Low-Flow Characteristics

s

of Streams in the 

Mississippi Embayment in 

Northern Arkansas and in 

Missouri

By PAUL R. SPEER, MARION S. MINES, M. E. JANSON, and others 

JPith a section on QUALITY OF THE WATER

By H. G. JEFFERY

WATER RESOURCES OF THE MISSISSIPPI EMBAYMENT

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 448-F

The magnitude, duration, frequency of 

recurrence, and chemical composition 

of low flows

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1966
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

William T. Pecora, Director

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Washington, D.C. 20402
CONTENTS

	Page 

Abstract_________________________________________ Fl Low-flow characteristics...-------------------------- F7

Introduction _._______________..._______. 1 Low-flow frequency_-._- _-______ _ 9

Purpose and scope. - 2 Flow duration.. ._ 9

^ _.,.,. 0 Factors affecting low flow _____-__--____ --_----- 11 Definition of terms... . 2 Headwater diversion channel basin.___ 13

Description of the area.. 3 gt Johng BayQU basin_._______________._________ 13

Climate.._ ___ 4 gt. Francis River basin_____________ 13

Physiography____-_---_----------------_------- 4 White River basin________----------_------ --- 15

Geology....-....-___________________________ 5 Major floods and ground-water recharge_______________ 16

Manmade changes __. ________________ 5 Low flows and ground-water fluctuations....------ 16

Headwater diversion channel basin.... 6 Method of study.... - 17

 ,.-... Basic data for the analysis..-------------.----------- 17 St. Johns Bayou basm. ______________.. 6 Draft_storage relations.. 17

St. Francis River basin .__________________ 6 Quality of the water, by H. G. Jeffery_________________ 20

 White River basin. _________________________ 6 Conclusions and recommendations. ___________________ 24

Farm ponds and lakes_-_---------__------------- 7 Selected references---------------------------------- 25

ILLUSTRATIONS

[Plates are in pocket]

PLATE 1. Map of the Mississippi embayment in northern Arkansas and in Missouri showing generalized geology and 7-day 

2-year low flow at gaging stations.

2. Map showing completed and proposed levees and channel and drainage improvements in the St. Francis River basin.

3. Map showing patterns for chemical analyses of low-flow surface waters in the Mississippi embayment in northern 

Arkansas and in Missouri. ' Page 

FIGURE 1. Map of the Mississippi embayment showing the areas described in the four chapters on low-flow characteristics

of streams-__----_--_-__-____________________________________________________________________ F3

2. Physiographic map of the Mississippi embayment in northern Arkansas and in Missouri.._________________ 4

3. Graphs showing magnitude and frequency of annual low flow for Black River near Corning, Ark., 1929-57-___ 9

4. Graphs showing flow-duration curves for Right Hand Chute of Little River at Rivervale, Ark., and Black

River near Corning, Ark. 1929-57___________________--_--.__-______________________ 13

5. Map of the Mississippi embayment showing numbered areal parts for which streamflow records are published

in U.S. Geological Survey reports on surface-water supply___________________-______________________ 18

6, 7. Graphs showing areal draft-storage relations 

6. Ten-year recurrence interval________________________________________ _ ____________________ 19

7. Twenty-year recurrence interval._____________________________________________________________ 19

TABLES

Page 

TABLE 1. Geologic units cropping out in area of study_____ _________________-___-_______________-_-_-_-____ F5

2. Low-flow characteristics of streams in the Mississippi embayment in northern Arkansas and in Missouri __ 8

3. Magnitude and frequency of annual low flow at daily-record gaging stations in the Mississippi embayment

in northern Arkansas and in Missouri_________________________________________________________ 10

4. Duration of daily flow at daily-record gaging stations in the Mississippi embayment in northern Arkansas and

in Missouri._____________________________________________ ._________________________ 12

5. Chemical analyses of low-flow surface waters in the Mississippi embayment in northern Arkansas and in

Missouri___________________________________________________________________________________ 21

6. Source and significance of dissolved mineral constituents and properties of water._______________________ 22

700-185 68 2

WATER RESOURCES OF THE MISSISSIPPI EMBAYMENT

LOW-FLOW CHARACTERISTICS OF STREAMS IN THE MISSISSIPPI EMBAYMENT IN

NORTHERN ARKANSAS AND IN MISSOURI

By PAUL E. SPEER, MARION S. HINES, M. E. JANSON, and others

ABSTRACT

The low-flow characteristics of a stream largely govern the 

type and the economics of its utilization. The magnitude, duration, and frequency of low flows included in this report are used 

both to determine whether a water-utilization project can be operated without storage and, if not, to estimate the amount of 

storage required to provide the minimum flows needed.

When direct runoff from precipitation ceases, the flow of 

streams is governed by the volume of water in ground storage 

and by the rate at which the ground water discharges into the 

stream. The character and distribution of the geologic formations within stream basins influence the quality and quantity of 

the low flows of streams.

Manmade changes to the land and to the stream systems 

probably have altered the regimen of flow of many streams. 

Heavy pumping of ground water near the streams may have 

lowered the water table, caused low flows to diminish or cease, 

and permitted the stream to recharge other aquifers with water 

derived from an adjacent aquifer.

Limited low-flow data, in cubic feet per second per square 

mile, for 23 daily-record gaging stations and 37 partial-record 

stations are summarized for ready comparison. The summary 

gives the minimum average 7-day and 30-day discharges that 

may be expected to recur at 2- and 10-year intervals and the 

flow at the 90- and 95-percent duration points. More detailed 

data on the magnitude and frequency of low flows and flow 

duration, in cubic feet per second, are given for the 23 dailyrecord gaging stations.

The 7-day low flows at the 2-year recurrence interval expressed on a per-square-mile basis, are used to demonstrate 

areal variations of low flow in this area. These indices range 

from 0 to 0.49 cubic foot per second per square mile.

Drafts that may be made from specified amounts of storage 

with a chance of deficiency once in 10 and 20 years on a longterm average are related to the median annual 7-day low flow 

to permit preliminary estimates to be made of the storage required to supplement natural low flows.

Chemical analyses of surface-water samples collected at 12 

sites during low-flow periods show the dissolved solids to 

range from 90 to 333 ppm (parts per million) ; the hardness 

to range from 57 to 275 pprn; and the iron content to range 

from 0.00 to 0.08 ppm. The surface waters in the study area 

generally are suitable for some uses with little or no treatment, 

but for municipal and industrial supplies, the waters would 

require softening, coagulation, filtration, and pH adjustment for 

corrosion control.

The results of the study suggest fields for further investigation to define additional causative features of the hydrologic' 

systems and to determine the effect that manmade changes to 

the stream systems may have upon the low flows of the streams 

and the ground-water systems.

INTRODUCTION

In the Mississippi embayment in northern Arkansas 

and in Missouri, large supplies of fresh water are available from both surface and underground sources. The 

area has a high average annual precipitation, and, in 

addition, much water is available from the Mississippi 

Eiver, which lies on the east side of the area, and 

from other large streams that originate outside. The 

water resources of the area, therefore, are more than 

ample to meet the needs for many years in the future, 

and the problems in surface-water supply will be those 

of distribution and of providing storage to meet the 

demands.

Because many parts of the area have been subjected 

to devastating floods, much attention in the past has 

been focused on flood control, on drainage, and on improving the channel hydraulics of the streams. In 

recent years, however, rapid economic development 

within the study area has so increased the consumptive 

use of water that serious localized shortages have occurred during periods of low streamflow. These shortages emphasize that knowledge of the areal availability 

of water during critical periods of low flow is paramount to the orderly economic growth of the area.

The flow characteristics and the chemical, physical, 

and biological properties of the water, which form the 

basis for utilizing the flow of a stream, exert a major 

influence on the economics of the stream's development. 

These factors vary with time, with location, and with 

manmade changes. Of particular significance for utilization of a stream are the magnitude of the low flow, the 

duration and frequency of a specific discharge, and the 

quality of the water during the low-flow periods. The

Fl
F2 WATER RESOURCES OF THE MISSISSIPPI EMBAYMENT

low-flow data included in this report show the amount 

of water available for use without storage and may be 

used to determine the storage required to provide the 

minimum flow needed; included also is an indication of 

the chemical quality of the waters in the streams during 

low flow.

Streamflow records used in the analyses for this report were collected over a period of many years by the 

U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Arkansas Geological Commission and with the Missouri Division of Geological Survey and Water Resources. Other 

records were obtained through cooperation with Federal agencies such as the Corps of Engineers and the 

Mississippi River Commission. The records were 

processed by electronic computer in the Washington 

office of the U.S. Geological Survey under the direction 

of W. L. Isherwood, hydraulic engineer.

The records were analyzed and the manuscript describing the low-flow characteristics of the streams in 

northern Arkansas was prepared by M. S. Hines, assisted by L. D. Hauth and John Sullavan, under the 

general direction of J. L. Saunders, succeeded by I. D. 

Yost, district engineer, and in Missouri by M. E. Janson, 

under the general direction of H. C. Bolon, succeeded by 

Anthony Homyk, Jr., district engineer. Technical 

supervision of quality-of-water analyses and preparation of the section of the report on quality of the water 

was under the direction of J. H. Hubble, district 

chemist. Other parts of the report were prepared, the 

results coordinated and reviewed, and the report assembled by P. R. Speer, staff engineer. Technical guidance on analytical procedure and format were provided by C. H. Hardison, staff engineer. The report 

was prepared under the direction of E. M. Gushing.

The principal authors gratefully acknowledge the 

assistance of E. M. Gushing, R. L. Hosman, and L. M. 

MacCary, who prepared the subsection on "Geology," 

participated in the determination of the geologic units 

that contribute to the low flows of the streams, reviewed 

the section on "Factors affecting low flow," and offered 

many helpful suggestions which have been incorporated 

into the report.

PURPOSE AND SCOPE

The purpose of the low-flow phase of the investigations in the Mississippi embayment is to define the hydrologic systems. Because most of the area is underlain 

by aquifers which yield large quantities of water to 

wells, ground water is the most readily available source 

of fresh-water supply in the embayment. Surface waters 

are available to those users who have access to the 

streams. In defining the hydrologic systems of the area, 

ground water and the low flows of the surface waters

are virtually one body of water and cannot be separated. 

The results of the studies on surface water and the 

results of the studies on ground water, which are published in chapters C-E of Professional Paper 448, 

complement each other in the definition of the 

hydrologic systems.

The purpose of this chapter is to present data that 

will facilitate evaluation of the characteristics of the 

low flow of the streams within the embayment in northern Arkansas and in Missouri. The chapter deals with 

surface water and with the relation of the aquifers to 

low streamflow; the low-flow characteristics of streams 

at 60 sites in the area are given. Other chapters (G-I) 

of the series contain similar data for other parts of the 

embayment (fig. 1).

Data essential to the planned development of water 

resources include: the magnitude of the low flow, the 

length of period that a specific discharge continues or is 

not exceeded, the frequency at which this discharge recurs, and the quality of the water during the low-flow 

periods. The data also are useful in the allocation of 

water and in the determination (1) of the recurrence 

of flows that are qualitatively unsuitable for specific 

uses and (2) of the economic feasibility of designing 

storage capacity needed to produce certain minimum 

flows of acceptable minimum quality. The data contained herein will enable water managers and designers 

to determine the magnitude and frequency of low flows 

at specific sites at the same time that they study the 

economics of development and operation.

The data presented for specific sites in the area conr 

sist of (1) frequency data showing the average intervals, in years, between low discharges for periods of 

selected length, (2) flow-duration data showing the percentage of the reference period during which the flow 

equaled or exceeded given rates of flow, and (3) 

chemical quality of the surface waters at various sites 

during low flows.

DEFHTITION OF TERMS

Most of the hydrologic terms used in this report are 

defined by Langbein and Iseri (1960). Other selected 

terms as used in this report are defined as follows:

Aquifer. A geologic formation, group of formations, 

or part of a formation that is waterbearing.

Climatic year. The year beginning April 1 and ending March 31 of the following calendar year.

Low-flow frequency curve. A graph showing as 

abscissa the recurrence interval (average return 

period), in years, at which the lowest mean flow for a 

selected number of days during a climatic year may be 

expected to be no greater than a specified discharge, 

plotted as ordinate.
LOW FLOW, STREAMS IN ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI F3

Low-flow index. The median annual 7-day low flow in 

cubic feet per second per square mile.

Median annual 7-day low flow. The annual 7-day 

low flow having a recurrence interval of 2 years (7-day 

2-year) that is, the mean flow for 7 consecutive days 

to be expected as the annual minimum 1 year out of 

2, on the average.

Partial-record station. A particular site on a stream 

at which limited streamflow data, generally consisting 

of sufficient streamflow measurements to establish a 

low-flow relation with the daily record at a nearby 

station, are collected over a period of years for use in 

hydrologic analyses.

Reference period. The years 1929-57; for low-flow 

frequency data, it is the 29 climatic years, April 1, 

1929, to March 31,1958, and for flow-duration data, it

is the 29 water years, October 1,1928, to September 30, 

1957.

DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA

The area of the embayment described in this chapter 

(fig. 1) includes 7,670 square miles in northern Arkansas 

and 3,950 square miles in southeastern Missouri.

Drainage from the area is to the Mississippi River and 

its tributaries. The principal tributary basins include 

that of the St. Francis River and its tributary, Little 

River; and that of the White River and its tributaries, 

the Black and the Cache Rivers. The natural channels 

are irregular and meandering, but some have been 

canalized, straightened, or otherwise altered to such an 

extent that they no longer resemble their natural state. 

Most channels have low hydraulic gradients due to the 

flat topography, and the flow is sluggish. The drainage

95° 94° 93°

32

FIGURE 1. Map of the Mississippi embayment showing the areas described in the four chapters F-I of Professional Paper 448 on low-flow

characteristics of streams. The area described in this chapter is shaded.
F4 WATER RESOURCES OF THE MISSISSIPPI EMBAYMENT

patterns in the lower reaches of the Headwater diversion channel, in the Little Kiver ditches, and in the 

lower reaches of the St. Francis Kiver have been greatly 

altered by man to facilitate drainage of the land for 

cultivation and to improve the hydraulics of the 

channels.

CLIMATE

The climate of the area is warm and humid. The 

temperature ranges from an average daily low of about 

26 °F during Janaury in the northernmost part of the 

area to an average daily high of about 93 °F during July 

in the southernmost part of the area. The average 

annual precipitation ranges from about 45 to about 48 

inches. Most of the precipitation is rain, but snowfalls 

of 1 inch or more occur in the northern part of the area 

on an average of five or six times a year. The climate 

of the area is mainly continental and is the result of an 

interplay of the cold airmasses moving out of Canada,

warm moist air moving northeastward from the Gulf 

of Mexico, and dry air from the west.

PHYSIOGRAPHY

The Mississippi embayment, a part of the Coastal 

Plain province, is an extensive lowland in a great structural trough between the Appalachian and Interior 

Highlands (Fenneman, 1938, p. 96). It has been 

formed by subsidence of the trough, aggradation, differential weathering, erosion, and crustal movement. 

During much of its existence, the embayment has been 

submerged by the sea, and since it last emerged, the 

Mississippi Kiver has followed close to the axis of the 

trough. The Mississippi embayment in the area 

covered by this report lies in two physiographic districts, St. Francis Basin and Crowleys Ridge (fig. 2). 

The St. Francis Basin extends from the Mississippi 

Biver to the western boundary of the embayment except

C^f f I "* !

-A ) / 11 C

_.L. ~' ' '""iT^ARKANSAsC

FIGURE 2 , Physiographic map of the Mississippi embayment in northern Arkansas and in Missouri. After Fenneman (1938) and others.
LOW FLOW, STREAMS IN ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI F5

for the area occupied by Crowleys Ridge, which is about 

midway between the river and the boundary.

Most of the present physiography probably is the 

result of (1) crustal movements of which the New 

Madrid earthquake (Fuller, 1912) of 1811-13 is the 

most recent, (2) the last submergence of the area by an 

arm of the sea while the lowlands were in the process 

of sinking or downwarping, and (3) erosion.

The St. Francis Basin occupies nearly all of the 

area studied. It is an extensive flat lowland plain of 

aggradation of the Quaternary System and has only a 

few areas higher than 300 feet above mean sea level. 

Streams in the St. Francis Basin in their natural state 

are sluggish and meandering. Crowleys Ridge is a 

distinctive feature that extends lengthwise through and 

mainly in the middle of the St. Francis Basin. The 

ridge is composed of Tertiary and Cretaceous deposits 

capped by Quaternary deposits and rises from 100 to 

250 feet above the alluvial plain of the St. Francis 

Basin. The eastern slopes of the ridge are rather steep, 

and they grade into the alluvial plains of the river 

valleys. A few thousand years ago, Crowleys Ridge 

was the divide between two great rivers that contributed 

to the alluvial plain of the embayment.

The Sikeston Ridge and Malden-Kennett Prairie are 

low terraces on the Quaternary alluvial plain; they lie 

east of Crowleys Ridge and rise 10-20 feet above the 

lowland plains. West of Crowleys Ridge, there are 

other small isolated terraces. The long, narrow low 

drainage basins of the streams and drainage ditches 

are alined parallel to these low terraces.

GEOLOGY

The area in northern Arkansas and southeastern 

Missouri described in this report is a part of the 

Mississippi embayment and lies within the Gulf Coastal 

Plain. The embayment in the past was periodically 

occupied by the sea and has been filled with sediments 

ranging in age from Jurassic to Quaternary. The 

thickness of the sedimentary rocks ranges from 0 at the 

edge of the embayment to many thousands of feet near 

the axis of the trough at the south end of the embayment, whereas in this area they range from 0 to about 

3,000 feet. Within this area, units ranging in age from 

Cretaceous to Quaternary crop out (pi. 1). On the 

western and northern periphery of the area, Paleozoic 

rocks crop out. Gushing, Boswell, and Hosman (1964) 

give a general description of the units of Cretaceous 

age and younger.

The important geologic units that crop out within the 

area of this study are given in table 1. The sand units 

that contribute most of the water to the low flow of 

streams include the McNairy Sand, sands of the Wilcox

790-185 66 2

Group (Wilcox Formation in Missouri) and the Claiborne Group, the Pliocene(?) deposits, and the 

alluvium and terrace deposits.

TABLE 1. Geologic units cropping out in area of study

ARKANSAS

Quaternary System

Alluvium and terrace deposits 

Loess

Tertiary System 

Pliocene (?) deposits 

Eocene Series 

Claiborne Group undifferentiated 

Wilcox Group undifEerentiated 

Paleocene Series

Midway Group undifferentiated

Cretaceous System 

Upper Cretaceous Series

Nacatoch Sand 

Paleozoic rocks undifferentiated

MISSOURI

Quaternary System

Alluvium and terrace deposits 

Loess

Tertiary System 

Pliocene (?) deposits 

Eocene Series

Wilcox Formation 

Paleocene Series 

Midway Group 

Porters Creek Clay 

Clayton Formation 

Cretaceous System 

Upper Cretaceous Series 

Owl Creek Formation 

McNairy Sand 

Paleozoic rocks undifferentiated

MANMADE CHANGES

Activities of man and nature combine to produce 

changes in the low flows of streams. In most instances, 

the effects of the changes are very difficult if not impossible to distinguish. This discussion will be confined to 

those manmade changes that probably have altered the 

regimen of flow of the streams. The changes can be 

grouped into (1) those applied to the land itself, such 

as irrigation, drainage, land utilization, changes in 

farm practices, and the intensity of cultivation, and (2) 

those applied to the stream systems, such as diversion of 

water, construction of drainage systems and levees, 

dredging of channels, and the creation of reservoirs for 

impoundment of water. Generally, the effects of these 

changes, many of which were begun prior to the collection of streamflow records, are interdependent and difficult to evaluate.

Most of the land in this area has been cultivated at 

one time or another. Some of the land was found to be 

submarginal for farming and was permitted to return 

to timber; other areas of previously uncultivated land 

have been drained and the land used for intensive farming by modern methods. During the growth of population centers, more wells are dug, more land is cleared of 

timber, farming operations are varied, industrial activity is changed, and the effects of these changes combine 

to produce an ever-changing demand on the supply of 

water available during periods of low flow in the 

streams. Most of these changes are gradual, and the 

effect on low flow would be difficult to evaluate without 

the extensive collection of data and a very thorough and 

detailed investigation.

Changes made directly to the stream systems involve 

the use or control of the water and are more noticeable.
F6 WATER RESOURCES OF THE MISSISSIPPI EMBAYMENT

The effects of some of these changes, however, are not 

permanent. Dredged channels may become partly 

filled with sediment or they may erode owing to increased velocity of flow. Channel clearing and snagging is a temporary improvement because of the 

regrowth of vegetation and reaccumulation of debris.

To define and describe all the manmade changes is beyond the scope of this report, but some of the major 

manmade changes to the river systems are described 

briefly by river basins in the following paragraphs.

HEADWATER DIVERSION CHANNEL BASIN

The upper part of the Castor Eiver basin, which originally drained toward the Little Eiver basin, was diverted in the early 1900's from its natural channel to the 

Headwater diversion channel. The flow in this manmade channel is eastward through low flat terrain. 

The Headwater diversion channel is joined by the 

Whitewater Eiver before it enters the Mississippi Eiver 

south of Cape Girardeau, Mo. (pi. 2). The diversion 

system comprises 50 miles of channel, 10 miles of floodways, 45 miles of levees, and 16,000 acres of detention 

basins which protect southeastern Missouri and northeastern Arkansas from flooding by the Mississippi Eiver and by the streams that drain the Ozark foothills 

north of the embayment. The system diverts runoff 

from 1,130 square miles. During low-flow periods, the 

water in the system originates largely in the hilly areas 

north of the embayment. Without this manmade drainage system it would have been impossible to develop the 

low-lying areas of the embayment south of this system.

ST. JOHNS BAYOU BASIN

Maple Slough and St. James ditch have been channeled into the St. Johns Bayou. The levee of the New 

Madrid Floodway along the Mississippi Eiver parallels the channels of St. James ditch, Maple Slough, and 

other ditches south and east of East Prairie, Mo. The 

drainage of Main ditch lateral 2 lies within the area 

of the floodway, and the lateral enters St. Johns Bayou 

through the floodway levee. These channels drain the 

area and allow storm runoff to flow rapidly from the 

low-lying, highly productive agricultural land.

ST. FRANCIS RIVER BASIN

Low flows of the St. Francis Eiver have been affected 

by regulation at Wappapello Keservoir (capacity, 

38,600 acre-ft at conservation pool level) since 1941, by 

operation of the locks and siphons at Marked Tree, 

Ark., since 1925, and by numerous drainage projects in 

the basin. Numerous cutoff channels have been dredged

to straighten meanders in the natural channel, the banks 

have been leveed, and other channel improvements 

have been completed along the main stem of the St. 

Francis Eiver from Marked Tree, Ark., to the mouth 

and at several locations along two of its tributaries, Little and Tyronza Eivers. Several manmade ditches, 

such as Kinnemore ditch, have been dug to drain 

sloughs and marshland near the river. Extensive additional improvements are proposed for the main stem of 

the lower St. Francis and the lower reaches of Little 

Eiver. Plate 2, a map prepared by the Memphis District, Corps of Engineers, shows the completed and proposed levees and channel improvements along the St. 

Francis, Little, and Tyronza Eivers, as of February 

26,1964.

The drainage pattern of the upper end of the Little 

Eiver basin, north of about lat 36° N"., has been affected 

more by manmade changes than any other basin of comparable size in the area. The Little Eiver Drainage 

District comprises a drainage system of 850 miles of 

ditches, 242 miles of low levees, and two detention basins. The system protects areas that previously were 

subject to frequent flooding; it drains about 1,760 

square miles into Big Lake, which is in Arkansas just 

south of the Missouri line. A continuing program is 

carried on to maintain and improve the system.

The L'Anguille Eiver channel has been cleared for a 

distance of 5 miles upstream from the mouth as part of 

the St. Francis Eiver basin project of the Corps of Engineers. Clearing and enlargement are proposed for 

the channel of the L'Anguille Eiver from the PoinsettCraighead County line to the mouth and for two of its 

tributaries, Brushy Creek and First Creek, for a distance of about 7 miles upstream from the main stem.

Drainage districts and many other local organizations have been engaged in drainage projects in the St. 

Francis Eiver basin, but detailed information on the 

nature and extent of the projects is not readily available.

The Soil Conservation Service, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, is engaged in a few watershed improvement projects in the area. On Caney Creek in Cross 

County, Ark., six floodwater-retarding structures (total capacity, 3,263 acre-ft) had been completed by the 

end of 1961. Other projects are probably of such a nature that they have little, if any, effect on low flow.

WHITE RIVER BASIN

Eegulation by several reservoirs in the White Eiver 

basin affects low flows of the main stem and some of its 

tributaries. Construction was completed and storage 

began in Norfork Eeservoir on North Fork Eiver in 

1943, in Clearwater Eeservoir on Black Eiver in 1948,
LOW FLOW, STREAMS IN ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI F7

in Bull Shoals Eeservoir in 1951, in Table Eock Eeservoir in 1956, and in Greers Ferry Eeservoir on Little 

Eed Eiver in 1961. On rare occasions, unusual operations at locks and dams 1, 2, and 3, near Batesville, 

Earnharts, and Walls Ferry, Ark., respectively, may 

affect the daily discharge of the White Eiver downstream from these locations.

Some levee- and channel-improvement work has been 

completed along the White and Black Eivers and their 

tributaries. Levees and tributary-channel improvements have been completed on the east bank of White 

Eiver from about 8 miles northwest of Clarendon, Ark., 

to about 2 miles north of Newport, Ark. Prior to 1948, 

White Eiver floodwaters sometimes topped the old 

levees in the vicinity of Augusta, Ark., flowed through 

the Cache Eiver bottoms, and returned to the White 

Eiver at Clarendon.

On the Black Eiver, short sections of levees and limited channel improvement have been completed in the 

vicinity of Manson, Pocahontas, Knobel, and Corning, 

Ark. The low flows of Black Eiver within the embayment have been partly regulated by Clearwater Eeservoir (capacity, 21,920 acre-ft at conservation pool level) 

since 1948. Part of the low flow, however, is derived 

from springs below the dam, with the result that the 

low-flow discharge is high and quite constant.

On the maui stem and tributaries of Flat Creek in 

Lawrence County, Ark., three floodwater-retarding 

structures (total capacity, about 13,200 acre-ft) were 

completed by the Soil Conservation Service in 1962.

FARM PONDS AND LAKES

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has assisted in 

the creation and improvement of many small ponds in 

the area. Many other impoundments have been created 

by other agencies, individuals, and private organizations. The Arkansas Conservation Needs Committee 

has estimated that there are 26,200 farm ponds and 

lakes, 40 acres or less in size, in the Mississippi embayment in Arkansas. Only the northern third of this 

area is included in this chapter.

The effect of most of these impoundments on streamflow is local, but the large number of small ponds in 

some areas may influence the low-flow characteristics 

of some streams, and the regulatory effect of ponds 

within a basin should be considered in the low-flow 

appraisal of streams.

LOW-FLOW CHARACTERISTICS

Streamflow data used in the study of the low-flow 

characteristics for this chapter include 23 continuous 

records of flow obtained at daily-record gaging stations,

and limited Streamflow data collected systematically 

over a period of years at 37 low-flow partial-record 

stations.

In order to compare the low-flow characteristics of 

one stream with those of another, all data were adjusted 

to the common reference period, 1929-57, except where 

noted. (See section on "Method of study" for discussion of the reference period.) Daily-discharge records 

at seven gaging stations are complete for the reference 

period, and seven others have 15 years or more of record during the period. Daily-record stations having 

less than 5 years of daily record during this period were 

used as partial-record stations. Data recorded 

through 1963 were used to define the low-flow characteristics at the partial-record stations.

The average annual precipitation in Arkansas from 

1891 to 1957 was about 49 inches, and from 1929 to 1957, 

it was 48.6 inches. In Missouri, the average annual precipitation from 1929 to 1957 was 46.3 inches. Thus the 

average precipitation in Arkansas during the reference 

period is approximately equivalent to that since 1891; 

precipitation data in Missouri for 1891-1957 are not 

available to show this comparison. Droughts occurred 

in this area in 1930, 1936, and near the end of the reference period. Arkansas and Missouri both had new 

extremes in precipitation during 1929-57. The new 

annual statewide lows are 34.2 and 30.6 inches, respectively, and the annual statewide highs are 65.8 and 76.9 

inches, respectively. However, precipitation data alone 

are not in themselves valid criteria on which to assess 

Streamflow patterns because many other factors, among 

them spatial and within-the-year distributions of precipitation, influence the quantity and rate of runoff.

The low-flow characteristics for all streams analyzed 

in this study are summarized in table 2. The stations 

are all in Part 7 (fig. 5); they are listed in downstream 

order, and their numbers are referred to the nationwide 

station-numbering system all these factors by current 

usage by the U.S. Geological Survey in its surfacewater reports. In assigning the numbers, no distinction is made between daily-record and partial-record 

stations. For some stations for which the selected items 

are zero, additional flow data are given in parentheses 

with appropriate reference notes. The last column of 

the table enables the user of the data to reconstruct the 

relation curve between the partial-record station and the 

daily-record station and to interpolate additional data 

if desired. Some of the partial-record stations were related to another partial-record station; for each such 

station the number of the other station is shown in 

parenthesis. The data shown are for natural unregulated conditions on the streams.
F8 WATER RESOURCES OF THE MISSISSIPPI EMBAYMENT

TAKLE 2. Low-flow characteristics of streams in the study area

[Data are adjusted to period 1929-57 on basis of relation to data at other gaging stations. Class of station: D, daily-record gaging station; P, partial-record or short-term 

daily-record station. Figures given for the 7-day 2-year annual low flow are the indices of low flow used in this report]

Station Station name

Class 

of

station

Drainage

area 

(sqmi)

Annual low flow, in cubic feet per second

per square mile, for indicated period of

consecutive days and for indicated

recurrence interval, in years

7-day

2-yr 10-yr

30-day

2-yr 10-yr

Flow, in cubic feet

per second per 

square mile, which Daily-record 

was equaled or ex- station with 

ceeded for indicated which partialpercent of time record station 

is correlated 1

90 95

Part 7. Lower Mississippi River basin

7-210.. 

219.. 

241 

241.5. 

241.7 

376 

400 

403.. 

404- 

404.7 . 

407 

408- 

408.5 

409 

410 

410.5-.. 

411 

420

424 

425 

430.. 

430.6.. 

431 

435.... __ .

439 

440..---..

460-- 

465.1........

465.2 _ 

465.5. _______

466

478.5. 

479.2. .

479.4_ 

479.5. 

609 

615. _ . 

625 

630 

631 

631.3. 

635.. _ .

640 

689 

690 

694. _ .

695 _

720 

735 

740 

746 

747 

748 

760 

768 

768.5 

769.5. _

773 

775. ..

776.5. 

Headwater diversion channel basin

St. Johns Bayou basin

St. Francis River basin

White River basin

Departee Creek near Coffeyville, Ark ____ ____ ..

D

P

P

P

P

D

D

P

P

P

P

P

P

P

D

P

P

D

P

D

D

P

P

D

P

D

P

P

P

D

P

P

P

D

P

D

D

D

P

P

P

D

P

D

P

D

D

D

D

P

P

P

D

P

P

P

P

D

P

423

982

97.3

17.5

24.5

956

1,370

245

79.5

11.6

59.6

28.0

31.7

46.9

111

28.6

96.1

235

62.0

235

175

36.8

41.4

450

51.5

4 gg3

89

144

66.4

38.7

0 11*1

28.7

51.0

503

807

165

484

957

1,245

78.0

33.5

188

1,749

305

4,843

78.5

1,162

1,123

QQ

476

34.3

270

86.5

1,141

97.1

163

195

285

1,041

51.1

0.09

.07

.04

.02

.07

.03

.10

.28

.017

.009

.01

0

.03

.38

.33

.21

.22

.14

.37

.24

.004

.49

.02

.11

.01

.15

.01

.15

.14

.26

13

0

«(. 012)

e (.032)

«(.029)

.20

.20

.23

.24

.03

.04

.05

.17

.033

.31

(2)

.28

si

fi.9

.10

«(. 001) (2)

0

.001

 (. 017)

0

.001

.004

.042

.008

0.06

.04

(2)

00(2)

.01

.08

.14

.004

0

(2) '

(2)

(2)

.18

.14

.13

(2) .

.07

(2)

.15

.0006

(2)

(2)

.07

(2)

.08

0

(2)

(2)

(2)

043

0

0

0

0

.18

.14

.17

.20

(2)

.006

.05

.14

.022

.25

(2)

.23

.24

'(. 005)

.086

0

(2)

0

0

0

0

0

.001

.014

.002

0.11

.08

.05

.03

.07

.04

.11

.37

.030

.009

.02

.004

.07

.49

.45

.26

.27

.17

.45

.29

.009

.54

.04

.13

.01

.16

.02

.17

.17

.39

.18

0

.005

6 (. 015)

.012

.21

.23

.25

.29

.05

.06

.06

.19

.039

.35

.002

.29

.37

.11

e (.016)

.007

«(. 005)

.005

.004

 (. 002)

.002

.006

.057

.013

0.07

.05

(2)

.006

(2)

.02

.08

.17

.006

0

(2)

(2)

(2)

.23

.18

.15

.17

.09

.29

.18

.001

.43

.01

.08

(2)

.09

.001

(2)

(2)

(2)

.061

0

0

0

0

.18

.16

.19

.22

.01

.009

.05

.15

.025

.27

(2)

.24

.25

.090

0

(2)

0

0

0

0

0

.002

.027

.003

0.12

.09

.04

.03

.07

.05

.11

.29

.019

.009

.02

.004

.06

.41

.35

.22

.22

.16

.37

.23

.007

.54

.02

.13

.01

.15

.01

.15

.17

.28

.15

0

.008

.002

.019

.23

.23

.25

.28

.05

.04

.06

.19

.052

.34

.005

.30

.32

.12

.001

.006

8 (.003)

.005

.003

 (.DOT)

.002

.006

.055

.009

0.10

.07

.03

.02

.05

.03

.10

.22

.012

.009

.01

0

.03

.32

.26

.19

.18

.12

.31

.20

.003

.49

.02

.11

.008

.12

.C06

.12

.12

.19

.11

0

0

.001

.001

.21

.20

.22

.25

.03

.02

.05

.17

.038

.30

(2)

.27

.28

.015

.11

0

(2)

0

0

0

0

.001

.004

.041

.005

7-0210

7-0440

7-0435

7-0440

7-0410

7-0410

7-0410

7-0420

7-0435

7-0430

7-0410

7-0410

7-0425

7-0425

7-0435

7-0425

7-0425

7-0440

7-0420

7-0410

Observed.

7-0479. 5

7-0479. 5

7-0740

7-0435

7-0410

7-0375

7-0740

7-0740

7-0740

7-0775

7-3630

7-0760

7-0760

7-0775

7-0775

(7-0404)

1 Station numbers shown in parentheses are partial-record stations.

2 Relation curve not defined in this range.

3 Data for natural conditions prior to operation of reservoir upstream.

* Includes that of Little River ditches 66 and 66-A.

* Data not to base period; based on observed data 1927-57 and records for nearby 

gaging stations.

6 Figure is for 1.2-yr recurrence interval; 2-yr figure is 0.

7 Figure is for 5-yr recurrence interval; 10-yr figure is 0.

8 Figure is for 80 percent of time; figure for 90 percent is 0.

9 Figure is for 70 percent of time; figures for 80 percent and 90 percent are 0.
LOW FLOW, STREAMS IN ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI F9

The low-flow data in table 2 are presented in cubic 

feet per second per square mile to facilitate comparison 

of flows of streams with drainage areas of different sizes. 

It should not be inferred, however, that the yield is uniform throughout each drainage basin. On the contrary, low-flow yields usually differ between tributary 

streams within a drainage basin and within reaches on 

a single stream. For example, based on use of the 7- 

day 2-year low flow as the index, the low-flow indices 

for streams in the Black River basin (7-0615 to 7-0740) 

range from 0.17 to 0.31 cfs per sq mi (cubic feet per second per square mile) on the main stem and from 0.012 

to 0.31 cfs per sq mi on the tributaries. The differences 

in low-flow indices are primarily due to the differences 

in hydraulic characteristics of the aquifer supplying the 

water to the stream, the depth of incision of the stream, 

and the interrelation of the hydraulic characteristics of 

the aquifer and of the stream.

The drainage areas given for most of the manmade 

ditches in the flat lowlands are subject to considerable 

error because the available maps do not permit accurate 

delineation of the drainage basins. The values for 

cubic feet per second per square mile for these ditches 

should, therefore, be used with caution.

The locations of the stations that are given in table 2 

are shown on plate 1. The station numbers shown on 

the plate are the same as those used in table 2. The 

low-flow index (7-day 2-year low flow) for each station 

is given in parentheses near the station symbol. The 

dash shown in parentheses for a few of the stations 

means that the relation with the daily-discharge station 

is not defined in this range.

LOW-FLOW FREQUENCY

Low-flow frequency data for 23 daily-record gaging 

stations are presented in table 3. "Some of these stations 

are now regulated, but the data are based on unregulated 

flow for the period of record, adjusted to the reference 

period 1929-57. Similar data for the partial-record 

stations have not been computed because of the limited 

basic information available at these sites. The data in 

table 3 can be plotted on graph paper similar to that 

used in figure 3 if a graphical presentation is desired.

In table 3, the probability of occurrence is given in 

terms of the average time interval between indicated 

low flows. For example, the annual low discharge for 

7 consecutive days on the Castor River at Zalma, Mo. 

(7-0210), may be equal to or less than 24 cfs (cubic feet 

per second) at average intervals of 10 years on a longarz

UJ >

<^o

U-Q

o° 

Sg 

3d. °^ 

zo

3*

li Iw Q: 

QP

1000

UJ -

C5Q

a

100

1.01 1.1 2 10 50 100 

RECURRENCE INTERVAL, IN YEARS

FIGURE 3. Magnitude and frequency of annual low flow for Black 

River near Corning, Ark. (7-0640), 1929-57.

term basis. The chance of occurrence in any year is 1 

in 10 or 10 percent. These recurrence intervals are 

averages and do not imply any regularity of recurrence. During the period. 1929-57, the 7-day minimum 

flow was equal to or less than 24 cfs (the 10-year event) 

in 1936, 1937, and 1954. Thus, during the 29-year period, the 10-year event occurred three times, which is 

in close agreement with the probable frequency; however, the intervals between these occurrences, 1 and 17 

years, demonstrate that there was not a regularity of 

recurrence.

The data in table 3 can be used to estimate the probable future magnitude and frequency of low flows at 

the indicated locations provided that climatological 

conditions remain the same and that manmade changes 

are considered in the computations.

FLOW DURATION

Flow-duration data for the 23 daily-record gaging 

stations are presented in table 4. As with low-flow 

frequency data, flow-duration data are not shown for 

the partial-record stations. The data in table 4 can be 

plotted on logarithmic-probability paper similar to that 

used in figure 4, if graphical presentation is desired.

The slope of the flow-duration curve so plotted is 

a quantitative measure of the variability of streamflow. 

The slopes of the flow-duration curves of the streams 

having large low-flow yields are flatter than those for 

streams having small low-flow yields. For example, 

the duration curve for Black River near Corning, Ark. 

(fig. 4), shows a lower variability and a higher-lowflow yield than the duration Curve for Right Hand 

Chute of Little River at Rivervale, Ark. Thus, the
F10 WATER RESOURCES OF THE MISSISSIPPI EMBAYMENT

TABLE 3. Magnitude and frequency of annual low flow at daily-record gaging stations in the study area

[Data are adjusted to period April 1929 to March 1958 on basis of relation to data at other gaging stations]

Station Station name

Drainage 

area 

(sq mi)

Period 

(consecutive 

days)

Annual low flow, in cubic feet per second, for indicated recurrence 

interval, in years

1.03 1.2 2 5 10 20 50

Part 7. Lower Mississippi River basin

7-210-- 

375.-- 

400.. ___ 

410 __ . _ ...

420 

425 

430

435

44(1

460.. .........

466 ...........

479.5 .......

615- .

Headwater diversion channel basin

St. Francis River basin

Little River ditch 251 near Lilbourn, Moi. ________

Little River ditch 251 near Kennett, Mo.. ________

Little River ditch 259 near Kennett, MoA _______

Eight Hand Chute of Little Biver at Eivervale, Ark. .

White River basin

423

956

1,370

111

235

235

175

450

883

89

2,113

807

484

957

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183

82

92 

114 

143 

246 

395

96

114 

146 

233

476 

959 

258

287 

344 

436 

740 

1.330 

90

99 

107 

123 

149 

204 

110

125 

144 

180 

264 

366 

110

123 

142 

176 

254 

352 

8.5

11 

18 

28 

44 

60 

96

106 

123 

152 

228 

335 

321

355 

410 

510 

690 

880 

14

17 

21 

27 

33 

67 

970

1,190 

1,440 

1,980 

3,100 

3,550 

94

154 

245 

3S5 

790 

1,400

160

174 

196 

235 

327 

465 

330

358 

400 

465 

625 . 

820

57

63 

75 

89 

145 

219

56

67 

84 

123 

249 

487 

180

203 

230 

289 

460 

700 

64

70 

80 

88 

104 

134 

60

69 

80 

94 

134 

178 

80

88 

101 

122 

180 

246 

2.8

4.0 

6.3 

12 

25 

43 

71

78 

90 

106 

156 

219 

207

222 

249 

293 

378 

473 

6.3

7.4 

9.0 

10 

15 

24 

550

655 

765 

1,030 

1,700 

1,800 

23

36

72 

142 

375 

720

126

135 

150 

173 

236 

316 

272

286 

315 

355 

464 

598

39

42 

48 

56 

83 

118

30

36 

43 

58 

112 

207 

132

140 

151 

180 

266 

388 

37

41 

50 

54 

63 

74 

32

36 

40

46 

62 

82 

56

61 

68 

80 

116 

160 

.7

.9 

1.5 

3.3 

10 

21 

50

54 

60 

71 

101 

138 

129

132 

142 

163 

201 

240 

1.3

1.5 

 1.9

2.7 

4.5 

7.4 

268

310 

380

475 

740 

780 

0

.4 

9.4 

42 

143 

295

97

103 

113 

127 

169 

212 

218

225 

240 

268 

342 

432

29

31 

34

41 

55 

72

18

20 

24 

29 

54 

92 

113

117 

122 

131 

174 

239 

20

23 

29 

32 

36 

43 

21

22 

25 

29 

37 

47 

42

45 

49 

56 

77 

102 

.2

.3

.4 

.7 

2.3 

6.8 

36

39 

43 

50 

68 

90 

86

92 

97 

108 

134 

159 

.1

.2 

.3 

.5 

1.2

2.5 

128

155 

194 

236 

335 

390 

0

0 

0 

14 

57 

106

78

82 

88 

98 

124 

154 

175

185 

200 

214 

265 

320

24

26 

29 

34

46 

60

13

15 

18 

22 

40 

64 

103

108 

. 113 

123 

146 

190 

15

16 

20 

23 

27 

33 

17

18 

21 

25 

31 

38 

36

38 

42 

48 

65 

84 

.1

.1 

.2 

.4 

1.2 

3.4 

30

32 

36 

42

58 

75 

71

76 

82 

89 

113 

133 

0

.1 

.1 

.2 

.5 

1.4 

90

104 

128 

161 

230 

288 

0

0 

0 

7.2 

36 

60

70

74 

78 

87 

109 

131 

158

165 

180 

192 

237 

283

21

23 

25 

29 

39 

51

10

11 

13

17 

30 

48 

96

100 

104 

112 

130 

160 

11

12 

15 

18 

21 

27 

14

15 

17 

21 

26 

32 

31

33

36 

42

56 

72 

.1

.1 

.1 

.2

.7 

1.8 

26

27 

30 

36 

49 

64 

60

64 

69 

76 

97 

115 

0

0 

0

!4 

1.0

72

80 

92 

112 

167 

224 

0

0 

0 

3.6 

24 

35

62

66 

70 

78 

97 

116 

147

152 

162 

175 

214

254

17

18 

20 

24 

32 

41

6.

7. 

9. 

11 

21 

34 

87

90 

94 

102 

118 

138 

7.

8. 

10 

12 

16 

21 

11

12 

14 

16

21

26 

26

28 

30 

34 

46 

59 

0

0 

0

!

21

22 

24 

29 

40 

52 

48

52 

55 

62 

80 

96 

0

0 

0 

0

56

61 

69 

80 

112 

164 

0

0 

0

13'

18

54

57 

61 

67 

84 

101 

132

135 

145 

155 

190 

223

See footnotes at end of table.
LOW FLOW, STREAMS IN ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI Fll 

TABLE 3. Magnitude and frequency of annual low flow at daily-record gaging stations in the study area Continued

Station Station name

Drainage

area 

(sqmi)

Period 

(consecutive 

days)

Annual low flow, in cubic feet per second, for indicated recurrence 

interval, in years

1.03 1.2 2 5 10 20 50

Part 7. Lower Mississippi River basin Continued

7-630-. 

640.. _ ...

690--- __ 

695-- ...

720.. 

735... 

7/m

760

775-.- __ ...

White River basin Continued

Spring River at Imboden, Ark ._ _ 

Eleven Point River near Ravenden Springs, Ark __ 

Piney Fork Strawberry River at Evening Shade, Ark _ ..

1,245

1,749

4,843

1,162

1,123

99

476

1,141

1,041

7

15 

30 

60 

120

183

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183 

7

15 

30 

60 

120 

183

438

465 

520 

608 

822 

1,180 

590

685 

800 

1,030 

1,370 

1,910 

2,420

2,690 

3,020 

3,450 

4,220 

6,250 

670

840 

910 

1,080 

1,350 

1,630 

745

860 

920 

1,020 

1,220 

1,420 

12

15 

21 

29 

49 

83 

93

108 

130 

171 

284 

465 

159

270 

400 

520 

1,020 

1,540 

173

260 

394 

590 

910 

1,330

361

373

408 

460 

606 

779 

400

455 

522 

670 

900 

1,120 

1,900

2,100 

2,250 

2,690 

3,170 

3,540 

390

420 

460 

540 

660 

860 

504

550 

598 

658 

742 

840 

5.0

6.4 

9.0 

14 

28 

48 

63

70 

84 

106 

172

275 

26

46 

87 

185 

460 

770 

70

82 

125 

226 

450 

670

300

315 

330

355 

450 

570 

295

312 

336 

391 

540 

618 

1,520

1,640 

1.710 

1,970 

2,210 

2,400 

320

330 

340 

365 

400 

510 

352

376 

410 

450 

490 

530 

1.2

1.5 

2.2 

4.8 

13 

23 

48

49 

52 

62 

99 

146 

1.2

2.2 

5.8 

16 

100 

270 

44

49 

59 

78 

117

185

256

264 

278 

302 

356 

420 

258

266 

278 

294 

358 

392 

1,310

1,350 

1,430 

1,550 

1,650 

1,800 

280

290 

300 

305 

330 

380 

289

305 

316 

331 

351 

385 

.5

.7 

.9 

1.2 

4.7 

10 

43

44 

45 

47 

62 

87 

0

0 

.1 

.6 

13 

73 

29

33 

37

44 

61 

78

231

242 

256 

275 

322 

380 

240

248 

258 

274 

320 

350 

1,210

1,270 

1,330 

1,380 

1,480 

1,620 

265

270 

280 

290 

310 

340 

268

276 

286 

300 

310 

339 

.2

.4 

.5 

.7 

1.8 

6.3 

41

42 

43 

45 

51 

68 

0

0 

0 

0 

3.4 

31 

15

21 

28 

34 

52 

66

217

223 

234 

254 

290 

348 

224

231 

240 

254 

290 

321 

1,120

1,180 

1,240 

1,270 

1,370 

1,500 

250

260 

270 

275 

290 

320 

250

256 

268 

279 

292 

316 

0

.1 

.2 

.4 

1.1 

3.4 

39

40 

41

42 

46 

57 

0

0 

0 

0 

.9 

13 

4.9

8.0 

15 

25 

43 

60

193

200 

213 

226 

268 

311 

205

212 

221 

232 

266 

294 

1,020

1,060 

1,110 

1,160 

1,300 

1,410 

240

250 

255 

270 

280 

310 

232

238 

246 

260 

276 

300 

0

0 

0 

.1 

.7 

1.3 

37

38 

39 

40 

44 

48 

0

0 

0 

0

.1

3.6 

1.2

2.0 

3.4 

8.1 

32 

49

 Data for natural conditions prior to operation of reservoir upstream. 

a Includes that of Little River ditches 66 and 66-A.

flow-duration data in table 4 are excellent for comparing the flow characteristics of different streams and may 

be used for preliminary planning of projects, but detailed planning will require further analysis and use 

of the low-flow frequency data shown in table 3.

The flow-duration data in table 4 are for the complete 

reference period, 1929-57; the flow-duration data for 

any particular year may deviate considerably from the 

adjusted data. For example, during 1954, a year of 

extremely low flow on Castor River, the daily discharge 

for Castor Eiver at Aquilla, Mo. (7-0430), equaled or 

exceeded 6.2 cfs only 41 percent of the time, whereas 

during the reference period, the daily discharge equaled 

or exceeded 5.8 cfs for 70 percent of the time.

The adjusted data in table 4 may be used to predict 

the long-term distribution of future flows at the indis Data not to base period; based on observed data 1927-57 and records for nearby 

stations.

cated locations, provided that climatological conditions 

remain the same and that manmade changes are considered in the computation.

FACTORS AFFECTING LOW FLOW

Water that sustains the natural flow of streams during long periods of little or no precipitation comes from 

ground-water discharge. The natural storage of this 

water is in the geologic units, and the low-flow characteristics of streams are governed by the release of the 

stored water.

The important factors that influence the natural base 

flow of streams are: (1) the permeability and porosity 

of the geologic units, (2) the accessibility of ground 

water to the stream channels, (3) the elevation of the 

water surface in the streams with respect to the eleva-
TABLE 4. Duration of daily flow at daily-record gagmg stations in the study area 

[Data are adjusted to period October 1928 to September 1957 on basis of relation to data at other gaging stations]

to

7-210,....-

375-. 

400-..-

410...-

420. ....

425.. . ..

430..--.

435...-

440.. 

460...-

466-..-

479.5. 

615.. 

625.. 

630-....

640- 

690.. 

695- 

720...-

735-. 

740.. ...

760-. 

775...-

Headwoter diversion etiannel basin

St. Francis River basin

Little River ditch 81 near Kenuett, Mo.. ___

Little River ditch 251 near Lilbourn, Mo ___ .

Little River ditch 251 near Kennett, Mo.. ......

Little River ditch 259 near Kenuett, Mo.' ___

White River basin

Black River at Poplar Bluff, Mo. 1 ..... .......

Spring River at Imboden. Ark,. ................

Art. _________ . _ . __ .... __ . __ .

Little Red River near Heber Springs, Ark... ...

423

QCC

1,370

111

OQK

235

175

2 883

89

2,113

Q1W

ASA

957

1,245

1,749

4,843

1,162

99

476

1,141

1,041

27

.7

108

16

10

36

.1

30

66

0

II9

77

160

238

252

1,120

257

0

38

0

18

30

16.5

113

91

37

34

73

.1

131

si

170

248

1,210

268

906

40

0

24

34

9ft S

120

22

40

.3

38

84

.2

156

OA

184

262

272

1,310

282

282

.7

44

0

31

42

30 2

133

29

46

.6

48

105

.5

226

.5

07

210

289

90S

1,460

311

316

1.5

51

.4

* 43

52

43.5

39

37

1 9

59

130

1.3

315

15

113

241

323

333

1,660

345

361

2.8

58

5.3

57

69

73.8

192

55

54

76

2.8

77

176

3.2

530

137

290

382

410

1,940

412

445

6.1

72

41

90

91

250

72

78

107

5 8

101

229

5.9

770

169

335

448

2,280

495

538

11

95

122

136

121

344

89

140

11

300

10

1,110

540

600

641

17

130

276

218

166

490

108

174

19

166

393

18

1,580

263

500

670

880

3,550

738

770

27

180

520

233

470

700

132

220

34

220

508

30

2,220

820

329

610

860

1,180

4,550

920

920

40

250

890

590

341

79 *

1,040

164

300

284

63

306

684

53

3,100

1,280

433

780

1,150

1,660

5,950

1,200

62

360

1,430

540

1,180

1,780

220

475

390

134

482

995

100

4,500

2,000

620

1,080

1,640

2,500

8,150

1,640

1,440

100

550

2,220

2,110

1,070

2,230

3,400

350

920

610

360

980

1,700

245

7,000

3,400

1,090

1,800

2,770

3,960

12,400

2,560

2,060

210

1,020

4,210

3,800

2,000

4,100

5,600

630

1,690

1,000

870

1,980

2,700

510

9,600

5, 100

1,880

2,850

4,400

5,700

17,100

3,780

2,830

375

1,820

7,500

5,400

4,120

8,790

8,900

1,220

3,800

1,950

1,530

3,860

4,060

1,050

13,800

7,800

3,560

5, 200

7,400

9,200

24,500

6,200

4,350

790

3,9W

15, 300

7,200

6,060

13, 700

11,800

1,700

4,100

2,850

2,000

5,880

4,960

1,500

18,400

10,200

5,150

8,000

10, 100

12, 500

30, 500

9,200

6,100

1,290

6,400

23,600

8,300

8,000

19,800

14,500

2,100

4,700

4,000

2,370

8,100

5,640

1,950

23,600

13,000

12,000

13, 600

16,600

37, 200

14, 700

9.250

2,020

9,700

34,400

9,300

o

1 Data for natural conditions prior to operation of reservoir upstream. 

3 Includes that of Little River ditches 66 and 66-A.

Data not to base period; based on observed data 1927-57 and records for nearby stations.
LOW FLOW, STREAMS IN ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI F13

30,000

10,000 r

and Chute of Little River 

vervale, Ark. (drainage 

2113 sq mi)

1000

I 1 I 1 | II 111 III II I l> I

1 50 99.9

PERCENT OF TIME INDICATED DISCHARGE 

WAS EQUALED OR EXCEEDED

FIGURE 4. Flow-duration curves for Right Hand Chute of 

Little River at Rlvervale, Ark. (7-0466), and Black River 

near Corning, Ark. (7-0640), 1929-57.

tion of the water table and to the elevation of the base 

of the aquifers, (4) the slope of the water table, and 

(5) the rate of evapotranspiration.

Heavy pumping of ground water near the stream may 

lower the water table and permit the stream to yield 

some of its flow to the aquifers. The dredging of 

stream channels may increase or decrease the low flows 

of the streams. Water is withdrawn from the streams 

in many parts of this area. The low flows of some of 

the streams given in this report may have been so altered from their natural flows by manmade practices 

that caution should be exercised in interpretation of the 

low-flow data.

Three major river basins, the Headwater diversion 

channel, the St. Francis River with its large upstream 

tributary, Little River, and the White River, are in the 

area of study. The factors affecting low flow of the 

streams in each basin are discussed in the following 

sections. The low-flow characteristics of the streams 

are compared by using the 7-day flow for the 2-year recurrence interval (table 2) as the low-flow index. The 

discharge for this median annual 7-day low flow is expressed in cubic feet per second per square mile to minimize the effect of size of drainage areas and thus 

emphasize the effects of basin geology.

A study of data in table 2 indicates a wide variation 

in low-flow yields of streams. This variation can be 

attributed mostly to the properties of the water-bearing 

geologic formations at elevations higher than the 

streambed, to the relation of streambed to water table, 

and to manmade changes in the drainage area. In the 

study area, some of these formations and aquifers are

the alluvial sands and gravels, the sands of the Wilcox 

Group (Wilcox Formation in Missouri), the McNairy 

Sand, and the Paleozoic rocks. Permeable layers in 

these formations are good contributors to the low flow 

of streams where the streambed is below the water table, 

but inasmuch as the units are not homogenous no definite 

figure of yield can be assigned to each formation. The 

McNairy Sand, for example, consists of irregularly 

bedded sand with sandy clay and glauconitic layers, and 

the extent and distribution of the permeable sand layers 

determine the ability of the formation to transmit, 

store, and yield water. During long periods of annual 

low flow, such as 183 days, during which precipitation 

occurs, varying rates of direct runoff are likely to occur 

concurrently with flow from ground-water sources.

HEADWATER DIVERSION CHANNEL BASIN

The Castor River basin above the station at Zalma, 

Mo. (7-0210), drains uplands that lie in Paleozoic 

rocks outside the embayment. The low-flow index of 

0.09 cf s per sq mi at this station is representative of the 

Paleozoic rocks in this area. Farther downstream, the 

Headwater diversion channel at Allenville, Mo. 

(7-0219), has an index of 0.07 cfs per sq mi. This lower 

yield is probably due in part to some loss of water into 

the alluvium from the manmade channel.

ST. JOHNS BAYOU BASIN

Maple Slough (7-0241.7), St. James ditch (7-0241.5), 

and Main ditch lateral 2 (7-0241) near East Prairie, 

Mo., have low-flow indices that range from 0.02 to 0.07 

cfs per sq mi. This range is typical of streams in the 

alluvium where the water table is not much higher than 

the streambed and where the hydraulic gradients of 

both the water table and the stream are low.

St. FRANCIS RIVER BASIN

The headwaters of the St. Francis River are outside 

the embayment in an area where the geologic formations 

yield very little base flow to the streams as indicated by 

the index of 0.03 cfs per sq mi for the station near 

Patterson, Mo. (7-0375). Downstream from Patterson, 

the low flows of the St. Francis River are regulated by 

Wappapello Reservoir, which is at the edge of the 

embayment. The low-flow index of 0.10 cfs per sq mi 

shown for the station at Fisk, Mo. (7-0400), is indicative of natural flow conditions before the reservoir was 

created. The increase in natural low-flow yield between 

Patterson and Fisk is attributed to several large springs 

that flow from Paleozoic dolomitic limestones.

The St. Francis River cuts through to the east side 

of Crowleys Ridge near Campbell, Mo. The western
F14 WATER RESOURCES OF THE MISSISSIPPI EMBAYMENT

tributaries of the St. Francis Eiver in Arkansas, above 

the mouth of L'Anguille Elver, head in the loess on 

Crowleys Eidge. As they leave the ridge, the streams 

cross outcrops of the Claiborne Group and terrace deposits and then cross the alluvium to reach the main 

channel. The alluvium is the primary source of base 

flow in this area, but the Claiborne Group also yields 

water to those streams that pass through its outcrop. 

The streams having the greater channel length in the 

alluvium have the higher low-flow indices. The lowflow index for Big Slough ditch near Marmaduke, Ark. 

(7-0403), is 0.28 cfs per sq mi. This high yield is 

caused by the dredging of the channel in the Quaternary 

alluvium for about 24 miles upstream from the station 

and also by the dredging of many tributaries that fan 

out over the valley from near Marmaduke to Piggott, 

Ark., and extend upstream into Crowleys Eidge on the 

west.

Locust Creek ditch near Paragould, Ark. (7-0404), 

which has a low-flow index of 0.017 cfs per sq mi, heads 

in the loess on Crowleys Eidge, crosses outcrops of Tertiary sand and gravel, and then enters the alluvium, 

where the main stem is dredged for a distance of about 

6 miles upstream from the station. The ditch has many 

small natural and dredged tributaries and one large 

dredged tributary, some of which head in Crowleys 

Eidge. The fact that Locust Creek ditch crosses terrace 

deposits and has a shorter length of channel in the alluvium than does Big Slough ditch explains the lower 

yield of Locust Creek ditch. To the south, Little Bay 

ditch near Jonesboro (7-0478.5), which has an index of 

zero, is dredged a short distance through the alluvium 

and drains mostly terrace deposits and Tertiary sand 

and gravel.

Most of the eastern tributaries of the St. Francis 

Eiver within the embayment are in alluvium or terrace 

deposits. A small part of the tributary drainage in 

the north end of the St. Francis Eiver basin is in detached sections of Crowleys Eidge, which are underlain 

by Tertiary and Cretaceous deposits. The ground 

water in the alluvium is near the land surface and in 

some places is under temporary artesian conditions, as 

shown by the fact that some wells along the lower part 

of Little Eiver in Arkansas flow for short periods following a general rain over the area. Kinnemore ditch 

at Card well, Mo. (7-0404.7), which has a low-flow index 

of 0.009 cfs per sq mi, is in the alluvium. The drainage area of this stream is small and the elevation of 

the water table at this point is near the elevation of the 

water surface in the stream. Fifteen Mile Bayou near 

West Memphis, Ark. (7-0479.2), has an index of zero, 

but this low index is believed to reflect the effects of 

withdrawals for irrigation in the vicinity of the station.

The Little Eiver ditches are manmade; they lie in the 

alluvium east of the St. Francis Eiver in Missouri. 

The number of tributary laterals, the properties of the 

geologic formations, the level of the adjacent water 

table, the amount of the drainage area that lies on 

higher ground upstream, the depth of the dredged 

channel all these factors together cause the wide variations in the low flow of the ditches, and as a result, the 

low-flow indices range from 0 to 0.49 cfs per sq mi. 

Main ditch 6 east of Maiden (7-0408) and ditch 9 near 

Gideon (7-0407), Mo., drain low-lying land that is 

within the sunken lands resulting from the New Madrid 

earthquate (Fuller, 1912), and have indices of 0 and 

0.01 cfs per sq mi, respectively; these ditches have verv 

low channel slopes and the elevation of the adjacent 

water table is about the same as the elevation of the 

bottom of the ditches. The station on Main ditch near 

Bernie (7-0408.5), which has a low-flow index of 0.03 

cfs per sq mi, probably receives some water from the 

Wilcox Formation in the upper part of the basin. Two 

points on Main ditch, near Maiden (7-0410.5) and at 

Holcomb (7-0411), have about the same index of 0.22 

cfs per sq mi. Most of the low flow of this ditch 

probably originates in aquifers of the Wilcox Formation which are near the surface or crop out along the 

east side of Crowleys Eidge.

Ditches in the Little Eiver drainage system in Missouri lie along or are incised into the minor ridges in the 

alluvium, such as the Malden-Kennett Prairie and 

Sikeston Eidge; they have relatively high indices of 

low flow. Main ditch 2 near Maiden (7-0409), which 

has an index 0.38 cfs per sq mi, intercepts the water 

table along the east side of the Malden-Kennett Prairie. Farther downstream, Little Eiver ditch 81 near 

Kennett (7-0410), which has an index of 0.33 cfs per 

sq mi, includes the flow from several laterals that join 

the system below Main ditch 2. The interchange of 

surface and ground water in the ditches depends on the 

manner in which the flow is controlled upstream. Little Eiver ditch 1 near Kennett (7-0420), which has an 

index of 0.14 cfs per sq mi, is influenced by flow in the 

laterals to tributary ditch 81 whose base flow is derived 

mostly from the upper reaches east of the MaldenKennett Prairie.

Main ditch 1 near Matthews (7-0424) has a high 

low-flow index of 0.37 cfs per sq mi. This flow originates mostly in the alluvial sand arid gravel of Sikeston 

Eidge, which lies along the east side of the channel, and 

in the Wilcox Formation and the McNairy Sand that 

are in the upper reaches of the ditch near Oran. Similarly, the base flow of Little Eiver ditch 251 near 

Lilbourn (7-0425), which has a low-flow index of 0.24 

cfs per sq mi, results mostly from high base flows along
LOW FLOW, STREAMS IN ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI F15

Sikeston Eidge that are received through the tributary, 

Main ditch 1. Several diversions upstream from the 

Lilbourn station complicate the derivation of the low 

flow at this point.

Castor River at Aquilla (7-0430) has a low-flow index 

of 0.004 cf s per sq mi; it has a relatively short channel 

upstream to the point where it is cut off by the Headwater diversion channel. Much of the Castor River 

main stem lies between detached sections of Crowleys 

Ridge. The Castor River basin lies mostly in the alluvium, but its channels are not incised deep enough into 

the zone of saturation to derive much yield from the 

alluvium. The low-flow index of 0.02 cf s per sq mi for 

Old Channel ditch 1 near Chaffee (7-0431) is typical 

of stream channels in the alluvium in the north end 

of the Little River drainage district; these channels do 

not intercept flow from any large aquifers. Ditch 24 

at Heagy (7-0430.5) has the highest low-flow index, 

0.49 cfs per sq mi, of any stream or ditch within the 

study area. This ditch derives most of its base flow 

from the McNairy Sand that crops out at the base of 

the northeast corner of Crowleys Ridge. A small part 

of the base flow in ditch 24 is derived as underflow 

through the alluvium (p. F13) from the manmade 

Headwater diversion channel, which lies north of the 

basin. Little River ditch 1 near Morehouse (7-0435), 

which includes Castor River, Old Channel ditch 1, and 

ditch 24, has a low-flow index of 0.11 cfs per sq mi.

Meander Line ditch near Portageville (7-0439) is in 

the alluvium and has a low-flow index of 0.01 cfs per sq 

mi. Little River ditch 251 near Kennett (7-0440) has a 

low-flow index of 0.15 cfs per sq mi, which is higher 

than the indices for nearby ditches or streams. The 

ditch receives its base flow from the alluvium along the 

west edge of Sikeston Ridge and from the interchange 

of flow between tributary ditches. Little River ditch 

259 near Kennett (7-0460) has a low-flow index of 0.01 

cfs per sq mi based on observed values; it is affected by 

lateral diversions and by withdrawals and return of 

irrigation waters. The indices for Pemiscot Bayou 

near Holland (7-0465.1), Main ditch 1 near Deering 

(7-0465.2), and Buffalo ditch near Arbyrd (7-0465.5) 

are 0.15, 0.14, and 0.26 cfs per sq mi, respectively. 

These values are high as compared to other streams in 

the alluvium, but the channels are deeply entrenched 

and, therefore, intercept more ground water in their 

reaches than do the ditches or streams to the north. 

Furthermore, Buffalo ditch drains an area of the sunken 

lands that resulted from the New Madrid earthquake. 

The index for Right Hand Chute of Little River at 

Rivervale, Ark. (7-0466), is 0.13 cfs per sq mi; this index 

is probably representative of those for the larger 

streams in the lower part of the Little River basin.

WHITE RIVER BASIN

The White River enters the Mississippi embayment 

near Newport, Ark. Flow of the main stem is 

regulated by numerous reservoirs and diversions upstream from the embayment boundary.

Immediately after entering the embayment, the 

White River is joined by the Black River, which also 

rises outside and enters the embayment at Poplar 

Bluff, Mo. The main stem of the Black River and its 

tributaries have large low-flow indices. The Black 

River at Poplar Bluff, Mo. (7-0630), for example, has a 

natural unregulated low-flow index of 0.24 cfs per sq 

mi; this flow is derived principally from springs in the 

Paleozoic rocks.

The eastern tributaries to the Black between Poplar 

Bluff, Mo., and Corning, Ark., include Lake Slough 

(7-0631) and Menorkenut Slough (7-0631.3) near 

Qulin, Mo., which are in the alluvium and which have 

indices of 0.03 and 0.04 cfs per sq mi, respectively. 

Cane Creek at Harviell, Mo. (7-0635), a western tributary to the Black, rises in the Paleozoic rocks but has 

an index of only 0.05 cfs per sq mi because erosion has 

not exposed the high-producing Paleozoic aquifers to 

the Cane Creek channels. The low indices of these and 

other, tributaries between Poplar Bluff and Corning 

are the reason for the smaller low-flow index of 0.17 cfs 

per sq mi for the Black River near Corning (7-0640).

The Current, Eleven Point, and Spring River basins 

include many large springs in south-central Missouri 

and north-central Arkansas that sustain very high base 

flows in the rivers. Eleven Point River near Ravenden 

Springs (7-0720), Ark., and Spring River near Imboden 

(7-0695), Ark., have low-flow indices of 0.31 and 0.28 

cfs per sq mi, respectively. No station on the Current 

River is included in the study, but its low-flow index is 

comparable or possibly higher than those for the Eleven 

Point and the Spring Rivers. The fact that the Current River enters the Black a short distance above the 

Pocahontas station (7-0690) explains the high index of 

0.31 cfs per sq mi at Pocahontas.

The other western tributaries of the Black River and 

the tributaries to the White River downstream from the 

Black have low-flow indices of 0.033 cfs per sq mi or less, 

except Strawberry River near Poughkeepsie, Ark. 

(7-0740), which has an index of 0.10 cfs per sq mi. The 

base flow at these stations, which are outside of the embayment, is derived mostly from Paleozoic rocks. 

After entering the embayment, the streams flow through 

alluvium and terrace deposits. Yield from the 

alluvium probably increases the base flow of these 

streams downstream from the gaging stations. Wattensaw Bayou near Hazen (7-0769.5) and Lagrue
F16 WATER RESOURCES OF THE MISSISSIPPI EMBAYMENT

Bayoti near Stuttgart (7-0780), Ark., each of which has 

a low-flow index of 0.001 cfs per sq mi, receive their 

base flow almost entirely from Quaternary terrace 

deposits. Small parts of their lower basins, which are 

near the White River, are in the alluvium, and the headwaters of Wattensaw Bayou are in Tertiary deposits. 

The eastern tributaries to the White River downstream from the Black River are low-yielding streams 

in narrow alluvial valleys within the Mississippi River 

alluvium. They are fed by smaller streams, many of 

which are in manmade channels that are incised into the 

terrace deposits. Cache River may be affected by 

diversions for irrigation in the extreme upper part of 

the basin, but at the station near Patterson, Ark. 

(7-0775), where the effect from irrigation, if any, is 

less significant, the low-flow index is 0.042 cfs per sq mi.

MAJOR FLOODS AND GROUND-WATER RECHARGE

The same properties of the geologic units along a 

stream that influence the movement of ground water 

into the stream may be expected also to influence the extent to which major floods may increase the groundwater storage. In addition, the elevation of the water 

table in the aquifer with respect to the stream, the 

height and duration of the flood, and the area inundated 

by the flood will influence the amount of ground-water 

recharge.

Most of the streams in this area are effluent streams 

that receive their base flow from ground-water sources, 

but some of the effluent streams or parts of them may 

become influent during periods of drought. During 

flood periods, also, an effluent stream may cease to be 

effluent, or may even become influent and contribute 

flow to the ground water. Ground-water recharge during times of flood stage in effluent streams is generally 

temporary. The recharged water, which is stored near 

the stream during the period of high river stage, is 

released soon after the flood has receded. Furthermore, 

the area of recharge due to flooding is generally limited 

to the flood plain of the stream. Recharge benefits derived during floods are similar to those from excess rainfall on the flood plain.

The deposition of sediment in the stream channel and 

on the flood plain may inhibit the interchange of surface and ground water. In some places, on the other 

hand, scouring action may increase the infiltration 

capacity of the stream channels and the flood plains.

The entire area east of Crowleys Ridge probably receives some recharge to the underlying aquifers during 

floods. East of Little River, however, much of the area 

is underlain by sandy clay, and the recharge through 

the sandy clay during flood periods is somewhat less 

than in the area between the Little River and the St.

Francis River which is underlain by sand. In areas 

other than that east of Crowleys Ridge, recharge as 

the result of flooding is limited to the narrow alluvial 

valleys along the streams.

LOW FLOWS AND GROUND-WATER FLUCTUATIONS

In the discussion of the factors affecting low flow, 

five important factors that influence the base flow of a 

stream are enumerated (p. Fll). The first two of these 

factors are fixed by the physical properties of the aquifers in contact with the stream, and the other three are 

variable factors that influence the rate at which the 

geologic units yield water to the stream.

Fluctuations in the base flow of a stream are generally 

related to fluctuations of the ground-water levels in 

the geologic units from which the stream receives its 

base flow, and the ground-water yield to a stream is 

represented approximately by the base flow of the 

stream.

Where a stream receives its base flow from a single 

aquifer, the elevation of the ground water in that aquifer is generally an index of the base flow. Most streams, 

however, receive their base flow from more than one 

aquifer, and the interrelation between waters in the 

aquifers and the base flow of the stream becomes extremely complex. Ground water in one or more of the 

aquifers, for example, may recede sufficiently to cause 

a reversal of water movement, and a transfer of surface water to ground water and a decrease in flow in 

some reaches of the stream may thus result. Furthermore, evapotranspiration exerts a seasonal effect on 

streamflow, an effect that is difficult to evaluate.

The volume of ground water available to support 

low flow is the water in the aquifers that lies adjacent 

to and at a higher elevation than the elevation of the 

water surface in the stream. The size of the surface 

drainage area, then, is not always a dependable basis 

for estimating the low-flow characteristics of streams, 

because (1) the limits of the aquifer that drains to the 

stream may not coincide with the surface drainage area, 

(2) there is great variation in the water-bearing characteristics of the geologic units from which the base 

flow of a stream is derived, and (3) there is great variation in the depth of entrenchment. The variations in 

the runoff per square mile presented in table 2 demonstrate the effect of these underground factors and provide an index for further investigation into the physical 

basis for the areal variation in low-flow yields. Because 

the index of low flow generally differs from stream to 

stream and at different points on the same stream, estimates of low-flow characteristics at an ungaged site 

should be based on discharge measurements of low flow
LOW FLOW, STREAMS IN ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI F17

at the site and on consideration of the low-flow characteristics of other streams in similar geologic settings.

METHOD OF STUDY

The method used to analyze basic data and to obtain 

the low-flow frequency and flow-duration data presented in this report is essentially graphical. The procedure consisted of smoothing the low-flow data for 

long-term records by comparison with data from other 

long-term stations and then adjusting the shorter records to the reference period by using relations with the 

long-term records. Statistical principles were used as 

a guide in evaluating the relations.

The following long-term stations served as a basis for 

the low-flow analyses in northern Arkansas and Missouri :

No. Name

3B6040 ____ Buffalo River near Flatwoods, Tenn. 

7-0305_____. Wolf River at Rossville, Tenn. 

7-0375_____. St. Francis River near Patterson, Mo. 

7-0570_____. Buffalo River near Rush, Ark. 

7-3635_____. Saline River near Rye, Ark.

Smoothed low-flow frequency curves for these stations 

were taken from a report by Hardison and Martin 

(1963). Flow-duration curves were obtained by drawing smooth curves through the observed data for the reference period, some consideration being given to the 

shape of the flow-duration curves at other long-term 

stations.

Index stations were selected from the remaining stations to obtain a representative distribution over the 

area. The low-flow records at these index stations were 

related to those at the long-term stations and were then 

used as a base to which to relate the flow at stations having records shorter than those at the index stations. 

Records from daily-record stations having less than 5 

years of record and data from low-flow partial-record 

stations were related to records for one of the other 

stations.

The reference period used for this study is the 29-year 

period, 1929-57, because this period was the longest for 

which a representative number of records at the selected 

long-term and index stations was available. The annual minimum discharges used in the low-flow frequencies are the lowest in each climatic year (the year starting April 1); the periods of low flow, which generally 

occur in the summer and fall, are therefore included in 

the same year. The flow-duration sequences are for 

complete water years.

Low-flow frequency and flow-duration results for 

partial-record stations and for daily-record stations 

having only a few years of continuous record are of a 

much lower order of accuracy than are similar results 

for the longer term stations, because the results are

based on relations defined over a smaller range in discharge and for a smaller variety of experience.

More detailed descriptions of the methods used in the 

study and the analyses of the records are given by Speer, 

Golden, Patterson, and others (1964).

BASIC DATA FOR THE ANALYSIS

The basic data for the results presented in this report 

are the records of discharge collected at 23 daily-record 

and 37 partial-record stations in or adjacent to the Mississippi embayment in northern Arkansas and southeastern Missouri. Locations of the stations are shown 

on plate 1. The names of the stations are given in table 

2.

Most of the streamflow records used in the analysis 

have been published annually in reports of the Geological Survey; a few were furnished by other agencies. 

In order to facilitate the publication of streamflow records, the United States is divided into 14 parts. All the 

records for the area described in this chapter are in Part 

7, the Lower Mississippi River basin (fig. 5).

Records of daily discharge for gaging stations having 

five or more complete consecutive water years not materially affected by regulation or diversion were processed by an electronic computer to obtain (1) the lowest 

mean discharge occurring during each climatic year 

for selected number of consecutive days and (2) the 

number of daily flows during each water year between 

selected limits of discharge (Speer, 1960). If the natural flow at a station became materially regulated or 

affected by diversions as the result of manmade changes, 

the part of the record so affected was not used. Records of less than 5 complete years were not processed by 

electronic computer but were analyzed as low-flow partial-record stations.

DRAFT-STORAGE RELATIONS

The discharges given in tables 2-4 are indications of 

the natural flow of the streams. Storage must be provided for drafts greater than the natural flow. The 

amount of such storage and the frequency with which 

it is required provide a basis for obtaining an economic 

balance between the cost and the loss resulting from an 

insufficient supply at periodic intervals. The low-flow 

frequency data in table 3 were used to estimate the draft 

that may be maintained with specified amounts of 

storage.

To provide a means for estimating the storage required at other sites, the storage-required frequency 

data are related to the median annual 7-day (7-day 

2-year) low flows as shown in figures 6 and 7. This 

index of low flow, which is the same as that used in the
F18 WATER RESOURCES OF THE MISSISSIPPI EMBATMENT

--^1 FLORiDA

Area covered by this report

FIGURE 5. Map of the Mississippi embayment showing numbered areal parts for which streamflow 

records are published in U.S. Geological Survey reports on surface-water supply.

section on "Factors affecting low flow," is given in table 

2 for 58 sites in the study area. For other sites, the 

index usually can be estimated by making a few measurements of low flow and relating the measured discharge to the concurrent discharge at the nearest site 

listed in table 2 where an acceptable correlation can be 

obtained (Searcy, 1959, p. 20). Application of frequency data for intermittent streams to storage problems is not recommended because techniques are not 

sufficiently well formulated at present to permit draftstorage analysis on a frequency basis for streams having 

indices of zero.

Data available to define the curves in figures 6B and 

7Z? have been combined with similar data for the embayment in southern Arkansas, northern Louisiana, and 

northeastern Texas, and one set of curves developed for 

the Mississippi embayment area west of the Mississippi 

Eiver in order to improve the reliability of the curves. 

The number of points available to define the curves 

range from 4 for the 90 acre-ft per sq mi at the 20-year
LOW FLOW, STREAMS IN ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI F19

STORAGE, IN ACRE-FEET PER SQUARE MILE 

A

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 

MEDIAN ANNUAL 7-DAY LOW FLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND PER SQUARE MILE

B

FIGURE 6. Areal draft-storage relations for a 10-year recurrence 

interval as a function of the median annual 7-day low flow, for 

storage of 0, 5, 15, 30, 60, and 90 acre-ft per sq mi.

recurrence interval to 66 for 0 acre-ft per sq mi at the 

10- and 20-year recurrence intervals and 5 acre-ft per sq 

mi at the 10-year recurrence interval. The scatter of 

the circles in figure 65 for a storage of 15 acre-ft per 

sq mi is typical of the scatter of the points that define 

other curves in figures 65 and 75. The curves in figures 6J. and 7J. are based on the curves in 65 and 75. 

The curves of zero storage in figures 6 and 7 represent 

the 7-day low flow for the 10- and 20-year recurrence 

interval and thus neglect the small amount of storage 

that would be required to regulate the 7-day flow. None 

of the curves consider reservoir losses or losses in conveyance of water from the storage facility to the point

STORAGE, IN ACRE-FEET PER SQUARE MILE 

A

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 

MEDIAN ANNUAL 7-DAY LOW FLOW, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND PER SQUARE MILE

B

FIGTJBE 7. Areal draft-storage relations for a 20-year recurrence 

interval as a function of the median annual 7-day low flow, for 

storage of 0, 5, 15, 30, 60, and 90 acre-ft per sq mi.

of utilization. Furthermore, a bias of about 10 percent 

that results from using low-flow frequency curves to 

compute storage requirements also has been neglected. 

Because the losses and the bias both tend to make the 

computed amount of storage smaller than it should be, 

allowance for these must be included in project design. 

Furthermore, the scatter of the points in figure 65 indicates that the storage required at a given station may 

depart greatly from the average given by the curves. 

The areal draft-storage relations, therefore, should be 

used only for obtaining preliminary estimates of draftstorage requirements at partial-record stations and for 

making comparisons between stations. More detailed
F20 WATER RESOURCES OF THE MISSISSIPPI EMBAYMENT

studies using the data in table 3, if available for the 

particular location, should be made in connection with 

design of specific projects. The curves should not be 

extrapolated beyond the limits to which they are shown. 

The procedure used to estimate the draft-storage 

requirements is described by Speer, Golden, Patterson, 

and others (1964).

The storage required for a specified draft with a 

chance that it will be insufficient on an average of once 

in 10 and once in 20 years can be estimated by using 

figures 6 and 7 and the median annual 7-day low flow 

for the stream at the point of utilization. Using the 

median annual 7-day low flow as abscissa and the storage to be provided as a parameter; the curves in figures 

6J. and TA give the expected draft. If the required 

draft is known, the curves in figures 6Z? and 75 can be 

used to estimate the amount of storage required.

Illustrative problem 1: Let it be assumed that a pi^>- 

posal is made to build a manufacturing plant on Cane 

Creek at Harviell, Mo., which will require a minimum 

flow of 29 cfs for operation; for economic reasons, the 

flow should not drop below this discharge more than 

once in 20 years on a long-term average. How much 

storage will be required to maintain this flow for this 

frequency ?

1. From table 2 for Cane Creek at Harviell, Mo. (7- 

0635), obtain the median annual 7-day low flow 

(7-day 2-year), which is 0.05 cfs per sq mi, and 

the drainage area, which is 188 square miles.

2. Divide 29 cfs by 188 square miles to obtain a required 

draft of 0.154 cfs per sq mi.

3. Use figure 7B. The abscissa being 0.05 cfs per sq mi 

and the ordinate being 0.154 cfs per sq mi, the estimated storage required is 30 acre-ft per sq mi or 

5,640 acre-ft. This amount plus 10 percent for 

bias and plus an additional amount for reservoir 

and conveyance losses would be required to provide 

the desired draft, and it would be insufficient at 

average intervals of 20 years.

Illustrative problem 2: Let it be assumed that demands for water are such that they greatly exceed the 

natural flow of Big Slough ditch near Marmaduke, 

Ark., and let it be assumed also that upstream from 

Marmaduke a total storage of 6,000 acre-ft could be 

developed or made available for supplementing low 

flows. What draft at Marmaduke can be maintained by 

this storage if a deficiency once in 10 years can be tolerated ?

1. From table 2 for Big Slough ditch near Marmaduke, 

Ark. (7-0403), obtain the drainage area, which is 

245 square miles, and the median annual 7-day 

low flow (7-day 2-year), which is 0.28 cfs per sq 

mi.

2. Estimate the annual reservoir and conveyance losses 

and deduct these amounts from the total storage. 

For the purpose of this problem, the total of reservoir and conveyance losses during a dry year and 

10 percent bias are estimated as 1,100 acre-ft. 

Then, the net storage available for use at Marmaduke is 6,000 acre-ft minus 1,100 acre-ft, or 4,900 

acre-ft.

3. Divide the net storage by the drainage area to obtain 

the net acre-feet per square mile available at Marmaduke :

4,900_ 

245 20 acre-ft per sq mi.

4. Use figure QA. The abscissa being 20 acre-ft per sq 

mi and the parameter being 0.28 cfs per sq mi, 

interpolate between median annual 7-day low-flow 

curves of 0.2 and 0.3 cfs per sq mi and read as ordinate the draft of 0.355 cfs per sq mi. On 245 

square miles this unit draft would give 87 cfs as 

the allowable draft that may be made and that 

would deplete the storage once in 10 years on a 

long-term average. As soon as the storage was 

depleted, the available flow would drop to the natural inflow, which for this stream is 0.14 cfs per 

sq mi or 34 cfs at a 10-year recurrence interval 

(see table 2), unless the allowable draft were curtailed to less than 87 cfs as the drought developed 

and as the amount of water in storage became 

dangerously low.

Storage and draft data in figures 6 and 7 may be converted to other units by using the following conversion 

equivalents:

1 acre-ft 0.326 million gallons=0.504 cfs-day. 

1 cfs=1.983 acre-ft per day=0.646 million gallons

per day.

1 million gallons per sq mi=1.548 cfs-days per 

sq mi=3.070 acre-ft per sq mi.

QUALITY OF THE WATER

BY H. G. JEFFEEY

Low-flow surface water in this area is generally a 

calcium magnesium bicarbonate type. The water is 

moderately mineralized, and most of it is hard. In 21 

samples analyzed (table 5), the dissolved-solids content ranged from 90 to 333 ppm (parts per million), 

hardness from 57 to 275 ppm, iron from 0.00 to 0.08 

ppm, fluoride from 0.0 to 0.5 ppm, nitrate from 0.0 to 

1.4 ppm, and silica from 1.8 to 30 ppm. The source and 

significance of dissolved mineral constituents and properties of water are shown in table 6.
LOW FLOW, STREAMS IN ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI 

TABLE 5. Chemical analyses of low-flow surface waters in the Mississippi embayment in northern Arkansas and in

F21

Geologic units in 

drainage basin above 

sampling station

Paleozoic rocks and 

Cretaceous deposits

Cretaceous deposits, 

Tertiary deposits, 

and alluvium

Pliocene (?) deposits

Quaternary terrace 

deposits and 

alluvium

Quaternary alluvium

Date 

sampled

Discharge 

(cfs)

Parts per million

Silica 

(SiOi)

Iron 

(Pe)

Calcium 

(Ca)

Magnesium 

(Mg)

Sodium 

(Na)

Potassium 

(K)

Bicarbonate 

(HC03)

Sulfate 

(S04)

Chloride 

(Cl)

Fluoride 

(F)

Nitrate 

(N03)

Dissolved 

solids (calculated 

from determined 

constituents)

Hardness as 

CaCOs

Calcium, 

magnesium

Noncarbonate

Specific 

conductance (micromhos at 

25° C)

pH Coloi

7-0430.5. Ditch 24 at Heagy, Mo. (drainage area, 36.8 sq mi)

9-13-60 

11-14-62 22.0 

30.8

8.5 

18

0.00 

.00

56 

60

27 

26

8.3

8.2

1.4 

1.3

294 

296

11 

14

12 

13

0.3 

.2

0.2 

.0

270 

287

250 

256

10 

14

471

498

7.6 

7.4

5 

3

7-0424. Ditch 1 near Matthews, Mo. (drainage area, 62.0 sq mi)

6-27-61 107 12 0.06 40 14 9.0 1.1 164 35 7.0 0.0 0.0 199 158 23 316 7.6 5

7-0776.5. Big Creek near Jonesboro, Ark. (drainage area, 51.1 sq mi)

9-28-60 

8-15-62 1.06 

.52

6.8 

9.3

0.01 

.04

13

12

6.0 

6.8

9.6 

9.1

2.7 

2.5

87 

83

5.0 

5.8

4.0 

5.5

0.3

.1

0.5 

.2

91 

92

57 

58

0 

0

151 

144

7.4 

7.3

15 

10

7-0746. Village Creek at Walnut Ridge, Ark. (drainage area, 34.3 sq mi)

8-14-62 2.64 17 0.00 36 14 7.5 4.2 182 9.2 3.5 0.1 0.4 182 148 0 274 7.9 8

7-0747. Village Creek at Newport, Ark. (drainage area, 270 sq mi)

9-28-60 

10-26-60 26.0

1.8

7.5

0.01 

.01

20 

18

4.8 

4.3

7.2 

6.0

4.0 

3.8

93

78

6.2 

6.6

5.0 

4.5

0.2 

.2

0.9 

1.0

96 

90

70 

62

0 

0

164

152

7.2 

7.0

22 

22

7-0404. Locust Creek ditch near Paragould, Ark. (drainage area, 79.5 sq mi)

9-28-60 

8-15-62 2.67 

1.58

6.4 

16

0.00 

.00

41 

63

9.9

15

12 

11

2.6 

1.5

170 '266

20 

16

9 5

?'. 5

0.3 

.1

0.5 

.4

186 

261

143 

219

4 

0

309 

393

7.8 

8.5

10 

5

7-0241. Lateral ditch 2 near East Prairie, Mo. (drainage area, 97.3 sq mi)

9-14-60 9.43 11 0.00 52 12 7.2 2.0 216 12 2.8 0.5 1.4 207 179 2 346 7.3 7

7-0465.2. Main ditch 1 near Deering, Mo. (drainage area, 66.4 sq mi)

9-15-60 

11-13-62 22.3

25.7

13

24

0.00 

.00

67 

79

19 

19

13

15

2 9 20 

. o

302 

328

23

25

5.5 

6.0

0.4 

.3

0.4 

.8

293 

333

245 

275

0 

6

480 

550

7.7 

7.1

7 

5

7-0409. Main ditch 2 near Maiden, Mo. (drainage area, 15.2 sq mi)

9-13-60 

6-26-61 

11-12-62

12.1 

50.2 

37.8

12 

13 

26

0.00 

.00 

.01

38 

39 

36

6.8 

7.2 

7.5

7.4 

7.4 

8.0

1.7

1.2 

1.5

140 

146 

133

19 

16 

19

5.5 

5.0 

6.2

0.4 

.0 

.2

0.6 

.1

.5

160 

161 

170

123 

127 

121

8 

8 

12

258 

257 

266

7.1 

7.6 

7.1

5 

7 

5

7-0631. Lake Slough near Qulin, Mo. (drainage area, 78.0 sq mi)

9-13-60 

11-12-62 6.90 

9.33

18 

30

0.00 58 

56

13 

14

4.5 

4.4

1.3 

1.3

248 

236

6.4

7.2

3.0

2.8

0.4 

.2

0.3

.2

227 

232

198 

197

0

4

372 

375

7.5 

7.0

7 

5

7-0465.5. Buffalo ditch near Arbyrd, Mo. (drainage area, 38.7 sq mi)

9-15-60 

6-26-61 16.6 

64.5

14 

20

0.00 

.08

53 

40

10 

16

8.0 

6.6

1.5 

1.3

204 

186

18 

23

5.0 

6.0

0.5 

.0

0.7 

.4

211

204

173 

166

6 

14

346 

317

7.3

7.7

7 

5

1-0479.2. Fifteen Mile Bayou near West Memphis, Ark. (drainage area, 51.0 sq mi)

10-25-60 7.36 7.1 0.00 62 18 8.1 4.1 266 26 4.0 0.3 1.0 262 228 6 433 7.2 20

1 Includes equivalent of 12 ppm of carbonate (COs).
F22

TABLE 6. Source and significance of dissolved mineral constituents and properties of water

Constituent or property Source or cause Significance

Silica (SiOa)~

Iron (Fe).

Manganese (Mn)

Calqium (Ca) and 

magnesium (Mg).

Sodium (Na) and 

potassium (K).

Bicarbonate

(HC03) and carbonate (CO3).

Sulfate (SOOChloride (Cl). 

Fluoride (F)_.

Nitrate (NO3).

Dissolved solids_____

Dissolved from practically all rocks 

and soils, commonly less than 30 

ppm. High concentrations, as much 

as 100 ppm, generally occur in 

highly alkaline waters.

Dissolved from practically all rocks 

and soils. May also be derived 

from iron pipes, pumps, and other 

equipment. More than 1 or 2 ppm 

of soluble iron in surface water generally indicates acid wastes from 

mine drainage or other sources.

Dissolved from some rocks and soils. 

Not so common as iron. Large 

quantities often associated with 

high iron content and acid water.

Dissolved from practically all rocks 

and soils, but especially from limestone, dolomite, and gypsum. Calcium and magnesium are found in 

large quantities in some brines. 

Magnesium is present in large 

quantities in sea water.

Dissolved from practically all rocks 

and soils. Found also in ancient 

brines, sea water, industrial brines, 

and sewage.

Action of carbon dioxide in water on 

carbonate rocks such as limestone 

and dolomite.

Dissolved from rocks and soils containing gypsum, iron sulfides, and 

other sulfur compounds. Commonly present in mine water and in 

some industrial wastes.

Dissolved from rocks and soils. 

Present in sewage and found in 

large amounts in ancient brines, sea 

water, and industrial wastes.

Dissolved in small to minute quantities from most rocks and soils. 

Added to many water systems by 

fluoridation of municipal supplies.

Decaying organic matter, legume 

plants, sewage, nitrate fertilizers, 

and nitrates in soils.

Chiefly mineral constituents dissolved 

from rocks and soils.

Forms hard scale in pipes and boilers. Carried over in steam of 

high-pressure boilers to form deposits on blades of turbines. 

Inhibits deterioration of zeolite-type water softeners.

More than about 0.3 ppm stains laundry and utensils reddish 

brown. Objectionable for food processing, textile processing, 

beverages, ice manufacture, brewing, and other processes. 

USPHS (1962) 1 drinking-water standards state that iron should 

not exceed 0.3 ppm. Larger quantities cause unpleasant taste 

and favor growth of iron bacteria.

Same objectionable features as iron. Causes dark brown or black 

stain. USPHS (1962) drinking-water standards state that 

manganese should not exceed 0.05 ppm.

Cause most of the hardness and scale-forming properties of water; 

soap consuming (see "Hardness"). Water low in calcium and 

magnesium desired in electroplating, tanning, and dyeing and in 

textile manufacturing.

Large amounts, in combination with chloride, give a salty taste. 

Moderate quantities have little effect on the usefulness of water 

for most purposes. Sodium salts may cause foaming in steam 

boilers, and a high sodium content may limit the use of water 

for irrigation.

Bicarbonate and carbonate produce alkalinity. Bicarbonates of 

calcium and magnesium decompose in steam boilers and hotwater facilities to form scale and release corrosive carbon dioxide 

gas. In combination with calcium and magnesium they cause 

carbonate hardness.

Sulfate in water containing calcium forms hard scale in steam 

boilers. In large amounts, sulfate in combination with other 

ions gives a bitter taste to water. Some calcium sulfate is considered beneficial in the brewing process. USPHS (1962) 

drinking-water standards recommend that the sulfate content 

should not exceed 250 ppm.

In large amounts in combination with sodium gives salty taste to 

water. In large quantities increases the corrosiveness of water. 

USPHS (1962) drinking-water standards recommend that the 

chloride content not exceed 250 ppm.

Fluoride in drinking water reduces .the incidence of tooth decay 

when the water is consumed during the period of enamel calcification. However, it may cause mottling of the teeth depending 

on the concentration of fluoride, the age of the child, the amount 

of water consumed, and the susceptibility of the individual. 

The maximum concentration of fluoride recommended by the 

USPHS (1962) varies with the annual average of maximum daily 

air temperatures and ranges downward from 1.7 ppm for an 

average maximum daily temperature of 50.0° F to 0.8 ppm for 

an average maximum daily temperature of 90.5° F. Optimum 

concentrations for these ranges are from 1.2 to 0.7 ppm.

Concentration much greater than the local average may suggest 

pollution. USPHS (1962) drinking-water standards suggest a 

limit of 45 ppm. Waters of high nitrate content have been 

reported to be the cause of methemoglobinemia (an often fatal 

disease in infants) and therefore should not be used in infant 

feeding. Nitrate has been shown to be helpful in reducing the 

intercrystalline cracking of boiler steel. It encourages the growth 

of algae and other organisms which may cause odor problems in 

water supplies.

USPHS (1962) drinking-water standards recommend that the dissolved solids should not exceed 500 ppm. However, 1,000 ppm 

is permitted under certain circumstances. Waters containing 

more than 1,000 ppm of dissolved solids are unsuitable for many 

purposes.

See footnote at end of table.
LOW FLOW, STREAMS IN ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI 

TABLE 6. Source and significance of dissolved mineral constituents and properties of water Continued

F23

Constituent or property Source or cause Significance

Hardness as CaCOs _

Specific conductance 

(micromhos at 

25°C).

Hydrogen-ion concentration (pH).

Color.

In most water, nearly all the hardness is 

due to calcium and magnesium. All 

the metallic cations other than the 

alkali metals also cause hardness.

Mineral content of the water.

Temperature.

Suspended sediment.

Acids, acid-generating salts, and free 

carbon dioxide lower the pH. Carbonates, bicarbonates, hydroxides, 

phosphates, silicates, and borates 

raise the pH.

Yellow-to-brown color of some water is 

generally caused by organic matter 

extracted from leaves, roots, and 

other organic substances. Color in 

water also results from industrial 

wastes and sewage.

Climatic conditions, use of water as a 

cooling agent, industrial pollution.

Erosion of land and stream channels. 

Quantity and particle-size gradation 

affected by many factors such as form 

and intensity of precipitation, rate of 

runoff, stream channel and flow 

characteristics, vegetal cover, topography, type and characteristics of 

soils in drainage basin, agricultural 

practices, and some industrial and 

mining activities. Largest concentrations and loads occur during 

periods of storm runoff.

Consumes soap before a lather will form. Deposits soap curd on 

bathtubs. Hard water forms scale in boilers, water heaters, and 

pipes. Hardness equivalent to the bicarbonate and carbonate 

is called carbonate hardness. Any hardness in excess of this is 

called noncarbonate hardness. Waters of hardness up to 60 

ppm are considered soft; 61-120 ppm, moderately hard; 121-180 

ppm, hard; more than 180 ppm, very hard.

Indicates degree of mineralization. Specific conductance is a 

measure of the capacity of the water to conduct an electric current. It varies with the concentration and degree of ionizatjon 

of the constituents and with temperature.

A pH of 7.0 indicates neutrality of a solution. Values higher than 

7.0 denote increasing alkalinity; values lower than 7.0 denote 

increasing acidity. pH is a measure of the activity of hydrogen 

ions. Corrosiveness of water generally increases with decreasing 

pH. However, excessively alkaline waters may also attack 

metals.

Water for domestic and some industrial uses should be free from 

preceptible color. Color in water is objectionable in food and 

beverage processing and many manufacturing processes.

Affects usefulness of water for many purposes. Most users desire 

water of uniformly low temperature. Seasonal fluctuations in 

temperatures of surface waters are comparatively large depending 

on the volume of water.

Sediment must generally be removed by flocculation and filtration 

before water is used by industry or municipalities. Sediment deposits reduce the storage capacity of reservoirs and lakes and 

clog navigable stream channels and harbors. Particle-size distribution is a factor controlling the density of deposited sediment 

and is considered in the design of filtration plants. Sediment data 

are of value in designing river-development projects, in the study 

of biological conditions and fish propagation, and in programs of 

soil conservation and watershed management.

1 "Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards," revised 1962, apply to drinking water and water-supply systems used by carriers and others subject to Federal quarantine regulations.

The suitability of water for most uses depends on the 

chemical and biological characteristics and the physical 

properties of the water. For most industrial and municipal uses, water requires some treatment, the degree 

and type of which depend on the quality and intended 

use of the water. In this area, the waters would be 

suitable for some uses with little or no treatment. 

However, for municipal and most industrial uses, most 

of the water would require softening, coagulation, filtration, and pH adjustment for corrosion control.

All the water in streams during periods of low flow is 

mainly ground-water discharge. Consequently, the 

chemical quality of low-flow surface water is similar to 

the chemical quality of the ground water. The chemical characteristics of this water are related to the chemical composition and solubility of the rocks in the drainage basins, and the length of time that the water has 

been in contact with the rocks.

The chemical characteristics of the water from the 

streams sampled are shown graphically on plate 3. The 

diagram, or pattern, at each site represents the average 

of the two or three analyses shown in table 5 for the site

except for four sites for which only one analysis is 

available. The number above the pattern denotes the 

average dissolved-solids content, and the symbols beneath the pattern indicate the geologic units that contribute water to the stream.

The patterns (pi. 3) show that calcium, magnesium, 

and bicarbonate are the principal constituents in waters from streams draining all formations except the 

Pliocene (?) deposits. All the streams, except ditch 24 

at Heagy, Mo. (7-0430.5), and Big Creek near Jonesboro, Ark. (7-0776.5), drain terrace or alluvial deposits of Quaternary age or they have alluvium present 

in the drainage basin. The chemical analyses of lowflow water (table 5 and pi. 3) from streams draining 

Quaternary deposits are similar to those given by Eyling (1960, p. 61) and Plebuch (1961, p. 54) for ground 

water from Quaternary deposits. This similarity indicates that during periods of low flow the flow for most 

streams in the area is mainly ground-water discharge 

from these deposits.

Ditch 24 at Heagy, Mo. (7-0430.5), drains Paleozoic 

rocks and Cretaceous deposits. The chemical charac-
F24 WATER RESOURCES OF THE MISSISSIPPI EMBAYMENT

teristics of water in this stream are similar to those of 

water in streams draining Quaternary deposits. This 

similarity is to be expected because generally the principal soluble constituents in the Paleozoic rocks and in 

the outcrop of the Cretaceous deposits are the carbonate 

salts of calcium and magnesium.

The dissolved-solids content of water in streams 

draining Quaternary deposits or draining Paleozoic 

rocks and Cretaceous deposits ranged from 90 to 333 

ppm. In each stream, however, the quality was fairly 

uniform during periods of low flow. The areal variation in dissolved solids is caused largely by differences 

in the composition of the deposits.

The dissolved-solids values of water from Village 

Creek at Newport, Ark. (7-0747), are much smaller 

than that for Village Creek at Walnut Eidge, Ark. (7- 

0746), or for other streams draining the alluvium or terrace deposits. The difference in the dissolved-solids 

content of water in Village Creek, however, is within 

the range observed during periods of fairly low flow 

in the daily samples on the Cache River at Patterson, 

Ark. (U.S. Geol. Survey, 1959, p. 47). Village Creek 

drains an area of similar geology that lies parallel to 

the Cache Eiver drainage basin, and the differences in 

the dissolved-solids values shown for the two sites on 

Village Creek may be due to the fact the samples were 

taken on different dates.

Big Creek near Jonesboro, Ark. (7-0776.5), drains 

Pliocene (?) deposits. The analyses indicate that bicarbonate is the principal anion in water from these deposits and that calcium, magnesium, and sodium are 

present in about equal quantities. The dissolved-solids 

content of water from Big Creek near Jonesboro generally is less than that in streams draining other geologic units, probably because the Pliocene(?) deposits 

do not have as much soluble material as the other 

deposits.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1. In the Mississippi embayment in northern Arkansas and in Missouri, the total water resources are sufficient to meet the needs for many years in the future; 

future problems in water supply are likely to be those 

of distribution and of providing storage to meet the 

demands during low flow. The use of water has increased rapidly in recent years, and in some areas, manmade changes probably have altered the low-flow characteristics of the streams. The data presented in this 

report provide a basis for planning development of the 

water resources and for water management, but further investigations may be needed for detailed design.

2. Comparison of the low-flow characteristics of the 

streams is made on the basis of unit runoff per square 

mile. Because of the wide variations in the yields of

the streams, and even of the same stream, the low-flow 

data presented in this report should not be extrapolated 

to ungaged sites without the aid of low-flow discharge 

measurements at the ungaged sites and without a 

knowledge of the geology, physiography, and other factors affecting the low flow.

3. The wide variations in the low-flow indices of the 

streams may be attributed, largely, to the depth to 

which the streams are incised, the relation of the water 

table to the bed of the stream, and the porosity and permeability of the aquifers in the immediate area. This 

study shows that some streams in this area have relatively low yields. If the need for additional low flow 

in these streams should arise, further investigations 

may suggest ways and means for increasing these low 

flows.

4j As indicated by the data in this report, the geologic 

units that contribute appreciable water to the low flow 

of streams in this area are (in order of importance) :

Alluvium.

Paleozoic rocks outside of the area.

Tertiary sands and gravels.

McNairy Sand of the Upper Cretaceous Series.

5. The median annual 7-day low flow serving as an 

index, areal draft-storage relations for 10- and 20-year 

recurrence intervals provide a convenient means for 

estimating the storage required to maintain a given 

minimum flow. The relations are valid for median annual 7-day low flows of as much as 0.40 cfs per sq mi 

and for storage of as much as 90 acre-ft per sq mi. 

Application of these relations is not recommended for 

intermittent streams or for daily-record gaging sites.

6. The chemical analyses of water in streams in this 

area during periods of low flow show that the waters 

generally are a calcium magnesium bicarbonate type. 

The water is moderately mineralized and most of it is 

hard (more than 120 ppm). It would be suitable for 

some uses with no treatment, but for municipal and 

most industrial uses, water of most of the streams would 

require softening, coagulation, filtration, and pH adjustment for corrosion control.

7. Data are needed to define additional causative 

phases of the hydrologic systems and to forecast the 

effect that future changes in the stream systems may 

have upon the low-flow regimen of the streams. These 

features include the effect of floods upon the groundwater table adjacent to the streams, the effect of deepening or widening of stream channels upon the regimen 

of low flow of the streams and upon the ground-water 

table adjacent to the streams, the interrelations between 

the ground-water fluctuations and the low flow of the 

streams, and the effect of impoundment of waters in 

ponds and reservoirs upon the low flow of the streams.
LOW FLOW, STREAMS IN ARKANSAS AND MISSOURI F25

The results of this study indicate that increases or decreases in low flow have probably resulted from manmade changes. More detailed knowledge of the geology 

and more low-flow measurements at additional sites 

would be needed to evaluate the low-flow potential of 

streams in much of this area.

SELECTED REFERENCES

Arkansas Conservation Needs Committee, 1961, Arkansas soil 

and water conservation needs inventory: Arkansas Geol. 

and Conserv. Comm., 120 p.

Beckman, H. C., and Hinchley, N. S., 1944, The large springs of 

Missouri: Missouri Div. Geol. Survey and Water Resources, 

2d ser., v. 29,141 p.

Gushing, E. M., Boswell, E. H., and Hosman, R. L., 1964, General 

geology of the Mississippi embayment: U.S. Geol. Survey 

Prof. Paper 448-B, 28 p.

Decker, Wayne, 1958, Chance of dry periods in Missouri: Missouri Univ. Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 707,11 p.

Fenneman, N. M., 1938, Physiography of eastern United States: 

New York and London, McGraw-Hill Book Co., 714 p.

Fuller, M. L., 1912, The New Madrid earthquake: U.S. Geol. 

Survey Bull. 494,119 p.

Grohskopf, J. G., 1955, Subsurface geology of the Mississippi 

embayment of southeastern Missouri: Missouri Div. Geol. 

Survey and Water Resources, 2d ser., v. 37, 133 p.

Hansen, F. N., 1957, Floods in the Arkansas-White-Red River 

basins in 1956, in Minutes of the fourteenth meeting of the 

U.S. Inter-Agency Committee on the Arkansas-White-Red 

River Basins: App. C, 7 p.

Hardison, C. H., and Martin, R. O. R., 1963, Low-flow frequency 

curves for selected long-term stream-gaging stations in eastern United States: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 

1669-G, 30 p.

Harrison, R. W., 1961, Alluvial empire, in Delta Fund in cooperation with Econ. Research Service: U.S. Dept. Agriculture, Pioneer Press, Little Rock, Ark., v. 1, 344 p.

Knight, R. D., 1963, Groundwater areas in Missouri: Missouri 

Div. Geol. Survey and Water Resources, 1 p., 1 map.

Langbein, W. B., and Iseri, K. T.} 1960, General introduction and 

hydrologic definitions: U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply 

Paper 1541-A, 29 p.

McQuigg, J. D., and Decker, W. L., 1962, The hydrologic balance 

of the lowlands of southeast Missouri: Missouri Agr. Expt. 

Sta. Jour., 8 p.

Morgan, A. E., 1911, Report on the St. Francis valley drainage 

project in northeastern Arkansas: U.S. Dept. Agriculture 

Bull. 230, pt. 1,100 p.

Patterson, J. L., 1964, Magnitude and frequency of floods in the 

United States. Part 7, Lower Mississippi River basin: 

U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 1681, 637 p.

Plebuch, R. O., 1961, Fresh-water aquifers of Crittenden 

County, Ark.: Arkansas Geol. and Conserv. Comm. Water 

Resources Circ. 8, 65 p.

Ryling, R. W., 1960, Ground-water potential of Mississippi 

County, Ark.: Arkansas Geol. and Conserv. Comm. Water 

Resources Circ. 7, 87 p.

Saunders, J. L., and Billingsley, G. A., 1950, Surface-water resources of Arkansas: Arkansas Univ. Inst. Sci. and Technol. 

Research Ser. 18,181 p.

Schultz, E. R., 1962, Bulletin of the Little River Drainage District: Little River Drainage Dist., Cape Girardeau, Mo., 

p. 3-14.

Searcy, J. K., 1955, Floods in Missouri, magnitude and frequency : U.S. Geol. Survey Circ. 370, 125 p.

 1959, Flow-duration curves: U.S. Geol. Survey WaterSupply Paper 1542-A, 33 p.

 1960, Graphical correlation of gaging station records:

U.S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 1541-C, p. 67-100.

Shepard, E. M., 1907, Underground waters of Missouri: U.S. 

Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 195, 224 p.

Soil Conservation Service, 1957, Watershed work plan, Caney 

Creek watershed, Cross County, Ark.: U.S. Dept. Agriculture, 47 p.

 1958, Watershed work plan, Camp Bayou watershed, 

Ashley County, Ark.: U.S. Dept. Agriculture, 31 p.

 1959a, Watershed work plan, Flat Creek watershed, 

Lawrence County, Ark.: U.S. Dept. Agriculture, 53 p.

 1959b, Watershed work plan, Randolph-Walnut Lake 

watershed, Desha County, Ark.: U.S. Dept. Agriculture, 29 p.

 1960, Watershed work plan, Arkansas City watershed,

Desha County, Ark.: U.S. Dept. Agriculture, 32 p.

Speer, P. R., 1960, Lowest mean discharge and flow duration 

data by year,s at selected gaging stations in the Mississippi 

embayment area: U.S. Geol. Survey open-file report, 666 p.

Speer, P. R., Golden, H. G., Patterson, J. F., and others, 1964, 

Low-flow characteristics of streams in the Mississippi embayment in Mississippi and Alabama: U.S. Geol. Survey 

Prof. Paper 448-1, 47 p.

Speer, P. R., Perry, W. J., McCabe, J. A., Lara, O. G., and others, 

1965, Low-flow characteristics of streams in the Mississippi 

embayment in Tennessee, Kentucky, and Illinois: U.S. Geol. 

Survey Prof. Paper 448-H, 36 p.

Speer, P. R., Hines, M. S., Calandro, A. J., and others, 1966, Lowflow characteristics of streams in the Mississippi embayment in southern Arkansas, northern Louisiana, and northeastern Texas: U.S. Geol. Survey Professional Paper 448-G. 

(In press.)

Stiff, H. A., Jr., 1951, The interpretation of chemical water analysis by means of patterns: Jour. Petroleum Technology, 

Oct., p. 15.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 1952, Little Rock, Memphis, New 

Orleans, Tulsa, and Vicksburg District Project Maps.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mississippi River Commission, 

[no date], Stages and discharge observations, lower valley 

of the Mississippi River, January 1 to June 30, 1937: Mississippi River Comm. Print 750.10-37, 53 p.

U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, St. Francis River 1929: 

U.S. 71st Cong., 2d sess., House Doc. 159, 78 p.

U.S. Congress, House of Representatives, Interior and Insular 

Affairs Committee, 1952, Groundwater regions of the 

United States their storage facilities: pt. 3 of The physical 

and economic foundation of natural resources, 78 p.

U.S. Geol. Survey, 1955, Compliation of records of surface waters 

of the United States through September 1950. Part 7, 

Lower Mississippi River basin: U.S. Geol. Survey WaterSupply Paper 1311, 606 p., 1 pi.

 1959, Quality of surface waters in the United States, 

1955. Parts 7 and 8, Lower Mississippi River basin and 

western Gulf of Mexico basins: U.S. Geol. Survey WaterSupply Paper 1402, 539 p.

U.S. Public Health Service, 1962, Drinking water standards, revised 1962: Public Health Service Pub. 956, 61 p.

Wood, N. H., June 1959, Arkansas water resources: Arkansas 

Univ., College Business Adm., Indus. Research and Ext. 

Center, 180 p.

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:I966