U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Scientific Investigations Report 2014–5082

Prepared in cooperation with the Caddo Nation, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and 

the Bureau of Reclamation

Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions 

in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area, Caddo County, 

Oklahoma, 2010–13
Cover:

Background, Rush Springs aquifer outcrop near Binger, Oklahoma, 2010. Photograph taken by Shana 

Mashburn. 

Top right, Real-time well near Hinton, Oklahoma, 2010. Photograph taken by Shana Mashburn. 

Top left, Rush Springs aquifer outcrop near Binger, Oklahoma, 2010. Photograph taken by Shana 

Mashburn. 

Bottom left, Spring near Colony, Oklahoma, 2011. Photograph taken by S. Jerrod Smith. 

Bottom right, Rush Springs aquifer outcrop near Binger, Oklahoma, 2010. Photograph taken by Shana 

Mashburn. 
Evaluation of Groundwater and SurfaceWater Interactions in the Caddo Nation 

Tribal Jurisdictional Area, Caddo County, 

Oklahoma, 2010–13

By Shana L. Mashburn and S. Jerrod Smith

Prepared in cooperation with the Caddo Nation, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and 

the Bureau of Reclamation

Scientific Investigations Report 2014–5082

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

SALLY JEWELL, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2014

Suggested citation:

Mashburn, S.L., and Smith, S.J., 2014, Evaluation of groundwater and surface-water interactions in the Caddo Nation 

Tribal Jurisdictional Area, Caddo County, Oklahoma, 2010–13: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 

2014–5082, 54 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20145082. 

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living 

resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS.

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, 

visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials 

as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner.

ISSN 2328-031X (print)

ISSN 2328-0328 (online)

ISBN 978-1-4113-3791-6
iii

Acknowledgments

The authors are indebted to Polly Edwards, Environmental Director of the Caddo Nation, who 

had the vision for this study and realized the benefits that would be provided to the Caddo 

Nation for long-term water planning. The U.S. Geological Survey Oklahoma Water Science 

Center and Caddo Nation appreciate the funds provided for this study by the Bureau of 

Indian Affairs and the Bureau of Reclamation Native American Affairs Technical Assistance 

Program. The authors also thank the private landowners who provided access to their lands 

for data collection. Progress on the study could not have been made without the landowners’ 

cooperation.

v

Contents

Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................................................iii

Abstract ..........................................................................................................................................................1

Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................2

Purpose and Scope ......................................................................................................................................2

Study Area Characteristics .........................................................................................................................2

Hydrogeology of the Study Area ................................................................................................................5

Base Flow from the Rush Springs Aquifer ................................................................................................6

Interaction between Groundwater and Surface Water of the Rush Springs Aquifer .....................23

Streambed Hydraulic Conductivity .................................................................................................23

Hydraulic Head in Streams and Alluvium ......................................................................................26

Volumetric Flow Rates from Seepage Meters ..............................................................................28

Interaction between Groundwater and Surface Water at Cobb Creek near the Eakly, 

Oklahoma, Streamflow-Gaging Station ............................................................................30

Springs Inventory and Location of Wetlands .........................................................................................34

Potentiometric Surface and Regional Groundwater Flow, 2010 .........................................................38

Groundwater-Level Fluctuations, 2010–13 ..............................................................................................41

Summary .......................................................................................................................................................52

References ...................................................................................................................................................53

Figures

1. Map showing study area, surficial geologic units, and locations of water-level 

monitoring wells and Mesonet stations, southwestern Oklahoma .....................................3

2. Graph showing precipitation for Oklahoma Climatological Survey Climate Division 7 

Southwest, 1935–2011 .................................................................................................................4

3. Pie diagram showing water use from the Rush Springs aquifer, 2005 ...............................5

4. Graph showing groundwater withdrawals in Caddo County, Oklahoma, 

1985–2005 ......................................................................................................................................5

5. Graph showing example of base flow determined by using the PART method 

and streamflow at streamflow-gaging station 07325850 (Lake Creek near Eakly, 

Oklahoma), March–July 2007 ....................................................................................................6

6. Map showing location of U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging stations in 

the vicinity of the Rush Springs aquifer ...................................................................................8

7. Graph showing daily streamflow and base flow derived by using the PART 

method for streamflow-gaging station 07325840 (Lake Creek near Sickles, 

Oklahoma), 2006–12 .....................................................................................................................9

8. Graphs showing (A) average annual streamflow and base flow, (B) base-flow 

index, (C) average annual streamflow and base-flow volume, and (D) monthly 

mean streamflow, base flow, and runoff at streamflow-gaging station 07325840 

(Lake Creek near Sickles, Oklahoma), 2006–12 ....................................................................10

9. Graph showing daily streamflow and base flow derived by using the PART 

method for streamflow-gaging station 07325850 (Lake Creek near Eakly, 

Oklahoma), 1970–77 ...................................................................................................................11
vi

10. Graph showing (A) average annual streamflow and base flow, (B) base-flow 

index, (C) average annual streamflow and base-flow volume, and (D) monthly 

mean streamflow, base flow, and runoff at streamflow-gaging station 07325850 

(Lake Creek near Eakly, Oklahoma), 1970–77 ........................................................................12

11. Graph showing daily streamflow and base flow derived by using the PART 

method for streamflow-gaging station 07325850 (Lake Creek near Eakly, 

Oklahoma), 2005–12 ...................................................................................................................13

12. Graph showing (A) average annual streamflow and base flow, (B) base-flow 

index, (C) average annual streamflow and base-flow volume, and (D) monthly 

mean streamflow, base flow, and runoff at streamflow-gaging station 07325850 

(Lake Creek near Eakly, Oklahoma), 2005–12 ........................................................................14

13. Graph showing daily streamflow and base flow derived by using the PART 

method for streamflow-gaging station 07325860 (Willow Creek near Albert, 

Oklahoma), 1971–77 ...................................................................................................................15

14. Graph showing (A) average annual streamflow and base flow, (B) base-flow 

index, (C) average annual streamflow and base-flow volume, and (D) monthly 

mean streamflow, base flow, and runoff at streamflow-gaging station 07325860 

(Willow Creek near Albert, Oklahoma), 1971–77 ..................................................................16

15. Graph showing daily streamflow and base flow derived by using the PART 

method for streamflow-gaging station 07325860 (Willow Creek near Albert, 

Oklahoma), 2005–12 ...................................................................................................................17

16. Graph showing (A) average annual streamflow and base flow, (B) base-flow 

index, (C) average annual streamflow and base-flow volume, and (D) monthly 

mean streamflow, base flow, and runoff at streamflow-gaging station 07325860 

(Willow Creek near Albert, Oklahoma), 2005–12 ..................................................................18

17. Graph showing daily streamflow and base flow derived by using the PART 

method for streamflow-gaging station 07326000 (Cobb Creek near Fort Cobb, 

Oklahoma), 1940–58 ...................................................................................................................19

18. Graph showing (A) average annual streamflow and base flow, (B) base-flow 

index, (C) average annual streamflow and base-flow volume, and (D) monthly 

mean streamflow, base flow, and runoff at streamflow-gaging station 07326000 

(Cobb Creek near Fort Cobb, Oklahoma), 1940–58 ...............................................................20

19. Graph showing daily streamflow and base flow derived by using the PART 

method for streamflow-gaging station 073274406 (Little Washita River above 

SCS [Soil Conservation Service] Pond No. 26 near Cyril, Oklahoma), 1996–2012 ...........21

20. Graph showing (A) average annual streamflow and base flow, (B) base-flow 

index, (C) average annual streamflow and base-flow volume, and (D) monthly 

mean streamflow, base flow, and runoff at streamflow-gaging station 073274406 

(Little Washita River above SCS [Soil Conservation Service] Pond No. 26 near 

Cyril, Oklahoma), 1996–2012 .....................................................................................................22

21. Map showing sites where slug tests and potentiomanometer readings were 

performed in July 2012 to determine hydraulic conductivity of streambed 

sediments in Caddo and Washita Counties, Oklahoma .......................................................24

22. Photograph showing temporary small-diameter well with pneumatic slug-test 

equipment installed ...................................................................................................................25

23. Photographs showing potentiomanometer and temporary small-diameter well, 

with the manometer mounted on a wooden board ..............................................................27

24. Diagram showing groundwater and surface-water data-collection stations at 

Cobb Creek near Eakly, Oklahoma, on Oklahoma State Highway 152 ..............................31
vii

25. Schematic diagram showing cross sections of a piezometer transect in the 

Cobb Creek alluvium showing altitudes of Cobb Creek and the alluvial aquifer 

water table during (A) flooding-stream conditions on November 8, 2011, 

2:30 a.m.; (B) normal, gaining-stream conditions on March 1, 2012, 8:30 a.m.; 

and (C) losing-stream conditions on July 29, 2012, 8:30 a.m. ..............................................32

26. Graph showing water-table altitudes measured at U.S. Geological Survey 

streamflow-gaging station 07325800 (Cobb Creek near Eakly, Oklahoma) and in 

three piezometers in the Cobb Creek alluvium showing altitudes of Cobb Creek 

and the alluvial groundwater table and precipitation measured at Weatherford, 

Okla., Mesonet station, September 2011–August 2012 .......................................................33

27. Map showing locations of springs and stream observations in and near the 

Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area, Oklahoma, September 2011 .............................35

28. Map showing locations of wetlands and frequently flooded soils in and around 

the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area, Oklahoma .....................................................37

29. Map showing the potentiometric surface of the Rush Springs aquifer in Caddo 

County, Oklahoma, July 2010.....................................................................................................39

30. Map showing the potentiometric surface of the Rush Springs aquifer in Caddo 

County, Oklahoma, January 2011 ............................................................................................40

31. Graph showing groundwater levels measured in U.S. Geological Survey well 

350748098231101 near Gracemont, Oklahoma, October 2010–June 2013 ........................42

32. Graph showing groundwater levels measured in U.S. Geological Survey well 

351308098341601 near Alfalfa, Oklahoma, October 2010–June 2013 .................................43

33. Graph showing groundwater levels measured in U.S. Geological Survey well 

351308098341601 near Alfalfa, Oklahoma, August 1948–June 2013 ..................................44

34. Graph showing groundwater levels measured in U.S. Geological Survey well 

351727098290401 Core 2, October 2010–June 2013 ..............................................................45

35. Graph showing groundwater levels measured in U.S. Geological Survey well 

351727098290401 Core 2, December 1989–June 2013 ..........................................................46

36. Graph showing groundwater levels measured in U.S. Geological Survey well 

352423098341701 near Eakly, Oklahoma, October 2010–June 2013 ...................................47

37. Graph showing groundwater levels measured in U.S. Geological Survey well 

352423098341701 near Eakly, Oklahoma, April 1965–June 2013 .........................................48

38. Graph showing groundwater levels measured in U.S. Geological Survey well 

352802098191601 near Hinton, Oklahoma, October 2010–June 2013 .................................49

39. Graphs showing monthly precipitation for Hinton and Fort Cobb Mesonet 

Stations, Oklahoma, October 2010–May 2013 .......................................................................50

40. Graph showing groundwater levels monitored with a vented pressure transducer 

and barometric pressure at U.S. Geological Survey well 352702098191601 near 

Hinton, Oklahoma, showing barometric efficiency typical of the unconfined part 

of the Rush Springs aquifer ......................................................................................................51
viii

Tables

1. List of streamflow-gaging stations located near the Rush Springs aquifer, 

southwestern Oklahoma, with periods analyzed using the PART method .........................9

2. Completion information for temporary wells installed in the area underlain by 

the Rush Springs aquifer, southwestern Oklahoma, 2012 ...................................................25

3. Horizontal hydraulic conductivity determined from slug tests conducted in 

the streambed sediments of streams overlying the Rush Springs aquifer, 

southwestern Oklahoma, August 2012 ...................................................................................26

4. Hydraulic head differences and gradients between streams and alluvium 

determined from potentiomanometer readings, in areas underlain by the Rush 

Springs aquifer, southwestern Oklahoma, August 2012 ......................................................28

 5. Seepage locations and flux velocities for sites measured in the area underlain 

by the Rush Springs aquifer, southwestern Oklahoma, July–August 2012 ......................29

6. Real-time continuous groundwater-level monitoring wells in the area underlain 

by the Rush Springs aquifer, southwestern Oklahoma, October 2010–June 2013 ..........41
ix

Conversion Factors

Inch/Pound to SI

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter (mm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Area

acre 4,047 square meter (m2)

acre 0.004047 square kilometer (km2)

square foot (ft2) 929.0 square centimeter (cm2)

square foot (ft2) 0.09290 square meter (m2)

square inch (in2) 6.452 square centimeter (cm2)

section (640 acres or 1 square 

mile)

259.0 square hectometer (hm2) 

square mile (mi2) 259.0 hectare (ha)

square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2) 

Volume

gallon (gal) 3.785 liter (L) 

gallon (gal) 0.003785 cubic meter (m3) 

million gallons (Mgal) 3,785 cubic meter (m3)

acre-foot (acre-ft) 1,233 cubic meter (m3)

Flow rate

foot per day (ft/d) 0.3048 meter per day (m/d)

foot per year (ft/yr) 0.3048 meter per year (m/yr)

cubic foot per second (ft3/s) 0.02832 cubic meter per second (m3/s)

cubic foot per day (ft3/d) 0.02832 cubic meter per day (m3/d)

gallon per minute (gal/min) 0.06309 liter per second (L/s)

million gallons per day (Mgal/d) 0.04381 cubic meter per second (m3/s)

inch per year (in/yr) 25.4 millimeter per year (mm/yr)

Hydraulic conductivity

foot per day (ft/d) 0.3048 meter per day (m/d)

Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 

(NAVD 88) and the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD 29). The NAVD 88 replaced 

the NGVD 29, previously known as the Sea Level Datum of 1929.

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

Altitude, as used in this report, refers to distance above the vertical datum.

Temperature in degrees Fahrenheit (°F) may be converted to degrees Celsius (°C) as follows:

°C=(°F-32)/1.8

Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water 

Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional 

Area, Caddo County, Oklahoma, 2010–13

By Shana L. Mashburn and S. Jerrod Smith

Abstract

Streamflows, springs, and wetlands are important natural 

and cultural resources to the Caddo Nation. Consequently, 

the Caddo Nation is concerned about the vulnerability of the 

Rush Springs aquifer to overdrafting and whether the aquifer 

will continue to be a viable source of water to tribal members 

and other local residents in the future. Interest in the longterm viability of local water resources has resulted in ongoing 

development of a comprehensive water plan by the Caddo 

Nation. As part of a multiyear project with the Caddo Nation 

to provide information and tools to better manage and protect 

water resources, the U.S. Geological Survey studied the 

hydraulic connection between the Rush Springs aquifer and 

springs and streams overlying the aquifer.

The Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area is located 

in southwestern Oklahoma, primarily in Caddo County. 

Underlying the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area is 

the Permian-age Rush Springs aquifer. Water from the Rush 

Springs aquifer is used for irrigation, public, livestock and 

aquaculture, and other supply purposes. Groundwater from the 

Rush Springs aquifer also is withdrawn by domestic (selfsupplied) wells, although domestic use was not included in 

the water-use summary in this report. Perennial streamflow 

in many streams and creeks overlying the Rush Springs 

aquifer, such as Cobb Creek, Lake Creek, and Willow Creek, 

originates from springs and seeps discharging from the aquifer.

This report provides information on the evaluation 

of groundwater and surface-water resources in the Caddo 

Nation Jurisdictional Area, and in particular, information that 

describes the hydraulic connection between the Rush Springs 

aquifer and springs and streams overlying the aquifer. This 

report also includes data and analyses of base flow, evidence 

for groundwater and surface-water interactions, locations of 

springs and wetland areas, groundwater flows interpreted from 

potentiometric-surface maps, and hydrographs of water levels 

monitored in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area from 

2010 to 2013.

Flow in streams overlying the Rush Springs aquifer, 

on average, were composed of 50 percent base flow in 

most years. Monthly mean base flow appeared to maintain 

streamflows throughout each year, but periods of zero flow 

were documented in daily hydrographs at each measured site, 

typically in the summer months. 

A pneumatic slug-test technique was used at 15 sites to 

determine the horizontal hydraulic conductivity of streambed 

sediments in streams overlying the Rush Springs aquifer. 

Converting horizontal hydraulic conductivities (Kh) from the 

slug-test analyses to vertical hydraulic conductivities (Kv) by 

using a ratio of Kv/Kh = 0.1 resulted in estimates of vertical 

streambed hydraulic conductivity ranging from 0.1 to 8.6 feet 

per day. Data obtained from a hydraulic potentiomanometer in 

streambed sediments and streams in August 2012 indicate that 

water flow was from the streambed sediments to the stream 

(gaining) at 6 of 15 sites, and that water flow was from the 

stream to the streambed sediments (losing) at 9 of 15 sites.

The groundwater and surface-water interaction data 

collected at the Cobb Creek near Eakly, Okla., streamflow 

gaging station (07325800), indicate that the bedrock 

groundwater, alluvial groundwater, and surface-water 

resources are closely connected. Because of this hydrologic 

connection, large perennial streams in the study area may 

change from gaining to losing streams in the summer. The 

timing and severity of this change from a gaining to a losing 

condition probably is affected by the local or regional 

withdrawal of groundwater for irrigation in the summer 

growing season. Wells placed closer to streams have a greater 

and more immediate effect on alluvial groundwater levels and 

stream stages than wells placed farther from streams. Largecapacity irrigation wells, even those completed hundreds of 

feet below land surface in the bedrock aquifer, can induce 

surface-water flow from nearby streams by lowering alluvial 

groundwater levels below the stream altitude. 

Twenty-five new springs visible from public roads and 

paths were documented during a survey of springs in 2011. 

Most of the springs are in upland draws on the flanks of 

topographic ridges. Wetlands primarily were identified by 

using a combination of data sources including the National 

Wetlands Inventory, Soil Survey Geographic database 

frequently flooded soils maps, and aerial photographs. 

Regional flow directions were determined by analysis 

of water levels measured in 29 wells completed in the Rush 
2 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

Springs aquifer in Caddo County and the Caddo Nation 

Tribal Jurisdictional Area. Water levels were monitored every 

30 minutes in five wells by using a vented pressure transducer 

and a data-collection platform with real-time transmitting 

equipment in each well. Those five wells ranged in depth from 

210 to 350 feet. Water levels in these five wells indicate that 

there was a decrease in water storage in the Rush Springs 

aquifer from October 2010 to June 2013. 

Introduction

The Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area is located 

in southwestern Oklahoma, primarily in Caddo County, Okla. 

(fig. 1). Underlying the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional 

Area is the Permian-age Rush Springs aquifer. Water from 

the Rush Springs aquifer is used for irrigation, public, 

livestock and aquaculture, and domestic supply purposes 

(Tortorelli, 2009). A Permian-age sandstone bedrock aquifer, 

the Rush Springs aquifer is unconfined in most locations 

where groundwater is pumped, has a maximum thickness of 

approximately 300 feet (ft), and can produce well yields in 

excess of 1,000 gallons per minute (gal/min) (Becker and 

Runkle, 1998). Perennial streamflow in many streams and 

creeks overlying the Rush Springs aquifer, such as Cobb 

Creek, Lake Creek, and Willow Creek, originates from springs 

and seeps discharging from the aquifer. Three surface-water 

reservoirs, constructed in and near the Rush Springs aquifer, 

that depend on perennial streamflows are: (1) Fort Cobb 

Reservoir and (2) Foss Reservoir (fig. 1), both managed by 

Bureau of Reclamation; and (3) Lake Chickasha, managed by 

the City of Chickasha (fig. 1).

The Caddo Nation is concerned about the vulnerability 

of the Rush Springs aquifer to overdrafting and whether the 

aquifer will continue to be a viable source of water to tribal 

members and other local residents in the future. Wells have 

been completed in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional 

Area that transfer groundwater outside of that jurisdictional 

area (Christopher Neel, Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 

written commun., 2012). These groundwater transfers have 

increased the awareness of the Caddo Nation to the potential 

for overdrafting of groundwater in the Rush Springs aquifer. 

Streamflows, springs, and wetlands are important natural 

and cultural resources to the Caddo Nation. Interest in the 

long-term viability of water resources in this area has led to 

the ongoing development of a comprehensive water plan by 

the Caddo Nation. A comprehensive water plan will provide 

guidelines for sustainable development and preservation of the 

water resources in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area 

(fig. 1). The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation 

with the Caddo Nation, initiated a multiyear study in 2008 to 

provide information and tools that can be used to manage and 

protect water resources as part of development of a Caddo 

Nation comprehensive water plan. 

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to provide information on 

the evaluation of groundwater and surface-water resources 

in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area, and in 

particular, information that describes the hydraulic connection 

between the Rush Springs aquifer and springs and streams 

overlying the aquifer. The study area is the Caddo Nation 

Tribal Jurisdictional Area (fig. 1). The scope of this report 

includes data and analyses of base flow in streams, evidence 

for groundwater and surface-water interactions, locations of 

springs and wetland areas, groundwater flows interpreted from 

potentiometric-surface maps, and hydrographs of water levels 

monitored in the area and near to the Caddo Nation Tribal 

Jurisdictional Area.

Study Area Characteristics

The Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area (hereafter 

referred to as “the study area”) encompasses primarily Caddo 

County, Okla. (fig. 1). The topography in the study area is 

characterized by moderately rolling hills with incised deep 

drainage channels. The major drainage channels are associated 

with the Washita River and Cobb and Sugar Creeks. Sugar 

Creek and its tributaries have deeply cut channels and canyons 

of dendritic patterns formed by headward erosion (Tanaka 

and Davis, 1963). The western part of the study area is 

characterized by cuestas and buttes capped with dolomite or 

gypsum (Tanaka and Davis, 1963). 

Land use in the study area consists mostly of cultivated 

crops and grasslands. Some evergreen and deciduous forests 

are located in the upland draws of creeks. Cultivated crops 

in this area consist of wheat, alfalfa, cotton, and other minor 

crops (National Agriculture Statistics Service, 2013). Animal 

production in this area includes beef cattle, hogs, sheep, and 

poultry (National Agriculture Statistics Service, 2013).

Climate data for the study area were summarized 

from 1935 through 2011 from the Oklahoma Climate 

Division 7 Southwest (National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, 2012). The average annual air temperature 

from 1935 through 2011 in the study area was 61.1 degrees 

Fahrenheit, with the coldest temperatures typically being 

measured in January and the hottest temperatures typically 

being measured in July. Average annual precipitation from 

1935 through 2011 was 28.3 inches per year (in/yr), with the 

5-year weighted moving average shown on figure 2. A wetter 

period is indicated on figure 2 when the 5-year weighted 

average is greater than the 1935 through 2011 average. A drier 

period is indicated when the 5-year weighted average is less 

than the 1935 through 2011 average. A persistent drier period 

occurred from 1951 through 1959. A persistent wetter period 

occurred from 1985 through 2001 (fig. 2).
Deer Creek

Squaw Creek

Creek

Cottonwood

Creek

Spring Creek

Yellow

Creek

Camp

Creek

Lost

Creek

Two Hatchet

 Creek

Uncle

Johns

Creek

Creek

Camp Cr

Deep Creek

Spring Creek

Washita

Buck

Creek

Tonkawa Creek

Bear Creek

Sixmile Creek

Bull

Creek

Leaper

Creek

Cedar Creek

Little Deer Creek

Little Deep Creek

Relay Creek

Winter Camp Creek

Fivemile Creek

Lariat Creek

Kickapoo

Hog

Cr

Willow Creek

Lake Creek

Cedar

Creek

Tony Hollow

Creek

Fisher Cr

Washita

River

Chicken Creek

Dead Wo man Creek

Sugar Creek

LumpmouthCreek

Canadian River

Horse Creek

Sixmil e Creek

Target Creek

Fourmile Creek

Bug gy Creek

Bullet Cr

White Bread Creek

Wil dcat Creek

Kohnoosky Creek

Medicine Creek

Spring Creek Ta ylor Cr

Cobb Creek

Gyp

Creek

CrookedCreek

Cedar Creek

Powder Face Creek

Keechi Creek

Gokey Creek

Spring Creek

Cobb Creek

Dry Creek

River

Sugar Creek

Arapaho Creek

West F ork Salt Cree

Io

k

nine Creek

West Ionine Creek

West Jack Hollow Cr

Jack Hollow Cr

Stinking Creek

Salt Creek

County Line

Creek

Rock Hollow

Otter Creek

Fort Cobb Reservoir

Lake Chickasha

Stinking Creek

Cobb Creek

Nort h Canadian River

98°45’ 98°30’ 98°15’ 98°

35°45’35°30’35°15’

OKLAHOMA

Oklahoma ClimatologicalSurvey Climate Division 7

Foss

Reservoir

Rush Springs aquifer—The Rush Springs aquifer consists of the Rush Springs Formation of the Whitehorse Group, as defined by Becker and Runkle (1998)

G

S

COMANCHE COUNTY

KIOWA COUNTY

WASHITA COUNTY

C

BLAI

CUSTER 

DEWEY C

Albers Equal-Area Conic projecNorth American Datum of 1983

0 5 10 0 5 

Geology from Heran and other

Gracemont

Chickasha

Weatherford El Reno

BLAINE COUNTY

CADDO COUNTY

WASHITA COUNTY

KIOWA COUNTY

GRADY

COUNTY

CANADIAN COUNTY

33

54

66

152

37

37

152

152

54

146

58

9

15

15

8

44

40

270

281 270

81

81

62

62

40

54A

54B

Alfalfa

Hinton

Eakly

Core 2

Hinton

Hinton

Weatherford

Fort Cobb

Fort Cobb

EXPLA

Caddo Nation TribaReal-time water-le

well and name 

Mesonet monitorin

Permian-age geolog

Cloud Chief Format

Whitehorse Group

Rush Springs For

Gypsum Bed)

Quaternary-age geo

AlluviumTerrace deposits

El Reno Group (incl

Chickasha FormDog Creek Shalof El Reno Grou

Marlow Formatio

(includes VerdMarlow Form

Hennessey Group (

Hennessey Gro

Figure 1. Study area, surficial geologic units, and locations of water-level monitoring wells and Mesonet stations, southwestern Oklahoma.
4 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

Water from the Rush Springs aquifer is used for 

irrigation, public, livestock and aquaculture, and other 

supply purposes (Tortorelli, 2009; U.S. Geological Survey, 

2013). Most of the water use in 2005 was for irrigation 

(66 percent of total water use); total water use in 2005 was 

approximately 10,500 million gallons per year (Mgal/yr) 

(fig. 3). Groundwater from the Rush Springs aquifer also is 

withdrawn by domestic (self-supplied) wells, as indicated by 

more than 700 wells completed in Caddo County (Oklahoma 

Water Resources Board, 2013), although domestic use 

was not included in the water-use summary in this report. 

Water-use data are summarized every 5 years by the USGS 

(Tortorelli, 2009). Groundwater-use data for Caddo County 

were summarized for 1985–2005. Groundwater use during the 

1985–2005 period averaged 13,300 Mgal/yr (40,800 acre-feet 

per year) (fig. 4).

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

193519371939194119431945194719491951195319551957195919611963196519671969197119731975197719791981198319851987198919911993199519971999200120032005200720092011

Precipitation, in inches per year

Year

1935–2011 average

1935–2011 5-year moving average

Annual average

EXPLANATION

Figure 2. Precipitation for Oklahoma Climatological Survey Climate Division 7 Southwest, 1935–2011.
Hydrogeology of the Study Area 5

Hydrogeology of the Study Area

The extent of the Rush Springs aquifer (fig. 1), as 

defined by Becker and Runkle (1998) and the extent used 

in this report, is approximately 2,400 square miles (mi2). 

The Rush Springs aquifer is comprised of the Permian-age 

Rush Springs Formation of the Whitehorse Group (Tanaka 

and Davis, 1963). Becker and Runkle (1998) limited the 

extent of the Rush Springs aquifer to areas with the largest 

groundwater withdrawals. Observations of cores and outcrops 

in Caddo County indicate that the Rush Springs aquifer is a 

homogeneous sandstone, with some interbedded dolomite 

and gypsum. The sandstone is composed of grains of mostly 

very fine- to fine-grained quartz that are well to moderately 

sorted. High-angle, cross-bedded sandstone is common in 

the Rush Springs Formation, indicating eolian deposition 

(Boggs, 2001). The degree of cementation varies throughout 

the aquifer, but observations of cores and outcrops indicate the 

presence of friable, poorly consolidated sandstone. Parts of 

the Rush Springs Formation have been eroded by runoff from 

upstream roads, culverts, dams, and rock outcrops to form 

cavities and plunge pools in surface exposures. These cavities 

look like canyons with nearly vertical walls and probably 

were formed from the force of rushing water during flashy 

precipitation events on friable sandstone.

The Rush Springs aquifer is bound by the erosional 

extent of the Rush Springs Formation to the east and south. 

Underlying the Rush Springs Formation and in contact to the 

east and south is the Marlow Formation of the Whitehorse 

Group, which is composed of interbedded sandstones, 

siltstones, mudstones, gypsum-anhydrite, and dolomite 

(Becker and Runkle, 1998; fig. 1). On the basis of lithology, 

the Marlow Formation most likely is a confining unit 

underlying the Rush Springs aquifer. To the west of the study 

area, the Rush Springs Formation is overlain by the Cloud 

Chief Formation and Quaternary alluvium and terrace deposits 

(which form alluvial aquifers). The Cloud Chief Formation is 

composed of massive gypsum interbedded with reddish-brown 

mudstone and siltstone (Becker and Runkle, 1998) and most 

likely acts as a confining unit to the Rush Springs aquifer 

(Tanaka and Davis, 1963). The Rush Springs Formation 

extends to the north and west of the study area. The Rush 

Springs Formation in Caddo, Custer, Dewey, Grady, and 

Washita Counties has aquifer properties typically providing 

good well yields and good water quality (Tanaka and Davis, 

1963). Beyond these counties, transmissivities of the aquifer 

decrease and groundwater contains larger concentrations 

of dissolved solids and sulfates (Tanaka and Davis, 1963), 

so that water from the formation is not used extensively in 

those areas. 

Alluvium and terrace deposits overlie the Rush Springs 

aquifer in the study area and are composed mostly of 

unconsolidated sands, silts, and clays with some gravel. On 

the basis of lithologies, groundwater is assumed to move 

readily through the alluvium and terrace deposits. Where 

the alluvium and terrace deposits overlie the Rush Springs 

Formation, those deposits are assumed to be in hydraulic 

connection with the Rush Springs Formation. Where the 

alluvium and terrace deposits overlie the Cloud Chief 

Formation, the alluvium and terrace deposits are assumed 

to not be in hydraulic connection with the Rush Springs 

Formation.

Livestock and

aquaculture

1,260 Mgal

12 percent Other

735 Mgal

7 percent

Public supply

1,575 Mgal

15 percent

Irrigation

6,930 Mgal

66 percent

Total water use in 2005: 10,500 million gallons (Mgal) (Tortorelli, 2009)

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Groundwater withdrawals, in million gallons per year 

Year

Figure 3. Water use from the Rush Springs aquifer, 2005. Figure 4. Groundwater withdrawals in Caddo County, Oklahoma, 

1985–2005.
6 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

Base Flow from the Rush Springs 

Aquifer

Several perennial streams originate in the Rush Springs 

aquifer. Perennial streams are defined as streams that have 

continuous flow in parts of the streambed all year during years 

of normal rainfall (Meinzer, 1923). Streams that are perennial 

indicate that groundwater contributes to streamflows and 

maintains streamflows during periods of no precipitation and 

no surface runoff. The part of streamflow sustained primarily 

by groundwater discharge that is not from runoff or snowmelt 

is referred to as “base flow.” 

Historical streamflow data from USGS streamflowgaging stations were retrieved from the National Water 

Information System (NWIS) and analyzed to determine the 

base-flow component of streamflow for streams overlying 

the Rush Springs aquifer. Base flow maintains streamflows 

throughout the year and, in some cases, provides water for 

reservoir storage. The amount of base flow that aquifers 

contribute to streams can change over time and by location 

in response to varying climatic conditions, such as changes 

in precipitation and temperature; and in response to increased 

surface-water use or groundwater use from aquifers in 

hydraulic connection to streams.

Historical streamflow data were compiled and analyzed 

by using the PART method (Rutledge, 1998) to determine 

the base-flow component of streamflow from the Rush 

Springs aquifer in selected streams overlying the Rush 

Springs aquifer. The PART method uses streamflow 

partitioning to estimate daily base flow from the streamflow 

record and is based on the antecedent streamflow recession 

(Rutledge, 1998; fig. 5). The PART method is used for the 

analysis of the groundwater-flow system of a basin for 

which a streamflow-gaging station at the downstream end 

can be considered the only point of outflow. One assumption 

of the PART method is that the area of the contributing 

groundwater-flow system is equal to the drainage area of the 

streamflow-gaging station for the purpose of expressing flow 

in units of specific discharge (length per time). To use the 

PART method, regulation and diversion of flow should be 

negligible and the drainage-basin area should be less than 

500 mi2 (Rutledge, 1998). For this report, negligible 

regulation for a streamflow-gaging station is defined as 

having less than 20 percent of the drainage area upstream 

from a streamflow-gaging station controlled by dams, 

floodwater-retarding structures, or other human modifications 

of streamflow.

1

10

100

1,000

Average daily flow, in cubic feet per second

March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007

Month and year

EXPLANATION

Streamflow

Base flow

Figure 5. Example of base flow determined by using the PART method (Rutledge, 1998) and streamflow at streamflow-gaging station 

07325850 (Lake Creek near Eakly, Oklahoma), March–July 2007.
Base Flow from the Rush Springs Aquifer 7

Five USGS streamflow-gaging stations located on the 

Rush Springs aquifer and analyzed by using the PART method 

to determine base flow (fig. 6 and table 1) included: 07325840 

(Lake Creek near Sickles, Okla.), 07325850 (Lake Creek 

near Eakly, Okla.), 07325860 (Willow Creek near Albert, 

Okla.), 07326000 (Cobb Creek near Fort Cobb, Okla.), and 

073274406 (Little Washita River above SCS Pond No. 26 near 

Cyril, Okla.). Unregulated streamflow data for streamflowgaging station 07325840 (Lake Creek near Sickles, Okla.) 

were available from 2006 through 2012, with daily mean 

streamflow for that period being 4.2 cubic feet per second 

(ft3/s) (U.S. Geological Survey, 2013; fig. 7). Daily mean 

streamflow is the calculated mean of the streamflow readings 

for the given day; most streamflow-gaging stations record 

every 15 or 30 minutes. Results from the PART method for 

the 2006–12 period indicate that the annual base-flow index 

for this streamflow-gaging station ranged from 0.3 in 2007 to 

0.86 in 2010 (fig. 8). The base-flow index is the ratio of base 

flow to total streamflow. Monthly mean base flow, runoff, 

and streamflow were calculated for the 2006–12 period 

by using results of the PART method and subtracting base 

flow from streamflow to determine runoff. Monthly mean 

streamflows for the 2006–12 period indicate that streamflows 

were composed mostly of base flow during the months of 

January, February, April, July, September, November, and 

December (fig. 8). Monthly mean streamflows during the 

months of March, May, and October indicate that base flow 

was about equal to runoff. Streamflows were composed mostly 

of runoff during the months of June and August. Streamflows 

at this site decreased to zero during July 2006, July through 

September 2011, and July through September 2012 (fig. 7). 

These periods of zero flow most likely are related to relatively 

long periods of no precipitation (fig. 2). Other potential causes 

in the decline of streamflow during the summer are water use 

and evaporation from streams and withdrawals from the Rush 

Springs aquifer or from the overlying alluvial aquifer.
8 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

Sugar Creek

Buggy Creek

Lake Creek

Spring Creek

Salt Creek

East Cache Creek

Fivemile Creek

Stinking Creek

Cedar Creek

Tonkawa Creek

Delaware Creek

Deep Creek

Wildcat Creek

Kickapoo Creek

Yellow

Buzzard Creek

Two Hatchet Creek

Buck Creek

Camp 

Creek

Cedar Creek

Hog Creek

Spring CreekSpring Creek

Cobb CreekCobb Creek

Cam p CreekCam p Creek

Running

Creek

Running

Creek

Washita River Washita River

Cedar Creek Cedar Creek

Creek

Punjo CreekPunjo Creek

Spring

Creek

Spring

Creek

Gokey

Creek

Gokey

Creek

Lost CreekLost Creek

Tahoe CreekTahoe Creek

Boxelder CreekBoxelder Creek

Rock Creek Rock Creek

Hog CreekHog Creek

Line CreekLine Creek

Tony Hollow

Creek

Tony Hollow

Creek

Rock Hollow CreekRock Hollow Creek

Ionine CreekIonine Creek

West Fork Salt CreekWest Fork Salt Creek

East Ionine CreekEast Ionine Creek

West Ionine Creek West Ionine Creek

East Jack Hollow

Creek

East Jack Hollow

Creek

White Bread CreekWhite Bread Creek

Bullet CreekBullet Creek

Fisher Cr Fisher Cr Canadian River Canadian River

Kohnoosky CreekKohnoosky Creek

Medicine CreekMedicine Creek

Arapaho CreekArapaho Creek

Fort Cobb Reservoir

Lake Chickasha

98°30’ 98°15’ 98°

35°15’

35°

OKLAHOMA

Map area

Caddo Nation Tribal

Jurisdictional Area Rush Springs aquifer

07325850

07325840

07325860

07326000

073274406

Albers Equal-Area Conic projection

North American Datum of 1983

0 10 15 MILES Geology from Heran and others (2003)

0 10 15 KILOMETERS

5

5

Rush Springs aquifer surface exposure

Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area boundary

U.S. Geological Survey streamgaging station and number (table 1)

EXPLANATION

073274406

KIOWA COUNTY

CADDO COUNTY

CADDO COUNTY

GRADY COUNTY

CANADIAN COUNTY

WASHITA COUNTY

07325800

Figure 6. Location of U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging stations in the vicinity of the Rush Springs aquifer.
Base Flow from the Rush Springs Aquifer 9

Table 1. List of streamflow-gaging stations located near the Rush Springs aquifer, southwestern Oklahoma, with periods analyzed 

using the PART method (Rutledge, 1998).

[The PART method uses streamflow partitioning to estimate daily base flow from the streamflow record and is based on antecedent streamflow recessions; 

SCS, Soil Conservation Service]

Station 

number

(see fig. 6)

Site name

Contributing 

drainage area

(square miles)1

Unregulated period 

analyzed by PART method

07325840 Lake Creek near Sickles, Okla. 19.1 2006–12

07325850 Lake Creek near Eakly, Okla. 52.5 1970–77 and 2005–12

07325860 Willow Creek near Albert, Okla. 28.2 1971–77 and 2005–12

07326000 Cobb Creek near Fort Cobb, Okla. 311 1940–58

073274406 Little Washita River above SCS Pond No 26 near Cyril, Okla. 3.65 1996–2012

1

U.S. Geological Survey, 2013.

1

10

100

1,000

2006 2008 2010 2012

Average daily flow, in cubic feet per second

Year

2007 2009 2011

Streamflow

Base flow

EXPLANATION

Figure 7. Daily streamflow and base flow derived by using the PART method (Rutledge, 1998) for streamflow-gaging station 07325840 

(Lake Creek near Sickles, Oklahoma), 2006–12.
10 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

A B

C D

EXPLANATION EXPLANATION

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Base flow

Streamflow

EXPLANATION

Base flow

Streamflow

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Base-flow index

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Monthly mean flow (2006–12), in cubic feet

per second

Annual flow volume, in acre-feet Average annual flow, in cubic feet per second

Year

Year Year Base-flow index (base flow/streamflow) January February March April May June July

August

September

October

NovemberDecember

Month

Runoff

EXPLANATION

Streamflow

Base flow

Figure 8. (A) average annual streamflow and base flow, (B) base-flow index, (C) average annual streamflow and base-flow volume, 

and (D) monthly mean streamflow, base flow, and runoff at streamflow-gaging station 07325840 (Lake Creek near Sickles, Oklahoma), 

2006–12.
Base Flow from the Rush Springs Aquifer 11

Unregulated streamflow data for streamflow-gaging 

station 07325850 (Lake Creek near Eakly, Okla.) were 

available for the periods 1970–77 and 2005–12. For the 1970–

77 period, daily mean streamflow was 7.4 ft3/s (fig. 9). Results 

from the PART method for the 1970–77 period indicate that 

the annual base-flow index for this streamflow-gaging station 

ranged from 0.16 in 1977 to 0.55 in 1976 (fig. 10). Monthly 

mean streamflows for the 1970–77 period indicate that 

streamflows were composed mostly of runoff for the months 

of March, May, June, July, August, September, October, and 

November (fig. 10). Monthly mean streamflows indicate 

that streamflows were composed mostly of base flow for the 

months of January, February, and April. Monthly mean flows 

during December indicate that base flow was about equal to 

runoff. Streamflows declined to zero from May to September 

during the years 1970–74 (fig. 9). The precipitation graph 

(fig. 2) indicates that 1973 and 1975 were years of aboveaverage precipitation. Streamflows during 1973 declined to 

zero in late July through August; streamflows during 1975 

never reached zero at this station.

EXPLANATION

1

10

100

1,000

1970 1972 1974 1976

Average daily flow, in cubic feet per second

Year

1971 1973 1975

10,000

1977

Streamflow

Base flow

Figure 9. Daily streamflow and base flow derived by using the PART method (Rutledge, 1998) for streamflow-gaging station 07325850 

(Lake Creek near Eakly, Oklahoma), 1970–77.
12 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

A B

C D

EXPLANATION

EXPLANATION

Base flow

Streamflow

Base-flow index

Runoff

Annual flow volume, in acre-feet

Average annual flow, in cubic feet per second

Year

Year Year Base-flow index (base flow/streamflow) January February March April May June

July

August

September

October

NovemberDecember

Month

EXPLANATION

Streamflow

EXPLANATION

Base flow

Streamflow

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

0

5

10

15

20

25

1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977

Monthly mean flow (1970–77), in cubic feet

per second

Base flow

Figure 10. (A) average annual streamflow and base flow, (B) base-flow index, (C) average annual streamflow and base-flow volume, 

and (D) monthly mean streamflow, base flow, and runoff at streamflow-gaging station 07325850 (Lake Creek near Eakly, Oklahoma), 

1970–77.
Base Flow from the Rush Springs Aquifer 13

For the 2005–12 period, daily mean streamflow was 

9.3 ft3/s (fig. 11). Results from the PART method for the 

2005–12 period indicate that the annual base-flow index for 

this streamflow-gaging station ranged from 0.3 in 2007 to 0.85 

in 2010 (fig. 12). Monthly mean streamflows for the 2005–12 

period indicate that streamflows were composed mostly of 

base flow from January to May, from September to December, 

and during July (fig. 12). Streamflows were composed mostly 

of runoff during the months of June and August for the 2005–

12 period. Streamflows never declined to zero during the 

2005–12 period but were close to zero at 0.08 ft3/s in August 

2011 and August 2012 at this station (fig. 11).

1

10

100

1,000

Average daily flow, in cubic feet per second

10,000

2005 2007 2009 2011

Year

2006 2008 2010 2012

Streamflow

Base flow

EXPLANATION

Figure 11. Daily streamflow and base flow derived by using the PART method (Rutledge, 1998) for streamflow-gaging station 07325850 

(Lake Creek near Eakly, Oklahoma), 2005–12.
14 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

A B

C D

EXPLANATION

EXPLANATION

Base flow

Streamflow

Base-flow index

Year

Year Year January February March April May June

July

August

September

October

NovemberDecember

Month

EXPLANATION

Base flow

Streamflow

Monthly mean flow (2005–12), in cubic feet

per second

Annual flow volume, in acre-feet

Average annual flow, in cubic feet per second

Base-flow index (base flow/streamflow)

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0

5

10

15

20

25

0

5

10

15

20

25

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Runoff

EXPLANATION

Streamflow

Base flow

Figure 12. (A) average annual streamflow and base flow, (B) base-flow index, (C) average annual streamflow and base-flow volume, 

and (D) monthly mean streamflow, base flow, and runoff at streamflow-gaging station 07325850 (Lake Creek near Eakly, Oklahoma), 

2005–12.
Base Flow from the Rush Springs Aquifer 15

Unregulated streamflow data for streamflow-gaging 

station 07325860 (Willow Creek near Albert, Okla.) were 

available for the periods 1971–77 and 2005–12. For the 

1971–77 period, daily mean streamflow was 4.1 ft3/s (fig. 13). 

Results from the PART method for the 1971–77 period 

indicate that the annual base-flow index for this streamflow 

gaging station ranged from 0.14 in 1977 to 0.80 in 1976 

(fig. 14). Monthly mean streamflows for the 1971–77 period 

indicate that streamflows were composed mostly of runoff for 

the months of May, June, July, and August (fig. 14). Monthly 

mean streamflows indicate that streamflows were composed 

mostly of base flow for the months of January, February, April, 

October, and December. Monthly mean streamflows indicate 

that base flow was about equal to runoff for the months of 

March, September, and November. Streamflows declined to 

zero for periods of 3–10 days during the months of August 

through October 1972, July 1974, and August 1976 at this 

station (fig. 13).

Streamflow

Base flow

EXPLANATION

1

10

100

1,000

Average daily flow, in cubic feet per second

10,000

1971 1973 1975 1977

Year

1972 1974 1976

Figure 13. Daily streamflow and base flow derived by using the PART method (Rutledge, 1998) for streamflow-gaging station 07325860 

(Willow Creek near Albert, Oklahoma), 1971–77.
16 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

A B

C D

EXPLANATION

Base flow

Streamflow

Year

Year Year January February March April May June

July

August

September

October

NovemberDecember

Month

EXPLANATION

Base-flow index

EXPLANATION

Base flow

Streamflow

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977

0

5

10

15

20

25

Monthly mean flow (1971–77), in cubic feet

per second

Annual flow volume, in acre-feet

Average annual flow, in cubic feet per second

Base-flow index (base flow/streamflow)

Runoff

EXPLANATION

Streamflow

Base flow

Figure 14. (A) average annual streamflow and base flow, (B) base-flow index, (C) average annual streamflow and base-flow volume, 

and (D) monthly mean streamflow, base flow, and runoff at streamflow-gaging station 07325860 (Willow Creek near Albert, Oklahoma), 

1971–77.
Base Flow from the Rush Springs Aquifer 17

For the 2005–12 period, daily mean streamflow for 

streamflow-gaging station 07325860 (Willow Creek near 

Albert, Okla.) was 4.0 ft3/s (fig. 15). Results from the PART 

method for the 2005–12 period indicate that the annual 

base-flow index for this streamflow-gaging station ranged 

from 0.42 in 2007 to 0.90 in 2006 (fig. 16). Monthly mean 

streamflows for the 2005–12 period indicate that streamflows 

were composed mostly of base flow for the months of January, 

February, March, April, May, July, September, October, 

November, and December (fig. 16). The month of August 

was the only month that streamflows were composed mostly 

of runoff. Monthly mean streamflows indicate that base flow 

was about equal to runoff for the month of June. Streamflows 

never declined to zero during the 2005–12 period but were 

close to zero at 0.1 ft3/s in September 2012 (fig. 15).

1

10

100

1,000

Average daily flow, in cubic feet per second

2005 2007 2009 2011

Year

2006 2008 2010 2012

Streamflow

Base flow

EXPLANATION

Figure 15. Daily streamflow and base flow derived by using the PART method (Rutledge, 1998) for streamflow-gaging station 07325860 

(Willow Creek near Albert, Oklahoma), 2005–12.
18 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

A B

C D

EXPLANATION

Base flow

Streamflow

Year

Year Year January February March April May June July

August

September

October

NovemberDecember

Month

EXPLANATION

Base-flow index

EXPLANATION

Base flow

Streamflow

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Monthly mean flow (2005–12), in cubic feet

per second

Annual flow volume, in acre-feet

Average annual flow, in cubic feet per second

Base-flow index (base flow/streamflow)

Runoff

EXPLANATION

Streamflow

Base flow

Figure 16. (A) average annual streamflow and base flow, (B) base-flow index, (C) average annual streamflow and base-flow volume, 

and (D) monthly mean streamflow, base flow, and runoff at streamflow-gaging station 07325860 (Willow Creek near Albert, Oklahoma), 

2005–12.
Base Flow from the Rush Springs Aquifer 19

Unregulated streamflow data for streamflow-gaging 

station 07326000 (Cobb Creek near Fort Cobb, Okla.) were 

available for the period 1940–58. For the 1940–58 period, 

daily mean streamflow was 50 ft3/s (fig. 17). Results from 

the PART method for the 1940–58 period indicate that 

the annual base-flow index for this streamflow-gaging 

station ranged from 0.27 in 1949 to 0.78 in 1956 (fig. 18). 

Monthly mean streamflows for the 1940–58 period indicate 

that streamflows were composed mostly of base flow for 

the months of January, February, March, November, and 

December (fig. 18). Monthly mean streamflows indicate that 

streamflows were composed mostly of runoff for the months 

of April, May, June, and July. Monthly mean streamflows 

indicate that base flow was relatively equal to runoff for the 

months of August, September, and October. Streamflows 

never declined to zero during the 1940–58 period but were 

close to zero at 0.2 ft3/s in September 1956 at this station 

(fig. 17). 

1

10

100

1,000

Average daily flow, in cubic feet per second

10,000

1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958

Year

Streamflow

Base flow

EXPLANATION

Figure 17. Daily streamflow and base flow derived by using the PART method (Rutledge, 1998) for streamflow-gaging station 07326000 

(Cobb Creek near Fort Cobb, Oklahoma), 1940–58.
20 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

A B

C D

EXPLANATION

Base flow

Streamflow

Year

Year Year

Month

EXPLANATION

Base-flow index

EXPLANATION

Base flow

Streamflow

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949195019511952195319541955195619571958

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949195019511952195319541955195619571958

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

1940194119421943194419451946194719481949195019511952195319541955195619571958

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Monthly mean flow (1940–58), in cubic feet

per second

Annual flow volume, in acre-feet Average annual flow, in cubic feet per second

Base-flow index (base flow/streamflow)

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

NovemberDecember

Runoff

EXPLANATION

Streamflow

Base flow

Figure 18. (A) average annual streamflow and base flow, (B) base-flow index, (C) average annual streamflow and base-flow volume, 

and (D) monthly mean streamflow, base flow, and runoff at streamflow-gaging station 07326000 (Cobb Creek near Fort Cobb, Oklahoma), 

1940–58.
Base Flow from the Rush Springs Aquifer 21

Unregulated streamflow data for streamflow gagingstation 073274406 (Little Washita River above SCS [Soil 

Conservation Service] Pond No. 26 near Cyril, Okla.) were 

available for the period 1996–2012. For the 1996–2012 

period, daily mean streamflow was 1.4 ft3/s (fig. 19). Results 

from the PART method for the 1996–2012 period indicate 

that the annual base-flow index for this streamflow-gaging 

station ranged from 0.19 in 2006 to 0.89 in 2001 (fig. 20). 

Monthly mean streamflows for the 1996–2012 period 

indicate that streamflows were composed mostly of base 

flow for the months of January, February, March, April, 

May, July, November, and December (fig. 20). Monthly 

mean streamflows indicate that streamflows were composed 

mostly of runoff for the months of June, August, and October. 

Monthly mean streamflows indicate that base flow was about 

equal to runoff for the month of September. Because the 

drainage area for this basin is smaller than the other stations 

(table 1), streamflows decrease to zero more frequently than at 

the other stations. Zero flow was documented for several days 

in the months of October 2003, May through September 2004, 

June through August 2006, July through September 2011, and 

August 2012 at this station (fig. 19).

Flows in streams overlying the Rush Springs aquifer, on 

average, are composed of 50 percent base flow for most years. 

Base flow appears to maintain streamflows throughout each 

year, but periods of zero flow were documented in the daily 

hydrographs for most of the sites and typically occurred in the 

summer months. These streams are not always perennial and 

periods of zero flow coincided with relatively long periods 

of no precipitation. Other potential causes in the decrease 

of streamflow during the summer are surface-water use and 

evaporation from streams and groundwater use from the Rush 

Springs aquifer or the overlying alluvial aquifer. 

1

10

100

1,000

Average daily flow, in cubic feet per second

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Year

Streamflow

Base flow

EXPLANATION

Figure 19. Daily streamflow and base flow derived by using the PART method (Rutledge, 1998) for streamflow-gaging station 

073274406 (Little Washita River above SCS [Soil Conservation Service] Pond No. 26 near Cyril, Oklahoma), 1996–2012.
22 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

A B

C D

EXPLANATION

Base flow

Streamflow

Runoff

Year

Year Year

Month

EXPLANATION

EXPLANATION

Base-flow index

Base flow

EXPLANATION

Base flow

Streamflow

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Monthly mean flow (1996–2012), in cubic feet

per second

Annual flow volume, in acre-feet

Average annual flow, in cubic feet per second

Base-flow index (base flow/streamflow)

January

February

March

April

June

August

September

October

NovemberDecember

May

July

Streamflow

Figure 20. (A) average annual streamflow and base flow, (B) base-flow index, (C) average annual streamflow and base-flow volume, 

and (D) monthly mean streamflow, base flow, and runoff at streamflow-gaging station 073274406 (Little Washita River above SCS [Soil 

Conservation Service] Pond No. 26 near Cyril, Oklahoma), 1996–2012.
Interaction between Groundwater and Surface Water of the Rush Springs Aquifer 23

Interaction between Groundwater and 

Surface Water of the Rush Springs 

Aquifer

The flow of water between groundwater and surface 

water can be described by using qualitative and quantitative 

methods. Direct and indirect methods can be used for 

quantifying flow between groundwater and surface water. For 

this report, direct and indirect methods were used, including 

the following: (1) hydraulic conductivity of streambed 

sediments was quantified to determine the potential and 

magnitude of flow between the stream and the Rush Springs 

aquifer, (2) hydraulic-head gradients were measured during 

the summer of 2012 between selected streams and alluvium 

to determine direction and magnitude of flow, (3) volumetric 

flow rates were quantified by using seepage meters installed in 

streambed sediments, and (4) water levels in the alluvium and 

stream were monitored at a streamflow-gaging station to show 

changes in flow between surface water and groundwater over 

time throughout a year.

Streambed Hydraulic Conductivity

Streambed hydraulic conductivity is defined in this report 

as the horizontal hydraulic conductivity of the streambed 

sediments underlying the stream and overlying the Rush 

Springs aquifer. A pneumatic slug-test technique was used to 

determine the horizontal hydraulic conductivity of streambed 

sediments in streams overlying the Rush Springs aquifer. The 

slug-test method measures horizontal hydraulic conductivity 

as a function of the response of the water level in a well to 

a displacement following the methods of Hinsby and others 

(1992), Zlotnik (1994), Zlotnik and others (1998), and Rus 

and others (2001). By estimating anisotropic conditions 

typical of streambed sediments, horizontal hydraulic 

conductivity can be used to estimate vertical hydraulic 

conductivity. Vertical streambed hydraulic conductivity is 

one of the properties that controls groundwater/surfacewater interactions between a stream and aquifer. In addition, 

streambed hydraulic conductivity is an important parameter in 

numerical groundwater-flow models needed to model the flux 

of groundwater across a stream/aquifer interface.

Streambed hydraulic conductivity was measured by a 

slug-test technique at 15 sites along Cobb Creek, Fivemile 

Creek, Lake Creek, Willow Creek, Keechi Creek, and Sugar 

Creek during July and August 2012 (fig. 21 and table 2). 

Initially, streambed hydraulic conductivity was to be measured 

at 30 sites overlying the Rush Springs aquifer, including 

reaches along Wildcat Creek, White Bread Creek, Medicine 

Creek, and Kickapoo Creek (see fig. 1 for locations of creeks), 

but most of these stream reaches were dry during July and 

August 2012, and could not be slug tested without saturated 

sediments. Temporary, small-diameter wells (with an inside 

diameter of 0.0521 ft) were pushed into the streambed 

sediments by using a mallet until refusal point or until water 

entered the well. A series of slug tests were performed at 

each depth to ensure that at least one of the tests contained 

observable water-level responses from the induced pressure 

changes. The wells were initially pumped by using tubing 

and a peristaltic pump to remove fine particle well skins from 

around the screen, and afterward, the water level was allowed 

to return to static level. The recovery rates in each well were 

relatively quick (30–60 seconds), so air pressure (pneumatic 

method) was used to displace the water in each well for the 

slug test (fig. 22). Water levels were monitored every second 

throughout the slug test by a submersible pressure transducer 

attached to a data logger. The slug test responses were 

analyzed by using the AQuifer TEst SOLVer (AQTESOLV) 

software package (Hydrosolve, Inc., 2011) and were matched 

to an analytical solution. 

Analytical solutions have been developed for various 

aquifer types under a variety of hydraulic conditions, and these 

analytical solutions have been published in previous reports 

and articles. Water-level data from slug tests can be entered 

into AQTESOLV software, and AQTESOLV can be used to 

match water-level data to previously published analytical 

solutions. Each of these analytical solutions has several 

assumptions that must be considered when determining a 

good fit between the water-level data and the analytical 

solution.

Slug-test data were input into AQTESOLV software to 

match an analytical solution provided in the software. Twelve 

of the slug tests were matched to the Springer-Gelhar solution 

(Springer and Gelhar, 1991). Two of the slug tests were 

matched to the Bouwer-Rice solution (Bouwer, 1989; Bouwer 

and Rice, 1976), and one of the slug tests was matched to the 

Kansas Geological Survey (KGS) Model with Skin solution 

(Hyder and others, 1994). 

The Bouwer-Rice solution (Bouwer and Rice, 1976) was 

developed for an overdamped slug test in a fully or partially 

penetrating well in an unconfined aquifer. The assumptions 

for the Bouwer-Rice solution are as follows: (1) the aquifer 

has infinite areal extent, (2) the aquifer is homogeneous and of 

uniform thickness, (3) the aquifer is unconfined, (4) flow to the 

well is quasi-steady state, and (5) volume of water is injected 

into or discharged from the well instantaneously. 

The Springer-Gelhar solution (Springer and Gelhar, 

1991) extended the Bouwer-Rice solution for a slug test in 

a homogeneous, anisotropic, unconfined aquifer to include 

inertial effects in the test well. This solution accounts for 

oscillatory water-level response that is sometimes observed 

in aquifers of high hydraulic conductivity. In addition, on 

the basis of the work of Butler (2002), frictional well loss in 

small-diameter wells is incorporated in the Springer-Gelhar 

solution. The assumptions for the Springer-Gelhar solution are 

similar to the assumptions of the Bouwer-Rice solution.
24 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

351727098353802 351727098314701

352516098424601

352239098411401

352002098310301

351824098372501

351543098315301

352531098244301

351427098223601

351359098280001

351330098203001

352422098354101

351911098362101

351404098331101

352055098400901

OKLAHOMA

Map area

Caddo Nation Tribal

Jurisdictional Area Rush Springs aquifer

Lake Creek

Willow Creek

Fort Cobb

Reservoir

Sugar CreekSugar Cree

S

k

pring Creek

Spring Creek

Fivemile Creek Fivemile Creek

Cobb CreekCobb Creek

Cobb

Creek

Cobb

Creek

Crooked CreekCrooked Creek

Taylor CreekTaylor Creek

Gyp

Creek

Gyp

Creek Buck Creek

Buck Creek

Bull Creek

Camp Creek

amp Creek

Cedar Creek Cedar Creek

Spring

Creek

Spring

Creek

Running CreekRunning Creek

Punjo CreekPunjo Creek

Deep

Creek DeepCreek

Keechi CreekKeechi Creek

0

2 4 6

8 MILES

0 8 KILOMETERS

Albers Equal-Area Conic projection 2 4 6

North American Datum of 1983

Geology from Heran and others (2003)

Rush Springs aquifer surface exposure

Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area boundary

Slug-test and potentiomanometer site and identifier (table 3)—

Gaining/losing from potentiomanometer (August 2012)

EXPLANATION

Gaining

Losing

98°40’ 98°30’ 98°20’

35°20’

35°10’

CADDO COUNTY

WASHITA COUNTY

KIOWA COUNTY

Figure 21. Sites where slug tests and potentiomanometer readings were performed in July 2012 to determine hydraulic conductivity of 

streambed sediments in Caddo and Washita Counties, Oklahoma.
Interaction between Groundwater and Surface Water of the Rush Springs Aquifer 25

Table 2. Completion information for temporary wells installed in the area underlain by the Rush Springs aquifer, southwestern 

Oklahoma, 2012.

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; depths are in feet from land-surface/surface-water interface; WMA, wildlife management area]

Agency Well identifier

(see fig. 21) Site name Test date Hole depth

Top screen 

depth

Bottom screen

depth

USGS 352516098424601 Cobb Creek at 1100 Road 8/27/2012 2.08 0.83 1.83

USGS 352239098411401 Cobb Creek at 1130 Road 8/8/2012 1.67 0.42 1.42

USGS 352055098400901 Cobb Creek at 1150 Road near Colony, Okla. 8/27/2012 6.50 5.25 6.25

USGS 351824098372501 Cobb Creek at 2450 Road 8/28/2012 6.17 4.92 5.92

USGS 351727098353802 Cobb Creek at Highway 152 7/31/2012 15.00 13.75 14.75

USGS 351404098331101 Cobb Creek at WMA near Lake, Okla. 8/28/2012 5.00 3.75 4.75

USGS 352422098354101 Fivemile Creek at 1110 Road 8/15/2012 5.08 3.83 4.83

USGS 351911098362101 Fivemile Creek at 1170 Road 8/2/2012 8.67 7.42 8.42

USGS 351427098223601 Keechi Creek at 2590 Road 8/7/2012 7.08 5.83 6.83

USGS 351330098203001 Keechi Creek at 2610 Road 8/15/2012 5.92 4.67 5.67

USGS 352002098310301 Lake Creek at 1160 Road 8/29/2012 2.33 1.08 2.08

USGS 351543098315301 Lake Creek at 1210 Road 8/29/2012 4.04 2.79 3.79

USGS 351727098314701 Lake Creek at Highway 152 8/2/2012 4.33 3.08 4.08

USGS 352531098244301 Sugar Creek at 2570 Road 8/14/2012 5.92 4.67 5.67

USGS 351359098280001 Willow Creek at 1230 Road 8/14/2012 1.67 0.42 1.42

Figure 22. Temporary small-diameter well with pneumatic slug-test equipment installed.
26 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

The KGS Model with Skin solution (Hyder and 

others, 1994) was developed for an overdamped slug test 

in an unconfined aquifer for fully and partially penetrating 

wells. The solution includes a skin zone of finite thickness 

enveloping the test well. The assumptions for the KGS 

Model with Skin solution are similar to the assumptions of 

the Bouwer-Rice solution, but the KGS Model with Skin 

solution also includes the following assumptions: (1) the 

aquifer potentiometric surface is initially horizontal, (2) flow 

is unsteady, and (3) water is released instantaneously from 

storage with a decline in hydraulic head. 

The Bouwer-Rice, Springer-Gelhar, and KGS Model 

with Skin solutions assume isotropic conditions. For each 

well site, the presence of anisotropy was anticipated, but the 

magnitude of the anisotropy was unknown, so the anisotropy 

in AQTESOLV (Kv/Kh; Kv being vertical hydraulic 

conductivity; Kh being horizontal hydraulic conductivity) 

was set to 1 and 0.1 to account for the anisotropy typically 

determined from large-scale pumping tests in the alluvium 

(Rus and others, 2001). Using Kv/Kh = 0.1 resulted in 

streambed horizontal hydraulic conductivity values for the 

well sites that ranged from 1 to 86 feet per day (ft/d), and 

using Kv/Kh = 1 resulted in streambed horizontal hydraulic 

conductivity values that ranged from 2 to 53 ft/d (table 3). 

The hydraulic conductivities derived from these slug tests 

are typical for fine to coarse sand (Freeze and Cherry, 1979). 

Converting horizontal hydraulic conductivities from the 

slug-test analyses to vertical hydraulic conductivities by 

using a ratio of Kv/Kh = 0.1 indicates that vertical hydraulic 

conductivity in the streambed sediments overlying the Rush 

Springs aquifer ranges from 0.1 ft/d to 8.6 ft/d.

Hydraulic Head in Streams and Alluvium

A hydraulic potentiomanometer was temporarily 

installed at the 15 slug-test sites (fig. 21) to determine the 

hydraulic-head gradient between the stream and alluvium. 

Comparison of hydraulic head between the stream and 

alluvium indicates the direction of flow and the magnitude of 

hydraulic gradients between surface water and groundwater. 

Hydraulic-head conditions in a stream and alluvium change 

over time and by location; therefore, the hydraulic data 

provided are the net directions and magnitude at given places 

and points in time. 

Table 3. Horizontal hydraulic conductivity determined from slug tests conducted in the streambed sediments of streams overlying the 

Rush Springs aquifer, southwestern Oklahoma, August 2012.

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; Kv, vertical hydraulic conductivity; Kh, horizontal hydraulic conductivity; WMA, wildlife management area]

Agency Well identifier

(see fig. 21) Site name Test date

Horizontal hydraulic conductivity

(feet per day)

Kv/Kh = 0.1 Kv/Kh = 1

USGS 352516098424601 Cobb Creek at 1100 Road 8/27/2012 14 8

USGS 352239098411401 Cobb Creek at 1130 Road 8/8/2012 36 22

USGS 352055098400901 Cobb Creek at 1150 Road near Colony, Okla. 8/27/2012 30 18

USGS 351824098372501 Cobb Creek at 2450 Road 8/28/2012 25 15

USGS 351727098353802 Cobb Creek at Highway 152 7/31/2012 22 13

USGS 351404098331101 Cobb Creek at WMA near Lake, Okla. 8/28/2012 25 15

USGS 352422098354101 Fivemile Creek at 1110 Road 8/15/2012 40 24

USGS 351911098362101 Fivemile Creek at 1170 Road 8/2/2012 15 9

USGS 351427098223601 Keechi Creek at 2590 Road 8/7/2012 16 10

USGS 351330098203001 Keechi Creek at 2610 Road 8/15/2012 13 8

USGS 352002098310301 Lake Creek at 1160 Road 8/29/2012 86 53

USGS 351543098315301 Lake Creek at 1210 Road 8/29/2012 26 16

USGS 351727098314701 Lake Creek at Highway 152 8/2/2012 33 20

USGS 352531098244301 Sugar Creek at 2570 Road 8/14/2012 40 25

USGS 351359098280001 Willow Creek at 1230 Road 8/14/2012 1 2
Interaction between Groundwater and Surface Water of the Rush Springs Aquifer 27

A hydraulic potentiomanometer, or minipiezometer, is a 

portable drive probe connected to a manometer (fig. 23). The 

temporary wells used for the slug tests (“Streambed Hydraulic 

Conductivity” section of this report) were also used for the 

potentiomanometer readings in July and August 2012. The 

slotted drive probe was pushed down inside the casing of the 

temporary well after the slug test was performed, while the 

outer tube was placed at the bottom of the stream next to the 

well. Water was pumped with a peristaltic pump up through 

the well screen and tubing. Once the tubing was full of water 

and free of bubbles, air was bled into the top of the manometer 

until the menisci were visible in the tubing on both sides of 

the manometer. Hydraulic head was recorded for the stream 

and the alluvium. Differences in hydraulic head between a 

stream and alluvium can indicate gaining and losing stream 

reaches. Gaining-stream reaches gain water from inflow of 

groundwater through the streambed. Losing-stream reaches 

lose water to groundwater by outflow from the stream through 

the streambed.

At 6 of the 15 sites, direction of flow was from the 

alluvium to the stream (gaining) and the magnitude of the 

hydraulic-head gradient ranged from 0.003 to 0.323. For 

the nine sites with direction of flow from the stream to the 

alluvium (losing), hydraulic head gradients ranged from 0.004 

to 0.076 (table 4). 

Figure 23. Potentiomanometer and temporary small-diameter well, with the manometer mounted on a wooden board.
28 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

Hydraulic-head differences in three of the six sites on 

Cobb Creek indicate that flow direction was from groundwater 

to surface water (gaining-stream section) (fig. 21 and table 4). 

These three sites are in the western part of the aquifer in 

Kiowa County. Hydraulic-head differences in the other 

three sites on Cobb Creek in western Caddo County indicate 

that flow direction was from surface water to groundwater 

(losing-stream section). Hydraulic-head differences at 

Fivemile Creek at 1110 Road indicate that flow direction was 

from surface water to groundwater (losing-stream section), 

whereas hydraulic-head differences at Fivemile Creek at 

1170 Road indicate flow was from groundwater to surface 

water (gaining-stream section) with a relatively high vertical 

hydraulic gradient. Hydraulic-head differences at the two 

sites on Keechi Creek indicate that flow was from surface 

water to groundwater (losing-stream section). Hydraulichead differences at the three sites on Lake Creek indicate that 

flow was from surface water to groundwater (losing-stream 

section). Hydraulic-head differences on the Sugar Creek and 

Willow Creek sites indicate that flow was from groundwater 

to surface water (gaining-stream section). Gaining and losing 

conditions along streams can change in time and by location. 

There are several factors that could cause a stream to be 

gaining or losing or cause changes in flow direction. A stream 

will be gaining if the head in the aquifer is higher than the 

head in the stream and a stream will be losing if the head in 

the aquifer is lower than the head in the stream. Groundwater 

use that causes the aquifer head to decline lower than the head 

in the stream will cause the stream to be losing. Most of the 

measured streams were losing, as they were measured in July 

and August, during times of the year that declines in water 

levels are observed across the Rush Springs aquifer (see the 

“Groundwater Level Fluctuations, 2010–13” section of this 

report).

Volumetric Flow Rates from Seepage Meters

Flux of water across the stream/alluvium interface was 

measured at five locations by using seepage meters during July 

through August 2012. Seepage-meter methods are described 

in Rosenberry and LaBaugh (2008). Locations where seepage 

meters were installed were: (1) Cobb Creek at 1150 Road, 

(2) Cobb Creek at Highway 152 (Oklahoma State Highway 

152), (3) Fivemile Creek at 1170 Road, (4) Lake Creek at 

1160 Road, and (5) Willow Creek at 1230 Road (fig. 21 and 

table 5). Seepage meters typically are constructed from a cutoff storage drum that is installed into streambed sediments. 

A collector bag is attached to the drum, and the change in 

the volume of the water in the bag over time is measured. A 

decrease in volume of water in the bag over time indicates flux 

from surface water to groundwater. An increase in the volume 

of water in the bag over time indicates flux from groundwater 

to surface water. Volumetric flow rates and flux velocities vary 

by location and with time.

Table 4. Hydraulic head differences and gradients between streams and alluvium determined from potentiomanometer readings, in 

areas underlain by the Rush Springs aquifer, southwestern Oklahoma, August 2012.

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; WMA, wildlife management area; Negative values indicate flow from stream to alluvium sediments while positive values 

indicate flow from alluvium sediments to stream]

Agency Well identifier Site name Difference in head

(inches) 

Vertical hydraulic 

head gradient

Gaining/

losing1

USGS 352516098424601 Cobb Creek at 1100 Road 2.480 0.155 Gaining

USGS 352239098411401 Cobb Creek at 1130 Road 3.563 0.323 Gaining

USGS 352055098400901 Cobb Creek at 1150 Road near Colony, Okla. 0.184 0.003 Gaining

USGS 351824098372501 Cobb Creek at 2450 Road -0.246 -0.004 Losing

USGS 351727098353802 Cobb Creek at Highway 152 -3.150 -0.018 Losing

USGS 351404098331101 Cobb Creek at WMA near Lake, Okla. -3.858 -0.076 Losing

USGS 352422098354101 Fivemile Creek at 1110 Road -1.594 -0.031 Losing

USGS 351911098362101 Fivemile Creek at 1170 Road 15.183 0.160 Gaining

USGS 351427098223601 Keechi Creek at 2590 Road -5.285 -0.070 Losing

USGS 351330098203001 Keechi Creek at 2610 Road -1.339 -0.022 Losing

USGS 352002098310301 Lake Creek at 1160 Road -0.079 -0.004 Losing

USGS 351543098315301 Lake Creek at 1210 Road -1.247 -0.032 Losing

USGS 351727098314701 Lake Creek at Highway 152 -0.394 -0.009 Losing

USGS 352531098244301 Sugar Creek at 2570 Road 2.943 0.047 Gaining

USGS 351359098280001 Willow Creek at 1230 Road 1.417 0.128 Gaining

1

Gaining stream reaches gain water from inflow of groundwater through the streambed. Losing stream reaches lose water to groundwater by outflow through 

the streambed. 
Interaction between Groundwater and Surface Water of the Rush Springs Aquifer 29

The seepage meters used for this study were constructed 

of a 55-gallon storage drum from which the end was cut off. 

The storage drum had a diameter of 22 inches and an area 

of 2.64 square feet. A collector bag and tubing with a 3/4-

inch inside diameter was attached to the top of the storage 

drum by a 1/2-inch inside-diameter connector. Fellows and 

Brezonik (1980) suggested that a tubing diameter larger than 

a 5-millimeter (0.20-inch) opening would not cause loss of 

efficiency for most fluxes commonly measured with seepage 

meters. The seepage meters were pushed into the streambed 

sediments with the collector bag filled with an initial volume 

of 2,000 milliliters of water. The seepage meters were left 

installed in the sediments for 1 to 3 hours. The end volume 

of water was measured from the collector bag and the time 

logged for each measurement interval. 

At each of the five locations where seepage meters were 

installed, four different seepage meters were placed at various 

sites in the streambed sediments within about 100 ft of the 

wells (fig. 21). Measurements at four different sites were 

made to account for the spatial variability of fluxes across the 

stream/alluvium interface. Water-volume measurements were 

logged over two time intervals to ensure that measurements 

were repeatable and similar at each site. 

Change in volume of water in the collector bag was 

divided by the area of the storage drum to normalize and 

determine a flux velocity (table 5). This flux velocity 

represents the measured flow rate across the stream/alluvium 

interface. Measurements at sites A, B, and C at Cobb Creek 

at 1150 Road near Colony, Okla., indicate that flow from 

the alluvium to the stream ranged from 0.013 to 0.039 ft/d, 

whereas measurements at site D indicated flow from the 

stream to alluvium (table 5). Measurements at all four sites at 

Cobb Creek at Highway 152 (Oklahoma State Highway 152) 

indicated that flow from the stream to the alluvium ranged 

from 0.003 to 0.140 ft/d (table 5). Measurements at sites A and 

B at the Fivemile Creek at 1170 Road location indicated flow 

from the stream to alluvium, with flux velocity of 0.045 and 

0.131 ft/d, whereas measurements at sites C and D indicated 

flow from the alluvium to the stream with flux velocity from 

0.017 to 0.039 ft/d. Measurements at all four sites at the 

Lake Creek at 1160 Road location indicated that flow from 

the alluvium to the stream ranged from 0.005 to 0.023 ft/d. 

Measurements at all four sites at the Willow Creek at 1230 

Road location indicated that flow from the stream to the 

alluvium ranged from 0.066 to 0.127 ft/d.

Flows determined from seepage meters, combined with 

hydraulic gradients determined from potentiomanometers, 

were used to determine the vertical hydraulic conductivity of 

the streambed sediments using Darcy’s law (Darcy, 1856). 

Darcy’s law is expressed as:

Q = KIA (1)

where

Q is flow, in cubic feet per day;

K is hydraulic conductivity, in feet per day;

I is the hydraulic head gradient; and

A is the cross-sectional area, in square feet.

For sites where seepage meters were deployed, the flux 

velocity from table 5 (equivalent to Q/A from equation 1) was 

divided by the vertical hydraulic head gradient from table 4 to 

determine the vertical hydraulic conductivity of the streambed 

sediments. The vertical hydraulic conductivity (Kv) using 

Darcy’s law ranged from 0.1 to 13 ft/d for all sites. The Kv 

at Cobb Creek at 1150 Road near Colony, Okla., site ranged 

from 0.7 to 13 ft/d. The Kv at Cobb Creek at Highway 152 

site ranged from 0.2 to 7.8 ft/d. The Kv at Fivemile Creek at 

1170 Road ranged from 0.1 to 0.8 ft/d. The Kv at Lake Creek 

at 1160 Road ranged from 1.3 to 5.8 ft/d. The Kv at Willow 

Creek at 1230 Road ranged from 0.5 to 1 ft/d. The vertical 

hydraulic conductivities determined using Darcy’s law were 

similar to the streambed hydraulic conductivities estimated 

from the slug tests, using a ratio of Kv/Kh = 0.1, that ranged 

from 0.1 ft/d to 8.6 ft/d.

Table 5. Seepage locations and flux velocities for sites measured in the area underlain by the Rush Springs aquifer, southwestern 

Oklahoma, July–August 2012.

[USGS, U.S. Geological Survey; Negative values indicate flow from stream to alluvium sediments while positive values indicate flow from alluvium sediments 

to stream]

Agency Well 

identifier Site name Date measured

Flux velocity

(feet per day)

Site A Site B Site C Site D

USGS 352055098400901 Cobb Creek at 1150 Road near Colony, Okla. 7/8/2012 0.039 0.019 0.013 -0.002

USGS 351727098353802 Cobb Creek at Highway 152 7/21/2012 -0.140 -0.016 -0.003 -0.113

USGS 351911098362101 Fivemile Creek at 1170 Road 8/2/2012 -0.131 -0.045 0.017 0.039

USGS 352002098310301 Lake Creek at 1160 Road 7/31/2012 0.023 0.005 0.014 0.018

USGS 351359098280001 Willow Creek at 1230 Road 8/7/2012 -0.066 -0.077 -0.127 -0.107
30 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

Interaction between Groundwater and Surface 

Water at Cobb Creek near the Eakly, Oklahoma, 

Streamflow-Gaging Station

In April 2011, USGS staff conducted site reconnaissance 

and installed water-table piezometers in the Cobb Creek 

alluvium adjacent to the Cobb Creek near Eakly, Okla. (USGS 

station number 07325800) streamflow-gaging station, by using 

mechanical direct-push methods. The purpose of piezometer 

installation was to monitor and record interactions between 

alluvial groundwater levels and stream stage from September 

2011 through August 2012. Hydraulic connection between the 

alluvial aquifer and the Rush Springs aquifer was assumed 

because the Rush Springs aquifer consists of well-sorted, 

poorly cemented sandstone in the study area, and the alluvial 

aquifer consists of unconsolidated sands, silts, and clays with 

some gravel.

Piezometers were installed at various distances from 

the stream channel near the streamflow-gaging station orifice 

(fig. 24). The piezometers were constructed with 1-inch 

diameter polyvinyl chloride casing and 5-ft-long prepack 

screens set just above the contact with the Rush Springs 

aquifer, which was at about 20–45 ft below the land surface 

(fig. 25). Water levels were initially recorded with an electric 

tape at about 10–20 ft below the land surface at the time of 

piezometer-well installation (U.S. Geological Survey, 2013; 

fig. 25A). Each piezometer was then developed for about 

half an hour with a peristaltic pump until the produced water 

appeared to be clear of sediment. On September 22, 2011, 

four of the piezometers (well 0 [351726098353801], well 2 

[351726098353701], well 3 [351726098353601], and well 5 

[351726098353501]) were equipped with Level TROLL 

500 unvented pressure transducers with internal data loggers 

recording hydraulic pressure measurements every 15 minutes. 

The four transducer-equipped piezometers were spaced about 

10, 115, 170, and 260 ft, respectively, from the center of 

Cobb Creek and formed a transect through the alluvium. A 

recording barometer (Baro TROLL 500) also was deployed at 

the site to correct the pressure-transducer data to atmospheric 

pressure (Freeman and others, 2004). On November 8, 2011, 

the well nearest Cobb Creek (well 0 [351726098353801]) 

was damaged by a flood with a crest stage of 1,386.16 

ft National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD 29) and a 

maximum instantaneous discharge of 2,140 ft3/s (station 

number 07325800; U.S. Geological Survey, 2013; fig. 26). 

Because well 0 was damaged from the flood, well 0 data are 

not included in this report. All other piezometer water levels 

were corrected for atmospheric pressure and referenced to the 

datum of the streamflow-gaging station number 07325800, 

which is NGVD 29.

The piezometer transect is parallel to the Oklahoma State 

Highway 152 bridge, just south of the eastern bridge abutment 

(fig. 24). Along the piezometer transect, the land slopes toward 

the river at about 1 ft per 30 ft between wells 5 and 2 and at 

about 1 ft per 7 ft between wells 2 and 0. A drainage ditch also 

runs parallel to Oklahoma State Highway 152 on the south 

side of the piezometer transect. Near well 3, the drainage 

ditch opened to a deep (5–10 ft) gulley and turned southwest 

to Cobb Creek. This gulley may have acted as a drain on the 

alluvial aquifer. The land surrounding the Cobb Creek site was 

used mostly for nonirrigated and irrigated agriculture. Several 

irrigation wells were located in the area, including one on the 

west side of Cobb Creek about 270 ft southwest of well 2 in 

the piezometer transect.

Because of the relatively high slope of the land surface, 

most streams overlying the Rush Springs aquifer convey 

flashy discharges after intense rainfall. Cobb Creek, for 

example, often returns to prestorm stage within a few days of 

an intense rainfall. Following the June 7–11, 2012, rainfall, 

stream stage was higher than water levels in wells 2 and 3 

(fig. 26). In mid-July 2012, following a few more rain events, 

stream stage was higher than at all three wells. The stream 

was losing for a few weeks in June and July because of a 

combination of runoff, which raised the stream stage, and 

possibly well pumping, which likely lowered groundwater 

levels. Recharge from surface-water runoff and flood flows, 

therefore, were not likely to have a large effect on alluvial and 

bedrock groundwater levels at this Cobb Creek near Eakly, 

Okla., location over the course of a year.
Well 0 (351726098353801) We

Well 4 (351727098353701)

Well 2 (351726098353701) Well 3 (351726098353601)

Well 1 (351727098353801)

Trees

Trees

Trees

Trees

Trees

Cobb Creek

OKLAHOMA STAT

Trees

OKLAHOMA STAT

07325800 gage house (atmospheric baromete

0 50 100 150 FEET

0 10 20 30 40 METERS

Web Mercator projectionWorld Geodetic System 1984

A 

A 

Irrigation well for center-pivot(probable location)

07325800 orifice

Bridge span

98°35’40” 98°35’39” 98°35’38” 98°35’37” 98°35’36” 

35°17’28”35°17’27”35°17’26”

Agriculture

Agriculture

Irrigatedagriculture

Agriculture 

Rush Springs aquifer

Figure 24. Diagram showing groundwater and surface-water data-collection stations at Cobb Creek near Eakly, Oklahoma, on Oklahoma State Highw
32 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

1,395

1,390

1,385

1,380

1,375

1,370

1,365

1,360

1,355

1,345

1,350

Water table

Cobb

Creek

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

1,395

Well 2

(351726098353701)

Well 3

(351726098353601)

Well 5

(351726098353501)

FEET ABOVE 

NGVD 29

1,390

1,385

1,380

1,375

1,370

1,365

1,360

1,355

1,345

1,350

Cobb Creek alluvium

Water table

Land surface

(approximate) Cobb

Creek

VERTICAL EXAGGERATION ×2.5 Distance from left bank, in feet

WEST EAST

1,395

Well 2

(351726098353701)

Well 3

(351726098353601)

Well 5

(351726098353501)

1,390

1,385

1,380

1,375

1,370

1,365

1,360

1,355

1,345

1,350

Water table

Cobb

Creek

Well 2

(351726098353701)

Well 3

(351726098353601)

Well 5

(351726098353501)

B

A

C

1,930 ft3/s

16 ft3

/s

1,385.48

1,378.72 1,377.73 1,376.03

1,373.52

1,375.74 1,375.93 1,376.30

1,372.82 1,372.21 1,372.01 1,372.64

EXPLANATION

2.7 ft3/s

1,372.82 Observed water-table altitude, in feet

Instantaneous discharge at Cobb Creek near Eakly 

(07325800) in cubic feet per second (ft3

/s)

Screened interval

Direction of groundwater flow

2.7 ft3/s

A A′

Land surface

(approximate)

Land surface

(approximate)

Rush Springs Formation 

(Rush Springs aquifer)

of Whitehorse Group

Rush Springs Formation 

(Rush Springs aquifer)

of Whitehorse Group

Cobb Creek alluvium

Rush Springs Formation 

(Rush Springs aquifer)

of Whitehorse Group

Cobb Creek alluvium

Figure 25. Schematic diagram showing cross sections of a piezometer transect in the Cobb Creek alluvium showing altitudes of Cobb 

Creek and the alluvial aquifer water table during (A) flooding-stream conditions on November 8, 2011, 2:30 a.m.; (B) normal, gainingstream conditions on March 1, 2012, 8:30 a.m.; and (C) losing-stream conditions on July 29, 2012, 8:30 a.m.
no data

1,371.5 1,372.5

Altitude above National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929, in feet

1,373.51,374.51,375.51,376.51,377.5

Maximum stage:November 8, 20111,386.16 feet

September October November December January February March April May June July 

2011 2012

A 0.88-foot data correction for orifice movement was prorated over the November 7–8 event and carried until the gage was reset on November 15 (Martin L. Schneider, U.S. Geological Survey,written commun., 2012). 

Approximate time when nearby pumping begins

Weatherford (WEAT) 

(Oklahoma Meson

Cobb Creek near EakWell 2 (351726098353Well 3 (3517260983536Well 5 (3517260983535

EXPLANAT

Figure 26. Water-table altitudes measured at U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging station 07325800 (Cobb Creek near Eakly, Oklahoma) and in the Cobb Creek alluvium showing altitudes of Cobb Creek and the alluvial groundwater table and precipitation measured at Weatherford, Okla., Meso

location), September 2011–August 2012.
34 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

The stream-stage and groundwater-level data collected 

at the Cobb Creek site indicate how surface water and 

groundwater interact at the site during a drought year. From 

September 2011 to mid-June 2012 and in the month of August 

2012, groundwater levels at wells 2, 3, and 5 were higher than 

the stream stage, indicating that this reach of Cobb Creek 

was a gaining stream for most of the study period (fig. 26). 

The 6-month upward trend in stream stage and groundwater 

levels reversed in mid-March. Evapotranspiration signatures 

(serrated pattern with 1-day frequency; see inset of fig. 26) 

also began appearing in mid-March and increased in amplitude 

as solar radiation and native vegetation activity increased into 

the summer. The altitude difference between groundwater 

levels and stream stage increased over the fall and spring 

months and reached a maximum of about 2.5–3.0 ft in March 

and April (fig. 26). The altitude of groundwater levels and 

stream stage began to decrease in late March. In May and 

early June, groundwater pumping and recovery signatures 

from a nearby irrigation-supply well about 270 ft southwest 

of the piezometer transect were evident in the aquifer waterlevel and stream-stage data (fig. 26). Well-completion 

reports indicated that the irrigation well was completed in the 

Rush Springs aquifer at a depth of about 260 ft below land 

surface in 2009 and produced an estimated yield of 200–

400 gal/min (Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 2013). In the 

remainder of June and July, groundwater levels and stream 

stage decreased, and the direction of the groundwater gradient 

between wells 2 and 3 changed. With the combined effects of 

evapotranspiration and pumping that decreased groundwater 

levels and periodic rainfall runoff that raised the stream stage, 

this reach of Cobb Creek became a losing stream in mid-June 

and July, with stream-stage altitudes greater than aquifer 

water-level altitudes in wells 2 and 3 (figs. 25C and 26). The 

lack of pumping recovery curves between mid-June and July 

indicates that groundwater-level and stream-stage declines 

were most likely the result of regional-scale withdrawals of 

multiple wells instead of the result of a single nearby pumping 

well. In August 2012, groundwater levels and stream stage 

began to increase, presumably when irrigation ceased at the 

end of the winter wheat and corn growing seasons. Winter 

wheat is harvested during June to early July and corn is 

harvested during August to October (Oklahoma Department of 

Agriculture, Food and Forestry, 2012). Also, the stream reach 

returned to a gaining stream and the groundwater gradient 

reversed, with aquifer water-level altitudes greater than the 

stream-stage altitude (fig. 26). 

The groundwater and surface-water interaction data 

collected at streamflow-gaging station 07325800 (Cobb Creek 

near Eakly, Okla.) indicate that the bedrock groundwater, 

alluvial groundwater, and streams were in hydrologic 

connection in the study area. Because of this hydrologic 

connection, large perennial streams in the study area can 

change from gaining to losing streams in the summer. The 

timing and severity of this change probably were affected 

by regional withdrawal of groundwater for irrigation during 

the summer growing season. Pumping wells placed closer to 

streams are likely to have a greater and more immediate effect 

on alluvial groundwater levels and stream stages than wells 

placed farther from streams. Large-capacity irrigation wells, 

even those completed hundreds of feet below land surface 

in the bedrock aquifer, can induce surface-water flow from 

nearby streams by lowering alluvial groundwater levels below 

the stream altitude.

Springs Inventory and Location of 

Wetlands

Documentation of springs and wetlands is important 

because these features mark the intersection of the 

groundwater table with the surface water and are therefore 

indicators of change in a hydrologic system. When 

groundwater levels fall as a result of less than normal 

precipitation, such as during 2011 (fig. 2), springs may 

stop discharging water, and wetland areas may become dry. 

Spring and wetland inventories were the focus of a 2011–12 

field survey of the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area, 

and precipitation had been less than normal in 2011 (fig. 2). 

Funding and time constraints precluded a comprehensive 

search of the area, so the goals of the spring and wetland 

inventories were (1) to compile historical documentation 

on spring and wetland locations, and (2) to identify new, 

undocumented spring and wetland locations accessible from 

public roads. The results from this inventory could provide 

data for a more comprehensive search for these features in the 

future. 

Prior to 2012, only two springs were documented in the 

NWIS database (U.S. Geological Survey, 2013) in the study 

area, but neither location was sufficiently accurate to locate the 

springs in the field during the summer of 2012. Because there 

were no useful historical spring locations in the study area, the 

primary objective of this study was to locate and document 

springs. Twenty-five springs visible from public roads and 

paths were documented during the survey (fig. 27). Two of 

these springs were in Red Rock Canyon State Park.
Springs Inventory and Location of Wetlands 35

RED ROCK

CANYON

STATE PARK

Anadarko

Weatherford

CobbCreek

Sixmile Cre ek

Powder Face Creek

Weave rsCreek

De e r Creek

Squaw Creek

Keechi Creek

Targ e t Creek

Fourmile Creek

Dry Creek

RockHollow Cre

e

k

Cottonwood Creek

Spring Creek

Sugar Creek

Dead Woman Creek

Lake Creek

White Bread Creek

Cana dian River

Yellow Creek

Washita Ri v er

Camp Creek

Tay lor Creek

Spring Creek

Lost Creek

No rthCa nad ian River Wildcat Creek Kohnoosky Creek

Medicine Creek

Camp Creek

Deep Creek

Spring Creek

L umpmouth Creek

Cobb Creek Buck Cre ek

Tonkawa Cre ek

Jack Hollow Creek

Spring Creek

Bear Cre ek

Bu ll Creek

Arapah oCreek

Leaper Creek

Cedar Creek

Little Deer Cre ek

Bullet Creek

PunjoCreek

RelayCree k

Winter CampCreek

Laria t Creek

Spr ni g C reek

CedarCreek

Kickapoo Creek

Cr ooked Creek

Gyp Creek

Willow

Creek

Salt Creek

Cedar Creek

County

Line Creek

Fisher Creek

Cobb Creek

Buggy Creek

Sixmile Cre e k

StinkingCre ek

West Fo rkSal tCreek

Horse Creek

Ionine Creek

Sugar Creek

Fivemile Creek

Go ke y

Creek

West Jack Hollow Creek

ChickenC reek

West Ionine Creek

Stinkin gCreek

Little Deep Creek

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10 11

12

13

14

15

16

17 18

19

20

21

22

24

23 25

98°48’ 98°42’ 98°36’ 98°30’ 98°24’ 98°18’ 98°12’ 98°06’ 98°

35°48’

35°42’

35°36’

35°30’

35°24’

35°18’

35°12’

35°06’

EXPLANATION

Albers Equal-Area Conic projection

North American Datum of 1983

0 3 6 9 12 15 MILES

0 3 6 9 12 15 KILOMETERS

Watershed boundaries from U.S. Department of Agrictulture, 2006

Streams from Horizon Systems Corporation, 2008

Area not studied

Lake or reservoir

Rush Springs aquifer

Unconfined

Confined

Caddo Nation Tribal 

Jurisdictional Area 

boundary

Watershed boundary

Spring and number, September 2011

Stream observation, 

September 2011

Dry

Wet

Ponded

Flowing

24

33

54

3

37

37

152

152

54

146

58

9

8

40

270

81

270

81

62 62

47

58

54B

54A

58

115

115

281

40

152

KINGFISHER COUNTY

CANADIAN COUNTY

CUSTER

COUNTY

CADDO

COUNTY

GRADY

COUNTY

KIOWA

COUNTY

BLAINE COUNTY

WASHITA

COUNTY

Figure 27. Locations of springs and stream observations in and near the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area, Oklahoma, 

September 2011.
36 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

All of the documented springs were discharging water 

at very low rates during the time they were identified. Spring 

discharge in the study area seems to be primarily in the form 

of distributed seep areas rather than discrete openings in rocks. 

Many of the springs documented in this report, such as the two 

springs in Red Rock Canyon State Park (fig. 27), were found 

in plunge pools where the sandstone has been eroded by runoff 

from upstream roads, culverts, dams, and rock outcrops in the 

study area. Most of the springs documented in this report are 

located in upland draws on the flanks of a topographic ridge 

that trends southeast from Weatherford to Anadarko (fig. 27). 

This ridge is believed to coincide with a groundwater divide 

separating groundwater flow between the Sugar Creek and 

Cobb Creek surface-water drainage systems. Of the 25 springs 

recorded in the study area, 6 were on tributaries of Sugar 

Creek, 11 were on tributaries of Cobb Creek, and 8 were on 

tributaries of the Canadian and Washita Rivers. All springs 

were flowing at the time of the field survey, but none of the 

springs were discharging enough water to obtain accurate 

discharge measurements. All of the documented springs were 

estimated to be discharging less than 1 ft3/s.

One of the challenges with spring identification in the 

study area is that much of the study area is occupied by deep 

draws and canyons that were not accessible during the field 

survey. Privately owned areas with rugged terrain and no 

improved vehicular access were not surveyed but may contain 

springs and seeps. Also, many of the spring-discharge areas 

have been inundated by small ponds impounded by dams on 

private land. Many small headwater ponds were at design 

capacity and were discharging water during the field survey, 

indicating that the ponds were supplied by spring flow.

More generalized spring-discharge areas were identified 

by documenting stream conditions in the study area. As a 

result of less than normal precipitation in western Oklahoma 

(fig. 2), many of the streams in the study area were dry in 

the summer and fall of 2011. All streamflow was considered 

to be groundwater-supplied base flow (supplied by springs 

and seeps) at the time of the spring inventory. For 2 weeks in 

September, a field crew visited 1,665 county and State road 

bridges over streams in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional 

Area, qualitatively documenting streamflow conditions. For 

each bridge location, the stream was classified into one of 

four categories: (1) dry (the streambed was dry), (2) wet (the 

streambed was wet, but there was no standing or flowing 

water), (3) ponded (the stream contained standing water 

that was not observed as flowing; dammed streams with 

no observable outflow were included in this category), and 

(4) flowing (the stream contained moving water; dammed 

streams with observable outflow were included in this 

category). Each of the stream observations was input into 

a geographic information system (GIS) database (fig. 27). 

Though this sample of stream observations is biased 

toward smaller streams, which are more easily crossed and 

thus have more bridges, these data could be used to map 

perennial streams or to delineate areas for more focused 

spring inventories. Nearly the entire lengths of Cobb Creek, 

Sugar Creek, Cedar Creek, Deer Creek, Lake Creek, Willow 

Creek, Fivemile Creek, and Buggy Creek were observed to 

be flowing in the study area in September 2011 and were thus 

considered to be perennial. Many of the smaller tributaries 

to these streams also were flowing in September 2011. The 

Washita River was observed to be flowing in the study area 

in September 2011, but the Canadian River was dry. The year 

2011 was particularly dry (fig. 2), and stream reaches that 

were flowing in September 2011 when there had been little 

rainfall were probably perennial.

The distribution of flowing-stream observations was 

compared with National Hydrography Dataset (NHDPlusV1) 

(Horizon Systems Corporation, 2008) perennial stream 

designations. This comparison was used as an independent 

check of perennial streams for quality assurance. The stream 

observations generally corresponded to the NHDPlusV1 

perennial streams, but there were some notable differences. 

Buggy Creek, Spring Creek, and Stinking Creek, which 

drained the aquifer near the Marlow Formation contact on the 

eastern side of the study area, were not listed as perennial for 

most of their length in NHDPlusV1 but were observed to be 

flowing along most of their length in September 2011. Also, 

the Canadian River is listed as perennial for most of its length 

in NHDPlusV1 but was dry in September 2011. In the western 

part of the study area, a few small streams were listed as 

perennial in NHDPlusV1 but were not flowing in September 

2011.

Wetlands primarily were identified by using a 

combination of data sources including the National Wetlands 

Inventory (NWI) (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013), Soil 

Survey Geographic database (SSURGO) frequently flooded 

soils maps (U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources 

Conservation Service, 2013), and aerial photographs (U.S. 

Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency, 2013) 

(fig. 28). Two wetland classes are common in the study area 

(1,153.73 mi2): (1) freshwater emergent wetlands, which 

comprise 3.34 mi2 (0.29 percent) and (2) freshwater forested/

shrub wetlands, which comprise 13.37 mi2 (1.16 percent) 

(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013). The emergent wetland 

class is characterized by erect, rooted, herbaceous hydrophyte 

plants, which are present for most of the growing season 

in most years. The freshwater forested/shrub wetland class 

includes areas dominated by woody vegetation including 

shrubs and trees taller than 20 ft. According to the SSURGO 

data, the Gracemont soil group of Caddo and Blaine Counties 

is the primary frequently flooded soil in the study area (U.S. 

Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation 

Service, 2013). These soil groups are located along major 

streams, including the Canadian River, Fivemile Creek, Lake 

Creek, Spring Creek tributaries, and Sugar Creek tributaries 

(see fig. 27 for stream locations). During the field survey, a 

few wetland areas were observed that were not documented in 

the NWI or SSURGO. Most of these sites were just upstream 

and downstream from ponds in narrow canyons and draws. 

Site access and detailed vegetation surveys would be needed, 

however, for confirmation and documentation of these possible 

additional wetlands.
Springs Inventory and Location of Wetlands 37

98°48’ 98°42’ 98°36’ 98°30’ 98°24’ 98°18’ 98°12’ 98°06’ 98°

35°48’

35°42’

35°36’

35°30’

35°24’

35°18’

35°12’

35°06’

Albert

Alfalfa

Anadarko

Binger

Bridgeport

Calumet

Carnegie

Colony

Concho

Corn

Cowden

Eakly

El Reno

Fay

Fort

Cobb

Geary

Gracemont

Greenfield

Hinton

Hydro

Mountain View

Mountain View

Okarche

Pocasset

Sickles

Squaretop

Swan

Lake Swan Lake

Thomas

Verden

Washita

Weatherford

Altona

Apache

Wye

Cody

Cogar

Cowden

Junction

Dead Women

Crossing Dead Women

Crossing

Dutton

Karns

Niles

Powers

Scott

Spring

Creek

Spring

Creek

Three-Way

Corner

Three-Way Corner

Lookeba

Nowhere

Cheyenne and

Arapaho Agency

(historical)

Albers Equal-Area Conic Projection

North American Datum 1983

Frequently flooded soils from U.S. Department of Agrictulture

Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2013

Wetland areas from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013

Streams from Horizon Systems Corporation, 2008

EXPLANATION

Frequently flooded soil

Freshwater emergent wetland

Freshwater forested/shrub wetland

0 3 6 9 12 15 MILES

0 3 6 9 12 15 KILOMETERS

33

54

3

37

37

152

152

54

146

58

9

8

40

270

81

270

81

62

62

47

58

54B

54A

58

115

115

281

40

152

KINGFISHER COUNTY

CANADIAN COUNTY

CUSTER

COUNTY

CADDO COUNTY

GRADY

COUNTY

KIOWA

COUNTY

BLAINE COUNTY

WASHITA

COUNTY

Area not studied

Lake or reservoir

Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional 

Area boundary

Lake

Cana dian River

Fivemile Creek

reek C

Spring Creek

Sugar Creek

Figure 28. Locations of wetlands and frequently flooded soils in and around the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area, Oklahoma.
38 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

Potentiometric Surface and Regional 

Groundwater Flow, 2010

Water levels measured from wells completed in the Rush 

Springs aquifer can be used to construct a potentiometricsurface map in the Rush Springs aquifer and to infer 

directions of groundwater flow. A potentiometric surface is 

the level at which water rises in a tightly cased well. Multiple 

potentiometric surfaces can be present in an aquifer. The 

potentiometric surface measured in wells for this report was 

intended to represent the shallowest water table in connection 

with the atmosphere through pore spaces in the rocks that 

make up the Rush Springs aquifer. 

Water levels were measured synoptically in 29 wells 

completed in the Rush Springs aquifer in Caddo County 

and the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area (fig. 29). 

Most of the wells were used for domestic purposes and were 

completed at depths less than 200 ft below land surface. 

Water levels were also measured in a few irrigation wells 

with completion depths of approximately 300–400 ft. Water 

levels were measured monthly starting in July 2010 and 

ending in January 2011. Water levels measured in wells were 

converted to the potentiometric surface by subtracting the 

water level from a land-surface altitude measured to the North 

American Vertical Datum of 1988 using a Global Positioning 

System. The potentiometric altitudes were then assigned to 

the well locations and interpolated by using contours of equal 

altitude. These contours represent the potentiometric surface 

for the date measured. The shallowest groundwater table 

in this aquifer is assumed to be connected to the streams; 

therefore, point altitudes along streams were obtained from 

a USGS 10-meter (3.3-ft) digital elevation model and were 

used to interpolate the potentiometric surface. Groundwater 

flows from areas of high potentiometric altitudes to areas of 

low potentiometric altitudes perpendicular to contour lines. 

Thus, potentiometric contours can be used to infer regional 

groundwater-flow directions in the aquifer.

The potentiometric-surface map for July 2010 indicates 

that groundwater in the northern part of Caddo County flows 

regionally from north to south and discharges to streams that 

flow into Fort Cobb Reservoir (fig. 29). Regional groundwater 

flow in the southern part of Caddo County is mostly towards 

the Washita River, but some flow is to the southeast where 

groundwater discharges to other streams leaving the aquifer 

boundaries. Regional groundwater in the northeastern part of 

Caddo County flows toward the south, where groundwater 

discharges to tributaries of Sugar Creek. Similar regional flow 

patterns are seen in the January 2011 potentiometric-surface 

map (fig. 30), but potentiometric altitudes are lower than those 

in the July 2010 map (fig. 29). 
Springs Inventory and Location of Wetlands 39

1,350

1,400

1,450

1,500

1,300

1,550

1,250

1,200

1,150

1,450

1,350

1,600

1,300

1,400

1,250

1,300

1,500

1,350

1,200

1,400

1,400

1,450

1,350

1,400

1,500

1,500

1,350

1,400

1,450

1,250

1,430.1

1,438.1

1,520.5

1,531.1

1,512.22

1,331.85

1,351.73 1,407.04

1,414.02

1,300.05

1,470.01

1,450.24

1,533.35

1,566.13

1,260.77 1,373.54

1,519.18

1,491.77

1,395.42

1,298.47

1,354.21

1,394.97

1,304.97

1,296.03

1,350.56

1,580.73

1,408.99

Line

Fisher

Creek

Creek

Boggy

Sugar Creek

Fort Cobb

 Reservoir

Lake 

Chickasha

Bear Creek

Gyp

Creek

Coffee Creek

Cavalry

Creek

Cobb Creek

Washita River

Fourmile Creek

Canadian River

Salt Creek

Ionine Creek

Creek

Tony Creek

Mission Creek

Ketch Creek

Stinking

Creek

Oak CreekOak Creek

98°40’ 98°20’ 98°

35°20’

35°

OKLAHOMA

Map area

Caddo Nation Tribal

Jurisdictional Area Rush Springs aquifer

0 5 10 15 20 MILES Geology from Heran and others (2003)

0 5 10 15 20 KILOMETERS

EXPLANATION

CANADIAN COUNTY

CUSTER COUNTY

CADDO COUNTY

BLAINE COUNTY

WASHITA COUNTY

KIOWA COUNTY

GRADY COUNTY

COMANCHE COUNTY

Albers Equal-Area Conic projection

North American Datum of 1983

Rush Springs aquifer surface exposure

Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area boundary

Potentiometric contour—Shows altitude at which water level would 

have stood in tightly cased wells, July 2010. Contour interval 50 feet. 

Dashed where approximately located. Datum is North American 

Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88)

Groundwater-flow direction

Well and July 2010 water-level altitude, in feet above NAVD 88 1,304.97

1,150

Figure 29. The potentiometric surface of the Rush Springs aquifer in Caddo County, Oklahoma, July 2010.
40 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

Line

Fisher

Creek

Creek

Boggy

Sugar Creek

Fort Cobb

 Reservoir

Lake 

Chickasha

Bear Creek

Gyp

Creek

Coffee Creek

Cavalry

Creek

Cobb Creek

Oak CreekOak Creek

Washita River

Fourmile Creek

Canadian River

Salt Creek

Ionine Creek

Creek

Tony Creek

Mission Creek

Ketch Creek

Stinking

Creek

98°40’ 98°20’ 98°

35°20’

35°

1,350

1,300

1,400

1,450

1,500

1,550

1,250

1,200

1,250

1,300

1,200

1,350

1,350

1,450

1,300

1,300

1,500

1,400

1,350

1,500 1,500

1,450

1,500

1,400

1,518.8

1,331.81

1,421.88

1,395.43

1,418.64

1,351.69

1,405.85

1,414.04

1,298.86

1,470.11

1,450.01

1,533.38

1,566.33

1,260.86 1,372.94

1,491.37

1,395.32

1,297.61

1,352.55

1,394.56

1,436.27

1,304.16

1,285.33

1,347.91

1,582.34

1,408.75

1,519.89

1,330.79

OKLAHOMA

Map area

Caddo Nation Tribal

Jurisdictional Area Rush Springs aquifer

Albers Equal-Area Conic projection

North American Datum of 1983

0 5 10 15 20 MILES Geology from Heran and others (2003)

0 5 10 15 20 KILOMETERS

CANADIAN COUNTY

CUSTER COUNTY

CADDO COUNTY

BLAINE COUNTY

WASHITA COUNTY

KIOWA COUNTY

GRADY COUNTY

COMANCHE COUNTY

Rush Springs aquifer surface exposure

Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area boundary

Potentiometric contour—Shows altitude at which water level would 

have stood in tightly cased wells, January 2011. Contour interval 50 feet. 

Dashed where approximately located. Datum is North American Vertical 

Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88)

Groundwater-flow direction

Well and January 2011 water-level altitude, in feet above NAVD 88

EXPLANATION

1,418.64

1,300

Figure 30. The potentiometric surface of the Rush Springs aquifer in Caddo County, Oklahoma, January 2011.
Groundwater-Level Fluctuations, 2010–13 41

Groundwater-Level Fluctuations, 

2010–13

Groundwater-level monitors recorded fluctuations in 

the water table that can be caused by nearby pumping and 

changes from evapotranspiration and increasing or decreasing 

barometric pressure. Multiple wells with groundwater-level 

monitors can be used to determine aquifer-wide effects to 

water-table altitudes from causes such as variations in climate 

and water use.

Groundwater levels were recorded every 30 minutes 

in five wells by use of Level TROLL 500 vented pressure 

transducers and data collection platforms with real-time 

transmitting equipment in each well (fig. 1). These five wells 

were completed in the Rush Springs aquifer and ranged 

in depth from 210–350 ft below land surface (table 6). 

Groundwater-level measurements were transmitted in real 

time to the USGS National Water Information System (NWIS) 

database (U.S. Geological Survey, 2013). Groundwater levels 

measured by the vented pressure transducers were checked 

and corrected with groundwater levels measured with an 

electric tape at least every other month or when errors were 

noticed in the real-time data online.

Groundwater levels in the five wells in the Rush Springs 

aquifer generally decreased during the period October 2010 

to June 2013 (figs. 31–38). The groundwater level in USGS 

well 350748098231101 near Gracemont, Okla., decreased 

approximately 3 ft from October 2010 to June 2013 (fig. 31). 

The groundwater level in USGS well 351308098341601 near 

Alfalfa, Okla., decreased approximately 10 ft from October 

2010 to June 2013 (fig. 32). USGS well 351308098341601 

near Alfalfa, Okla., was monitored prior to October 2010, 

and historical water levels indicated that the groundwater 

level in that well decreased approximately 34 ft from August 

1948 to June 2013 (fig. 33). The groundwater level in USGS 

well 351727098290401 Core 2 decreased approximately 

13 ft from October 2010 to June 2013 (fig. 34). USGS well 

351727098290401 Core 2 was monitored prior to October 

2010, and the groundwater level was 77 ft below land surface 

in December 1989 and rose and declined several times to 

86 ft below land surface in June 2013 in that well (fig. 35). 

The groundwater level in USGS well 352423098341701 near 

Eakly, Okla., decreased approximately 7 ft from October 

2010 to June 2013 (fig. 36). USGS well 352423098341701 

near Eakly, Okla., was monitored prior to October 2010, and 

historical water levels show that the groundwater level in that 

well decreased from about 58 ft below land surface to 75 ft 

below land surface from 1965 to 1986 and then rose to 56 ft 

below land surface in October 2010 (fig. 37). The groundwater 

level in USGS well 352802098191601 near Hinton, Okla., 

declined approximately 2 ft from October 2010 to June 2013 

(fig. 38). 

Table 6. Real-time continuous groundwater-level monitoring 

wells in the area underlain by the Rush Springs aquifer, 

southwestern Oklahoma, October 2010–June 2013.

Well 

identifier

Station 

name

Well 

depth

(feet)

350748098231101 08N-11W-32 BBA 1 Gracemont 350

351308098341601 09N-13W-28 DDD 1 Alfalfa GW Well 335

351727098290401 10N-12W-32 DDD 1, Core 2 GW Well 257

352423098341701 11N-13W-21 DDD 1 Eakly GW Well 210

352802098191601 12N-11W-36 CCA 1 Hinton 225
42 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

Depth to water, in feet below land surface

Year

2010 2011 2012 2013

Figure 31. Groundwater levels measured in U.S. Geological Survey well 350748098231101 near Gracemont, Oklahoma, October 2010–

June 2013.
Groundwater-Level Fluctuations, 2010–13 43

58

60

62

64

66

68

70

72

Depth to water, in feet below land surface

Year

2011 2012

No data

2010 2013

Figure 32. Groundwater levels measured in U.S. Geological Survey well 351308098341601 near Alfalfa, Oklahoma, October 2010–June 

2013.
44 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Depth to water, in feet below land surface

Year

No data No data

2015

Figure 33. Groundwater levels measured in U.S. Geological Survey well 351308098341601 near Alfalfa, Oklahoma, August 1948–June 

2013.
Groundwater-Level Fluctuations, 2010–13 45

65

70

75

80

85

90

Depth to water, in feet below land surface

Year

2010 2011 2012 2013

Figure 34. Groundwater levels measured in U.S. Geological Survey well 351727098290401 Core 2, October 2010–June 2013.
46 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

Depth to water, in feet below land surface

Year

19881989199019911992199319941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016

Figure 35. Groundwater levels measured in U.S. Geological Survey well 351727098290401 Core 2, December 1989–June 2013.
Groundwater-Level Fluctuations, 2010–13 47

2010 2013

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

Depth to water, in feet below land surface

Year

2011 2012

Figure 36. Groundwater levels measured in U.S. Geological Survey well 352423098341701 near Eakly, Oklahoma, October 2010–June 

2013.
48 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

No data

No data

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

Depth to water, in feet below land surface

19651970197519801985199019952000200520102015

Year

Figure 37. Groundwater levels measured in U.S. Geological Survey well 352423098341701 near Eakly, Oklahoma, April 1965–June 2013.
Groundwater-Level Fluctuations, 2010–13 49

76

76.5

77

77.5

78

78.5

79

79.5

80

Depth to water, in feet below land surface

Year

2010 2011 2012 2013

Figure 38. Groundwater levels measured in U.S. Geological Survey well 352802098191601 near Hinton, Oklahoma, October 2010–June 

2013.
50 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

During the summer months of 2011 and 2012, declining 

water levels were measured in USGS well 351308098341601 

near Alfalfa, Okla. (fig. 32), USGS well 351727098290401 

Core 2 (fig. 34), and USGS well 352423098341701 near 

Eakly, Okla. (fig. 36), which probably were caused by lack 

of precipitation (fig. 39) and increased withdrawals from 

the aquifer. There were periods of increased precipitation 

from October to December 2011, March to June 2012, and 

August to September 2012 (fig. 39). Water levels in USGS 

well 351308098341601 near Alfalfa, Okla., started to decline 

in May 2011. The timing of water-level recovery of this 

well is difficult to determine because water levels continued 

to decline into the next year (2012), but the rate of decline 

decreased from November 2011 to April 2012. Groundwater 

levels measured in USGS well 351727098290401 Core 2 

(fig. 34) began to decline in May 2011 and began to recover 

in October 2011. Groundwater levels measured in USGS 

well 352423098341701 near Eakly, Okla. (fig. 36), started 

to decline in May 2011 and began to recover in November 

2011. Similar decline and recovery patterns were observed 

in 2012 for groundwater levels measured in USGS well 

352423098341701 near Eakly, Okla. Decreasing groundwater 

levels in these three wells during the summer months, along 

with the steady decline in groundwater levels in USGS well 

350748098231101 near Gracemont, Okla. (fig. 31), and 

USGS well 352802098191601 near Hinton, Okla. (fig. 38), 

indicate that more water was flowing out of the groundwater 

system than into the groundwater system from October 

2010 to June 2013. Groundwater levels measured in these 

five wells indicate that there was a negative change in 

storage in the Rush Springs aquifer from October 2010 to 

June 2013.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

October 2010

November 2010December 2010

January 2011

February 2011

March 2011

April 2011

May 2011

June 2011

July 2011

August 2011

September 2011

October 2011

November 2011December 2011

January 2012

February 2012

March 2012

April 2012

May 2012

June 2012

July 2012

August 2012

September 2012

October 2012

November 2012December 2012

January 2013

February 2013

March 2013

April 2013

May 2013

Precipitation, in inches per month

Fort Cobb

Hinton

October 2010–May 2013 year moving average (Fort Cobb)

October 2010–May 2013 year moving average (Hinton)

Month and year

EXPLANATION

Figure 39. Monthly precipitation for Hinton and Fort Cobb Mesonet Stations (see fig. 1 for locations), Oklahoma, October 2010–May 

2013.
Groundwater-Level Fluctuations, 2010–13 51

A recording barometer was put in the gage house of the 

USGS well 352802098191601 near Hinton, Okla., to monitor 

barometric pressure for comparison to groundwater levels 

measured in that well during February and March 2013, 

when evapotranspiration would be minimal to none (fig. 40). 

Hourly fluctuations in groundwater levels throughout each 

day, as shown in figures 31–38, were primarily caused by 

increasing or decreasing barometric pressure. Groundwater 

levels were monitored by using a vented pressure transducer 

to account for changes in groundwater levels in each well 

with increasing or decreasing barometric pressure. The 

fact that these groundwater levels were measured with 

vented pressure transducers and that the groundwater levels 

responded to changes in barometric pressure indicates that 

the unconfined part of the Rush Springs aquifer has a high 

barometric efficiency (fig. 40). This change in groundwater 

levels because of changes in barometric pressure also was 

described by Tanaka and Davis (1963). Groundwater levels 

in unconfined parts of the Rush Springs aquifer rise quickly 

with a decrease in barometric pressure and fall quickly with 

an increase in barometric pressure. The confined part of the 

Rush Springs aquifer probably would respond differently to 

changes in barometric pressure and would have a relatively 

low barometric efficiency. Response caused by barometric 

pressure needs to be considered when evaluating hourly to 

daily changes in groundwater levels, which also can be caused 

by evapotranspiration, nearby pumping, or local recharge 

(Freeze and Cherry, 1979).

31.4

31.6

31.8

32

32.2

32.4

32.6

78.9 32.8

79

79.1

79.2

79.3

79.4

79.5

79.6

79.7

79.8

Barometric pressure, in feet of water

Water level, in feet below land surface

Date

2/11/20132/12/20132/13/20132/14/20132/15/20132/16/20132/17/20132/18/20132/19/20132/20/20132/21/20132/22/20132/23/20132/24/20132/25/20132/26/20132/27/20132/28/2013

3/1/20133/2/20133/3/20133/4/20133/5/20133/6/20133/7/2013

3/8/20133/9/2013

3/10/2013

Water Level

Barometric pressure

EXPLANATION

Figure 40. Groundwater levels monitored with a vented pressure transducer and barometric pressure at U.S. Geological Survey well 

352702098191601 near Hinton, Oklahoma, showing barometric efficiency typical of the unconfined part of the Rush Springs aquifer.
52 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

Summary

Streamflows, springs, and wetlands are important natural 

and cultural resources to the Caddo Nation. Consequently, the 

Caddo Nation is concerned about the vulnerability of the Rush 

Springs aquifer to overdrafting and whether the aquifer will 

continue to be a viable source of water to tribal members and 

other local residents in the future. The U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS), in cooperation with the Caddo Nation, the Bureau 

of Indian Affairs, and the Bureau of Reclamation, initiated a 

multiyear study to provide information and tools to assist with 

management and protection of water resources in the Caddo 

Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area and to help develop a Caddo 

Nation comprehensive water plan. 

This report provides information on the evaluation of 

groundwater and surface-water resources in the Caddo Nation 

Tribal Jurisdictional Area, and in particular, information that 

describes the hydraulic connection between the Rush Springs 

aquifer and springs and streams overlying the aquifer. This 

report also includes data and analyses of base flow, evidence 

for groundwater and surface-water interactions, locations of 

springs and wetland areas, groundwater flows interpreted from 

potentiometric-surface maps, and hydrographs of water levels 

monitored in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area.

Flow in streams overlying the Rush Springs aquifer, 

on average, were composed of 50 percent base flow for 

most years. Monthly mean base flow appeared to maintain 

streamflows throughout each year, but periods of zero flow 

were documented in the daily hydrographs for most sites, 

typically in the summer months, indicating that these streams 

were not always perennial and were affected by longer periods 

of no precipitation. Other potential causes in the decline of 

streamflow during the summer are water use and evaporation 

from streams and withdrawals from the Rush Springs aquifer 

or from the overlying alluvial aquifer.

A pneumatic slug-test technique was used at 15 sites to 

determine the horizontal hydraulic conductivity of streambed 

sediments in streams overlying the Rush Springs aquifer. 

Converting horizontal hydraulic conductivities (Kh) from the 

slug-test analyses to vertical hydraulic conductivities (Kv) by 

using a ratio of Kv/Kh = 0.1 indicates that vertical hydraulic 

conductivity in the streambed sediments overlying the Rush 

Springs aquifer ranged from 0.1 to 8.6 feet per day (ft/d).

A hydraulic potentiomanometer was used in the 

streambed sediments and the stream at the same 15 sites 

at which slug tests were done to determine the direction of 

water flow and the magnitude of hydraulic gradients between 

surface water and groundwater. At 6 of the 15 sites, direction 

of water flow was from the streambed sediments to the stream 

(gaining), and the magnitude of the hydraulic-head gradient 

ranged from 0.003 to 0.323. At the nine sites with direction 

of water flow from the stream to the streambed sediments 

(losing), hydraulic-head gradients ranged from 0.004 to 0.076.

The flux of water across the stream/alluvium interface 

was measured directly at five locations by using seepage 

meters. The change in water volume in a collector bag was 

divided by the area of the storage drum to normalize and 

determine a flux velocity. This flux velocity represented the 

measured flow rate across the stream/alluvium interface. 

Volumetric flow rates and flux velocities varied with location 

and time. At the Cobb Creek at Highway 152 (Oklahoma State 

Highway 152) and Willow Creek at 1230 Road sites, negative 

flux velocities were measured, indicating flow of water from 

the stream to the alluvium (losing) ranging from 0.003 to 

0.140 ft/d. At the Cobb Creek at 1150 Road near Colony 

and Lake Creek at 1160 Road sites, positive flux velocities 

were measured, indicating water flow from the alluvium to 

the stream (gaining) ranging from 0.005 to 0.039 ft/d. At 

the Fivemile Creek at 1170 Road site, positive and negative 

flux velocities were measured in the streambed. The vertical 

hydraulic conductivity (Kv) using Darcy’s law ranged from 

0.1 to 13 ft/d for all sites. The vertical hydraulic conductivities 

determined using Darcy’s law were similar to the streambed 

hydraulic conductivities estimated from the slug tests, using a 

ratio of Kv/Kh = 0.1, that ranged from 0.1 ft/d to 8.6 ft/d.

The groundwater and surface-water interaction data 

collected at streamflow-gaging station 07325800 (Cobb Creek 

near Eakly, Okla.) showed that the bedrock groundwater, 

alluvial groundwater, and surface-water resources were 

in hydraulic connection in the study area. Because of this 

hydrologic connection, large perennial streams in the 

study area may change from gaining to losing streams in 

the summer. The timing and extent of this change may 

be influenced by regional withdrawal of groundwater for 

irrigation in the summer growing season. Irrigation wells 

placed closer to streams were likely to cause a greater and 

more immediate effect on alluvial groundwater levels and 

stream stages than wells placed farther from streams. Largecapacity irrigation wells, even those completed hundreds of 

feet below land surface in the bedrock aquifer, can induce 

surface-water flow from nearby streams by lowering alluvial 

groundwater levels below the stream altitude. 

Documentation of springs and wetlands is important 

because these areas mark the intersection of groundwater with 

surface water and are therefore good indicators of change 

in the hydrologic system. When groundwater levels fall as a 

result of less than normal precipitation, such as during 2011, 

springs may stop discharging water, and wetland areas may 

dry up. Spring and wetland inventories were conducted in a 

2011–12 field survey of the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional 

Area, and precipitation had been below normal in 2011. 

Twenty-five springs visible from public roads and paths were 

documented during that survey. Two of these springs were 

in Red Rock Canyon State Park. Most of the springs were 

in upland draws on the flanks of a topographic ridge that 

trends southeast from Weatherford to Anadarko. This ridge 

is believed to coincide with a groundwater divide separating 

groundwater flow between the Sugar Creek and Cobb Creek 

surface-water drainage systems. All of the 25 springs were 

flowing at the time of the field survey, but none of the springs 

were discharging enough water to obtain accurate discharge 

measurements. All documented springs were estimated to 

be discharging less than 1 cubic foot per second. Wetlands 

were identified primarily by using a combination of data 
References 53

sources. Two wetland classes are common in the study area 

(1,153.73 square miles [mi2]): freshwater emergent wetlands, 

which comprise 3.34 mi2 (0.29 percent of the study area), and 

freshwater forested/shrub wetlands, which comprise 13.37 mi2

(1.16 percent of the study area).

Groundwater levels were measured in 29 wells 

completed in the Rush Springs aquifer in Caddo County and 

the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area. Groundwater 

levels were measured monthly starting in July 2010 and 

ending in January 2011. The potentiometric-surface map for 

July 2010 indicates that regional groundwater flow in the 

northern part of Caddo County was from north to south and 

that groundwater discharged to streams that flow into Fort 

Cobb Reservoir. Regional groundwater flow in the southern 

part of Caddo County was mostly toward the Washita River, 

but some groundwater flow was to the southeast, where some 

groundwater discharged to other streams flowing past the 

aquifer boundaries. In the northeastern part of Caddo County, 

groundwater flowed to the south, where it discharged to 

tributaries of Sugar Creek. Similar regional flow patterns were 

measured in January 2011, but potentiometric altitudes were 

lower in January 2011 than in July 2010.

Groundwater levels were measured every 30 minutes in 

five wells by using a vented pressure transducer and a datacollection platform with real-time transmitting equipment 

in each well. These five wells ranged in depth from 210 

to 350 feet below land surface. Groundwater levels in the 

five wells completed in the Rush Springs aquifer generally 

decreased from October 2010 to June 2013. Three wells with 

decreasing groundwater levels during the summer months 

and the steady decline in water levels indicated that more 

water flowed from the groundwater system than flowed into 

the groundwater system from October 2010 to June 2013. 

Groundwater levels in these five wells indicated a negative 

change in storage in the Rush Springs aquifer from October 

2010 to June 2013 because of a lack of precipitation and 

withdrawals from the aquifer.

References

Becker, M.F., and Runkle, D.L., 1998, Hydrogeology, water 

quality, and geochemistry of the Rush Springs aquifer, 

western Oklahoma: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 98–4081, 37 p.

Boggs, Sam, Jr., 2001, Principles of sedimentology and 

stratigraphy (3d ed.): Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 

Prentice Hall, 726 p.

Bouwer, Herman, 1989, The Bouwer and Rice slug test—An 

update: Ground Water, v. 27, no. 3, p. 304–309.

Bouwer, Herman, and Rice, R.C., 1976, A slug test method for 

determining hydraulic conductivity of unconfined aquifers 

with completely or partially penetrating wells: Water 

Resources Research, v. 12, no. 3, p. 423–428.

Butler, J.J., Jr., 2002, A simple correction for slug tests 

in small-diameter wells: Ground Water, v. 40, no. 3, 

p. 303–307.

Darcy, Henry, 1856, Les fontaines publiques de la ville de 

Dijon: Dalmont, Paris, 647 p., and atlas.

Fellows, C.R., and Brezonik, P.L., 1980, Seepage flow into 

Florida lakes: Water Resources Bulletin, v. 16, no. 4, 

p. 635–641.

Freeman, L.A., Carpenter, M.C., Rosenberry, D.O., Rousseau, 

J.P., Unger, Randy, and McLean, J.S., 2004, Use of 

submersible pressure transducers in water-resources 

investigations: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of 

Water-Resources Investigations, book 8, chap. A3, 65 p.

Freeze, R.A., and Cherry, J.A., 1979, Groundwater: 

Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 604 p.

Heran, W.D., Green, G.N., and Stoeser, D.B., 2003, A digital 

geologic map database for the State of Oklahoma: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 2003–247, 12 digital 

geologic maps.

Hinsby, Klaus, Bjerg, P.L., Andersen, L.J., Skov, Bent, 

and Clausen, E.V., 1992, A mini-slug test method for 

determination of a local hydraulic conductivity of an 

unconfined sandy aquifer: Journal of Hydrology, v. 136, 

p. 87–106.

Horizon Systems Corporation, 2008, National Hydrography 

Dataset Plus Version 1 (NHDPlusV1): Horizon Systems 

Corporation, accessed November 13, 2008, at http://www.

horizon-systems.com/nhdplus/.

Hyder, Zafar, Butler, J.J., Jr., McElwee, C.D., and Liu, 

Wenzhi, 1994, Slug tests in partially penetrating wells: 

Water Resources Research, v. 30, no. 11, p. 2945–2957.

Hydrosolve, Inc., 2011, AQTESOLV for Windows: 

Hydrosolve, Inc., accessed January 2011, at http://www.

aqtesolv.com.

Meinzer, O.E., 1923, Outline of ground-water hydrology, with 

definitions: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 

494, 71 p.

National Agriculture Statistics Service, 2013, County 

estimates: U.S. Department of Agriculture, accessed 

December 4, 2013, at http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_

by_State/Oklahoma/Publications/County_Estimates/index.

asp.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2012, 

Precipitation data from Oklahoma Climate Division 7 

Southwest: National Climatic Data Center, accessed 

June 19, 2012, at http://www7.ncdc.noaa.gov/CDO/

CDODivisionalSelect.jsp. 
54 Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area

Oklahoma Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry, 

2012, Oklahoma Agricultural Statistics 2012, 80 p.

Oklahoma Mesonet, 2013, Oklahoma Climatological Survey, 

Daily data retrieval, accessed June 18, 2013, at http://www.

mesonet.org/index.php/weather/daily_data_retrieval.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 2013, Water well record 

search: accessed November 26, 2013, at http://www.owrb.

ok.gov/wd/search/search.php?type=wl.

Rosenberry, D.O., and LaBaugh, J.W., 2008, Field techniques 

for estimating water fluxes between surface water and 

ground water: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and 

Methods 4–D2, 128 p.

Rus, D.L., McGuire, V.L., Zurbuchen, B.R., and Zlotnik, V.A., 

2001, Vertical profiles of streambed hydraulic conductivity 

determined using slug tests in central and western Nebraska: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 2001–4212, 32 p.

Rutledge, A.T., 1998, Computer programs for describing the 

recession of ground-water discharge and for estimating 

mean ground-water recharge and discharge from streamflow 

records—Update: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 98–4148, 43 p.

Springer, R.K., and Gelhar, L.W., 1991, Characterization of 

large-scale aquifer heterogeneity in glacial outwash by 

analysis of slug tests with oscillatory response, Cape Cod, 

Massachusetts: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations Report 91–4034, p. 36–40.

Tanaka, H.H., and Davis, L.V., 1963, Ground-water resources 

of the Rush Springs Sandstone in the Caddo County area, 

Oklahoma: Oklahoma Geological Survey Circular 61, 

33 p. 

Tortorelli, R.L., 2009, Water use in Oklahoma 1950–2005: 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 

2009–5212, 49 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency, 2013, 

National Agriculture Imagery Program: Aerial Photography 

Field Office, accessed January 30, 2013, at http://www.fsa.

usda.gov/FSA/apfoapp?area=home&subject=prog&topic=

nai.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources 

Conservation Service, 2006, Watershed Boundary Dataset 

(WBD): Natural Resources Conservation Service, accessed 

January 30, 2006, at http://www.ncgc.nrcs.usda.gov/

products/datasets/Watershed/.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources 

Conservation Service, 2013, Digital soil map of U.S.: 

accessed January 30, 2013, at http://datagateway.nrcs.usda.

gov/.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2013, National Wetlands 

Inventory: Ecological Services, accessed January 31, 2013, 

at http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2013, USGS water use data for 

Oklahoma, National Water Information System: U.S. 

Geological Survey, accessed January 31, 2013, at 

http://waterdata.usgs.gov/ok/nwis/wu.

Zlotnik, V.A., 1994, Interpretation of slug and packer tests 

in anisotropic aquifers: Ground Water, v. 32, no. 5, 

p. 761–766.

Zlotnik, V.A., and McGuire, V.L., 1998, Multi-level slug tests 

in highly permeable formations—1. Modification of the 

Springer-Gelhar (SG) model: Journal of Hydrology, v. 204, 

no. 1, p. 271–282.

Publishing support provided by

Lafayette and Rolla Publishing Service Centers
Mashburn and Smith—Evaluation of Groundwater and Surface-Water Interactions in the Caddo Nation Tribal Jurisdictional Area—SIR 2014–5082

ISSN 2328-031X (print)

ISSN 2328-0328 (online)

http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20145082 Printed on recycled paper

I SBN 978- 1- 4113-3791- 6

9 7 8 1 4 11 337 916