-
TEXAS WATER CONNISSION
Joe D. Carter, ChairmanO. F. Dent, Commissioner
H. A. Beckwith, Commissioner
BULLETIN 6411
CHEMICAL QUALITY OF SURFACE WATERS IN THE
HUBBARD CREEK WATERSHED, TEXAS
Progress Report, September 196)
By
C. H. Hembree and J. F. Blakey
Prepared by the U. S. Geological Surveyin cooperation with
theTexas Water Commission
and theWest Central Texas Municipal Water District
November 1964
-
Published and distributedby the
Texas Water CommissionPost Office Box 12311Austin, Texas
78711
Authorization for use or reproduction of any originalmaterial
contained in this publication, i. e., not obtainedfrom other
sources, is freely granted without the necessityof securing
permission therefor. The Commission would ap-preciate
acknowledgement of the source of original materialso utilized.
-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
!l\'TRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . • . . . . . . . • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • .
1
The Problem....... ...
.........••••.......•.......•.......•••.....• 1
Previous Investigations....... 2
Purpose of the
Study.............................................. 4
Sl1l'R-lARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. .•• . . . . . . .••. . . . . . .• . . . . . . ..•. . . . . .•
4
DESCRIPTION OF AREA. . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . • • . .
. . . . • • • . . . . . • • • . . . . . . . • • . . . . . 6
Location and Extent.......... . ..••.. . . . ..••.. . . . . . •
. . . . . . .••. . . . . . 6
Drainage..........................................................
6
Hubbard Creek Reservoir.................. .•. . . . . . . .• . .
. . . ..••. . . . . 8
Physical
Setting.................................................. 8
Physiography. . . . . .. . .••. . . . . . .•. . . . . . .••. . .
. . . .•. . . . . . . .•. . . . B
Geology......................................................
9
Climate......................................................
9
CH£}UCAL QUALITY OF WATER........ ..•. .••.• 12
Dissolved·Solids Discharge and Concentration.. .. .. . . ..••.
.. .. .••. . 12
Hubbard Creek near Breckenridge..............................
13
Big Sandy Creek near Breckenridge. .........•.........••... .•.
13
Hubbard Creek near Albany. ...••.......•.... ....• 21
Salt Prong Hubbard Creek near Albany. .....•.........•.•......
21
Coc:Iparison of Yields. ..••..... . n
Deep Creek at Moran and North Fork Hubbard Creeknear
Albany................................................ ~l
Relation to Base
Flow............................................. 1.9
Relation to
Geology............................................... L.9
-
TABLE OF CO~~ENTS (Cont'd.)
Page
\~ATER QUALITY AND USE 0 00 ......••.......•....... 00 .....•.
o. . 36
Domestic 00.·· ••• 0······· ••.••••.•• ·•·····• 0·····.....
36
Industry ............•........ 0 .......•• ···· •.• 0.•.•.•.• 0
00·· 42
Irrigation 0•...•. 0 .......••....... 0······· 00·.· •..• 0"
42
REFERENCES 0 0 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 0 • • • • • • •
• • • • 45
TABLES
1. Weighted average analyses of Hubbard Creek near
Breckenridge,Texas,
1955-62................................................... Ilj
2. Water and chloride discharge at chemical-quality
samplingsites in the Hubbard Creek
watershed............................. 33
3. Analyses of surface water at chemical-quality samplingsites
1.n the Hubbard Creek watershed o· 34
ILLUSTRATIONS
Figures
1. Relation of Chloride Concentration of Hubbard Creek
nearBreckenridge to Number of Injection Permits in HubbardCreek
Watershed.................................................. 5
2. Geologic Hap of the Hubbard Creek Watershed 0" •• ••• • •
7
3. Honthly Precipitation at U. S. Weather BureauStation, Albany,
Texas, May 1955 to September 1962 ,.... 10
4. Annual Water Discharge, Hubbard Creek near
Breckenridge,\-later Years
1941-62.............................................. 11
5. Water, Dissolved-Solids, and Chloride Discharges from
FourSubdivisions of Hubbard Creek Watershed, in Percentageof Total
for Watershed, February 1 to September 30, 1962......... 14
6. Chloride Concentration and Water Discharge of Hubbard
Creeknear Breckenridge, 1962 Water Year. 15
7. Chloride Concentration and Water Discharge of HubbardCreek
near Breckenridge, October 1, 1962 to April 30, 1963....... 16
8. Monthly Water, Chloride, and Dissolved-Solids
Discharges,Hubbard Creek near Breckenridge, October 1961
toSeptember 1962...................................................
17
-
fABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.)
Page
9. Monthly Water, Chloride, and Dissolved~Solids Discharges,Big
Sandy Creek near Breckenridge, February toSeptember
1962.................................................. 19
10. Chloride Concentration and Water Discharge of Big SandyCreek
near Breckenridge, February 1, 1962 to April 30, 1963..... 20
11. Honth1y \.,later, Chloride, and Dissolved-Solids
Discharges,Hubbard Creek near Albany, February to September 1962...
....•••• 22
12. Chloride Concentration and Water Discharge of HubbardCreek
near Albany, February 1, 1962 to A~ril 30, 1963........... 23
13. Monthly Water, Chloride, and Dissolved-Solids
Discharges,Salt Prong Hubbard Creek near Albany, February
toSeptember 1962..................................................
24
14. Chloride Concentration and Water Discharge of Salt
ProngHubbard Creek near Albany, February 1, 1962 to April 30,
1963... 25
15. Water, Dissolved-Solids, and Chloride Discharges from
ThreeSubdivisions of Hubbard Creek Watershed, in Percentageof the
Total from the Three Subdivisions, February 1,1962 to April 30,
1963.......................................... 26
16. Chloride Concentration and Water Discharge of Deep Creeknear
Moran, October 31, 1962 to April 30, 1963.................. 27
17. Chloride Concentration and Water Discharge of North
ForkHubbard Creek near Albany, November 1, 1962 to April 30,
1963... 28
18. water, Dissolved-Solids, and Chloride Discharges from
AreasAbove Station on Salt Prong Hubbard Creek, in Percentageof
Total from Sub-Basin, November 1, 1962 to April 30, 1963.....
J()
19. Map of Hubbard Creek Watershed Showing Chloride
Concentrationof Surface Water at Chemical-Quality Sampling Sites.
31
20. Base Flow, Chloride Concentration, and Chloride Dischargeat
Selected Sites in the Hubbard Creek Watershed,January 25·26,
1962............................................. 37
21. Map of Hubbard Creek Watershed ShOWing Natural
ChlorideConcentration of Surface-Warer
Runoff........................... 39
22. Relation of Sodium-Chloride Ratio to Chloride
Concentrationfor a Stream Affected by Natural Contamination and
forHubbard Creek near Breckenridge.. .. .. . 41
23. Classification of Water from Hubbard Creek Watershed
forIrrigation Use..................................................
43
-
C HEM I CAL QUA LIT Y a F SUR F ACE WATE R S
Rep 0 r tPro g res s
I N THE HUB BAR D C R E E K WATE R SHE D
S e pte m b e r
T E X A S
196 3
INTRODUCTION
The Problem
The West Central Texas Municipal Water District) Abilene, Texas)
has con-structed a reservoir on Hubbard Creek near Breckenridge,
Texas (impoundmentbegan September 1962). The impounded water will
be used as a public-watersupply for several cities in west-central
Texas. Cities now within the waterdistrict are Abilene, Albany,
Anson, and Breckenridge.
Oil production in the Hubbard Creek watershed began in 1920. In
April1961 there were 5)400 producing oil and gas wells) 782
depleted wells) and5)193 dry holes upstream from Hubbard Creek Dam
(written communiciation)West Central Texas Municipal Water
District) 1961). A large number of dryholes and abandoned wells
were not properly plugged and shallow ground-wateraquifers in many
parts of the watershed have been contaminated by salt water(written
communiciation) J. H. Samuell) 1937). Also) the water quality
ofHubbard Creek and most of its tributaries is affected by
oil-field brines thatreach the streams as surface runoff or as
effluent ground water. Concentra-tions of dissolved constituents)
especially chloride) in the base flow of thestreams are above the
recommended maximum limits for domestic use.
Chemical-quality records collected on Hubbard Creek near
Breckenridgesince April 1955 show that the water at this station is
not of acceptablequality for domestic use except during high flows.
Records for this stationfor water years 1955-57 indicated that the
annual weighted-average concentra-tion of chloride would be about
45 to 50 ppm (parts per million). This concen-tration is well
within the acceptable chloride limits for most uses, and onthis
basis the construction of the dam was started. ThereaZter) a
largeincrease in chloride concentration occurred. In 1958 the
weighted-ave~ageconcentration of chloride was almost three times
that of previous years) andby 1962 had increased to almost 200 ppm.
However) a weighted-average chlorideconcentration of 200 ppm would
be of acceptable quality for domestic use if theyearly runoff were
mixed in a reservoir and if evaporation effects are notconsidered.
Obviously) the concentrating effect of evaporation on the
dissolvedsolids in the reservoir cannot be ignored.
Because of a high area-depth ratio and the local climate) yearly
evapora-tion from Hubbard Creek Reservoir will be high--so high)
indeed) that abouthalf the time the amount of water evaporated from
the reservoir after fillingwill be greater than the inflow (written
communication, Freese) Nichols) and
-
Endress, 1962). During some years, and especially during drought
periods, thechloride concentration of the water in the reservoir
probably will exceed therecommended maximum limit for domestic use
of 250 parts per million (U. S.Public Health Service, 1962). That
is, if the quality of the inflow is notimproved.
Previous Investigations
A salt-water reconnaissance survey of the Hubbard Greek
watershed was madeby the Texas State Department of Health in May
1961. The survey indicated thatseveral areas are potential sources
of chloride contamination (written communi-cation, J. D. Goff and
J. R. Morgan, 1961). The survey by the Texas StateDepartment of
Health disclosed:
I' ••• that Hubbard Greek contained chloride concentrations
ofapproximately 1,000 ppm near Hubbard Greek Reservoir Dam.This
chloride increased progressing upstream and approach-ing oil
fields. When no flow was visible, there was evi-dence of previous
brine flows because of salt deposits onthe banks and stream
beds.
Many pits were found being utilized for attempted disposalof
brines that are produced in oil recovery operations inthis
area."
The report by the Texas State Department of Health concluded
that:
"Generally the brines from the oil fields in the HubbardCreek
Keservoir watershed do not enter watercourses bysurface routes.
However, sub-surface migration of thesebrines along the beds of the
streams draining the area isconsidered to be taking place according
to laboratoryanalysis of the samples collected. Discharge of the
brinesinto the watercourses in this manner is difficult to detectby
a visual investigation.
The high chloride concentrations found in oil-field
brineproduced from the counties involved and the volume reportedare
such that the entry of it into the watercourses andthe continued
discharge to the environs by the use of pitsis likely to seriously
impair the quality of the water inthe Hubbard Creek Reservoir."
The firm of Conselman, Jenke, and Tice, Abilene, Texas,
contracted withthe West Central Texas Municipal Water District in
December 1961 to prepare areport on "Salt-Water Contamination in
the Hubbard Creek Reservoir Watershed ofShackelford, Stephens,
Callahan, and Eastland Counties, Texas." Among otherimportant
findings, their report concludes in part that:
"1. The Hubbard Creek Reservoir Watershed is naturallyclean, and
its geologic setting is stratigraphically quitefavorable,
particularly as compared to areas north andwest .•..
- 2 -
-
2. Streams entering Hubbard Creek Reservoir are now
carryingexcessive concentrations of dissolved chlorides and
othersalts as compared to the normal content to be expected
fromleaching of the outcrops traversed.
3. The chief source of these abnormal chlorides is indus-trial
brine produced in connection with oil and gas opera-tions, which
have been and continue to be intensive in thearea.
4. Industrial brines have reached the watershed from(1) surface
leakage of salt-water pits, producing wells,water injection wells,
lease lines, tanks, heaters, trea-ters, and abandoned dry holes;
(2) leaching of salt-impregnated areas by runoff; (3) seepage of
salt-waterpits into the shallow subsurface; (4) subsurface
seepagefrom salt water disposal wells pumping brine into
theannulus, with pressures and volumes in excess of thecapacity of
subsurface reservoirs; (5) waterflood injectionwells which
unintentionally inject brine into reservoirsother than those to be
repressured; (6) abandoned shot-holes and core-holes which receive
lateral salt watermigration from other sources; and (7) occasional
deliberatedisposal of brine by dumping into surface watercourses.
ll
Freese, Nichols, and Endress, Consulting Engineers, Fort Worth,
Texas,completed a report on chloride routing studies of Hubbard
Creek Reservoir inJune 1962. Their conclusions are as follows:
" .•.with the degree of chloride contamination now beingobserved
on Hubbard Creek, the resulting concentrations inHubbard Creek
Reservoir can be expected to rise above thelimit recommended by the
U. S. Public Health Service (25Uparts per million) during drouth
periods. The onlyapparent means to prevent this occurrence is to
reduce theman-made pollution on the watershed and bring the
mineralcontent of the runoff back down to the levels measuredprior
to 1958. Specifically, the overall average chlorideconcentration in
the stream flow must be reduced to 50 ppmor less if the lake water
is to meet Public Health Servicestandards on a continuous and
dependable basis.
Unless there is same further increase in pollution onHubbard
Creek, the reservoir will not become unduly saltyfor a few years
after impoundment begins. Judging from thechloride routing analyses
included in this study, some fiveto ten years will elapse between
closure of the dam and theincrease of chlorides in the lake to more
than 250 ppm,with the quality of the runoff as it exists at
present.
Early quality measurements of the u.S. Geological Surveyon
Hubbard Creek, from 1955 to 1957, encourage the beliefthat the
chloride content can be held below 50 ppm if pro-per attention is
given to the handling of oil-field brinesand other similar wastes
within the watershed boundaries."
- 3 -
-
The West Central Texas Municipal Water District has studied the
cause ofthe progressive increase of chloride as measured at the
station on HubbardCreek near Breckenridge. They believe that there
is a correlation uetween thenumber of injection permits and the
increase in e~loride (Austin P. Hancock,written communication,
1963). Figure 1 was prepared from data furnished byMr. Hancock on
the number of permits. The relation of chloride concentrationto the
number of permits is too pronounced to be fortuitous.
Purpose of the Study
In December 1961 the U. S. Geological Survey, in cooperation
with the WestCentral Texas Municipal Water District and the Texas
Water Commission, began astudy of the surface-water resources of
the Hubbard Creek watershed. The pur-pose of the study is to
determine the chemical quality of surface waters; todetermine the
source areas and extent of rapidly increasing dissolved
solids,especially chloride; to show the effect of remedial measures
in reducing theamount of dissolved solids reaching the Hubbard
Creek Reservoir; to determinestratification patterns in Hubbard
Creek Reservoir; to record and analyze theeffects of withdrawals
from the bottom of the reservoir on stratificationpatterns; and to
determine the optimum rate at which saline water can bereleased
from the bottom of the reservoir without withdrawal of the
betterwater in the upper layers.
For this study, the daily streamflow and chemical-quality
station onHubbard Creek near Breckenridge that was established in
April 1955 will becontinued. In February 1962 daily streamflow and
chemical-quality stationswere established on Big Sandy Creek near
Breckenridge, Hubbard Creek nearAlbany, and Salt Prong Hubbard
Creek near Albany; all three stations are abovethe area to be
inundated by Hubbard Creek Reservoir. In October 1962 dailystations
were established on Deep Creek at Moran and North Fork Hubbard
Creeknear Albany. Two additional daily stations, Hubbard Creek near
Sedwick andSnailum Creek near Albany, and a continuous specific
conductance recorder atthe reservoir outlet will be established in
the spring of 1964. In addition,streamflow measurements will be
made and samples collected for chemicalanalyses about 4 times a
year at each of 13 sites on tributaries. Other instru-mentation and
stations will be added as needed.
This is a progress report summarizing the data collected through
April1963 and indicates the present quality of the inflow to the
reservoir and someof the source areas of chlorides. Another
progress report will be prepared atthe end of the 1964 water
year.
SilllMARY
The surface waters of Hubbard Creek watershed were by nature
originallylow in chloride content. However, at present the chloride
content of many ofthe streams is high. Chemical-quality records
indicate a progressive increasein chloride since about 1955, and
this increase in chloride coincides with anincrease in water-flood
projects in the oil fields.
Salt springs near the "Old Albany Salt Works" on a tributary of
Salt ProngHubbard Creek are the only known source of natural
contamination. The flowfrom these springs is small and enters Lake
McCarty, which is about 6 miles
- 4 -
•
-
I IEXPLANATION
-1'"204 cis Mean wOler discharge, in• cubic feet per second
196219S8 Waler yearDolo on number of Injection permits
granted by 'he Texas Railroad Com- VmiSSion furnished b, Wesl
CentrolTelos Municipal Waler District.MO' b. large number of wells
for
/each permit. 23,752 bo r rels 01 sol tWOI er pO' day being
injected as of 2~4 cfs1-1-62/J958 47.9 cts 83.0 cfs Leis1959
1960-"'"
1/ 1961
/2~ cls /1956 ;1.633 cfs248 cf~
1957Apr -Sept 1955
z0->-..'">-zWvzz00v-~
~-W:>0
-
W'",,".. o.'"~ I WZ>-..,0W>-~
"-W"
230
210
190
170
150
130
110
90
70
50
3050 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210
CUMULATIVE INJECTION PERMITS
Relation
to
of Chloride
Number of
Figure
Concentration ofInjection Permits
Hubbord Creek near Breckenridge
In Hubbard Creek Watershed
".
US GeoloQlcol Survey In coop8roll00 WI 111 Il'Ie Tues worer
Commissionlind Ihe Wes! Cenlrol Tues MUniCipal Worer District
-
southwest or Albany. Lake McCarty is the water supply for
Albany.have no appreciable effect on the quality of water in
Hubbard Creek
The springsReservoir.
Saline flows, dead vegetation, and salt encrustations along
waterways nearoil fields occur throughout the watershed. A major
source area of chloridecontamination is above the station on Salt
Prong Hubbard Creek near Albany.If the runoff from the area above
this station during February to September1962 had been diverted out
of the watershed, 4S percent less chloride wouldhave passed the
outflow station on Hubbard Creek near Breckenridge. The sourceof
the high chloride can be isolated even more closely. North Fork
HubbardCreek, a tributary of Salt Prong Hubbard Creek that drains
an intensivelydeveloped oil field west of Albany, contributed 81
percent of the chloride loadthat passed the station on Salt Prong
during the period November 1962 to April1963. The drainage area
above the station on North Fork is only one-third ofthe drainage
area above the station on Salt Prong.
The drainage area above the station on Big Sandy Creek near
Breckenridgecontributes less chloride per unit area than the
drainage area above the sta-tion on Hubbard Creek near Albany. Most
of the abnormally high chloride water(one sample of low flow
contained 10,500 ppm chloride) in Big Sandy sub-basinis in Battle
Creek and its tributaries that drain oil-field areas. Source
areasof saline water above the station on Hubbard Creek near Albany
are mostly abovethe station on Deep Creek near Moran and on Hubbard
Creek above the mouth atDeep Creek. One sample of low flow from a
tributary of Deep Creek west ofMoran contained 13,600 ppm of
chloride.
Lake Cisco, the water supply of CiSCO, stores runoff from the
upperreaches of Big Sandy Creek. Chemical analyses of water from
Lake Cisco indi-cate that the water is usually less than 15 ppm
chloride. Other chemicalanalyses of water from ponds and lakes
throughout the watershed indicate thatif contamination is
substantially reduced or eliminated, the water of HubbardCreek
Reservoir would be of excellent quality cost of the time, and would
beof acceptable quality even during those years when evaporation
from the reser-voir exceeds the inflow.
DESCRIPTION OF AREA
Location and Extent
The area drained by Hubbard Creek extends from northern Callahan
Countyand northwestern Eastland County across eastern Shackelford
County and westernStephens County to the Clear Fork Brazos River 10
miles north of Breckenridge,Texas (Figure 2). The drainage area
above U. S. Highway IB3, northwest ofBreckenridge, and 8 miles
above the mouth is 1,111 square miles.
Drainage
Deep Creek, which has a larger drainage area than Hubbard Creek
abovetheir junction, starts in Callahan County southwest of Putnam
and flows north-east and then north to join Hubbard Creek south of
State Farm Road 601. MexiaCreek is the largest tributary of Deep
Creek (Figure 19).
- 6 -
-
,.... -.EXPLANATION
".-!! ( .......~~~·~·l;l""..t_. _._ 5ot t,'"II, ov,
~.
I II 0 J/
I -"\.,..~...I
-
Salt Prong Hubbard Creek and its principal tributary, North Fork
HubbardCreek, drain areas entirely within Shackelford County. Salt
Prong starts inthe south-central part of the county and flows into
Hubbard Creek about 4 milesabove U. S. Highway 180. North Fork
Hubbard Creek begin3 west of A!oany nearthe center of the county
and enters Salt Prong about 3 miles southeast ofAlbany.
Big Sandy Creek, which has the largest drainage area of the
three principaltributaries of Hubbard Creek, starts in Eastland
County near Cisco and flowsgenerally north across Stephens County
to about 8 miles southwest of Brecken-ridge where it flows into
Hubbard Creek Reservoir. The principal tributary ofBig Sandy Creek
is Battle Creek, which rises in northeastern Callahan County,flows
across southeastern Shackelford County and southwestern Stephens
County,and flows into Big Sandy Creek a short distance above State
Farm Road 576, and8.2 miles southwest of Breckenridge (Figure
19).
Hubbard Creek Reservoir
Hubbard Creek Reservoirarea is 1,107 square miles.
impoundment began in September 1962.Pertinent data for the
reservoir are
Drainageas follows:
ElevationFeature (feet above Capaci ty Area
mean sea level) (acre-feet) (acres)
Top of dam 1,208.0 -- --Top of earth fuse plug 1,197.0 584,000
22,000Crest of emergency
spi llway 1,194.0 521,000 20,500Top of gates of outlet
structure (servicespi llway) 1,183.0 320,000 15,250
Crest of outletstructure 1,176.5 225,000 12,300
Invert of 48-inchvalve 1,134.0 4,000 700
Shoreline: 100 miles at elevation 1,183.0 feet above mean sea
level
Physical Setting
Physiography
Physiographically, the Hubbard Creek watershed is in the Osage
Plainssection of the Central Lowlands province. The Callahan Divide
on the southand southwest separates the watershed from the Colorado
River Basin. Thealtitude of the watershed ranges from about 1,200
feet above msl (mean sealevel) in the north to about 2,000 feet
above msl on the south and west bound-aries. Except for moderately
rough topography along the divide, the topographyis rolling to
hilly and the numerous small streams flow generally northeast
ornorthwest into the principal streams. Most of the principal
streams haveeroded their valleys in outcrop of shale, or in some
places shale alternatingwith thin beds of limestone. Separating the
valleys are low ridges of gently
- 8 -
-
northwestward-dipping limestone. Sandstone forms the ridges and
underlies thevalleys in the eastern part of the area, particularly
in Big Sandy Creek sub-basin.
Geology
The following description of the geology of the Hubbard Creek
watershed isfrom a discussion of the geology of the area by Frank
B. ConseLman (writtencommunication, 1962).
Hubbard Creek watershed is near the eastern margin of the
Permian Basin,which is a large structurally downwarped and filled
basin underlying northwestTexas and adjoining states. Most of the
rocks that crop out in the HubbardCreek watershed are limestone and
thick beds of relatively softer shale, whichseparate the limestone.
The shale between the limestone has been partiallyeroded leaving a
series of ridges or cuestas. The ridges are steep on the eastand
slope gently to the west about 40 feet per mile, which is the dip
of theunderlying rocks. These westward-dipping beds of limestone
and shale ofPermian age were once overlain by nearly horizontal
rocks of Early Cretaceousage that have been removed by erosion
except along the southern divide.
The oldest rocks crop out in the southeast part of the watershed
nearCisco. These rocks are of Pennsylvanian age and are mostly
limestones, sand-stones, and siltstones.
Outcrops of Permian rocks, which in some areas are notorious as
producersof bad water, cover about 95 percent of the watershed.
(See Figure 2.) How-ever, these Permian rocks are geochemically
unlike the Permian rocks that cropout to the southwest in the
Colorado River Basin and in the drainage basins ofother streams to
the west and northwest. The Lower Permian rocks in theHubbard Creek
watershed are predominately marine and contain negligible
quan-tities of salt and gypsum as compared to the younger gypsum
and salt-bearingPermian rocks to the west.
Another important aspect of the rocks and their relation to the
qualityof surface water is the westward dip of the rock strata.
This westward dipcoupled with the northeastward trend of the
streams minimizes the area of out-crop of each formation crossed by
the streams. The watershed is an area ofground-water recharge to
the few aquifers present and little or no ground wateris effluent
to the streams except from alluvium along the streams.
Climate
The climate of the four-county area is typical of much of the
Wesc TexasPlains. The mean temperature for July is about 84°F, and
the maximum tempera-ture recorded is 112°F. The mean temperature
for January is about 44°F, butmaximums in the eighties and minimums
near OGF have been recorded. The averagegrowing season is 226 days,
extending from late March to early November (Te:{asAlmanac,
1961-1962, p. 636). The average annual precipitation is 25 to
26inches with no well-defined wet season (Figure 3). Much of the
precipitationfor the region occurs during storms and thunderstorms
with 10 to 20 percent ofthe annual precipitation occurring in a few
days. Irregularities in the annualprecipitation pattern are further
exemplified by Figure 4 which shows annualwater discharge for
Hubbard Creek near Breckenridge for the water years 1941-62.
- 9 -
-
12
----'1958
-L-1957
JFMAMJJASONOJfMAMJJASA SON 0___ MON1THS
1956WATER YEARS
1955
ON 0 J F M A M J J A 5 aND J F M A M J J A SON 0 J F MA M J J A
S ON 0 J F M A M J J A 5MONTHS
ONDJFMAMJJASONOJ FMAMJJ
,
,,
;
I
-~f- HA n n n n ft H n- -H n II nI-
n IIn n n II n
I
;
1-- -,f- - - - -
, n HAn H- -H nn n II n n nil
4
4
o
•
o
•
,
•
•
,
'0
'0
'"'":ruzz-z
"I-«I-o.;:;
~ I '"0 '"o.
1959 1960WATER YEARS
1961l I
1962
Figure :3
Monthly Precipitation at U.5. Weather Bureau Stotion,
Albany, Texas, May 1955 to September 1962
".u S GeoloQltol Sur ••y ,n coop,rotion ."rn In, r"OI wor..
Comminlon
Gnd lilt Will Cenltol ruos Munltloal Wall' O,unel
, . J
-
700
600
'"oz< 400
'""o:r....z.300
w
"''"..:ru
'"0 200'"w......,.
100
o
Delober 1940 to April 1955 estimated b,Freese, Nichols, and
Endress, Consulting -Engineers (written communication, June
1962),
- Record for 1962 waler yeor adjusted f 0'
- reservoir conlents; storage in HubbardCreek Reservoir began
September 1962. -
-
~l-
I-l-
I-
I- -
r-l-I-
l-I--
I- -I- - -
f-e-- -- -
I-~ I--
- ~ n I--I--Nr"J~IO\D1'10 10 10 10 10 10O'l CTl en O'l a'l
en
Annual Waler Discharge,
Waler
WATER YEAR
Figure 4
Hubbard Creek near Breckenridge,
Years 1941-62
,"
u.s, Geoloqicol Survey in cooperation with the TIKas Waler
Commissionand the WISt Centrol Te_os Municipal Woler District
- 11 -
-
Probably the most important climatic factor aifecting the
qua!i~y of waterin Hubbard Creek Reservoir is evaporation from the
surface of the reservoir.The concentrating effect of evaporation
will increase the chloride concentrationand concentration of other
constituents of the reservoir water. Lowry (1960,p. £-9) tabulated
monthly reservoir evaporation rates for Texas for the IS-yearperiod
from 1940 to 1957. Based on the evaporation rates given by Lowry
thenet evaporation from Hubbard Creek Reservoir, if the reservoir
had been in placeduring this period, would have been 4.57 feet
annually. The maximum net evap-oration would have been 6.16 feet
for the drought year of 1956 and the cinimumwould have been 2.61
feet for the abnormally wet year of 1957.
CHEl-UCAL QUALITY OF WATER
Dissolved-Solids Discharge and Concentration
The dissolved-solids concentration at any point on Hubbard C~eek
or itstributaries may be greater, equal, or less, than at any
upstream or downstreampoint. The effect of inflow on the
concentration downstream depends on theamount of inflow as well as
the concentration of the inflow. Assuming no wateris lost between
the upstream and downstream points the relation between
waterdischarges and dissolved-solids concentrations would be as
follows:
CQ-K:Q=CQaa bb cc
Where C : concentration of water at upstream pointa
Q : water discharge at upstream pointa
C : concentration of inflowb
Qb
: quantity of inflow
C : concentration of water at downstream pointc
Q : water discharge at downstream pointc
Records for the period February to September 1962 show that the
dissolved-solids concentration of Hubbard Creek was increased by
inflow from Salt ProngHubbard Creek and was decreased by inflow
from Big Sandy Creek and severalsmall tributaries below the mouth
of Salt Prong. Similar changes in concen-tration are known to occur
in other reaches of Hubbard Creek and its tribu-taries.
Natural base or sustained flow of streams in Hubbard Creek
watershed isalmost nonexistent except in the lower reaches of
Hubbard Creek. Duringperiods of no flow or meager flows,
evaporation of ponded pools leaves saltdeposits on the banks and
streambeds, especially in contaminated reaches of the
- 12 -
-
streams. These deposits are dissolved rapidly by the next runoff
event andcarried downstream or into Hubbard Creek Reservoir.
Because of the irregularprecipitation pattern and contamination,
salt encrustations are common alongthe stream channels, and the
initial flow of a runoff-event may be highlysaline.
The three upstream stations, Big Sandy Creek near Breckenridge,
HubbardCreek near Albany, and Salt Prong Hubbard Creek near Albany
record runoff from80 percent of the 1,111 square miles above the
station on Hubbard Creek nearBreckenridge. During the period
February to September 1962, the three upstreamstations recorded
three-fourths of the flow recorded at the station on HubbardCreek
near Breckenridge. Percentage relationships of the stations
upstreamfrom the primary station for this period are shown in
Figure 5.
Hubbard Creek near Breckenridge
The maximum dissolved-solids concentration at the station on
Hubbard Creeknear Breckenridge was observed in July 1960. Mean
discharge for the first 5days of the month was less than 0.05 cfs
(cubic feet per second), and thedissolved-solids content was 5,350
ppm. In June 1961, over half of the totalflow for the water year
(October 1960 to September 1961) was recorded and theminimum
dissolved-solids content was 112 ppm.
The concentration of any particular dissolved constituent in
Hubbard Creeknear Breckenridge varies with the discharge rate.
Bicarbonate, for example,varies only slightly with changes in water
discharge, but sodium and chloride,which are the major constituents
during low flow, decrease drastically as thewater discharge
increases. Calcium and magnesium vary with water dischargesomewhat
like sodium, but the relation of calcium and magnesium to water
dis-charge is not as consistent. The sulfate content of Hubbard
Creek apparentlydepends on from which part of the watershed the
flow comes. Saline waterpassing the station on Hubbard Creek near
Breckenridge mayor may not be highin sulfate.
Figures 6 and 7 show the daily water discharge and concentration
ofchloride. Monthly values for water, chloride, and
dissolved-solids dischargefor the 1962 water year are shown in
Figure 8. Weighted averages and extremesfor the period of record
(1955-62) are given in Table 1.
Big Sandy Creek near Breckenridge
The station on Big Sandy Creek near Breckenridge records the
runoff from298 square miles. Although flow was recorded less than
half the time, the run-off measured at the Big Sandy Creek station
was almost one-third of the totalrunoff from Hubbard Creek
watershed for the 8-month period February to Septem-ber 1962
(Figure 5). Chemical quality versus streamflow at this station
issimilar to that at the station on Hubbard Creek near
Breckenridge, but thewater is of better quality. As at Hubbard
Creek near Breckenridge, the bicar-bonate content of Big Sandy
Creek shows little relation to flow. Other prin-cipal ions vary
inversely with the discharge, and sodium and chloride are themajor
constituents at low flow. The monthly discharges of water,
chloride,and dissolved solids from February to September 1962 for
the Big Sandy stationare shown in Figure 9, and the daily water
discharge and chloride concentra-tions for the period February 1962
to April 1963 are given in Figure 10.
- 13 -
-
_x
~,"O
-
" ,! ~"" "T "l" ,!L---,----- ---- --~
"'" I,·•
· -.• •~:; ~
• •
~
o
"c-o~-c"'-'cou
o'"i•
···•,-
··,•
·;,•J<
._~........,_,;l~ •
____..,.-_. :I'
I, "
,
_'"-~";.-_.J-:~~ _':>._--.-.-
".---_..'-
----------
--...",..";;=:-
1 J ---------.- . -_.~.-.---- -,.------
•
'"",
r!•
L-.,.
··•
•• <
j --.t•I,< ,I
,I
l. I
-
•
z
o
.,
00
o
October November Oecember JanUQry February Mo rt h A P ri I
0, I 202.5 , "
, , 2 , , , " , !i 1015 Z " "FilII "'" II II , II II , II II , ,
, , , , :'~ =l- vY'
-f- -f- r -E
'-Chloridei= conterlll'OllOnl-f- -I- -
,~, =~----""""
~.." ~I-
...._.. . ~"._, ,l-
"
~. :#..•. .,, " •, ". ,1==
,.....•.,..."~•
~WaleI' disC:horQe-'
f- ":'"l-I- -
I.
F '. :'~
, =---
If- .. -. , •l-
. • L __ , - -" •, , , ,l- . ,
1\1
• -'. • r' jr.1 1 :\~
, '1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 '" I I ,i "'" "'" 0'10152025
51015202$ 510152025 :I 101520 25 5101520 510152025 510152025Oclober
November Olcember Januory Februory March April
10
1.0
100zo~~
~
zw~
~
~
0:: 100~
z
woz'3ru
z2~z~
zwuzou
Figure 7
Chloride Concentration and Water Discharge of Hubbard Creek
neor Breckenridge, October I, 1962 to April 3D, 1963
...US GeolOQ,col Sut..., in coo",,"ohon .WI "" TlOos Warer
Comm'",on
and Ihl West C
-
,,,,,8...~•Ci ..
o
.~ §e~•o-x xx ," ,•'u::,.o
"'~,§ ~• xx
]
'"'""0
-'"Do-uo
-o'"c
'"'"m-'"DE'"-0-'""'
'"m
"0Co
o
,,;
'"'"~o.cu~
Ci
'""0~
o.cU
•-,.2'~
;•
,,,,G. "' 'l?U"JS'O i""O$-OlA10n,,,
,NO. HI ']?~""J'iO lQ'MO'MJ
IlH-}MJ' ""l?W."Ji'C wl' ••
,
[
=~~~i~~ii!~~~~~~~~~~!~~~~~~~~~~!'1.z~I,•
·,~
• ·• · ;" . ·•~ · ,• ,• !
",
• · •x ·" ; , •~ [ill 0
~oo
17
-
•
~,·,
,,·,o
·i
,~·,·!1.,·]J
,·,,
·,·,,,
,.,--.,",,,, .. .,
00
~" ... .; ..... ~~"' ...
...;;.! ~
.In.-
; - ... P~J'.. ,I'• !
..Jf-----l-+-------.j,
.-.
;
!
,j
,.·.,j ~..::..::.i
,
";i!·.
,•<
~·,,,·
..
1
·!
!,,!··,···,
,--·
,!,··;l
18
-
".
IO.OOO" ."• U 0• ••o
"1=-------[
1962
Figure 9
Monthly Water, Chloride, and Dissolved- Solids Discharges,
Big Sandy Creek near Breckenridge,
February to September 1962
u_ 5 GeoloQ,col Survey in cooperolion with Ihe lues Woter
Comm'SSlonand the Wut Centrol Te~os Municipal WOler Oisl"Cl
- 19 -
-
•!••,
••w,w••,,•·,•
'00 •ww·
,-
--i:l'o
! 1 I I..".
., "'"(
......i H--Ti
I l- .J ..",
r•••••• ,
iii riJO"'"I. 0)-..-10'-I-I I t
II........ ,
,..-,
100"110 •T! I IT
......... '• .. '!.fl'
0"60"
'10""......M"
illi>'
(.
..,."H~1"r
c".c.,..... ......f ••" ••.-t..-
~
~
~
E
I~ J ::~i' :1 .,~ " : I ;, I' , •,I: , ,I :' "...' - ., t'
I ',: " " 'I ", , 'I .1 : ,i
I: : I, :i :I:: I
I ; 1 l :::1 :\:: ,I:, , , I '. •I ,1 1 I,.: ' I " I I I~ .""
,."..
-
Hubbard Creek near Albany
The station on Hubbard Creek near Albany has the largest
drainage ar2a(461 square miles) of any ot the three inflow
stati()n~ above the reservoir.The relation of dissolved-solids load
to water discharge at this station issimilar to that for Hubbard
Creek near Breckenridge. During the first 8 monthsof record, the
area above the Albany station contributed approximately one-third
of the total dissolved-solids load and one-third of the water
dischargefrom the watershed (Figure 5). The variation of individual
ions with stream-flow was similar to the ion-water relationship at
Big Sandy Creek near Brecken-ridge for the 8 months of record, but
the dissolved-solids load was double thatmeasured at the Big Sandy
Creek station. Data collected at the Albany stationare given in
Figures 11 and 12.
Salt Prong Hubbard Creek near Albany
Compared to the two other streams above the reservoir previously
a~scussed, Salt Prong Hubbard Creek near Albany (drainage area 116
square miles)is the smallest and the saltiest. During the first 8
months of record, thearea above the station on Salt Prong
contributed 16 percent of the Dischargeand 36 percent of the
dissolved-solids load from the watershed (Figure 5).Chemical
quality versus streamflow was characteristic of a contaminated
streamwith the first waters of high flows being saline. The
bicarbonate ion, as atthe other stations, does not change
appreciably with changes in flow. Thesodium and chloride ions are
the major constituents and vary inversely withflow. The calcium and
magnesium content increases with the sodium ions butnot
consistently, and the sulfate ions show little relation to
dissolved-solidsconcentrations or to streamflow. Data for the
period of record are given inFigures 13 and 14.
Comparison of Yields
Comparative yields from three subdivisions above the reservoir
for the 15months of record (February 1962 to April 1963) are shown
in Figure 15.
Deep Creek at Moran andNorth Fork Hubbard Creek near Albany
In November 1962, stations were established on Deep Creek at
Moran andNorth Fork Hubbard Creek near Albany. Almost all the
runoff for the first 6months of station operation occurred during
the last week of April. Based onthis short period the chemical
quality versus streamflow at the two stationsseems to conform with
the remainder of the watershed.
With little or no flow for most of the period, the chloride
concentrationat the station Deep Creek at Moran reached 2,200 ppm.
The daily water dis-charge and chloride concentrations are shown on
Figure 16.
The station on North Fork Hubbard Creek near Albany had a
sustained 110101(0.3 to 0.5 cfs) of highly saline water for the
6-month period. The weightedaverage chloride for the period was
2,520 ppm and concentrations greater than3,000 ppm chloride were
common. Data for the period (November 1962 to April1963) are shown
on Figure 17.
- 21 -
-
10,000'r:::- ---,
'''"'1:-:::-------------1
J.ly..,Aphl......
(XPLANATION
~ '011.'" .'O• • "• u 0•••
Monthly Water, Chloride,
Hubbard
February
Figure II
and Dissolved-Solids
Creek near Albany,
to September 1962
Discharges,
u S Geolo'ilicol Survey In cooperotion WiTh lhe Tuos WOTe.
CommISSIonond The Wesl Cenrrel Tues Mun,Clpol WeTe. OISlrll;1
'"
- 22 -
-
!
•§•
l,••····
••,,
,••,,•
"
-
-!1~
,.
---=11000-
.",11
,•,
~'D
......r .······f
-+-+--~-
N.....' .. I D.......,
1"TTr
b-"b t 1_,,_1 I ~-
oc....,
""1"'..--
--1-1-
-.,...TTTTr
.-.."..,..
,."J,••
--
' ..
I.
...... I "'"
t.?"lG.. It..
I'~'
I '
v-"t', , (
,---K~ ~I. ~ l.J ""Ito _ •• 1'••
£' :, Ii'" II 1~I\ ~l :, I
I Ii ' ,\ -j," I "• ':: \ :: I ,• ~I' I II ,': J,~ , I I '"
.~,I' '1', I I 'I',I I,' I I. • I' I I,I Iii: I I, 1\ "-5""'" .."
••,.. I I 'I:\ ~l: \ \' : \ 1\ I -t-':' :::', 1: I \ : l -,, \ l '
~ \ ' ,. I I I I"\1' " \ : \ : \ I j,\ , \ ' " ' ,, ' '\1, ' 1 ,I \
" I,,\ l'~ , , • I, • I
,;, I, : ' "" • \ ' \ '" I .; I ' "I' " I 1 \
p ~ ~ 1------11 -t- -+---:' I" " Ir. 1;: l: " : : :..: : 1 ,\
'1'I '1: ' ': I I n:, : \ ., \
.1 'l,.t :I, I I ,'I' I" I \",:,\::J "I: ~ : ::': ,\: : ;'I
~ ," " , ' ,'" 'I" ' ", I I ,I I ,nI, ~ "I ' , I", '., I \ I '"I
_
L" l,iJu-l~ iu..LL.!JU-' , , \1 , : , : ~ : ., :..Ll.-l1 Ill: ,\
: ,I. , ., : o.......' ...... • .., ... .... J.I h.II S I.....'
0...... No......' Doc..,.. ' l...... _..... ' "",_ "'"
It_:r-!1:31/', (I:;,. I. I,
I J :, ~:.. :, ~
•
•,•
~;Tii~I,
·•I
·,a oOOt_,,,··1!
,NW
Fie,lUre 12
Chloride Concentration and Water Discharge of
near Albany, February I, 1962 to April
Hubbard
30, 1963
Creek
,,.U s. Geolo9'CDt SUfYI, in Cooo"Ollon Wllh lrl' ruol Walt.
C_million
and lilt WIll cenl.ol rUOI Munic,pol 'Nat" DIIl.lcl
-
••• 0w ••w •';" ~ z
~ .u••
'50
'0,000"'------------ ::1EXPLANATION
~ Wo'" dl.t"'Qt
[j C~lo"d. di".o,g.
D D; ...\v ••-OOIo~• • ',,".r.ol000I:: --i
'"
"
1962
Figure 13
Monthly Woler, Chloride, and Dissolved-Solids Discharges,
Salt Prong Hubbard Creek near Albany,
February to September 1962
US GeoloCjicol Survey ,n cooperation wilh the lnos WahH
CommiSSionand the West Crlll.ol luas Mun,clpal Worer D'SlriC!
- 24 -
-
f ....." ...... .~, ... I ... ... ...·t.., ",,- ~,- .......,,,
--- ......" , . ...... ..",I I -r I r "" 1 T r I I' " I I I "" I
1'" I TIl I I 'I 1 'I "" '=
I ::" -::! .. " ..,,,; "r-.---1. -~ \-1\./' .. _\ '( •.~; ~
\(.~"..._..".".. I( 1/\ l( ("~I" ......".'1.. -
,•••o;o
••••·•o",
•,!o
"
•,••
,~
-
;j"'0
,...,-jlO
.0'"00'
--.:1'000
.....,roo".,.-'-'.-l-WJ-l......;_LLI•••••••0........'N
........'0.....,I ••' .....,...."J."
.' , ,-i! : \.\ !: l--S-·"l" '''''''''r ~"" """ . ,:' \."
'"'\j". =",·V , •. ''''~l "' "0 ~ '. ,.-:. '0',,+ r _ ,,-'. ,__,'.
, \"" •• 0 \\ , ..' \
\ ,~: ~• "1 "I ", ,
V." I
\
i j', ', ', ,. ,• •,,,,,,,, '",..'",.iJ:...LL.L..l
..., I J••••
'\,'.,,,
".t"
!"
i! I I" I "I I li '1
---r----r--o' "I:! I "I. I '.t , C I ,
o,,, ••,,."'"'L.' • ~ , ,\ ~ ::\ ~ , I"I, "'. 'I ~ \
" ,
\v
"uo"rl'" •.,onl .",-.u~"'!:r.~,••" I ....
-
."
., ... -....... ,., ".~ ......,
I~,,I,, '-
."J~ I P
, \
....
.... ---\,':-r"-~~=t----,{-+
--
_.
• eo '" " " , ...
[XPLAI
-
czouw~
•~
u..~
u
z.
w0 ~••x
u~
Q
•w"•., •
"o ww•
00
October November Oecember January FebruGry I Moreh April°fO I
ITT
I
TTl II , , , I , I , , '" ""::i= =~ -e- -e- nOIIO.~ - no Ilow -)
..,r- ~nOfIOW:=
~~:: nOIIOW" :::- \.-. -- -Chloride concentrolion
- -
0=,
::::::J= ...
I- ~.I- ~
III ,OF~1=
l= ~ojl- i~
5Wotet d,selloflle ~I
I I, ,L
f= II~
I,l- I,
.;.~ ,,!,~
, .;., , n r,i " , ,;.
,, " "
', " , Ii, " , , , , ,I:, , , l: , , " " , " "I, 0:5 D 1:5 202:5
:5 I015202!i :51015Z025 :5 1015 20 25 5101S20 5101:5202.5 :5 101520
2.:5October November December January February Morch Ap 'II
zo
"••"z '0wuzou
,opO~~~
>
•w~
~
"Ix: 1000~
wc
•9xu
Figure 16
Chloride Concentration and Water Discharge of
near Maran, October 31, 1962 to Apri 1 30,
Deep
1963
Creek
U 5 GeoloQlcol SUfvty ,n cooperal,on wilh rhe TUGS Wole.
Commiuion
ond Ihe WI!5! Cenlrol Tuos Munu;IPol Wole. Dlstricl
".
-- 27 --
-
z
-o
u
'""u
-II II I:I 101.52025 0 .1
April:I 10 15202
Februory
1111111111:I 1015 20ts
MarchJanuary
:; 10152025
December
510150025
November
}
f': ,: /W01U discharge r
~---*f---__+----+__---+_----__+----i'=lLO~ ,I:' ~F -,',",f=f--
,-/ ~ ,-~_ .. \ ~ .J\ __ ----- ..... ~~,', r\ ,', r'. r-'" t"=_r:=
\~" ---,,---- .- ~-, .._--_. ,- -,-f--
""I "'" 1111':I 10 152025
'O'=----+-----+----+---+----+---~Ia
F~~~
f--
'001:::----+_---__+----+__---+_-----+----=1:::100 ~f= = ~~ = ~r
~f- - ~~ - ~
~
~~
~
o
3xu
fjN:O~'j.~m~b['¥'¢~O='~'j.~m~b~"¥:+=}J~O~"~",~'~'~+~Fj'~b~,"~O~"~H~M~O~"]h~~4jjA~'~'ij;'p~z
IQPOOl:51015Z025 5101$2025 510152025 510152025510152025 510152025o
FilII"'" "" "'" 11111 111'=j ~ ='"
I-~:-----f-------t\--t--i---t--l-rl; ~ \ ~Cl:
10001:::----+_---__+--\---+__---+_-----+----=1~ ~ \ =z ~ ~ =r-
Chloride concentration -
~ -~ -
Figure 11
Chloride Concentration and Water Discharge of North Fork Hubbard
Creek
near Albany, November I, 1962 10 April 30, 1963u. S GeoloQlcol
Survey In cooperotlon WIth the Tuas Wale, Commissian
ond the Wut Central Te~as Mumcipal Water Distflct
'"
- 28 -
-
Percentage of water, dissolved solids, and ~hloride from the
area a~ovethe North Fork Hubbard Creek station and from the
remainder of the area abovethe station on Salt Prong Hubbard Creek
are shown on Figure 18.
Relation to Base Flow
During the winter of 1961-62 personnel of the U. S.two field
investigations in the Hubbdrd Creek watershed.lected at 62 sites.
Locations of the sites and the dataFigure 19 and Tables 2 and
3.
Geological ~urvey madeSamples were col-
obtained are shown in
The first field investigation was made in December 1961.
Potentialsources of contamination and evidence of contamination
were observed. TheDecember survey was made during a low-flow period
and most of the samplingsites had discharges of less than 1 cfs.
The water samples varied from brinescollected west of Albany that
contained more than 20,000 ppm chloride to waterof excellent
quality (16 ppm chloride) in Lake Cisco.
Another low-flow investigation was made in January 1962. A water
samplewas collected at each streamflow station, at some of the
December samplingsites, and at new sampling sites. At most of the
sites chloride concentrationswere higher than in December. Results
of the low-flow investigation are givenin Figure 20.
Relation to Geology
Chloride contamination of the streams in the watershed is so
widespreadthat the quality of water of most of the streams has only
a minor relation tothe types of rocks cropping out at the surface.
However, the quality of waterin many small streams and in the
numerous stockponds scattered throughout thearea reflect the effect
of these rocks.
As a part of the study of salt-water contamination of the
Hubbard Creekwatershed, Conselman, Jenke, and Tice (written
communication, May 1962) col-lected and analyzed water samples from
many small streams and stock tanks.At the time the samples were
collected, no appreciable runoff had occurred forseveral months.
Consequently, the quality of water in the small streams
andstockponds was probably of poorer quality than the average for
runoff fromthese virtually uncontaminated areas. Although the
chloride values may notbe representative of the average runoff, we
can assume, with confidence, thatthey approximate the maximum
chloride concentration of the average annualrunoff. Chloride
concentrations shown on Figure 21 strongly indicate that
theconcentration of chloride in the natural runoff of the watershed
would not bemore than 35 ppm and probably would be less.
Only one natural spring containing a high concentration of
chloride isknown to occur in the watershed. The site of this
spring, near the head ofone of the tributaries of Salt Prong, is
known as the "Old Albany Salt to/arks."The exact date of its first
use as a local source of salt is unknown, butearliest records
mention its use.
Samples of water collected at different places in the seepage
area nearthe salt works by U. S. Geological Survey personnel on
July 13, 1940, contained
- 29 -
-
-EXPLANATION
H,droI09;C Ilolioni O,oinOQt ......(Iq. mi.l
Notfh flIrk ~bord C..... ntar Alb>", 38.4
Sail ~f\tj Hubbard C'ttk "'0' Albany 116
4 MIL[S
I-"'-
~>
,>---h d>....' ""~'
-...!~~':> ,--,.,f~u--_...-'
/
•
~
s/""~..., Mee,,,!/'),
)
,~
"'~f
\,..'"I
l,
'""
(
"'-67%48%26%19%
~
r
----, I
'~a 33%hb :52 0/ • ......... ,""-C 74%d 81%
W.iQht.cl·a....oQ.chlorl'" (ppml
"'01610
'"176P.U:."IoQ' 01 10101 10' tub_bali"
a 33~. 01 d.olnOQ' Or.a
b 52"10 01 .ott< dlHho'Qt74"10 01 diuolUd-talldt
ditCho'Qt
d 81"10 01 chlo,id. dilchorQ'
Inl ...."'I..Q a
-
T••'. l. ..".", .... ,., , "
-
..I
~,
,
•
··
,
··;
,
,
..
•
••
·,
,
"·
•
!
•
,•,
··
,
:
=
,
···•••
:
•
••·
,
!
:
,
,
•
I
:
!
•,
,
•,
··
·
I
,
,,•·
r--~l•
I:
I,
,··
•
,I~•
~
-
: I:
Jj~j
1,j!
;.~!
i,.i
l,
,,
!j, .~ !, -,
e
I..
- 35 -
..
,
,
•
•
•
•
•
e
•
-
4)150 and 17)050 ppm of chloride.Tice on March 13) 1962,
contained
A sample analyzed by Conselman, JeOl~e1 ilnd1,075 ppm chloride.
•
In his study of the salt area in 1940, W. H. White of the U. S.
GeologicalSurvey (written communication) concluded that the source
of the salt was notextensive and that the salt water originated by
slow movement of ground waterthrough limestones which crop out to
the east and dip beneath the site.
In 1962, ConseLman, Jenke) and Tice (~itten communication)
independentlyarrived at essentially the same conclusion. They
conclude that "The apparentlyunique character of this salt spring,
and the unmeasurably low volume of theseepage indicate that this
salt deposit results from leaching of a small areaof capped Valera
lnot shown on Figure 2) within which a saline pocket appar-ently is
located. Such pockets are rare. The combination of structure
andtopography necessary to permit seepage is also rare. It is
therefore highlyunlikely that salt springs would be either numerous
or qualitatively importantin this area."
An additional indication of the low level of natural
contamination in theHubbard Creek watershed is the low
sodium-chloride ratio of water from HubbardCreek near Breckenridge.
Figure 22 shows the relation of the sodium-chlorideratio to the
chloride concentration for a stream affected by natural-salt
con-tamination, and for Hubbard Creek near Breckenridge. In 1958,
Burdge Irelan(~itten communication) stated that the characteristics
and concentrations ofindividual ions were different in water from
saline springs and in oil-fieldbrines. A study by Leonard and Ward
(1962, p. 126-127) of the sodium-chlorideratio, in parts per
million, in brines from springs in Oklahoma showed a uni-form ratio
of 0.64. The combining ratio of sodium and chloride J in parts
permillion, is 0.65. Chemical analyses of 30 oil-field brines from
the samegeneral area conSistently showed sodium-chloride ratios of
less than 0.60 andthe average of the ratios for the 30 samples of
oil-field brine was 0.50. InFigure 22 the sodium-chloride ratio of
the Salt Fork Brazos River near Asper-mont, which is affected
strongly by brine inflow from springs (Baker) R. C,)Hughes, L. S.]
and Yost] I. D.] 1964] p. 1)] agrees well with the natural
brineratio of 0.64 found by Leonard and Ward] except for the dilute
waters of highflow. The ratio of sodium to chloride for Hubbard
Creek near Breckenridge wassubstantially less than 0.60, except for
dilute waters containing less than 80ppm chloride. The contrast
between the sodium-chloride ratio of water fromHubbard Creek and
from Salt Fork of Brazos River probably would be greater ifthe flow
of Hubbard Creek near Breckenridge was not diluted by inflow
fromrelatively uncontaminated tributaries.
WATER QUALITY AND USE
The chemical quality of the water of Hubbard Creek Reservoir is
a majorfactor in determining the value of the water supply to the
consumer. The waterin the streams is of fair to poor quality and
may be undesirable or only mar-ginal for some uses. However, most
of the water to be used will be withdrawnfrom the reservoir, where
mixing will improve the quality.
Domestic
Water to be used in the home should be clear, pleasant to the
taste) andfree from pathogenic organisms. The recommended limits
for most substances
- 36 -
-
""
D.O' .,.900 n ... '0.01 '.d .01
BRECKE"'RIDGE
5.93
-
found in water are listed in the Public Health Service Drinking
.later Standards(1962, p. 7). These standards apply only to waters
used on common carriers ininterstate traffic, but the limits given
are normally accepted as the standardfor drinking water in the
United States.
Some 7 years of record at the station on Hubbard Creek near
Breckenridgereveal that concentrations of fluoride and nitrate are
less than the acceptedmaximums. The nitrate concentration rarely
exceeds 5 ppm and fluoride concen-tration averages less than 0.5
ppm for the period of record. The recommendedlimits for nitrate and
fluoride are 44 ppm and 1.2 ppm (fluoride limit appli-cable only to
this area), respectively.
Hardness is the characteristic of water that receives the most
attentionin domestic use. As the hardness of water increases the
quantity of soaprequired to produce a lather also increases. The
use of hard water is alsoobjectionable because it contributes to
the formation of scale in water heaters,radiators, and pipes.
Calcium and magnesium are the principal causes of hard-ness of
water. Several other elements also cause hardness but rarely occur
insufficient quantities to have any appreciable effect. The
following table isused by the U. S. Geological Survey in
classifying water hardness by numericalranges.
Hardness range Rating(ppm)
60 or less Soft
61 to 120 Moderately hard
III to 180 Hard
More than 180 Very hard
Present data indicate that water from Hubbard Creek Reservoir
will range fromhard to very hard.
Water containing large quantities of sulfate usually has a
laxative effect.Sulfate, however, will be no problem in the Hubbard
Creek Reservoir and shouldbe well below the recommended limit of
250 ppm set by the U. S. Public HealthService.
For most people the chloride-taste threshhold occurs at about
250 ppm andwater with a chloride concentration of 500 ppm has an
unmistakable and charac-teristic salty taste. Also, chloride
concentrations below 500 ppm may causecorrosion in home water
heaters and appliances. The recommended limit by theU. S. Public
Health Service for chloride is 250 ppm and water in Hubbard
CreekReservoir may equal or exceed this limit, especially during
drought periods andif pollution by oil-field brine is not
reduced.
Annual weighted-average concentrations and extremes for the
period ofrecord at Hubbard Creek station near Breckenridge are
given in Table 1.
- 38 -
-
lOO,OOOC::T-,,-,,--,-,----,-,,-,-,-=::J
Ii,
. I..,'":.
,o.ooof-----------'1,i-,----------=::1.it.j! ..'..
••""••••••• '000••w••9•u
'.'.1 ••
, ... ' ..: '..; .;. :'; ".:
"'II SDIt ""'"" ........ l'lNw'1:,/"''''' AOiMf_.
fn..1:,',,·:i.··'i;".. ;
.;.
' .
. :::: ..• 1' ,
• o·'. :: : 'i ...... l'\Ibbord C.Hk ...0. Brteh"""IJI. f.-.I"
..,..-
';i:." :.1', I"
'OOI----~7~~~c:------------_1"
.1". , ..
•
,o.';;;:--'---;;-';;;-...L~;;;--'--~;;;--'---;;';;;--'---~;-L....~;-'-~0_30
0.-40 O.~ 0 &0 0.10 0.80 0.90 I 0
SOOIUIII (""III)
CIlLOIIiOE (""WI
Figure 22
Relation af Sodium-Chloride Ratio to Chloride Concentration
for a Stream Affected by Notural Contamination ond
for Hubbard Creek near Breckenridge
u S Geolo~lcol s""~" In tOOO"OI,on .,I~ I~' f"05 Wolf.
CommiSSionond I~ WISI C'nl'OI f"05 lII",n'tllllll Wgler O"Ir'C1
- 41 -
-
Industry
Because of the many different uses of water by industry] there
are manydifferent requirements in regard to water quality. Often
the quality of wateris of more importance than the quantity; water
treatment may be more costlythan development of sources of water
supply. An individual element orcharacteristic may determine the
value of the water supply for one application]while water of
uniform quality is necessary to another. Uniformity of waterquality
may be difficult to maintain in the water supplied by the Hubbard
CreekReservoir because of the sporadic rainfall on the watershed
and the probabilityof long droughts.
The primary concern of most industries using Hubbard Creek
Reservoir as awater supply will be the hardness of water and the
chloride concentration.Hardness is objectionable because of the
formation of scale in pipes] boilers]and other containers where
water is heated or evaporated. Formation of thecalcium carbonate
scale causes loss of heat transfer and loss of flow. How-ever] this
scale is also a protective coating against corrosive properties
ofthe water. A high chloride concentration in industrial water is
objectionablebecause of its corrosive properties.
The Hubbard Creek Reservoir water supply will probably be
suitable formany industrial purposes] with or without minor
treatment] but the chlorideconcentration and hardness could limit
the water for some industrial applica-tions.
Irrigation
The total concentration of soluble salts and the sodium ion and
its rela-tion to other ions are the characteristics of water of
most concern in irriga-tion water. High concentrations of dissolved
solids or sodium ions in watermay reduce crop yields by decreasing
the ability of plants to take water andby adversely affecting the
soil structure. The U. S. Salinity Laboratory Staff(1954] p. 80)
introduced the sodium-adsorption ratio (SAR) as a measure of
thesodium hazard in water for irrigation. Figure 23 is a diagram
for classifyingwater with respect to salinity hazard and sodium
hazard on the basis of speci-fic conductance and SAR. Annual
weighted averages (1956-62) for Hubbard Creeknear Breckenridge are
plotted on the diagram.
The water in Hubbard Creek Reservoir probably would be
classified asmedium to high salinity and low sodium. This
classification should be used onlyas a guide because there are many
other factors involved in determining thevalue of a water supply
for irrigation. A few of the factors to be consideredare the type
of soil] drainage] rainfall] and salt tolerance. With the
annualaverage rainfall of 25 to 26 inches, the Hubbard Creek
Reservoir water shouldbe satisfactory for irrigation of crops with
moderate salt tolerance. Duringdroughts] when the rate of
evaporation from the reservoir equals or exceeds theinflow, the
water supply may be marginal for irrigation of most plants.
- 42 -
-
SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE, IN MICROMHOS AT 25-C
100 2 3 4 5 678 KXlO 2 3 4 5000>. ,'. 30 30"- ..• '"28
EXPLANATION• Annual weiQhled averoge to<
Hubbard Cr~k neor
26 Breckenridge (1956-1962)
••• '" 24'"22
00 -20 20a: ~'" a:N'" zl8I
Q
-
,
•
1
-
REFERENCES
Baker, R. C., Hughes, L. S., and Yost, 1. D., 1964, Natural
sources or salinityin the Brazos River, Texas, with particular
reierence to the Croton and SaltCroton Creek basins: U. S. Geol.
Survey Water-Supply Paper l669CC.
Leonard, A. R., and Ward, P. E., lY62, Use of NajCl ratios to
distinguish oil-field from salt-spring brines in western Oklahoma,
in Geol. Survey Research1962: U. S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 450-B,
no. 52:-p. 126-127.
Lowry, R. L., Jr., 1960, Monthly reservoir evaporation rates for
Texas J 19~Othrough 1957: Texas Water Commission Bull. 6006.
Texas AlmanacJ 1961-l962J A. H. Belco Corp'J Dallas J Texas, 704
p.
U. S. Publicstandards:
Health Service, 1962, Public Health Service drinking waterPublic
Health Service Pub. 956 J 61 p.
U. S. Salinity Laboratory Staff, 1954, Diagnosis and improvecent
of saline andalkali soils: U. S. Dept. Agriculture Handb. 60 J 160
p.
- 45 -
-
•
-
t, •.,.'I".,o·".."
-I
U 5 Geoloq,col Survey In cooperOloon wIth fhe Tuos WOltt
Comm,u,onand The Wesl CenTrol Texos hhl1llOPQI WOltr D,5l'1C1
..-.__ .......---'-~' ._ --_.-._ ~
_.
"'_-II--S'-_~ ..
---~..--.-
Figure 19
Mop of Hubbard Creek Watershed Showing
Chloride Concentration of Surface Water
at Chemical-Quality Sampling Sites
_ _ .. _ ... _.u·..._:1!1 ......_ ......._ ... _
0"
... _..... __..--
-
."
EXPLANATION
"1 C"""'h 0"""0"'0,"0'" ," po,," ~, .. ,,100"
0,10, 9.' r·.~
.:"....
..
..
..
'"
Figure 21
Mop of Hubbard Creek Watershed Showing Natural Chloride
Concentration
of Surfoce·Waler Runoff
u. s. Geolo91col Survey in cooperolion with lhe Tuos Waler
Commissiongnd Ihe WU! Cenlrol Tuos Municipol Woler Oislricl