Compilation of Data to Support Development

of a Pesticide Management Plan by the

Yankton Sioux Tribe, Charles Mix County,

South Dakota

Open-File Report 2004-1032

Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Compilation of Data to Support Development 

of a Pesticide Management Plan by the 

Yankton Sioux Tribe, Charles Mix County, 

South Dakota

By Bryan D. Schaap

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Open-File Report 2004-1032
U.S. Department of the Interior

Gale A. Norton, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Charles G. Groat, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2004

For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services

Box 25286, Denver Federal Center

Denver, CO 80225

For more information about the USGS and its products:

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/

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

endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.

Suggested citation:

Schaap, B.D., 2004, Compilation of data to support development of a pesticide management plan by the Yankton Sioux 

Tribe, Charles Mix County, South Dakota: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2004-1032, 23 p.
 iii

Contents

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

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

Purpose and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Description of Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Data Sets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Pesticide Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Pesticide Concentrations in Surface Water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Topographic Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Geohydrologic Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Land Cover and Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Precipitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Irrigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Orthophotos. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Selected References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Supplemental Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Figures

1. Map showing the location of the historic Yankton Sioux Reservation and ecoregions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

2. Map showing locations of selected water-quality sampling sites and hydrologic units . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

3. Graph showing concentrations of selected pesticides at Lake Andes above

Ravinia (06452390), 1990-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

4. Graph showing atrazine concentrations at selected Lake Andes sites, 1990-2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Tables

1. Pesticide data available for this report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

2. Estimated use of 31 herbicides in Charles Mix County, South Dakota, in 1987. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

3. Statistical summaries of analytical results for selected total pesticide constituents for

Lake Andes stations, 1990-2000. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

4. Analytical results for selected dissolved pesticide constituents for Lake Andes

stations, 2001-2002. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

5. Analytical results for selected dissolved pesticide constituents for Lake Francis

Case and the Missouri River, 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

6. Summary of geohydrologic data sets for the study area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

7. Land cover and use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

8. Normal precipitation (1961-90), in inches, for selected South Dakota stations within

and near the historic Yankton Sioux Reservation area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

9. Irrigation within the study area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
iv 

Conversion Factors, Datums, and Acronyms

Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 

(NGVD 29).

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to either the North American Datum of 1927 

(NAD 27) or the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83). See metadata of the individual data 

sets for specific horizontal datum.

Multiply By To obtain

acre 4,047 square meter

acre 0.4047 hectare

cubic foot per second 0.02832 cubic meter per second

foot 0.3048 meter

gallon per minute 0.06309 liter per second

inch 2.54 centimeter

inch 25.4 millimeter

square mile 259.0 hectare

square mile 2.590 square kilometer

CD-ROM Compact Disk—Read Only Memory

DEM Digital Elevation Model

ESRI Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc.

GIS Geographical Information System

HTM Hypertext Markup Language

HTML Hypertext Markup Language

MRLC Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics

MrSID Multi-Resolution Seamless Image Data

NASS National Agricultural Statistics Service

NCFAP National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy

NLCD National Land Cover Data

NRCS U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Service

NWIS USGS National Water Information System

NWS National Weather Service

OPP Office of Pesticide Programs

PDF Portable Document Format

PMP Pesticide Management Plan

SDASS U.S. Department of Agriculture, South Dakota Agricultural Statistics Service

USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture

USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

USGS U.S. Geological Survey
Compilation of Data to Support Development of a 

Pesticide Management Plan by the Yankton

Sioux Tribe, Charles Mix County, South Dakota

By Bryan D. Schaap

Abstract

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is working 

with the Yankton Sioux Tribe to develop a pesticide management plan to reduce potential for contamination of ground water 

that may result from the use of registered pesticides. The 

purpose of this study was to compile technical information to 

support development of a pesticide management plan by the 

Yankton Sioux Tribe for the area within the Yankton Sioux 

Reservation, Charles Mix County, South Dakota. Five pesticides (alachlor, atrazine, cyanazine, metolachlor, and simazine) 

were selected by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for 

the management plan approach because they had been identified as probable or possible human carcinogens and they often 

had been associated with ground-water contamination in many 

areas and at high concentrations.

This report provides a compilation of data to support 

development of a pesticide management plan. Available data 

sets are summarized in the text of this report, and actual data 

sets are provided in one Compact Disk—Read-Only Memory 

that is included with the report.

The compact disk contains data sets pertinent to the development of a pesticide management plan. Pesticide use for the 

study area is described using information from state and 

national databases. Within South Dakota, pesticides commonly 

are applied to corn and soybean crops, which are the primary 

row crops grown in the study area. Water-quality analyses for 

pesticides are summarized for several surface-water sites. 

Pesticide concentrations in most samples were found to be 

below minimum reporting levels. Topographic data are 

presented in the form of 30-meter digital elevation model grids 

and delineation of drainage basins. Geohydrologic data are 

provided for the surficial deposits and the bedrock units. A 

high-resolution (30-by-30 meters) land-cover and land-use 

database is provided and summarized in a tabular format. More 

than 91 percent of the study area is used for row crops, pasture, 

or hay, and almost 6 percent of the study area is covered by 

water or wetlands. Average monthly and yearly precipitation 

data are summarized in a tabular format. Irrigation information 

associated with permitted and licensed diversion points is 

provided. A composite of aerial photographs of Charles Mix 

County is provided. This report also describes and summarizes 

the data sets and files, and how the data are relevant to development of a pesticide management plan.

Introduction

Surface water and ground water are used for domestic, 

stock-watering, and irrigation purposes within Charles Mix 

County (Amundson, 2002). Various pesticides, including herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, and nematocides, are applied to 

row crops, which cover approximately 316 square miles, or 

about 46 percent of the historic Yankton Sioux Reservation. 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is 

working with the Yankton Sioux Tribe to develop a pesticide 

management plan to reduce potential for contamination of 

ground water that may result from the use of registered pesticides. An important component of developing a pesticide 

management plan is to determine specific areas where ground 

water may be vulnerable to contamination.

The purpose of the study was to compile technical information in support of development of a pesticide management 

plan by the Yankton Sioux Tribe for Tribal lands. This study 

was performed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in 

cooperation with the USEPA.

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to provide information that 

can be used by the Yankton Sioux Tribe to develop a pesticide 

management plan for Tribal lands within the historic Yankton 

Sioux Reservation. The report provides a compilation of existing technical data relevant to the process including pesticideuse, water-quality, topographic, geohydrologic, land-cover and 

land-use, precipitation, and irrigation data, and orthophotos. 

The report contains descriptions and summaries of the data sets, 

and describes how they might be used to evaluate aquifer 

vulnerability to pesticide contamination. The report also 

describes the organization of the data sets that are provided on 

one Compact Disk—Read-Only Memory (CD-ROM) that is 

included with the report. Five pesticides (alachlor, atrazine, 

cyanazine, metolachlor, and simazine) were selected by the 

USEPA for the management plan approach because they had 

been identified as probable or possible human carcinogens and 

they often had been associated with ground-water contamination in many areas and at high concentrations (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996).
2 Data to Support Development of a Pesticide Management Plan by the Yankton Sioux Tribe

Description of Study Area

At one time, the Yankton Sioux Reservation consisted of 

the eastern part of Charles Mix County (fig. 1). As of 2003, 

Yankton Sioux Tribal lands were distributed throughout the 

historic Yankton Sioux Reservation. Information about ownership of individual parcels of land within the historic Yankton 

Sioux Reservation is not included in this report, but, when 

possible, the data have been presented in such a way that 

location-specific information can be retrieved. In this report, the 

historic Yankton Sioux Reservation is referred to as the study 

area.

The study area includes about 686 square miles, which 

includes the westernmost extent of continental glaciation and 

the eastern edge of the Great Plains (Bryce and others, 1998). 

This area includes parts of the Southern Missouri Coteau, 

Southern Missouri Coteau Slope, and Southern River Breaks 

ecoregions (fig. 1), which are distinguished on the basis of 

topography, soil types, and plant types. The Southern Missouri 

Coteau ecoregion is characterized by gradual changes in altitude and small areas of high density wetlands. The Southern 

Missouri Coteau Slope ecoregion is a transitional area between 

the Southern Missouri Coteau ecoregion to the north and the 

Southern River Breaks ecoregion to the south. The Southern 

River Breaks ecoregion, located along the Missouri River, is 

characterized by deciduous forest in the draws and northern 

aspects (Bryce and others, 1998).

The general geology of the study area consists of varying 

thickness of glacial drift on top of a bedrock shale. Glacial drift 

consists of till, glaciofluvial (stream) sediments, and glaciolacustrine (lake) sediments. Glacial till is a heterogeneous 

mixture of clay, silt, sand, gravel, and boulders, and is often 

very low in permeability. Glaciofluvial sediments include 

glacial-outwash deposits of sand and gravel deposited by 

flowing glacial meltwaters. Glaciolacustrine sediments are 

composed of layered deposits of clay, silt, and sand transported 

into ancient lakes by glacial meltwaters. Alluvium may be 

found along recent flood plains or lakebeds, and generally 

consists of deposits of silt, sand, and gravel. Loess and other 

wind-blown deposits are found on topographic highs near the 

Missouri River and consist of angular, well-sorted, fine-grained 

particles (Kume, 1977).

Data Sets

Several data sets are available for the study area and are 

included on the CD-ROM. Geospatial data are provided in 

Arc/Info coverages, which are compatible with several 

Geographical Information System (GIS) software packages. 

The geospatial coverages presented on the CD-ROM are in the 

Universal Transverse Mercator projection. Pesticide-use data 

are provided in Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) format or hypertext 

markup language (.htm). Water-quality data are presented 

in both Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet (.xls) format and tabdelimited text (.txt) format. A description and summary of each 

data set and relevance to a pesticide management plan are 

provided, along with any special comments regarding format 

on the CD-ROM. The contents of the CD-ROM are listed in 

the Supplemental Information section at the end of this 

report. 

Data for this study were obtained from a variety of sources, 

and those sources are described as completely as possible. Some 

data came from published maps and reports, and these are cited 

using traditional formats. Some data were downloaded from 

Internet sites, and the address and date of downloading are 

reported for these sources. Some data were downloaded from 

links created to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 

Geospatial Data Gateway (http://lighthouse.nrcs.usda.gov/

gateway/gatewayhome.html). For this information, a request 

was submitted to the USDA Geospatial Data Gateway site, and 

a temporary link for downloading the data was created. Citing 

this link as the source of information would not be useful 

because it became inactive 5 days after it was created. For those 

data, the USDA Geospatial Data Gateway is cited as the source 

of the information, and the date that the data were downloaded 

also is cited.

Pesticide Use

Pesticide use within the study area mainly is to control 

weeds and insects on crops, although fungicides and nematocides may be used on certain crops. Information describing 

pesticide usage in the study area or parts of it were available 

from three sources. Herbicide-use data in 1987 by county for 

South Dakota are available from the USGS (Battaglin and 

Goolsby, 1994). Statewide pesticide-use data for South Dakota 

are available from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, South 

Dakota Agricultural Statistics Service (SDASS) (2001). A 

pesticide-use database for 1992 and 1997 is searchable by pesticide type, region, State, and crop (National Center for Food and 

Agricultural Policy Pesticide Use Database, 2001). Table 1 lists 

all of the pesticides that are included in at least one of these 

three sources of information or were analyzed for in the 

sampling programs described in the section “Pesticide Concentrations in Surface Water.” A description of the pesticideuse data from each source and its format on the CD-ROM 

follows. 

A 1987 compilation of annual use estimates of 96 herbicides for all counties in the conterminous United States was 

published by Battaglin and Goolsby (1994). The data are 

published digitally and are intended for estimating regional 

herbicide use and for producing maps showing relative rates of 

herbicide use across regions (Battaglin and Goolsby, 1994). 

Estimated use of 31 herbicides in Charles Mix County in 1987 

is shown in table 2. Use estimates show that 2,4-D was applied 

to the greatest number of acres, whereas EPTC was applied at 

the highest rate. Data downloaded from the South Dakota Agricultural Statistics Service web site (http://www.nass.usda.gov/

sd/dnlds/dnld_c.htm) on August 28, 2003, show that 110,000 

acres of corn, 23,300 acres of soybeans, and 38,000 acres of 

wheat were planted in Charles Mix County in 1987.
Data Sets 3

Figure 1. Location of the historic Yankton Sioux Reservation and ecoregions.

46

281

281

281 46

Lake

Lake

Andes

Francis Case

Fort

Randall

Dam

MISSOURI

RIVER

Choteau Choteau

Creek

Creek

Choteau

Choteau

Creek

Creek

Choteau

Wagner

Ravinia Ravinia

Lake Andes Lake Andes

Pickstown Pickstown

Marty

Wagner

Dante

Ravinia

Lake Andes

Pickstown

Marty

Southern Southern

Missouri Missouri

Coteau

Southern Missouri Southern Missouri

Coteau Slope Coteau Slope

Southern Southern

River

Breaks

Southern

Missouri

Coteau

Southern Missouri

Coteau Slope

Southern

River

Breaks

0 2 4 6 8 10 KILOMETERS

0 2 4 6 8 10 MILES

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph 1:100,000, 1995

Universal Transverse Mercator projection, zone 14

98o30'

98o20'

98o10'

43o 43o

98o10'

98o20'

43o10' 43o10'

43o20' 43o20'

Boundary of Historic Yankton Sioux Reservation

Charles Mix County

SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA

Study

area
4 Data to Support Development of a Pesticide Management Plan by the Yankton Sioux Tribe

Table 1. Pesticide data available for this report.

[Bold indicates detections in water-quality studies. Shaded rows indicate the five pesticides selected for the pesticide management plan approach]

Pesticide

Source of data

Battaglin

and

Goolsby1

South Dakota

Agricultural

Statistics

Service2

National Center

for Food and

Agricultural

Policy3

Lake Andes4

Lake Francis

Case/

Missouri River5

2,4-D x x x X6,7

2,4-DB x x x7

2,4-DP X6

2,4,5-T x6,7

Acetochlor x x X7 X

Acifluorfen x x x7

Alachlor x x X6,7 x

Aldicarb x6,7

Aldicarb sulfone x6,7

Aldicarb sulfoxide x6,7

Aldrin x6

Alpha BHC x6,7 x

Ametryne X6

2,6-Diethyl aniline x7 x

Atrazine x x x X6,7 X

De-ethyl atrazine X6,7 X

De-isopropyl atrazine X6

Methyl azinphos x7 x

Benfluralin x7 x

Beta benzene hexachloride x6

Bentazon x x x x7

Bromacil X6,7

Bromoxynil x x x x7

Butachlor x6

Butylate x x x6,7 x

Carbaryl x x6,7 x

Carbofuran x x6,7 x

3-Hydroxy carbofuran x6,7

Carboxin x6

Chloramben x

Chlorethoxyfos x

Chlorimuron x

Chlordane x6

Chlorothalonil x x6,7

Chlorpyrifos x X6,7

Chlorsulfuron x x

Clethodim x x
Data Sets 5

Clomazone x

Clopyralid x x x7

Copper x

Cyanazine x x X6,7 x

Cycloate x6

Cyfluthrin x

Dacthal x7

DCPA x7 x

DEF x6

Delta benzene hexachloride x6

Diazinon x6,7 x

Dicamba x x x x7

Dichlobenil x7

Dichlorprop x7

Diclofop x x

Dieldrin x6,7 x

Difenzoquat x x

Dimethenamid x

Dimethoate x

Dinoseb x7

Diphenamid x6

Diquat x

Disulfoton x x6,7 x

Diuron X7

DNOC x7

Endosulfan x6

Endrin x6

EPTC x x x X7 X

Esfenvalerate x

Ethalfluralin x x x7 x

Ethion x6

Ethoprop x x7 x

Ethyl parathion x

Fenoxaprop x

Fenuron x7

Fluazifop x x

Flumetsulam x x

Table 1. Pesticide data available for this report.—Continued

[Bold indicates detections in water-quality studies. Shaded rows indicate the five pesticides selected for the pesticide management plan approach]

Pesticide

Source of data

Battaglin

and

Goolsby1

South Dakota

Agricultural

Statistics

Service2

National Center

for Food and

Agricultural

Policy3

Lake Andes4

Lake Francis

Case/

Missouri River5
6 Data to Support Development of a Pesticide Management Plan by the Yankton Sioux Tribe

Flumiclorac x

Fluometuron x7

Fomesafen x

Fonofos x x6,7 x

Glyphosate x x x

Guthion x6

Halosulfuron x

Heptachlor epoxide x6

Hexazinone x6

Imazamethabenz x

Imazamox x

Imazapyr x

Imazaquin x

Imazethapyr x x x

Isoxaflutole x

Lactofen x

Lambdacyhalothrin x

Lindane x6,7 x

Linuron x7 x

Malathion x x6,7 x

Maleic hydrazide x

Mancozeb x

Maneb x

MCPA x x x x7

MCPB x7

Metalaxyl x

Methiocarb x6,7

Methomyl x6,7

Methoxychlor x6

Methylmetsulfuron x

Methylparathion x x6,7 x

Methyltribenuron x

Methyltrithion x6

Metolachlor x x x X6,7 X

Metribuzin x x X6,7 x

Metsulfuron x x

Mirex x6

Table 1. Pesticide data available for this report.—Continued

[Bold indicates detections in water-quality studies. Shaded rows indicate the five pesticides selected for the pesticide management plan approach]

Pesticide

Source of data

Battaglin

and

Goolsby1

South Dakota

Agricultural

Statistics

Service2

National Center

for Food and

Agricultural

Policy3

Lake Andes4

Lake Francis

Case/

Missouri River5
Data Sets 7

Molinate x7 x

1-Napthol x6

Napropamide x7 x

Neburon x7

Nicosulfuron x x

Norflurazon x7

Oryzalin x7

Oxyamyl x6,7

P,P’-DDD x6

P,P’-DDE x6,7 x

P,P’-DDT x6

Paraquat x

Parathion x6,7 x

PCB x6

PCN x6

PCNS x6

Pebulate x7 x

Pendimethalin x x x x7 x

Permethrin x

Permethrin cis x7 x

Perthane x6

Phorate x x6,7 x

Picloram x x x7

Primisulfuron x x

Prometone X6,7 X

Prometryne x6

Pronamide x7 x

Propachlor x x x6,7 x

Propanil x7 x

Propargite x7 x

Propazine x6

Propham x6,7

Propiconazole x

Propoxur x6,7

Prosulfuron x

Quizalofop x

Rimsulfuron x x

Table 1. Pesticide data available for this report.—Continued

[Bold indicates detections in water-quality studies. Shaded rows indicate the five pesticides selected for the pesticide management plan approach]

Pesticide

Source of data

Battaglin

and

Goolsby1

South Dakota

Agricultural

Statistics

Service2

National Center

for Food and

Agricultural

Policy3

Lake Andes4

Lake Francis

Case/

Missouri River5
8 Data to Support Development of a Pesticide Management Plan by the Yankton Sioux Tribe

Sethoxydim x x x

Silvex x6,7

Simazine x x X6,7 x

Simetryne x6

Sulfosate x

Tebuthiuron x7 x

Tefluthrin x

Terbacil x6,7 x

Terbufos x x7 x

Thiameturon x

Thifensulfuron x x

Thiobencarb x7 x

Thiophanate methyl x

Toxaphene x6

Tralomethrin x

Triallate x x x7 x

Triasulfuron x

Tribenuron x

Triclopyr x7

Trifluralin x x x x6,7 x

Triphenyltin hyd x

Trithion x6

Vernolate x6

1Only includes those pesticides in this database for Charles Mix County (Battaglin and Goolsby, 1994).

2

Accessed on the Internet at URL http://www.nass.usda.gov/sd/releases/agchem01.pdf on January 15, 2003. The report describes pesticide use in the State 

of South Dakota.

3

Indicated for those pesticides with use greater than 0 pounds applied in 1997. Accessed on the Internet at URL http://pestdata.ncsu.edu/ncfap/search.cfm 

on February 25, 2003. Estimates are for the State of South Dakota.

4

Sando and Neitzert (2003) and U.S. Geological Survey (1996-2003).

5Samples collected during April and May 2002 by the Yankton Sioux Tribe (U.S. Geological Survey, 2003).

6

Samples collected during 1990-2000 (Sando and Neitzert, 2003).

7

Samples collected during 2001-2002 (U.S. Geological Survey, 2002-2003).

Table 1. Pesticide data available for this report.—Continued

[Bold indicates detections in water-quality studies. Shaded rows indicate the five pesticides selected for the pesticide management plan approach]

Pesticide

Source of data

Battaglin

and

Goolsby1

South Dakota

Agricultural

Statistics

Service2

National Center

for Food and

Agricultural

Policy3

Lake Andes4

Lake Francis

Case/

Missouri River5
Data Sets 9

Table 2. Estimated use of 31 herbicides in Charles Mix County, South Dakota, in 1987.

[Data from Battaglin and Goolsby (1994). Shaded rows indicate pesticides selected for the pesticide management plan approach]

Pesticide Acres treated1 Pounds of active

ingredient applied2

Pounds applied

per treated acre3

Pounds used per

square mile of

Charles Mix County4

2,4-D 55,921 23,831 0.426 21.145

2,4-DB 357 357 1.000 .317

Acifluorfen 1,149 287 .250 .255

Alachlor 35,042 54,636 1.559 48.479

Atrazine 21,102 19,505 .924 17.307

Bentazon 4,135 3,473 .840 3.082

Bromoxynil 13,502 4,402 .326 3.906

Butylate 2,087 8,349 4.000 7.408

Chloramben 763 1,756 2.301 1.558

Chlorsulfuron 1,861 33 .018 .029

Cyanazine 9,393 11,178 1.190 9.918

Dicamba 51,220 13,709 .268 12.164

Diclofop 1,607 1,206 .750 1.070

Difenzoquat 203 152 .749 .135

EPTC 26,273 115,516 4.397 102.498

Ethalfluralin 2,519 2,291 .909 2.033

Fluazifop 230 46 .200 .041

Glyphosate 4,595 2,365 .515 2.098

Imazethapyr 2,297 115 .050 .102

MCPA 20,846 7,921 .380 7.028

Metolachlor 12,915 27,052 2.095 24.003

Metribuzin 2,482 953 .384 .846

Metsulfuron 2,355 24 .010 .021

Pendimethalin 5,931 8,018 1.352 7.114

Picloram 2,532 1,266 .500 1.123

Propachlor 6,338 30,571 4.823 27.126

Sethoxydim 459 92 .200 .082

Simazine 1,333 1,999 1.500 1.774

Thiameturon 2,217 44 .020 .039

Triallate 542 542 1.000 .481

Trifluralin 20,056 15,714 .784 13.943

1

Rounded to nearest acre.

2

Rounded to nearest pound.

3

Calculated for this report from columns 2 and 3.

4

Rounded to three decimal places.
10 Data to Support Development of a Pesticide Management Plan by the Yankton Sioux Tribe

Because Battaglin and Goolsby (1994) used cropping data 

from the 1987 Census of Agriculture, it is possible that crop 

management practices, herbicide use, and application methods 

have changed and the data may no longer represent current 

pesticide use. However, other available data sets do not give 

pesticide-use data on a county basis and are less specific in 

relating data to the study area. The Battaglin and Goolsby 

data are provided as a GIS coverage on the CD-ROM in the 

/pestuse/battaglin/ directory.

Statewide pesticide usage information (South Dakota 

Agricultural Statistics Service, 2001) shows that herbicides 

were applied to 100 percent of corn acreage in South Dakota 

and insecticides were applied to 15 percent of corn acreage in 

2000. Atrazine was the most common herbicide applied, used 

on 42 percent of corn acreage, while acetolachlor was used on 

34 percent of corn acreage. In 2000, herbicides were used on 

98 percent of all soybean acreage, with glyphosate used on 

67 percent of soybean acreage (South Dakota Agricultural 

Statistics Service, 2001). SDASS data for 2000 indicated that 

120,000 acres of corn and 141,700 acres of soybeans, with 

fewer acres of wheat, hay, oats, and sunflowers, were harvested 

in Charles Mix County (South Dakota Agricultural Statistics 

Service, 2003a). SDASS data for 2002 indicated that 

79,300 acres of corn and 128,800 acres of soybeans were 

harvested in Charles Mix County (South Dakota Agricultural 

Statistics Service, 2003b).

The National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy has 

a web-based database of pesticide use that is accessible at URL 

http://pestdata.ncsu.edu/ncfap/search.cfm. The database was 

constructed using available published reports of pesticide use 

and a survey of Extension Service specialists; thus, this 

database may overlap other data sources presented in this 

report.

Pesticide Concentrations in Surface Water

Surface water in the study area has been sampled for pesticides by the USGS and the Yankton Sioux Tribe at selected 

locations (fig. 2). Lake Andes was sampled from 1990-2002 by 

the USGS. Table 3 summarizes selected total pesticide concentrations in Lake Andes during 1990-2000, and table 4 summarizes selected dissolved pesticide concentrations in Lake 

Andes during 2001-2002. Because of changes in analytical 

methods over time for some constituents, the minimum reporting level is not consistent for all samples. Figure 3 shows 

concentrations for selected pesticides at Lake Andes above 

Ravinia (station 06452390) from 1990-2002. Figure 4 shows 

atrazine concentrations at four Lake Andes sampling sites from 

1990-2002. For both figures 3 and 4, concentrations less than 

the minimum reporting level were plotted at one-half of the 

minimum reporting level. Samples were collected during 

April, May, or June. A total of 116 pesticides and pesticide 

metabolites were analyzed for in samples from Lake Andes, 

and 17 of these were detected at least once (table 1).

The Yankton Sioux Tribe started sampling Lake Francis 

Case and the Missouri River at Fort Randall Dam in 2002 

(fig. 2). Table 5 summarizes selected pesticide concentrations 

in Lake Francis Case and the Missouri River in April and May 

2002. A total of 46 pesticides and pesticide metabolites were 

analyzed for in samples from Lake Francis Case and the 

Missouri River, and six of these analytes were detected in at 

least one sample (table 1).

Analytical results for samples collected from Lake Andes, 

Lake Francis Case, and the Missouri River at Fort Randall Dam 

are provided on the CD-ROM in the /watqual/ directory in 

Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet (.xls) format and tab-delimited 

text (.txt) format. The QWDATA.xls and QWDATA.txt files 

present the pesticides results, and the yst_organics.xls and 

yst_organics.txt files present the organics results, including 

pesticides.

Topographic Data

Topographic data for the study area are from the USGS 

30-meter Digital Elevation Model (DEM) and are available on 

the CD-ROM. The DEM can be used to determine the altitude 

of the land surface at any point within the study area. For the 

study area, the minimum altitude is about 1,211 feet above 

NGVD 29, the maximum altitude is about 1,944 feet above 

NGVD 29, and the mean altitude is about 1,523 feet above 

NGVD 29. If the water-table altitude for a location within the 

study area is known, the DEM can be used to calculate the 

depth to the water table for that location. Slope determinations 

also can be made, which is a determining factor in the amount 

of runoff. Precipitation that falls on an area of steeper slope is 

more likely to run off into surface water and less likely to infiltrate into an aquifer than precipitation that falls on an area of 

lesser slope. The DEM also can be used to determine drainage 

patterns, delineate drainage basins, and generate summary 

statistics, such as minimum, maximum, and mean altitudes for 

selected areas.

The study area includes parts of the 10140101 Fort 

Randall Reservoir and 10170101 Lewis and Clark Lake hydrologic units (fig. 2). These hydrologic units were defined at a 

scale of 1:250,000, and the data were accessed on the Internet 

on April 25, 2003, at URL http://water.usgs.gov/GIS/huc.html. 

Within the study area, the primary surface-water features of 

hydrologic unit 10140101 are Lake Andes and Lake Francis 

Case, and the primary surface-water features of hydrologic unit 

10170101 are Choteau Creek and the Missouri River.
Data Sets 11

Figure 2. Locations of selected water-quality sampling sites and hydrologic units.

46

281

281

281 46

Lake

Lake

Andes

Francis Case

Fort

Randall

Dam

MISSOURI

RIVER

Choteau Choteau

Creek

Creek

Choteau

Choteau

Creek

Creek

Choteau

Wagner

Ravinia Ravinia

Lake Andes Lake Andes

Pickstown Pickstown

Marty

Wagner

Dante

Ravinia

Lake Andes

Pickstown

Marty

10170101 10170101

10140101 10140101

10170101

10140101

Owens Bay near Ravinia Owens Bay near Ravinia

Lake Andes near Ravinia Lake Andes near Ravinia

Lake Andes above Ravinia Lake Andes above Ravinia

Lake Andes above Lake Andes Lake Andes above Lake Andes

Lake Francis Case Lake Francis Case

near Lake Andes near Lake Andes

Missouri River at Fort Randall Dam Missouri River at Fort Randall Dam

Owens Bay near Ravinia

Lake Andes near Ravinia

Lake Andes above Ravinia

Lake Andes above Lake Andes

Lake Francis Case

near Lake Andes

Missouri River at Fort Randall Dam

0 2 4 6 8 10 KILOMETERS

0 2 4 6 8 10 MILES

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph 1:100,000, 1995

Universal Transverse Mercator projection, zone 14

98o30'

98o20'

98o10'

43o 43o

98o10'

98o20'

43o10' 43o10'

43o20' 43o20'

Boundary of Historic Yankton Sioux Reservation
12 Data to Support Development of a Pesticide Management Plan by the Yankton Sioux Tribe

Figure 3. Concentrations of selected pesticides at Lake Andes above Ravinia (06452390), 1990-2002.

Figure 4. Atrazine concentrations at selected Lake Andes sites, 1990-2002.

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0

1

2

3

PESTICIDE CONCENTRATION, IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER

Alachlor

Atrazine

Metolachlor

Cyanazine

Simazine

2,4-D

++

+

++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++

++

+

+

+

+

++

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

0

1

2

3

ATRAZINE CONCENTRATION, IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER

Lake Andes above Ravinia (06452390)

Lake Andes near Ravinia (06452391)

Owens Bay near Ravinia (06452403)

Lake Andes above Lake Andes (06452406)
Table 3. Statistical summaries of analytical results for selected total pesticide constituents for Lake Andes stations, 1990-2000.[Shaded columns indicate pesticides selected for the pesticide management plan approach. Location of stations shown in figure 2. All constituents in micrograms per liter. <, less 

from study described by Sando and Neitzert (2003)]

2,4-D 2,4-DP Aceto- chlor Alachlor Ametryne Atra- zine De-ethyl atrazine De-iso- propyl atrazine Brom- acil Chlor- pyrifos Cyana- zine Diuron EPTC Meto- lachlor 

Lake Andes above Ravinia, SD (06452390)

Number of samples 20 19 0 20 21 22 18 19 20 10 22 0 0 22 Percent detections 90.0 5.3 0 4.5 14.3 86.4 50.0 15.8 .0 .0 9.1 0 0 31.8 Median .11 <.01 NA <.1 <.1 .45 .20 <.2 <.2 <.01 <.2 NA NA <.2 Minimum <.01 <.01 NA <.1 <.1 <.1 <.2 <.2 <.2 <.01 <.2 NA NA <.2 Maximum .63 .2 NA .3 .1 2 .5 .2 <.2 <.01 .5 NA NA 1.2 

Lake Andes near Ravinia, SD (06452391)

Number of samples 20 19 0 19 20 21 18 18 19 10 21 0 0 21 Percent detections 90.0 5.0 0 .0 10.0 81.0 16.7 5.6 .0 .0 14.3 0 0 19.0 Median .07 <.01 NA <.1 <.1 .3 <.2 <.2 <.2 <.01 <.2 NA NA <.2 Minimum <.01 <.01 NA <.1 <.1 <.1 <.2 <.2 <.2 <.01 <.2 NA NA <.2 Maximum .33 .13 NA <.1 .1 1.1 .4 .2 <.2 <.01 .6 NA NA 1.5 

Owens Bay near Ravinia, SD (06452403)

Number of samples 18 18 0 19 21 21 18 18 19 10 21 0 0 21 Percent detections 57.9 .0 0 .0 .0 38.1 5.6 .0 5.3 .0 14.3 0 0 .0 Median .04 <.01 NA <.1 <.1 <.1 <.2 <.2 <.2 <.01 <.2 NA NA <.2 Minimum <.01 <.01 NA <.1 <.1 <.1 <.2 <.2 <.2 <.01 <.2 NA NA <.2 Maximum .19 <.01 NA <.1 <.1 .4 .2 <.2 .2 <.01 .4 NA NA <.2 

Lake Andes above Lake Andes, SD (06452406)

Number of samples 18 18 0 19 21 21 18 18 19 10 21 0 0 21 Percent detections 84.2 .0 0 4.8 4.8 81.0 11.1 11.1 .0 .0 14.3 0 0 23.8 Median .08 <.01 NA <.1 <.1 .2 <.2 <.2 <.2 <.01 <.2 NA NA <.2 Minimum <.01 <.01 NA <.1 <.1 <.1 <.2 <.2 <.2 <.01 <.2 NA NA <.2 Maximum .25 <.01 NA .1 .1 .6 .3 .2 <.2 <.01 .5 NA NA .5 
Table 4. Analytical results for selected dissolved pesticide constituents for Lake Andes stations, 2001-2002. [Shaded columns indicate pesticides selected for the pesticide management plan approach. Location of stations shown in figure 2. All constituents in micrograms per liter. <, less E, estimated. Data from U.S. Geological Survey (2002, 2003)] Date 2,4-D 2,4-DP Aceto- chlor Ala- chlor Ame- tryne Atra- zine De- ethyl atra- zine De-iso- propyl atra- zine Bro- macil Chlor- pyri- fos Cyana- zine Diuron EPTC Meto- lachlor 

Lake Andes above Ravinia, SD (06452390) April 18, 2001 <0.11 -- <0.004 <0.002 -- 0.181 E.028 -- <0.54 <0.005 <0.018 <0.06 <0.002 0.036 

June 26, 2001 <.15 -- .015 <.002 -- .286 <.006 -- <.17 <.005 <.018 <.06 .003 .235 April 9, 2002 <.17 -- <.006 <.004 -- .028 E.005 -- <.09 <.005 <.018 <.12 <.002 E.010 June 11, 2002 <.16 -- <.006 <.004 -- .071 E.012 -- <.09 <.005 <.018 <.12 .013 E.010 

Lake Andes near Ravinia, SD (06452391) April 18, 2001 <0.14 -- <0.004 <.002 -- .141 E.032 -- <.45 <.005 <.018 <.13 <.002 E.017 

June 27, 2001 <.96 -- .026 <.002 -- .220 <.006 -- <.11 <.005 <.018 <.06 .005 .340 April 9, 2002 <.16 -- <.006 <.004 -- .024 E.004 -- <.09 <.005 <.018 <.12 <.002 <.013 June 11, 2002 <.16 -- <.006 <.004 -- .083 E.015 -- <.09 <.005 <.018 E.04 <.002 E.012 

Owens Bay near Ravinia, SD (06452403) April 18, 2001 <.11 -- <.004 <.002 -- .051 E.012 -- <.26 <.005 <.018 <.06 <.002 E.012 

June 27, 2001 <.11 -- .039 <.002 -- .119 <.006 -- <.09 E.002 <.018 <.06 E.002 .022 April 9, 2002 <.21 -- <.006 <.004 -- .011 E.002 -- <.09 <.005 <.018 <.12 <.002 E.005 June 11, 2002 <.16 -- .024 <.004 -- .100 E.019 -- <.09 <.005 <.018 <.12 <.002 E.011 

Lake Andes above Lake Andes, SD (06452406)

April 18, 2001 <.11 -- <.004 <.002 -- .216 E.032 -- <.42 <.005 <.018 <.11 <.002 E.010 June 27, 2001 <.82 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- <.09 -- -- <.06 -- -- April 9, 2002 <.23 -- .007 <.004 -- .068 E.008 -- <.14 <.005 <.018 <.18 <.002 E.011 June 11, 2002 <.16 -- .021 <.004 -- .100 E.020 -- <.09 <.005 <.018 <.13 .005 .023 
Table 5. Analytical results for selected dissolved pesticide constituents for Lake Francis Case and the Missouri River, 2002.[Shaded columns indicate pesticides selected for the pesticide management plan approach. Location of stations shown in figure 2. All constituents in micrograms per liter. <, less E, estimated. Data from U.S. Geological Survey (2003)]

Date 2,4-D 2,4-DP Aceto- chlor Ala- chlor Ame- tryne Atra- zine

Deethyl

atrazine

De-isopropyl

atrazine

Bromacil Chlor- pyri- fos Cyana- zine Diuron EPTC Meto- lachlor 

Lake Francis Case near Lake Andes, SD (430419098401600)

April 22, 2002 -- -- <0.006 <0.004 -- 0.023 E0.006 -- -- -- <0.018 -- <0.002 E0.010 May 20, 2002 -- -- E.005 <.004 -- .025 E.004 -- -- -- <.018 -- .004 E.005 

Missouri River at Fort Randall Dam, SD (06453000)

April 23, 2002 -- -- <.006 <.004 -- .021 E.005 -- -- -- <.018 -- <.002 E.009 May 21, 2002 -- -- .009 <.004 -- .027 E.005 -- -- -- <.018 -- .003 E.006 
16 Data to Support Development of a Pesticide Management Plan by the Yankton Sioux Tribe

Geohydrologic Data

Coverages for geohydrologic data for the study area 

include generalized geology, extent of surficial aquifers, thickness of surficial deposits, estimated potential yield of surficial 

deposits, and extent of bedrock units (table 6). These coverages 

were produced by scanning, registering, and digitizing the 

published figures. A boundary for the Codell aquifer, which is 

a bedrock aquifer, is not provided because it underlies the entire 

study area (Kume, 1977). The geohydrologic data can be used 

to determine which areas are vulnerable to pesticide contamination.

The polygon coverage representing the generalized geology of the study area is based on Kume (1977, fig. 4). The 

coverage shows that most of the study area is covered with 

Quaternary-age deposits of alluvium, outwash, loess, and till. 

The alluvium generally is along Choteau Creek and the 

Missouri River. The outwash areas are generally along the alluvium of Choteau Creek. The mapped loess deposits are along 

the Missouri River. Most of the study area is covered with till. 

The Cretaceous-age deposits of Pierre Shale and Niobrara Marl 

are primarily along Lake Francis Case and the Missouri River 

in the southern part of the study area. Narrow areas of Niobrara 

Marl were mapped between the Missouri River alluvium and 

the Pierre Shale.

The polygon coverage representing the surficial aquifers 

of the study area is based on Kume (1977, fig. 11). These aquifers (Choteau, Corsica, Geddes, Tower, Greenwood, Delmont, 

and minor aquifers) are composed of Quaternary-age sand and 

gravel deposits. A comparison with the generalized geology 

coverage shows that some of these aquifers approximately 

correspond to units in the general geology coverage. For 

example, the Delmont aquifer is associated with the alluvium 

deposits along Choteau Creek, and the Tower and Greenwood 

aquifers are associated with mapped alluvium along the 

Missouri River. Other aquifers, such as the Choteau aquifer, 

which covers the largest area of any of the surficial aquifers, 

consist of several layers within the till (Kume, 1977, p. 16).

The arc coverage representing the thickness of the 

Quaternary-age surficial deposits is based on Kume (1977, 

fig. 9). The arcs indicate areas where the surficial deposits are 

50, 100, 200, 300, and 400 feet thick. The areas with thicknesses of 50 feet or less of surficial deposits are primarily along 

Lake Francis Case and the Missouri River. In the northwestern 

part of the study area, the surficial deposits are more than 

300 feet thick, and in the northeastern part of the study area, the 

surficial deposits are more than 400 feet thick.

The polygon coverage representing the estimated potential 

yield of surficial deposits is based on Kume (1977, fig. 16). The 

polygons indicate areas where the estimated potential yield 

ranges from less than 50 gallons per minute to more than 

500 gallons per minute. The estimates are based on aquifer 

properties (thickness, extent, and material grain size) and 

reported yields of irrigation and municipal wells (Kume, 1977, 

p. 18). Most of the study area (49 percent) has an estimated 

potential yield of less than 50 gallons per minute, but about 

17 percent of the study area has an estimated potential yield of 

more than 500 gallons per minute. Some of the area with an 

estimated potential yield of more than 500 gallons per minute 

is along the Missouri River and is associated with the Tower 

Table 6. Summary of geohydrologic data sets for the study area.

Geohydrologic data set

Arc/Info

coverage 

name

Contents of coverage

Generalized geology geology Polygon coverage of alluvium, loess, till, outwash, Pierre Shale, and Niobrara Marl 

(Kume, 1977, fig. 4)

Extent of surficial aquifers surficial_aq Polygon coverage of the Choteau, Corsica, Geddes, Tower, Greenwood, Delmont, 

and minor surficial aquifers (Kume, 1977, fig. 11)

Thickness of surficial deposits thicknessdep Arc coverage of thickness of surficial deposits (50, 100, 200, 300, and 400 feet) 

(Kume, 1977, fig. 9)

Estimated potential yield

of surficial deposits

est_yield Polygon coverage of estimated potential yield (less than 50, 50 to 100, 100 to 150, 

150 to 250, 250 to 500, and more than 500 gallons per minute) (Kume, 1977, 

fig. 16)

Extent of bedrock units bedrock Polygon coverage of Ogallala undifferentiated, Pierre Shale, Niobrara Marl, and 

Carlile Shale (Hedges, 1975, fig. 5)
Data Sets 17

and Greenwood aquifers, but most of this area appears to be 

associated with the Choteau and Delmont aquifers and surficial 

deposits with thicknesses of more than 200 feet.

The polygon coverage representing the bedrock geology of 

the study area is based on Hedges (1975, fig. 5). For most of the 

study area, the uppermost bedrock unit is the Cretaceous-age 

Carlile Shale, Niobrara Marl, or Pierre Shale. The Carlile Shale 

is found along the Missouri River and Choteau Creek. The 

Niobrara Marl is found to the north of the Carlile Shale along 

the Missouri River and in an irregularly shaped body trending 

northwest to southeast. The Pierre Shale is the uppermost 

bedrock unit in the rest of the study area, except for some 

isolated areas of Tertiary-age Ogallala undifferentiated deposits 

(Hedges, 1975).

Land Cover and Use

Land-cover data were developed for the Multi-Resolution 

Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium, an interagency 

project involving the USGS, the USEPA, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, and the USDA, 

Forest Service. The National Land Cover data sets are highresolution (30-by-30-meters) digital data describing land cover 

for the conterminous United States. Twenty-one general landcover classes were developed for mapping 30-meter Landsat 

thematic mapper satellite data. Only 13 of the 21 land-cover 

classes were present within the study area. The data are organized by State and were downloaded with the metadata from the 

Internet on January 16, 2003, using links to the Geospatial Data 

Gateway. The National Land Cover data set for South Dakota 

was preliminary at the time this study was completed; therefore, 

the accuracy assessment of the data set was not completed. 

Land-cover and land-use data can be used to determine where 

pesticides and fertilizers are likely to be applied, where crops 

are irrigated, and where urban development is located. Landcover and land-use data for Charles Mix County and the study 

area are summarized in table 7. Information for Charles Mix 

County is included because some information, including pesticide use, is only available on a county-by-county basis. Using 

the number of acres within Charles Mix County and within the 

study area, estimates can be made of the pesticide use within the 

study area. 

Within the study area, three categories account for more 

than 91 percent of the land cover and use. Row crops 

(46.02 percent) cover the most area of any category, followed 

by pasture/hay (33.20 percent) and grasslands/herbaceous 

plants (11.86 percent).

Table 7. Land cover and use.

Land cover and use

Charles Mix County Within historic

reservation boundary

Acres Percent Acres Percent

Row crops (corn, soybeans, sunflowers, etc.) 313,356.7 42.53 202,115.5 46.02

Pasture/hay (may be used for grazing or seed/hay crops) 237,796.2 32.27 145,811.0 33.20

Grasslands/herbaceous plants (grasses and forbs often utilized for grazing) 104,155.0 14.14 52,090.4 11.86

Open water 38,660.2 5.25 15,528.7 3.54

Deciduous forest 17,295.8 2.35 10,516.7 2.39

Emergent herbaceous wetlands 17,099.6 2.32 9,200.9 2.10

Evergreen forest 4,502.2 .61 1,390.3 .32

Commercial/industrial/transportation (infrastructure, such as roads and railroads) 1,787.3 .24 1,004.0 .23

Low intensity residential (most commonly single-family housing) 750.2 .10 367.0 .08

Small grains (wheat, barley, oats, etc.) 733.8 .10 560.9 .13

Woody wetlands 445.1 .06 410.4 .09

Urban/recreational grasses (parks, lawns, golf courses, air strips, etc.) 184.2 .02 124.6 .03

Bare rock, sand, clay 38.5 .01 29.8 .01

Total 736,793.6 100.00 439,150.2 100.00
18 Data to Support Development of a Pesticide Management Plan by the Yankton Sioux Tribe

Precipitation

Precipitation data can be used to determine when pesticides are likely to be applied. The data also may be used to estimate recharge to the ground-water system, which is often used 

as a factor in assessing sensitivity of ground-water systems to 

contamination (Focazio and others, 2002).

Precipitation data from 1961-90 for six National Weather 

Service (NWS) stations in or near the study area are presented 

in table 8. The average monthly values were downloaded 

from the Internet on February 13, 2003, at URL 

http://climate.sdstate.edu/web/GIS_index.htm. Two of the 

stations, Pickstown and Wagner (fig. 1), are within the study 

area and represent the smallest and second-largest annual 

precipitation totals, respectively, of the group. The average 

annual precipitation during the 30-year period was 

22.25 inches at Pickstown and 25.20 inches at Wagner. For all 

six stations, the largest monthly averages were during May, 

June, or July and ranged from 3.63 to 4.10 inches. The smallest 

monthly averages for all six stations were during January and 

ranged from 0.32 to 0.58 inches.

Irrigation

Irrigation information was obtained from the South 

Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 

Water Rights Program (Ron Duvall, written commun., 2003). 

That information was used to create an Arc/Info point coverage 

with the data fields and values described in table 9. Irrigation 

data can be used to determine when and where pesticides are 

likely to be applied. Irrigation data also may be used to 

improve recharge estimates.

The irrigation point coverage contains information about 

58 permits (39 ground water and 19 surface water) for a total 

of 66 diversion points. Of the 58 permits, 51 have been licensed 

and the remaining 7 have not yet received the license from the 

State. The licensed irrigation withdrawals are for a total of 

9,187.1 acres and 102.13 cubic feet per second. Of the 39 

ground-water permits, 32 are for the Choteau aquifer, 3 are for 

the Delmont aquifer, 2 are for Pleistocene series aquifers, and 

2 are for the Geddes aquifer. It should be noted that these aquifer designations are assigned by the State of South Dakota, and 

the locations of the withdrawals may be known only to the 

nearest 160 acres.

Orthophotos

The orthophotos data set for Charles Mix County is a 

composite of aerial photographs that have been registered to 

the Universal Transverse Mercator coordinate system. The 

photographs were taken from August 14, 1991, through 

September 3, 1998. The orthophoto data set was downloaded 

with the metadata from the Internet on February 21, 2003, 

using a link to the Geospatial Data Gateway.

The orthophotos can be used to compare surface features, 

such as roads and buildings, to subsurface information, such as 

estimated potential yield. They also can be used to compare 

reported irrigation diversion point locations to areas where the 

water is used and to observe changes in roads, drainages, land 

use, etc., over time.

Table 8. Normal precipitation (1961-90), in inches, for selected South Dakota stations within and near the historic Yankton Sioux 

Reservation area.

[Monthly values retrieved from URL http://climate.sdstate.edu/web/GIS_index.htm on Feb. 13, 2003]

Station Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Annual

Armour 0.52 0.69 1.67 2.34 3.18 3.88 3.12 2.16 2.38 1.56 0.84 0.72 23.06

Bonesteel .32 .65 1.79 2.78 4.10 3.96 3.35 2.75 2.82 1.66 .83 .53 25.54

Pickstown .40 .52 1.57 2.35 2.97 3.97 2.74 2.28 2.46 1.51 .84 .64 22.25

Platte .48 .62 1.72 2.46 3.69 3.77 2.83 2.31 2.27 1.54 .86 .66 23.21

Tyndall .43 .64 1.55 2.31 3.38 3.60 3.63 2.41 2.56 1.50 1.05 .71 23.77

Wagner .58 .79 1.68 2.56 3.61 3.84 3.12 2.45 2.87 1.70 1.09 .91 25.20
Data Sets 19

Table 9. Irrigation within the study area.

[Data from the South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Water Rights Program (Ron Duvall, written commun., 2003).

PLSS, public land survey system]

Field name in 

Arc/Info

coverage

Description Values

permit Permit identifier, alphanumeric Various

totaldp Total number of diversion points for the permit 1, 2, or 3

dpnum Number of the specified diversion point for the permit 1, 2, or 3

qq Sub-section identifiers A, B, C, D, or L (lot)

section Section number of the PLSS description 1-6, 8, 10-17, 19-22, 25-30, 32-36

township Township number of the PLSS description, all are N (north) 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, or 98

range Range number of the PLSS description, all are W (west) 62, 63, 64, 65, or 66

latitude Latitude in decimal degrees 42.85796 - 43.32386

longitude Longitude in decimal degrees 98.11019 - 98.67093

aquifer Aquifer code CH (Choteau)

PS (Pleistocene Series)

D (Delmont)

GE (Geddes)

unit Management unit 

(for ground-water withdrawals only)

W (Wagner)

M (Missouri River)

diversion Diversion name GROUNDWATER

MISSOURI RIVER

CHOTEAU CREEK

BULL CREEK DRAINAGE

WELL & DUGOUT

SLOUGH

status2003 Permitted or licensed status as of March 2003 LC (licensed)

PE (permitted)

permit_acres Permitted acres

(permits are issued prior to licenses)

0.0 - 600.0

license_acres Licensed acres

(licensed values take precedence over permit values)

0.0 - 660.0

permit_cfs Permitted withdrawals in cubic feet per second 0.00 - 8.57

license_cfs Licensed withdrawals in cubic feet per second 0.00 - 9.43

HUC Hydrologic unit code 10140101 (Fort Randall Reservoir)

10170101 ( Lewis and Clark Lake)
20 Data to Support Development of a Pesticide Management Plan by the Yankton Sioux Tribe

Selected References

Amundson, F.D., 2002, Estimated use of water in South 

Dakota: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 02-440, 

17 p.

Battaglin, W.A., and Goolsby, D.A., 1994, Spatial data in geographic information systems format on agricultural chemical 

use, land use, and cropping practices in the United States: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations 

Report 94-4176, 87 p. (available online at URL 

http://water.usgs.gov/pubs/wri/wri944176/).

Bryce, S.A., Omernik, J.M., Pater, D.E., Ulmer, Michael, 

Schaar, Jerome, Freeouf, Jerry, Johnson, Rex, Kuck, Pat, and 

Azevedo, S.H., 1998, Ecoregions of North Dakota and South 

Dakota: Dynamac Corporation, 1 sheet.

Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc., 2000, ArcDoc 

version 8.0.2, patch 1: Redlands, Calif., ESRI.

Focazio, M.J., Reilly, T.E., Rupert, M.G., and Helsel, D.R, 

2002, Assessing ground-water vulnerability to contamination—Providing scientifically defensible information for 

decision makers: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1224, 

33 p.

Hedges, L.S., 1975, Geology and water resources of Charles 

Mix and Douglas Counties, South Dakota—Part 1, Water 

resources: South Dakota Geological Survey Bulletin 22, 

43 p.

Kolpin, D.W., Burkart, M.R., and Thurman, E.M., 1994, 

Herbicides and nitrate in near-surface aquifers in the midcontinental United States, 1991: U.S. Geological Survey WaterSupply Paper 2413, 34 p.

Kume, Jack, 1972, Major aquifers in Charles Mix and Douglas 

Counties, South Dakota: South Dakota Geological Survey 

Information Pamphlet No. 2, 6 p.

Kume, Jack, 1977, Geology and water resources of Charles Mix 

and Douglas Counties, South Dakota—Part 2, Water 

resources: South Dakota Geological Survey Bulletin 22, 

31 p.

National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy Pesticide Use 

Database, 2001, accessed on July 31, 2001, at URL 

http://pestdata.ncsu.edu/ncfap/search.cfm

Neitzert, K.M., 1995, Records of wells and chemical analyses 

of ground water in Charles Mix and Douglas Counties, South 

Dakota: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 95-153, 

129 p.

Sando, S.K., and Neitzert, K.M., 2003, Water and sediment 

quality of the Lake Andes and Choteau Creek Basins, South 

Dakota: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4148, 114 p.

South Dakota Agricultural Statistics Service, 2001, South 

Dakota 2000 agricultural chemical usage: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, accessed on August 28, 2003, at URL 

http://www.nass.usda.gov/sd/releases/agchem01.pdf

South Dakota Agricultural Statistics Service, 2003a, Snapshot 

of county 023: U.S. Department of Agriculture, accessed on 

August 28, 2003, at URL 

http://www.nass.usda.gov/sd/cp/cpco0230.htm

South Dakota Agricultural Statistics Service, 2003b, Snapshot 

of county 023: U.S. Department of Agriculture, accessed on 

August 28, 2003, at URL 

http://www.nass.usda.gov/sd/cp/cpco0232.htm

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996, Pesticides and 

ground water state management plan regulation: Federal 

Register, June 26, 1996, v. 61, no. 124, p. 33259-33301.

U.S. Geological Survey, 1996-2003, Water resources data, 

South Dakota, water years, 1995-2002: U.S. Geological 

Survey Water-Data Reports SD-95-1 to SD-02-1 (published 

annually).
Supplemental Information
22 Data to Support Development of a Pesticide Management Plan by the Yankton Sioux Tribe

Disk 1

A_document (contains metadata in HTML format for coverages on the disk)

A_notice.txt

bedrock

 bedrock (polygon coverage)

 info

dem

 dem_ft (grid format)

 info

 dem_ft.aux

estimated_yield

 est_yield (polygon coverage)

 info

geology

 geology (polygon coverage)

 info

huc

 hucs (polygon coverage)

 info

irrigation

 info

 irrigation (point coverage)

landuse

 ecoregions (polygon coverage)

 info

 landuse_grid (grid format)

 landuse_grid.aux

orthophotos

 info

 ortho1-1_sd023.aux

 ortho1-1_sd023.sdw

 ortho1-1_sd023.sid (MrSID format)

 ortho1-1_sd023.sid.xml
Disk 1 23

pestuse

 battaglin

 cm_agchem (polygon coverage)

 cm_herb1 (polygon coverage)

 cm_herb2 (polygon coverage)

 cm_herb3 (polygon coverage)

 cm_herb4 (polygon coverage)

 cm_herb5 (polygon coverage)

 info

 agchem2000.pdf

 cmco1997.htm

 cmco1998.htm

 cmco1999.htm

 cmco2000.htm

surficial_aquifers

 info

 surficial_aq (polygon coverage)

thickness

 info

 thicknessdep (arc coverage)

watqual

 yst_organics.xls

 yst_organics.txt

 info

 QWDATA.xls

 QWDATA.txt

 wq_sites (point coverage)