 8426'1310

330

553

355

- 175.5 12/79

-207.2 3/81

-205.4 10/81

-18~.5
3/82

118 Vernon Cope land

Terrell

Dawson

3148'19 10 - 8424 1 42"

375

500

385

- 212.5 12/79

-213.0 3/81

-241.2 10/81

-225.7 3/82

119 Steve Cocke

2251

Fish Hatchery #3

Terrell

Dawson

3146'24 10 - 84"28 1 53

375

500

378

- 197.0 12/79

-197.0 3/81

-201.9 12/81

-188.2 3/82

120 Clty of Parrott

3119

Terrell

Parrott

31"53'48 10 - 84"30'46"

480

401

290

- 152.0 12/79

-151.0 3/81

-158.1 10/81

-155.0 3/82

122 Thomas Bent Iey

Terrell

Shellman

3146 1 29 10 - 8434 1 21"

350

380

231

- 121.7

-110.5

-141.6 -121.2

0w 1

12/79

3/81

10/81

3/82

123 Clty of Bronwood fl2

Terrell

Bronwood

3149 1 55 10 - 8421 1 45"

355

465

390

- 203.0 12/79

-199.0 3/81

125 Gene Sutherland

126 Harold Darden

127 Mr. Bowen

693

128 James Hart #1

130 Senator Hugh Carter
131 James Short #2

132 South RIver Farms
134 Pete Long #3

Sumter Sumter Sumter Sumter Sumter Sumter Webster lee

Botts ford

31"58'45 10 - 8426'17"

445

Ellaville S.

3208'16 10 - 8422'1410

530

Lake Collins

32"01 1 05" - 8417 1 33 10

461

Lake Collins

3205 1 53"- 84"17 1 4510

475

Plains

32"00 1 58"- 8424 1 4010

480

Smithville W.

3156'40 10 - 84"20 1 22 10

390

Church Hi II

32"10 1 27 10 - 84"33'4210

602

Smithville W.

31"53 1 54"- 84"19 124"

339

190

140

122

305

240

230

200

350

300

170

400

280

- 66.5 3/81
- 74.8 12/79

- 71.0 10/81
- 78.6 10/81

- 68.2 3/82
- 76.0 3/82

- 143.7 12/79

-142.2 3/81

-154.3 10/81

- 111.6 12/79
- 96.3 12/79

-109.9 3/81
- 96.7 3/81

-122.6 10/81
-101.2 10/81

- 125.2 3/81

-150.4 10/81

- 130.3 3/81

-132.5 10/81

-132.3 3/82

- 92.2 12/79

- 89.0 3/81

-148.0 3/82
-115.7 3/82
- 95.2 3/82

APPENDIX C -WELL DATA Fffi THE POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE OF THE CLAYTON-AQUIFER (1979-1982)

FIELD NO.

OWNER

GGS ~
NO. NO .

COUNTY

QUAD

LAT. - LONG.

LAND SURFACE ELEVATION (feet)

TOTAL DEPTH (feet)

CASING DEPTH (feet)

STATIC WATER LEVEL (SWL J
DATE MEASURED

SWL DATE

SWL DATE

SWI. Dt.rE

135 Kolomokl State Park TW-1

3443

136 Adams Brothers #2

Early Calhoun

Blakely N. Holt

31"28 1 27"- 84"55'1511

310

31 "32'27 11 - 8429'4011

222

612

491

580

460

- 141.7 3/81
- 92.4
10/81

-148.2 10/81

143.0 3/82

137 Bert Thomas

Sumter

Smithville W.

3155'25 11 - 84"20 1 48"

432

466

360

- 176.8 3/81

-216.1 10/81

-203.0 3/82

140 Webb #1

Terrell

Dawson

31 "48 1 02 11 - 84"24 1 0411

348

465

407

- 196.3 3/81

-216.2 10/81

-196.7 3/82

141 USGS Recorder

Clay

Ft. Gaines

31 "36 1 42 11 - 85"03 1 21 11

147

120

44

- 32.4

- 29.32

10/81

3/82

142 Singletary

1163

Early

Bancroft

31 "24 1 45 11 - 84"49 1 42 11

230

770

672

- 67.6

- n.o - 72.9

Farms (Bancroft) 01
.j>.

3/81

11/81

3/82

143 C.T. Martin

3449

Randolph

Doverel

31 "39'53 11 - 84"36'1211

322

430

356

- 126.4

-148.2 -127.0

o.w. #2

3/81

10/81

3/82

144 J lmmy Bangs #2 145 Raymond Goodman

Terrell

Chlckasawhatchee

Webster

Benevo I ence

31"38 1 55 11 - 84"29 1 5511

300

31 "57 1 25 11 - 84"38 1 0311

530

500

400

240

- 128.8 12/79
- 141.5 3/81

-137.0 3/81

-157.9 10/81

-144.1 10/81

-130.5 3/82

-132.7 3/82

146 Pete Long o.w. 3517
.#1

147 vtj h;;,rans.
Memorial Park TW - I

3518

148 Featherfield Farms

Lee Crisp

Smithville W.

31"53 1 53 11 - 84"19 1 25"

338

Cobb

31"57 1 31 11 - 83"54 12311

252

Dougherty

Holt

31"35 141 11 - $4"26 105 11

228

384

332

550

510

585

485

- 151.8 -133.8

10/81

3/82

- 39.8
4/82

- 78.4
3/82

150 City of Dawson Maintenance 8drn

Terrell

Dawson

31 "46 1 36 11 - 84"26'13 11

355

- 215.7 3/82

151 Ben Arthur

Terrell

Bronwood

31"46 1 01 11 - 84"20 132 11

325

543

440

- 177.65 3/82

APPENDIX D-WELL DATA FOR THE POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE OF THE CLAIBORNE AQUIFER (1979-1982)

FIELD NO. OWNER

GGS oc

NO. NO.

COUNTY

QUAD

LAT. - LONG.

LAND

STATIC WATER

SURFACE TOTAL CASING LEVEL CSWLl

ELEVATION DEPTH DEPTH

DATE

SWL

SWL

SWL

(feet)

(feet) (feet) MEASURED DATE

DATE

DATE

10 City of Cordele 390 14

Crisp

Cordele

31"58'16 11 - 8346'2811

316

600

270

- 76.5
12/79

- 76.5 3/81

- 78.5 10/81

- 69.5 3/82

26 City of Albany
#17

Dougherty

Albany E.

31"35'5511 - 84"06'2611

208

7DO

200

- 113.4 1/80

-114.0 2/81

-115.0 4/82

01 01

32 City of Shellman

Randolph

Shellman

31"45'31 11 - 84"36'58"

393

135

- 35.5

- 35.5 - 31.5

- 34.5

12

12/79

3/81

10/81

3/82

37 F. \tlaltsman II

282 188 Sumter

Americus

32"01'4811 - 84"13'0511

373

129

106

- 51.5
12/79

- 23.1 3/81

- 53.6 10/81

- 51.9 3/82

67 (K.G. Kindred) 310 200 Sumter

Smlthvlll e E.

31"59'5711 - 84"11 1 59

357

85

CJ. Deriso)

Powell Farms

- 43.2
12/79

- 39.9 - 45.5

3/81

10/81

- 40.4 3/82

75 City of Sasser 368 II

Terrell

Sasser

31"43 108"- 84"20'52"

314

201

181

- 40.0
12/79

- 44.5 3/81

- 46.9 10/81

- 35.3 3/82

77 Great Southern 729 Paper Company

Early

Gordon

31"09'5211 - 85"05'45

120

380

380

- 21.2
12/79

- 19.5 3/81

- 15.0 11/81

- 22.9 !/82

APPENDIX D - WELL DATA FOR THE POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE OF THE CLAIBORNE AQUIFER (1979-1982)

FIELD NO, OWNER

GGS oc
NO, NO.

COUNTY

QUAD

LAT. - LONG.

LAND SURFACE ELEVATION (feet)

TOTAL DEPTH (feet)

CASING DEPTH (feet)

STATIC WATER LEVEL (SWL l
DATE MEASURED

SWL DATE

SWL DATE

SWL DATE

80 SIng Ietary Farms
82 Grady Milliner
83 McNair #I

3151 3388

84 H,T. Mclendon #4

Early Clay Calhoun Calhoun

Bancroft Zetto Bluff ton 8 luff ton

31 "25 1 13 11 - 8450'01 11

250

31"32'37 11 - 84"52 1 43 11

355

31"34'35"- 8447'15"

352

31"35 1 00 11 - 84"47 1 2911

365

200

188

150

140

103

140

120

- 42.8 - 43,3

12/79

3/81

- 59.9 - 61.8

12/79

3/81

- 54.6 - 55,2

12/79

3/81

- 71,4 - 69,2

12/79

3/81

- 32,4 11/81

- 15.9 3/82

- 62,1 10/81

- 59,7 3/82

- 56.2 10/81

- 53,0 3/82

- - 70.0

66,8

10/81

3/82

85 Isler Farms Flying Service

Clay

Zetto

31 "36 1 07 11 - 6452'3911

420

142

80

- 64.3 - 64.6

- 64.2

3/81 10/61

3/82

86 E. Alday (G. Chapman l

Clay

Bluff ton

3136 1 49 11 - 84"51'3711

405

122

67

- 44.4 - 45.5

- 45,7 - 44,7

12/79

3/61

10/81

3/S2

88 W.D. Beard #I 3366

Calhoun

Morgan

31 "34 1 45 11 - 8435 1 0211

254

140

- 14.0 - 16,8

- 16.6 - 11.8

(1'1

11/79

3/61

10/61

3/82

Ol

89 w. Stan Iey

Randolph

Carnegie

31"43 1 04 11 - 8451'1511

470

50

- 42.8 - 42.7

- 44.3 - 42, I

12/79

3/61

11/81

3/82

90 Gene Kennedy
91 Melvin Peavay 12

Randolph Randolph

Cuthbert Brooksv II le

3147'26 11 - 84"47'1011

474

31"45 1 51 11 - 84"39'2311

425

66

50

- 39,0

- 39.3

- 40,3

- 36.0

12/79

3/81

11/81

3/82

110

- 38.6

12/79

92 Dean Whaley #2

Randolph

Brooksville

31"45 1 36 11 - 84"39 1 1011

418

110

- 33,8
12!79

94 Dean Whaley #I

Randolph

Shellman

31"50 1 21 11 - 84"37 1 0911

470

90

60

- 63,9

- 69,6

- 67.7

- 68,2

12/79

3/81

10/81

3/82

95 Bob Chamb I Iss

Terrell

Dawson

31 "45 1 56 11 - 84"28 1 2311

371

180

- 35,5
12/79

- 37.5 3/81

- 38.9 10/81

- 41,4 3/82

96 Sonny Reese

Terrell

Chlckasawhatchee

31"41'33 11 - 84"25 1 57 11

270

200

60

- 7.9

- 7.2

- 9,4

- 5,9

12/79

3/81

10/81

3/82

97 T.W. #11

3384

Dougherty

Reds tore Crossroads

31 "26 1 54 11 - 84"21'01"

182

320

300

- 22,9
12/79

- 29.0 3/81

- 27,6 10/81

- 27,34 3/82

98 r.w. fl4

Dougherty

Pretoria

3135'30 11 - 84"20 1 32 11

220

251

232

- 17,0
12!79

- 22.0 3/81

- 26.3 10/81

- 18,27 S/82

APPENDIX D - WELL DATA FOR THE POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE OF THE CLAIBORNE AQUIFER (f 979-1982)

FIELD NO. OWNER

GGS oc
NO. NO.

COUNTY

QUAD

LAT. - LONG.

LAND SURFACE ELEVATION (teet)

TOTAL DEPTH (feet)

CASING DEPTH (feet)

STATIC WATER LEVEL !SWL)
DATE MEASURED

SWL DATE

SWL DATE

SWL DATE

100 T.w. #2

Dougherty

AIbany East

31 31'05 11 - 84"06 143 11

195

418

398

- 70.3
12/79

- 88.0 3/81

- 90.4 10/81

- 79.55 3/82

101 T.w. #5
102 o.w. #2 MI II er Brewery

Dougherty

Albany West

Dougherty

Albany East

31 "35'34"- 84"10 1 3011

198

31"35'45 11 - 84"04 14711

205

257

237

560

300

- 84.6
12/79
- 66.0 12/79

- 83.0 3/81

- 88.2 10/81

- 79.94 3/82

103 T.w. 18

Lee

Leesburg

31"38'13 11 - 84"12 1 5011

238

385

- 97.0
12/79

- 99.0 3/81

-106.7 10/81

- 94.5 3/82

104 W.H. Fryer

Lee

Sasser

31 "40'08 11 - 84"17'2611

258

263

100

- 37.0 12/79

- 29.5 3/81

- 46.3 10/81

- 32.2 3/82

105 J. Daniels #2

Terrell

Sasser

31"41'20 11 - 84"19'0911

290

320

100

- 52.9 3/81

- 54.0 10/81

- 40.9 3/82

107 Sheriff J. Dean

Terrell

Dawson

31 "47 1 48" - 84"25 1 0511

340

120+5

84

- 23.5

- 24.0

- 26.3

- 19.9

C1l

12/79

3/81

10/81

3/82

-...1

108 Jack Balentine

Terrell

Parrott

31"54'01 11 - 84"30'1911

450

60

- 34.5 12/79

- 38.4 3/81

- 40.6 10/81

- 40.0 3/82

109 John Wills

Terrell

Bronwood

31"50 1 26 11 - 84"20'5511

362

120

89

- 51.4

- 49.4

- 52.6

- 44.1

12/79

3/81

10/81

3/82

110 John Wise

Terrell

Bronwood

31"47 1 08 11 - 84"17'21

301

135

- 39.7
12/79

- 35.5 3/81

- 43.6 10/81

- 31.9 3/82

111 Ha Iey Brothers Farm

Lee

Leesburg

31"41'13"- 84"13 1 2211

220

300

- 35.9
12/79

- 35.1 3/81

- 57.2 10/81

- 50.4 3/82

113 Gloria Spann

Sumter

Plains

32'01 '17"- 84"24 109

503

50

40

- 42.3

- 44.2

- 44.5

- 42.5

12/79

3/81

10/81

V82

114 City of Plains #4

Sumter

Plains

32"02'09 - 84"23'12 11

491

90

80

- 31.7

3/82

115 Dru or Dave Murray

314 210 Sumter

Plains

32"03 1 00" - 84"23'2511

509

86

76

- 50.1

- 49.3

- 51.3

- 52.0

12/79

3/81

10/81

3/82

116 C Ity of P Ia Ins 113
117 S.w. Ga. Exper1- 2157 ment Station #1

Sumter Sumter

Plains Lake Collins

32"02'07" - 84"23 1 2011

494

32"02 1 48 11 - 84"22'1611

510

91

80

- 32.5

- 30.2

- 33.9

12/79

3/81

10/81

107

70

- 56.6

- 53.5

- 57.4 - 58.4

12/79

3/81

10/81

3/82

APPENDIX D-WELL DATA FOR THE POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE OF THE CLAIBORNE AQUIFER (1979-1982)

F IELD NO. CJ.oiNER

GGS oc
1(). 1().

COUNTY

QUAD

LAT. - LONG.

LAND SURFACE ELEVATION (feet)

TOTAL DEPTH (teet)

CASING DEPTH (feet)

STATIC WATER LEVEL (SWL)
DATE
~lEASURED

SWL DATE

SWL DATE

SWL DATE

119 R.S. Moore

296

120 Clark Rainbow

709

Center - PurIna

Sumter Sumter

Ellavl I le Americus

32"09'14 11 - 84"18'25"

512

32"07'11"- 84"11'4611

461

154

70

136

126

- 67.6 12/79
- 42.2 12!79

- 69.7 3/81
- 41.7 3/81

- 69.5 10/81
- 45.4 10/81

- 68.7 3/82
- 45.4 3/82

123 Henry Hart #lA

Sumter

Smithvl I leE.

31 "59'37 11 - 84"09'0911

343

90

- 27.3 - 26.6

12/79

3/81

- 36.9 10/81

- 21.5 3/82

124 Charles Miller 3358

Sumter

Cobb

31"56'37 11 - 83"58 1 5911

285

310

230

- 26.5
12/79

- 22.6 3/81

- 39.4 10/81

- 17.9 3-'82

125 Ga. Veterans

2252

Mem. State Park

Crisp

Cobb

31"57'17 11 - 85"54 1 5011

262

300

- 25.5
12/79

- 26.5 3/81

- 28.6 10/81

- 24.8 3/82

126 W.T. Greene

Crisp

Cordele

3159 1 27 11 - 83"49 1 3811

312

400

200

- 35.4
12/79

- 34.6 3/81

- 37.1 10/81

- 32. I 3/82

128 E.o. Cannon
en 00

Dooly

Drayton

32"03'28 11 - 83"54 1 0311

310

200

- 39.9 12/79

- 40.4 3/81

- 45.5 10/81

- 37.4 3/82

129 Dr. James 1-llnor

Dooly

Byromville

32"10 1 17 11 - 83"58 1 33"

325

290

70

- 40.7 - 41.6

- 49.9

- 42.2

12/79

4/81

10/81

3/82

130 HardIgree #1

Dooly

VIenna

32"06 1 42 11 - 83"50'4011

340

340

240

- 40.6
l/80

131 City of Vlenn<> 143 #I

Doo ly

VI anna

32"05 1 39 11 - 8347'31"

355

571

571

- 65.8 12179

- 64.5 3/81

- 67.2 10.81

- 60.5 3/82

132 WI I I lam Sparrow

Dooiy

Pi nevlew
N.w.

32"13'15 11 - 83"42 1 2311

370

280?

175

- 41.0
4/81

- 48.4 10/81

- 37.5 3/82

133 George McKay

1805

Crisp

Drayton

32"0120 11 - 83"54'05"

288

170

125

- 25.4
12179

- 26.5 3/81

- 30.4 10/81

- 24.3 3/82

134 Judge Horn

Crisp

Cobb

31 5910 11 - 83"54'55"

265

300

- 16.1
12/79

135 City of Unadilla #3

Dooly

Unadilla

32"15 1 06 11 - 83"44'23

376

315

315

- 57.1
12/79

- 57.2 3/81

- 63.9 10/81

- 53.5 3/82

136 TerrIll Hudson
138 City of Byromville 11

Dooly Dooly

Henderson Byromvl lie

32"1527 11 - 83"47 1 2511

430

32"12'14 11 - 83"54 1 29"

380

400

200

203

- 100.3 3/81
- 91.0 4/81

-104.4 10/81
-105.1 10/81

- 97.75 3/82
- 92.7 4/82

APPENDIX D - WELL DATA FOR THE POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE OF THE CLAIBORNE AQUIFER ( 1979-1982)

FIELD NO.

OWNER

GGS oc
NO. NO.

COUNTY

QUAD

LAT. - LONG.

LAND SURFACE ELEVATION (feet)

TOTAL DEPTH (feet)

CASING DEPTH (feet)

STATIC WATER LEVEL (SWLl
DATE MEASURED

SWL DATE

SWL DATE

SWL DATE

139 Henry Hart 112A

Sumter

Smithville E.

31 57'54" - 84 08'08"

348

125

- 53.5 10/81

- 33.6 3/82

140 Boots Lyles

Sumter

Smlthvl I leE.

3158 1 34 11 - 8407'4311

365

300

- 70.4 10/81

- 50.4 3/82

142 John Daniels #1

Terrell

Sasser

3141'42"- 8419 134"

309

320

- 34.6 3/82

143 Marcus Regans

Randolph

B I uffton

3137'17"- 8449'51"

360

124

103

- 45.3 12/79

- 45.2 3/81

- 46.5 11/81

-44.9 3/82

145 Shingler & Reed

Early

Gordon

3110'15"- 8500'43"

211

460

280

- 85.8 11/81

- 78.3 3/82

(.]1

tO

146 Kolomokl State

Early

Blakely N.

3128'27- 8455'1511

310

140

120

- 74.8

- 76.9

- 75.4

Park T .w. 113

3/81

11/81

3/82

148 Shiloh Church

Terrell

Shellman

31"49'35- 84"33'11 11

365

60

- 36.8 12/79

150 HardIgree #2

151 F I rewel I Mi I I er Brewery

154 Clty of Smith-
ville #2

2137

Dooly Dougherty Lee

V lenna Albany E.
Smithville w.

32"06'46- 83"49 1 2311

341

31 36 1 25- 8404'1511

200

3154 1 02 11 - 8415'2911

328

360

300

350

195

195

- 32.1 3/81
- 72.0 3/81
- 36.5 3/81

- 35.5 10/81
-104.5 10/81
- 39.4 10/81

- 28.5 3/82
- 90.63 3/82
- 34.3 3/82

155 C.T. Martin
o.w. #1
156 Pete Long o.w.
#2

Randolph Lee

Doverel Smithvi lie W.

3139 1 53 01 - 8436'12 11

322

3153 1 53"- 8419 1 25 11

338

94

77

143

112

- 29.5 3/81
- 39.2 10/81

- 30.6 10/81
- 36.8 3/82

- 27.4 3/82

159 CIty of Leary 2239

Calhoun

Leary

31 29'12 11 - 8430 1 4711

205

556

- 31.7 3/82

'

GEORGIA GEOLOGIC SURVEY

GEOLOGIC SECTIONS OF THE CLAYTON AQUIFER
From Tuohy, M.A., 1983a

A

soo'

Ill - - - MJ - -

SUMTER

- - - - - - + - - L E E - + - - - - - - - - - TERRELL

40o'

3001

20o'

IOo'

0 -IOo'

-20o'

.Joo'

- 4001

- - - - -----
ClAIBORNE GROUP

A'
CALHOUN ------- ---------------------t-----------------------EARLY ------------------------
GGS
437

ClAIBORNE GROUP

WILCOX GROUP

--- - ---

INFORMATION CIRCULAR 55 PLATE I

A- - - A' GEOLOGIC SECTION

e

WELL LOCATIO N

20 -40 BO Milu

-9o~L-------------------------~~o~----------------------~2~o~----------------------~,o~----------------------~,~6------------------------~sto~-----------------------:6~o------------------------~7o~----------------------~8~0------------------------~9~0~----------------------~~~oo Mil

B

-t--------------- soo ALABAMA' -HENRY

CLAY - - - - - - - + - : G : - : G S : - . - - - - - - - - - - - CALHOUN

11!

GGS

Ill

DOUG HERTY

GGS

GGS

11

415

B'
CR ISP WORTH ---------r-GG~
IDI

Mea n Sea Level 0

CLAIBORN
E GRou p

ClAIBORNE GROUP

---- - -

WI LCOX GROUP

LIT HOLOG Y

EXPLANATION ACCESSORIES D C h e rl

c
GsGnS WEBSTER soo'
400 1

TERRELL
GGS
211

c
DOUGH ERTY - - - - - - - llr BAKER+----------------- MITCHELL
GGS
101

GGS
t1

GGS
)101

~~~~@~~~~~~ Clay

.

lim estone

t ; j Marl

CORRELATION CHART ( After Pul Huddle.,tun.11i1B1)

I I ~_-- : : Clay streaks

80olomite

D

Macrofossi l s

8 Interbedded limeston~.

c==.J lntorb ed ded marl

-3 001

-soo1

- I>Oo'

-700' -8 001 -9 001
-10001

-11001

-12001

- 13001

-14 001

________________________ - 1soo L-------------------------~1oL-------------------------21o

_JJoL-------------------------~lo--------------------------soL-------------------------6~o~----------~-----------:,:o-------------------------;,ao M il.,

r-::-1 Finely disseminated
L__j phosphate grains
1- I~- Glauconite
MISCEUANEOUS SYMBOLS
Clayton aq uif er
~No samplt>
- - - - ln dei inile bound ary
Cartography by E.S. Ramos

GEORGIA GEOLOGIC SURVEY

A
- - - - S C i t U Y - - - + - - - - - - - SUMTER

11111

Gill

GGI

315

296

so

GEOLOGIC SECTIONS OF THE CLAIBORNE AQUIFER
From Crews, P.A., 1983a

A'
lEE-----------------+---------------------- DOUGHERTY ---------------------+---------- MITCHEll-----------

GGS

GGS

261

109

INFORMATION CIRCULAR 55 PLATE 2
Mea n Sea level 0
-4001'--------------L-------------' 10 M il s A -- A' GEOLOGIC SECTION

10

20

30

40

B EARlY

ClAY

CALHOU N

GGS

GGS

GGS

437

138

353

so
RANDOLPH

60
GGS
350

70 TERRELl

80

90 M il.,

B' SUMTER - -
GGS
504

/ / /
/ / / / / / /

Clayton fm

WILCOX GROUP Clayton fm.

l.-------------~~o~------------~2~0~----~-------~3~0~-------------t40~------------~5~0~------------~6~0;-------------------,7~o;-------------------------~~o Mils

c RANDOlPH
GGS
552

c TERRELL -------+-- LEE --+------------- SUMTER ---------------t---------- DOOLY --------

GGS

GGS

GGS

GGS

352

406

137

143

EXPLANATION

LITHOLOGY

ACCESSORIES
Bchert 8

lnlerbed ded marl

~~~~~~~~~~=d Clay
g umeslon e
ITT TIMarl

I - - I ~ ~ ~ Clay streaks.
0 o o lomite

r--:1 L__:__j

Finely d issem i~ ated
phosphate gra1 ns

D Glauconite

8

Ma cro fossi ls

Q

In terbe dd ed lim w one

CORRELATION CHART (After Paul H~o~dd leet un, 1 981)

lli milsand
MISCELL ANEO US SYMBOlS
Claiborne aquifer

~N o samplts
- - - - Ind efini te bound ary

0
- 2001
L--------------~.~o~--------------~2~o~-----------------~3~o~-------------------------.~o~------------------------~so~-------------------------;6~o--------------------------~7o Mil

Cartograptly by E. S. Ramo s