Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service

Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation,

and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in the 

Daniel Boone National Forest, Eastern Kentucky, 2015–17

Scientific Investigations Report 2019–5006

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service

Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation,

and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in the 

Daniel Boone National Forest, Eastern Kentucky, 2015–17

Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service
Cover photograph. Downstream view at Rock Creek near Yamacraw, Kentucky (U.S. Geological Survey 

station 03410590). Photograph by Mac A. Cherry, U.S. Geological Survey, May 2015.
Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph 

Separation,and Water Quality of Abandoned 

Mine Lands in the Daniel Boone National 

Forest, Eastern Kentucky, 2015–17

By Mac A. Cherry

Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service

Scientific Investigations Report 2019–5006

U.S. Department of the Interior

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

DAVID BERNHARDT, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

James F. Reilly II, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2019

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/.

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.

Suggested citation:

Cherry, M.A., 2019, Streamflow gain and loss, hydrograph separation, and water quality of abandoned mine lands in 

the Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky, 2015–17: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 

2019–5006, 36 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20195006.

ISSN 2328-0328 (online)
iii

Acknowledgments

The author acknowledges the contributions made by Margueritte Wilson, Dr. Claudia Cotton, 

Andrew Christensen, Jon Walker, and Dave Lane of the U.S. Forest Service during the planning 

and reconnaissance phases of this study. The author recognizes U.S. Forest Service District 

Rangers Jason Nedlo and Tim Reed for allowing access to the study areas. 

Stephen Pickard, David Kidd, Bobby Joe Monhollen, Spencer Edmonson, Catherine Fargen, and 

Ryan Thompson of the U.S. Geological Survey are acknowledged for their contributions to data 

collection, record computations, and illustration assistance.

v

Contents

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

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

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................1

Purpose and Scope .......................................................................................................................................3

Description of Study Areas and Site Selection ........................................................................................3

Rock Creek.............................................................................................................................................3

Wildcat and Addison Branches .........................................................................................................5

Methods...........................................................................................................................................................5

Streamflow and Discrete Water-Quality Data Collection ..............................................................9

Streamflow Gain and Loss Computation...........................................................................................9

Hydrograph Separation Computations..............................................................................................9

Continuous Water-Quality Data Collection.....................................................................................10

Results and Discussion...............................................................................................................................10

Synoptic Surveys and Streamflow Gains and Losses ..................................................................10

Hydrograph Separation .....................................................................................................................29

Continuous Water Quality..................................................................................................................29

Summary........................................................................................................................................................34

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................34

Figures

1. Maps showing location of study sites within the Daniel Boone National

Forest, eastern Kentucky.............................................................................................................2

2. Maps showing geology within the Daniel Boone National Forest,

eastern Kentucky..........................................................................................................................4

3. Picture of the pipe that contains and protects the continuous water-quality

monitor at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Rock Creek near

Yamacraw, Kentucky (station number 03410590) ..................................................................11

4. Maps showing specific conductance at study sites in the Wildcat/Addison

Branch study area in Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky...........................13

5. Picture of the seep in the Wildcat Branch of the Wildcat/Addison Branch

study area at site WT6 taken June 8, 2016, Daniel Boone National Forest,

eastern Kentucky........................................................................................................................14

6. Maps showing gaining, losing, and undetermined stream reaches in the

Wildcat/Addison Branch study area in Daniel Boone National Forest,

eastern Kentucky........................................................................................................................16

7. Graphs showing instantaneous streamflow (15-minute) at the

U.S. Geological Survey streamgage on Rock Creek near Yamacraw, Kentucky

(station number 03410590).........................................................................................................22

8. Maps showing gaining, losing, and undetermined stream reaches in the

Rock Creek study area in Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky ...................25
vi

Figures—Continued

9. Picture of a cave between site RM8 and RM9 that caused the streamflow 

to go subsurface, reach 8, Rock Creek study area, Daniel Boone National 

Forest, eastern Kentucky...........................................................................................................26

10. Pictures of ferric hydroxide precipitant or “yellow boy” in the Rock Creek 

study area ....................................................................................................................................27

11. Maps showing specific conductance at study sites in the Rock Creek study 

area in Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky....................................................28

12. Graph showing flow duration curves for observed streamflow, and base flow and 

surface runoff calculated with six hydrograph separation methods for the 

U.S. Geological Survey streamgage on Rock Creek near Yamacraw, Kentucky 

(station number 03410590) for the period August 2015 to August 2017..............................31

13. Graph showing continuous dissolved oxygen and pH at the

 U.S. Geological Survey streamgage on Rock Creek near Yamacraw, Kentucky 

(station number 03410590), from July 15, 2016 to July 31, 2017 ...........................................32

14. Graph showing specific conductance and streamflow at the 

U.S. Geological Survey streamgage on Rock Creek near Yamacraw, Kentucky 

(station number 03410590), from July 15, 2016 to July 31, 2017 ...........................................33

Tables

1. Sites in the Rock Creek and Wildcat/Addison Branch study areas where 

streamflow and discrete water-quality properties were measured during 

synoptic surveys, eastern Kentucky, 2015–17..........................................................................6

2. Streamflow and discrete water-quality results from synoptic surveys made 

June 2016 and May 2017 at Wildcat Branch, Daniel Boone National Forest, 

eastern Kentucky........................................................................................................................12

3. Results of streamflow gain and loss computations from synoptic surveys 

made June 2016 and May 2017 at Wildcat Branch, Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky................................................................................................................................15

4. Streamflow and discrete water-quality results from synoptic surveys made 

June 2016 and May 2017 at Addison Branch, Daniel Boone National Forest, 

eastern Kentucky........................................................................................................................17

5. Results of streamflow gain and loss computations from synoptic surveys 

made June 2016 and May 2017 at Addison Branch, Daniel Boone National 

Forest, eastern Kentucky...........................................................................................................18

6. Streamflow and discrete water-quality results from synoptic surveys made 

June 2016 and May 2017 at unnamed branches, Daniel Boone National Forest, 

eastern Kentucky .......................................................................................................................19

7. Streamflow and discrete water-quality results from synoptic surveys made 

November 2015 and May 2016 at Rock Creek study area, Daniel Boone National 

Forest, eastern Kentucky...........................................................................................................20

8. Results of the streamflow gain and loss computations from synoptic surveys 

made November 2015 and May 2016 at Rock Creek, Daniel Boone National Forest, 

eastern Kentucky........................................................................................................................23
vii

Tables—Continued

9. Monthly mean streamflow at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage on 

Rock Creek near Yamacraw, Kentucky (station number 03410590) for the 

period September 2015 through July 2017, with monthly base flow and 

base-flow index calculated with six different hydrograph separation methods .............30

10. Base-flow index summary statistics for the U.S. Geological Survey 

streamgage on Rock Creek near Yamacraw, Kentucky (station number 

03410590) for the period September 2015 through July 2017...............................................31

11. Summary statistics for continuous water-quality parameters recorded 

at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage on Rock Creek near 

Yamacraw, Kentucky (station number 03410590) for the period July 15, 2016 

to July 31, 2017 ............................................................................................................................32

Conversion Factors

U.S. customary units to International System of Units

Multiply By To obtain

Length

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 0.4047 hectare (ha)

acre 0.4047 square hectometer (hm2

) 

Flow rate

cubic foot per second (ft3

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

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

°F = (1.8 × °C) + 32.

Datum

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

Supplemental Information

Specific conductance is given in microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius 

(μS/cm at 25 °C).

Concentrations of chemical constituents in water are given in either milligrams per liter (mg/L) 

or micrograms per liter (μg/L).

Abbreviations

AMD acid mine drainage

AML abandoned mine land

BFI base-flow index computer program

DO dissolved oxygen

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Forest Service U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service

GW Toolbox Groundwater Toolbox

OLC open limestone channel

ppm parts per million

USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

YSI Yellow Springs Instruments
Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation, 

and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in the 

Daniel Boone National Forest, Eastern Kentucky, 2015–17

By Mac A. Cherry

Abstract

During 2015–17, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service 

(Forest Service), carried out a study to characterize the hydrology and water chemistry in two study areas within the Daniel 

Boone National Forest. One study area was within the Rock 

Creek drainage and the other study area included the Wildcat 

and Addison Branch drainages. Both study areas historically 

were mined for coal prior to the Surface Mining Control and 

Reclamation Act of 1977 and contain abandoned coal mine 

sites that have since been the focus of remediation efforts. 

Synoptic surveys of streamflow and water-quality properties 

(water temperature, pH, specific conductance, and dissolved 

oxygen) of Rock Creek were done during November 2015 and 

May 2016, and surveys of Wildcat and Addison Branches were 

done during June 2016 and May 2017. Streamflow measurements were used to quantify contributions from tributaries and 

to compute streamflow gain and loss in designated reaches. 

Discrete measurements of water temperature, pH, specific 

conductance, and dissolved oxygen were used to evaluate conditions during a short timeframe and for comparison between 

study areas. Study designs for the two study areas differed 

because there was an operating streamgage on Rock Creek 

near Yamacraw, Kentucky (station number 03410590) where 

streamflow and water-quality properties (water temperature, 

specific conductance, pH, dissolved oxygen, and turbidity) 

were monitored continuously, while Addison and Wildcat 

Branches were ungaged. Several hydrograph separation methods were used to estimate base flow and runoff at the Rock 

Creek gage. These data will be used by the Forest Service to 

evaluate the current (2018) conditions and plan remediation 

efforts.

The water quality at Rock Creek was less affected by acid 

mine drainage (AMD) than the Wildcat or Addison Branches. 

Appreciable losing reaches, where water flowed underground, 

were identified in both study areas. All losing reaches coincided with karst topography. Streamflow increased in areas 

with openings to underground mine tunnels, known as portals.

Six hydrograph separation methods (Base-flow index 

[BFI; standard and modified], HYSEP [fixed interval, sliding interval, and local minimum], and PART) were applied to 

daily mean streamflow collected from August 2015 to August 

2017 at station number 03410590. The hydrograph separation methods partition total streamflow into base flow and 

streamflow that originated from surface runoff. Base flow typically reacts slowly to precipitation infiltration and is largely 

sustained by groundwater discharge. The estimated daily base 

flow and runoff made with the different separation methods are 

not highly different. On average, base flow accounted for more 

total streamflow than surface runoff during the study period, 

irrespective of method.

Water temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, and turbidity values were measured from July 2016 

through July 2017 with a continuous monitor installed at station number 03410590. Nearly neutral pH values that ranged 

from 6.8 to 7.9 standard units likely limited metal solubility in 

the surface water. The continuous specific conductance values 

ranged between 30 and 259 microsiemens per centimeter at 

25 degrees Celsius. The previous remediation efforts are likely 

continuing to improve the effect of AMD in the study area. 

Introduction

The Rock Creek and Wildcat/Addison Branch drainages 

(fig. 1) (hereafter referred to as the Rock Creek and Wildcat/

Addison Branch study areas) in the Daniel Boone National 

Forest contain abandoned mine lands (AMLs) (U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 2015 and 2016). Mines 

began operating in both study areas in the early to mid-1900s 

and used a combination of surface and underground mining 

practices to extract the coal (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, 2016). Many of the mining operations took 

place prior to the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act 

of 1977, which regulated coal mines but also aimed to reclaim 

AMLs. As a consequence of mining, coal waste piles accumulated throughout the study areas, and many of the underground 

mines were left open and entrances to underground mines 
2 Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation, and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in Eastern Kentucky

##

##

#

#

### #

##

#

####

#

#

## ##

#

##

#

RT9

RT8

RM8

RM9

RT7

RM6

RT6 RT5

RM5

RT4

RM4

RT3

RM3

RT2

RM2

RT1

RM14

RM13

RT12

RM12

RT11 RT10

RM11

RM10

RM7

RM1

RT13

Paint Cliff

White Oak 

Junction

Co-Operative

84°36' 84°34' 84°32'

36°43'

36°42'

36°41'

KENTUCKY

Daniel Boone National Forest boundary from

U.S. Forest Service Automated Lands Program

Mine data from Kentucky Mine Mapping Information System

Base from U.S. Geological Survey National Hydrography Dataset, 2012, 

1:24,000, Geographic Coordinate System World Geodetic System 1984 

0 1 2 KILOMETERS

0 1 2 MILES

##

#

#

#

#

#

###

#

#

#

#

#

# ##

##

#

#

## ##

##

###

WM5 WM7

WT9 WM6

WT8

WT7

WM4

WT6

WT5

WT3

WT4

WT2

WM3

WT1

WM2 WM1

AM6

AT3

AM5

AM4 AT2

AM3

AT1 AM2

AM1

UT4

UT3

UT2 UT1

WT11WT10

84°26' 84°24'

36°59'

36°58'

36°57'

B

Water Tank Hollow

Cab

Br

in

anch

Unnamed Tributary

White Oak Creek

Unnamed

Branch #3

Cumberland River

Roberts Hollow

Koger Fork

Rock Creek

Poplar Spring Hollow

Grassy Fork

Unnamed

EXPLANATION

# Study site

Water body

Site RM3/USGS streamgage 

(03410590)

#

Mined area

Daniel Boone National Forest

A

Branch #1

Unnamed

Wildcat Branch

Addison Bra n c h

Branch #2

Jones Branch

Unnamed Tributary

Wolfpen Br a nch

#

# #

# # RT8

RM8

RM9

RM7

RM10

Jones Branch

White Oak Creek

Rock Creek

Rock

Creek

Rock Cr eek

Big South Fork of the Cumberland Riv e r

Figure 1. Location of study sites within the Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky. A, Wildcat/Addison Branch study area. 

B, Rock Creek study area.
Description of Study Areas and Site Selection 3

(called portals) collapsed (URS Group, Inc., 2017). The coal 

mining resulted in acid mine drainage (AMD) throughout the 

landscape (Carew, 2002). The acidification of mine drainage 

is caused by the oxidation of sulfur-bearing minerals in coal 

after contact with oxygen and water which leads to increased 

acidity and transport of soluble metals, such as aluminum and 

iron (Gluskoter, 1977; Jin and others, 2007).

Remediation efforts have been made in the Rock Creek 

and Wildcat/Addison Branch study areas in the past (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency [EPA], 2005). In the mid1990s, coal waste piles in the Wildcat/Addison Branch study 

area were treated with agricultural lime and topped with soil 

and vegetation to neutralize the high acidity, and sediment 

ponds were constructed with limestone drains that connected 

the ponds to the main streams (Carew, 2002). The Wildcat/

Addison Branch study area remediation efforts were evaluated in 2015, and it was concluded that many of the treatments 

were no longer effective because of lack of maintenance and 

the continued flow of highly contaminated leachate through 

the coal waste piles had exceeded the capacity of the method 

to neutralize AMD (U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest 

Service, 2016). A surface-flow wetland was constructed in the 

Rock Creek study area in 1989 (and renovated in 1995) that 

treated the high-metal load AMD in Jones Branch (Barton 

and Karathanasis, 1999). After a 19-month post-renovation 

period, the authors noted changes in soluble iron from 39 to 

787 milligrams per liter (mg/L), pH from 3.4 to 6.5 standard 

units, and acidity as calcium carbonate equivalent from 199 

to 2,240 mg/L. Portions of White Oak Creek, Lower Rock 

Creek, and their tributaries were dosed with limestone sand in 

2000, which changed the water chemistry from net acidic to 

net alkaline (Carew, 2002). In 2000, open limestone channels 

(OLCs) were installed in select tributaries in the Rock Creek 

study area. The OLCs at the town of Co-Operative (fig. 1) 

changed the ranges of pH from 2.8 to 6.1 standard units before 

construction to 6.7 to 7.6 standard units after construction and 

at Roberts Hollow from 2.7 to 4.9 standard units before construction to 4.9 to 7.9 standard units after OLC construction 

(Carew, 2002). A modified vertical flow system was installed 

in the Paint Cliff area and resulted in a change from net acidic 

to net alkaline discharge at the mouth of Rock Creek (Carew, 

2002; URS Group, Inc., 2017).

Staff from the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service (Forest Service) Region 8 and the Daniel Boone National 

Forest are proposing to improve water quality by performing 

multiple remediation actions. It is necessary for the hydrology and chemistry of the study area to be characterized so the 

areas can be assessed and remediated within the bounds of the 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 

Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). To help address that requirement, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation 

with the Forest Service, carried out a study to characterize the 

hydrology and water chemistry in the Rock Creek and Wildcat 

Branch/Addison Branch areas of the Daniel Boone National 

Forest. The results of this study will augment the Engineering 

Evaluation/Cost Analysis (EE/CA) process.

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to describe the results of a 

study done to characterize water quality with respect to AMD 

influences and determine whether selected stream reaches 

were gaining or losing water during non-runoff periods in two 

study areas within the Daniel Boone National Forest in eastern 

Kentucky. The study areas included portions of the Rock 

Creek drainage and the Wildcat and Addison Branch drainages. Six different hydrograph separation techniques were 

used to estimate the contribution of groundwater discharge to 

total streamflow at a streamflow gaging station in the Rock 

Creek study area, and continuous water-quality data established baseline conditions during the study period. Data collection occurred between November 2015 and May 2017.

Description of Study Areas and Site 

Selection

This study was done in two separate areas, on tributaries 

to the Big South Fork of the Cumberland River and Cumberland River in southwestern Daniel Boone National Forest 

(fig. 1). The southernmost study area includes Rock Creek and 

its tributaries that drain to the Big South Fork of the Cumberland River (fig. 1B); the second study area, about 19 miles to 

the northeast, includes Wildcat Branch, Addison Branch, and 

three unnamed branches (fig. 1A) that drain to the Cumberland 

River. The Daniel Boone National Forest, located in eastern 

Kentucky, is owned and managed by the Forest Service. 

The streamgage on Rock Creek near Yamacraw, Kentucky 

(station number 03410590; herein referred to as Rock Creek 

streamgage) is at the confluence of Rock Creek and Koger 

Fork (site RM3; fig. 1B). 

Rock Creek

The Rock Creek study area is located in McCreary 

County, Ky. (not shown), and includes lower Rock Creek 

(after the confluence with White Oak Creek), White Oak 

Creek, and their tributaries (fig. 1B). The entire Rock Creek 

basin is approximately 62.7 square miles. Approximately 

64 percent of the Rock Creek basin is owned and managed 

by the Forest Service. 

The bedrock underlying the Rock Creek study area is 

from the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian systems (Pomerene, 

1964) (fig. 2B). The Paragon Formation consists of distinctly 

grayish-red or olive green shale, yellowish-brown to greenishbrown sandstone, and grey to yellowish-brown limestone. The 

sandstone is calcareous or argillaceous and weathers from 

carbonate leaching. The upper slopes are from the coal-containing lower-Pennsylvanian Series.
4 Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation, and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in Eastern Kentucky

! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! !

!

!

! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! !

! !

!

! ! ! !

! !

!

! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

!

!

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

!

!

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

!

!

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! !

!

! !

! ! !

! ! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

!

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

!

!

! !

! !

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! ! !

! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! 

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

!

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

!

!

!

!

! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

!

! !

!

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! !

84°36' 84°34' 84°32'

36°43'

36°42'

36°41'

KENTUCKY

Daniel Boone National Forest boundary from U.S. Forest Service

Automated Lands Program, geology from Yang and Stidham (2006)

and Zhang and Stidham (2006), mine data from Kentucky Mine

 Mapping Information System

Base from U.S. Geological Survey National Hydrography Dataset, 2012, 1:24,000

Geographic Coordinate System World Geodetic System 1984 

0 1 2 KILOMETERS

0 1 2 MILES

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! !

!

! !

! !

! ! !

!

! !

! !

! !

!

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

!

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! !

!

! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! ! !

!

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

!

!

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

!

!

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

!

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! ! !

! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

!! ! ! !

! !

!

! !

!

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

! !

!

!

!

!

! !

! ! ! !

! ! !

! !

!

! ! ! !

! ! !

! ! ! ! ! ! !

!

! !

! !

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

!

!

!

! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

!

!

!

!

!

! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

!

! !

!

! ! ! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! ! ! !

! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! ! !

! ! 

! !

! !

! ! !

!

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

!

!

! !

!

!

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

! !

!

! !

!

!

! !

! !

!

!

!

!

! !

! !

84°26' 84°24'

36°59'

36°58'

36°57'

Rock Creek

Water Tank Hollow

Cabin Branch

Unnamed Tributary

White Oak Creek

Unnamed

Branch #3

Cumberland River

Roberts Hollow

Koger Fork

Rock Creek

Poplar Spring Hollow

Grassy Fork

Unnamed

EXPLANATION

Daniel Boone National Forest

Water body

! ! !

Watershed boundary

Mined area

Geology

Alluvium (Quaternary)

Colluvial blocks (Quaternary and Tertiary) 

Grundy Formation (Early Pennsylvanian)

Alvy Creek formation (Early Pennsylvanian)

Rockcastle Conglomerate (Early Pennsylvanian)

Paragon Formation (Late Mississippian)

Hartselle Formation (Middle Mississippian) 

Kidder Limestone Member of Monteagle Limestone (Middle Mississippian)

A

Branch #1

Unnamed

Wildcat Branch

Addison Bra n c h

Branch #2

Jones Branch

Unnamed Tributary

Wolfpen Br a nch

B

Big South Fork of the Cumberland Riv e r

Figure 2. Geology within the Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky. A, Wildcat/Addison Branch study area. 

B, Rock Creek study area.
Methods 5

There is a distinct difference between the land use in 

upper and lower Rock Creek. Above the confluence with 

White Oak Creek, Rock Creek is relatively undisturbed from 

coal mining, designated as a State Wild River, and is a stocked 

trout fishery (Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife 

Resources, 2017; URS Group, Inc., 2017). Many of the mines 

along White Oak Creek left behind open underground mine 

portals, coal waste piles, and other sources of AMD (Carew, 

2002). White Oak Creek has been documented as contributing 

large quantities of AMD to the lower portion of Rock Creek 

(U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 2016).

Site selection was based on recommendations from the 

Forest Service Region 8 staff, with input from the USGS (table 

1), to target sites that helped define gaining and losing reaches, 

and locations of known geologic importance or with known 

mining activities. Water-quality data from Rock Creek, previously collected by the USGS, were published in Carew (2002) 

and used in this report for comparisons to previous conditions. 

Sites were generally chosen on tributaries and the main stem 

after the confluence of each respective tributary. The main 

stem sites were selected far enough downstream from the 

tributary confluence to avoid backwater. 

Wildcat and Addison Branches

The Wildcat/Addison Branch study area is located in 

Pulaski County, Ky. (not shown), with streams draining to 

the Cumberland River, a popular fishing and recreation area 

(fig. 1A). The study area includes Wildcat Branch, Addison 

Branch, and their major tributaries. The study area also 

includes three nearby unnamed branches, which have relatively small drainage areas that flow directly into the Cumberland River. The entire study area is over 2,600 acres and is 

mostly contained in the Daniel Boone National Forest.

The Wildcat/Addison Branch study area bedrock is from 

two different geologic systems: Mississippian and Pennsylvanian (fig. 2A) (Smith and others, 1973). Underlying the main 

channel streambeds and confluences are rocks of Mississippian 

age that generally are composed of shale, dolomite, limestone, 

and sandstone from the Paragon Formation. The confluence 

areas of all study streams with the Cumberland River contain 

limestone and shale from the Kidder Limestone Member. This 

limestone and shale feature is characterized by steep bluffs and 

karst topography (McDowell, 1983). The bedrock underlying 

the high gradient, headwater streams is Pennsylvanian age 

and contains shale from the Alvy Creek formation along the 

mid slopes and Rockcastle Conglomerate and Grundy Formation on the ridges. The shale is medium to yellowish gray and 

grayish brown. The siltstone and sandstone is light gray to 

olive gray and the sandstone is very fine-grained quartzose and 

contains mica and iron- and magnesium-containing minerals 

and thin bands of coal. 

Surface and underground mining in the Wildcat/Addison 

Branch study area began in the early 1900s and continued 

through the 1970s (U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest 

Service, 2015). A few of the underground mine entry portals 

remain open and act as conduits, contributing AMD directly 

to the streams. Water samples have been collected in the study 

area that contained high levels of sulfate and dissolved aluminum, iron, and other heavy metals (U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 2015). Wildcat Branch has been identified by the State Unified Watershed Assessment as a priority 

watershed /subbasin and is listed in the 2012 Kentucky 305(b) 

Report to Congress as a 303(d)-listed stream as “impaired” 

for its intended uses (U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest 

Service, 2015). The listing was assigned because of low pH, 

heavy metals loading, and stream sedimentation resulting in 

nonsupport of aquatic resources and other beneficial uses. 

Additionally, the Nature Conservancy classifies this basin as a 

“Critical Watershed” to conserve at-risk fish and mussel species (U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 2015).

Similar to the Rock Creek study area, sites were selected 

to help define reaches that gain or lose water under non-runoff 

conditions. The geology of the Wildcat/Addison Branch 

study area was not as well known as Rock Creek, so no sites 

were chosen based on geology. Maps of mined areas were 

not available for the Addison Branch basin. Several sites in 

the Wildcat/Addison Branch study area were selected only to 

provide the Forest Service with information on water quality and the relative contribution of streamflow at locations 

expected to be important for future remediation strategies 

(sites UT1–4; table 1).

Methods

Streamflow measurements and discrete water-quality data 

were collected during two synoptic surveys in each of two 

study areas: Rock Creek and Wildcat/Addison Branches. Synoptic survey streamflow measurements were used to compute 

reach-specific streamflow gain and loss, and discrete water 

temperature, pH, specific conductance, and dissolved oxygen 

(DO) measurements were used to evaluate basin-scale conditions over a short timeframe. The Rock Creek streamgage (site 

RM3; table 1, fig. 1B) provided continuous streamflow, water 

temperature, pH, specific conductance, DO, and turbidity data. 

Hydrograph separation techniques were used to characterize 

the contribution of groundwater discharge relative to total 

streamflow at the Rock Creek streamgage. Data were collected 

from 2015 to 2017 and are available as a USGS data release 

(Cherry, 2019). 
Table 1. Sites in the Rock Creek and Wildcat/Addison Branch study areas where streamflow and discrete water-quality properties were measured dueastern Kentucky, 2015–17.—Continued [R, Rock Creek; M, main stem; °, degree; ‘, minute; ‘’, second; T, tributary; W, Wildcat Branch; A, Addison Branch; U, unnamed] Map identifier (fig. 1) U.S. Geological Survey station identifier U.S. Geological Survey station description Latitude Longitude Da

first 

Rock Creek study area RM1 364250084325400 Rock Creek main stem below Grassy Fork, Kentucky 36° 42’ 49.7’’ ‒84° 32’ 54.1’’ Novemb

RT1 364247084325400 Grassy Fork tributary at mouth before Rock Creek, Kentucky 36° 42’ 47.6’’ ‒84° 32’ 54.0’’ NovembRM2 364244084330100 Rock Creek main stem below Watertank Hollow, Kentucky 36° 42’ 44.2” ‒84° 33’ 00.8” Novemb

RT2 03410594 Water Tank Hollow at culvert at mouth before Rock Creek, Kentucky 36° 42’ 43.8” ‒84° 33’ 03.3” NovembRM3 03410590 Rock Creek near Yamacraw, Kentucky 36° 42’ 11.8” ‒84° 33’ 44.2” NovembRT3 03410585 Koger Fork tributary at mouth before Rock Creek, Kentucky 36° 42’ 02.9” ‒84° 33’ 45.9” NovembRM4 364227084340500 Rock Creek main stem below Poplar Spring, Kentucky 36° 42’ 19.4” ‒84° 34’ 01.6” NovembRT4 03410578 Poplar Spring tributary at mouth before Rock Creek, Kentucky 36° 42’ 22.2” ‒84° 34’ 05.2” NovembRM5 364222084343500 Rock Creek main stem below Paint Cliff #1 and #2, Kentucky 36° 42’ 22.6” ‒84° 34’ 35.0” NovembRT5 03410575 Paint Cliff #1 tributary above pond, Kentucky 36° 42’ 25.3” ‒84° 34’ 33.6” NovembRT6 364225084343300 Paint Cliff #2 tributary above pond, Kentucky 36° 42’ 27.0” ‒84° 34’ 38.0” NovembRM6 364238084334500 Rock Creek main stem below Roberts Hollow, Kentucky 36° 42’ 37.4” ‒84° 34’ 57.4” NovembRT7 03410571 Roberts Hollow tributary at mouth before Rock Creek, Kentucky 36° 42’ 37.5” ‒84° 35’ 01.7” NovembRM7 364237084350100 Rock Creek main stem below White Oak Creek and Junction, Kentucky 36° 42’ 10.4” ‒84° 35’ 44.3” NovembRM8 364210084354500 Rock Creek main stem at White Oak Junction , Kentucky 36° 42’ 09.7” ‒84° 35’ 43.4” NovembRM9 03410559 Rock Creek main stem above White Oak Creek and Junction, Kentucky 36° 42’ 08.9” ‒84° 35’ 42.0” NovembRM10 03410557 White Oak Creek main stem at mouth before Rock Creek, Kentucky 36° 42’ 09.1” ‒84° 35’ 50.0” Novemb

RT8 03410555 Jones Branch tributary above White Oak Creek, Kentucky 36° 42’ 08.8” ‒84° 35’ 50.4” NovembRM11 364143084360800 White Oak Creek main stem below Wolfpen Branch, Kentucky 36° 41’ 44.0” ‒84° 36’ 08.7” NovembRT9 364138084360400 Wolfpen Branch tributary above White Oak Creek, Kentucky 36° 41’ 43.4” ‒84° 36’ 08.9” NovembRT10 364135084363200 Co-Operative South tributary above White Oak Creek, Kentucky 36° 41’ 35.6” ‒84° 36’ 32.1” NovembRT11 03410547 Big Momma tributary above White Oak Creek, Kentucky 36° 41’ 35.0” ‒84° 36’ 37.4” NovembRM12 364134084365400 White Oak Creek main stem below Unnamed Tributary, Kentucky 36° 41’ 34.4” ‒84° 36’ 52.9” Novemb

RT12 364134084365500 Unnamed tributary above White Oak Creek, Kentucky 36° 41’ 37.0” ‒84° 36’ 56.5” Novemb

RM13 364126084372300 White Oak Creek main stem below Cabin Branch, Kentucky 36° 41’ 27.0” ‒84° 37’ 23.0” Novemb

RT13 03410542 Cabin Branch tributary at mouth before White Oak Creek, Kentucky 36° 41’ 29.8” ‒84° 37’ 24.9” Novemb

RM14 364125084372400 White Oak Creek main stem above Cabin Branch, Kentucky 36° 41’ 26.9” ‒84° 37’ 21.7” Novemb
Table 1. Sites in the Rock Creek and Wildcat/Addison Branch study areas where streamflow and discrete water-quality properties were measured dueastern Kentucky, 2015–17.—Continued[R, Rock Creek; M, main stem; °, degree; ‘, minute; ‘’, second; T, tributary; W, Wildcat Branch; A, Addison Branch; U, unnamed]

Map 

identifier 

(fig. 1)

U.S. Geological 

Survey 

station identifier

U.S. Geological Survey station description Latitude Longitude Da

first 

Wildcat/Addison Branch study area

WM1 365822084260700 Wildcat Branch main stem at mouth before conflunce with Cumberland 

River, Kentucky

36° 58’ 22.7’’ ‒84° 2’6 07.10’’ June 9, 

WM2 365836084253300 Wildcat Branch main stem below Unnamed Tributary #2, Kentucky 36° 58’ 36.2’’ ‒84° 25’ 33.9’’ June 9, WT1 365838084253300 Unnamed Tributary #2 above confluence with Wildcat Branch, Kentucky 36° 58’ 38.7’’ ‒84° 25’ 33.0’’ June 9, WT2 365842084252500 Unnamed Tributary #3 before confluence with Wildcat Branch, Kentucky 36° 58’ 42.0’’ ‒84° 25’ 25.0’’ June 9, WM3 365841084252800 Wildcat Branch main stem below confluence with unnamed tributary #3, 

Kentucky

36° 58’ 41.1’’ ‒84° 25’ 28.4’’ June 9, 

WT3 365849084253800 East Unnamed Tributary #2 above confluence with East Branch, Kentucky 36° 58’ 49.9’’ ‒84° 25’ 32.6’’ Not meaWT4 365849084253200 West Unnamed Tributary #2 above confluence with West Branch, Kentucky 36° 58’ 49.2’’ ‒84° 25’ 38.0’’ Not meaWT5 365907084254500 West Unnamed Tributary #2 below pond at Hwy 122C, Kentucky 36° 59’ 07.0’’ ‒84° 25’ 45.2’’ June 8, WT6 365912084254000 East Unnamed Tributary #2 above pond at Hwy 122C at seep, Kentucky 36° 59’ 12.3’’ ‒84° 25’ 40.3’’ June 8, WT7 365903084251100 Unnamed Tributary #4 above confluence with Wildcat Branch, Kentucky 36° 59’ 03.5’’ ‒84° 25’ 11.6’’ June 8, WM4 365900084251400 Wildcat Branch main stem below confluence with Unnamed Tributary #4, 

Kentucky 

36° 59’ 00.3’’ ‒84° 25’ 14.6’’ June 8, 

WM5 365903084245800 Wildcat Branch main stem between Unnamed Tributaries #4 and #5, 

Kentucky

36° 59’ 03.9’’ ‒84° 24’ 58.8’’ June 8, 

WT8 365904084245600 Outfall from settling pond before confluence with Wildcat Branch, 

Kentucky

36° 59’ 10.9’’ ‒84° 25’ 43.0’’ June 8, 

WM6 365905084245500 Wildcat Branch main stem below beaver pond at Hwy 5148, Kentucky 36° 59’ 05.4’’ ‒84° 24’ 55.3’’ June 8, WT9 365907084245700 Unnamed Tributary #5 above confluence with Wildcat Branch at beaver 

pond, Kentucky

36° 59’ 07.2’’ ‒84° 24’ 56.7’’ June 8, 

WT10 365911084243800 West pond above Wildcat Branch main stem, Kentucky 36° 59’ 11.1’’ ‒84° 24’ 38.7’’ June 8, WT11 365910084243700 East pond above Wildcat Branch, Kentucky 36° 59’ 10.7’’ ‒84° 24’ 37.8’’ June 8, WM7 365909084244000 Wildcat Branch main stem above Unnamed Tributary #5, Kentucky 36° 59’ 09.6’’ ‒84° 24’ 40.0’’ June 8, AM1 365708084252900 Addison Branch main stem at mouth above Cumberland River, Kentucky 36° 57’ 08.1’’ ‒84° 25’ 29.3’’ June 29AM2 365721084252200 Addison Branch main stem above unnamed tributary, Kentucky 36° 57’ 10.3’’ ‒84° 25’ 30.9’’ June 29AT1 365722084252000 Unnamed tributary at mouth above Addison Branch, Kentucky 36° 57’ 21.6’’ ‒84° 25’ 22.3’’ June 29AM3 365744084251000 Addison Branch main stem below confluence of East and West Branches, 

Kentucky

36° 57’ 22.9’’ ‒84° 25’ 20.3’’ June 28

AT2 365746084251100 Addison Branch West at mouth above confluence with East Branch, 

Kentucky

36° 57’ 44.1’’ ‒84° 25’ 10.4’’ June 28
Table 1. Sites in the Rock Creek and Wildcat/Addison Branch study areas where streamflow and discrete water-quality properties were measured dueastern Kentucky, 2015–17.—Continued [R, Rock Creek; M, main stem; °, degree; ‘, minute; ‘’, second; T, tributary; W, Wildcat Branch; A, Addison Branch; U, unnamed] Map identifier (fig. 1) U.S. Geological Survey station identifier U.S. Geological Survey station description Latitude Longitude Da

first 

Wildcat/Addison Branch study area—Continued AM4 365744084251100 Addison Branch main stem at mouth above confluence with West Branch, Kentucky 36° 57’ 44.8’’ ‒84° 25’ 11.0’’ June 28, 

AM5 365809084253200 Addison Branch main stem below seep, Kentucky 36° 58’ 09.9’’ ‒84° 25’ 32.2’’ June 29, AT3 365756084245700 Seep on Addison Branch East, Kentucky 36° 58’ 05.9’’ ‒84° 24’ 51.8’’ June 29, AM6 365756084245600 Addison Branch main stem above seep, Kentucky 36° 58’ 11.3’’ ‒84° 24’ 46.1’’ June 29, 

Unnamed tributaries UT1 365922084260000 Unnamed Branch #1 above pond, Kentucky 36° 59’ 22.8’’ ‒84° 26’ 00.4’’ June 8, 2

UT2 365920084260500 Unnamed Branch #1 below pond, Kentucky 36° 59’ 20.8’’ ‒84° 26’ 05.3’’ June 8, 2UT3 365756084262300 Unnamed Branch #2 before Cumberland River, Kentucky 36° 57’ 56.0’’ ‒84° 26’ 23.5’’ June 7, 2UT4 365740084253900 Unnamed Branch #3 before Cumberland River, Kentucky 36° 57’ 40.4’’ ‒84° 25’ 39.0’’ June 29, 
Methods 9

Streamflow and Discrete Water-Quality Data 

Collection

Streamflow and discrete water-quality measurements 

were made following USGS policies and methods (Rantz and 

others, 1982; Wilde and Radtke, 1998; Wagner and others, 

2006; Turnipseed and Sauer, 2010; U.S. Geological Survey, 

variously dated). In most instances, water velocity was measured with Sontek acoustic velocity meters and streamflow 

was computed by means of the mid-section method (Sontek/

YSI, 2007; Turnipseed and Sauer, 2010). In all other instances, 

streamflow was measured with the volumetric method (Rantz 

and others, 1982) or was estimated if flow was too low to 

measure.

The errors in the streamflow measurements were rated 

qualitatively (excellent, good, fair, or poor) by the field technician according to guidelines established by Sauer and Meyer 

(1992). The errors associated with excellent, good, fair, and 

poor measurements were considered to be 2, 5, 8, and 10 percent of the true streamflow, respectively. The error is based on 

assessments of streambed and velocity uniformity, streambed 

materials, and other stream characteristics that may affect the 

measurement accuracy. Streamflow measurement error, in 

cubic feet per second, was calculated by multiplying the value 

of streamflow by the assigned qualitative rating error. For 

example, a measured streamflow of 1.24 cubic feet per second 

(ft3

/s) rated fair (plus or minus 8 percent) would have a potential measurement error of plus or minus 0.10 ft3

/s.

Discrete water quality was measured with Yellow Springs 

Instruments (YSI) EXO multiparameter monitors (YSI, 2017). 

The monitors were equipped with water temperature, pH, DO, 

and specific conductance probes. Water-quality monitors were 

calibrated and operated according to manufacturer recommendations (YSI, 2017). 

Streamflow Gain and Loss Computation

The timing of the synoptic surveys used for gain and loss 

computations was intended to capture variability in base-flow 

conditions, with a survey in the spring and autumn when the 

duration of antecedent dry conditions are generally shorter 

and longer, respectively. Logistics determined that the surveys 

were not always carried out as designed. Synoptic surveys 

were done at the Rock Creek study area in November 2015 

and May 2016, and at the Wildcat/Addison study area in June 

2016 and May 2017. The timing of synoptic surveys was 

intended to select periods not associated with a storm event; 

rather when streams were in “assumed” base-flow conditions 

based on the streamflow at the streamgage on Rock Creek 

and precipitation data from a nearby weather station for the 

ungaged Wildcat and Addison Branches. The synoptic surveys 

did not follow a precipitation event large enough to cause 

large changes in streamflow. No synoptic surveys were made 

during direct precipitation events.

Streamflow gains and losses were computed by separating 

a stream into reaches and determining the differences in flow 

between upstream and downstream boundaries. A gaining reach 

has groundwater that discharges to surface water, resulting in 

a downstream increase in flow; conversely, a losing reach has 

surface water that discharges to groundwater, resulting in a 

downstream decrease in flow. Other factors that can affect 

the net change in flow within a stream reach include tributary 

inflow, stream diversions, return flows from point sources, and 

evapotranspiration. Streamflow gains and losses (Turco and 

others, 2007) were computed as

G =QD – QU – I + D – R + E, (1)

where

G is streamflow gain or loss,

QD is streamflow measured at the downstream reach,

QU is streamflow measured at the upstream reach,

I is measured tributary inflows,

D is measured stream diversions (outflows),

R is return flows, and

E is evapotranspiration. (All units are cubic feet per second.)

Numerous tributary inflows were measured during the 

study. There were no diversions or return flows. Evapotranspiration was not measured and was assumed negligible (Slade 

and others, 2002; Turco and others, 2007). All the individual 

measurement errors were summed to determine the potential 

total error associated with each reach, and the reach is considered verified if the error associated with the reach does not 

exceed the gain or loss value (Turco and others, 2007).

Hydrograph Separation Computations

Hydrograph separation involves partitioning a streamflow 

record into base flow and runoff components. Base flow is 

the component of total streamflow that persists in absence of 

runoff, reacts slowly to precipitation infiltration, and is largely 

sustained by groundwater discharge (Eckhardt, 2008). 

Surface runoff includes water (from precipitation) that 

travels over the land surface and through channels to a stream 

plus water that infiltrates the soil surface that travels above 

the main groundwater level to a stream by means of gravity. 

The USGS Groundwater Toolbox (GW Toolbox; Barlow and 

others, 2015) was used to partition the total streamflow into 

surface runoff and base flow and to calculate the base-flow 

index (the ratio of base flow to total streamflow). Hydrograph 

separation analyses were done using daily mean streamflow 

data from the Rock Creek gage for the period August 2015 to 

August 2017. The analyses were done with each of six methods: Base-flow index (BFI) (standard and modified), HYSEP 

(fixed interval, sliding interval, and local minimum), and 

PART. Each method was used because they are available in the 

GW Toolbox, which aggregates several hydrograph-separation 
10 Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation, and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in Eastern Kentucky

programs. Barlow and others (2015) suggest using several 

hydrograph separation methods and comparing the results 

because each method works best in different conditions. Daily 

mean streamflow data from the Rock Creek streamgage were 

obtained from the USGS National Water Information System 

(NWIS) and used for hydrograph separation (U.S. Geological 

Survey, 2018).

Wahl and Wahl (1995) developed the original BFI program based on a procedure created by the Institute of Hydrology (1980). The original BFI program divided streamflow 

into intervals of N-days; the minimum streamflow during each 

N-day interval is compared to adjacent minimum, and turning 

points are determined. By default, the original BFI set the day 

interval (N) and the turning point test factor (f) to 5 and 0.9, 

respectively (Nelms and others, 2015). When f is set to 0.9, if 

90 percent of a given N-day minimum is less than both adjacent N-day minimums, that minimum is considered a turning 

point. Turning points are connected by straight lines to create 

the base-flow hydrograph. The BFI-modified method replaces 

f with the daily recession index (K′):

K f (2) ' N 





 





1

and equals 0.979 when the defaults of N=5 days and f=0.9 

are used. For this analysis, an N-day interval of 2 was used 

for both BFI methods. Wahl and Wahl (1995) suggested an 

N value should be consistent with the duration of time required 

for surface runoff to typically cease. An N value of 2 was used 

because surface runoff generally ended within 1–2 days after 

peak runoff during the study period. The other values used 

were f=0.90 and K′=0.9487.

Additional base-flow analyses were done using the 

HYSEP methods (Sloto and Crouse, 1996). HYSEP uses 

three separation methods originally developed by Pettyjohn 

and Henning (1979): fixed interval, sliding interval, and local 

minimum. Annual base-flow estimates are typically more reliable than monthly or daily estimates with the HYSEP method, 

and long-term records are more reliable because they capture 

a wider range of climatic conditions than short-term records 

(Sloto and Crouse, 1996). HYSEP is more reliable in natural 

flow regimes compared to streams that have diversions or are 

regulated from reservoirs (Sloto and Crouse, 1996); none of 

the study streams in the Rock Creek study area had diversions 

or significant storage from ponds or reservoirs.

Base flow was also analyzed using the PART method, 

which was originally developed by Rutledge (1998). Base 

flow is estimated with PART by interpolating between streamflows on days estimated to be unaffected by surface runoff 

determined on the basis of antecedent streamflow recession 

criteria. The recommended lower and upper limits for drainage 

area are 1 and 500 square miles, respectively, for the PART 

method. Geologic heterogeneity, such as the karst geology in 

the study area, can bias the results (Rutledge, 1998).

Continuous Water-Quality Data Collection

Water-quality properties (water temperature, pH, DO, 

specific conductance, and turbidity) were measured continuously at the Rock Creek streamgage from July 2016 through 

July 2017. Water-quality data were measured with a YSI 

6-series multiparameter water-quality monitor (YSI, 2012). 

The water-quality monitor was suspended from the bridge 

and placed near the thalweg of the stream (fig. 3). USGS 

protocols were used during the operation and maintenance 

of the multiparameter water-quality monitors and computation of continuous water-quality records (Wagner and others, 

2006). According to criteria described in Wagner and others 

(2006), the periods of water-quality records for all parameters 

were rated good except some periods associated with high 

flow were deleted because the sonde was not heavy enough 

to remain submerged during high velocities. To prevent that 

problem, a weight was added to the suspended water-quality 

well on May 27, 2017 (fig. 3).

Results and Discussion

This section describes the results of the synoptic surveys 

from both study areas (Rock Creek and Wildcat/Addison 

Branches). Gaining and losing stream reaches were identified, and water quality measurements were taken across the 

entire study area in a short time span. From the Rock Creek 

streamgage, the results of the hydrograph separation analyses 

and continuous water-quality parameters are presented. 

Synoptic Surveys and Streamflow Gains and 

Losses

Low pH and high specific conductance values from many 

of the Wildcat Branch sites during both synoptic surveys indicated that the study area was likely affected by AMD during 

the study period (table 2, fig. 4). The pH of AMD is usually 

2.0 to 4.0 standard units (Nordstrom, 2011), and 68 percent 

of all the pH measurements in the Wildcat Branch study area 

were below 4.0 standard units (table 2). The highest measurement of specific conductance in the Wildcat Branch study 

area was at site WT6 (mean of values from 2016 and 2017 

of 2,540 microsiemens per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius 

[μS/cm]). Site WT6 was a seep in the hillside that discharged 

groundwater directly into the headwaters of Wildcat Branch 

(fig. 5). The DO was not measured during the first survey at 

site WT6 because the DO probe malfunctioned, but the water 

from the site was anoxic (0.1 mg/L) during the second survey. 

A streamgage was not available at the Wildcat/Addison 

Branch study area, so precipitation measured at a nearby 

weather station was used to estimate when streams were at 

base flow conditions. During the preceding 14, 7, and 2 days 
Results and Discussion 11

Figure 3. Picture of the pipe that contains and protects the continuous water-quality monitor at the 

U.S. Geological Survey streamgage Rock Creek near Yamacraw, Kentucky (station number 03410590).
12 Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation, and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in Eastern Kentucky

Table 2. Streamflow and discrete water-quality results from synoptic surveys made June 2016 and May 2017 at Wildcat Branch, 

Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky. 

[ft3/s, cubic foot per second; °C, degree Celsius; μS/cm, microsiemen per centimeter at 25 °C; mg/L, milligram per liter; W, Wildcat Branch; M, main stem; 

T, tributary; DRY, stream was at no flow; ±, plus or minus; %, percent; --, not available]

Map 

identifier 

(fig. 1)

U.S. Geological 

Survey 

station identifier

Date of 

synoptic 

survey

Streamflow 

(ft3/s)

Streamflow 

measurement 

rating

Water 

temperature 

(°C)

Specific 

conductance 

(μS/cm)

Dissolved 

oxygen 

(mg/L)

pH 

(standard 

units)

First survey

WM1 365822084260700 June 9, 2016 DRY DRY DRY DRY DRY

WM2 365836084253300 June 9, 2016 1.24 Fair±8% 16.1 720 -- 3.3

WT1 365838084253300 June 9, 2016 0.10 Fair±8% 13.7 -- -- 5.1

WT2 365842084252500 June 9, 2016 0.09 Poor±10% 13.4 716 -- 3.0

WM3 365841084252800 June 9, 2016 1.12 Fair±8% 16.1 776 -- 3.1

WT3 365849084253800 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

WT4 365849084253200 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

WT5 365907084254500 June 8, 2016 0.22 Poor±10% 21.9 1,800 -- 4.5

WT6 365912084254000 June 8, 2016 0.10 Fair±8% 14.1 2,560 -- 3.8

WT7 365903084251100 June 8, 2016 0.17 Fair±8% 21.5 801 -- 3.8

WM4 365900084251400 June 8, 2016 1.11 Good±5% 19.4 798 -- 3.1

WT8 365904084245600 June 8, 2016 0.02 Fair±8% 20.9 423 -- 3.5

WM5 365903084245800 June 8, 2016 1.06 Fair±8% 23.4 778 -- 3.0

WM6 365905084245500 June 8, 2016 0.84 Fair±8% 22.1 807 -- 4.8

WT9 365907084245700 June 8, 2016 0.18 Poor±10% 18.8 1,160 -- 3.1

WT10 365911084243800 June 8, 2016 0.54 Fair±8% 26.3 914 -- 3.0

WT11 365910084243700 June 8, 2016 0.19 Poor±10% 27.4 114 -- 4.3

WM7 365909084244000 June 8, 2016 0.50 Fair±8% 25.5 735 -- 3.0

Second survey

WM1 365822084260700 May 9, 2017 DRY DRY DRY DRY DRY DRY

WM2 365836084253300 May 9, 2017 2.35 Good±5% 16.4 571 9.4 3.5

WT1 365838084253300 May 9, 2017 0.54 Fair±8% 17.4 802 9.3 4.6

WT2 365842084252500 May 9, 2017 0.11 Fair±8% 13.9 484 9.4 3.1

WM3 365841084252800 May 9, 2017 1.41 Fair±8% 16.5 569 9.4 3.4

WT3 365849084253800 May 10, 2017 0.07 Fair±8% 15.5 505 9.3 6.0

WT4 365849084253200 May 10, 2017 0.51 Fair±8% 17.7 956 8.9 4.3

WT5 365907084254500 May 9, 2017 0.21 Fair±8% 17.3 1,740 9.1 4.0

WT6 365912084254000 May 9, 2017 0.11 Poor±10% 14.0 2,520 0.1 4.1

WT7 365903084251100 May 10, 2017 0.20 Fair±8% 18.0 -- 8.9 3.6

WM4 365900084251400 May 10, 2017 1.05 Fair±8% 17.4 664 9.0 3.3

WT8 365904084245600 May 8, 2017 0.06 Poor±10% 17.9 389 8.9 3.5

WM5 365903084245800 May 8, 2017 1.59 Fair±8% 17.9 447 9.0 3.4

WM6 365905084245500 May 8, 2017 1.36 Fair±8% 19.5 467 8.6 3.4

WT9 365907084245700 May 8, 2017 0.31 Fair±8% 15.3 1030 9.5 3.2

WT10 365911084243800 May 8, 2017 0.34 Fair±8% 20.0 494 8.7 3.2

WT11 365910084243700 May 8, 2017 0.73 Fair±8% 18.8 100 9.0 4.1

WM7 365909084244000 May 8, 2017 1.00 Fair±8% 18.2 457 9.0 3.2
Results and Discussion 13

KENTUCKY

Base from USGS National Hydrography Dataset, 2012, 1:24,000 Geographic Coordinate 

System World Geodetic System 1984. Daniel Boone National Forest boundary from U.S.

Forest Service Automated Lands Program. Mine data from Kentucky Mine Information System

#

#

# *# *

*#

#* #*

#*#*

*#

*#

*#

*#

*##*

*#

*#

*#

*# #*

*#

*#

*#*#

*

*

Unname d

Wildcat Branch

WM5

WT9 WM6

WM4 WT8

WT7

WT6

WT5

WM3

WT2

WM2

AM6

AT3

AM5

AT2

AM3

AM2 UT4

UT3

UT2 UT1

WT11 WT10

WM7

84°26' 84°24'

36°59'

36°58'

36°57'

Branch # 3

Cumberland River

Unnamed

Branch #1

Unnamed

Branch #2

0 1 2 KILOMETERS

0 1 2 MILES

Addison Branch

EXPLANATION

Water body

Daniel Boone National Forest

Specific conductance at study site,

*# Less than or equal to 300

*# 301 to 600

*# 601 to 900

*# Greater than 900

Mined area

in microsiemens per centimeter

A

B

#

# *# *

*#

#* #*

#**##*

*#

*#

*#

*#

*# *#*#

#**#

*#

#*

*# #*#*

*#

*#

**##*

Unname d

Wildcat Branch

WM5

WT9 WM6

WM4 WT8

WT6

WT5

WT4 WT3

WM3

WT2

WT1

WM2

AM6

AT3

AM5

AT2 AM4

AM3

AM2 UT4

UT3

UT2

UT1

WT11 WT10

WM7

84°26' 84°24'

36°59'

36°58'

36°57'

Branch # 3

Cumberland River

Unnamed

Branch #1

Unnamed

Branch #2

Addison Branch

Study area

Figure 4. Specific conductance at study sites in the Wildcat/Addison Branch study area in Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern 

Kentucky. A, June 2016. B, May 2017. (Sites with no streamflows are not shown.)
14 Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation, and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in Eastern Kentucky

Figure 5. Picture of the seep in the Wildcat Branch of the Wildcat/Addison Branch study area at site WT6 taken June 8, 2016, 

Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky.

of the June 2016 survey, the study area received 2.17, 1.23, 

and 0.00 inches (in.) of cumulative precipitation, respectively, 

at nearby Williamsburg, Ky. (not shown on map; University 

of Kentucky, 2017). During the preceding 14, 7, and 2 days of 

the May 2017 survey, the study area received 2.59, 1.25, and 

0.00 in. of cumulative precipitation, respectively.

Gaining and losing reaches were identified along the 

main stem of Wildcat Branch (table 3, fig. 6). Wildcat Branch 

reach 1, from upstream at site WM2 to downstream at WM1, 

was losing during both surveys, and the stream was dry at site 

WM1 during both surveys. Site WM1 is the last site on Wildcat Branch before the confluence with the Cumberland River. 

The Kidder Limestone Member underlies Wildcat Branch 

reach 1 (fig. 2A), so during the surveys the karst topography 

directed all the streamflow into the subsurface somewhere 

along Wildcat Branch reach 1.

The measured values of pH and specific conductance 

at Addison Branch sites indicated the study area, except the 

small basin draining at site AT2, was likely affected by AMD 

during the study period (table 4; fig. 4). The DO of the water 

at site AT3 was consistently the lowest among all Addison 

Branch sites and was anoxic during the first survey (0.2 mg/L; 

table 4). Site AT3 is an open mine portal that discharges 

groundwater directly to the surface. The values of pH from 

all Addison Branch sites except AT2 were below 4.0 standard 

units. Site AT2 consistently had the highest pH values and 

lowest specific conductance values. Site AT2 drained the west 

portion of the Addison Branch basin and had better water 

quality but less streamflow than AM4, the last site on the east 

portion of Addison Branch (table 4).

Gaining and losing reaches were identified along the 

main stem of Addison Branch (table 5; fig. 6). Similar to Wildcat Branch, Addison Branch reach 1 was the last reach before 

the confluence with the Cumberland River and was losing 

during both surveys. A large swallow hole that directed all the 

streamflow to the subsurface was found on Addison Branch 

reach 1 while performing the field work. Site AM4 was not 

measured during the June 2016 synoptic survey, so site AM4 

was not used in the May 2017 reach 3 computation. Site AM5 

was the upstream-most site in reach 3 for both computations. 
Results and Discussion 15

Table 3. Results of streamflow gain and loss computations from synoptic surveys made June 2016 and May 2017 at Wildcat Branch, 

Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky.

[ft3/s, cubic foot per second; W, Wildcat Branch; M, main stem; T, tributary; --, not available; ±, plus or minus; Underlined values of reach gain or loss exceed 

the potential error associated with the streamflow measurements, and are considered verified]

Reach Map identifier 

(fig. 1)

Downstream 

streamflow 

(ft3/s)

Upstream 

streamflow 

(ft3/s)

Inflow 

streamflow 

(ft3/s)

Reach gain 

or loss 

(ft3/s)

1 Maximum error 

associated with 

streamflow 

measurement 

(ft3/s)

Maximum error 

associated with 

reach streamflow 

(ft3/s)

First survey (June 8–9, 2016)

1 WM1 0.00 -- -- ‒1.24 ±0.00 0.10

1 WM2 -- 1.24 -- -- ±0.10 --

2 WM2 1.24 -- -- 0.02 ±0.10 0.20

2 WM3 -- 1.12 -- -- ±0.09 --

2 WT1 -- -- 0.10 -- ±0.01 --

3 WM3 1.12 -- -- ‒0.08 ±0.09 0.16

3 WM4 -- 1.11 -- -- ±0.06 --

3 WT2 -- -- 0.09 -- ±0.01 --

4 WM4 1.11 -- -- ‒0.12 ±0.06 0.15

4 WM5 -- 1.06 -- -- ±0.08 --

4 WT7 -- -- 0.17 -- ±0.01 --

5 WM5 1.06 -- -- 0.02 ±0.08 0.17

5 WM6 -- 0.84 -- -- ±0.07 --

5 WT8 -- -- 0.02 -- ±0.00 --

5 WT9 -- -- 0.18 -- ±0.02 --

Second survey (May 8–10, 2017)

1 WM1 0.00 -- -- ‒2.35 ±0.00 0.12

1 WM2 -- 2.35 -- -- ±0.12 --

2 WM2 2.35 -- -- 0.40 ±0.12 0.27

2 WM3 -- 1.41 -- -- ±0.11 --

2 WT1 -- -- 0.54 -- ±0.04 --

3 WM3 1.41 -- -- 0.25 ±0.11 0.20

3 WM4 -- 1.05 -- -- ±0.08 --

3 WT2 -- -- 0.11 -- ±0.01 --

4 WM4 1.05 -- -- ‒0.74 ±0.08 0.23

4 WM5 -- 1.59 -- -- ±0.13 --

4 WT7 -- -- 0.20 -- ±0.02 --

5 WM5 1.59 -- -- ‒0.14 ±0.13 0.27

5 WM6 -- 1.36 -- -- ±0.11 --

5 WT8 -- -- 0.06 -- ±0.01 --

5 WT9 -- -- 0.31 -- ±0.02 --

1

The error associated with a streamflow measurement, in cubic feet per second, is the product of the measured streamflow and the qualitative rating error from 

table 2.
16 Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation, and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in Eastern Kentucky

KENTUCKY

Base from U.S. Geological Survey National Hydrography Dataset, 2012, 1:24,000

Geographic Coordinate System World Geodetic System 1984

Daniel Boone National Forest boundary from U.S. Forest Service

Automated Lands Program, mined areas from Kentucky Mine 

Mapping Information System

1

2

4

5

3

5

3 4

2

1

1

2

3

4

4

1

2

3

1

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

###

#

#

##

##

Unname d

Wildcat Branch

WT9 WM6

WM5 WT8

WM4

WT7

WM3

WT2

WT1

WM2 WM1

AM6

AT3

AM5

AT2

AM3

AT1 AM2

AM1

84°26' 84°24'

36°59'

36°58'

36°57'

Branch # 3

Cumberland River

Unnamed

Branch #1

Unnamed

Branch #2

0 1 2 KILOMETERS

0 1 2 MILES

Addison Branch

EXPLANATION

# Study site

Stream reach number

Verified gaining reach

Verified losing reach

Undetermined reach

Water body

Daniel Boone National Forest

Mined area

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

##

##

Unname d

Wildcat Branch

WT9 WM6

WM4 WM5 WT8

WT7

WM3

WT2

WT1

WM2

WM1

AM6

AT3

AM5

AT2

AM3

AT1

AM2

AM1

84°26' 84°24'

36°59'

36°58'

36°57'

Branch # 3

Cumberland River

Unnamed

Branch #1

Unnamed

Branch #2

Addison Branch

Study area

B

A

Figure 6. Gaining, losing, and undetermined stream reaches in the Wildcat/Addison Branch study area in Daniel Boone 

National Forest, eastern Kentucky. A, June 2016. B, May 2017. Undetermined reaches have the sum of errors associated with 

the streamflow measurements greater than the gain or loss value.
Results and Discussion 17

Table 4. Streamflow and discrete water-quality results from synoptic surveys made June 2016 and May 2017 at Addison Branch, 

Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky.

[ft3/s, cubic foot per second; °C, degree Celsius; mS/cm, microsiemen per centimeter at 25 °C; mg/L, milligram per liter; A, Addison Branch; M, main stem; 

DRY, stream was at no flow; ±, plus or minus; %, percent; T, tributary; --, not available]

Map 

identifier 

(fig. 1)

U. S. Geological 

Survey station 

identifier

Date of 

synoptic 

survey

Streamflow 

(ft3

/s)

Streamflow 

measurement 

rating

Water 

temperature 

(°C)

Specific 

conductance 

(μS/cm)

Dissolved 

oxygen (mg/L)

pH

(standard

units)

First survey

AM1 365708084252900 June 29, 2016 DRY DRY DRY DRY DRY DRY

AM2 365721084252200 June 29, 2016 0.46 Fair±8% 19.5 1,280 9.0 2.5

AT1 365722084252000 June 29, 2016 DRY DRY DRY DRY DRY DRY

AM3 365744084251000 June 28, 2016 0.43 Fair±8% 20.6 1,280 8.5 2.6

AT2 365746084251100 June 28, 2016 0.13 Poor±10% 22.0 56 8.3 7.9

AM4 365744084251100 -- -- -- -- -- -- --

AM5 365809084253200 June 29, 2016 0.32 Fair±8% 16.6 1,780 8.5 2.4

AT3 365756084245700 June 29, 2016 0.16 Poor±10% 13.6 2,000 0.2 2.4

AM6 365756084245600 June 29, 2016 0.04 Poor±0% 18.1 412 2.7 3.0

Second survey

AM1 365708084252900 May 10, 2017 DRY DRY DRY DRY DRY DRY

AM2 365721084252200 May 10, 2017 1.81 Fair±8% 16.0 742 9.6 2.8

AT1 365722084252000 May 10, 2017 DRY DRY DRY DRY DRY DRY

AM3 365744084251000 May 10, 2017 1.46 Good±5% 16.5 972 9.3 2.7

AT2 365746084251100 May 10, 2017 0.37 Fair±8% 16.8 38 9.2 5.3

AM4 365744084251100 May 10, 2017 0.88 Fair±8% 16.6 1,250 9.3 2.6

AM5 365809084253200 May 11, 2017 0.68 Fair±8% 15.6 1,370 9.3 2.6

AT3 365756084245700 May 11, 2017 0.39 Poor±10% 13.3 1,500 2.4 2.6

AM6 365756084245600 May 11, 2017 0.11 Fair±8% 15.0 297 6.2 3.2

Addison Branch reach 4 was gaining during both surveys 

(table 5). Site AT3 was a mine portal, an artifact from previous 

mining activity, and discharged groundwater directly to the 

surface and had 3 to 4 times more flow than the next upstream 

main stem site (site AM6; table 4). 

The results of the synoptic surveys from June 2016 and 

May 2017 on various unnamed tributaries are listed in table 6. 

The unnamed tributaries were relatively small, so gains and 

losses were not computed. Site UT3 had the largest flows 

during both surveys and site UT4 had the lowest flows during 

both surveys. Sites UT3 and UT4 had the lowest specific conductance values (table 6).

Synoptic surveys were made November 2015 and May 

2016 in the Rock Creek study area (table 7). The Rock Creek 

streamgage, located at site RM3, indicated streamflow was 

approximately steady during both surveys (fig. 7A and B). The 

streamflow during the May 2016 survey was about 3.5 times 

greater than the November 2015 survey at site RM1. It is 

beneficial to do synoptic surveys during different streamflow 

conditions, so groundwater and surface water interactions can 

be evaluated at different water-table depths. 
18 Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation, and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in Eastern Kentucky

Table 5. Results of streamflow gain and loss computations from synoptic surveys made June 2016 and May 2017 at Addison Branch, 

Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky.

[ft3/s, cubic foot per second; A, Addison Branch; M, main stem; T, tributary; --, not available; ±, plus or minus; Underlined values of reach gain or loss exceed 

the potential error associated with the streamflow measurements, and are considered verified]

Reach

Map 

identifier 

(fig. 1)

Downstream 

streamflow 

(ft3/s)

Upstream 

streamflow 

(ft3/s)

Inflow 

streamflow 

(ft3/s)

Reach gain or 

loss (ft3/s)

1

Maximum error 

associated with 

streamflow 

measurement 

(ft3/s)

Maximum error 

associated with 

reach streamflow 

(ft3/s)

First survey (June 28–29, 2016)

1 AM1 0.00 -- -- –0.46 ±0.00 ±0.04

1 AM2 -- 0.46 -- -- ±0.04 --

1 AT1 -- -- 0.00 -- ±0.00 --

2 AM2 0.46 -- -- 0.03 ±0.04 ±0.07

2 AM3 -- 0.43 -- -- ±0.03 --

3 AM3 0.43 -- -- –0.02 ±0.03 ±0.07

3 AM5 -- 0.32 -- -- ±0.03 --

3 AT2 -- -- 0.13 -- ±0.01 --

4 AM5 0.32 -- -- 0.12 ±0.03 ±0.05

4 AM6 -- 0.04 -- -- ±0.00 --

4 AT3 -- -- 0.16 -- ±0.02 --

Second survey (May 10–11, 2017)

1 AM1 0.00 -- -- –1.81 ±0.00 ±0.14

1 AM2 -- 1.81 -- -- ±0.14 --

1 AT1 -- -- 0.00 -- ±0.00 --

2 AM2 1.81 -- -- 0.35 ±0.14 ±0.21

2 AM3 -- 1.46 -- -- ±0.07 --

3 AM3 1.46 -- -- 0.41 ±0.07 ±0.15

3 AM5 -- 0.68 -- -- ±0.05 --

3 AT2 -- -- 0.37 -- ±0.03 --

4 AM5 0.68 -- -- 0.18 ±0.05 ±0.10

4 AM6 -- 0.11 -- -- ±0.01 --

4 AT3 -- -- 0.39 -- ±0.04 --

1

The error associated with a streamflow measurement, in cubic feet per second, is the product of the measured streamflow and the qualitative rating error 

from table 4.
Results and Discussion 19

Table 6. Streamflow and discrete water-quality results from synoptic surveys made June 2016 and May 2017 at unnamed branches, 

Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky.

[ft3/s, cubic foot per second; °C, degree Celsius; mS/cm, microsiemen per centimeter at 25 °C; mg/L, milligram per liter; U, unnamed; T, tributary; 

±, plus or minus; %, percent; --, not available]

Map site 

identifier 

(refer to 

fig. 1)

U. S. Geological 

Survey station 

identifier

Date of 

synoptic 

survey

Streamflow 

(ft3

/s)

Streamflow 

measurement 

rating

Water 

temperature 

(°C)

Specific 

conductance 

(μS/cm)

Dissolved 

oxygen 

(mg/L)

pH 

(standard 

units)

First survey

UT1 365922084260000 June 8, 2016 0.05 Poor±10% 15.5 1,260 -- 3.3

UT2 365920084260500 June 8, 2016 0.04 Poor±10% 18.5 880 -- 3.6

UT3 365756084262300 June 7, 2016 0.16 Fair±8% 20.9 24 -- 5.9

UT4 365740084253900 June 9, 2016 0.01 Poor±10% 19.1 20 8.8 6.7

Second survey

UT1 365922084260000 May 9, 2017 0.02 Poor±10% 13.4 971 7.9 3.4

UT2 365920084260500 May 9, 2017 0.05 Fair±8% 15.2 825 9.2 3.7

UT3 365756084262300 May 11, 2017 0.10 Fair±8% 15.1 34 8.9 4.4

UT4 365740084253900 May 11, 2017 0.01 Poor±10% 15.6 19 9.0 4.8

Gaining and losing stream reaches were identified along 

White Oak Creek and lower Rock Creek (table 8; fig. 8). 

Eight reaches were verified as gaining or losing, with the gain 

or loss greater than the sum of streamflow measurement errors, 

during the November 2015 survey, but only four reaches 

were verified during May 2016. A substantial loss of flow was 

consistently observed in reach 8, where a limestone outcrop 

alongside the streambank allowed surface water to drain underground (table 8; fig. 9). It was not until after the confluence 

of Roberts Hollow (site RT7) and Rock Creek that a gaining 

reach was observed. The exact location where the stream 

resurfaced was not identified during the synoptic surveys.

Barton and Karathanasis (1999) renovated a constructed 

wetland on Jones Branch (site RT8) in 1990. The study objective was to treat AMD and they observed an increase in pH 

from 3.4 to 6.5 standard units during a 19-month study period. 

In the current study, site RT8 was dry in November 2015, but 

in May 2016 (when water was present), the pH was 7.5 standard units (table 7). Measurements for pH were not available 

for most sites during the first synoptic survey in November 

2015 because the pH probe malfunctioned, but during the 

second synoptic survey in May 2016, pH values were above 

6.5 standard units at 21 of 26 sites (81 percent; table 7). 

The pH values were generally more alkaline in the Rock 

Creek study area than in the Wildcat/Addison Branch study 

area, where pH was measured above 6.5 standard units at 

2 of 26 sites (8 percent) during the first synoptic survey in 

June 2016 (tables 2, 4, and 6). The near-neutral values of pH 

measured in the Rock Creek study area indicated the previous 

remediation efforts at Rock Creek likely continued to mitigate 

the AMD. 

There are numerous sites in the Rock Creek study 

area where a ferric hydroxide precipitate (also known as 

“yellow-boy”) armored the natural or limestone-lined streambed (fig. 10). The armoring on the limestone rocks limits 

the neutralizing capacity of the rock. The formation of ferric 

hydroxide precipitate is pH dependent, forming if the pH is 

above about 3.5 standard units (Hem and Cropper, 1959). 

The spatial distribution of specific conductance values at 

the Rock Creek study area can be seen in figure 11. A specific 

conductance benchmark for evaluating aquatic life has been 

developed for central Appalachian streams (EPA, 2011). 

The report established a chronic aquatic life benchmark of 

300 μS/cm that applies to parts of West Virginia and Kentucky, 

which includes the study area. The synoptic survey made at 

Rock Creek in May 2016 is temporally close to the June 2016 

survey made at Wildcat/Addison and serves as a comparison; 

twenty-three percent of the Rock Creek sites were above the 

300 μS/cm benchmark, where 81 percent of the Wildcat/Addison sites were above the threshold.
20 Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation, and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in Eastern Kentucky

Table 7. Streamflow and discrete water-quality results from synoptic surveys made November 2015 and May 2016 at Rock Creek study 

area, Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky.—Continued

[ft3/s, cubic foot per second; °C, degree Celsius; mS/cm, microsiemen per centimeter at 25 °C; mg/L, milligram per liter; R, Rock Creek; M, main stem;

 ±, plus or minus; %, percent; --, not available; T, tributary; DRY, stream was at no flow]

Map 

identifier 

(fig. 1)

U.S. Geological 

Survey 

station identifier

Date Streamflow 

(ft3/s)

Streamflow 

measurement 

rating

Water 

temperature 

(°C)

Specific 

conductance 

(μS/cm)

Dissolved 

oxygen 

(mg/L)

pH 

(standard 

units)

First survey

RM1 364250084325400 November 5, 2015 14.6 Good±5% 15.4 162 9.2 --

RT1 364247084325400 November 5, 2015 0.01 Poor±10% 14.7 127 7.0 --

RM2 364244084330100 November 5, 2015 14.0 Good±5% 15.3 166 9.4 --

RT2 03410594 November 5, 2015 0.03 Fair±8% 14.2 59 9.5 --

RM3 03410590 November 5, 2015 14.5 Good±5% 15.8 166 9.6 --

RT3 03410585 November 5, 2015 0.17 Fair±8% 14.1 343 9.5 --

RM4 364227084340500 November 4, 2015 11.6 Good±5% -- -- -- --

RT4 03410578 November 4, 2015 0.03 Poor±10% -- -- -- --

RM5 364222084343500 November 4, 2015 14.0 Fair±8% 16.4 208 9.0 --

RT5 03410575 November 4, 2015 0.02 Poor±10% 18.6 3,440 7.3 --

RT6 364225084343300 November 5, 2015 0.81 Fair±8% -- -- -- --

RM6 364238084334500 November 4, 2015 14.2 Good±5% 16.1 143 9.0 --

RT7 03410571 November 4, 2015 0.08 Fair±8% 17.5 976 8.2 --

RM7 364237084350100 November 4, 2015 0.58 Fair±8% 18.1 311 8.9 --

RM8 364210084354500 November 4, 2015 0.29 Fair±8% 17.5 174 8.0 7.6

RM9 03410559 November 4, 2015 12.6 Good±5% 16.2 116 9.3 7.2

RM10 03410557 November 4, 2015 0.64 Fair±8% 16.5 287 9.5 7.

RT8 03410555 November 4, 2015 DRY DRY DRY DRY DRY DRY

RM11 364143084360800 November 4, 2015 1.02 Poor±10% 15.2 287 9.2 7.1

RT9 364138084360400 November 4, 2015 0.06 Poor±10% 14.3 110 9.1 7.3

RT10 364135084363200 November 4, 2015 0.07 Fair±8% 15.2 477 8.1 6.9

RT11 03410547 November 4, 2015 0.26 Good±5% 14.8 582 9.9 6.8

RM12 364134084365400 November 4, 2015 0.73 Good±5% 15.0 148 9.1 8.2

RT12 364134084365500 November 4, 2015 0.04 Poor±10% 14.9 359 9.0 8.0

RM13 364126084372300 November 3, 2015 0.56 Fair±8% 15.4 -- -- 7.0

RT13 03410542 November 3, 2015 0.10 Fair±8% 17 435 8.4 --

RM14 364125084372400 November 3, 2015 0.67 Fair±8% 16.6 75 8.1 6.6

Second survey

RM1 364250084325400 May 18, 2016 50.6 Good±5% 14.3 127 9.1 7.4

RT1 364247084325400 May 18, 2016 50.6 Good±5% 14.3 127 9.1 7.4

RM2 364244084330100 May 18, 2016 50.6 Good±5% 14.3 127 9.1 7.4

RT2 03410594 May 18, 2016 1.31 Fair±8% 12.8 42 9.7 8.5

RM3 03410590 May 18, 2016 42.2 Good±5% 14.4 133 8.8 7.3

RT3 03410585 May 18, 2016 1.62 Poor±10% 12.7 115 9.4 7.0

RM4 364227084340500 May 19, 2016 39.1 Fair±8% 14.9 124 9.2 7.3

RT4 03410578 May 19, 2016 22 Poor±10% 13.5 449 9.3 3.5

RM5 364222084343500 May 18, 2016 40.6 Fair±8% 14.5 216 8.8 6.8

RT5 03410575 May 18, 2016 0.23 Poor±10% 15.8 1,150 8.7 3.7
Results and Discussion 21

Table 7. Streamflow and discrete water-quality results from synoptic surveys made November 2015 and May 2016 at Rock Creek study 

area, Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky.—Continued

[ft3/s, cubic foot per second; °C, degree Celsius; mS/cm, microsiemen per centimeter at 25 °C; mg/L, milligram per liter; R, Rock Creek; M, main stem;

 ±, plus or minus; %, percent; --, not available; T, tributary; DRY, stream was at no flow]

Map 

identifier 

(fig. 1)

U.S. Geological 

Survey 

station identifier

Date Streamflow 

(ft3/s)

Streamflow 

measurement 

rating

Water 

temperature 

(°C)

Specific 

conductance 

(μS/cm)

Dissolved 

oxygen 

(mg/L)

pH 

(standard 

units)

Second survey—continued

RT6 364225084343300 May 19, 2016 0.75 Poor±10% 14.9 3,140 3.3 5.4

RM6 364238084334500 May 19, 2016 37.2 Good±5% 14.1 107 9.0 7.7

RT7 03410571 May 19, 2016 0.64 Fair±8% 15.0 420 9.0 7.0

RM7 364237084350100 May 19, 2016 3.63 Good±5% 13.3 202 9.9 7.2

RM8 364210084354500 May 19, 2016 0.28 Poor±10% 12.9 201 10.0 7.2

RM9 03410559 May 19, 2016 29.2 Good±5% 13.6 86 9.2 7.6

RM10 03410557 May 19, 2016 4.21 Good±5% 11.9 189 10.0 6.9

RT8 03410555 May 19, 2016 0.86 Fair±8% 12.2 242 9.7 7.5

RM11 364143084360800 May 19, 2016 4.28 Good±5% -- -- -- --

RT9 364138084360400 May 19, 2016 0.39 Fair±8% 11.1 96 9.4 7.1

RT10 364135084363200 May 19, 2016 0.48 Poor±10% 12.8 357 8.5 7.5

RT11 03410547 May 19, 2016 0.40 Fair±8% 12.6 459 9.6 6.6

RM12 364134084365400 May 18, 2016 3.15 Good±5% 13.1 95 9.4 6.5

RT12 364134084365500 May 18, 2016 0.32 Fair±8% 12.8 162 9.1 7.5

RM13 364126084372300 May 18, 2016 3.15 Fair±8% 13.0 101 9.0 7.1

RT13 03410542 May 18, 2016 1.04 Fair±8% 12.8 172 9.0 6.4

RM14 364125084372400 May 18, 2016 2.12 Fair±8% -- 58 9.0 7.6
22 Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation, and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in Eastern Kentucky

1 256 511 766 1021 1276

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

 May 7 May 9 May 11 May 13 May 15 May 17 May 19 May 21

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2015

Streamflow, in cubic feet per second

 Oct. 24 Oct. 26 Oct. 28 Oct. 30 Nov. 1 Nov. 3 Nov. 5 Nov. 7

Streamflow, in cubic feet per second

2016

A

B

Period of time 

when synoptic 

survey was made

Period of time 

when synoptic 

survey was made

Figure 7. Instantaneous streamflow (15-minute) at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage on Rock 

Creek near Yamacraw, Kentucky (station number 03410590). A, Survey 1, October 24–November 9, 2015. 

B, Survey 2, May 7–22, 2016.
Results and Discussion 23

Table 8. Results of the streamflow gain and loss computations from synoptic surveys made November 2015 and May 2016 at Rock 

Creek, Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky.—Continued

[ft3/s, cubic foot per second; R, Rock Creek; M, main stem; --, not available; T, tributary; ±, plus or minus; Underlined values of reach gain or loss exceed the 

potential error associated with the streamflow measurements, and are considered verified]

Stream 

reach

Map 

identifier 

(fig. 1)

Downstream 

streamflow 

(ft3/s)

Upstream 

streamflow 

(ft3/s)

Inflow 

streamflow 

(ft3/s)

Reach 

gain or loss 

(ft3/s)

1

Maximum error 

associated with 

streamflow 

measurement 

(ft3/s)

Maximum error 

associated with 

reach streamflow 

(ft3/s)

First survey (November 3–5, 2015)

1 RM1 14.6 -- -- 0.59 ±0.73 ±1.43

1 RM2 -- 14.0 -- -- ±0.70 --

1 RT1 -- -- 0.01 -- ±0.00 --

2 RM2 14.0 -- -- –0.53 ±0.70 ±1.42

2 RM3 -- 14.5 -- -- ±0.72 --

2 RT2 -- -- 0.03 -- ±0.00 --

3 RM3 14.5 -- -- 2.73 ±0.72 ±1.31

3 RM4 -- 11.6 -- -- ±0.58 --

3 RT3 -- -- 0.17 -- ±0.01 --

4 RM4 11.6 -- -- –2.43 ±0.58 ±1.70

4 RM5 -- 14.0 -- -- ±1.12 --

4 RT4 -- -- 0.03 -- ±0.00 --

5 RM5 14.0 -- -- –1.03 ±1.12 ±1.89

5 RM6 -- 14.2 -- -- ±0.71 --

5 RT5 -- -- 0.02 -- ±0.00 --

5 RT6 -- -- 0.81 -- ±0.06 --

6 RM6 14.2 -- -- 13.5 ±0.71 ±0.77

6 RM7 -- 0.58 -- -- ±0.05 --

6 RT7 -- -- 0.08 -- ±0.01 --

7 RM7 0.58 -- -- –0.35 ±0.05 ±0.12

7 RM10 -- 0.64 -- -- ±0.05 --

7 RM8 -- -- 0.29 -- ±0.02 --

8 RM8 0.29 -- -- –12.3 ±0.02 ±0.65

8 RM9 -- 12.6 -- -- ±0.63

9 RM10 0.64 -- -- –0.38 ±0.05 ±0.15

9 RM11 -- 1.02 -- -- ±0.10 --

9 RT8 -- -- 0.00 -- ±0.00 --

10 RM11 1.02 -- -- –0.10 ±0.10 ±0.17

10 RM12 -- 0.73 -- -- ±0.04 --

10 RT9 -- -- 0.06 -- ±0.01 --

10 RT10 -- -- 0.07 -- ±0.01 --

10 RT11 -- -- 0.26 -- ±0.01 --

11 RM12 0.73 -- -- 0.13 ±0.04 ±0.08

11 RM13 -- 0.56 -- -- ±0.04 --

11 RT12 -- -- 0.04 -- ±0.00 --

12 RM13 0.56 -- -- –0.21 ±0.04 ±0.10

12 RM14 -- 0.67 -- -- ±0.05 --

12 RT13 -- -- 0.10 -- ±0.01 --
24 Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation, and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in Eastern Kentucky

Table 8. Results of the streamflow gain and loss computations from synoptic surveys made November 2015 and May 2016 at Rock 

Creek, Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky.—Continued

[ft3/s, cubic foot per second; R, Rock Creek; M, main stem; --, not available; T, tributary; ±, plus or minus; Underlined values of reach gain or loss exceed the 

potential error associated with the streamflow measurements, and are considered verified]

Stream 

reach

Map 

identifier 

(fig. 1)

Downstream 

streamflow 

(ft3/s)

Upstream 

streamflow 

(ft3/s)

Inflow 

streamflow 

(ft3/s)

Reach 

gain or loss 

(ft3/s)

1

Maximum error 

associated with 

streamflow 

measurement 

(ft3/s)

Maximum error 

associated with 

reach streamflow 

(ft3/s)

Second survey (May 18–19, 2016)

1 RM1 50.6 -- -- 4.63 ±2.53 ±6.21

1 RM2 -- 44.4 -- -- ±3.55 --

1 RT1 -- -- 1.57 -- ±0.13 --

2 RM2 44.4 -- -- 0.89 ±3.55 ±5.76

2 RM3 -- 42.2 -- -- ±2.11 --

2 RT2 -- -- 1.31 -- ±0.10 --

3 RM3 42.2 -- -- 1.48 ±2.11 ±5.40

3 RM4 -- 39.1 -- -- ±3.13 --

3 RT3 -- -- 1.62 -- ±0.16 --

4 RM4 39.1 -- -- –1.72 ±3.13 ±6.40

4 RM5 -- 40.6 -- -- ±3.25 --

4 RT4 -- -- 0.22 -- ±0.02 --

5 RM5 40.6 -- -- 2.42 ±3.25 ±5.21

5 RM6 -- 37.2 -- -- ±1.86 --

5 RT5 -- -- 0.23 -- ±0.02 --

5 RT6 -- -- 0.75 -- ±0.08 --

6 RM6 37.2 -- -- 32.9 ±1.86 ±2.09

6 RM7 -- 3.63 -- -- ±0.18 --

6 RT7 -- -- 0.64 -- ±0.05 --

7 RM7 3.63 -- -- –0.86 ±0.18 ±0.42

7 RM10 -- 4.21 -- -- ±0.21 --

7 RM8 -- -- 0.28 -- ±0.03 --

8 RM8 0.28 -- -- –28.9 ±0.03 ±1.49

8 RM9 -- 29.2 -- -- ±1.46

9 RM10 4.21 -- -- –0.93 ±0.21 ±0.49

9 RM11 -- 4.28 -- -- ±0.21 --

9 RT8 -- -- 0.86 -- ±0.07 --

10 RM11 4.28 -- -- –0.14 ±0.21 ±0.48

10 RM12 -- 3.15 -- -- ±0.16 --

10 RT9 -- -- 0.39 -- ±0.03 --

10 RT10 -- -- 0.48 -- ±0.05 --

10 RT11 -- -- 0.40 -- ±0.03 --

11 RM12 3.15 -- -- –0.32 ±0.16 ±0.44

11 RM13 -- 3.15 -- -- ±0.25 --

11 RT12 -- -- 0.32 -- ±0.03 --

12 RM13 3.15 -- -- –0.01 ±0.25 ±0.50

12 RM14 -- 2.12 -- -- ±0.17 --

12 RT13 -- -- 1.04 -- ±0.08 --

1

The error associated with a streamflow measurement, in cubic feet per second, is the product of the measured streamflow and the qualitative rating error 

from table 7.
Results and Discussion 25

12

11

10

9

1

6

5

4

3

2 1

##

##

#

#

#

# # ##

##

#

####

#

#

## ##

#

##

RT9

RT8

RM8

RM9

RT7

RM6

RT6RT5

RM5

RT4

RM4

RT3

RM3

RT2

RM2

RT1

RM14

RM13

RT12

RM12

RT11 RT10

RM11

RM10

RM7

RM1

RT13

84°36' 84°34' 84°32'

36°43'

36°42'

36°41'

KENTUCKY

Daniel Boone National Forest boundary from U.S. Forest 

 Service Automated Lands Program Survey. Mine 

 data from Kentucky Mine Information System

Base from U.S. Geological Survey National Hydrography Dataset, 2012,

1:24,000, Geographic Coordinate System World Geodetic System 1984 

0 1 2 KILOMETERS

0 1 2 MILES

B

Water Tank Hollow

Cab

Br

in

anch

Unnamed Tributary

Paint Cliff White Oak Creek

Roberts Hollow

Koger Fork

Rock Creek

Poplar Spring Hollow

Grassy Fork

A

Jones Branch

Unnamed Tributary

Wolfpen Br a nch

Co-Operative

White Oak

Junction

Paint Cliff

Big South Fork of the Cumberland Riv e r

Big South Fork of the Cumberland Riv e r

#

# #

#

#

8

7

RT8

RM8

RM9

RM7

RM10

Jones Branch

White Oak Creek

Rock Creek

10

11

12

6

##

##

#

#

#

### #

##

#

####

#

#

## ##

#

##

RT9

RT8

RM8

RM9

RT7

RM6

RT6 RT5

RM5

RT4

RM4

RT3

RM3

RT2

RM2

RT1

RM14

RM13

RT12

RM12

RT11 RT10

RM11

RM10

RM7

RM1

RT13

84°36' 84°34' 84°32'

36°43'

36°42'

36°41'

Water Tank Hollow

Cab

B

in

ranch

Unnamed Tributary

Paint Cliff

White Oak Creek

Roberts Hollow

Koger Fork

Rock Creek

Poplar Spring Hollow

Grassy Fork

Jones Branch

Unnamed Tributary

Wolfpen Br a nch

White Oak

Junction

Co-Operative

1 2

3

4

5

7

8

9

#

#

#

# #

RT8

RM8

RM9

RM7

RM10

Jones Branch

White Oak Creek

Rock Creek

EXPLANATION

# Study site

Water body

Mined area

Stream reach number

Verified gaining reach

Verified losing reach

Undetermined reach

Rock Creek

Rock Creek

Ro kc r C eek

Rock Creek

Study area

Daniel Boone National Forest

Figure 8. Gaining, losing, and undetermined stream reaches in the Rock Creek study area in Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern 

Kentucky. A, November 2015. B, May 2016. Undetermined reaches have the sum of errors associated with the streamflow measurements 

greater than the gain or loss value.
26 Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation, and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in Eastern Kentucky

Figure 9. Picture of a cave between site RM8 and RM9 that caused the streamflow to go subsurface, reach 8, 

Rock Creek study area, Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky.
Results and Discussion 27

A

B

C

Figure 10. Pictures of ferric 

hydroxide precipitant or “yellow 

boy” in the Rock Creek study area. 

A, Site RT4. B, Site RT6. C, Site RT8.
28 Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation, and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in Eastern Kentucky

##

##

#

#

#

# #

#

####

## ##

#

##

*#*#

#**#

#*

*#

*#

#*#*#* #*

#**#

*#

#**#*##*

*#

*#*# #*#*

*#

#**#

RT9

RT8

RM8

RM9

RT7RM6

RT6RT5

RM5

RT4

RM4

RT3

RM3

RT2

RM2

RT1

RM14

RM13

RT12

RM12

RT11 RT10

RM10

RM7

RM1

RT13

Co-Operative

White Oak

Junction

Paint Cliff

Paint Cliff

84°36' 84°34' 84°32'

36°43'

36°42'

36°41'

KENTUCKY

Daniel Boone National Forest boundary from U.S. Forest Service 

 Mine data from Kentucky Mine Information System

Base from U.S. Geological Survey National Hydrography Dataset, 2012, 1:24,000

Geographic Coordinate System World Geodetic System 1984 

0 1 2 KILOMETERS

0 1 2 MILES

Water Tank Hollow

Cab

Br

in

anch

Unnamed Tributary

Paint Cliff White Oak Creek

Roberts Hollow

Koger Fork

Rock Creek

Poplar Spring Hollow

Grassy Fork

A

Jones Branch

Unnamed Tributary

Wolfpen Br a nch

Big

South Fork of the

Big South Fork of the Cumberland Riv e r

#

#

#

# #

*

*#

#*

#* *# RT8

RM8

RM9

RM7

RM10

Jones Branch

White Oak Creek

Rock Creek

*##

#*

*#

#

*##*

*#*#

*#

*#

*#

*#*# *#*#

*

*#

*

#*

*#

*#

#

#

RT9

RM8

RT7RM6

RT5

RM5

RM2

RT3

RM3

RT1

RM14

RT12

RM12

RT11 RT10

RM11

RM7

RM1

RM10

RT13

White Oak Paint Cliff

Junction

Co-Operative

RT2

RM9

84°36' 84°34' 84°32'

36°43'

36°42'

36°41'

A

Water Tank Hollow

Cabin Branch

Unnamed Tributary

White Oak Creek

Roberts Hollow

Koger Fork

Rock Creek

Poplar Spring Hollow

Grassy Fork

Jones Branch

Unnamed Tributary

Wolfpen Br a nch

B

#

*#

*

RM10

*# *# RM9

RM8

RM7

Big South Fork of the Cumberland Riv e r

Jones Branch

White Oak Creek

Rock Creek

EXPLANATION

Daniel Boone National Forest

Water body

Mined area *# Less than or equal to 300

*# 301 to 600

*# 601 to 900

*# Greater than 900

Rock Creek

Rock Creek

Rock Creek

Rock Creek

Study area

Specific conductance at study site,

in microsiemens per centimeter

Figure 11. Specific conductance at study sites in the Rock Creek study area in Daniel Boone National Forest, eastern Kentucky. 

A, November 2015. B, May 2016. 
Results and Discussion 29

Hydrograph Separation

Six hydrograph separation methods were applied to daily 

mean streamflows from the Rock Creek streamgage (site 

RM3) for the period August 2015 to August 2017. Only partial 

streamflow record was available for the months of August 

2015 and August 2017. Monthly mean streamflow for the 

period September 2015 through July 2017 ranged from

 7.2 ft3/s for October 2016 to 328 ft3/s for February 2016 

(table 9). On average, base flow accounted for more total 

streamflow than surface runoff during the study period, irrespective of method used for hydrograph separation.

Barlow and others (2015), caution against using the 

GW Toolbox where groundwater recharge is not uniformly 

distributed over the entire basin, which can be caused by 

losing reaches and where all groundwater recharge, except 

what is lost to evapotranspiration, does not discharge to the 

receiving stream. A major losing reach was identified upstream 

of the Rock Creek streamgage at reach 8 (fig. 8, table 8), so 

groundwater recharge was not uniformly distributed over the 

entire basin and may not entirely discharge to the receiving 

stream (Rock Creek). These shortcomings prevent the extrapolation of the hydrograph separation results from Rock Creek 

reach 3, to the entire upstream basin. 

Summary statistics for base-flow index values calculated 

from six different methods are shown in table 10. The summary statistics were computed only for months with complete 

streamflow record. The mean base-flow index ranged from 

0.681 using the PART method to 0.565 using the BFI Modified 

method. Barlow and others (2015) presented a 30-year dataset 

from a USGS streamgage on the Pawcatuck River at Wood 

River Junction, Rhode Island (station number 01117500) and 

determined the PART method generated the highest base-flow 

index and both BFI methods generated the lowest base-flow 

index. The methods that generated the highest and lowest 

base-flow indices from Barlow and others (2015) agree with 

the current study, but do not represent what the methods will 

yield from all streamgages.

Flow-duration curves were plotted so that results from 

hydrograph separation methods could be compared between 

each other (fig. 12). The flow duration curves were developed 

from daily mean streamflows, base flows, and runoff estimates 

and included partial-month record. The curves indicate the 

duration characteristics of estimated daily base flow and runoff 

made with the different separation methods are not highly different. Greater differences were observed between methods in 

base-flow duration characteristics at lower percent exceedance 

levels and greater differences in runoff duration characteristics 

at higher percent exceedance levels.

Continuous Water Quality

Summary statistics of continuous record for water temperature, pH, specific conductance, DO, and turbidity values 

measured July 15, 2016 through July 31, 2017 are presented 

in table 11. The water-quality information collected during the 

synoptic surveys provided a widespread view of the conditions across the study area, but the continuous data provided 

a detailed perspective of the water quality at a single location. 

Water quality results from discrete measurements made during 

the synoptic surveys were similar between site RM3 and the 

outlet of the study area (site RM1; table 7) during these lowflow conditions.

The continuous water-quality results were used to evaluate the presence of AMD at the outlet of the Rock Creek study 

area. Water samples were not collected during this study, but 

the pH values were near neutral at the Rock Creek streamgage 

(fig. 13). Barton and Karathanasis (1999) showed that by raising the pH to near-neutral values at site RT8, sulfate concentrations decreased by 56 percent, aluminum concentrations 

decreased by 98 percent, and iron concentrations decreased 

by 95 percent. The previous remediation efforts are likely 

continuing to improve the effect of AMD in the study area. 

The continuous specific conductance values ranged between 

30 and 259 μS/cm (table 11). The range of specific conductance values were below the specific conductance aquatic life 

benchmark of 300 μS/cm (EPA, 2011). The minimum continuous DO during the study period was 7.5 mg/L (table 11). There 

was an inverse relationship between DO and pH values, and 

the diurnal fluctuations observed in both parameters was likely 

from biological activity (fig. 13). 

Specific conductance is affected by AMD, even in areas 

where dilution occurs, so it is considered a good indicator for 

AMD (Gray, 1995). There is a general inverse relationship 

between streamflow and specific conductance (fig. 14). It is 

expected for specific conductance of streamflow to decrease 

during precipitation events because precipitation typically 

has relatively low specific conductance and the storm runoff dilutes the water in the stream. (fig. 14). A decrease in 

specific conductance was observed during storm events, but 

directly before the drop, there was a sharp spike (fig. 14). 

This response has been observed in karst areas and attributed 

to carbonate-rich water stored in the epikarst that was forced 

to the stream by storm-generated hydraulic head and then 

dropped to pre-storm levels from diluted storm water (Toran 

and others, 2006). 
Table 9. Monthly mean streamflow at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage on Rock Creek near Yamacraw, Kentucky (station number 03410590) for tthrough July 2017, with monthly base flows and base-flow indices calculated with six different hydrograph separation methods. [ft3/s, cubic foot per second; PART, a computer program that partions streamflow to estimate base flow (Rutledge, 1998); HYSEP, a computer program that includes three methods 

hydrograph into components of base flow and surface runoff (Sloto and Crouse, 1996); BFI, a computer program that implements the procedures for base-flow separation that were Hydrology (Wahl and Wahl, 1995); NA, not applicable] Month Number of days per month Monthly mean streamflow (ft3/s) PART base flow (ft3/s) PART base-flow index HYSEP fixed interval base flow (ft3/s) HYSEP fixed interval base-flow index HYSEP local minium base flow (ft3/s) HYSEP local minium base-flow index HYSEP sliding interval base flow (ft3/s) HYSEP sliding interval base-flow index BFI standard base flow (ft3/s) BFI standar

base-flo

index 

Sep. 2015 30 23.3 21.1 0.905 19.4 0.833 17.5 0.753 19.1 0.820 18.8 0.808 Oct. 2015 31 27.9 21.1 0.757 23.3 0.838 19.8 0.711 21.6 0.774 20.1 0.720 Nov. 2015 30 40.6 20.1 0.494 25.6 0.629 16.3 0.401 17.9 0.440 16.8 0.412 Dec. 2015 31 226 95.9 0.424 120 0.531 59.2 0.262 105 0.464 92.0 0.407 

Jan. 2016 31 116 94.1 0.814 80.4 0.696 80.8 0.699 84.1 0.728 90.1 0.779 

Feb. 2016 29 328 174 0.532 154 0.468 129 0.394 165 0.504 139.0 0.424 

Mar. 2016 31 91.4 85.0 0.931 78.0 0.854 74.8 0.819 76.9 0.841 76.6 0.839 

Apr. 2016 30 58.7 53.9 0.919 50.6 0.861 47.8 0.815 49.7 0.847 52.4 0.892 

May 2016 31 126 64.5 0.511 59.7 0.473 46.1 0.365 61.2 0.484 45.7 0.361 

June 2016 30 35.5 25.1 0.707 22.1 0.622 20.4 0.574 23.1 0.650 22.5 0.634 

July 2016 31 46.9 18.7 0.398 18.1 0.386 17.2 0.367 20.0 0.426 17.4 0.372 

Aug. 2016 31 18.8 16.1 0.857 15.0 0.798 14.5 0.775 15.0 0.799 15.1 0.802 

Sep. 2016 30 9.0 8.2 0.916 7.6 0.843 7.59 0.848 7.6 0.846 7.8 0.865 

Oct. 2016 31 7.2 6.6 0.905 6.3 0.867 6.3 0.876 6.4 0.882 6.6 0.913 

Nov. 2016 30 14.3 11.2 0.784 11.3 0.790 11.2 0.783 11.1 0.777 11.5 0.803 

Dec. 2016 31 132 32.6 0.246 40.7 0.308 28.3 0.214 45.3 0.342 28.5 0.215 

Jan. 2017 31 116 81.7 0.704 80.1 0.691 80.3 0.693 76.2 0.657 78.1 0.674 

Feb. 2017 28 62.3 53.3 0.856 45.7 0.733 47.9 0.769 47.0 0.755 47.8 0.766 

Mar. 2017 31 173 102 0.591 95.2 0.551 85.4 0.495 95.7 0.554 86.9 0.503 

Apr. 2017 30 161 66.8 0.416 79.0 0.492 56.0 0.349 71.4 0.444 56.4 0.351 

May 2017 31 154 71.5 0.463 67.7 0.439 68.2 0.442 71.8 0.465 68.2 0.442 

June 2017 30 59.8 38.8 0.649 35.8 0.599 35.3 0.590 36.1 0.604 35.5 0.593 July 2017 31 13.3 12.0 0.900 11.5 0.862 11.3 0.848 11.7 0.877 NA NA 

Mean NA 88.6 50.9 0.681 49.8 0.659 42.6 0.601 49.4 0.651 44.8 0.589 
Results and Discussion 31

Table 10. Base-flow index summary statistics for the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage on Rock Creek near Yamacraw, 

Kentucky (station number 03410590) for the period September 2015 through July 2017.

[PART, a computer program that partions streamflow to estimate base flow (Rutledge, 1998); HYSEP, a computer program that includes three 

methods to separate a streamflow hydrograph into components of base flow and surface runoff (Sloto and Crouse, 1996); BFI, a computer 

program that implements the procedures for base-flow separation that were established by the Institute of Hydrology (Wahl and Wahl, 1995)]

PART

HYSEP 

fixed 

interval

HYSEP 

local 

minimum

HYSEP 

sliding 

interval

BFI 

standard

BFI 

modifed

Mean 0.681 0.659 0.601 0.651 0.589 0.565

Maximum 0.931 0.867 0.876 0.882 0.913 0.883

Minimum 0.246 0.308 0.214 0.342 0.215 0.214

Spread 0.684 0.559 0.662 0.54 0.698 0.669

0 0.5 1 5 20

Percentage of time streamflow was equaled or exceeded

1

10

100

1,000

Streamflow, in cubic feet per second 

EXPLANATION

2 10 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Observed streamflow

Base flow estimated by PART method

Base flow estimated by HYSEP Fixed Interval method

95 98 99 99.5 99.8

Base flow estimated by HYSEP Local Minimum method

Base flow estimated by HYSEP Sliding Interval method

Base flow estimated by Base-Flow Index Standard method

Base flow estimated by Base-Flow Index Modifed method

Runoff estimated by PART method

Runoff estimated by HYSEP Fixed Interval method

Runoff estimated by HYSEP Local Minimum method

Runoff estimated by HYSEP Sliding Interval method

Runoff estimated by Base-Flow Index Standard method

Runoff estimated by Base-Flow Index Modifed method

Figure 12. Flow duration curves for observed streamflow, and base flow and surface runoff calculated 

with six hydrograph separation methods for the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage on Rock Creek near 

Yamacraw, Kentucky (station number 03410590) for the period August 2015 to August 2017.
32 Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation, and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in Eastern Kentucky

Table 11. Summary statistics for continuous water-quality parameters recorded at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage 

on Rock Creek near Yamacraw, Kentucky (station number 03410590) for the period July 15, 2016 to July 31, 2017.

[°C, degree Celsius; mS/cm, micosiemen per centimeter; mg/L, milligram per liter; FNU, formazine nephelometric unit]

Statistic

Water

temperature

(°C)

pH

(standard

units)

Specific 

conductance

(μS/cm)

Dissolved

oxygen (mg/L)

Turbidity

(FNU)

Maximum 27.6 7.9 259 14.1 1,060

75th percentile 21.8 7.6 183 11.0 5

Median 16 7.4 119 9.3 3

25th percentile 9.1 7.3 81 8.5 2

Minimum 0.5 6.8 30 7.5 0

Mean 15.4 7.4 132 9.7 5

6.60

6.80

7.00

7.20

7.40

7.60

7.80

8.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

10.00

11.00

12.00

13.00

14.00

15.00

July 2016 Sep. 2016 Oct. 2016 Dec. 2016 Jan. 2017 Feb. 2017 Mar. 2017 Apr. 2017 May 2017 June 2017 July 2017

pH, in standard units

EXPLANATION

Aug. 2016 Nov. 2016

Dissolved oxygen, in milligrams per liter

Dissolved oxygen

pH

Date

Figure 13. Continuous dissolved oxygen and pH at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage on Rock Creek near 

Yamacraw, Kentucky (station number 03410590), from July 15, 2016 to July 31, 2017.
Results and Discussion 33

169313852077276934614153484555376229692176138305899796891038111073117651245713149138411453315225159171660917301179931868519377200692076121453221452283723529242212491325605262972698927681283732906529757304493114131833325253321733909346013529335985

10

100

1,000

10,000

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

July 2016 Aug. 2016 Sep. 2016 Oct. 2016 Nov. 2016 Dec. 2016 Jan. 2017 Feb. 2017 Mar. 2017 Apr. 2017 May 2017 June 2017 July 2017

Streamflow, in cubic feet per second

Specific conductance, in microsiemens per centimeter

Specific conductance

Streamflow

EXPLANATION

Date

1

Figure 14. Specific conductance and streamflow at the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage on Rock Creek near Yamacraw, 

Kentucky (station number 03410590), from July 15, 2016 to July 31, 2017.

A substantial part of the streamflow in Rock Creek 

goes underground in reach 8 and resurfaces downstream in 

reach 6 (table 8). The maximum specific conductance for 

the 12-month period at the Rock Creek streamgage was 

259 μS/cm (table 11). Because the pH is near neutral at the 

Rock Creek streamgage, much of the aluminum and iron are 

likely precipitating out and not being carried downstream 

in the dissolved form. Anecdotal evidence of metal mineral 

precipitation was observed as iron staining at several sites in 

the Rock Creek study area (fig. 10). Based on the 300 μS/cm 

benchmark, the specific conductance results indicated the 

effect of AMD at the Rock Creek streamgage was minimal.
34 Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation, and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in Eastern Kentucky

Summary

During 2015–17, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest 

Service, carried out a study to characterize the hydrology 

and water chemistry in the Rock Creek and Wildcat and 

Addison Branches of the Daniel Boone National Forest. The 

Rock Creek and Wildcat/Addison Branch study areas contain 

abandoned mine lands. Mines began operating in both areas 

in the early to mid-1900s and used a combination of surface 

and underground mining practices to extract the coal. Many of 

the mining operations took place prior to the Surface Mining 

Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, which regulated coal 

mines but also aimed to reclaim abandoned mine lands. As a 

consequence of mining, coal waste piles accumulated throughout the study areas, and many of the underground mines were 

inadequately reclaimed, leaving open and collapsed underground mine portals. 

Streamflow measurements and field measurements of 

water-quality properties were made during two synoptic 

surveys in both study areas. Additionally, continuous waterquality and streamflow data were collected at the Rock 

Creek near Yamacraw, Kentucky (station number 03410590; 

herein referred to as Rock Creek streamgage, and continuous 

streamflow data were used for hydrograph separation analyses. Not all sites measured during the synoptic surveys were 

used to compute gains and losses, some were instead used to 

determine the relative contributions of tributaries. Sites were 

established on Rock Creek, Wildcat Branch, Addison Branch, 

their major tributaries, and three unnamed tributaries. Sites 

were typically established on major tributaries and on the main 

stem downstream of the tributaries. 

The study results indicated the water quality in the Rock 

Creek study area was generally better than the Wildcat/Addison Branch study area. Wildcat and Addison Branches both 

contained seeps (sites WT6 and AT3) that were included in the 

synoptic surveys. Sites WT6 and AT3 that had the highest specific conductance and lowest pH values in the Wildcat Branch 

and Addison Branch study areas, respectively. Site WT6 was 

a seep that fed Wildcat Branch. Site AT3 is an entrance to a 

mine portal that discharges groundwater directly to Addison 

Branch. Most of the Addison Branch sites had pH values at or 

below 3.0 standard units, except for site AT2. Site AT2 drained 

an area of the Addison Branch basin that had relatively good 

water quality during the study.

Reach 1 of Wildcat and Addison Branches was losing 

during both surveys. The stream was dry at sites WM1 and 

AM1 during both surveys, and both were the last site on their 

respective branches before the confluence with the Cumberland River. The Kidder Limestone Member underlies both 

reaches, so the karst topography likely directed all the streamflow subsurface somewhere along the reach.

Six hydrograph separation methods were applied to daily 

mean streamflow from the Rock Creek streamgage for the 

period August 2015 to August 2017. The six methods were 

chosen because they were all included in the U.S. Geological 

Survey Groundwater Toolbox. The PART and ase-flow index 

modified methods produced the highest and lowest mean 

base-flow index values, respectively. The curves indicate the 

duration characteristics of estimated daily base flow and runoff 

made with the different separation methods are not highly different. Each of the hydrograph separation methods are limited 

by losing stream reaches, so the losing stream reaches on Rock 

Creek prevented extrapolating the results computed at site 

RM3 to the entire upstream basin.

Continuous water temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, 

specific conductance, and turbidity values were measured 

from July 2016 through July 2017. The near-neutral pH values 

measured at the Rock Creek streamgage likely caused much 

of the aluminum and iron to precipitate out, causing them not 

to be carried downstream in the dissolved form. The specific 

conductance results indicated the effect of acid mine drainage 

at the streamgaging station was minimal, taking into consideration the upstream contributions of acid mine drainage. 

References Cited

Barlow, P.M., Cunningham, W.L., Zhai, T., and Gray, M., 

2015, U.S. Geological Survey Groundwater Toolbox, a 

graphical and mapping interface for analysis of hydrologic 

data (version 1.0)—User guide for estimation of base flow, 

runoff, and groundwater recharge from streamflow data: 

U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods, book 3, 

chap. B10, 27 p., accessed August 2017 at http://dx.doi.

org/10.3133/tm3B10.

Barton, C.D., and Karathanasis, A.D., 1999, Renovation of 

a failed constructed wetland treating acid mine drainage: 

Environmental Geology, v. 39, no. 1, p. 39–50. [Also available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s002540050435.]

Carew, M.B., 2002, Acid mine drainage abatement in the 

lower Rock Creek watershed—McCreary County, Kentucky: Proceedings, National Association Abandoned Mine 

Land Program: Reclamation 2002, September 15–18, 2002, 

Park City, UT, 27 p., accessed August 2017 at https://

fs.ogm.utah.gov/pub/MINES/AMR_Related/NAAMLP/

AMD1/Carew.pdf.

Cherry, M.A., 2019, Streamflow and water-quality data for 

selected streams in the Daniel Boone National Forest, 

eastern Kentucky, 2015–17, U.S. Geological Survey data 

release, https://doi.org/10.5066/F7FX78D9.
References Cited 35

Eckhardt, K., 2008, A comparison of baseflow indices, which 

were calculated with seven different baseflow separation methods: Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam), v. 352, 

p. 168–173.

Gluskoter, H.J., 1977, Inorganic sulfur in coal: Energy 

Sources, v. 2, no. 2, p. 125–131. [Also available at https://

doi.org/10.1080/00908317708945974.]

Gray, N.F., 1995, Field assessment of acid mine drainage 

contamination in surface and groundwater: Environmental 

Geology, v. 27, no. 4, p. 358–361. [Also available at https://

doi.org/10.1007/BF00766705.]

Hem, J.D., and Cropper, W.H., 1959, Survey of ferrous-ferric 

chemical equilibria and redox potentials, in Chemistry of 

iron in natural waters, 1959: U.S. Geological Survey WaterSupply Paper 1459–A, 31 p.

Institute of Hydrology, 1980, Research report, v. 1 of Low 

flow studies: Wallingford, United Kingdom, Institute of 

Hydrology, 42 p.

Jin, S., Fallgren, P.H., Morris, J.M., and Gossard, R.B., 2007, 

Biological source treatment of acid mine drainage using 

microbial and substrate amendments: microcosm studies: 

Mine Water Environment, v. 27, p. 20–30. 

Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, 2017, 

Kentucky fishing and boating guide, 2017–2018: Kentucky 

Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, 38 p.

McDowell, 1983, Stratigraphy of the Silurian Outcrop Belt on 

the east side of the Cincinnati Arch in Kentucky, with revisions in the nomenclature: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1151–F, 27 p. [Also available at https://pubs.

usgs.gov/pp/1151f/report.pdf.]

Nelms, D.L., Messinger, T., and McCoy, K.J., 2015, Annual 

and average estimates of water-budget components based on 

hydrograph separation and PRISM precipitation for gaged 

basins in the Appalachian Plateaus Region, 1900–2011: 

U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 944, 10 p., accessed 

August 2017 http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/ds944.

Nordstrom, D.K., 2011, Mine waters—Acidic to circumneutral: Elements, v. 7, no. 6, p. 393–398. [Also available at 

https://doi.org/10.2113/gselements.7.6.393.]

Pettyjohn, W.A., and Henning, R., 1979, Preliminary estimate 

of ground-water recharge rates, related streamflow and 

water quality in Ohio: Columbus, Ohio State University, 

Water Resources Center Project Completion Report 552, 

323 p.

Pomerene, J.B., 1964, Geology of the Barthell quadrangle 

and part of the Oneida north quadrangle, Kentucky: U.S. 

Geological Survey Geologic Quadrangle 314.

Rantz, S.E., and others, 1982, Measurement of discharge by 

conventional current-meter method, chap. 5 of Measurement and computation of streamflow—Volume 1. Measurement of stage and discharge: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Supply Paper 2175, p. 79–183.

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., [Also available at 

https://pubs.usgs.gov/wri/wri984148/.]

Sauer, V.B., and Meyer, R.W., 1992, Determination of error in 

individual discharge measurements: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 92–144, 21 p.

Slade, R.M., Jr., Bentley, J.T., and Michaud, D., 2002, Results 

of streamflow gain-loss studies in Texas, with emphasis on 

gains from and losses to major and minor aquifers, Texas, 

2000: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2002–68, 

131 p.

Sloto, R.A., and Crouse, M.Y., 1996, HYSEP—A computer 

program for streamflow hydrograph separation and analysis: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 96–4040, 46 p.

Smith, J.H., Pomerene, J.B., and Ping, R.G., 1973, Geologic 

map of the Hail quadrangle, McCreary and Pulaski Counties, Kentucky: U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Quadrangle Map GQ-1058., 1:24000. [Also available at https://pubs.

er.usgs.gov/publication/gq1058.]

Sontek/Yellow Springs Instruments, 2007, Argonaut-ADV and 

Flowtracker principles of operation: accessed on August 12, 

2017, at http://www.sontek.com/princop/aadv/aadvpo.htm.

Toran, L., Tancredi, J.H., Herman, E.K., and White, W.B., 

2006, Conductivity and sediment variation during storms as 

evidence of pathways to karst springs, in Harmon, R.S. and 

Wicks, C.M., eds., Perspectives on karst geomorphology, 

hydrology, and geochemistry—A tribute volume to Derek 

C. Ford and William B. White: Boulder, Colo., Geological 

Society of America, p. 15–22.

Turco, M.J., East, J.W., and Milburn, M.S., 2007, Base flow 

(1966–2005) and streamflow gain and loss (2006) of the 

Brazos River, McLennan County to Fort Bend County, 

Texas: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations 

Report 2007–5286, 27 p.

Turnipseed, D.P., and Sauer, V.B., 2010, Discharge measurements at gaging stations: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods book 3, chap. A8, 87 p. [Also available 

at http://pubs.usgs.gov/tm/tm3-a8.]
36 Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation, and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in Eastern Kentucky

University of Kentucky, 2017, Kentucky historical data: Lexington, Ky., University of Kentucky, Ag Weather Center, 

accessed August 2017, at http://weather.uky.edu/ky/data.

php#KY_Monthly_Data. 

URS Group, Inc., 2017, Draft Engineering Evaluation/Cost 

Analysis Rock Creek abandoned mine sites: Engineering 

Report, 151 p. [Also available at https://www.fs.usda.gov/

Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/fseprd529926.pdf.]

U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 2015, Wildcat Branch/Addison Branch mines site: Draft Engineering 

Evaluation/Cost Analysis, 101 p., accessed August 2017, 

at https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/

fseprd488508.pdf.

U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 2016, Rock 

Creek abandoned coal mine sites Daniel Boone National 

Forest: U.S. Department of Agriculture Fact Sheet, 2 p. 

[Also available at https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_

DOCUMENTS/fseprd519704.pdf.]

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA], 2005, Section 

319 Nonpoint source program success story Kentucky: 

Washington, DC, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

EPA/841/F-05/004H, July 2005.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA], 2011, A fieldbased aquatic life benchmark for conductivity in central 

Appalachian streams (Final Report): Washington, DC, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA/600/R10/023F.

U.S. Geological Survey, variously dated, The national field 

manual for the collection of water-quality data: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods, book 9, chaps. 

A1–A10, accessed August 10, 2017, at http://water.usgs.

gov/owq/FieldManual/.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2018, National Water Information 

System—Web interface: accessed August 2017, at https://

doi.org/10.5066/F7P55KJN.

Wagner, R.J., Boulger, R.W., Jr., Oblinger, C.J., and Smith, 

B.A., 2006, Guidelines and standard procedures for continuous water-quality monitors—Station operation, record 

computation, and data reporting: U.S. Geological Survey 

Techniques and Methods, book 1, chap. D3, 51 p. + 8 

attachments, accessed August 10, 2017, at http://pubs.water.

usgs.gov/tm1d3.

Wahl, K.L., and Wahl, T.L., 1995, Determining the flow of 

Comal Springs at New Braunfels, Texas, in Proceedings of 

Texas Water 95, August 16–17, 1995, San Antonio, Tex.: 

American Society of Civil Engineers, p. 77–86. [Also 

available at https://www.usbr.gov/tsc/techreferences/hydraulics_lab/pubs/PAP/PAP-0708.pdf.]

Wilde, F.D., and Radtke, D.B., 1998, National field manual for 

the collection of water-quality data—Field measurements: 

U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources 

Investigations, book 9, chap. A6 [variously paged].

Yang, X.Y., and Stidham, M., 2006, Spatial database of the 

Hail quadrangle, McCreary and Pulaski Counties, Kentucky: Kentucky Geological Survey, ser. 12, Digitally 

Vectorized Geologic Quadrangle Data DVGQ-1058. 

[Adapted from Smith, J.H., Pomerene, J.B., and Ping, R.G., 

1973, Geologic map of the Hail quadrangle, McCreary and 

Pulaski Counties, Kentucky: U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Quadrangle Map GQ-1058, scale 1:24,000.]

Yellow Springs Instruments [YSI], 2012, 6-series multiparameter water quality sondes user manual: YSI Incorporated, 

379 p., accessed January 8, 2017, at https://www.ysi.com/

File%20Library/Documents/Manuals/069300-YSI-6-SeriesManual-RevJ.pdf.

Yellow Springs Instruments [YSI], 2017, EXO user manual: 

YSI Incorporated, 153 p., accessed January 8, 2017, at 

https://www.ysi.com/File%20Library/Documents/Manuals/

EXO-User-Manual-Web.pdf.

Zhang, Q., and Stidham, M., 2006, Spatial database of the 

Barthell quadrangle and part of the Oneida North quadrangle, Kentucky: Kentucky Geological Survey, ser. 12, Digitally Vectorized Geologic Quadrangle Data DVGQ-314. 

[Adapted from Pomerene, J.B., 1964, Geology of the Barthell quadrangle and part of the Oneida North quadrangle, 

Kentucky: U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Quadrangle 

Map GQ-314, scale 1:24,000.]

For additional information contact:

Director, Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Water 

Science Center

U.S. Geological Survey

9818 Bluegrass Parkway

Louisville, KY 40299

Publishing support provided by the 

Rolla and Madison Publishing 

Service Centers
Cherry—Streamflow Gain and Loss, Hydrograph Separation, and Water Quality of Abandoned Mine Lands in Eastern Kentucky—SIR 2019–5006 

ISSN 2328-0328 (online)

https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20195006