Comal Springs Mapping Project
description
Transcript of Comal Springs Mapping Project
![Page 1: Comal Springs Mapping Project](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051622/5681505d550346895dbe5d0e/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Comal Springs Mapping Project
Texas Parks and Wildlife DepartmentUnited States Fish and Wildlife Service
![Page 2: Comal Springs Mapping Project](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051622/5681505d550346895dbe5d0e/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Why map Comal Springs?• Identify precise locations
of GW inputs• Provides basis for future
comparison at varying flows
• Provides basis for systematic sampling of springs for inverts
• Provide info on habitat associations
![Page 3: Comal Springs Mapping Project](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051622/5681505d550346895dbe5d0e/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Comal Springs Mapping Project
Goal – to map, describe, and document the various spring outlets that comprise Comal
Springs
Objectives• Gather geospatial data with submeter accuracy
• Gather elevation, WQ, flow, and photos• Describe physical habitat of each spring• Compile data into a geodatabase
• Disseminate info to interested parties
![Page 4: Comal Springs Mapping Project](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051622/5681505d550346895dbe5d0e/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Results• 425 Springs mapped• 333 point springs• 92 groups of springs
• Landa Lake – 176 (42%)• W. Shore – 142 (32%)• SR 1 – 21 (5%)• SR 2 – 14 (3%)• SR 3 – 57 (13%)• SR 4-6, OC, SFP – 1-5 (≤ 1%)
![Page 5: Comal Springs Mapping Project](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051622/5681505d550346895dbe5d0e/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Comal Springs Mapping Project
![Page 6: Comal Springs Mapping Project](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051622/5681505d550346895dbe5d0e/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Results
• Spring types– 165 (39%) alluvial, 195 (46%) upwelling, 40 (9%)
single orifice
• 17 veg types associated with spring openings– Associated with 132 (31%) of springs– Anacua (27%), Elephant Ear (23%), and Ligustrum
(19%) most common
• Total discharge ranged from 244 to 224 cfs– Historical average (1934-2011) is 290 cfs
![Page 7: Comal Springs Mapping Project](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051622/5681505d550346895dbe5d0e/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Results
SR 1 - 20 cfs
SR2 – 4.6 cfs
SR3 – 31.3 cfs
19.2 cfs
99.4 cfs
Location Discharge (cfs)
Spring Run 1 20
Spring Run 2 4.6
Spring Run 3 31.3
Upper Landa Lake 19.2
W Shoreline/Spring Island Area 80.2
W Shoreline/Landa Lake Area 84.7
Total Discharge (Comal River) 240
![Page 8: Comal Springs Mapping Project](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051622/5681505d550346895dbe5d0e/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Discussion• Map provides basis for future work• Future mapping efforts at varying flows
• Reveal changes in spring habitats and system as a whole
• Targets (cfs) – 290, 196, 150, 120, 100, 90-30 at 10 cfs increments
• Sampling of CSRB and other rare inverts in Comal Springs system• Systematic sampling of springs to define distribution of
organisms in system• Provide information on habitat associations• Estimating surface population size