Configuration of the Base of the Edwards-Trinity Aquifer

System and Hydrogeology of the Underlying

Pre-Cretaceous Rocks, West-Central Texas 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Water-Resources Investigations Report 91–4071
Blank Page
Configuration of the Base of the Edwards-Trinity Aquifer

System and Hydrogeology of the Underlying

Pre-Cretaceous Rocks, West-Central Texas 

By Rene' A. Barker and Ann F. Ardis 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

WATER-RESOURCES INVESTIGATIONS REPORT 91–4071

 

Austin, Texas

1992
ii

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

MANUEL LUJAN, JR., Secretary

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

Dallas L. Peck, Director

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

by the U.S. Government.

For additional information Copies of this report can be purchased

write to: from:

District Chief U.S. Geological Survey 

U.S. Geological Survey Books and Open-File Reports Section

8011 Cameron Rd. Federal Center, Box 25425

Austin, TX 78753 Denver, CO 80225
 iii

CONTENTS

Page

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

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

Purpose and scope .................................................................................................................................. 2

Location of study area ............................................................................................................................. 2

Previous investigations and methods of present study ............................................................................ 2

Edwards-Trinity aquifer system ................................................................................................................ 5

Geologic history of the pre-Cretaceous rocks .................................................................................................... 5

Paleozoic Era ........................................................................................................................................... 5

Mesozoic Era ........................................................................................................................................... 10

Configuration of the base of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system ....................................................................... 10

Balcones fault zone .................................................................................................................................. 11

Hill Country and southern Edwards Plateau ............................................................................................ 11

Northern Edwards Plateau ...................................................................................................................... 13

Trans-Pecos ............................................................................................................................................. 13

Hydrogeology of the pre-Cretaceous rocks ........................................................................................................ 14

Cambrian through Pennsylvanian rocks .................................................................................................. 15

Permian and Triassic rocks ...................................................................................................................... 16

Hydraulic characteristics .......................................................................................................................... 18

Summary ............................................................................................................................................................ 20

Selected references ........................................................................................................................................... 22
 iv

ILLUSTRATIONS

[Plate is in pocket]

Page

Plate 1. Map showing configuration and age of the rocks that constitute the base

of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system and selected contiguous hydraulically

connected units, west-central Texas.

Figure 1. Map showing study area and geographic subareas of the Edwards-Trinity

aquifer system .................................................................................................................................. 3

2. Map showing paleogeographic and structural features in west-central Texas

and parts of adjacent states and northern Mexico ........................................................................... 6

3. Generalized hydrogeologic section through the study area showing relation between

the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system and the pre-Cretaceous rocks that form

the base of the system ..................................................................................................................... 12

TABLES

Table 1. Generalized correlation chart of the rocks that compose the

Edwards-Trinity aquifer system ......................................................................................................... 7

2. Generalized correlation chart of the pre-Cretaceous rocks that form the base

of the Edwards- Trinity aquifer system .............................................................................................. 8
 v

CONVERSION FACTORS AND VERTICAL DATUM

Multiply By To obtain

darcy 0.835 meter per day

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter

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

foot per mile (ft/mi) 0.1894 meter per kilometer

foot squared per day (ft2/d) 0.0929 meter squared per day

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

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer

millidarcy 0.0000835 meter per day

square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer

Sea level: In this report, "sea level" refers to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929--a

geodetic datum derived from a general adjustment of the first-order level nets of the United States and

Canada, formerly called Sea Level Datum of 1929.
Blank Page
 1

CONFIGURATION OF THE BASE OF THE EDWARDS-TRINITY AQUIFER

SYSTEM AND HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE UNDERLYING

PRE-CRETACEOUS ROCKS, WEST-CENTRAL TEXAS

By Rene' A. Barker and Ann F. Ardis 

ABSTRACT

The Edwards-Trinity aquifer system is underlain by an extensive complex of rocks, ranging from

Late Cambrian through Late Triassic in age, that are typically about 10 to perhaps 1,000 times less

permeable than those composing the aquifer system. The Cretaceous rocks of the aquifer system are

separated from the pre-Cretaceous rocks by an unconformity that spans about 60 million years of erosion

during the Jurassic Period. The upper surface of the pre-Cretaceous rock complex forms the base of the

Edwards-Trinity aquifer system. The configuration of the base reflects the original topography of the

eroded pre-Cretaceous land surface plus the effects of subsequent deformation.

The most permeable pre-Cretaceous rocks are in the eastern half of the study area where they

compose the Hickory aquifer (in Upper Cambrian rocks), Ellenburger-San Saba aquifer (Upper CambrianLower Ordovician), and Marble Falls aquifer (Lower Pennsylvanian). These aquifers are hydraulically

connected to the northeastern fringe of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system, as their up-turned margins

crop out around the flanks of the breached Llano uplift. The Rustler aquifer in rocks of Late Permian age

underlies parts of the Trans-Pecos region, where it yields small amounts of greatly mineralized water for

industrial and agricultural purposes. The Dockum aquifer in rocks of Late Triassic age directly underlies

the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system in western parts of the study area, and locally increases the saturated

thickness of the ground-water-flow system by an average of about 200 feet. Despite these notable

exceptions, the collective effect of the pre-Cretaceous rocks is that of a barrier to ground-water flow,

which limits the exchange of water across the base of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system.
 2

INTRODUCTION

The study of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system by the U.S. Geological Survey is part of a

nationwide Regional Aquifer-Systems Analysis (RASA) program. Since 1978, the RASA program has

investigated more than 20 regional aquifer systems that individually provide significant amounts of ground

water to large parts of the country. The overall objectives of each RASA study are to: (1) Describe the

ground-water-flow system as it existed before development and as it exists today; (2) evaluate the

changes that occurred between the predevelopment period and the present; (3) integrate the results of

previous studies concerning particular aspects of the flow system or local areas within it; and (4) provide

some capability for evaluating the effects of future ground-water development. 

The ground-water-flow system of an area cannot be described without assessing the

hydrogeologic boundaries of that system. An extensive complex of Paleozoic and Triassic rocks underlies

west-central Texas. These pre-Cretaceous rocks are generally, but not everywhere, less permeable than

the overlying Cretaceous rocks that compose the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system. The base of the

Edwards-Trinity aquifer system is herein defined as the upper surface of the pre-Cretaceous rock complex

upon which the rocks of the aquifer system rest.

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to: (1) Summarize the geologic history of the pre-Cretaceous rocks

that underlie and, thus, affect the hydrogeology of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system; (2) delineate the

configuration of the base of the aquifer system (the upper surface of the pre-Cretaceous rocks); and (3)

describe the hydrogeology of the pre-Cretaceous rocks, particularly with respect to their effect on the

aquifer system.

The scope of this report is limited primarily to interpretation of information resulting from previous

studies of pre-Cretaceous rocks in the study area. Previously completed fieldwork and publications

served as the basis for the contents of this report. Hydrogeologic terminology used herein was

determined from several sources such as the Bureau of Economic Geology of the University of Texas at

Austin, the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, and the Texas Water Development Board;

thus, some of the terminology may not conform to usage of the U.S. Geological Survey.

Location of Study Area

The study area of the Edwards-Trinity RASA extends approximately from Atascosa County on the

southeast to Culberson County on the northwest and from the Rio Grande on the southwest to the

Colorado River on the northeast (fig. 1). The Edwards-Trinity aquifer system of west-central Texas spans

about 42,000 mi2 in an area that includes four geographic subareas: The Balcones fault zone; the Hill

Country; the Edwards Plateau; and the Trans-Pecos. 

Previous Investigations and Methods of Present Study

The hydrogeologic data in this report originated primarily from the results of previous

investigations. The data used to contour the configuration of the base of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer

system were obtained from the sources listed on plate 1. The geologic ages of the rocks that constitute

the base were determined from stratigraphic sections and geologic maps in reports listed under "Selected

References."
 3

Figure 1. Study area and geographic subareas of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system. 

TEXAS

LOCATION MAP

Study

 area

0 20 40 60 80 MILES

ANDREWS MARTIN HOWARD

LOVING WINKLER ECTOR

REEVES

WARD

CULBERSON

STERLING

IRION

UPTON REAGAN

MIDLAND GLASSCOCK

PECOS

CRANE

JEFF DAVIS

BREWSTER

TERRELL

CROCKETT

NEW MEXICO

TEXAS

UNITED

MEXICO

STATES

MITCHELL

TOM

E

K

VAL VERDE

SCHLEI

SUTTON

GRANDE

RIO

PECOS

RIVER

104o

103o

102o 101o

32o

31o

30o

29o
 4

COKE

MASON

M GREEN CONCHO

MCCULLOCH

SAN SABA

LLANO BURNET

GILLESPIE TRAVIS

KERR

BANDERA

KENDALL

HAYS

BEXAR

GUADALUPE

COMAL

ATASCOSA

MEDINA

EDWARDS

REAL

KINNEY UVALDE

ICHER MENARD

KIMBLE

COLORADO

RIVER

100o

99o

98o

Balcones fault zone

Hill Country

Edwards Plateau

Trans-Pecos

GEOGRAPHIC SUBAREAS

Contiguous hydraulically

 connected units

STUDY AREA

Boundary of the Edwards-

 Trinity aquifer system

SAN ANTONIO

AUSTIN
 5

Although none of the previous studies dealt with the entire RASA study area (fig. 1), the results of previous work were 

integrated into a master data base that spans nearly the entire area of RASA interest. Where the results of previous 

work overlapped, the contributing data were checked for consistency and were revised if necessary. Where differences 

among the data were small, the inconsistencies were usually remedied by numerically averaging the available data. In 

the few cases where discrepancies were large (for example, as a result of differing stratigraphic picks, well locations, or 

datum altitudes), the inappropriate data were identified and discarded."

Edwards-Trinity Aquifer System

The Edwards-Trinity aquifer system (table 1) is in Cretaceous rocks that underlie about 42,000 mi2

of west-central Texas. Gently dipping strata of the aquifer system thin northwestward atop massive preCretaceous rocks (table 2) that form the base of the system. Lower Trinity rocks of the aquifer system

grade upward--from predominately terrigenous clastic sediments in the east and fluvial-deltaic (terrestrial)

deposits in the west--into supratidal and lagoonal evaporites, dolomitic intertidal deposits, and shallow

marine and reefal carbonates of upper Trinity, Fredericksburg, and Washita strata. Although the gulfwardthickening wedge of Edwards-Trinity strata is not fully saturated nor consistently permeable in all

directions, the rocks are enough alike hydrologically to collectively define a regional aquifer system. The

permeability of the aquifer system results mostly from tectonic fractures and secondary porosity caused by

the selective leaching of evaporites and soluble carbonate constituents. Although transmissivity values

average less than 10,000 ft2/d over 90 percent of the study area, they exceed 100,000 ft2/d over most of

the Edwards aquifer in the Balcones fault zone. The Hammett Shale, which blankets the Hill Country and

easternmost parts of the Edwards Plateau, comprises one of two confining units. Where not exposed in

the outcrop or covered with alluvium, the rocks of the aquifer system are overlain directly by either the Del

Rio Clay or the Buda Limestone, both of which are relatively impermeable and form the lower part of the

Navarro-Del Rio confining unit in the Balcones fault zone.

GEOLOGIC HISTORY OF THE PRE-CRETACEOUS ROCKS

The Edwards-Trinity aquifer system is underlain by a complex of Paleozoic (Upper Cambrian

through Permian) and Mesozoic (Upper Triassic) rocks. The upper surface of this complex is the base of

the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system, and aquifers in these pre-Cretaceous rocks interact hydraulically with

parts of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system. The depositional and tectonic origins of the pre-Cretaceous

rocks are summarized below.

Paleozoic Era

The geologic history of west-central Texas during the Paleozoic Era was dominated by: (1) The

Ouachita geosyncline (Flawn and others, 1961), which bordered a southern segment of the ancestral

North American continent; (2) land masses to the south and east of the geosyncline; and (3) shallow inland

seas across the stable continental foreland, north and west of the geosyncline. The location of the

Ouachita geosyncline (Nicholas and Rozendal, 1975, fig. 5) was generally coincident with that of the

Ouachita structural belt (fig. 2). From what is now southeastern Oklahoma, the Ouachita geosyncline

trended southwesterly toward the Llano uplift where it curved westward, against the southern edge of the

Devils River uplift, into the Marathon-Solitario uplift region of southwest Texas and northern Mexico. The

Llano and Devils River uplifts were resistant promontories of crystalline Precambrian rock on the southern

perimeter of the ancestral North American Craton (Flawn, 1956, p. 25).

Although clastic sedimentation prevailed during the entire history of the geosyncline, deposition in

the foreland area was mainly organic or chemical and only partly clastic until Late Permian time (Sellards

and Baker, 1935, p. 18). Intermittent tectonic pulses throughout the Paleozoic maintained prominent land

areas near the southern and eastern margins of the geosyncline that supplied the subsiding trough with
 6

Figure 2. Paleogeographic and structural features in west-central Texas and parts of adjacent states and northern 

Mexico.

Ouachita structural belt

Boundary of the Edwards-

 Trinity aquifer system

EXPLANATION

0 50 100 MILES

96o

98o 100o 102o

104o

36o

34o

32o

30o

28o

MIDLAND BASIN

DELAWARE BASIN

CENTRAL

BASIN

PLATFORM

DELAWARE

MTS

APA

MTS.

CHE

DAVIS

MTS

GLASS

MTS

BARILLA

MTS

P E R M I A N 

 B A S I N MARFA

BASIN

SOLITARIO

UPLIFT

VAL VERDE BASI

M

N

ARATHON

UPLIFT MARATHON SALIENT

RIO

GRANDE

EMBAYMENT

DEVILS RIVER

UPLIFT

KERR BASI

M

N

EDINA AXIS

LLANO

UPLIFT

BALCONES

FAULT

ZONE

COASTAL

PLAIN

GULF

A N C E S T R A L G U L F O F

M E X I C O B A S I N

PRESENT–DAY

GULF OF MEXICO

NEW MEXICO

OKLAHOMA

MEXICO
7

Table 1.—Generalized correlation chart of the rocks that compose the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system

[Hydrogeologic terminology modified from Imlay, 1945; Lozo and Stricklin, 1956; Forgotson, 1957; Brand and Defo

Stricklin and others, 1971; Rose, 1972; Loucks, 1977; and Smith and Brown, 1983]

EDWARDS AQUIFERTRINITY AQUIFEREDWARDS-TRINITY AQUIFER

NAVARRO-DEL RIO CONFIHAMMETT CONFINING UNROCKS ABSENT

STRATIGRAPHIC UNIT

ERATHEM SYSTEM PROVINCIAL STAGE Trans-Pecos Edwards Plateau Northwestern Southeastern Hill Country 

Anacacho LimestoneAustin GroupEagle Ford GroupBuda LimestoneDel Rio Clay

Buda LimestoneDel Rio Clay

Boquillas FormationBuda LimestoneDel Rio Clay

Gulfian

Washitan

FredericksTrinitian burgian

Fort LancasterFormationFort TerrettFormationBasalCretaceoussand

BorachoFormationFinlayFormation

Glen RoseFormation

BasalCretaceoussand

BasalCretaceoussand

SegoviaFormationFort TerrettFormation

Glen RoseLimestoneHensel SandCow CreekLimestoneHammett Shale

SycamoreSand

SligoFormation

Hosston Formation

Glen RoseLimestone

Hensel

Cow CreekLimestone

HammettSandShale

E

d

w

a

r

d

s

G

r

oup

UPPER

L

O

W

E

R

RETACEOU

M

ES

O

Z

O

I

C

CS
 8

SYSTEM SERIES OR

GROUP

STRATIGRAPHIC

UNIT

ERA- HYDROGEOLOGIC UNIT

THEMMESOZOIC PALEOZOIC

Dockum

Group

Triassic

Upper

Middle

Lower

Confining unit

Dockum aquifer

Confining units

Rustler aquifer

Dewey Lake Red Beds

Rustler Formation

Salado Formation

Castile Formation

Marble Falls Limestone

Guadalupian

Leonardian

Wolfcampian

Cisco Group

Canyon Group

Strawn Group

Bend Group

Ochoan

Permian

Pennsylvanian

Mississippian

Devonian

Silurian

Ordovician

Cambrian

Undivided

Undivided

Undivided

Undivided

Undivided

Undivided

Undivided Mostly confining units

Mostly confining units

Marble Falls aquifer

Ellenburger

Group

San Saba Limestone

Member

Mostly confining units

Hickory aquifer

Ellenburger - San Saba aquifer

Upper

Undivided

Undivided

Wilberns

Formation Riley Formation

Hickory Sandstone

Member

Precambrian rocks, undifferentiated

(Hydrogeologic terminology based on usage of the Texas Water

Development Board and the Bureau of Economic Geology,

University of Texas at Austin)

Table 2. Generalized correlation chart of the pre-Cretaceous rocks

 that form the base of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system
 9

sediment. According to Flawn and others (1961, p. 30), most of the middle and upper Paleozoic detritus

resulted from the erosion of previously deposited sediment of the geosyncline, which was uplifted by

preliminary bursts of orogenic activity prior to the climactic late Paleozoic orogeny.

The broad foreland area, north and west of the geosyncline, fluctuated between emergent periods

of erosion and submergent periods of deposition during the early and middle Paleozoic. Following about

400 million years of erosion during the late Precambrian and Early Cambrian (Flawn, 1956, p. 68-71), the

Hickory Sandstone Member of the Riley Formation was deposited in the Llano area upon an unevenly

eroded surface of Precambrian igneous, meta-igneous, and metasedimentary rocks (Barnes and others,

1972). This was followed by the deposition of more than 2,500 ft of mostly marine sediments, including

the San Saba Limestone Member of the Wilberns Formation (Upper Cambrian) and the cherty, dolomitic

Ellenburger Group of Ordovician age. After about 1,000 ft of Silurian and Devonian marine strata were

deposited in west Texas (Wilson and Majewske, 1960, p. 65-86), the central Texas area was inundated at

least twice by Mississippian seas; however, relatively little sediment accumulated. Following uplift and

erosion of the Mississippian strata in the Llano area, the Marble Falls Limestone of Early Pennsylvanian

age was deposited. The pace of both deposition and tectonic activity increased substantially during the

Pennsylvanian Period.

During the Ouachita orogeny, which climaxed between Late Pennsylvanian and Early Permian

time, geosynclinal deposits several thousands of feet thick were overwhelmed by uplift and intense

deformation as part of a tectonic upheaval that progressed westward from northeast Texas to the TransPecos (Flawn and others, 1961, p. 186-188). The geosynclinal facies were folded, sheared, and thrust

faulted into a late Paleozoic mountain range that extended from eastern Mississippi, through the Ouachita

Mountains of Arkansas and Oklahoma, to the Marathon-Solitario region of Texas. The interior sediments

of the geosyncline underwent various degrees of metamorphism--producing slate, phyllite, and

metaquartzite--as blocks of early Paleozoic rocks were thrust northward across younger strata. The Llano

and Devils River uplifts became resistant buttresses against which the Ouachita facies were thrust from

the south, shearing and folding intervening rocks of the foreland. A very complex foreland structure

resulted (Webster, 1980; Calhoun and Webster, 1983), creating petroleum traps that help provide one of

the most productive oil and gas provinces in the world. 

During the waning stages of the Ouachita orogeny, three distinct but interconnected basins

developed within a broad shallow seaway in west Texas (King, 1942). These basins, individually called

the Marfa, Delaware, and Midland basins, are collectively known as the Permian Basin (fig. 2). The basins

were fringed by barrier reefs and separated by carbonate platforms. Until sediment filled the basins

toward the end of Permian time, conditions that were unique to the basins, the intervening platforms, and

the fringing reefs produced different kinds of rocks. The basins were the centers of deep-water marine

(mainly clastic) deposition, collecting black shales first and calcareous sandstones later. The reefs

provided environments wherein dolomite and limestone formed, while layers of gypsiferous shale and

bedded gypsum accumulated in lagoons behind the reefs. The warm, shallow-water environment of the

platforms produced dolomitic limestones, while evaporites and onshore red beds formed along the

landward edges of the basins. From a widespread beginning, the seas of the west-Texas Permian Basin

withdrew and expanded cyclically over time, becoming progressively more restricted. 

The depositional regime of west Texas experienced a profound change during the Late Permian

(King, 1942, p. 758-763). Under conditions of extreme aridity, the seaways shrank and the basins became

saltier; red beds, evaporites, and dolomitic limestones encroached upon the basins. In response to

regional upwarping, the sea level eventually fell below the basin rims, exposing the fringing reefs and

leaving the interbasin platforms emergent. Under the intense aridity, detrital influx to the basins was

minimal, and each basin became a giant evaporating pan, not unlike the Dead Sea of the present day.

The predominate sediments were gypsum, anhydrite, halite, and potash of the Castile and Salado

Formations--which, in the Delaware basin, are more than 4,000 ft thick (Jones, 1953, p. 40). Following

differential uplift and erosion near the end of the Permian Period, fresher water conditions returned and the
 10

thin Rustler Formation of principally reddish sand, anhydrite, and dolomitic limestone was deposited. As

the connection with the open sea continued to improve, the super-saline waters disappeared and finegrained clastic sediments washed in from surrounding high ground and blanketed the underlying

evaporitic strata with the Dewey Lake Red Beds. The Permian sea withdrew southward as the region

once again was uplifted at the close of the Paleozoic Era.

Mesozoic Era

The retreat of the Permian sea was followed by a long interval of nondeposition, local warping, and

erosion during Early and Middle Triassic time. The humidity probably increased relative to that of the Late

Permian, as the climate fluctuated between pluvial intervals and moderate aridity. While uplift continued

in the Llano area, and erosion planed down the central basin platform (fig. 2), a closed continental basin

formed in west Texas. This basin was partly filled during the Late Triassic with easily erodible Paleozoic

sediments that were reworked and deposited as red beds under fluvial, deltaic, and lacustrine conditions

(McGowen and others, 1979). These Triassic red beds--known today as the Dockum Group--exhibit

many facies, ranging from mudstones to conglomerates, but are predominately variegated shales and

quartzose siltstones and sandstones. 

Most of west-central Texas was emergent during the Jurassic (60 million years), during which time

the study area was eroded to a rolling peneplain characterized by broad river valleys and low ridges of

resistant rocks. This peneplained surface, upon which the Cretaceous rocks eventually were deposited,

was named the Wichita paleoplain by Hill (1901, p. 384). The pre-Cretaceous landmass slumped toward

the ancestral Gulf of Mexico basin (fig. 2), causing a reversal in the direction of surface drainage. The

reversal in drainage, which may have begun during the Permian, was completed by the end of the

Jurassic so that the earlier pattern of northwestward drainage toward inland seas was superceded by

southeastward drainage into a westward-advancing Cretaceous sea (Sellards and others, 1933, p. 24).

The ancestral Ouachita Mountains were denuded to the roots by erosion, as the remnants in

central Texas sank beneath the transgressing Cretaceous sea (Flawn and others, 1961, p. 189-190).

Surface remnants of this once-prominent mountain range are visible today in west-central Arkansas,

southeastern Oklahoma, and in the Marathon-Solitario uplift region of southwest Texas (Nicholas and

Rozendal, 1975). The mostly buried foundation of the Ouachita Mountains is marked by the Ouachita

structural belt (fig. 2).

The early Mesozoic collapse of the Ouachita structural belt in central Texas accompanied the

opening of the Gulf of Mexico. The area of greatest subsidence corresponds to the present Gulf Coastal

Plain (fig. 2). Flawn (1964, p. 274) suggested that the ancestral Gulf of Mexico basin developed from a

fundamental weakness or lack of stability in the Ouachita structural belt.

Geologists have recognized for a number of years that the Balcones fault zone is linked to features

of the underlying Ouachita structural belt. R.W. Maclay (U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 1989)

attributes the nearly vertical planes of normal (down-to-the-gulf) faulting within the fault zone to surfaces

created earlier by wrench faulting in the Ouachita structural belt. Sellards and Baker (1935, p. 57-62)

suggested that tectonic adjustments to tensional forces across the Ouachita structure during the late

Mesozoic established the pattern for Balcones faulting (of Cretaceous strata) during the Cenozoic. Flawn

(1956, p. 32) surmised that the southern margin of the ancient North American Craton was the

fundamental control for all Ouachita and Balcones structures.

CONFIGURATION OF THE BASE OF THE EDWARDS-TRINITY AQUIFER SYSTEM

The contour map on plate 1 illustrates the relief on the base of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system.

The configuration of the base results from the erosional topography of the pre-Cretaceous land surface

(Wichita paleoplain), plus the effects of subsequent deformation. The surface upon which the Edwards-
 11

Trinity rocks were deposited was considerably flatter than the present-day base. In addition to trends

inherent from the Wichita paleoplain, the base manifests the superimposed effects of subsidence, uplift,

folding, faulting, and structural collapse caused by the dissolution of underlying carbonate constituents and

evaporite minerals.

Depending on the density of control and the amount of relief on the base, the contours on plate 1

depict intervals of 100, 200, or 500 ft. The contours were drawn to show regional trends; local features IY

be obscured. For example, sharp, local fault displacements on the base are not obvious on plate 1.

Altitudes on the base range from about 5,000 ft below sea level on the Ouachita structural belt in southern

Medina County to more than 4,000 ft above sea level on the northern flank of the Marathon uplift in

southern Pecos and northern Brewster Counties. Regionally, the base is characterized by: (1) A steeply

plunging southeastern margin that conforms to the Balcones fault zone; (2) a moderately inclined band

that wraps around the Hill Country to the southern part of the Edwards Plateau from the southeastern flank

of the Llano uplift; (3) a broad platform with a gentle southward tilt in the northern Edwards Plateau; and

(4) a variable, rugged configuration in the Trans-Pecos.

Balcones Fault Zone

The base of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system in the Balcones fault zone (fig. 1) is the top of

sunken, partly metamorphosed remnants of the ancient Ouachita Mountains. Flawn and others (1961, p.

13) have separated these pre-Cretaceous rocks into the foreland facies and Ouachita facies (fig. 3) of the

Ouachita structural belt (fig. 2). Paleozoic rocks north and west of the structural belt are informally termed

"foreland rocks."

Plate 1 shows that the base of the aquifer system in the Balcones fault zone descends steeply lard

the Gulf of Mexico at slopes averaging about 175 ft/mi. The gulfward plunge of the base results 11 both

subsidence toward the ancestral Gulf of Mexico basin during late Paleozoic and Mesozoic time j down-tothe-gulf fault displacements atop the Ouachita structural belt during late Mesozoic(?) and Cenozoic time.

The base, between altitudes of about 2,500 ft below sea level and about sea level, is overlain by the

Balcones fault system (fig. 2), a zone of en echelon normal faults. In addition to cutting through rocks of

the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system (fig. 3), some of the Balcones faults appear to extend into rocks of the

Ouachita structural belt (Flawn and others, 1961, pl. 2; Maclay and Small, 1986, fig. 2). 

Because the base in the Balcones fault zone is generalized with 500-ft contours, the displacement

caused by individual faults is masked on plate 1. Although the total throw of Balcones faulting (of

Cretaceous strata) was estimated by Weeks (1945, p. 1,734) to be about 1,200 ft near San Antonio and

about 900 ft near Austin, the amount of vertical fault displacement within the pre-Cretaceous rocks is

unknown. Fault displacements within the Cretaceous rocks above the base greatly affect ground-water

conditions in the Edwards aquifer of the Balcones fault zone (Maclay and Small, 1986).

Hill Country and Southern Edwards Plateau

The Edwards-Trinity aquifer system in the Hill Country and southern parts of the Edwards Plateau

is underlain by a moderately steep band of pre-Cretaceous rocks updip of, and roughly conformable to, the

Balcones fault zone. Between sea level and about 1,000 ft above sea level, the southward slope on base

averages about 40 ft/mi--less than 25 percent of that in the fault zone. Flawn and others (1961, p. 19)

suggest that this slope approximates that which existed across the entire eastern part of the Wichita

paleoplain before gulfward downwarping and fault displacement steepened it over the Balcones It zone.

Local aberrations in the configuration of the base also indicate smaller-scale warping and (or) fault

displacements that trend north to south and northwest to southeast. Although features of this smaller size

do not appear to significantly affect the regional hydrology of the overlying aquifer system, they could
12

Figure 3. Generalized hydrogeologic section through the study area showing relation between the Edwards-Trinity aquifer 

taceous rocks that form the base of the system. 

Rocks of Cenozoic age

Rocks of late Cretaceous age

Rocks of early Cretaceous age

Rocks of Triassic age

Rocks of Permian age

Rocks of Cambrian- Pennsylvanian age

Rocks of Precambrian age

Fault

EXPLANATION

Cenozoic Pecos alluvium aquifer

Dockum Group Dockum aquifer

Dewey Lake Red Beds

Rustler, Salado, and Castile Formations Guadalupian, Leonardian, and Wolfcampian

 Series, undivided

Edwards-Trinity aquifer system

Cisco, Canyon, Strawn, and Bend Groups, undivided Marble Falls aquifer Ellenburger - San Saba aquifer Hickory aquifer

NOT TO SCALE

Igneous, meta-igneous, and metasedimentary rocks

Rocks of t

EDWARDS PLATEAU

LLANO 

UPLIFT 

HILL

NORTHWEST 
 13

indicate local increases or decreases in transmissivity resulting from the thickening, thinning, displacement

of water-yielding zones in the Cretaceous rocks that compose the system. The steepening slope on the

base across Val Verde County may be partly a result of downwarping on the northeastern flank of the Rio

Grande embayment (Murray, 1961, p. 128-131). This downwarping would 'e occurred prior to or during

deposition of the Lower Cretaceous Glen Rose Limestone (table 1), which nearly quadruples in thickness

between northern and southern Val Verde County (Reeves and Small, 1973, p. 10).

Northern Edwards Plateau

In northern parts of the Edwards Plateau, between altitudes of about 1,000 and 3,000 It, the

regional sIope on the base of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system averages about 10ft/mi. The contour

map of the base (pl. 1) indicates numerous positive and negative features in this area; some are too small

in vertical or areal extent to be accurately defined with the 100-ft contour interval used for this area of the

map. Most of the features are erosional scars carved into the pre-Cretaceous surface by wind and water.

The areas of highest relief stood as islands in the Early Cretaceous sea; the lowest areas were the first to

receive Cretaceous sediments, and they now contain the thickest accumulations. Some of the local relief

in eastern parts of the area may have formed (or was accentuated) during the Miocene, when deformation

along the Balcones fault zone probably re-elevated the Llano uplift (Barnes and others, 1972, p. 44). The

regional southeastward slope of the Edwards Plateau is probably caused by a broad, gentle uplift and

eastward tilting of the western landscape that occurred sometime (perhaps, off and on) during the

Cenozoic Era (Sellards and Baker, 1935, p. 155).

Cartwright (1932, p. 694-699) noted some of the more prominent features of the base in his map of

the pre-Cretaceous surface of the northeastern part of the Edwards Plateau; Rose (1972, figs. 4 and 5)

have names to a few of the structures that he associated with relief in beds of the overlying Edwards

Group (Fredericksburg-lower Washita rocks). The elongate high near the intersection of Kimble, Menard,

Schleicher, and Sutton Counties--named the Roosevelt high by Rose--was attributed by Cartwright to the

resistant nature of the underlying massive limestone of Lower Permian age. The dome-shaped feature on

the base in north-central Gillespie County results from a Precambrian high at the head of the Medina axis

(fig. 2)--a positive feature described by Rose (1972) as bearing southwesterly across central Kerr and

northwestern Bandera Counties. The wide, southward plunging depression between the Roosevelt high

and the Medina axis was designated by Rose (1972) as the Junction trough. Plate 1 indicates that, on the

base, there is about 800 ft of relief between the Junction trough and the Roosevelt high, and about 500 ft

of relief between this trough and the dome in north-central Gillespie County. Structure-contour maps

drawn by Rose (1972, figs. 4 and 5) for the base of the Edwards Group, and for an horizon near the middle

of the Edwards, show about 100 ft of relief between both the Junction trough and the Roosevelt high and

the Junction trough and the dome in Gillespie County. These maps show that horizons within the rocks of

the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system undulate less abruptly than does the base of the system.

Much of the local relief in the bedding of the Edwards-Trinity rocks results from differential

compaction of the Cretaceous sediments as they adjusted to the topography of the pre-Cretaceous terrain.

Collapse structures, resulting from the post-depositional or penecontemporaneous removal of evaporitic

sediments, also are important factors, but only in small areas (Rose, 1972, p. 55-56). According to

Cartwright (1932, p. 700), the plastic lime mud and marly clay of the Edwards-Trinity sediments adjusted

"...in direction, though not in degree, to the slope of the surface on which they were deposited." As

Cretaceous sediments accumulated upon the pre-Cretaceous surface of local erosional relief, the muds

and clays compacted and the overlying beds settled. The areas of thickest deposition--corresponding to

the areas of lowest elevation on the pre-Cretaceous surface--settled the most, thereby translating a

subdued replica of the basal surface into overlying rocks of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system.
 14

Trans-Pecos

The Trans-Pecos is the most mountainous region in Texas. The base of the Edwards-Trinity

aquifer system on the eastern flanks of mountains (in Brewster, Culberson, and Jeff Davis Counties) is

ruggedly configured partly as a result of the active tectonic history of the region. The highest elevations in

the study area are in southern Pecos and northern Brewster Counties on the eastern flank of the

Marathon uplift (fig. 2), where Paleozoic rocks were intensely folded, overthrusted, and uplifted during the

Ouachita orogeny. The Marathon area was beveled by erosion prior to being inundated by Cretaceous

seas. Since the Early Cretaceous, the area was twice uplifted and eroded as a result of major late

Mesozoic and Cenozoic deformations. Northwest of the Marathon uplift, the southwestern margin of the

study area is bounded by the Glass, Davis, Barrilla, Apache, and Delaware Mountains (fig. 2). These

elevated land masses and associated high-angle faults and tight folds--which today separate the

mountains hydraulically from the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system--were formed mostly by Laramide and

Basin and Range deformations during the Cenozoic (Henry and Price, 1985). Concurrently, toward the

north, the base of the aquifer system was warped and faulted. Because of the structural complexity of the

rocks underlying the mountain flanks, and the sparse control available at this time to define it, the

configuration of the base is not mapped on plate 1 to the southwestern boundary of the study area.

From northern Terrell County, the base of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system plunges southward

at about 50 to 60 ft/mi, and the Glen Rose Limestone thickens greatly in this direction. The abrupt

steepening of the base and thickening of the Glen Rose here resemble conditions in Val Verde County;

these conditions undoubtedly relate to the structural history of the area. The southern part of Terrell

County is underlain by the Marathon salient of the Ouachita structural belt (fig. 2), which sank from

prominence following the Late Paleozoic orogeny. According to Murray (1961, p. 129), regional zones of

weakness associated with the structural belt may have helped determine the size, shape, and form of the

Rio Grande embayment. Jager (1942, p. 384) attributed the presence of the Glen Rose Limestone and

the thickening of Cretaceous rocks in Terrell County to "...the steep slope into the Rio Grande

embayment, the old floor of which sank rapidly during Cretaceous time." Jager (1942) also noted the

"valley-like feature" along the Pecos River in northeastern Pecos and northwestern Crockett Counties

(outlined by the 2,000-ft contour on pl. 1), which he noted might be due in large part to "salt solution." 

The removal of soluble halite, gypsum, and anhydrite from the Castile, Salado, and Rustler

Formations of Late Permian age has profoundly altered the base of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system in

parts of the Trans-Pecos. The dissolution may have begun as early as Late Permian or Triassic time and

probably has continued into the Cenozoic Era. The source and course of the freshwater that dissolved

the soluble strata is debatable (Adams, 1944; Maley and Huffington, 1953; and Wessel, 1988); the

conditions probably varied from time to time and from place to place. Nevertheless, large solution cavities

developed in the subsurface as the salts and evaporites were carried away by undersaturated ground

water. As overlying Permian, Triassic, and Cretaceous strata collapsed, an elongate complex of troughs

formed, which stretches from northern Pecos County to southeastern New Mexico (Ashworth, 1990, fig.

5). The troughs were subsequently filled with approximately 1,900 ft of alluvium derived from the trough

margins and mountains to the south.

The Cenozoic alluvium, as it is known in west Texas, extends into large parts of Crane, Loving,

Pecos, Reeves, Ward, and Winkler Counties where the older Edwards-Trinity rocks have been eroded

from the area. The alluvium is predominately an unconsolidated to semi-consolidated mixture of gravel,

sand, silt, clay, and caliche. Where it is relatively permeable and important as a source of ground water,

the unit comprises the Cenozoic Pecos alluvium aquifer (Ashworth, 1990, p. 12). Because the Cenozoic

Pecos alluvium aquifer is contiguous and hydraulically connected to the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system,

the base of the alluvium is included on plate 1 where the Edwards-Trinity rocks are missing.
 15

HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE PRE-CRETACEOUS ROCKS

The pre-Cretaceous rock complex that underlies the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system typically is a

barrier to ground-water flow, thus limiting the exchange of water between the pre-Cretaceous rocks and

the aquifer system. Nevertheless, a few Paleozoic formations and one Triassic unit are permeable over

large enough parts of the study area to be considered "minor" aquifers by the Texas Water Development

Board (1990, p. 1-6). In most places, the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system is more permeable than the

underlying pre-Cretaceous rocks, and the aquifer system generally contains water that is less expensive to

pump and is suitable for more uses without treatment. In some places outside the area underlain by the

Edwards-Trinity aquifer system, or near the thin, unsaturated fringes of the system, the pre-Cretaceous

rocks are the sole or primary source of ground water. Where the rocks of the Edwards-Trinity system are

present and are saturated, however, the pre-Cretaceous strata are generally less important sources of

ground water because they are deeper and typically contain water with larger concentrations of dissolved

minerals.

The ages of the rocks that directly underlie the Edwards- Trinity aquifer system--and selected

contiguous rocks that are hydraulically connected to the system--are indicated on plate 1 and in figure 3.

Hydrogeologic aspects of the pre-Cretaceous rocks are discussed below, starting in the eastern part of the

study area with the oldest rocks and progressing westward toward the youngest.

Cambrian through Pennsylvanian Rocks

The southern and eastern parts of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system are underlain directly by

rocks ranging in age from Cambrian through Pennsylvanian whose hydrogeologic characteristics vary

considerably. Rocks belonging to the Ouachita facies (fig. 3) of the Ouachita structural belt (figs. 2 and 3)

generally are metamorphosed and (or) sheared and locally crystalline (Flawn and others, 1961, p. 121-

124); these Cambrian through Pennsylvanian rocks are virtually impermeable. Although the Cambrian

through Pennsylvanian rocks of the foreland facies generally are deformed structurally, they are only

slightly metamorphosed and thus, may be permeable locally. The extent of deformation and degree of

metamorphism in the foreland rocks generally decrease with distance from the Ouachita structural belt

(Flawn and others, 1961).

The most permeable strata of Cambrian through Pennsylvanian age are within the: (1) Hickory

Sandstone Member of the Riley Formation (Upper Cambrian); (2) San Saba Limestone Member of the

Wilberns Formation (Upper Cambrian); (3) Ellenburger Group (Lower Ordovician); and (4) Marble Falls

Limestone (Lower Pennsylvanian). These rocks are important aquifers in the northeastern part of the

study area where the Edwards- Trinity strata have been removed by erosion and upturned edges of the

aquifers are exposed in broken, arcuate bands around the granitic core of the now-breached Llano uplift

(fig. 3; pl. 1). Locally, the Hickory Sandstone Member and the Marble Falls Limestone each yield more

than 1,000 gal/min to individual wells; the Ellenburger Group and San Saba Limestone Member,

combined, yield as much as 1,000 gal/min to individual wells (Muller and Price, 1979, p. 54).

Because the permeability of the Cambrian and Ordovician rocks generally is restricted to scattered

fracture zones and an irregular distribution of solution cavities, the availability of ground water from these

rocks varies greatly. The Hickory aquifer, consisting principally of sand, fractured sandstone, and zones of

dissolved carbonate cement in the Hickory Sandstone (Pettigrew, 1991), furnishes most of the ground

water for the Llano uplift area of central Texas (Muller and Price, 1987, p. 54). Because the Ellenburger

Group and the San Saba Limestone are adjacent and hydraulically similar, they are generally combined for

hydrologic purposes into the Ellenburger-San Saba aquifer. The strata composing the Hickory and

Ellenburger-San Saba aquifers dip at slopes generally exceeding 100 ft/mi beneath the Edwards-Trinity

Aquifer system in Blanco, Concho, Gillespie, Kimble, and Menard Counties. The Hickory and EllenburgerSan Saba aquifers become less accessible, and their waters more saline, away from the Llano uplift.
 16

Follett (1973, p. 17) found that the rock units between the Hickory and Ellenburger-San Saba

aquifers in northwest Blanco County yield very small to small quantities of freshwater, and reported that

'...individually they are relatively insignificant in regard to the hydrology of the area." Although this

description by Follett (1973) is believed to apply generally throughout the study area, Mason (1961, p. 26)

deduced from water-quality similarities in southern McCulloch County that most Cambrian rocks there

probably are connected hydraulically. Alexander and Patman (1969, p. 26) reported that a similar

situation may exist in Kimble County. Mason (1961) also noted that in many places the hydraulic head is

greater in the Hickory aquifer than in the overlying Cambrian and Ordovician rocks. Because of the noted

head differences and the fact that the few wells in the intervening Cambrian rocks are limited to very small

yields (less than 10 gal/min) for domestic and stock purposes, the rocks between the Hickory and

Ellenburger-San Saba aquifers are considered to be mostly confining units in this report (table 2).

The Silurian, Devonian, and Mississippian rock units are relatively thin in the study area, and they

generally are buried too deep to have been explored for potential sources of ground water. The clastic

Silurian, Devonian, and Mississippian deposits are composed mostly of dark petroliferous and pyritiferous

shales (University of Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology, 1981), and the calcareous rocks are typically

siliceous or cherty as the result of cementation and recrystallization (Barnes and others, 1972, p. 30-37).

Because of their generally fine-grained and (or) dense nature, the Silurian, Devonian, and Mississippian

rocks are assumed herein to comprise mostly confining units (table 2) and to have only negligible

hydrologic effects on the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system.

Except where the Marble Falls Limestone of Early Pennsylvanian age is permeable by virtue of

solution cavities and fractures in and near its outcrop area (pl. 1), the Pennsylvanian rocks are relatively

impermeable. Where the Marble Falls Limestone is permeable, contains freshwater, and is accessible to

water-supply wells, it composes the Marble Falls aquifer (Muller and Price, 1979, p. 54). Pennsylvanian

rocks that are stratigraphically above the Marble Falls aquifer are considered herein (table 2) to compose

mostly confining units.

Because the intervening Middle and Upper Pennsylvanian and Permian rocks are mostly confining

units (table 2) that total hundreds of feet in thickness, there is little potential for hydraulic interaction

between the Cambrian through Pennsylvanian rocks and the Cretaceous rocks of the Edwards-Trinity

aquifer system. However, exceptions to this generalization occur on the flanks of the Llano uplift near the

northeastern fringe of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system (fig. 2).

A potentiometric-surface map of the study area by Kuniansky (1990) shows that the EdwardsTrinity aquifer system is hydraulically continuous with Cambrian through Pennsylvanian rocks in Blanco,

Gillespie, Llano, Mason, McCulloch, and San Saba Counties (fig. 1). The internal, deeply eroded part of

the Llano uplift forms a topographic basin of low relief (fig. 3). The potentiometric data (Kuniansky, 1990)

indicate that ground water discharging laterally from the northeastern fringe of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer

system joins the shallow ground-water-flow regime of the breached Llano uplift. The shallow flow regime

of this area includes the outcrop areas of the Hickory, Ellenburger-San Saba, and Marble Falls aquifers

(pl. 1).

As the result of late Paleozoic to early Mesozoic faulting and erosion, the Hensel Sand of

Cretaceous age (table 1) rests directly on Cambrian and Ordovician rocks in eastern Kimble County and

parts of Gillespie County (Mount, 1963, fig. 3). The Hensel Sand forms the lower part of the EdwardsTrinity aquifer system in these areas. Here, the Paleozoic rocks are hydraulically connected to the Hensel

Sand, which may receive some recharge through upward leakage of ground water from the underlying

Hickory and Ellenburger-San Saba aquifers (Mount and others, 1967, p. 63).

Permian and Triassic Rocks

The central, northern, and western parts of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system are underlain

directly by Permian and Triassic rocks (fig. 3; pl. 1) that in most places are relatively impermeable, but, in
 17

some places, offer potential for secondary sources of ground water. Where permeable Permian or

Triassic rocks directly underlie the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system, small amounts of water may migrate

along circuitous flowpaths between these pre-Cretaceous rocks and the Cretaceous rocks of the aquifer

system. The known sources of ground water from the Permian and Triassic rocks and the exchange of

water across the base of the aquifer system are discussed below.

The majority of Wolfcampian and Leonardian (Lower Permian) and Guadalupian (Upper Permian)

rocks in the study area are strongly indurated, fine-grained marine deposits that (relative to the

permeability of the overlying Cretaceous rocks) compose mostly confining units (table 2). Mount and

others (1967, p. 79) characterized the Lower Permian rocks of the northern Edwards Plateau as "...either

too tight to yield water to wells or else they yield only small amounts of mineralized water." However, the

sandy characteristics of some Leonardian and Guadalupian strata indicate that they "...may contain small

amounts of fresh to slightly-saline water..." to supplement the water supply in parts of Coke, Irion,

Schleicher, and Tom Green Counties (Walker, 1979, p. 46). The potential also exists for Lower Permian

rocks that form the elongate high on the base of the aquifer system near the common corner of Kimble,

Menard, Schleicher, and Sutton Counties (pl. 1) to receive minor amounts of downward leakage from the

Edwards-Trinity aquifer system (Mount and others, 1967, fig. 9).

The Ochoan (Upper Permian) strata of the Permian Basin are composed mostly of terrestrial red

beds that are relatively impermeable. However, the Rustler Formation is a marginal source of highly

mineralized water that is used by industry and agriculture in parts of the Trans-Pecos. The generally large

and highly variable concentrations of calcium, sodium, sulfate, and chloride make the water unsuitable for

drinking and most other domestic uses. Transmissivity and storage-coefficient values in the Rustler are

believed to be low, and well yields generally are much less than 1,000 gal/min (Muller and Price, 1979, p.

57). Nevertheless, the Rustler Formation is permeable enough to provide or augment the water supply for

irrigation, livestock, and secondary oil recovery in most of Reeves County and in western parts of Loving,

Pecos, and Ward Counties. Where the Rustler Formation yields ground water to wells, it is known as the

Rustler aquifer (Ashworth, 1990, p. 6).

The lower, middle, and upper parts of the Upper Triassic Dockum Group in west Texas were

referenced by many authors for many years as the Tecovas, Santa Rosa, and Chinle "formations,"

respectively (Jones, 1953, p. 41). However, the stratigraphic relations among the Santa Rosa Sandstone

and Chinle Formation of the Colorado Plateau and the Triassic rocks of west Texas are uncertain, and

they are currently being debated (Chatterjee, 1987, p. 139-149). Therefore, a general subdivision of the

Dockum Group (lower, middle, and upper) is used herein (table 2).

The Dockum Group (McGowen and others, 1979) is a terrigenous red-bed facies of fluvial, deltaic,

3.nd lacustrine environments that is composed mostly of reddish-brown to gray sandstone, sand,

5il1stone, and shale. Because the lower and upper parts of the Dockum Group contain the largest

percentages of siltstone and shale, they are relatively impermeable. The middle part of the Dockum,

however, is sandy locally. Where the middle Dockum unit is accessible to water-supply wells and

composed principally of sand that is saturated, it comprises the Dockum aquifer (Texas Water

Development Board, 1990). In the west Texas area, and in most of the hydrogeologic literature, the

Dockum aquifer has been known as the Santa Rosa aquifer.

The Dockum aquifer is an important source of irrigation and livestock water and a less important,

source of domestic and municipal water in northwestern parts of the Edwards Plateau, in most of Winkler

and Ward Counties, and in eastern parts of Loving and Reeves Counties (Mount and others, 1967; White,

1968; Ashworth, 1990). Water pumped from the Dockum aquifer varies considerably in quantity and

quality with respect to area; however, well yields rarely exceed a few hundred gallons per minute and the

water typically contains large concentrations of sodium, sulfate, and fluoride. Hydraulic interaction with the

Edwards-Trinity system is limited to areas where the upper Dockum unit is absent. The upper Dockum

unit typically consists of shale and lenticular beds of siltstone that confine ground water in the underlying

Dockum aquifer. Where the upper Dockum unit is absent, sands of the Dockum aquifer are directly
 18

overlain by basal sands of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system (fig. 3). Where the Dockum and EdwardsTrinity aquifers abut, the effective depth of the ground-water-flow system may extend to the lower Dockum

unit, or--where the lower Dockum unit is missing--to the Dewey Lake Red Beds of Ochoan Late Permian)

age.

Areas where the Dockum aquifer is known to merge hydraulically with the Edwards-Trinity aquifer

system are indicated on plate 1. In these areas, the saturated thickness of the regional flow system may

increase by as much as 400 ft (Ogilbee and others, 1962, pls. 5-7; Walker, 1979, fig. 13); however, the

average increase in saturation is probably about 200 ft.

Although the Dockum aquifer is known to directly underlie the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system in

eastern Reeves and western Crockett Counties, the extent and hydraulic characteristics of the middle

Dockum unit are uncertain across central Pecos County. Over most of Pecos County, the Edwards-Trinity

system is underlain directly by Permian and Triassic red beds that have not been differentiated. The

uppermost Permian strata, composed primarily of Dewey Lake Red Beds, are red shales and siltstones

cemented with gypsum and calcite. The Dewey Lake unit resembles the lowermost Triassic strata, the

lower Dockum unit, which is composed also of strongly oxidized terrestrial sediment; the lower Dockum

unit primarily is a reworked remnant of the Dewey Lake Red Beds. Although the thickness of the

undifferentiated red-bed interval in Pecos County ranges from 0 to about 1,500 ft, no part stands out as an

especially noteworthy water-yielding unit. According to Armstrong and McMillion (1961, p. 37), the red

beds of Permian and Triassic age in this area yield "...small amounts of water at various locations." If the

middle Dockum unit exists in Pecos County, it is apparently less permeable than the Dockum aquifer of

adjacent counties. For these reasons, the possibility of hydraulic contact between the Dockum aquifer

(middle Dockum unit) and the Edwards-Trinity aquifer across central Pecos County is uncertain and, thus,

is noted by question marks on plate 1.

The wide extent and typically low permeability of the Permian and Triassic red beds generally

buffer the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system from the deeper, salt-laden sediments of the Permian Basin.

The collective thickness of the Dewey Lake and lower Dockum confining units generally exceeds a few

hundred feet over most of the Trans-Pecos and northwestern Edwards Plateau. However, where these

units are absent in northeastern Pecos County (pl. 1), there is potential for water-quality degradation in

the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system by upward leakage of brackish water from the underlying Salado and

Rustler Formations.

The Permian and Triassic red beds are thin or missing in an area just south of the Pecos River in

northeastern Pecos County (Armstrong and McMillion, 1961, pl. 7). Here, as shown on plate 1, the

Rustler Formation (or the Salado Formation, where the Rustler is missing) directly underlies the EdwardsTrinity aquifer system. The Rustler Formation is composed predominately of anhydrite and dolomite, with

minor amounts of salt and limestone. The Salado Formation is composed principally of halite, with small

amounts of anhydrite, dolomite, and potash minerals (Jones, 1953, p. 40-41). The concentration of

dissolved solids in water from the Rustler Formation commonly ranges between about 2,000 and about

6,000 mg/L (Muller and Price, 1979, p. 57). Although hydrostatic pressures in the Rustler Formation have

declined since development began, many of the first wells completed in this unit flowed at land surface

(Knowles and Lang, 1947, p. 7-8; Armstrong and McMillion, 1961, p. 34-36). When measured in February

1987, water levels in two wells completed in the Rustler aquifer of west-central Pecos County were about

40 ft higher than those in nearby wells finished in the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system (T.A. Small, U.S.

Geological Survey, written commun., 1989). According to Small, the dissolved solids and hydrostatic

pressure of water in the Salado Formation are probably as great or greater than in the Rustler Formation.

The concentration of chemical constituents in water samples from the overlying part of the

Edwards-Trinity aquifer system during 1969-75 averaged 1,750 mg/L for dissolved solids, 625 mg/L for

sulfate, and 320 mg/L for chloride (Rees and Buckner, 1980, fig. 6). These relatively large concentrations

may indicate upward leakage of brackish ground water from the Salado and Rustler Formations.
 19

Hydraulic Characteristics

Transmissivity and storage-coefficient data are sparse for the Paleozoic and Triassic rocks.

Conditions that determine the hydraulic properties of these rocks are extremely variable and the

opportunities to test for these properties have been limited. Aquifer tests on the Hickory aquifer conducted

at 14 sites in Gillespie, Mason, and McCulloch Counties yielded transmissivity values that range from

about 500 to about 4,850 ft2/d and average about 3,250 ft2/d (Mason, 1961; Mount, 1963; Myers, 1969).

Where the Hickory aquifer is confined, storage-coefficient values range from about 1 X 10-5 to about 1 X

10-4. Mount (1963, p. 20) determined that the transmissivity of the Ellenburger Group in one area of

southeastern Gillespie County ranges from about 10,000 to about 13,500 ft2/d. Aquifer-test data are not

available for the total thickness of the Ellenburger-San Saba aquifer, nor for the Marble Falls aquifer in the

study area. A 21-hour aquifer test in Ward County indicated a transmissivity value of about 2,900 ft2/d for

the Rustler aquifer (White, 1971, p. 28). Aquifer-test data are not available for the Dockum aquifer in

Upper Triassic rocks of the study area. However, Mount and others (1967, p. 54) reported that the

transmissivity of the "upper sands of the Santa Rosa aquifer" in Upper Triassic rocks north of the study

area (in Scurry County) ranges from about 200 to about 800 ft2/d and averages about 500 ft2/d; the

associated values of storage coefficient average about 2 X 10-3. An aquifer test in Upton County on the

upper Dockum (confining) unit yielded a transmissivity value of about 50 ft2/d for the "Chinle equivalent,"

as the strata were called at that time (White, 1968, p. 22).

The transmissivity and storage-coefficient values listed above apply to local conditions that were

found to yield ground water to wells. These data probably reflect "better-than-average" conditions near

successful wells, rather than average conditions that might provide "dry holes" or less successful wells.

Although the results of aquifer tests on successful wells in water-scarce areas are usually reported, such is

not the case with disappointing results.

Hydraulic-conductivity data for relatively deep Paleozoic rocks are available from core sampling

and production tests conducted by the petroleum industry and summarized by the Texas Water

Development Board (1972, p. 6-9). For Cambrian through Pennsylvanian rocks of central Texas,

hydraulic-conductivity values range from 0.1 to 600 millidarcies (2.74 X 10-4 to 1.64 ft/d). Hydraulicconductivity values measured in the Wolfcampian (Lower Permian) rocks of west-central Texas range from

1 millidarcy to "more than 1 darcy" (2.74 X 10-3 to more than 2.74 ft/d). For Guadalupian (Upper Permian)

rocks of west Texas, the hydraulic-conductivity values range from 1 to 500 millidarcies (2.74 X 10-3 to 1.37

ft/d). Although these hydraulic-conductivity data typify the capacity of production zones in petroleum

reservoirs, they are extremely small by water-well standards. By comparison, the hydraulic conductivity of

water-yielding Edwards-Trinity strata probably averages about 10 ft/d in the western part of the study area

and about 1,000 ft/d in the Balcones fault zone. Although some of the Paleozoic rocks are permeable

enough for petroleum extraction, few of the Paleozoic units constitute reliable aquifers.

The scarcity of hydraulic data for the pre-Cretaceous rocks precludes mapping the distribution of

transmissivity or hydraulic conductivity; however, a general assessment can be made regarding their

permeability relative to that of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system. The results of computer-model

analyses, aquifer tests, and geologic observation indicate that transmissivity values range from less than

100 to about 50,000 ft2/d and average less than 10,000 ft2/d over the Hill Country, Edwards Plateau, and

Trans-Pecos. Maclay and Land (1988, p. A26) indicated that transmissivity values in the Edwards aquifer

of the Balcones fault zone range from about 10,000 to more than 1,000,000 ft2/d; Maclay and Small [1986,

fig. 20) indicate an average transmissivity value of about 750,000 ft2/d for the San Antonio area. The

saturated thickness of the aquifer system ranges from less than 10ft in western parts of the study 3rea to

more than 1,000 ft in the Balcones fault zone and probably averages about 500 It, overall. Based on the

available hydraulic data and the known depositional, structural, and diagenetic differences between the

pre-Cretaceous and Cretaceous rocks, it can be generalized that the aquifer system is underlain by rocks

that are typically 10 to perhaps 1,000 times less permeable than those of the aquifer system.
 20

Hydraulic-head and hydraulic-conductivity data are not available to quantify the magnitude of

ground-water flow across the base of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system. However, the rates of vertical

ground-water flow between the pre-Cretaceous rocks of the base and the Cretaceous rocks of the aquifer

system are considered very small or negligible, compared to the rates of lateral flow within the system.

Permeability differences between the rocks of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system and the preCretaceous rocks that underlie it result from depositional, structural, and diagenetic differences between

the pre-Cretaceous and Cretaceous rocks. Whereas the bulk of Upper Cambrian through Lower Permian

rocks originated in basinal or geosynclinal environments, most of the Edwards-Trinity strata reflect

characteristics of a shallow carbonate shelf (Rose, 1972, p. 62-71). The pre-Cretaceous rocks are

structurally more complex than those of the overlying aquifer system (Sellards and Baker, 1935). Folds

and faults within the Paleozoic rocks have compartmentalized fluid flow, creating petroleum traps and

restricting ground-water circulation. The major structure affecting the aquifer system is the Balcones fault

zone, and this zone is characterized by porous fractured rock and a honeycombed and cavernous pattern

of secondary permeability (Maclay and Small, 1986). LeGrand and Stringfield (1966) showed that

secondary (post-depositional) permeability values in carbonate rocks increase with the dynamics of

freshwater circulation and attain maximum values within the zone of water-level fluctuation. A relatively

shallow water table has probably persisted since the Edwards-Trinity sediments were subaerially

exposed; this condition, coupled with a surficial influx of carbon dioxide-enriched meteoric water, has

favored a near-surface pattern of permeability development (Abbott, 1975, p. 255-260).

Because compaction, cementation, and recrystallization of calcareous sediments progress with

time, and each of these processes generally reduces or obliterates the primary porosity, the permeability

of carbonate rocks typically decreases with geologic age (Jakucs, 1977, p. 69, fig. 16). The permeability

of some Cretaceous rocks of the Edwards-Trinity system has increased locally over time, as the result of

tectonic fracturing and a dynamic freshwater-flow regime that aided the porosity-enhancing process of

dissolution. In contrast, it seems that the effects of compaction, cementation, and recrystallization

resulting from deep burial and late diagenesis have combined to retard the overall permeability in the

underlying pre-Cretaceous rocks.

SUMMARY

The Edwards- Trinity aquifer system is composed of Cretaceous rocks that are underlain by an

extensive complex of Cambrian through Triassic rocks. The upper surface of the pre-Cretaceous complex

forms the base of the aquifer system. The incongruent contact between the pre-Cretaceous rocks and

those of the aquifer system marks a major unconformity, spanning about 60 million years of erosion

during the Jurassic Period. As the result of relatively advanced stages of compaction, cementation, and

recrystallization resulting from deep burial and late diagenesis, the pre-Cretaceous rocks typically are

about 10 to perhaps 1,000 times less permeable than the Cretaceous rocks of the aquifer system.

The configuration of the base results from the erosional topography of the pre-Cretaceous land

surface, plus the effects of subsequent structural deformation. In addition to relief inherent from the

original (much flatter) surface, the present surface exhibits the effects of subsidence, uplift, folding,

faulting, and structural collapse caused by the dissolution of underlying carbonate rocks. From about

5,000 ft below sea level on the sunken Ouachita structural belt at the southern edge of the Balcones fault

zone, the base rises to more than 4,000 ft above sea level on the northern flank of the Marathon uplift in

the Trans-Pecos. Regionally, the base is characterized by: (1) A steeply plunging southeastern margin

over the Balcones fault zone; (2) a moderately inclined band that wraps around the Hill Country into the

southern Edwards Plateau; (3) a broad platform with a gentle southward slope in the northern Edwards

Plateau; and (4) a variable, rugged configuration in the Trans-Pecos. Slopes on this surface range from

an average of about 10 ft/mi in northern parts of the Edwards Plateau to an average of about 175 ft/mi

across the Balcones fault zone.
 21

Permeable pre-Cretaceous rocks (of Late Cambrian through Early Pennsylvanian age) are

exposed on the flanks of the breached Llano uplift where rocks of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system are

missing. Water discharging laterally from the northeastern fringe of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system

merges with the shallow flow regime of the Llano uplift where the Hickory, Ellenburger-San Saba, and

Marble Falls aquifers crop out. Under ideal conditions, these aquifers locally yield 1,000 gal/min or more

to individual wells.

The Rustler aquifer in Upper Permian rocks is a marginal source of greatly mineralized water,

which is used for industrial and agricultural purposes in parts of the Trans-Pecos. Upward leakage of

brackish ground water from the Rustler Formation or the underlying Salado Formation, or both, may have

contributed to the degradation of water quality in the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system of northeastern Pecos

County. 

The middle unit of the Dockum Group of Triassic age is locally sandy; where it is permeable and

saturated, it is known as the Dockum aquifer. The Dockum aquifer is used as a source of water for

livestock, domestic, and municipal supply in parts of the Edwards Plateau and Trans-Pecos; well yields are

generally limited to a few hundred gallons per minute. Where the upper Dockum unit is absent, the

Dockum aquifer directly underlies the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system and may increase the saturated

thickness of the regional ground-water-flow system by an average of about 200 ft.

Paleozoic rocks in eastern Kimble County and parts of Gillespie County are hydraulically

connected to the Hensel Sand of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system. Here, the Hensel Sand may receive

some recharge through the upward leakage of ground water from the Hickory and Ellenburger-San Saba

aquifers. Subcrops of sandy and dolomitic middle Permian rocks in northern parts of the Edwards Plateau

may contain small amounts of fresh to slightly-saline water to supplement local water supplies in an area

generally dominated by the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system. The potential exists for minor amounts of

downward leakage from the aquifer system to Lower Permian rocks that form a prominent Paleozoic high

near the common corner of Kimble, Menard, Schleicher, and Sutton Counties.

The conditions that determine the hydraulic properties of the pre-Cretaceous rocks vary greatly,

and the opportunities to test for these properties have been rare. Extremely limited hydraulic data indicate

an average transmissivity value of about 3,250 ft2/d for the Hickory aquifer and local transmissivity values

of: (1) about 10,000 to 13,500 ft2/d for the Ellenburger Group; (2) about 2,900 ft2/d for the Rustler aquifer;

(3) about 200 to about 800 ft2/d for the Dockum aquifer; and (4) about 50 ft2/d for the upper (confining) unit

of the Dockum Group. Storage-coefficient data indicate values ranging from about 1 X 10-5 to about 1 X

10-4 for the Hickory aquifer and about 2 X 10-3 for the Dockum aquifer. Aquifer-test data are not available

for the Marble Falls aquifer or the total thickness of the Ellenburger-San Saba aquifer, and the

transmissivity and storage-coefficient values given for the Dockum aquifer come from Scurry County, north

of the study area.

Hydraulic-head and hydraulic-conductivity data are not available to quantify the magnitude of

ground-water flow across the base of the aquifer system. However, the rates of vertical exchange

between the pre-Cretaceous rocks of the base and the Cretaceous rocks of the aquifer system are very

small or negligible relative to the rates of lateral flow within the aquifer system.

With the exception of conditions near the Llano uplift and in subcrops of the Rustler and Dockum

aquifers in western parts of the study area, there is little indication that an appreciable amount of leakage

occurs between the Edwards- Trinity aquifer system and the underlying pre-Cretaceous rocks. The aquifer

system generally is isolated from the permeable pre-Cretaceous rocks by intervening strata of relatively

low permeability. Depositional, structural, and diagenetic information about the rocks--together with

observations of the occurrence, availability, and movement of ground water in the study area--indicate that

the pre-Cretaceous rocks collectively form a barrier to ground-water flow, which generally limits the

exchange of water across the base of the aquifer system.
 22

SELECTED REFERENCES

Abbott, P.L., 1975, On the hydrology of the Edwards Limestone, south-central Texas: Journal of Hydrology,

v. 24, p. 251-269.

Adams, J.E., 1944, Upper Permian Ochoa Series of Delaware basin, west Texas and southeastern New

Mexico: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 28, no. 11, p. 1,596-1,625.

Alexander, W.H., Jr., and Patman, J.H., 1969, Ground-water resources of Kimble County, Texas: Texas

Water Development Board Report 95, 93 p.

Armstrong, C.A., and McMillion, L.G., 1961, Geology and ground-water resources of Pecos County, Texas:

Texas Board of Water Engineers Bulletin 6106, v. 1,241 p.

Ashworth, J.B., 1983, Ground-water availability of the Lower Cretaceous formations in the Hill Country of

south-central Texas: Texas Department of Water Resources Report 273, 173 p.

-----1990, Evaluation of ground-water resources in parts of Loving, Pecos, Reeves, Ward, and Winkler

Counties, Texas: Texas Water Development Board Report 317,51 p.

Baker, R.C., Dale, D.C., and Baum, G.H., 1965, Ground-water conditions in Menard County, Texas: Texas

Water Commission Bulletin 6519, 94 p.

Barnes, V.E., Bell, W.C., Clabaugh, S.E., Cloud, P.E., Jr., McGhee, R.V., Rodda, P.Uo, and Young, K.P.,

1972, Geology of the Llano region and Austin area: Austin, University of Texas, Bureau of Economic

Geology Guidebook No. 13, 77 p.

Blank, H.R., Knisel, W.G., and Baird, R.W., 1966, Geology and ground-water studies in part of the Edwards

Plateau of Texas, including Sutton and adjacent counties: U.S. Soil and Water Conservation Research

Division, Agricultural Research Service ARS 41-103, 40 p.

Brand, J.P., and Deford, R.K., 1958, Comanchean stratigraphy of Kent quadrangle, Trans-Pecos, Texas:

American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 42, no. 2, p. 371-386.

Brown, J.B., Rogers, L.T., and Baker, B.B., 1965, Reconnaissance investigation of the ground-water

resources of the middle Rio Grande basin, Texas, in Reconnaissance investigation of the ground-water

resources of the Rio Grande basin, Texas (1973 reprint): Texas Water Commission Bulletin 6502, p. 1-

80.

Calhoun, G.Go, and Webster, R.E., 1983, Surface and subsurface expression of the Devils River uplift,

Kinney and Val Verde Counties, Texas, in Structure and stratigraphy of the Val Verde basin--Devils River

uplift, Texas: West Texas Geological Society Publication No. 83-77,166 p.

Cartwright, L.D., Jr., 1932, Regional structure of Cretaceous on Edwards Plateau of southwest Texas:

American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 16, no. 7, p. 691-700.

Chatterjee, Sankar, 1987, The Late Triassic Dockum vertebrates: Their stratigraphic and

paleobiogeographic significance, in Padian, Kevin, ed., The beginning of the age of dinosaurs: Faunal

change across the Triassic-Jurassic boundary: Cambridge University Press (ISBN 0-521-30328-1), p

139-149.

Flawn, P.T., 1956, Basement rocks of Texas and southeast New Mexico: Austin, University of Texas, Bureau

of Economic Geology Publication 5605, 261 p.

-----1964, Basement rocks of the Texas Gulf Coastal Plain: Transactions of the Gulf Coast Association of

Geological Societies, v. 14, p. 271-275.

Flawn, P.T., Goldstein, A., Jr., King, P.B., and Weaver, C.E., 1961, The Ouachita system: Austin, University

of Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology Publication 6120, 401 p.

Follett, C.R., 1973, Ground-water resources of Blanco County, Texas: Texas Water Development Board

Report 174, 97 p.

Forgotson, J.M., Jr., 1957, Stratigraphy of Comanchean Cretaceous Trinity Group: American Association of

Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 41, no. 10, p. 2,328-2,363.

Henry, C.D., and Price, J.G., 1985, Summary of the tectonic development of Trans-Pecos, Texas: Austin,

University of Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology Miscellaneous Map No. 36, 8 p.
 23

Hill, R.T., 1901, Geography and geology of the Black and Grand prairies, Texas: U.S. Geological Survey, 21st

Annual Report, pt. 7, 666 p.

Iglehart, H.H., 1967, Occurrence and quality of ground water in Crockett County, Texas: Texas Water

Development Board Report 47, 157 p.

Imlay, R.W., 1945, Subsurface Lower Cretaceous formations of south Texas: American Association of

Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 29, p. 1,416-1,469.

Jager, E.H., 1942, Pre-Cretaceous topography of western Edwards Plateau, Texas: American Association of

Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 26, no. 3, p. 380-386.

Jakucs, Laszlo, 1977, Morphogenetics of karst regions: New York, Halsted Press, Wiley and Sons, 284 p.

Jones, T.S., 1953, Stratigraphy of the Permian Basin of West Texas: Stratigraphic Problems Committee of

West Texas Geological Society, 57 p.

King, P.B., 1942, Permian of west Texas and southeastern New Mexico: American Association of Petroleum

Geologists Bulletin, v. 26, no. 4, p. 535-563.

Knowles, D.B., and Lang, J.W., 1947, Preliminary report on the geology and ground-water resources of

Reeves County, Texas (1952 reprint): Texas Board of Water Engineers, 88 p.

Kuniansky, E.L., 1990, Potentiometric surface of the Edwards-Trinity aquifer system and contiguous

hydraulically connected units, west-central Texas, winter 1974-75: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 89-4208, 2 sheets.

LeGrand, H.E., and Stringfield, V.T., 1966, Development of permeability and storage in the Tertiary

limestones of the southeastern States, U.S.A.: International Association of Scientific Hydrology, v. 9, no.

4, p. 61-73.

Long, A.T., 1958, Ground-water geology of Real County, Texas: Texas Board of Water Engineers Bulletin

5803, 47 p.

1963, Ground-water geology of Edwards County, Texas: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1619-

J, 29 p.

Loucks, R.G., 1977, Porosity development and distribution in shoal-water carbonate complexes--subsurface

Pearsall Formation (Lower Cretaceous) south Texas, in Bebout, D.G., and Loucks, R.G., eds.,

Cretaceous carbonates of Texas and Mexico--Applications to subsurface exploration: Austin, University

of Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology Report of Investigations 89, p. 97-126.

Lozo, F.E., Jr., and Stricklin, F.L., Jr., 1956, Stratigraphic notes on the outcrop basal Cretaceous, Central

Texas: Transactions of the Gulf Coast Association of Geological Societies, v. 6, p. 67-78.

Maclay, R.W., and Land, L.F., 1988, Simulation of flow in the Edwards aquifer, San Antonio region, Texas,

and refinement of storage and flow concepts: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2336-A, 48 p.

Maclay, R.W., Rettman, P.L., and Small, T.A., 1980, Hydrochemical data for the Edwards aquifer in the San

Antonio area, Texas: Texas Department of Water Resources LP-131, 38 p.

Maclay, R.W., and Small, T.A., 1986, Carbonate geology and hydrology of the Edwards aquifer in the San

Antonio area, Texas: Texas Water Development Board Report 296, 90 p.

Maley, V.C., and Huffington, R.M., 1953, Cenozoic fill and evaporite solution in the Delaware basin, Texas

and New Mexico: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 64, no. 5, p. 539-545.

Mason, C.C., 1961, Ground-water geology of the Hickory Sandstone Member of the Riley Formation,

McCulloch County, Texas: Texas Board of Water Engineers Bulletin 6017, 84 p.

McGowen, J.H., Granata, G.E., and Seni, S.J., 1979, Depositional framework of the Lower Dockum Group

(Triassic), Texas Panhandle: Austin, University of Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology Report of

Investigations 97, 60 p.

McKee, E.D., and Oriel, S.S., 1967, Paleotectonic maps of the Permian System: U.S. Geological Survey

Miscellaneous Geologic Investigations Map 1-450,164 p.

McKee, E.D., Oriel, S.S., Ketner, K.B., MacLachlan, M.E., Goldsmith, J.W., MacLachlan, J.C., and Mudge,

M.R., 1959, Paleotectonic maps, Triassic System: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Geologic

Investigations Map 1-300, 33 p.
 24

Milner, S., Buftler, R.T., Farmer, R.E., and Clark, D.K., 1975, Stratigraphic atlas of North and Central

America: Princeton, New Jersey, Princeton University Press (Cook, T.D., and Bally, A.W., eds.), 272 p.

Mount, J.R., 1963, Investigation of ground-water resources near Fredericksburg, Texas: Texas Water

Commission Memorandum Report No. 63-03, 115 p.

Mount, J.R., Rayner, F.A., Shamburger, V.M., Jr., Peckham, R.C., and Osborne, F.L., Jr., 1967,

Reconnaissance investigation of the ground-water resources of the Colorado River basin, Texas (1974

reprint): Texas Water Development Board Report 51, 107 p.

Muller, D.A., and Price, R.D., 1979, Ground-water availability in Texas, estimates and projections through

2030 (1987 reprint): Texas Department of Water Resources Report 238, 77 p.

Murray, G.E., 1961, Geology of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Province of North America: New York, Harper

and Brothers, 692 p.

Myers, B.N., 1969, Compilation of results of aquifer tests in Texas: Texas Water Development Board Report

98, 532 p.

Nicholas, R.L., and Rozendal, R.A., 1975, Subsurface positive elements within Ouachita foldbelt in Texas

and their relation to Paleozoic cratonic margin: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin,

v. 59, no. 2, p. 193-216

Ogilbee, William, Wesselman, J.B., and Irelan, Burdge, 1962, Geology and ground-water resources of

Reeves County, Texas: Texas Water Commission Bulletin 6214, v. I, 193 p.

Pettigrew, R.J., 1991, Geology and flow systems of the Hickory aquifer, San Saba County, Texas: Baylor

University Geological Studies Bulletin 51, 51 p.

Rees, R.W., and Buckner, A.W., 1980, Occurrence and quality of ground water in the Edwards-Trinity

(Plateau) aquifer in the Trans-Pecos region of Texas: Texas Department of Water Resources Report

255, 42 p.

Reeves, R.D., 1969, Ground-water resources of Kerr County, Texas: Texas Water Development Board

Report 102, 63 p.

Reeves, R.D., and Small, T.A., 1973, Ground-water resources of Val Verde County, Texas (1987 reprint):

Texas Water Development Board Report 172,145 p.

Rose, P.R., 1972, Edwards Group, surface and subsurface, central Texas: Austin, University of Texas,

Bureau of Economic Geology Report of Investigations 74, 198 p.

Sellards, E.H., Adkins, W.S., and Plummer, F.B., 1933, The geology of Texas, v. I, Stratigraphy: Austin,

University of Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology Bulletin 3232, 1,007 p.

Sellards, E.H., and Baker, C.L., 1935, The geology of Texas, v. II, Structural and economic geology: Austin,

University of Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology Bulletin 3401,884 p.

Smith, C.I., and Brown, J.B., 1983, Introduction to road log Cretaceous stratigraphy, in Structure and

stratigraphy of the Val Verde basin--Devils River uplift, Texas: West Texas Geological Society

Publication No. 83-77, 166 p.

Stricklin, F.L., Jr., Smith, C.I., and Lozo, F.E., 1971, Stratigraphy of Lower Cretaceous Trinity deposits of

central Texas: Austin, University of Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology Report of Investigations 71, 63

p.

Texas Water Development Board, 1972, A survey of the subsurface saline water of Texas: Texas Water

Development Board Report 157, v. I, 113 p. (Prepared by Core Laboratories, Inc., Consulting and

Engineering Department, Dallas, Texas.)

1990, Water for Texas, today and tomorrow: Texas Water Development Board Document No. GP-5-1, 186 p.

University of Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology, 1957, Occurrence of oil and gas in west Texas: Austin,

University of Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology Bulletin 5716 (Herald, F.A., ed.), 442 p.

1981, Geologic atlas of Texas, Llano sheet (with accompanying explanation): Austin, University of Texas,

Bureau of Economic Geology, scale 1:250,000.

Walker, L.E., 1979, Occurrence, availability, and chemical quality of ground water in the Edwards Plateau

region of Texas: Texas Department of Water Resources Report 235, 336 p.
 25

Webster, R.E., 1980, Structural analysis of Devils River uplift--southern Val Verde basin, southwest Texas:

American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 64, no. 2, p. 221-241.

Weeks, A.W., 1945, Balcones, Luling, and Mexia fault zones in Texas: American Association of Petroleum

Geologists Bulletin, v. 29, no. 12, p. 1,733-1,737.

Wessel, G.R., 1988, Shallow stratigraphy, structure and salt-related features, Yates Oil Field area, Pecos and

Crockett Counties, Texas: Ph.D. thesis, Colorado School of Mines.

West Texas Geological Society, 1949, East-west cross section through Permian Basin of West Texas: West

Texas Geological Society Publication, 1 sheet.

-----1951, North-south cross section through Permian Basin of West Texas: West Texas Geological Society

Publication, 1 sheet.

-----1953, North-south cross section through Permian Basin of West Texas: West Texas Geological Society

Publication, 1 sheet.

-----1961, Shallow formations and aquifers of the West Texas area: West Texas Geological Society

Publication No. 61-45, 17 figs.

-----1962, Southwest-northeast cross section, Marathon region to Midland basin: West Texas Geological

Society Publication No. 62-47,1 sheet.

-----1964, Cross section through Delaware and Val Verde basins from Lea County, New Mexico, to Edwards

County, Texas: West Texas Geological Society Publication No. 64-49, 1 sheet.

White, D.E., 1968, Ground-water resources of Upton County, Texas: Texas Water Development Board

Report 78, 137 p.

-----1971, Water resources of Ward County, Texas: Texas Water Development Board Report 125, 219 p.

William F. Guyton and Associates, 1958, Ground-water resources in the Monahans-Toyah area including

parts of Winkler, Ward, Pecos, Reeves, and Loving Counties, Texas: Prepared for Texas Electric Service

Company.

Wilson, J.L., and Majewske, C.P., 1960, Conjectured middle Paleozoic history of central and west Texas, in

Aspects of the geology of Texas: a symposium: Austin, University of Texas, Bureau of Economic Geology

Publication 6017, p. 65-86.