U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5028

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

Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc 

in the Spring River Flood Plain and Tributary Flood Plains, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009–11
Cover. Chat piles (mine tailings) in the Tar Creek Basin, Cherokee County, Kansas (photograph by Eric Looper, U.S. Geological Survey).
Occurrence and Variability of MiningRelated Lead and Zinc in the Spring River 

Flood Plain and Tributary Flood Plains, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009–11

By Kyle E. Juracek

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

Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5028

U.S. Department of the Interior

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

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2013

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

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

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

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

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

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

U.S. Government.

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

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

Suggested citation:

Juracek, K.E., 2013, Occurrence and variability of mining-related lead and zinc in the Spring River flood plain and 

tributary flood plains, Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009–11: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 

2013–5028, 70 p.
iii

Contents

Acknowledgments........................................................................................................................................vi

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

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

Previous Investigations........................................................................................................................3

Purpose and Scope ..............................................................................................................................5

Description of the Spring River Basin ...............................................................................................5

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

Flood-Plain Surficial-Soil Sampling and Analysis ...........................................................................5

Site Selection ...............................................................................................................................5

Sample Collection and Preparation..........................................................................................6

Chemical Analyses ......................................................................................................................6

Particle-Size Analysis ...............................................................................................................10

Flood-Plain Coring and Analysis ......................................................................................................10

Site Selection .............................................................................................................................10

Core Collection and Preparation.............................................................................................11

Chemical Analysis......................................................................................................................11

Quality Control..............................................................................................................................................11

Samples Collected from the Spring River Flood Plain ..................................................................11

Samples Collected from the Tributary Flood Plains ......................................................................14

Sediment-Quality Guidelines......................................................................................................................15

Background Information for Trace Elements ..........................................................................................16

Flood-Plain Occurrence of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc ..................................................................16

Spring River..........................................................................................................................................17

Brush Creek .........................................................................................................................................17

Cow Creek............................................................................................................................................17

Shawnee Creek...................................................................................................................................17

Shoal Creek..........................................................................................................................................17

Short Creek ..........................................................................................................................................21

Spring Branch......................................................................................................................................21

Tar Creek ..............................................................................................................................................22

Turkey Creek ........................................................................................................................................22

Willow Creek........................................................................................................................................23

Variability of Lead and Zinc Concentrations in Relation to Mining Activity and Other Factors......23

Source Effects.....................................................................................................................................23

Downstream Effects...........................................................................................................................26

Distance-from-Channel Effects........................................................................................................30

Particle-Size Effects...........................................................................................................................32

Summary and Conclusions.........................................................................................................................32

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................33

Appendixes ...................................................................................................................................................37
iv

Figures

1. Map showing location of the Spring River system, the Cherokee County

superfund site, and lead- and zinc-mined areas in the Tri-State Mining District,

Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma...............................................................................................2

2. Maps showing location of surficial-soil sampling sites and coring sites in the

Spring River flood plain and tributary flood plains, Cherokee County, Kansas..................7

3. Map showing lead concentrations in surficial-soil samples collected from the

Spring River flood plain and tributary flood plains, Cherokee County, Kansas,

2009, 2011 .....................................................................................................................................18

4. Map showing zinc concentrations in surficial-soil samples collected from the

Spring River flood plain and tributary flood plains, Cherokee County, Kansas,

2009, 2011 .....................................................................................................................................20

5. Graph showing variability of flood-plain zinc concentrations with distance from

the Spring River along transects T1 through T6 ....................................................................30

Tables

1. Chemical analyses performed on surficial-soil and core samples from the Spring

River flood plain and tributary flood plains, Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009–11 ............10

2. Cadmium, lead, and zinc concentrations for three surficial-soil samples collected

from the Spring River flood plain and six surficial-soil samples collected from the

tributary flood plains, Cherokee County, Kansas, and analyzed by x-ray

fluorescence and spectroscopic methods.............................................................................13

3. Sediment-quality guidelines and associated bioaccumulation index for cadmium,

lead, and zinc...............................................................................................................................16

4. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by

x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil samples collected from the Spring River

flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, November 2009.......................................................19

5. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by

x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core samples collected from the Brush

Creek flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, April and May 2011.....................................21

6. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by

x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core samples collected from the Cow

Creek flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, March 2011 ..................................................22

7. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by

x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core samples collected from the

Shawnee Creek flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, March 2011 ................................23

8. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by

x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core samples collected from the Shoal

Creek flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, May 2011 ......................................................24

9. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by

x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core samples collected from the Short

Creek flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, March and April 2011.................................25

10. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by

x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core samples collected from the Spring

Branch flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, March 2011................................................26
v

11. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by x-ray

fluorescence for surficial-soil and core samples collected from the Tar Creek flood

plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, March and April 2011.......................................................27

12. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by

x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core samples collected from the Turkey

Creek flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, March 2011 ..................................................28

13. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by

x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core samples collected from the Willow

Creek flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, April 2011......................................................29

14. Lead and zinc concentrations with distance from the Spring River for flood-plain

coring sites located along transects T1 through T6 .............................................................31

Appendix Tables

1–1. Latitude and longitude coordinates, and land use, for surficial-soil sampling sites

in the Spring River flood plain and tributary flood plains in Cherokee County,

Kansas, 2009, 2011 ......................................................................................................................38

1–2. Latitude and longitude coordinates for coring sites in the Spring River flood plain

in Cherokee County, Kansas, November 2009 and March 2010..........................................41

1–3. Percentage of silt and clay and constituent concentrations determined by

combustion and spectroscopic methods for three surficial-soil samples collected

from the Spring River flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, November 2009................42

1–4. Results of x-ray fluorescence analysis of standard reference samples and

comparison to most probable values ......................................................................................43

1–5. Percentage of silt and clay and constituent concentrations determined by

combustion and spectroscopic methods for six surficial-soil samples collected

from tributary flood plains, Cherokee County, Kansas, March, April, and May

2011 ...............................................................................................................................................49

1–6. Cadmium concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil

samples collected from the Spring River flood plain and tributary flood plains,

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2011......................................................................................51

1–7. Constituent concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores

collected from the Spring River flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2010........53

1–8. Cadmium concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected

from tributary flood plains, Cherokee County, Kansas, 2011 ...............................................69
vi

Conversion Factors, Abbreviations, and Datum

Multiply By To obtain

Length

centimeter (cm) 0.3937 inch (in.)

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

millimeter (mm) 0.03937 inch (in.)

Area

acre 4,047 square meter (m2)

acre 0.4047 hectare (ha)

acre 0.004047 square kilometer (km2)

square foot (ft2) 0.09290 square meter (m2)

square mile (mi2) 259.0 hectare (ha)

square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2) 

Mass

gram (g) 0.03527 ounce (oz) 

milligram per kilogram (mg/kg) 1.0 part per million (ppm) 

pound (lb) 0.4536 kilogram (kg)

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

Acknowledgments

The author acknowledges Bryant Burnett (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Galena, 

Kansas) and Carl Hayes (Cherokee County Health Department, Columbus, Kansas) for their 

much-appreciated assistance in obtaining access permission from multiple landowners for the 

purpose of sample collection. For conducting the x-ray fluorescence analyses of the surficial-soil 

and core samples, Bryant Burnett and Laura Price (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Kansas 

City, Kansas) are acknowledged. For providing a technical review of the report, John Miesner 

(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Manhattan, Kansas) is acknowledged.

Several U.S. Geological Survey individuals also are recognized for their invaluable assistance 

in the completion of this study. For core collection on the Spring River flood plain, the author 

acknowledges Paul Brenden, Eric Looper, Jake Morris, and Doug Mugel. For core collection on 

the tributary flood plains, the author acknowledges Eric Looper. For collection of surficial-soil 

samples from the Spring River flood plain and tributary flood plains, the author acknowledges 

Eric Looper. Finally, for providing a technical review of the report, the author acknowledges 

Doug Mugel.
Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and 

Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain and Tributary Flood 

Plains, Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009–11

By Kyle E. Juracek

Abstract

Historical mining activity in the Tri-State Mining District 

(TSMD), located in parts of southeast Kansas, southwest Missouri, and northeast Oklahoma, has resulted in a substantial 

ongoing input of cadmium, lead, and zinc to the environment. 

To provide some of the information needed to support remediation efforts in the Cherokee County, Kansas, superfund site, 

a 4-year study was begun in 2009 by the U.S. Geological Survey that was requested and funded by the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency. A combination of surficial-soil sampling 

and coring was used to investigate the occurrence and variability of mining-related lead and zinc in the flood plains of the 

Spring River and several tributaries within the superfund site. 

Lead- and zinc-contaminated flood plains are a concern, in 

part, because they represent a long-term source of contamination to the fluvial environment.

Lead and zinc contamination was assessed with reference 

to probable-effect concentrations (PECs), which represent 

the concentrations above which adverse aquatic biological 

effects are likely to occur. The general PECs for lead and 

zinc were 128 and 459 milligrams per kilogram, respectively. 

The TSMD-specific PECs for lead and zinc were 150 and 

2,083 milligrams per kilogram, respectively.

Typically, surficial soils in the Spring River flood plain 

had lead and zinc concentrations that were less than the 

general PECs. Lead and zinc concentrations in the surficialsoil samples were variable with distance downstream and with 

distance from the Spring River channel, and the largest lead 

and zinc concentrations usually were located near the channel. 

Lead and zinc concentrations larger than the general or 

TSMD-specific PECs, or both, were infrequent at depth in the 

Spring River flood plain. When present, such contamination 

typically was confined to the upper 2 feet of the core and 

frequently was confined to the upper 6 inches.

Tributaries with few or no lead- and zinc-mined areas in 

the basin—Brush Creek, Cow Creek, and Shawnee Creek—

generally had flood-plain lead and zinc concentrations (surficial 

soil, 6- and 12-inch depth) that were substantially less than the 

general PECs. Tributaries with extensive lead- and zinc-mined 

areas in the basin—Shoal Creek, Short Creek, Spring Branch, 

Tar Creek, Turkey Creek, and Willow Creek—had floodplain lead concentrations (surficial soil, 6- and 12-inch 

depth) that frequently or typically exceeded the general and 

TSMD-specific PECs. Likewise, the tributaries with extensive 

lead- and zinc-mined areas in the basin had flood-plain zinc 

concentrations (surficial soil, 6- and 12-inch depth) that 

frequently or typically exceeded the general PEC. With the 

exception of Shoal and Willow Creeks, zinc concentrations 

typically exceeded the TSMD-specific PEC. The largest floodplain lead and zinc concentrations (surficial soil, 6- and 12-inch 

depth) were measured for Short and Tar Creeks. Lead and 

zinc concentrations in the surficial-soil samples collected from 

the tributary flood plains varied longitudinally in relation to 

sources of mining-contaminated sediment in the basins. Lead 

and zinc concentrations also varied with distance from the 

channel; however, no consistent spatial trend was evident. For 

the surficial-soil samples collected from the Spring River flood 

plain and tributary flood plains, both the coarse (larger than 

63 micrometers) and fine particles (less than 63 micrometers) 

contained substantial lead and zinc concentrations.

Introduction

For about 100 years (1850–1950), the Tri-State Mining 

District (TSMD) in parts of southeast Kansas, southwest 

Missouri, and northeast Oklahoma (fig. 1) was one of the 

primary sources of lead and zinc ore in the world (Brosius 

and Sawin, 2001). Mining activity in the TSMD ended in 

the 1970s. The historical mining activity in the TSMD has 

resulted in a substantial ongoing input of cadmium, lead, 

and zinc to the environment (Juracek, 2006; Juracek and 

Becker, 2009). Recent studies by the U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS), in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (USFWS) and the Kansas Department of Health and 

Environment (KDHE), documented cadmium, lead, and zinc 

concentrations in sediment that far exceeded background 

levels as well as probable-effects guidelines for toxic aquatic 

biological effects (Pope, 2005; Juracek, 2006). For these 
2 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Tri-State Mining District

37°20'

36°50'

37°

10'

94°50’ 40’ 30’ 20’ 94°10’

Oronogo

Carterville

Carterville

Carl Junction

Airport Drive

Joplin

Webb

City

Brooklyn

Heights

Fidelity

Carthage

Reeds

Waco

Asbury

Neck City

Purcell Alba

Jasper

Golden City

Avilla

La Russell

Sarcoxie

Wentworth

Duenweg

Diamond

Neosho

Granby

Newtonia

Fairview

Ritchey

Seneca

Baxter Springs

Treece

Picher

Quapaw

Commerce

Cardin

Miami

Wyandotte

Peoria

Weir

Roseland West Mineral

Pittsburg

Columbus

North Fork Spring River

Spring River

North Fork Spring River

Spring

River Center Creek

Center Creek

Turkey Creek

Shoal Creek

Shoal Creek

Spring River

Neosho River

Grand Lake O’ the Cherokees

Tar Creek

KANSAS

OKLAHOMA

MISSOURI

Tar Creek Willow Creek

Brush Creek

Brush Creek

Cow Creek

Cow

Creek

Shawnee Creek

Little Shawnee Creek

Short Creek

Empire Lake

CHEROKEE COUNTY

CRAWFORD COUNTY BARTON COUNTY

JASPER COUNTY

NEWTON COUNTY

OTTAWA COUNTY

EXPLANATION

Tri-State Mining District

Cherokee County superfund site

Lead and zinc mined areas

Cherokee

0

0 2 4 6 8 KILOMETERS

2 4 6 8 MILES

KANSAS

OKLAHOMA

MISSOURI

ARKANSAS

Index map

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1987, 1:100,000

Universal Transverse Mercator projection

Zone 15

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American

 Datum of 1983 (NAD 83)

Shawnee Creek

Galena

Spring River

Spring

Branch

Scammon

Stark City

Riverton

Lowell

Boundary of Spring River Basin

Lead and zinc mined areas from Brichta, 1960

Figure 1. Location of the Spring River system, the Cherokee County superfund site, and lead- and zinc-mined areas in the TriState Mining District, Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma.
Introduction 3

studies, the USGS sampled deposited sediment in the Spring 

River and its tributaries, Tar Creek, and Empire Lake in 

Cherokee County, Kansas. Sediment quality is an important 

environmental concern because sediment may be a sink for 

some water-quality constituents and a source of constituents 

to the overlying water column and biota (Baudo and others, 

1990; Zoumis and others, 2001; Luoma and Rainbow, 2008). 

Once in the food chain, sediment-derived constituents may 

pose an even greater concern because of bioaccumulation (that 

is, the accumulation of constituents in biological tissues of 

living organisms) (Smol, 2002).

The ongoing mining-related input of cadmium, lead, 

and zinc to the environment has resulted in contamination 

that has adversely affected biota including mussels (Angelo 

and others, 2007), waterfowl (Beyer and others, 2004; van 

der Merwe and others, 2011), and fish (Wildhaber and others, 

1998, 1999, 2000). In recent years, a shellfish consumption 

advisory was issued in Kansas (Kansas Department of Health 

and Environment, 2006, 2012) and a fish consumption 

advisory was issued in Oklahoma (Oklahoma Department of 

Environmental Quality, 2008) because of cadmium or lead 

contamination, or both. Human health problems and risks 

also have been attributed to mining-related contamination 

(Neuberger and others, 1990; Malcoe and others, 2002). In 

response to concern about the mining-related environmental 

contamination, southeast Cherokee County was listed on the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA) National 

Priority List as a superfund hazardous waste site in 1983 

(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2004).

Mining-related contamination is not confined to stream 

channels and lake beds in Cherokee County (Juracek, 2006). 

During floods, contaminated sediment is carried out of the 

channels and deposited on the adjoining flood plains. Floodplain contamination is an important environmental concern 

because of the potentially toxic effects of the contaminated 

sediment on wildlife. Moreover, the contaminated flood plains 

are a potential concern because the stored sediment may be 

remobilized and reintroduced into the aquatic environment 

(for example, by floods and channel-bank erosion). Given 

the importance of flood-plain contamination as an issue for 

environmental restoration, an understanding of the magnitude 

and extent of the contamination is needed.

A 4-year study by USGS, which was requested and 

funded by USEPA, was begun in 2009 to investigate the 

occurrence and variability of mining-related cadmium, lead, 

and zinc in the Spring River flood plain and tributary flood 

plains located in the Cherokee County, Kansas, superfund site 

(fig. 1). The specific objectives of the study were to:

1. Determine the concentrations of cadmium, lead, and 

zinc in the Spring River flood plain and tributary 

flood plains;

2. Determine how flood-plain contamination along the 

Spring River and tributary streams varies with distance downstream, with distance from the channel, 

and in relation to particle size; and

3. Determine the depth of contamination in the Spring 

River flood plain and tributary flood plains.

Information on contamination of the Spring River flood 

plain and tributary flood plains provided by this study, in 

combination with previous studies on in-channel and lakebed 

sediment contamination, will assist USEPA in the development 

of a comprehensive remediation plan for Cherokee County.

Previous Investigations

Several previous studies have examined the effects of 

lead and zinc mining on water and sediment quality in or 

near Cherokee County, Kansas. Barks (1977) investigated the 

effects of abandoned lead and zinc mines and tailings piles on 

water and sediment quality in the vicinity of Joplin, Missouri. 

Water from abandoned lead and zinc mines in the area, some 

of which discharges at the surface, was determined to have 

average dissolved zinc concentrations of 9,400 micrograms 

per liter (μg/L). Mine-water discharges increased the dissolved 

zinc concentrations in receiving streams from a baseline of 

about 40 μg/L to about 500 μg/L during low-flow conditions. 

In runoff from tailings areas, dissolved zinc concentrations 

averaged 16,000 μg/L. Runoff from one tailings area during 

a summer storm contained maximum dissolved cadmium, 

lead, and zinc concentrations of 1,400 μg/L, 400 μg/L, and 

200,000 μg/L, respectively. The mining activity also resulted 

in increased zinc concentrations in stream-bottom sediment 

from a baseline of about 100 micrograms per gram (μg/g) 

to about 2,500 μg/g and increased lead concentrations in 

stream-bottom sediment from a baseline of about 20 μg/g 

to about 450 μg/g (Barks, 1977). The bottom-sediment 

samples, described as sandy, were not sieved to isolate the 

silt-clay fraction before analyses to determine trace-element 

concentrations. Spring River tributaries sampled as part of the 

Barks (1977) study included Center Creek, Short Creek, and 

Turkey Creek (fig. 1).

An extensive study of the effects of abandoned lead and 

zinc mines on hydrology and surface-water and groundwater 

quality in Cherokee County, Kansas, and adjacent areas, 

was completed by Spruill (1987). Water from mines 

located mostly in the vicinity of Galena, Kansas (fig. 1) had 

respective median concentrations of 180 μg/L, 240 μg/L, 

and 37,600 μg/L for dissolved cadmium, lead, and zinc. Of 

the four streams sampled that were affected by lead and zinc 

mining and provide flow directly or indirectly to Empire Lake 

(that is, Center Creek, Shoal Creek, Short Creek, and Turkey 

Creek; fig. 1), Short Creek had the largest concentrations 

of dissolved cadmium (170 μg/L) and zinc (25,000 μg/L) 

(Spruill, 1987).

Ferrington and others (1989) completed a study to 

determine the occurrence and biological effects of cadmium, 

lead, manganese, and zinc in the Short Creek/Empire Lake 

aquatic system in Cherokee County, Kansas. As part of 

this study, bottom sediment was sampled at multiple sites 

within the Spring River and Shoal Creek arms as well as the 
4 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

main body of Empire Lake. Bottom sediment throughout 

Empire Lake was found to have increased concentrations 

of all four trace elements. The largest concentrations of 

cadmium, lead, and zinc were detected in two samples 

collected from the Spring River arm near the mouth of Short 

Creek (fig. 1). At this location, mean concentrations of 

cadmium, lead, and zinc were about 129 μg/g, 1,600 μg/g, 

and 23,000 μg/g, respectively (Ferrington and others, 

1989). The bottom-sediment samples were not sieved to 

isolate the silt-clay fraction prior to analyses to determine 

trace-element concentrations. Overall, the results indicated 

substantial transport and accumulation of sediment-associated 

trace elements in Empire Lake. No statistically significant 

relations between trace-element concentrations and benthic 

macroinvertebrate species richness or abundance were 

determined. It was concluded that the primary biological 

effect of large cadmium, lead, and zinc concentrations in 

the bottom sediment of Empire Lake was a reduction of 

aquatic macroinvertebrate abundance, and presumably overall 

biological productivity of the reservoir system (Ferrington and 

others, 1989).

A study to determine concentrations of trace elements and 

organic compounds in sediment and biota of the Spring River 

system, including Empire Lake, was completed by USFWS in 

1992. As part of the study, two bottom-sediment samples were 

collected from a site in both the Spring River and Shoal Creek 

arms upstream from the main body of Empire Lake. Cadmium 

concentrations in the bottom sediment averaged about 26 μg/g 

for the sampling site in the Spring River arm and about 

23 μg/g for the sampling site in the Shoal Creek arm. For lead, 

the respective average sediment concentrations for the Spring 

River and Shoal Creek sites were 165 and 230 μg/g. Average 

zinc concentrations in the sediment for the Spring River and 

Shoal Creek sites were 3,580 and 3,300 μg/g, respectively 

(U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992). It is uncertain if the 

bottom-sediment samples were sieved to isolate the siltclay fraction before analyses to determine trace-element 

concentrations.

Davis and Schumacher (1992) conducted an appraisal of 

surface-water quality in the Spring River Basin of southwest 

Missouri and southeast Kansas using existing water-quality 

data collected from the early 1960s to September 1987 by 

USGS and KDHE. Results indicated that several Spring River 

tributaries, including Brush, Center, Cow, Turkey, and Short 

Creeks (fig. 1), are significantly affected by lead-zinc or coal 

mining. The effect of the contaminated tributaries on the water 

quality of the Spring River was revealed by a comparison of 

the water-quality data collected at the Spring River sampling 

stations located near Waco, Missouri (upstream from the 

tributary inflows), and Baxter Springs, Kansas (downstream 

from the tributary inflows) (fig. 1). Increased median 

concentrations of several water-quality constituents were 

documented including an increase of dissolved zinc from 30 

to 310 μg/L. The largest single source of dissolved zinc to the 

Spring River was determined to be Short Creek. Davis and 

Schumacher (1992) also concluded that baseline water-quality 

conditions for the study area were best represented by the 

Spring River near Waco, Missouri, and Shoal Creek near 

Galena, Kansas.

A study by Pope (2005) provided an assessment of 

streambed sediment quality along the main stem and major 

tributaries of both the Spring River and Tar Creek within 

the boundary of the Cherokee County, Kansas, superfund 

site (fig. 1). All sediment samples were collected to a 

depth of 0.8 inch (in.) and sieved to isolate the less than 

63-micrometers (μm) fraction (silt- and clay-size particles) for 

analysis. Concentrations ranged from 0.6 to 460 milligrams 

per kilogram (mg/kg) for cadmium, 22 to 7,400 mg/kg for 

lead, and 100 to 45,000 mg/kg for zinc, with respective 

median concentrations of 13, 180, and 1,800 mg/kg. The 

largest concentrations were measured at sampling sites 

in the Short Creek, Tar Creek, and Spring Branch basins. 

Proceeding downstream along the 22-mile length of the Spring 

River within the study area, it was determined that sediment 

concentrations of cadmium, lead, and zinc increased about 18, 

7, and 17 times, respectively.

Juracek (2006) investigated mining-related sediment 

contamination in Empire Lake, Kansas (fig. 1). All bottomsediment samples were sieved to isolate the less than 63-μm 

fraction for analysis. Cadmium concentrations ranged from 

7.3 to 76 mg/kg with a median concentration of 29 mg/kg. 

Lead concentrations ranged from 100 to 950 mg/kg with a 

median concentration of 270 mg/kg. Zinc concentrations 

ranged from 1,300 to 13,000 mg/kg with a median 

concentration of 4,900 mg/kg. In general, the cadmium, lead, 

and zinc concentrations were one to two orders of magnitude 

larger than estimated local background concentrations with the 

largest concentrations in the older sediment that corresponded 

to when the mines were in operation. Despite a decrease in 

concentrations with time, the concentrations of cadmium, lead, 

and zinc in the most recently deposited bottom sediment still 

exceeded probable-effects guidelines (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1997; MacDonald and others, 2000) for 

toxic aquatic biological effects.

Angelo and others (2007) investigated the effects of 

historical lead and zinc mining activity on mussel populations 

in the Spring River Basin. As part of the study, mussel 

species diversity, densities, and concentrations of cadmium, 

lead, and zinc in streambed sediment and mussel soft tissue 

were determined at selected sites along the Spring River and 

tributary streams. Mussels were not found in the downstream 

reaches of Center, Shoal, Short, and Turkey Creeks. Also, 

mussel diversity and density were substantially reduced in the 

Spring River downstream from Center and Turkey Creeks. 

Angelo and others (2007) concluded that the historical 

lead and zinc mining activity continues to adversely affect 

environmental quality and impede the recovery of mussel 

populations in much of the Spring River Basin.

MacDonald and others (2010) completed an ecological 

risk assessment to investigate risks to benthic invertebrates 

exposed to contaminants in aquatic habitats within the TSMD. 

Specifically, the assessment was focused on the survival, 
Methods 5

growth, and reproduction of amphipods, midges, and mussels 

as affected by exposure to contaminants in surface water, 

sediment, and pore water. Cadmium, lead, and zinc were 

identified as the principal contaminants of interest in the 

TSMD. It was determined that exposure to contaminated 

surface water, sediment, and pore water posed increased risks 

to benthic invertebrates throughout a large part of the TSMD 

(MacDonald and others, 2010).

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to present the results of the 

USGS study to assess the magnitude, extent, and variability of 

mining-related contamination in the Spring River flood plain 

and tributary flood plains located in the Cherokee County, 

Kansas, superfund site. In 2009, surficial-soil samples were 

collected at 30 sites in the Spring River flood plain. In 2009 

and 2010, a total of 34 cores were collected along 6 transects 

in the Spring River flood plain. In 2011, surficial-soil 

samples and cores were collected at more than 50 sites along 

transects in several tributary flood plains. All surficial-soil 

samples and cores were analyzed for cadmium, lead, and zinc 

concentrations. Cadmium, lead, and zinc are the trace elements 

that were of primary interest in this study because they are 

the major contaminants introduced into the environment as a 

result of the historical mining activity (Juracek, 2006). In this 

report, background trace element concentrations were defined 

as concentrations that were minimally affected by historical 

lead and zinc mining.

Results presented in this report will provide some of 

the information required by USEPA for the development of a 

comprehensive remediation plan for Cherokee County. From 

a national perspective, the methods and results presented in 

this report provide guidance and perspective for future studies 

concerned with the issues of sediment-associated contaminant 

transport and deposition in fluvial environments.

Description of the Spring River Basin

The Spring River Basin drains about 2,500 square miles 

(mi2) of southwest Missouri, southeast Kansas, and northeast 

Oklahoma (Seaber and others, 1987) (fig. 1). Principal 

tributaries to the Spring River in Cherokee County include 

Brush Creek, Cow Creek, Center Creek, Shawnee Creek, 

Shoal Creek, Short Creek, Turkey Creek, and Willow Creek 

(fig. 1). Several of the tributaries drain areas that were substantially affected by historical lead and zinc mining.

The Spring River Basin overlaps two physiographic 

provinces as defined by Fenneman (1938, 1946). The southeast 

two-thirds of the basin is located in the Springfield Plateau 

Section of the Ozark Plateaus Province. This part of the basin 

is underlain by limestone of Mississippian age (Fenneman, 

1938). The northwest one-third of the basin, including the 

Kansas part of the basin located west of the Spring River, is 

located in the Osage Plains Section of the Central Lowland 

Province. This part of the basin is underlain by shale with 

interbedded sandstone and limestone of Pennsylvanian age 

(Fenneman, 1938). Topographically, the basin is typified by 

gently rolling uplands dissected by streams.

The lead and zinc ores in the TSMD occur in the cherty 

limestones of Mississippian age. The ores possibly resulted 

from hydrothermal (that is, hot, metal-bearing) solutions that 

originated as sedimentary brines (Leach and others, 2010) 

and moved into the porous and permeable cherty limestones. 

The solutions deposited sphalerite (zinc sulfide), galena (lead 

sulfide) and other associated minerals.

Several major soil associations are present within the 

Spring River Basin. Soils in the Missouri part of the basin 

are described by Allgood and Persinger (1979). Information 

on soils in the Kansas part of the basin is provided by the 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service 

(1973, 1985).

The climate in the Spring River Basin is characterized 

as subhumid continental (Stringer, 1972). Long-term, mean 

annual precipitation at Joplin, Missouri (period of record 

1948–2011) is about 43 in. (High Plains Regional Climate 

Center, 2012) (fig. 1).

Land use in the Spring River Basin is predominantly 

a mix of cropland, grassland, and woodland (Davis and 

Schumacher, 1992). Historically, numerous sites within the 

basin were mined for coal, lead, and zinc (Brichta, 1960; 

Marcher and others, 1984). The distribution of lead- and zincmined lands within the basin is shown in figure 1.

Methods

The objectives of this study were accomplished using 

available and newly collected information. Available 

information included sediment chemistry data from previous 

investigations. New information was obtained through the 

collection and analysis of surficial-soil samples and cores from 

the Spring River flood plain and tributary flood plains in the 

Cherokee County superfund site.

Flood-Plain Surficial-Soil Sampling and 

Analysis

Site Selection

The selection of surficial-soil sampling sites for the 

Spring River flood plain involved multiple steps. First, all 

1-mi2 sections that were located mostly (that is, at least 

50 percent) or completely in the Spring River flood plain 

were identified using USGS 1:24,000-scale topographic 

quadrangle maps. Second, the selected sections were divided 

into quadrants. Third, for each section, a quadrant was 

randomly selected for sampling. The random-selection process 

involved the use of coin flips to determine if the quadrant was 

north or south and east or west. Using this process, either the 
6 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

northwest, northeast, southwest, or southeast quadrant was 

selected for each section. If the randomly selected quadrant 

for a section was unusable, either because it was located 

mostly out of the flood plain or because access permission 

from the land owner was not granted, the next quadrant was 

selected using a clockwise rotation. A total of 30 surficial-soil 

sampling sites were selected (fig. 2A). Typically, the floodplain soil was sampled at the center of each randomly selected 

quadrant. However, for a few quadrants, the soil was sampled 

off center either because the center of the quadrant was under 

water or because access permission from the land owner was 

not granted. The latitude and longitude coordinates for the 

center of each sampling site, obtained using global positioning 

system (GPS) technology, are provided in table 1–1 in the 

appendix at the back of this report.

Tributary streams for which flood-plain surficial soils 

were sampled included Brush Creek, Cow Creek, Shawnee 

Creek, Shoal Creek, Short Creek, Spring Branch, Tar Creek, 

Turkey Creek, and Willow Creek (fig. 1). Tar Creek is 

not a direct tributary of the Spring River. It flows into the 

Neosho River, which subsequently joins the Spring River at 

Grand Lake O’ the Cherokees in Oklahoma. Tar Creek was 

included because it drains a part of Cherokee County that 

was substantially affected by historical lead and zinc mining 

activity (fig. 1). Along each stream, one to three transects were 

established for the purpose of sampling (figs. 2A–2U). A total 

of 20 transects were established. Along each transect, two 

to four sampling sites were selected. The distance between 

successive sampling sites (when two or more sites were 

sampled on the same side of the stream) ranged from about 

10 to about 300 feet (ft) as determined by flood-plain width, 

number of sites, and site conditions. A total of 59 surficialsoil sampling sites were selected. The latitude and longitude 

coordinates for the center of each sampling site, obtained 

using GPS technology, are provided in table 1–1 at the back of 

this report.

Sample Collection and Preparation

The Spring River flood-plain surficial-soil samples 

were collected in the fall of 2009. The tributary flood-plain 

surficial-soil samples were collected in the spring of 2011. 

All flood-plain surficial-soil samples were collected to a 

depth of about 1 in. At each Spring River flood-plain site, the 

soil was sampled at the selected center location and typically 

at a distance (hereafter referred to as the sampling radius) 

of 100 ft north, south, east, and west of the center. This 

sampling method is referred to as the five-point sampling 

technique. For the tributary flood-plain sites, the five-point 

sampling technique was used with a sampling radius that 

ranged from 5 to 50 ft as determined by the width of flood 

plain available for sampling and the number of sampling 

sites per transect.

At each sampling site, an equal volume of soil was 

collected at the five locations using a 5-in. long section of 

cellulose acetate butyrate transparent tubing (2.625-in. inside 

diameter) that was pushed by hand into the soil. The tubing 

was thoroughly cleaned with a clean paper towel prior to 

each reuse. For each site, the soil from the five locations was 

combined in a plastic bag and transported back to the USGS 

laboratory in Lawrence, Kansas, for subsequent sample 

preparation.

Following air drying, each bulk sample was spread out 

on a clean plastic sheet and all visible organics (for example, 

plant fragments, seed pods, and roots) were removed using 

stainless steel tweezers. Each sample was disaggregated 

using a rubber-tipped pestle until the entire sample passed 

through a 4-millimeter (mm) stainless steel sieve. Then, 

each disaggregated sample was placed in a glass bowl and 

homogenized using a plastic spoon to provide a composite 

sample for each site. All utensils used in sample preparation 

were thoroughly cleaned with deionized water and wiped dry 

with a clean paper towel before each reuse.

The composite sample for each site was split into three 

subsamples of approximately equal size by successively 

removing random scoops of the sample using a plastic spoon 

and placing it into three separate plastic bags. The scooping 

continued until the entire sample was redistributed into 

the three subsamples. Respectively, subsamples a, b, and c

were used for chemical analyses, particle-size analysis, and 

archival.

Chemical Analyses

The flood-plain surficial-soil samples were analyzed 

for cadmium, lead, and zinc using x-ray fluorescence (XRF) 

(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2007). The Spring 

River flood-plain samples were analyzed at the USEPA field 

office in Galena, Kansas. The tributary flood-plain samples 

were analyzed at the USEPA office in Kansas City, Kansas. 

All samples were analyzed as bulk samples. Subsequently, all 

samples were wet sieved using deionized water to isolate the 

less than 63-μm fraction (silt and clay). The less than 63-μm 

fraction for each sample was dried and analyzed for cadmium, 

lead, and zinc using XRF. All bulk and less than 63-μm 

samples collected from the Spring River flood plain were 

analyzed using a handheld XRF instrument. All bulk and less 

than 63-μm samples collected from the tributary flood plains 

were analyzed using a stationary XRF instrument.

To assess comparability of results with other recently 

completed studies in Cherokee County, Kansas [see 

studies by Pope (2005) and Juracek (2006) in the Previous 

Investigations section of this report], a split-replicate sample 

from three Spring River flood-plain surficial-soil sampling 

sites (SRF-2, SRF-5, and SRF-10) and six tributary floodplain surficial-soil sampling sites (BC2-1, SB2-2, SnC2-1, 

StC1-2, TrC1-3, and WC2-1) were analyzed by combustion 

and various spectroscopic methods (table 1). For each site, 

the composite sample was split to provide the original and 

split-replicate samples. Besides cadmium, lead, and zinc, the 

nine split-replicate samples were analyzed for 22 additional 

trace elements, nutrients (total nitrogen and total phosphorus) 
Methods 7

Empire 

Lake

XYXYXYXYXY

XYXYXYXYXYXY

XYXYXYXYXYXY

XYXYXYXYXY

XYXYXYXYXYXYXY

XYXYXYXYXY

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!( !( !(

!(

!( !(

!(

!(

!( !( !( !(

!( !( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

Baxter

Springs

Galena

Treece

94°50' 45' 94°40'

37°15'

10'

05'

37°00’

Kansas

Missouri

Oklahoma

Map area

EXPLANATION

0 1 2 3 4 MILES

0 2 3 4 1 KILOMETERS

SRF-1 SRF-3 SRF-2

SRF-4

SRF-19

SRF-17

SRF-18

SRF-11

SRF-16

SRF-13

SRF-9

SRF-7

SRF-14

SRF-6

SRF-15

SRF-10

SRF-5

SRF-20

SRF-23

SRF-22 SRF-26

SRF-25

SRF-29

SRF-21

SRF-33

SRF-32

SRF-31

SRF-28

SRF-27

SRF-24

Boundary of 

Cherokee County 

superfund site

Short Creek

Spring River

Shoal Creek

Co w Creek

Spring River

Tar Creek

Spring River

T1-1

T2-1 T2-6

T1-5

T3-5 T3-1

T4-1

T4-5

T5-1

T5-7

T6-1

T6-5

CC2

StC2 StC1

TkC1

SnC1

ShC2

SnC2

SB2 SB1

WC1

CC1

ShC1 WC2

SB3

TrC2

TrC3

WC3

BC2

TrC1

BC1

X

Y

Willow Creek

T6-1

SRF-33(

!(TrC1

Brush Creek

Spring Branch

Shawnee Creek

Lead and zinc mined areas 

Approximate flood-plain extent

U.S. Geological Survey surficial-soil sampling site 

in the Spring River flood plain and site identifier

U.S. Geological Survey surficial-soil sampling and 

coring transect in tributary flood plain and 

transect identifier. See figures 2B–2U for 

location of sampling sites along each transect

U.S. Geological Survey coring site in Spring 

River flood plain and site identifier—First two 

characters, T1–T6, represent the transect 

identifiers

Turkey

Creek

Center

Creek

2A

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1987, 1:100,000

Universal Transverse Mercator projection

Zone 15

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American

 Datum of 1983 (NAD 83)

Lead and zinc mined areas from Brichta, 1960

Approximate flood-plain extent from Federal

Emergency Management Agency (2008)

Figure 2. Location of surficial-soil sampling sites and coring sites in the Spring River flood plain and tributary flood plains, 

Cherokee County, Kansas. (Note: Because the tributary streams are shown as linear, rather than two-dimensional, features 

in figures 2B–2U, the sampling sites are closer to the channels than they appear.)
8 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

BC1-4

BC1-3

BC1-2

BC1-1

2B. Brush Creek transect BC1

Brush Creek

Brush Creek

BC2-2

BC2-1

CC1-1 CC1-2 CC1-3

2D. Cow Creek transect CC1

Cow Creek

2C. Brush Creek transect BC2

CC2-2

CC2-1

2E. Cow Creek transect CC2 (unnamed tributary)

Unnamed tributary

SnC1-3

SnC1-2

SnC1-1

2F. Shawnee Creek transect SnC1

Shawnee

Creek

SnC2-1 SnC2-2

2G. Shawnee Creek transect SnC2

ShC1-3

ShC1-2

ShC1-1

2H. Shoal Creek transect ShC1

Shoal Creek

ShC2-4

ShC2-3

ShC2-2

ShC2-1

2I. Shoal Creek transect ShC2

Shoal Creek

StC1-3

StC1-2

StC1-1

2J. Short Creek transect StC1

Short Creek

StC2-2

StC2-1

2K. Short Creek transect StC2

Short Creek

Shawnee Creek

N

0 100 200 FEET

0 50 METERS

0 100 200 FEET

0 50 METERS

0 100 200 FEET

0 50 METERS

0 100 200 FEET

0 50 METERS

0 100 200 FEET

0 50 METERS

0 100 200 FEET

0 50 METERS

0 100 200 FEET

0 50 METERS

0 100 200 FEET

0 50 METERS

0 100 200 FEET

0 50 METERS

0 100 FEET

0 25 METERS

Figure 2. Location of surficial-soil sampling sites and coring sites in the Spring River flood plain and 

tributary flood plains, Cherokee County, Kansas. (Note: Because the tributary streams are shown as 

linear, rather than two-dimensional, features in figures 2B–2U, the sampling sites are closer to the 

channels than they appear.)—Continued
Methods 9

N

SB1-1

SB1-2

2L. Spring Branch transect SB1

Spring Branch

SB2-3

SB2-2 SB2-1

2M. Spring Branch transect SB2

Spring Branch

SB3-2

SB3-1

2N. Spring Branch transect SB3

Spring

Branch

TrC1-4

TrC1-3

TrC1-2

TrC1-1

2O. Tar Creek transect TrC1

Tar Creek

TrC2-4

TrC2-3

TrC2-2

TrC2-1

2P. Tar Creek transect TrC2

Tar Creek

TrC3-4

TrC3-3

TrC3-2

TrC3-1

2Q. Tar Creek transect TrC3

Tar Creek

!

TkC1-3

TkC1-2

TkC1-1

2R. Turkey Creek transect TkC1

Turkey Creek

WC1-3

WC1-2

WC1-1

2S. Willow Creek transect WC1

Willow Creek

WC2-4

WC2-3

WC2-2

WC2-1

2T. Willow Creek transect WC2

Willow Creek

WC3-2

WC3-1

2U. Willow Creek transect WC3

Willow Creek

0 100 FEET

0 25 METERS

0 100 FEET

0 25 METERS

0 100 FEET

0 25 METERS

0 100 FEET

0 25 METERS

0 100 FEET

0 25 METERS

0 100 FEET

0 25 METERS

0 100 FEET

0 25 METERS

0 100 200 FEET

0 50 METERS

0 100 200 FEET

0 50 METERS

0 100 200 FEET

0 50 METERS

Figure 2. Location of surficial-soil sampling sites and coring sites in the Spring River flood plain and 

tributary flood plains, Cherokee County, Kansas. (Note: Because the tributary streams are shown as 

linear, rather than two-dimensional, features in figures 2B–2U, the sampling sites are closer to the 

channels than they appear.)—Continued
10 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

and organic and total carbon (table 1). The nine samples 

were analyzed as bulk samples and as the less than 63-μm 

fraction. Analyses of the nine samples by combustion and 

various spectroscopic methods were performed at the USGS 

Sediment Trace Element Partitioning Laboratory in Atlanta, 

Georgia. Analyses of samples for total nitrogen and carbon 

concentrations were performed using the methods described 

by Horowitz and others (2001). Analyses for total phosphorus 

and trace elements were performed using the methods 

described by Fishman and Friedman (1989), Arbogast (1996), 

and Briggs and Meier (1999). The spectroscopic methods 

used provided total (at least 95 percent of the element present) 

rather than total-recoverable concentrations. For cadmium, 

lead, and zinc, analysis of two duplicate samples (that is, two 

original samples were split and both halves were analyzed) 

indicated that the analytical variability for the spectroscopic 

methods was about 10 percent or less. Data for the additional 

constituents are presented but not discussed (see tables 1–3 

and 1–5 at the back of this report).

Particle-Size Analysis

A particle-size analysis was completed for each surficialsoil sample to determine the percentage of sand, silt, and 

clay in each sample. The particle-size determinations were 

completed by ARDL, Inc., Mt. Vernon, Illinois, using 

hydrometer analyses following American Society for Testing 

and Materials method D422 (American Society for Testing 

and Materials International, 2007).

Flood-Plain Coring and Analysis

Site Selection

Spring River flood-plain coring sites were selected to be 

representative of conditions throughout the Cherokee County, 

Kansas, superfund site as affected by tributary inputs. Coring 

sites were established along six transects that generally were 

oriented perpendicular to the Spring River. The six transect 

locations (fig. 2A) were as follows: (1) between the Missouri 

State line and the Center Creek confluence (transect T1), 

(2) between the Center and Turkey Creek confluences (transect 

T2), (3) between the Turkey and Short Creek confluences 

(transect T3), (4) between the Short Creek confluence and 

Empire Lake (transect T4), (5) between Empire Lake and the 

Willow Creek confluence (transect T5), and (6) downstream 

from the Spring Branch confluence near the Oklahoma State 

line (transect T6). Along each transect, five to seven coring 

sites were selected at an approximately equal distance interval 

that ranged from about 800 ft for transects T3 and T6 to about 

1,300 ft for transect T5 (fig. 2A). The distance interval varied 

among transects as dictated by flood-plain width, number 

of sites per transect, site conditions, and property access. 

The latitude and longitude coordinates for each coring site, 

obtained using GPS technology, are provided in table 1–2 at 

the back of this report.

Tributary flood-plain coring sites were collocated with the 

surficial-soil sampling sites. At each site, the core was collected 

at or near the center of where the five-point surficial-soil sample 

Table 1. Chemical analyses performed on surficial-soil and core samples from the Spring River flood plain and tributary flood plains, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009–11.

[Number in parentheses is the detection limit or method reporting limit for each constituent. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; %, percent dry weight]

Analyses using x-ray fluorescence methods1

Cadmium (50–150 mg/kg) Lead (10–100 mg/kg) Zinc (10–100 mg/kg)

Analyses using combustion and various spectroscopic methods2

Aluminum (0.1%) Chromium (1.0 mg/kg) Molybdenum (1.0 mg/kg) Sulfur (0.01%)

Antimony (0.1 mg/kg) Cobalt (1.0 mg/kg) Nickel (1.0 mg/kg) Thallium (50 mg/kg)

Arsenic (0.1 mg/kg) Copper (1.0 mg/kg) Nitrogen, total (100 mg/kg) Tin (1.0 mg/kg)

Barium (1.0 mg/kg) Iron (0.1%) Phosphorus, total (50 mg/kg) Titanium (0.01%)

Beryllium (0.1 mg/kg) Lead (1.0 mg/kg) Selenium (0.1 mg/kg) Uranium (50 mg/kg)

Cadmium (0.1 mg/kg) Lithium (1.0 mg/kg) Silver (0.5 mg/kg) Vanadium (1.0 mg/kg)

Carbon, organic (0.1%) Manganese (10.0 mg/kg) Strontium (1.0 mg/kg) Zinc (1.0 mg/kg)

Carbon, total (0.1%)

1

The detection limit varies depending on several factors including the constituent of interest, the type of detector used, the type and strength of excitation 

source, count time used to irradiate the sample, physical matrix effects, chemical matrix effects, and interelement spectral interferences (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2007).

2

Carbon and nitrogen analyzed by combustion. Antimony, arsenic, and selenium analyzed by hydride generation inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission 

spectroscopy (ICP-AES). Cadmium, lead, and silver analyzed by flame atomic absorption. Remaining constituents analyzed by ICP-AES (Fishman and Friedman, 1989; Arbogast, 1996; Briggs and Meier, 1999; Horowitz and others, 2001).
Quality Control 11

was collected. Thus, the latitude and longitude coordinates 

for each core were the same as for the surficial-soil sample 

collected at each site (table 1–1 at the back of this report).

Core Collection and Preparation

The Spring River flood-plain cores were collected in the 

fall of 2009 and the spring of 2010 using a truck- or tractormounted Geoprobe® GH-40 direct-push system. A total of 

34 cores were collected. Cores collected along transects T1, 

T3, and T6 were pushed to a depth of 16 ft or refusal. Cores 

collected along transects T2, T4, and T5 were pushed to a 

depth of 8 ft or refusal. Coring sites are shown in figure 2A. 

Each core was collected in 4-ft increments by successive core 

runs using a 1.5-in. diameter by 4-ft long core barrel with an 

acetate liner. The coring equipment was thoroughly washed 

with a laboratory detergent solution and rinsed with tap water 

and deionized water prior to each core run. A new acetate 

liner was used for each core run. Following collection, the 

cores were placed in cardboard core boxes, transported to a 

secure storage facility, and laid out on tables. Approximately 

one-third of the liner was removed to allow the cores to air 

dry. Also, about one-third of each core was removed with a 

stainless steel knife to expose the inner material for geologic 

description and chemical analysis. Compaction affected all 

collected cores as evidenced by the fact that the length of each 

recovered core was always less than the depth of penetration. 

Depth measurements along each core were adjusted to account 

for compaction, which was assumed to be uniform for each 

core. The adjusted depth intervals were computed for each 

core using the ratio of the length of recovered core to the depth 

of penetration.

The tributary flood-plain cores were collected in the 

spring of 2011 using a 24-in. hand-push corer. A core was 

collected at 54 sampling sites. At five sites, a core was not 

collected typically because shallow rock was encountered, 

which prevented penetration of the corer. Each core was 

collected to a depth of 15 in. or refusal. A new 1-in. diameter 

butyrate liner was used for each site. Compaction affected 

all collected cores. Following collection, the cores were 

segmented to remove the 6- and 12-in. depth intervals for 

subsequent chemical analysis. Identification of the 6- and 

12-in. depth intervals for each core required that compaction 

be accounted for as described previously. Each core was cut 

at the adjusted depth intervals to expose the estimated 6- and 

12-in. depths. For a few cores, shallower depth intervals 

were used because refusal was encountered before the target 

depth (15 in.) was achieved. A total of 105 core segments 

were obtained from the 54 cores. The core segments were air 

dried.

Chemical Analysis

All flood-plain cores were analyzed for cadmium, lead, 

and zinc using XRF (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

2007). The Spring River core samples were analyzed at the 

USEPA field office in Galena, Kansas. The tributary core 

samples were analyzed at the USEPA office in Kansas City, 

Kansas. All core samples were analyzed as bulk samples. 

Generally, for the Spring River cores, the top 2-in. interval 

of each core was analyzed. Then, the remainder of each core 

was analyzed about every one-third of a foot (adjusted for 

compaction as necessary). All Spring River core samples 

were analyzed using a handheld XRF instrument. For 

the tributary cores, the 6- and 12-in. depths (adjusted for 

compaction as necessary) were analyzed using a stationary 

XRF instrument.

Quality Control

Samples Collected from the Spring River 

Flood Plain

Quality control for the XRF chemical analysis of the 

Spring River flood-plain surficial-soil samples involved 

several parts. To determine the analytical variability of 

the XRF method, 10 bulk samples and 11 less than 63-μm 

samples were analyzed 3 times. Additional verification was 

provided by the analysis of split-replicate samples (three 

sampling sites) using spectroscopic methods. Within-site 

variability of the surficial soils was assessed using sequential 

five-point replicate samples (three sampling sites) and 

a 17-point sampling technique (three sampling sites) to 

determine the representativeness of the five-point sampling 

technique. In the 17-point technique, the soil was sampled at 

the selected center location and at a sampling radius of 50 and 

100 ft north, northeast, east, southeast, south, southwest, west, 

and northwest of the center. Finally, the accuracy of the XRF 

method was evaluated using standard reference samples and 

blank samples, which were repeatedly analyzed before, during, 

and after the analysis of the surficial-soil and core samples.

The evaluation of XRF analytical variability was 

constrained by some results that were less than the XRF 

limit of detection (LOD). For cadmium, concentrations in 

the bulk samples were less than the XRF LOD for at least 

2 of the 3 analyses for 8 of the 10 samples. For the remaining 

two samples, XRF-measured cadmium concentrations were 

within ±3 and ±35 percent of the mean concentration for 

each sample. Similarly, cadmium concentrations for the 

less than 63-μm samples were less than the XRF LOD for 

at least 2 of the 3 analyses for 10 of the 11 samples. For the 

remaining sample, XRF-measured cadmium concentrations 

were within ±37 percent of the mean concentration. For lead, 

XRF analytical variability for the bulk and less than 63-μm 

samples ranged from ±2 to ±38 percent (nine samples) and 

±2 to ±18 percent (four samples), respectively. For zinc, 

XRF analytical variability for the bulk and less than 63-μm 

samples ranged from ±2 to ±33 percent (10 samples) and ±3 to 

±27 percent (eight samples), respectively.
12 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

A comparison of cadmium concentrations for the 

bulk and less than 63-μm samples determined by XRF 

and spectroscopic methods was not possible because the 

cadmium concentrations were less than the XRF LOD for 

all three samples (SRF-2, SRF-5, and SRF-10). Lead and 

zinc concentrations for the three bulk samples determined 

by spectroscopic methods averaged 55 and 28 percent larger, 

respectively (table 2). A comparison of lead concentrations 

in the less than 63-μm samples was constrained because 

concentrations were less than the XRF LOD for two of 

the three samples. For the remaining sample, the lead 

concentration determined by spectroscopic methods was 

51 percent larger. Zinc concentrations for the less than 63-μm 

samples determined by spectroscopic methods averaged 

80 percent larger (table 2). A complete list of results for the 

three split-replicate samples analyzed by combustion and 

spectroscopic methods is provided in table 1–3 at the back of 

this report. 

Within-site variability was assessed to determine the 

representativeness of the five-point sampling technique. At 

three sampling sites (SRF-1, SRF-3, and SRF-7), a sequential 

five-point replicate sample was collected immediately next 

to the original five-point sample. Also, at three sampling 

sites (SRF-4, SRF-9, and SRF-29), an additional sample was 

collected using the 17-point sampling technique.

An assessment of within-site variability for cadmium 

using the five-point bulk samples was not possible because 

the cadmium concentrations for all original, sequentialreplicate, and 17-point samples were less than the XRF 

LOD. On average, the lead and zinc concentrations in the 

three sequential-replicate bulk samples were within ±11 and 

±15 percent of the concentrations in the three original bulk 

samples, respectively. For lead, the average variability for 

the sequential-replicate samples was computed using only 

two sampling sites because the lead concentration was less 

than the XRF LOD for one of the original bulk samples. 

On average, the lead and zinc concentrations for the three 

17-point bulk samples were within ±27 and ±23 percent 

of the concentrations in the three five-point bulk samples, 

respectively.

An assessment of within-site variability using the 

less than 63-μm samples was constrained by measured 

concentrations less than the XRF LOD. For cadmium, an 

assessment was not possible because the results for all fivepoint and 17-point samples were less than the XRF LOD. 

Likewise, for lead, an assessment was not possible using the 

original and sequential-replicate five-point samples because 

all results were less than the XRF LOD. For the comparison 

using the five- and 17-point samples, all results were less 

than the XRF LOD for two of the three sampling sites. For 

the remaining sampling site, the lead concentration for the 

17-point sample was 43 percent larger than the five-point 

sample. On average, zinc concentrations for the sequentialreplicate five-point samples were within ±57 percent of the 

concentrations in the original five-point samples. On average, 

zinc concentrations for the 17-point samples were within 

±10 percent of the concentrations in the five-point samples. 

For zinc, the average variability for the 17-point samples was 

computed using only two sampling sites because the zinc 

concentration was less than the XRF LOD for one of the fivepoint less than 63-μm samples.

Quality control for the XRF analysis of the Spring 

River flood-plain cores involved two parts. To determine 

the analytical variability of the XRF method, two or three 

intervals of each core typically were analyzed two or three 

times. The accuracy of the XRF method also was evaluated 

using standard reference samples and blank samples which 

were repeatedly analyzed before, during, and after the analysis 

of the cores.

Repeat analyses were completed for 75 core intervals. 

Analytical variability for each trace element only was 

computed using the core intervals for which all results were 

larger than the XRF LOD. For cadmium (50 core intervals 

used), XRF-measured concentrations were on average within 

±14 percent of the mean concentration for each core interval. 

XRF-measured concentrations of lead (33 core intervals used) 

were on average within ±15 percent of the mean concentration 

for each core interval. For zinc (51 core intervals used), XRFmeasured concentrations were on average within ±10 percent 

of the mean concentration for each core interval.

Results for the analysis of standard reference samples 

using XRF are provided in table 1–4 at the back of this report. 

A target goal for acceptable results of analysis of reference 

samples was within ±10 percent of the most probable 

value (MPV) for the constituent, except when constituent 

concentrations were near or less than method reporting limits. 

For the reference sample with a cadmium MPV of 500 mg/kg, 

cadmium concentrations were within ±10 percent of the MPV 

for 89 percent of the results (47 analyses). Only 1 of 42 results 

was within ±10 percent for the reference sample with a 

cadmium MPV of 28.2 mg/kg. Cadmium concentrations for 

the remaining 41 results averaged 50 percent larger than the 

MPV. For the reference sample with a cadmium MPV of 

1.12 mg/kg, analytical precision could not be determined for 

eight of nine results because the MPV was less than the XRF 

LOD (table 1–4).

The analytical precision of XRF for lead also was 

assessed using three standard reference samples. For the 

reference sample with a lead MPV of 2,700 mg/kg, lead 

concentrations were within ±10 percent of the MPV for 

95 percent of the results (43 analyses). Lead concentrations 

were within ±10 percent of the MPV for 87 percent of the 

results (47 analyses) for the reference sample with a lead MPV 

of 500 mg/kg. For the reference sample with a lead MPV of 

27 mg/kg, analytical precision could not be determined for five 

of nine results because the measured concentration was less 

than the XRF LOD. The remaining four results ranged from 

about 4 percent larger to about 33 percent less than the MPV 

(table 1–4).

The analytical precision of XRF for zinc was assessed 

using two standard reference samples. For the reference 

sample with a zinc MPV of 3,800 mg/kg, zinc concentrations 
Quality Control 13

Table 2. Cadmium, lead, and zinc concentrations for three surficial-soil samples collected from the Spring River flood plain and six 

surficial-soil samples collected from the tributary flood plains, Cherokee County, Kansas, and analyzed by x-ray fluorescence (XRF) and 

spectroscopic methods (SM).

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; LOD, limit of detection; --, not determined]

Sample 

identifier 

(figs. 2A–2U)

Concentrations in bulk sample

(mg/kg)

Concentrations in less than 63-micrometer fraction

(mg/kg)

XRF1 SM Difference

(percent) XRF1 SM Difference(percent)

Cadmium2

Spring River sampling sites

SRF-2 <LOD 0.8 -- <21.8 0.7 --

SRF-5 <LOD 0.3 -- <8.6 0.4 --

SRF-10 <12.0 5.7 -- <16.6 7.4 --

Tributary sampling sites

BC2-1 <12.8 0.5 -- <12.3 0.9 --

SB2-2 <13.1 24 -- <13.3 22 --

SnC2-1 <12.9 0.1 -- <11.8 0.2 --

StC1-2 48 80 67 28 78 179

TrC1-3 54 100 85 <9.4 93 --

WC2-1 <13.2 9.9 -- <13.0 8.9 --

Lead2

Spring River sampling sites

SRF-2 20 28 40 <25.6 25 --

SRF-5 14 30 114 <15.4 26 --

SRF-10 83 91 10 93 140 51

Tributary sampling sites

BC2-1 55 24 -56 24 36 50

SB2-2 598 670 12 651 740 14

SnC2-1 47 28 -40 12 35 192

StC1-2 4,897 5,600 14 3,284 6,100 86

TrC1-3 4,278 8,300 94 2,016 8,000 297

WC2-1 261 260 -0.4 174 280 61

Zinc2

Spring River sampling sites

SRF-2 91 110 21 50 110 120

SRF-5 46 60 30 43 67 56

SRF-10 704 940 34 732 1,200 64

Tributary sampling sites

BC2-1 133 170 28 127 250 97

SB2-2 3,149 3,400 8 2,940 3,500 19

SnC2-1 54 75 39 35 97 177

StC1-2 10,700 11,000 3 5,436 11,000 102

TrC1-3 15,300 26,000 70 6,896 26,000 277

WC2-1 1,511 1,700 13 1,290 1,600 24

1

The limit of detection (LOD) for XRF analyses varies depending on several factors. See footnote on table 1 for more information.

2

For samples SRF-2 (bulk sample only) and SRF-10 (bulk sample and <63-micrometer sample), the reported concentration estimated using XRF was computed as the average of three XRF analyses that were done for each sample. For all tributary samples, the reported concentration was the average of three XRF 

analyses that were done for each sample. 
14 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

were within ±10 percent of the MPV for 91 percent of the 

results (43 analyses). For the reference sample with a zinc 

MPV of 46 mg/kg, 33 percent of the results (9 analyses) were 

within ±10 percent of the MPV (table 1–4).

A total of 41 blank samples were analyzed before, during, 

and after the XRF analyses of the surficial-soil and core 

samples. Lead and zinc concentrations were less than the XRF 

LOD for all 41 samples. Cadmium concentrations were less 

than the XRF LOD for 38 of 41 samples.

The variability described in the preceding paragraphs 

likely was caused, in part, by the use of a handheld (as 

opposed to stationary) XRF instrument for the chemical 

analyses of the surficial-soil and core samples.

Samples Collected from the Tributary Flood 

Plains

Quality control for the XRF chemical analysis of the 

tributary flood-plain surficial-soil and core samples involved 

several parts. Each tributary surficial-soil and core sample 

was analyzed multiple times until three results were obtained 

that were within 10 percent of the mean concentration. To 

assess analytical variability of the XRF method, the first three 

results for each sample were used. Additional verification 

was provided by the analysis of split-replicate samples (six 

sampling sites) using spectroscopic methods. Within-site 

variability of the surficial soils was assessed using sequential 

five-point replicate samples (six sampling sites) and the 

17-point sampling technique (five sampling sites) to determine 

the representativeness of the five-point sampling technique. 

In the 17-point technique, the soil was sampled at the selected 

center location and at 100 and 50 percent of the site-specific 

sampling radius north, northeast, east, southeast, south, 

southwest, west, and northwest of the center. Finally, the 

accuracy of the XRF method was evaluated using standard 

reference samples and blank samples that were repeatedly 

analyzed before, during, and after the analysis of the surficialsoil and core samples.

The evaluation of XRF analytical variability for the 

surficial-soil samples was constrained by cadmium results 

that were less than the XRF LOD. Cadmium concentrations 

in the bulk surficial-soil samples were less than the XRF 

LOD for at least 2 of the 3 analyses for 53 of the 70 samples. 

For the remaining 17 samples, XRF-measured cadmium 

concentrations ranged from 0 to ±29 percent of the mean 

concentration for each sample with an average variability of 

±11 percent. Cadmium concentrations for the less than 63-μm 

samples were less than the XRF LOD for all three analyses 

for 66 of the 70 samples. For the remaining four samples, 

XRF-measured cadmium concentrations ranged from ±7 to 

±42 percent of the mean concentration. For lead, analytical 

variability for the bulk samples ranged from ±1 to ±12 percent 

with an average variability of ±4 percent (70 samples). 

Analytical variability for lead concentrations in the less than 

63-μm samples ranged from ±1 to ±33 percent with an average 

variability of ±8 percent (69 samples). For zinc, analytical 

variability for the bulk samples ranged from 0 to ±12 percent 

with an average variability of ±3 percent (70 samples). 

Analytical variability for zinc concentrations in the less than 

63-μm samples ranged from ±1 to ±25 percent with an average 

variability of ±3 percent (70 samples).

The evaluation of XRF analytical variability for the core 

samples also was constrained by cadmium results that were 

less than the XRF LOD. For cadmium, analytical variability 

ranged from 0 to ±28 percent from the mean concentration 

for each sample with an average variability of ±10 percent 

(21 samples). Analytical variability for lead ranged from 

±1 to ±42 percent with an average variability of ±9 percent 

(100 samples). For zinc, analytical variability ranged from 

0 to ±26 percent with an average variability of ±4 percent 

(104 samples).

A comparison of cadmium concentrations for the bulk 

and less than 63-μm surficial-soil samples determined by 

XRF and spectroscopic methods was constrained because 

most of the concentrations were less than the XRF LOD. For 

two bulk samples, cadmium concentrations determined by 

spectroscopic methods averaged 76 percent larger (table 2). 

Lead concentrations for the bulk samples determined by 

spectroscopic methods ranged from 56 percent smaller to 

94 percent larger. For the less than 63-μm samples, lead 

concentrations determined by spectroscopic methods ranged 

from 14 to 297 percent larger (table 2). Zinc concentrations 

for the bulk samples determined by spectroscopic methods 

ranged from 3 to 70 percent larger. For the less than 63-μm 

samples, zinc concentrations determined by spectroscopic 

methods ranged from 19 to 277 percent larger (table 2). 

Overall, including the results for both the Spring River and 

tributary flood plains, lead and zinc concentrations determined 

by spectroscopic methods typically were larger. A complete 

list of results for the six split-replicate samples analyzed by 

combustion and spectroscopic methods is provided in table 

1–5 at the back of this report.

Within-site variability was assessed to determine the 

representativeness of the five-point sampling technique. 

A sequential five-point replicate sample was collected 

immediately next to the original five-point sample at six 

sampling sites (BC2-2, CC1-3, SB2-1, TrC1-2, TkC1-3, and 

WC1-1). A 17-point sample was collected at five sampling 

sites (BC1-2, CC1-2, ShC2-1, SB2-3, and TrC3-1).

An assessment of within-site variability for cadmium 

using the five-point bulk samples was constrained because the 

cadmium concentrations for five of the six sequential-replicate 

sampling sites, and all five of the 17-point sampling sites, were 

less than the XRF LOD. For the single site with detectable 

cadmium concentrations, the sequential-replicate sample 

had a cadmium concentration that was 3 percent larger. On 

average, the lead and zinc concentrations in the six sequentialreplicate bulk samples were within ±8 and ±4 percent of the 

concentrations in the six original five-point bulk samples, 

respectively. On average, the lead and zinc concentrations 

for the five 17-point bulk samples were within ±11 and 
Sediment-Quality Guidelines 15

±14 percent of the concentrations in the five original five-point 

bulk samples, respectively.

An assessment of within-site variability using the less 

than 63-μm samples was not possible for cadmium because 

the cadmium concentrations for all original, sequentialreplicate, and 17-point samples were less than the XRF LOD. 

On average, lead and zinc concentrations in the six sequentialreplicate less than 63-μm samples were within ±10 and 

±15 percent of the concentrations in the six original less than 

63-μm samples, respectively. On average, the lead and zinc 

concentrations for the five 17-point less than 63-μm samples 

were within ±19 and ±13 percent of the concentrations in the 

five original less than 63-μm samples, respectively. For lead, 

the average variability for the 17-point samples was computed 

using only four sampling sites because the lead concentration 

was less than the XRF LOD for one of the original less than 

63-μm samples.

Results for the analysis of standard reference samples 

using XRF are provided in table 1–4 at the back of this 

report. A target goal for acceptable results of analysis of 

reference samples was within ±10 percent of the MPV for 

the constituent, except when constituent concentrations were 

near or less than method reporting limits. For the reference 

sample with a cadmium MPV of 500 mg/kg, cadmium 

concentrations were within ±10 percent of the MPV for 

92 percent of the results (36 analyses). Only 24 percent of the 

results (34 analyses) were within ±10 percent for the reference 

sample with a cadmium MPV of 28.2 mg/kg. For the reference 

sample with a cadmium MPV of 1.12 mg/kg, analytical 

precision could not be determined because the MPV was less 

than the XRF LOD (table 1–4).

The analytical precision of XRF for lead also was 

assessed using three standard reference samples. For the 

reference sample with a lead MPV of 2,700 mg/kg, lead 

concentrations were within ±10 percent of the MPV for 

100 percent of the results (36 analyses). Lead concentrations 

were within ±10 percent for 81 percent of the results 

(36 analyses) for the reference sample with a lead MPV of 

500 mg/kg. For the reference sample with a lead MPV of 

27 mg/kg, only 8 percent of the results (36 analyses) were 

within ±10 percent (table 1–4).

The analytical precision of XRF for zinc was assessed 

using two standard reference samples. For the reference 

sample with a zinc MPV of 3,800 mg/kg, zinc concentrations 

were within ±10 percent of the MPV for only 14 percent of the 

results (36 analyses); however, 100 percent of the results were 

within ±13 percent of the MPV. For the reference sample with 

a zinc MPV of 46 mg/kg, none of the results (36 analyses) 

were within ±10 percent. On average, the results were 

45 percent less than the MPV (table 1–4).

A total of 24 blank samples were analyzed before, during, 

and after the XRF analyses of the surficial-soil and core 

samples. Cadmium, lead, and zinc concentrations were less 

than the XRF LOD for all 24 samples.

Sediment-Quality Guidelines

The USEPA has adopted nonenforceable sedimentquality guidelines (SQGs) in the form of level-of-concern 

concentrations for several trace elements (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1997). These level-of-concern 

concentrations were derived from biological-effects 

correlations made on the basis of paired onsite and laboratory data to relate incidence of adverse biological effects in 

aquatic organisms to dry-weight sediment concentrations. 

Two such level-of-concern guidelines adopted by USEPA 

are referred to as the threshold-effects level (TEL) and 

the probable-effects level (PEL). The TEL is assumed to 

represent the concentration below which toxic aquatic 

biological effects rarely occur. In the range of concentrations 

between the TEL and PEL, toxic effects occasionally occur. 

Toxic effects usually or frequently occur at concentrations 

above the PEL.

USEPA cautions that the TEL and PEL guidelines are 

intended for use as screening tools for possible hazardous 

levels of chemicals and are not regulatory criteria. This 

cautionary statement is made because, although biologicaleffects correlation identifies level-of-concern concentrations 

associated with the likelihood of adverse organism response, 

the comparison may not demonstrate that a particular chemical 

is solely responsible. In fact, biological-effects correlations 

may not indicate direct cause-and-effect relations because 

sediment may contain a mixture of chemicals that contribute 

to the adverse effects to some degree. Thus, for any given 

site, these guidelines may be over- or underprotective 

(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1997).

MacDonald and others (2000) developed consensusbased SQGs for several trace elements that were computed as 

the geometric mean of several previously published SQGs. 

The consensus-based SQGs consist of a threshold-effect 

concentration (TEC) and a probable-effect concentration 

(PEC). The TEC represents the concentration below which 

adverse effects are not expected to occur, whereas the PEC 

represents the concentration above which adverse effects are 

expected to occur more often than not. An evaluation of the 

reliability of the SQGs indicated that most of the individual 

TECs and PECs provide an accurate basis for predicting the 

presence or absence of sediment toxicity (MacDonald and 

others, 2000).

A comparison of the two sets of trace-element SQGs 

indicated some differences (table 3). The largest difference 

was for the zinc PEL and PEC. In this case, the PEC 

(459 mg/kg) was about 69 percent larger than the PEL 

(271 mg/kg).

In 2009, TSMD-specific PECs for cadmium, lead and 

zinc were developed. The TSMD-specific PECs represent 

sediment concentrations predicted to reduce the survival of 

the amphipod Hyalella azteca (a species known to be sensitive 
16 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

to trace element contamination) by 10 percent relative to 

reference conditions in the TSMD (Ingersoll and others, 

2009). In this study, both the general PECs provided by 

MacDonald and others (2000) and the TSMD-specific PECs 

provided by Ingersoll and others (2009) were used to assess 

sediment quality. A comparison of the PECs is provided in 

table 3.

Background Information for Trace 

Elements

Trace elements are important determinants of sediment 

quality because of their potential toxicity to living organisms 

(Forstner and Wittman, 1981; Smol, 2002; Luoma and 

Rainbow, 2008). Trace elements may be defined as elements 

that typically are found in the environment in relatively 

low (less than 0.1 percent) concentrations (Pais and Jones, 

1997; Adriano, 2001). Using this definition, the majority of 

the elements analyzed in this study may be considered trace 

elements. Exceptions, which are some of the abundant rockforming elements, include aluminum and iron (Adriano, 

2001).

Trace elements in sediment and soil originate naturally 

from the rock within a basin. In addition to natural sources 

(for example, ore deposits), elevated concentrations of trace 

elements may be attributable to several human-related sources 

including fertilizers, liming materials, pesticides, irrigation 

water, animal and human wastes, coal-combustion residues, 

leaching from landfills, mining, metal-smelting industries, and 

automobile emissions (Forstner and Wittman, 1981; Davies, 

1983; Adriano, 2001; Luoma and Rainbow, 2008).

The health of living organisms is dependent on a 

sufficient intake of various trace elements. Many elements, 

such as cobalt, copper, iron, manganese, and zinc, are essential 

for plants, animals, and humans. Other elements, such as 

arsenic and chromium, are required by animals and humans 

but are not essential for plants. Nonessential elements for 

plants, animals, and humans include cadmium, mercury, 

and lead (Lide, 1993; Pais and Jones, 1997; Adriano, 2001; 

Marmiroli and Maestri, 2008).

Toxicity is a function of several factors including the type 

of organism, availability of a trace element in the environment, 

and its potential to bioaccumulate once in the food chain. 

The daily intake of trace elements by animals and humans 

may be classified as deficient, optimal, or toxic. Most, if not 

all, trace elements may be toxic in animals and humans if the 

concentrations are sufficiently large (Pais and Jones, 1997; 

Smol, 2002; Luoma and Rainbow, 2008). Information on the 

bioaccumulation index (Pais and Jones, 1997) for cadmium, 

lead, and zinc is provided in table 3. The bioaccumulation 

index indicates the relative potential of a trace element to 

bioaccumulate in organisms.

Flood-Plain Occurrence of MiningRelated Lead and Zinc

This section describes the occurrence of lead and zinc 

in surficial-soil samples and cores collected from the Spring 

River flood plain and tributary flood plains. Cadmium data 

(provided in tables 1–6 through 1–8 at the back of this report) 

are not discussed because the XRF results either were less than 

the XRF LOD or at relatively small concentrations that were of 

questionable accuracy. In the following sections, the mean lead 

and zinc concentrations determined by XRF were used for all 

samples that were analyzed three times (that is, selected Spring 

River flood-plain samples and all tributary flood-plain samples). 

If one or two of the three XRF results for a sample were less 

than the LOD, the final result was reported as less than the 

largest value that was measured. Sediment quality was assessed 

with reference to general and TSMD-specific PECs (table 3).

For perspective in the following sections, it is helpful 

to know the background concentrations of lead and zinc for 

the study area. Based on an analysis of streambed-sediment 

samples collected at sites minimally affected by historical 

lead and zinc mining within the Cherokee County superfund 

site, Pope (2005) estimated the background sediment 

concentrations of lead and zinc to be 20 and 100 mg/kg, 

respectively. Nationally, Horowitz and others (1991) estimated 

the background concentrations of lead and zinc in sediment to 

be 23 and 88 mg/kg, respectively.

Table 3. Sediment-quality guidelines (SQGs) and associated bioaccumulation index for cadmium, lead, and zinc.

[Values in milligrams per kilogram. Shading indicates guidelines to which sediment concentrations were compared in this report. USEPA, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency; TEL, threshold-effects level; PEL, probable-effects level; TEC, threshold-effect concentration; PEC, probable-effect concentration]

Trace element USEPA (1997)1 MacDonald and others (2000)1 Ingersoll and others (2009)2 Bio-accumulation 

index3 TEL PEL TEC PEC PEC

Cadmium 0.676 4.21 0.99 4.98 11.1 Moderate

Lead 30.2 112 35.8 128 150 Moderate

Zinc 124 271 121 459 2,083 High

1

General sediment-quality guidelines.

2

Sediment-quality guidelines specific to the Tri-State Mining District.

3

Bioaccumulation index information for trace elements from Pais and Jones (1997).
Flood-Plain Occurrence of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc 17

Spring River

Of the 30 surficial-soil sites sampled in the Spring River 

flood plain, lead concentrations larger than the PECs were 

only measured for two sites—SRF-15 and SRF-19. Site SRF15, located near the Turkey Creek confluence (fig. 3), had lead 

concentrations in the bulk and less than 63-μm samples of 310 

and 314 mg/kg, respectively (table 4). These concentrations 

were more than twice the general (128 mg/kg) and TSMDspecific (150 mg/kg) PECs. Site SRF-19, located near the 

Short Creek confluence (fig. 3), had lead concentrations in the 

bulk and less than 63-μm samples of 2,180 and 1,980 mg/kg, 

respectively (table 4). These concentrations were more than an 

order of magnitude larger than the general and TSMD-specific 

PECs.

Zinc concentrations in the bulk and less than 63-μm 

samples exceeded the general PEC (459 mg/kg) for four 

sites—SRF-10 (located downstream from the Turkey 

Creek confluence), SRF-15, SRF-19, and SRF-27 (located 

downstream from Empire Lake) (fig. 4, table 4). Zinc 

concentrations in the bulk and less than 63-μm samples 

approached the TSMD-specific PEC (2,083 mg/kg) for site 

SRF-15 and were more than twice the TSMD-specific PEC for 

site SRF-19 (table 4).

Contamination at depth was infrequent in the Spring 

River flood plain. Of the 34 cores collected along six transects (fig. 2A), lead concentrations larger than the general and 

TSMD-specific PECs were only measured in 5 (15 percent) of 

the cores (T1-2, T2-1, T4-2, T4-3, and T6-1). Zinc concentrations larger than the general PEC were only measured in 10 

(29 percent) of the cores (T1-2, T2-1, T2-2, T4-1, T4-2, T4-3, 

T5-2, T5-3, T5-4, and T6-1). Zinc concentrations larger than 

the TSMD-specific PEC were only measured in three (9 percent) of the cores (T1-2, T2-1, and T6-1). With two exceptions, the contamination typically was confined to the upper 

2 ft of the core and frequently was confined to the upper 6 in. 

One exception was core T2-1, located near the Center Creek 

confluence (figs. 1, 2A), in which zinc concentrations larger 

than the general PEC were measured to a depth of about 7 ft. 

In the upper 1.2 ft of this core, zinc concentrations were about 

two to six times larger than the TSMD-specific PEC. The other 

exception was core T6-1, located downstream from the Willow 

Creek and Spring Branch confluences (figs. 1, 2A), in which 

lead and zinc concentrations larger than the general or TSMDspecific PECs, or both, were measured to respective depths of 

2.8 and 3.5 ft. The complete list of XRF results for all 34 cores 

is provided in table 1–7 at the back of this report.

Brush Creek

The Brush Creek basin does not include any lead- and 

zinc-mined areas (fig. 1). Surficial-soil and core samples 

collected at six sites (two transects, figs. 2A–2C) in the Brush 

Creek flood plain had lead and zinc concentrations (bulk and 

less than 63 μm) that were substantially less than the general 

PECs (figs. 3 and 4, table 5).

Cow Creek

The Cow Creek basin includes at least two lead- and 

zinc-mined areas (fig. 1). Surficial-soil and core samples 

collected from transect CC1 (three sites, figs. 2A and 2D), 

located along the main stem of Cow Creek, had lead and zinc 

concentrations (bulk and less than 63 μm) that were substantially less than the general PECs (figs. 3 and 4, table 6). 

Surficial-soil and core samples collected from transect CC2 

(two sites, figs. 2A and 2E), located along an unnamed tributary downstream from a mined area, had lead concentrations 

(bulk and less than 63 μm) that were less than the general 

PEC. However, zinc concentrations (bulk and less than 63 

μm) in the surficial-soil samples collected from both sites 

along transect CC2 were greater than the general PEC. At site 

CC2-1, zinc concentrations for the bulk samples at the 6- and 

12-in. depths were greater than the TSMD-specific PEC (figs. 

3 and 4, table 6).

Shawnee Creek

The Shawnee Creek basin includes a few lead- and zincmined areas that primarily are located in the upland between 

Shawnee Creek and the Spring River (fig. 1). Surficial-soil 

and core samples collected at five sites (two transects, figs. 

2A, 2F, and 2G) in the Shawnee Creek flood plain had lead 

and zinc concentrations (bulk and less than 63 μm) that 

were substantially less than the general PECs (figs. 3 and 4, 

table 7).

Shoal Creek

Multiple lead- and zinc-mined areas are located 

throughout the Shoal Creek basin (fig. 1). At downstream 

transect ShC1 (figs. 2A and 2H), surficial-soil concentrations 

greater than the general PECs were measured at one of three 

sites for lead (site ShC1-1, bulk sample only) and at two of 

three sites for zinc (sites ShC1-1 and ShC1-3, bulk samples for 

both sites and less than 63-μm sample for one site) (figs. 3 and 

4, table 8). The lead concentration also exceeded the TSMDspecific PEC. At the 6- and 12-in. depths, lead concentrations 

(bulk samples) were less than the general PEC at all three 

sites. Zinc concentrations (bulk samples) were greater than 

the general PEC at the 6- and 12-in. depths at the site located 

nearest the channel (site ShC1-1) (table 8).

At upstream transect ShC2 (figs. 2A and 2I), surficialsoil concentrations greater than the general PECs were typical 

for lead (three of four sites, bulk samples for all three sites 

and less than 63-μm sample for one site) and zinc (all four 

sites, bulk samples for all four sites and less than 63-μm 
18 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Empire 

Lake

Baxter

Springs

Galena

Treece

94°50' 45' 94°40'

37°15'

10'

05'

37°00’

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1987, 1:100,000

Universal Transverse Mercator projection

Zone 15

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American

 Datum of 1983 (NAD 83)

Boundary of 

Cherokee County 

superfund site

EXPLANATION

SRF-33

Lead and zinc mined areas 

Approximate flood-plain extent

U.S. Geological Survey surficial-soil sampling 

site in the Spring River flood plain and site 

identifier

U.S. Geological Survey surficial-soil sampling 

and coring transect in tributary flood plain and 

transect identifier. Number of slices in the 

circle indicates how many sites are on the 

transect. See figures 2B–2U

Lead concentration, in milligrams per kilogram

Short Creek

Spring River

Shoal Creek

Spring River

Tar Creek

Spring River

SB1

Willow Creek

TrC1

Brush Creek

Turkey

Creek

Center

Creek

0 1 2 3 4 MILES

0 2 3 4 1 KILOMETERS

Shawnee

Creek Lead and zinc mined areas from Brichta, 1960

Approximate flood-plain extent from Federal

Emergency Management Agency (2008)

Co w Creek

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!( !(

!( !( !(

!(

!( !(

!(

!(

!( !( !( !(

!( !( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

Kansas

Missouri

Oklahoma

Map area

SRF-1

SRF-3

SRF-2

SRF-4

SRF-19

SRF-17

SRF-18

SRF-11

SRF-16

SRF-13

SRF-9

SRF-7

SRF-14

SRF-6

SRF-15

SRF-10

SRF-5

SRF-20 SRF-23

SRF-22

SRF-26

SRF-25

SRF-29

SRF-21

SRF-33

SRF-32

SRF-31

SRF-28

SRF-27

SRF-24

CC2

StC2 StC1

TkC1

SnC1

ShC2

SnC2

SB2

WC1

CC1

ShC1 WC2

TrC2

TrC3

WC3

BC2

TrC1

BC1

SB1

! Less than 128 128–150 Greater than 150 ! !

SB3

Figure 3. Lead concentrations in surficial-soil samples collected from the Spring River flood plain and tributary flood 

plains, Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2011.
Flood-Plain Occurrence of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc 19

Table 4. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil samples 

collected from the Spring River flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, November 2009.

[Shading indicates concentration greater than the general probable-effect concentration listed in table 3. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; μm, 

micrometer; C, cropland; G, grassland]

Surficial-soil 

sampling site 

identifier 

(fig. 2A)

Land

use1

Percentage of silt 

and clay in bulk 

sample

Lead concentration,

mg/kg

Zinc concentration,

mg/kg

Bulk sample2 <63-μm fraction3 Bulk sample2 <63-μm fraction3

SRF-1 C 70.9 24 <14.0 56 46

SRF-2 C 94.4 20 <25.6 91 50

SRF-3 C 91.0 <19 <9.4 78 <13.2

SRF-4 C 90.2 16 <17.2 53 <37

SRF-5 C 87.2 14 <15.4 46 43

SRF-6 G 91.9 31 28 108 134

SRF-7 G 67.6 21 <17.5 186 152

SRF-9 C 82.9 29 <16.3 75 25

SRF-10 G 49.9 83 93 704 732

SRF-11 C 79.4 17 <16.7 38 38

SRF-13 C 83.9 30 <17.6 102 68

SRF-14 C 83.2 19 <17.1 60 50

SRF-15 G 93.3 310 314 2,010 2,060

SRF-16 C 83.3 43 <18.1 151 112

SRF-17 C 81.7 21 <18.0 55 46

SRF-18 C 70.3 18 <15.6 40 40

SRF-19 G 89.9 2,180 1,980 4,850 4,170

SRF-20 G 79.7 28 <17.1 58 30

SRF-21 G 77.9 17 <20.3 32 73

SRF-22 G 65.5 32 23 96 117

SRF-23 C 63.8 17 <16.0 22 <23.4

SRF-24 G 78.1 26 27 150 185

SRF-25 G 73.7 20 <15.2 39 <18.5

SRF-26 G 61.6 35 <11.1 96 <28

SRF-27 G 85.6 69 62 761 684

SRF-28 C 85.6 26 34 88 150

SRF-29 C 96.5 47 28 200 212

SRF-31 G 87.3 19 <17.1 81 91

SRF-32 C 96.6 20 <17.2 60 55

SRF-33 G 87.3 13 <19.1 73 58

1

Land use on the date the surficial-soil sample was collected. Sampling dates are provided in table 1–1 at the back of this report.

2

For samples SRF-1, SRF-3, SRF-4, SRF-10, SRF-15, and SRF-19, the reported concentration estimated using x-ray fluorescence (XRF) was computed as the 

average of three XRF analyses that were done for each bulk sample.

3

For samples SRF-3, SRF-4, SRF-10, SRF-15, SRF-16, SRF-17, SRF-18, SRF-19, SRF-24, and SRF-26, the reported concentration estimated using XRF was 

computed as the average of three XRF analyses that were done for each less than 63-micrometer sample.
20 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Figure 4. Zinc concentrations in surficial-soil samples collected from the Spring River flood plain and tributary flood 

plains, Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2011.

Empire 

Lake

Baxter

Springs

Galena

Treece

94°50' 45' 94°40'

37°15'

10'

05'

37°00’

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1987, 1:100,000

Universal Transverse Mercator projection

Zone 15

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American

 Datum of 1983 (NAD 83)

Boundary of 

Cherokee County 

superfund site

EXPLANATION

SRF-33

Lead and zinc mined areas 

Approximate flood-plain extent

U.S. Geological Survey surficial-soil sampling 

site in the Spring River flood plain and site 

identifier

U.S. Geological Survey surficial-soil sampling 

and coring transect in tributary flood plain and 

transect identifier. Number of slices in the 

circle indicates how many sites are on the 

transect. See figures 2B–2U

Zinc concentration, in milligrams per kilogram

Lead and zinc mined areas from Brichta, 1960

Approximate flood-plain extent from Federal

Emergency Management Agency (2008)

Short Creek

Spring River

Shoal Creek

Spring River

Tar Creek

Spring River

SB1

Willow Creek

TrC1

Brush Creek

Turkey

Creek

Center

Creek

0 1 2 3 4 MILES

0 2 3 4 1 KILOMETERS

Shawnee

Creek

! Less than 459 459–2,083 Greater than 2,083 ! !

Co w Creek

!( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

! !(

! ! !

!(

!( !

!

!(

! ! ! !

!( !( !(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

!(

SRF-1

SRF-3

SRF-2

SRF-4

SRF-19

SRF-17

SRF-18

SRF-11

SRF-16

SRF-13

SRF-9

SRF-7

SRF-14

SRF-6

SRF-15

SRF-10

SRF-5

SRF-20 SRF-23

SRF-22

SRF-26

SRF-25

SRF-29

SRF-21

SRF-33

SRF-32

SRF-31

SRF-28

SRF-27

SRF-24

CC2

StC2

StC1

TkC1

SnC1

ShC2

SnC2

SB1

WC1

CC1

ShC1 WC2

SB3

TrC2

TrC3

WC3

BC2

TrC1

BC1

SB2

Kansas

Missouri

Oklahoma

Map area
Flood-Plain Occurrence of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc 21

samples for three sites) (figs. 3 and 4, table 8). Lead and 

zinc concentrations (bulk samples) greater than the general 

PECs were measured at the 6- and 12-in. depths at the site 

located nearest the channel (site ShC2-1). At the 6-in. depth 

for that site, the zinc concentration also exceeded the TSMDspecific PEC. For all samples collected along transect ShC2 

with lead concentrations greater than the general PEC, the 

lead concentrations also exceeded the TSMD-specific PEC 

(table 8). 

Short Creek

Short Creek drains an area that was extensively mined for 

lead and zinc (fig. 1). The landscape in the vicinity of Galena 

was so disturbed by mining activity that it came to be known 

as “Hell’s Half Acre” (Brosius and Sawin, 2001). All surficialsoil and core samples (bulk and less than 63 μm) collected 

at five sites (two transects, figs. 2A, 2J, and 2K) in the Short 

Creek flood plain had lead and zinc concentrations that were 

substantially greater than both the general and TSMD-specific 

PECs (figs. 3 and 4, table 9). Mining-related contamination 

was most pronounced at the sampling sites located along 

downstream transect StC1 (figs. 2A and 2J). At these sites, 

lead and zinc concentrations ranged up to more than 30 and 

6 times greater than the TSMD-specific PECs, respectively 

(table 9). 

Spring Branch

An extensive lead- and zinc-mined area is located in the 

upstream part of the Spring Branch basin (fig. 1). Lead and 

zinc concentrations in the surficial-soil samples (bulk and less 

than 63 μm) collected at seven sites (three transects, figs. 2A, 

2L, 2M, and 2N) typically were greater than both the general 

and TSMD-specific PECs (figs. 3 and 4, table 10). At depths 

ranging from 4 to 12 in., lead concentrations (bulk samples) 

Table 5. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core 

samples collected from the Brush Creek flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, April and May 2011.

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; μm, micrometer; --, not available]

Surficial-soil 

sampling and coring 

site identifier 

(figs. 2A–2C)

Percentage of 

silt and clay 

in bulk sample

Sample depth,

inches

Lead concentration,

mg/kg

Zinc concentration,

mg/kg

Bulk sample <63-μm fraction Bulk sample <63-μm fraction

Transect BC1 (downstream)

BC1-1 47.6 0 41 27 68 90

-- 6 13 -- 103 --

-- 12 16 -- 101 --

BC1-2 62.5 0 50 17 90 80

-- 6 24 -- 121 --

-- 12 26 -- 148 --

BC1-3 80.8 0 64 32 146 177

-- 6 22 -- 95 --

-- 12 21 -- 51 --

BC1-4 87.6 0 62 22 203 125

-- 6 21 -- 144 --

-- 12 19 -- 77 --

Transect BC2 (upstream)

BC2-1 79.6 0 55 24 133 127

-- 6 24 -- 104 --

-- 12 10 -- 63 --

BC2-2 81.3 0 66 16 200 116

-- 6 31 -- 177 --

-- 12 20 -- 50 --
22 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

typically exceeded the general PEC and frequently exceeded 

the TSMD-specific PEC. Zinc concentrations (bulk samples) 

at depths ranging from 4 to 12 in. typically exceeded the 

general PEC and occasionally exceeded the TSMD-specific 

PEC (table 10).

Tar Creek

Within Cherokee County, most of the downstream half 

of the Tar Creek basin was extensively mined for lead and 

zinc (fig. 1). Transects TrC1 and TrC2 were located within 

the extensively mined area whereas transect TrC3 was 

located upstream from the extensively mined area (fig. 2A). 

All surficial-soil and core samples collected along transects 

TrC1 and TrC2 (eight sites, figs. 2O and 2P) had lead and 

zinc concentrations (bulk and less than 63 μm) that were 

much larger than both the general and TSMD-specific PECs. 

For lead, concentrations ranged from about 2 to more than 

50 times greater than the TSMD-specific PEC. For zinc, 

concentrations ranged from 1.3 to 45 times greater than the 

TSMD-specific PEC (figs. 3 and 4, table 11). All surficial-soil 

and core samples collected along transect TrC3 (four sites, 

fig. 2Q) had lead and zinc concentrations (bulk and less than 

63 μm) that were substantially less than the general PECs 

(figs. 3 and 4, table 11). 

Turkey Creek

The Turkey Creek basin includes numerous lead- and 

zinc-mined areas (fig. 1). All surficial-soil samples collected 

along transect TkC1 (three sites, figs. 2A and 2R) had lead 

and zinc concentrations (bulk and less than 63 μm) that were 

larger than both the general and TSMD-specific PECs (figs. 3 

and 4, table 12). At the 6- and 12-in. depth, lead and zinc 

concentrations (bulk samples) at sites TkC1-1 and TkC1-2 

(located north of Turkey Creek, fig. 2R) were much greater 

than the general and TSMD-specific PECs. However, at site 

TkC1-3 (located south of Turkey Creek, fig. 2R), only the zinc 

Table 6. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core 

samples collected from the Cow Creek flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, March 2011.

[Shading indicates concentration greater than the general probable-effect concentration listed in table 3. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; μm, 

micrometer; --, not available]

Surficial-soil 

sampling and coring 

site identifier 

(figs. 2A, 2D, and 2E)

Percentage of 

silt and clay in 

bulk sample

Sample depth,

inches

Lead concentration,

mg/kg

Zinc concentration,

mg/kg

Bulk sample <63-μm fraction Bulk sample <63-μm fraction

Transect CC1 (downstream)

CC1-1 90.1 0 59 20 178 121

-- 4 26 -- 203 --

-- 10 18 -- 178 --

CC1-2 81.4 0 63 <9.4 165 76

-- 6 18 -- 151 --

-- 12 19 -- 130 --

CC1-3 77.6 0 55 14 158 83

-- 6 16 -- 148 --

-- 12 22 -- 127 --

Transect CC2 (upstream)

CC2-11 94.9 0 96 40 1,353 1,050

-- 6 51 -- 2,208 --

-- 12 40 -- 9,042 --

CC2-21 91.7 0 89 48 1,477 1,145

-- 6 <8.0 -- 114 --

-- 12 10 -- 388 --

1

Sampling site located along an unnamed tributary of Cow Creek. The tributary basin includes a historical lead- and zinc-mined area (fig. 1).
Variability of Lead and Zinc Concentrations in Relation to Mining Activity and Other Factors 23

concentration (bulk sample) at the 6-in. depth was greater than 

the general PEC (table 12).

Willow Creek

Lead- and zinc-mined areas are located in the 

downstream half of the Willow Creek basin (fig. 1). Transects 

WC1 and WC2 were located downstream from mined areas, 

whereas transect WC3 was located upstream from the mined 

areas (fig. 2A). Surficial-soil and core samples collected along 

transects WC1 and WC2 (seven sites, figs. 2A, 2S, and 2T) had 

lead concentrations (bulk and less than 63 μm) that typically 

were greater than both the general and TSMD-specific PECs. 

Zinc concentrations for these samples typically were greater 

than the general PEC but less than the TSMD-specific PEC. 

All surficial-soil and core samples collected along transect 

WC3 (two sites, fig. 2U) had lead and zinc concentrations 

(bulk and less than 63 μm) that were substantially less than the 

general PECs (figs. 3 and 4, table 13).

Variability of Lead and Zinc 

Concentrations in Relation to Mining 

Activity and Other Factors

In this section, the variability of lead and zinc 

concentrations in the Spring River flood plain and tributary 

flood plains was interpreted in relation to historical mining 

activity and other factors. Topics addressed include source 

effects, downstream effects, distance-from-channel effects, 

and particle-size effects.

Source Effects

Sources of sediment to the segment of the Spring River 

flood plain located within the Cherokee County superfund site 

include tributaries and the upstream Spring River. Lead and 

zinc concentrations in surficial-soil samples collected from the 

Spring River flood plain typically were less than the general 

Table 7. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core 

samples collected from the Shawnee Creek flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, March 2011.

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; μm, micrometer; --, not available]

Surficial-soil 

sampling and coring 

site identifier 

(figs. 2A, 2F, and 2G)

Percentage of 

silt and clay in 

bulk sample

Sample depth,

inches

Lead concentration,

mg/kg

Zinc concentration,

mg/kg

Bulk sample <63-μm fraction Bulk sample <63-μm fraction

Transect SnC1 (downstream)

SnC1-1 81.3 0 58 13 51 44

-- 6 20 -- 45 --

-- 12 12 -- 24 --

SnC1-2 68.2 0 56 31 99 80

-- 6 19 -- 37 --

-- 12 12 -- <14.7 --

SnC1-3 89.2 0 64 35 165 129

-- 6 41 -- 99 --

-- 12 <9.2 -- 22 --

Transect SnC2 (upstream)

SnC2-1 95.6 0 47 12 54 35

-- 6 <9.6 -- 31 --

-- 12 <9.2 -- <13.7 --

SnC2-2 90.5 0 46 18 58 49

-- 6 12 -- 44 --

-- 12 <9.6 -- 20 --
24 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

PECs even though several tributaries (flood-plain soils and 

streambed sediment) were substantially contaminated with 

lead and zinc concentrations that frequently or typically 

exceeded the general PECs and often exceeded the TSMDspecific PECs (tables 4, 8–13; Pope, 2005). Several possible 

explanations, singly or in combination, may account for this 

condition. First, mining-contaminated sediment delivered 

by tributary inflows during periods of low to moderate 

Spring River flow may remain largely confined to the Spring 

River channel. Second, mining-contaminated sediment 

delivered by tributary inflows may be diluted when mixed 

with relatively uncontaminated sediment delivered by 

the upstream Spring River. Third, mining-contaminated 

sediment delivered by tributary inflows may be immediately 

transported downstream or, if deposited on the Spring 

River flood plain, it may subsequently be remobilized and 

transported downstream.

A fourth possibility is that lead and zinc concentrations 

in Spring River flood-plain surficial-soil samples collected 

from cropland were diluted by plowing (that is, by mixing 

the contaminated surficial deposits with underlying “clean” 

soil). Within the Spring River flood plain, 16 sampling sites 

were located in cropland and 14 sampling sites were located in 

grassland (table 4). Lead concentrations in the bulk surficialsoil samples collected from cropland ranged from 14 to 

47 mg/kg with a median of 20 mg/kg. In comparison, lead 

concentrations in the bulk samples collected from grassland 

ranged from 13 to 2,180 mg/kg with a median of 30 mg/kg 

(table 4, fig. 3). Zinc concentrations in the bulk samples 

collected from cropland ranged from 22 to 200 mg/kg with 

Table 8. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core 

samples collected from the Shoal Creek flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, May 2011.

[Shading indicates concentration greater than the general probable-effect concentration listed in table 3. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; μm, 

micrometer; --, not available]

Surficial-soil 

sampling and coring 

site identifier

(figs. 2A, 2H, and 2I)

Percentage of silt 

and clay in bulk

sample

Sample

depth,

inches

Lead concentration,

mg/kg

Zinc concentration, 

mg/kg

Bulk sample <63-μm fraction Bulk sample <63-μm fraction

Transect ShC1 (downstream)

ShC1-1 94.3 0 177 104 1,269 857

-- 6 99 -- 669 --

-- 12 73 -- 530 --

ShC1-2 94.4 0 87 30 456 253

-- 6 35 -- 263 --

-- 12 31 -- 251 --

ShC1-3 95.3 0 106 41 521 219

-- 6 44 -- 354 --

-- 12 33 -- 301 --

Transect ShC2 (upstream)

ShC2-1 88.6 0 281 162 2,007 1,255

-- 6 283 -- 2,551 --

-- 12 231 -- 1,857 --

ShC2-2 84.2 0 177 67 1,135 508

-- 5 23 -- 339 --

ShC2-3 91.4 0 167 99 1,133 722

-- 6 30 -- 405 --

-- 12 28 -- 375 --

ShC2-4 86.5 0 92 40 519 293
Variability of Lead and Zinc Concentrations in Relation to Mining Activity and Other Factors 25

a median of 60 mg/kg. In comparison, zinc concentrations 

in the bulk samples collected from grassland ranged from 32 

to 4,850 mg/kg with a median of 102 mg/kg (table 4, fig. 4). 

These results substantiate the possibility of a cropland-related 

dilution effect associated with plowing. Such an effect will 

only be appreciable if the total thickness of contaminated 

sediment deposited is substantially less than the total depth of 

the plow layer.

Lead and zinc contamination in the tributary flood plains 

was related to the availability of sources; that is, the amount 

of historical lead and zinc mining activity in the basins. 

Typically, the tributary flood-plain surficial-soil sampling 

sites were located in woodland or grassland (table 1–1). 

Tributaries with little or no historical mining activity in their 

basins were Brush, Cow, and Shawnee Creeks (fig. 1). With 

one exception, lead and zinc concentrations in the surficial 

soils and subsurface (that is, 6- and 12-in. depths) of these 

tributary flood plains were substantially less than the general 

PECs (tables 3, 5, 6, and 7). The exception was transect CC2, 

which was located along an unnamed tributary of Cow Creek 

and immediately downstream from a historically mined area 

(figs. 2A and 2E). Along this transect, zinc concentrations 

greater than the general PEC were measured for the surficial 

soil at both sampling sites. At site CC2-1, zinc concentrations 

at depth exceeded the TSMD-specific PEC (table 6). In an 

assessment of streambed sediment contamination within the 

Cherokee County superfund site, Pope (2005) measured lead 

and zinc concentrations (in the less than 63-μm fraction) for 

Brush, Cow, and Shawnee Creeks that typically were less than 

the general PECs.

The remaining six tributaries—Shoal Creek, Short 

Creek, Spring Branch, Tar Creek, Turkey Creek, and Willow 

Creek—have substantial historically mined areas in their 

basins (fig. 1). All six tributary flood plains had lead and 

zinc concentrations that frequently or typically exceeded the 

general PECs (tables 3, 8–13). Likewise, lead concentrations 

frequently or typically exceeded the TSMD-specific PEC. 

With the exception of Shoal and Willow Creeks, zinc 

concentrations typically exceeded the TSMD-specific PEC 

(tables 8–13). Similar results were reported for streambedsediment concentrations (less than 63-μm fraction) in the six 

tributaries (Pope, 2005).

Along Tar and Willow Creeks, the longitudinal change 

in flood-plain contamination, in relation to the location of 

historically mined areas, was pronounced. For both basins, 

lead and zinc concentrations in samples collected along the 

transect located upstream from the historically mined areas 

(that is, transects TrC3 and WC3; fig. 2A) were substantially 

less than the general PECs. Conversely, lead and zinc 

concentrations in samples collected along the transects located 

Table 9. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core 

samples collected from the Short Creek flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, March and April 2011.

[Shading indicates concentration greater than the general probable-effect concentration listed in table 3. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; μm, 

micrometer; --, not available]

Surficial-soil 

sampling and coring 

site identifier

(figs. 2A, 2J, and 2K)

Percentage of silt 

and clay in bulk

sample

Sample

depth,

inches

Lead concentration,

mg/kg

Zinc concentration, 

mg/kg

Bulk sample <63-μm fraction Bulk sample <63-μm fraction

Transect StC1 (downstream)

StC1-1 81.1 0 4,677 3,020 10,400 5,579

-- 6 2,303 -- 12,800 --

-- 12 3,456 -- 3,503 --

StC1-2 80.1 0 4,897 3,284 10,700 5,436

-- 6 1,759 -- 8,077 --

-- 9 1,332 -- 8,671 --

-- 12 253 -- 3,516 --

StC1-3 83.4 0 3,711 2,586 12,700 8,212

-- 6 4,986 -- 12,700 --

Transect StC2 (upstream)

StC2-1 74.2 0 300 650 5,341 4,028

-- 6 256 -- 4,935 --

StC2-2 78.9 0 439 284 5,697 4,597
26 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

within or downstream from the historically mined areas (that 

is, transects TrC1, TrC2, WC1, and WC2; fig. 2A) typically 

exceeded the general PECs (tables 11 and 13). Contamination 

was most pronounced (of all the sites sampled for this study) 

for the two downstream transects on the Tar Creek flood plain, 

with lead and zinc concentrations that frequently far exceeded 

the TSMD-specific PECs (table 11). A similar longitudinal 

pattern in streambed-sediment contamination (less than 63-μm 

fraction) for these two streams was reported by Pope (2005).

Downstream Effects

Once introduced into the fluvial system, miningcontaminated sediment is affected by several processes 

including temporary deposition, long-term storage, 

remobilization, transport, hydraulic sorting, dilution by mixing 

with relatively uncontaminated sediment, chemical sorption 

and desorption, and biological uptake (Lewin and Macklin, 

1987; Macklin, 1996; Miller, 1997; Luoma and Rainbow, 

2008). Because mining-related trace elements are mostly 

(often more than 90 percent) transported in the particulate 

phase, fluvial geomorphic processes are important, if not 

dominant, in the redistribution of mining-contaminated 

sediment in the environment (Horowitz, 1991; Miller, 1997). 

With distance downstream from the source area, sediment 

concentrations of mining-related trace elements typically will 

decrease unless additional downstream sources contribute 

contaminated sediment (Axtmann and Luoma, 1991; Macklin, 

1996; Luoma and Rainbow, 2008).

Within the Cherokee County superfund site, the Spring 

River receives inflows from several tributaries that drain 

mining-affected areas (fig. 1). Along its 22-mi length within 

the superfund site, Pope (2005) determined that lead and 

zinc concentrations in the bed sediment of the Spring River 

increased about 7 and 17 times, respectively. Surficial-soil 

concentrations of lead and zinc in the Spring River flood plain 

Table 10. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core 

samples collected from the Spring Branch flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, March 2011.

[Shading indicates concentration greater than the general probable-effect concentration listed in table 3. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; μm, 

micrometer; --, not available]

Surficial-soil 

sampling and coring 

site identifier

(figs. 2A and 2L–2N)

Percentage of silt 

and clay in bulk

sample

Sample

depth,

inches

Lead concentration,

mg/kg

Zinc concentration, 

mg/kg

Bulk sample <63-μm fraction Bulk sample <63-μm fraction

Transect SB1 (downstream)

SB1-1 73.7 0 510 350 5,702 3,205

-- 4 497 -- 5,708 --

-- 10 834 -- 792 --

SB1-2 66.7 0 434 387 5,285 4,615

Transect SB2

SB2-1 62.5 0 697 654 3,515 2,546

-- 4 928 -- 2,699 --

-- 10 917 -- 2,293 --

SB2-2 73.4 0 598 651 3,149 2,940

-- 6 148 -- 697 --

-- 12 95 -- 519 --

SB2-3 71.3 0 233 182 973 781

Transect SB3 (upstream)

SB3-1 61.7 0 702 987 2,303 4,068

-- 6 469 -- 171 --

-- 10 84 -- 147 --

SB3-2 41.8 0 487 104 4,361 1,165
Variability of Lead and Zinc Concentrations in Relation to Mining Activity and Other Factors 27

Table 11. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core 

samples collected from the Tar Creek flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, March and April 2011.

[Shading indicates concentration greater than the general probable-effect concentration listed in table 3. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; μm, 

micrometer; --, not available]

Surficial-soil 

sampling and coring 

site identifier

(figs. 2A and 2O–2Q)

Percentage of silt 

and clay in bulk

sample

Sample

depth,

inches

Lead concentration,

mg/kg

Zinc concentration, 

mg/kg

Bulk sample <63-μm fraction Bulk sample <63-μm fraction

Transect TrC1 (downstream)

TrC1-1 89.7 0 3,076 2,238 18,800 20,300

-- 6 4,774 -- 35,300 --

-- 12 5,450 -- 24,100 --

TrC1-2 91.7 0 5,363 4,050 25,500 23,100

-- 6 4,708 -- 20,000 --

-- 12 5,737 -- 24,000 --

TrC1-3 46.9 0 4,278 2,016 15,300 6,896

-- 6 3,773 -- 14,900 --

-- 12 4,515 -- 19,000 --

TrC1-4 59.8 0 5,069 7,837 14,700 22,000

-- 6 5,344 -- 14,900 --

-- 12 2,324 -- 4,937 --

Transect TrC2

TrC2-1 93.1 0 524 313 3,594 2,720

-- 4 486 -- 3,173 --

-- 10 496 -- 4,071 --

TrC2-2 90.7 0 591 296 4,331 2,869

-- 4 626 -- 3,522 --

-- 10 606 -- 2,939 --

TrC2-3 90.2 0 466 337 4,069 3,086

-- 4 425 -- 3,738 --

-- 10 3,544 -- 51,300 --

TrC2-4 84.4 0 513 409 4,895 3,737

-- 4 519 -- 3,768 --

-- 10 2,494 -- 94,200 --

Transect TrC3 (upstream)

TrC3-1 94.5 0 62 30 290 201

-- 6 53 -- 290 --

-- 12 49 -- 242 --
28 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 11. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core 

samples collected from the Tar Creek flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, March and April 2011.—Continued

[Shading indicates concentration greater than the general probable-effect concentration listed in table 3. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; μm, 

micrometer; --, not available]

Surficial-soil Lead concentration, Zinc concentration, Percentage of silt Sample sampling and coring mg/kg mg/kg and clay in bulk depth, site identifier sample inches Bulk sample <63-μm fraction Bulk sample <63-μm fraction (figs. 2A and 2O–2Q)

Transect TrC3 (upstream)—Continued

TrC3-2 95.9 0 76 44 313 223

-- 6 53 -- 245 --

-- 12 30 -- 197 --

TrC3-3 94.6 0 79 46 336 234

-- 6 53 -- 212 --

-- 12 39 -- 176 --

TrC3-4 89.4 0 90 58 348 276

-- 6 55 -- 220 --

-- 12 13 -- 83 --

Table 12. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core 

samples collected from the Turkey Creek flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, March 2011.

[Shading indicates concentration greater than the general probable-effect concentration listed in table 3. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; μm, 

micrometer; --, not available]

Surficial-soil 

sampling and coring 

site identifier 

(figs. 2A and 2R)

Percentage of silt 

and clay in bulk

sample

Sample 

depth, 

inches

Lead concentration, 

mg/kg

Zinc concentration, 

mg/kg

Bulk sample <63-μm fraction Bulk sample <63-μm fraction

Transect TkC1

TkC1-1 94.8 0 823 785 5,110 4,899

-- 6 923 -- 6,722 --

-- 12 1,610 -- 10,100 --

TkC1-2 77.3 0 825 677 5,458 4,165

-- 6 677 -- 4,289 --

-- 12 1,216 -- 8,826 --

TkC1-3 96.6 0 475 363 2,839 2,130

-- 6 92 -- 670 --

-- 12 31 -- 143 --
Variability of Lead and Zinc Concentrations in Relation to Mining Activity and Other Factors 29

Table 13. Percentage of silt and clay and concentrations of lead and zinc determined by x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil and core 

samples collected from the Willow Creek flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, April 2011.

[Shading indicates concentration greater than the general probable-effect concentration listed in table 3. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; μm, 

micrometer; --, not available]

Surficial-soil 

sampling and coring 

site identifier 

(figs. 2A, and 2S–2U)

Percentage of silt 

and clay in bulk 

sample

Sample 

depth, 

inches

Lead concentration, 

mg/kg

Zinc concentration, 

mg/kg

Bulk sample <63-μm fraction Bulk sample <63-μm fraction

Transect WC1 (downstream)

WC1-1 63.0 0 210 181 927 788

-- 6 239 -- 1,053 --

-- 12 257 -- 1,010 --

WC1-2 77.3 0 258 188 1,128 879

-- 6 274 -- 1,064 --

-- 12 152 -- 723 --

WC1-3 78.4 0 224 151 927 704

-- 6 140 -- 906 --

Transect WC2

WC2-1 76.4 0 261 174 1,511 1,290

-- 6 336 -- 1,783 --

-- 12 305 -- 1,565 --

WC2-2 82.4 0 277 178 947 658

-- 6 256 -- 1,078 --

-- 12 220 -- 1,117 --

WC2-3 71.4 0 264 143 1,112 545

-- 6 31 -- 346 --

-- 12 475 -- 1,736 --

WC2-4 86.1 0 290 370 1,235 1,592

-- 6 2,607 -- 2,560 --

-- 12 493 -- 1,858 --

Transect WC3 (upstream)

WC3-1 96.1 0 68 52 184 271

-- 6 68 -- 328 --

-- 12 30 -- 132 --

WC3-2 87.9 0 91 23 289 157

-- 6 47 -- 248 --

-- 12 42 -- 122 --
30 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

were variable and did not indicate a pronounced upstream-todownstream trend (figs. 3 and 4, table 4). The variability was 

caused, in part, by the complexity of factors that determine 

the distribution of mining-contaminated sediment on the flood 

plain.

A comparison of lead and zinc concentrations in the 

bottom sediment of two reservoirs located on the Spring 

River indicated less contamination with distance downstream 

from the mining-affected areas. Median lead and zinc 

concentrations in the bottom sediment of Empire Lake, 

Kansas (located within the superfund site and immediately 

downstream from several mining-affected areas within 

the TSMD) (fig. 1), were about 5 and 6 times larger than 

median concentrations in the bottom sediment of Grand 

Lake O’ the Cherokees, Oklahoma (located at least 13 miles 

downstream from the last Spring River tributary that drains 

a substantial mining-affected area) (Juracek, 2006; Juracek 

and Becker, 2009). The Neosho River (fig. 1), with its larger 

flows and less-contaminated sediment, likely dilutes the load 

of contaminated sediment delivered to Grand Lake O’ the 

Cherokees by the Spring River (Juracek and Becker, 2009).

A pronounced downstream decrease in flood-plain and 

bed-sediment lead and zinc concentrations typically was not 

indicated for the sections of the mining-affected tributaries 

located within the Cherokee County superfund site (tables 

8–13; Pope, 2005). The explanation largely was related to 

the distribution of historically mined areas within each basin 

(fig. 1).

Distance-from-Channel 

Effects

The distribution of miningcontaminated sediment on flood 

plains is complex because it is 

determined by the interaction 

of several factors including 

the size and density of the 

contaminated particles, floodplain width and topography, 

flood characteristics (frequency, 

magnitude, duration), and 

fluvial geomorphic processes 

(Lewin and others, 1977; 

Brewer and Taylor, 1997; 

Lecce and Pavlowsky, 1997). 

The complexity is evidenced 

by previous studies in which 

mining-related flood-plain 

contamination with increasing 

distance from the channel 

increased, decreased, or 

indicated no trend (Bradley and 

Cox, 1990; Macklin and others, 1994; Brewer and Taylor, 

1997; Walling and others, 2003).

Mining-related contamination in surficial soils (bulk 

sample results) was variable in the Spring River flood 

plain and tributary flood plains with respect to increasing 

distance from the channel. For the Spring River flood plain, 

distance-from-channel effects were assessed using the cores 

(generally, the top 1–2 in.) collected along six transects 

(fig. 2A). Four to six cores were used for each transect. No 

consistent trend in lead and zinc concentrations with distance 

from the channel was evident for transect T1. For transect 

T2, lead and zinc concentrations initially decreased with 

distance from the channel then stabilized. For transect T3, lead 

concentrations were relatively stable with distance whereas 

zinc concentrations initially were variable then decreased. 

Lead and zinc concentrations along transect T4 increased then 

decreased. For transect T5, lead and zinc concentrations were 

variable with an overall decrease with distance. Along transect 

T6, lead concentrations decreased with distance whereas zinc 

concentrations decreased then increased. Overall, a tendency 

for the largest lead and zinc concentrations to be located near 

the channel was indicated (table 14, fig. 5).

Variability in lead and zinc concentrations with distance 

from the channel was indicated for the tributary flood plains. 

Only transects with at least two surficial-soil sampling sites 

located on the same side of the channel were used to assess 

changes in contamination with increasing distance from the 

channel. The availability of only two sampling sites on the 

0

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Zinc concentration, in milligrams per kilogram 

Distance from Spring River, dimensionless 

T1

T2

T3

Transect site

EXPLANATION

T4

T5

T6

Figure 5. Variability of flood-plain zinc concentrations (surficial-soil bulk samples) with 

distance from the Spring River along transects T1 through T6. Location of transects shown in 

figure 2A.
Variability of Lead and Zinc Concentrations in Relation to Mining Activity and Other Factors 31

Table 14. Lead and zinc concentrations (surficial-soil bulk samples) with distance from the Spring River for flood-plain coring sites 

located along transects T1 through T6. Location of transects shown in figure 2A.

[Shading indicates concentration greater than the general probable-effect concentration listed in table 3. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; N, nearest to channel; 

<, less than; F, farthest from channel] 

Transect

(fig. 2A) Coring site Lead concentration(mg/kg)

Zinc concentration

(mg/kg)

Depth interval analyzed

(inches)

T1 T1-1 (N) 27 90 0–2 

T1-2 260 4,850 0–2 

T1-3 26 66 0–1 

T1-4 <27 77 0–2 

T1-5 (F) 30 152 0–2 

T2 T2-1 (N) 187 4,656 0–2 

T2-2 40 592 0–2 

T2-3 <20 36 0–2 

T2-4 27 48 0–1 

T2-5 23 34 0–1 

T2-6 (F) 21 34 0–2 

T3 T3-1 (N) <51 184 0–2 

T3-2 45 170 0–2 

T3-6 45 323 0–2 

T3-3 51 269 0–2 

T3-4 50 255 0–2 

T3-5 (F) 38 205 0–2 

T4 T4-2 (N) 153 631 0–1 

T4-3 210 1,092 0–1 

T4-4 51 438 0–1 

T4-5 (F) <57 374 0–1 

T5 T5-2 (N) 64 521 0–1 

T5-3 70 747 0–1 

T5-4 67 563 0–1 

T5-5 49 206 0–1 

T5-6 58 329 0–1 

T5-7 (F) 25 80 0–1 

T6 T6-1 (N) 116 1,435 0–1 

T6-2 70 329 0–2 

T6-3 22 56 0–1 

T6-4 31 67 0–1.5 

T6-5 (F) <20 150 0–3 
32 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

same side of the channel for multiple transects constrained the 

ability to determine if trends in lead and zinc concentrations 

with distance from the channel were present. Nevertheless, the 

available data demonstrated the spatial complexity of lead and 

zinc contamination on the tributary flood plains.

For Brush Creek, transects BC1 (both sides of channel, 

two sampling sites on each side) and BC2 (one side of 

channel, two sampling sites) were evaluated (figs. 2A–2C). In 

all three cases, lead and zinc concentrations were larger for the 

sampling site located farthest from the channel (table 5).

Transect CC1 (one side of channel, two sampling sites) 

was evaluated for Cow Creek. Lead and zinc concentrations 

were slightly smaller for the sampling site located farthest 

from the channel (figs. 2A and 2D, table 6).

For Shawnee Creek, transect SnC1 (one side of channel, 

two sampling sites) was evaluated. With distance from the 

channel, the lead concentration essentially was unchanged 

whereas the zinc concentration substantially decreased 

(figs. 2A and 2F, table 7).

Two transects were evaluated for Shoal Creek (fig. 2A). 

Along transect ShC1 (one side of channel, three sampling 

sites), lead and zinc concentrations with distance from the 

channel decreased then increased. However, along transect 

ShC2 (one side of channel, four sampling sites), lead and 

zinc concentrations decreased with distance from the channel 

(figs. 2A, 2H, and 2I, table 8).

For Short Creek, transects StC1 (one side of channel, 

three sampling sites) and StC2 (one side of channel, two 

sampling sites) were evaluated (figs. 2A, 2J, and 2K). 

With distance from the channel along transect StC1, lead 

concentration increased then decreased and zinc concentration 

decreased. Lead and zinc concentrations were larger for the 

sampling site located farthest from the channel for transect 

StC2 (table 9).

The transects evaluated for Spring Branch were SB1 

(one side of channel, two sampling sites) and SB2 (one side of 

channel, three sampling sites) (figs. 2A, 2L, and 2M). Lead and 

zinc concentrations were larger for the sampling site located 

farthest from the channel for transect SB1. Along transect 

SB2, lead and zinc concentrations decreased with distance 

from the channel (table 10).

For Tar Creek, the transects evaluated were TrC1 (one 

side of channel, four sampling sites), TrC2 (both sides of 

channel, two sampling sites on each side), and TrC3 (one side 

of channel, four sampling sites) (figs. 2A, and 2O–2Q). Along 

transect TrC1, lead concentration was variable whereas zinc 

concentration increased then decreased with distance from the 

channel. For transect TrC2, lead and zinc concentrations for 

the sampling site located farthest from the channel, compared 

to the near-channel site, were larger on one side of the channel 

and smaller on the other side of the channel. For transect 

TrC3, lead and zinc concentrations increased with distance 

from the channel (table 11).

For Turkey Creek, transect TkC1 (one side of channel, 

two sampling sites) was evaluated (figs. 2A and 2R). Whereas 

the lead concentration was virtually the same for both 

sampling sites, the zinc concentration was smaller for the site 

located farthest from the channel (table 12).

The transects evaluated for Willow Creek were WC1 

(one side of channel, three sampling sites) and WC2 (both 

sides of channel, two sampling sites on each side) (figs. 2A, 

2S, and 2T). With distance from the channel, lead and zinc 

concentrations increased then decreased for transect WC1. 

On both sides of the channel along transect WC2, the zinc 

concentration was larger for the sampling site located farthest 

from the channel. However, the lead concentration for the site 

located farthest from the channel was larger on one side and 

smaller on the other side (table 13).

Particle-Size Effects

In general, there is an inverse relation between particle 

size and trace element concentrations in sediment. That 

is, as particle size decreases, trace element concentrations 

increase, in part, because of the greater surface area available 

for elements to accumulate (Horowitz, 1991; Luoma 

and Rainbow, 2008). However, for mining-contaminated 

sediment, this general relation may not hold because coarse 

sediment (that is, particles larger than 63 mm) can have large 

concentrations of mining-related elements (Bradley, 1989; 

Moore and others, 1989).

For all surficial-soil sampling sites in the Spring River 

flood plain and tributary flood plains, XRF analyses were 

performed on the bulk sample and the less than 63-μm 

fraction to assess compositional differences related to particle 

size. Typically, substantial differences in lead and zinc 

concentration were measured for the bulk and less than 63-μm 

samples. For lead and zinc, concentrations in the less than 

63-μm fraction were within ±20 percent of the concentrations 

in the bulk sample for only 17 and 32 percent of the cases, 

respectively. Lead and zinc concentrations in the less than 

63-μm fraction were smaller than the concentrations in the 

bulk sample for 89 and 80 percent of the cases, respectively 

(tables 4–13). One possible explanation to account, in part, 

for the divergent concentrations is analytical variability. A 

second possible explanation is differences in the chemical 

composition of the coarse particles (that is, larger than 63 mm) 

in comparison to the fine particles (that is, less than 63 mm). 

Specifically, for the surficial-soil samples analyzed by XRF 

in this study, the coarse particles possibly contained larger 

concentrations of lead and zinc compared to the fine particles.

Summary and Conclusions

A 4-year study by the U.S. Geological Survey, which was 

requested and funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, was begun in 2009 to investigate the occurrence and 

variability of mining-related lead and zinc in the Spring River 

flood plain and tributary flood plains in the Cherokee County, 

Kansas, superfund site. The study used a combination of 
References Cited 33

surficial-soil sampling and coring completed in 2009 through 

2011. The results of this study are summarized below:

1. With few exceptions, surficial soils in the Spring 

River flood plain had lead and zinc concentrations 

that were less than the general probable-effect concentrations (PECs), which represent the concentrations above which adverse aquatic biological effects 

are likely to occur.

2. Lead and zinc concentrations larger than the general 

or TSMD-specific PECs, or both, were infrequent at 

depth in the Spring River flood plain. When present, 

such contamination typically was confined to the 

upper 2 feet of the core and frequently was confined 

to the upper 6 inches.

3. Tributaries with few or no lead- and zinc-mined 

areas in the basin—Brush Creek, Cow Creek, and 

Shawnee Creek—generally had flood-plain lead and 

zinc concentrations (surficial soil, 6- and 12-inch 

depth) that were substantially less than the general 

PECs.

4. Tributaries with extensive lead- and zinc-mined 

areas in the basin—Shoal Creek, Short Creek, Spring 

Branch, Tar Creek, Turkey Creek, and Willow 

Creek—had flood-plain lead concentrations (surficial soil, 6- and 12-inch depth) that frequently or 

typically exceeded the general and TSMD-specific 

PECs.

5. Tributaries with extensive lead- and zinc-mined 

areas in the basin—Shoal Creek, Short Creek, 

Spring Branch, Tar Creek, Turkey Creek, and Willow Creek—had flood-plain zinc concentrations 

(surficial soil, 6- and 12-inch depth) that frequently 

or typically exceeded the general PEC. With the 

exception of Shoal and Willow Creeks, zinc concentrations typically exceeded the TSMD-specific 

PEC.

6. The largest flood-plain lead and zinc concentrations 

(surficial soil, 6- and 12-inch depth) were measured 

for Short and Tar Creeks.

7. Lead and zinc concentrations in the surficial-soil 

samples from the Spring River flood plain were 

variable with distance downstream and with distance 

from the channel. Overall, a tendency for the largest 

lead and zinc concentrations to be located near the 

channel was indicated.

8. Lead and zinc concentrations in the surficial-soil 

samples from the tributary flood plains varied longitudinally in relation to sources of mining-contaminated sediment in the basins. The concentrations also 

varied with distance from the channel; however, no 

consistent spatial trend was evident.

9. For the surficial-soil samples collected from the 

Spring River flood plain and tributary flood plains, 

both the coarse (larger than 63 micrometers) and 

fine particles (less than 63 micrometers) contained 

substantial lead and zinc concentrations.

References Cited

Adriano, D.C., 2001, Trace elements in terrestrial 

environments—Biogeochemistry, bioavailability, and risks 

of metals (2d ed.): New York, Springer-Verlag, 866 p.

Allgood, F.P., and Persinger, I.D., 1979, Missouri general soil 

map and soil association descriptions: U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 74 p.

Angelo, R.T., Cringan, M.S., Chamberlain, D.L., Stahl, A.J., 

Haslouer, S.G., and Goodrich, C.A., 2007, Residual effects 

of lead and zinc mining on freshwater mussels in the Spring 

River Basin (Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma, USA): 

Science of the Total Environment, v. 384, p. 467–496.

Arbogast, B.F., 1996, Analytical methods manual for the 

Mineral Resource Surveys Program: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 96–525, 248 p. 

American Society for Testing and Materials International, 

2007, D422-63, Standard test method for particlesize analysis of soils, in American Society for Testing 

and Materials International Book of Standards: West 

Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, American Society for Testing 

and Materials International, v. 4.08, p. 10–17.

Axtmann, E.V., and Luoma, S.N., 1991, Large-scale 

distribution of metal contamination in the fine-grained 

sediments of the Clark Fork River, Montana, U.S.A.: 

Applied Geochemistry, v. 6, p. 75–88.

Barks, J.H., 1977, Effects of abandoned lead and zinc 

mines and tailings piles on water quality in the Joplin 

area, Missouri: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources 

Investigations 77–75, 49 p.

Baudo, Renato, Giesy, J.P., and Muntau, Herbert, eds., 1990, 

Sediments—Chemistry and toxicity of in-place pollutants: 

Ann Arbor, Michigan, Lewis Publishers, 405 p.

Beyer, W.N., Dalgarn, J., Dudding, S., French, J.B., Mateo, 

R., Miesner, J., Sileo, L., Spann, J., 2004, Zinc and 

lead poisoning in wild birds in the Tri-State Mining 

District (Oklahoma, Kansas, and Missouri): Archives 

of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, v. 48, 

p. 108–117.

Bradley, S.B., 1989, Incorporation of metalliferous sediments 

from historic mining into river floodplains: GeoJournal, 

v. 19.1, p. 5–14.
34 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Bradley, S.B., and Cox, J.J., 1990, The significance of the 

floodplain to the cycling of metals in the River Derwent 

catchment, U.K.: The Science of the Total Environment, 

v. 97/98, p. 441–454.

Brewer, P.A., and Taylor, M.P., 1997, The spatial distribution 

of heavy metal contaminated sediment across terraced 

floodplains: Catena, v. 30, p. 229–249.

Brichta, L.C., 1960, Catalog of recorded exploration drilling 

and mine workings, Tri-State Zinc-Lead District—Missouri, 

Kansas, and Oklahoma: U.S. Bureau of Mines Information 

Circular 7993, 13 p.

Briggs, P.H., and Meier, A.L., 1999, The determination of 

forty two elements in geological materials by inductively 

coupled plasma-mass spectrometry: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 99–166, 15 p.

Brosius, Liz, and Sawin, R.S., 2001, Lead and zinc mining 

in Kansas: Kansas Geological Survey Public Information 

Circular 17, 6 p.

Davies, B.E., 1983, Heavy metal contamination from base 

metal mining and smelting—Implications for man and 

his environment, chap. 14 of Thornton, Iain, ed., Applied 

environmental geochemistry: New York, Academic Press, 

p. 425–462.

Davis, J.V., and Schumacher, J.G., 1992, Water-quality 

characterization of the Spring River Basin, southwestern 

Missouri and southeastern Kansas: U.S. Geological Survey 

Water-Resources Investigations Report 90–4176, 112 p.

Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2008, Digital flood 

insurance rate map database, Cherokee County, Kansas 

(and incorporated areas): Federal Emergency Management 

Agency, November 19, 2008.

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

States: New York, McGraw-Hill, 714 p.

Fenneman, N.M., 1946, Physical divisions of the United 

States: U.S. Geological Survey special map, scale 

1:7,000,000, 1 sheet.

Ferrington, L.C., Galle, O.K., Blackwood, M.A., Wright, 

C.A., Schmidt, F.J., and Jobe, J.M., 1989, Occurrence and 

biological effects of cadmium, lead, manganese, and zinc in 

the Short Creek/Empire Lake aquatic system in Cherokee 

County, Kansas: Kansas Water Resources Research 

Institute, contribution no. 277, 126 p.

Fishman, M.J., and Friedman, L.C., eds., 1989, Methods for 

determination of inorganic substances in water and fluvial 

sediments: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of WaterResources Investigations, book 5, chap. A1, 545 p.

Forstner, Ulrich, and Wittmann, G.T.W., 1981, Metal pollution 

in the aquatic environment: New York, Springer-Verlag, 

486 p.

High Plains Regional Climate Center, 2012, Historical data 

summaries: accessed March 1, 2012, at http://www.hprcc.unl.edu/.

Horowitz, A.J., 1991, A primer on sediment-trace element 

chemistry (2d ed.): Chelsea, Michigan, Lewis Publishers, 136 p.

Horowitz, A.J., Elrick, K.A., Demas, C.R., and Demcheck, 

D.K., 1991, The use of sediment-trace element geochemical 

models for the identification of local fluvial baseline 

concentrations, in Peters, N.E., and Walling, D.E., 

eds., Sediment and stream water quality in a changing 

environment—Trends and explanation, Proceedings of 

Symposia of the 20th General Assembly of the International 

Union of Geodesy and Geophysics, Vienna, Austria, 

August 11–24, 1991: Oxfordshire, United Kingdom, IAHS 

publication no. 23, p. 339–348.

Horowitz, A.J., Elrick, K.A., and Smith, J.J., 2001, Estimating 

suspended sediment and trace element fluxes in large river 

basins—Methodological considerations as applied to the 

NASQAN program: Hydrological Processes, v. 15, p. 1107–

1132.

Ingersoll, C.G., Ivey, C.D., Brumbaugh, W.G., Besser, J.M., 

and Kemble, N.E., 2009, Toxicity assessment of sediments 

from the Grand Lake O’ the Cherokees with the amphipod 

Hyalella azteca: U.S. Geological Survey Administrative 

Report CERC-8335-FY09-20-01, 97 p. Accessed December 

2009, at http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/oklahoma/

envqual.htm.

Juracek, K.E., 2006, Sedimentation and occurrence and trends 

of selected chemical constituents in bottom sediment, 

Empire Lake, Cherokee County, Kansas, 1905–2005: 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 

2006–5307, 79 p.

Juracek, K.E., and Becker, M.F., 2009, Occurrence and trends 

of selected chemical constituents in bottom sediment, Grand 

Lake O’ the Cherokees, northeast Oklahoma, 1940–2008: 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 

2009–5258, 28 p.

Kansas Department of Health and Environment, 2006, Kansas 

issues new fish consumption advisories, News release 

issued January 9, 2006: accessed February 2006, at http://

www.kdheks.gov/news/index.html.

Kansas Department of Health and Environment, 2012, KDHE 

issues revised fish consumption advisories, News release 

issued January 5, 2012: accessed April 2012, at http://www.

kdheks.gov/news/index.html.
References Cited 35

Leach, D.L., Taylor, R.D., Fey, D.L., Diehl, S.F., and 

Saltus, R.W., 2010, A deposit model for Mississippi ValleyType lead-zinc ores, chap. A of Mineral deposit models for 

resource assessment: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific 

Investigations Report 2010–5070–A, 52 p.

Lecce, S.A., and Pavlowsky, R.T., 1997, Storage of miningrelated zinc in floodplain sediments, Blue River, Wisconsin: 

Physical Geography, v. 18, p. 424–439.

Lewin, J., Davies, B.E., and Wolfenden, P.J., 1977, 

Interactions between channel change and historic mining 

sediments, chap. 23 of Gregory, K.J., ed., River channel 

changes: Chichester, England, John Wiley & Sons, p. 353–

367.

Lewin, John, and Macklin, M.G., 1987, Metal mining and 

floodplain sedimentation in Britain, in Gardiner, V., ed., 

International geomorphology: New York, John Wiley & 

Sons, p. 1,009–1,027.

Lide, D.R., ed., 1993, CRC handbook of chemistry and 

physics (74th ed.): Boca Raton, Florida, CRC Press, 

variously paged.

Luoma, S.N., and Rainbow, P.S., 2008, Metal contamination 

in aquatic environments—Science and lateral management: 

New York, Cambridge University Press, 573 p.

MacDonald, D.D., Ingersoll, C.G., and Berger, T.A., 2000, 

Development and evaluation of consensus-based sediment 

quality guidelines for freshwater ecosystems: Archives 

of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, v. 39, 

p. 20–31.

MacDonald, D.D., Ingersoll, C.G., Crawford, Meara, Prencipe, 

Heather, Besser, J.M., Brumbaugh, W.G., Kemble, Nile, 

May, T.W., Ivey, C.D., Meneghetti, Melissa, Sinclair, Jesse, 

and O’Hare, Margaret, 2010, Advanced Screening-Level 

Ecological Risk Assessment (SLERA) for aquatic habitats 

within the Tri-State Mining District, Oklahoma, Kansas, 

and Missouri: Nanaimo, British Columbia, MacDonald 

Environmental Sciences Ltd., [variously paged].

Macklin, M.G., Ridgway, J., Passmore, D.G., and Rumsby, 

B.T., 1994, The use of overbank sediment for geochemical 

mapping and contamination assessment—Results 

from selected English and Welsh floodplains: Applied 

Geochemistry, v. 9, p. 689–700.

Macklin, M.G., 1996, Fluxes and storage of sedimentassociated heavy metals in floodplain systems—Assessment 

and river basin management issues at a time of rapid 

environmental change, chap. 13 of Anderson, M.G., 

Walling, D.E., and Bates, P.D., eds., Floodplain processes: 

Chichester, England, John Wiley & Sons, p. 441–460.

Malcoe, L.H., Lynch, R.A., Kegler, M.C., and Skaggs, V.J., 

2002, Lead sources, behaviors, and socioeconomic factors 

in relation to blood lead of Native American and white 

children—A community-based assessment of a former 

mining area: Environmental Health Perspectives, v. 110, 

supplement 2, p. 221–231.

Marcher, M.V., Kenny, J.F., and others, 1984, Hydrology of 

area 40, Western Region, Interior Coal Province, Kansas, 

Oklahoma, and Missouri: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations, Open-File Report 83–266, 97 p.

Marmiroli, Nelson, and Maestri, Elena, 2008, Health 

implications of trace elements in the environment and 

the food chain, chap. 2 of Prasad, M.N.V., ed., Trace 

elements as contaminants and nutrients—Consequences in 

ecosystems and human health: Hoboken, New Jersey, John 

Wiley & Sons, p. 23–53.

Miller, J.R., 1997, The role of fluvial geomorphic processes 

in the dispersal of heavy metals from mine sites: Journal of 

Geochemical Exploration, v. 58, p. 101–118.

Moore, J.N., Brook, E.J., and Johns, Carolyn, 1989, Grain 

size partitioning of metals in contaminated, coarse-grained 

river floodplain sediment: Clark Fork River, Montana, 

U.S.A.: Environmental Geology and Water Science, v. 14, 

p. 107–115.

Neuberger, J.S., Mulhall, Margaret, Pomatto, M.C., 

Sheverbush, Joan, and Hassanein, R.S., 1990, Health 

problems in Galena, Kansas—A heavy metal mining 

superfund site: The Science of the Total Environment, v. 94, 

p. 261–272.

Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality, 2008, DEQ 

issues fish consumption advisory for Tar Creek area, News 

release issued February 27, 2008: accessed April 2012, at 

http://www.leadagency.org/TarCreekFishAdvisory0208.pdf.

Pais, Istvan, and Jones, J.B., Jr., 1997, The handbook of trace 

elements: Boca Raton, Florida, St. Lucie Press, 223 p.

Pope, L.M., 2005, Assessment of contaminated streambed 

sediment in the Kansas part of the historic Tri-State 

Lead and Zinc Mining District, Cherokee County, 2004: 

U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 

2005–5251, 61 p.

Seaber, P.R., Kapinos, F.P., and Knapp, G.L., 1987, 

Hydrologic unit maps: U.S. Geological Survey WaterSupply Paper 2294, 63 p.

Smol, J.P., 2002, Pollution of lakes and rivers—A 

paleoenvironmental perspective: New York, Oxford 

University Press, 280 p.
36 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Spruill, T.B., 1987, Assessment of water resources in leadzinc mined areas in Cherokee County, Kansas, and adjacent 

areas: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2268, 

68 p.

Stringer, E.T., 1972, Foundations of climatology—An 

introduction to physical, dynamic, synoptic, and 

geographical climatology: San Francisco, W.H. Freeman 

and Company, 586 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation 

Service, 1973, Soil survey of Crawford County, Kansas: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 

50 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation 

Service, 1985, Soil survey of Cherokee County, Kansas: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 

105 p.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1997, The incidence 

and severity of sediment contamination in surface waters 

of the United States, volume 1—National sediment quality 

survey: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report 

823–R–97–006, variously paged.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2004, National 

priority list sites in the midwest: accessed January 2010, at 

http://www.epa.gov/region7/cleanup/npl_files/index.htm.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2007, Field portable 

x-ray fluorescence spectrometry for the determination of 

elemental concentrations in soil and sediment, method 

6200: accessed January 2010, at http://epa.gov/epawaste/

hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/6200.pdf.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992, Trace elements 

and organic compounds in the Spring River Basin of 

southeastern Kansas in 1988: U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Contaminant report no. R6/505M/91, 60 p.

van der Merwe, Deon, Carpenter, J.W., Nietfeld, J.C., and 

Miesner, J.F., 2011, Adverse health effects in Canada geese 

(Branta Canadensis) associated with waste from zinc 

and lead mines in the Tri-State Mining District (Kansas, 

Oklahoma, and Missouri, USA): Journal of Wildlife 

Diseases, v. 47, no. 3, p. 650–660.

Walling, D.E., Owens, P.N., Carter, J., Leeks, G.J.L., Lewis, 

S., Meharg, A.A., and Wright, J., 2003, Storage of sedimentassociated nutrients and contaminants in river channel and 

floodplain systems: Applied Geochemistry, v. 18, p. 195–

220.

Wildhaber, M.L., Allert, A.L., Schmitt, C.J., Tabor, V.M., and 

Mulhern, Daniel, 1998, Both contaminants and habitat limit 

Neosho madtom (Noturus placidus) numbers in the Spring 

River, a midwestern warmwater stream effected by runoff 

from historic zinc and lead mining, in Kennedy, Chris, and 

MacKinley, Don, eds., Fish response to toxic environments, 

Proceedings of the International Congress on the Biology 

of Fish, Towson University, Baltimore, Maryland, 

July 26–30, 1998: accessed March 2005, at http://www.

fishbiologycongress.org.

Wildhaber, M.L., Schmitt, C.J., and Allert, A.L., 1999, Factors 

explaining the distribution and site densities of the Neosho 

madtom (Noturus placidus) in the Spring River, Missouri: 

U.S. Geological Survey Toxic Substances Hydrology 

Program in Proceedings of the Technical Meeting, 

Charleston, South Carolina, March 8–12, 1999—volume 1 

of 3: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Report 

99–4018A, accessed April 2005, at http://toxics.usgs.gov/

pubs/wri99-4018/Volume1/sectionD/1502_Wildhaber/.

Wildhaber, M.L., Allert, A.L., Schmitt, C.J., Tabor, V.M., 

Mulhern, Daniel, Powell, K.L., and Sowa, S.P., 2000, 

Natural and anthropogenic influences on the distribution of 

the threatened Neosho madtom in a midwestern warmwater 

stream: Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 

v. 129, p. 243–261.

Zoumis, Theofanis, Schmidt, Astrid, Grigorova, Lidia, and 

Calmano, Wolfgang, 2001, Contaminants in sediments—

Remobilisation and demobilisation: The Science of the 

Total Environment, v. 266, p. 195–202. 
Appendixes 37

Appendixes
38 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 1–1. Latitude and longitude coordinates, and land use, for surficial-soil sampling sites in the Spring River flood plain and 

tributary flood plains in Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2011.

Sampling site identifier

(figs. 2A–2U)

Date sampled 

(month/day/year)

Latitude

(decimal degrees)

Longitude

(decimal degrees) Land use1

Spring River

SRF-1 11/12/09 37.19567 94.62797 Cropland.

SRF-2 11/12/09 37.19608 94.63589 Cropland.

SRF-3 11/12/09 37.18958 94.64267 Cropland.

SRF-4 11/12/09 37.18272 94.62847 Cropland.

SRF-5 11/12/09 37.17367 94.62850 Cropland.

SRF-6 11/13/09 37.16772 94.63506 Grassland.

SRF-7 11/13/09 37.15814 94.62844 Grassland.

SRF-9 11/13/09 37.13692 94.63506 Cropland.

SRF-10 11/13/09 37.13481 94.65361 Grassland.

SRF-11 11/17/09 37.12239 94.69069 Cropland.

SRF-13 11/17/09 37.12006 94.66225 Cropland.

SRF-14 11/17/09 37.12253 94.64644 Cropland.

SRF-15 11/17/09 37.12897 94.62683 Grassland.

SRF-16 11/17/09 37.11019 94.65789 Cropland.

SRF-17 11/17/09 37.10778 94.68119 Cropland.

SRF-18 11/17/09 37.11614 94.68992 Cropland.

SRF-19 11/17/09 37.09272 94.67336 Grassland.

SRF-20 11/17/09 37.07742 94.68325 Grassland.

SRF-21 11/18/09 37.07939 94.70044 Grassland.

SRF-22 11/18/09 37.07558 94.71056 Grassland.

SRF-23 11/18/09 37.07628 94.72953 Cropland.

SRF-24 11/18/09 37.06428 94.73683 Grassland.

SRF-25 11/23/09 37.06572 94.71061 Grassland.

SRF-26 11/23/09 37.06817 94.70367 Grassland.

SRF-27 11/23/09 37.05853 94.72561 Grassland.

SRF-28 11/23/09 37.04872 94.70792 Cropland.

SRF-29 11/23/09 37.05542 94.69722 Cropland.

SRF-31 11/23/09 37.03203 94.71469 Grassland.

SRF-32 11/24/09 37.02469 94.71200 Cropland.

SRF-33 11/24/09 37.00719 94.70869 Grassland.

Brush Creek

BC1-1 04/14/11 37.08067 94.75128 Woodland.

BC1-2 05/04/11 37.08028 94.75083 Grassland.

BC1-3 05/04/11 37.08008 94.75061 Grassland.

BC1-4 05/04/11 37.08086 94.75144 Woodland.

BC2-1 05/04/11 37.11256 94.77489 Woodland.

BC2-2 05/04/11 37.11269 94.77506 Woodland.
Appendixes 39

Table 1–1. Latitude and longitude coordinates, and land use, for surficial-soil sampling sites in the Spring River flood plain and 

tributary flood plains in Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2011.—Continued

Sampling site identifier

(figs. 2A–2U)

Date sampled 

(month/day/year)

Latitude

(decimal degrees)

Longitude

(decimal degrees) Land use1

Cow Creek

CC1-1 03/16/11 37.22239 94.65353 Woodland.

CC1-2 03/16/11 37.22239 94.65222 Cropland.

CC1-3 03/16/11 37.22239 94.65122 Cropland.

CC2-1 03/16/11 37.24161 94.63156 Woodland.

CC2-2 03/16/11 37.24153 94.63147 Woodland.

Shawnee Creek

SnC1-1 03/17/11 37.13450 94.67867 Cropland.

SnC1-2 03/17/11 37.13456 94.67833 Woodland.

SnC1-3 03/17/11 37.13464 94.67778 Woodland.

SnC2-1 03/16/11 37.17831 94.69786 Cropland.

SnC2-2 03/16/11 37.17831 94.69650 Cropland.

Shoal Creek

ShC1-1 05/05/11 37.03939 94.66717 Woodland.

ShC1-2 05/05/11 37.03989 94.66706 Grassland.

ShC1-3 05/05/11 37.04017 94.66700 Grassland.

ShC2-1 05/05/11 37.04111 94.63814 Grassland.

ShC2-2 05/05/11 37.04094 94.63814 Grassland.

ShC2-3 05/05/11 37.04075 94.63811 Grassland.

ShC2-4 05/05/11 37.04031 94.63814 Grassland.

Short Creek

StC1-1 03/15/11 37.08925 94.66289 Grassland.

StC1-2 03/15/11 37.08914 94.66294 Grassland.

StC1-3 03/15/11 37.08903 94.66297 Grassland.

StC2-1 04/13/11 37.09014 94.62481 Grassland.

StC2-2 04/13/11 37.09019 94.62481 Grassland.

Spring Branch

SB1-1 03/30/11 37.02831 94.73042 Woodland.

SB1-2 03/30/11 37.02828 94.73042 Woodland.

SB2-1 03/30/11 37.02814 94.73839 Woodland.

SB2-2 03/30/11 37.02811 94.73833 Woodland.

SB2-3 03/30/11 37.02811 94.73831 Woodland.

SB3-1 03/31/11 37.02436 94.74094 Woodland.

SB3-2 03/31/11 37.02433 94.74067 Woodland.

Tar Creek

TrC1-1 03/31/11 37.00406 94.85781 Grassland.

TrC1-2 03/31/11 37.00400 94.85786 Grassland.

TrC1-3 03/31/11 37.00394 94.85792 Grassland.

TrC1-4 03/31/11 37.00386 94.85808 Disturbed.

TrC2-1 04/01/11 37.01297 94.86067 Woodland.

TrC2-2 04/01/11 37.01289 94.86072 Woodland.

TrC2-3 04/01/11 37.01272 94.86086 Woodland.
40 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 1–1. Latitude and longitude coordinates, and land use, for surficial-soil sampling sites in the Spring River flood plain and 

tributary flood plains in Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2011.—Continued

Sampling site identifier

(figs. 2A–2U)

Date sampled 

(month/day/year)

Latitude

(decimal degrees)

Longitude

(decimal degrees) Land use1

TrC2-4 04/01/11 37.01269 94.86089 Woodland.

TrC3-1 04/12/11 37.03181 94.85097 Grassland.

TrC3-2 04/12/11 37.03189 94.85106 Grassland.

TrC3-3 04/12/11 37.03203 94.85111 Grassland.

TrC3-4 04/12/11 37.03211 94.85122 Grassland.

Turkey Creek

TkC1-1 03/15/11 37.12870 94.62492 Grassland.

TkC1-2 03/15/11 37.12858 94.62508 Grassland.

TkC1-3 03/15/11 37.12811 94.62586 Grassland.

Willow Creek

WC1-1 04/13/11 37.04022 94.74033 Woodland.

WC1-2 04/13/11 37.04025 94.74033 Woodland.

WC1-3 04/13/11 37.04028 94.74031 Woodland.

WC2-1 04/13/11 37.03739 94.77664 Grassland.

WC2-2 04/13/11 37.03747 94.77661 Grassland.

WC2-3 04/13/11 37.03761 94.77656 Grassland.

WC2-4 04/13/11 37.03767 94.77656 Grassland.

WC3-1 04/14/11 37.06306 94.81008 Woodland.

WC3-2 04/14/11 37.06322 94.81003 Grassland.

1

Land use observed on the day the surficial-soil sample was collected.
Appendixes 41

Table 1–2. Latitude and longitude coordinates for coring sites in the Spring River flood plain in Cherokee County, Kansas, November 

2009 and March 2010.

Coring site identifier 

(fig. 2A)

Date cored 

(month/day/year)

Latitude

(decimal degrees)

Longitude

(decimal degrees)

T1-1 11/04/09 37.18159 94.64084

T1-2 11/04/09 37.18149 94.63608

T1-3 11/03/09 37.18164 94.63330

T1-4 11/04/09 37.18167 94.63009

T1-5 11/04/09 37.18209 94.62711

T2-1 03/15/10 37.14627 94.62048

T2-2 03/15/10 37.14639 94.62400

T2-3 03/15/10 37.14481 94.62752

T2-4 03/15/10 37.14483 94.63155

T2-5 03/15/10 37.14483 94.63570

T2-6 03/15/10 37.14485 94.63972

T3-1 11/05/09 37.11937 94.66467

T3-2 11/06/09 37.11930 94.66115

T3-3 11/05/09 37.11909 94.65642

T3-4 11/05/09 37.11910 94.65400

T3-5 11/05/09 37.11906 94.65043

T3-6 11/06/09 37.11888 94.65869

T4-1 03/16/10 37.09111 94.68756

T4-2 03/16/10 37.09022 94.68355

T4-3 03/16/10 37.08937 94.67899

T4-4 03/16/10 37.08875 94.67538

T4-5 03/16/10 37.08853 94.67194

T5-1 03/17/10 37.05256 94.73207

T5-2 03/17/10 37.05334 94.72497

T5-3 03/17/10 37.05306 94.72222

T5-4 03/17/10 37.05311 94.71757

T5-5 03/17/10 37.05311 94.71254

T5-6 03/17/10 37.05270 94.70870

T5-7 03/17/10 37.05272 94.70523

T6-1 11/03/09 37.01228 94.71766

T6-2 11/03/09 37.01195 94.71477

T6-3 11/03/09 37.01210 94.71135

T6-4 11/02/09 37.01190 94.70998

T6-5 11/02/09 37.01184 94.70650
42 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 1–3. Percentage of silt and clay and constituent concentrations determined by combustion and spectroscopic methods for 

three surficial-soil samples (SRF-2, SRF-5, SRF-10) collected from the Spring River flood plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, November 

2009.

[Location of sampling sites shown in figure 2A. Values in parentheses are concentrations in the less than 63-micrometer fraction. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; %, percent dry weight; <, less than]

Constituent and unit of 

measurement

Constituent concentration

Sample

SRF-2

Sample

SRF-5

Sample

SRF-10

Percentage of silt and clay in 

bulk sample

95 88 51

Nutrients

Total nitrogen, mg/kg 1,500 (1,100) 1,300 (1,000) 1,200 (1,500)

Total phosphorus, mg/kg 620 (610) 520 (550) 500 (690)

Carbon

Carbon (total organic), % 1.5 (1.4) 1.4 (1.2) 1.7 (2.1)

Carbon (total), % 1.5 (1.3) 1.4 (1.2) 1.6 (1.8)

Trace elements

Aluminum, % 4.0 (4.2) 2.7 (3.1) 2.3 (3.9)

Antimony, mg/kg 0.6 (0.6) 0.6 (0.6) 0.4 (0.6)

Arsenic, mg/kg 5.4 (5.7) 5.0 (4.9) 6.3 (7.4)

Barium, mg/kg 490 (520) 380 (420) 270 (450)

Beryllium, mg/kg 1.4 (1.4) 0.9 (0.9) 1.0 (1.5)

Cadmium, mg/kg 0.8 (0.7) 0.3 (0.4) 5.7 (7.4)

Chromium, mg/kg 44 (46) 39 (39) 37 (54)

Cobalt, mg/kg 9 (9) 7 (8) 11 (15)

Copper, mg/kg 13 (14) 11 (12) 10 (17)

Iron, % 1.5 (1.6) 1.2 (1.3) 1.6 (2.1)

Lead, mg/kg 28 (25) 30 (26) 91 (140)

Lithium, mg/kg 25 (26) 19 (21) 17 (26)

Manganese, mg/kg 1,100 (940) 500 (520) 650 (930)

Molybdenum, mg/kg <1 (<1) <1 (<1) <1 (<1)

Nickel, mg/kg 17 (16) 8 (9) 14 (19)

Selenium, mg/kg 0.3 (0.3) 0.4 (0.4) 0.3 (0.5)

Silver, mg/kg <0.5 (<0.5) <0.5 (<0.5) <0.5 (0.6)

Strontium, mg/kg 62 (65) 50 (53) 40 (62)

Sulfur, % 0.019 (0.019) 0.019 (0.020) 0.046 (0.058)

Thallium, mg/kg <50 (<50) <50 (<50) <50 (<50)

Tin, mg/kg 2 (2) <1 (<1) 1 (2)

Titanium, % 0.47 (0.49) 0.42 (0.40) 0.25 (0.45)

Uranium, mg/kg <50 (<50) <50 (<50) <50 (<50)

Vanadium, mg/kg 59 (59) 49 (49) 42 (63)

Zinc, mg/kg 110 (110) 60 (67) 940 (1,200)
Appendixes 43

Table 1–4. Results of x-ray fluorescence analysis of standard reference samples and comparison to most probable values.

[Shading indicates values not within ± 10 percent of the most probable value. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; MPV, most probable value; --, not determined or 

not applicable; <, less than; LOD, limit of detection. Reference samples from Fisher Scientific]

Sample code

Cadmium Lead Zinc

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

RCRA MPV 500 -- 500 -- -- --

Results obtained during analyses of Spring River flood-plain samples

536 7.2 488 -2.4 36 --

539 7.8 548 9.6 -- --

545 9.0 485 -3.0 <34.1 --

518 3.6 482 -3.6 47 --

525 5.0 515 3.0 61 --

535 7.0 508 1.6 55 --

511 2.2 481 -3.8 64 --

489 -2.2 503 0.6 51 --

525 5.0 482 -3.6 <33.8 --

548 9.6 449 -10.2 47 --

517 3.4 522 4.4 34 --

482 -3.6 494 -1.2 42 --

512 2.4 514 2.8 38 --

527 5.4 477 -4.6 85 --

516 3.2 513 2.6 50 --

527 5.4 522 4.4 48 --

542 8.4 525 5.0 49 --

509 1.8 506 1.2 55 --

529 5.8 505 1.0 41 --

526 5.2 435 -13.0 54 --

544 8.8 508 1.6 69 --

531 6.2 519 3.8 63 --

525 5.0 515 3.0 61 --

535 7.0 508 1.6 55 --

511 2.2 481 -3.8 64 --

503 0.6 486 -2.8 51 --

531 6.2 540 8.0 98 --

529 5.8 467 -6.6 54 --

527 5.4 456 -8.8 54 --

530 6.0 568 13.6 56 --

532 6.4 452 -9.6 48 --

483 -3.4 449 -10.2 <35.0 --

521 4.2 463 -7.4 44 --

528 5.6 538 7.6 60 --

530 6.0 532 6.4 50 --

505 1.0 514 2.8 56 --
44 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 1–4. Results of x-ray fluorescence analysis of standard reference samples and comparison to most probable values.—Continued

[Shading indicates values not within ± 10 percent of the most probable value. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; MPV, most probable value; --, not determined or 

not applicable; <, less than; LOD, limit of detection. Reference samples from Fisher Scientific]

Sample code

Cadmium Lead Zinc

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

Results obtained during analyses of Spring River flood-plain samples—Continued

525 5.0 502 0.4 51 --

513 2.6 506 1.2 43 --

512 2.4 488 -2.4 34 --

540 8.0 524 4.8 37 --

578 15.6 505 1.0 68 --

610 22.0 506 1.2 77 --

541 8.2 441 -11.8 74 --

606 21.2 510 2.0 64 --

617 23.4 489 -2.2 84 --

598 19.6 538 7.6 68 --

520 4.0 444 -11.2 65 --

Results obtained during analyses of tributary flood-plain samples

552 10.4 566 13.2 53 --

542 8.4 532 6.4 47 --

517 3.4 519 3.8 43 --

561 12.2 500 0 46 --

536 7.2 538 7.6 61 --

541 8.2 497 -0.6 46 --

545 9.0 499 -0.2 42 --

535 7.0 501 0.2 50 --

532 6.4 520 4.0 45 --

518 3.6 532 6.4 59 --

509 1.8 517 3.4 49 --

529 5.8 507 1.4 57 --

544 8.8 483 -3.4 47 --

544 8.8 473 -5.4 47 --

524 4.8 461 -7.8 44 --

516 3.2 431 -13.8 49 --

542 8.4 478 -4.4 58 --

545 9.0 445 -11.0 23 --

531 6.2 478 -4.4 36 --

551 10.2 465 -7.0 44 --

493 -1.4 465 -7.0 42 --

523 4.6 459 -8.2 30 --

541 8.2 474 -5.2 49 --

543 8.6 415 -17.0 43 --

514 2.8 439 -12.2 40 --
Appendixes 45

Table 1–4. Results of x-ray fluorescence analysis of standard reference samples and comparison to most probable values.—Continued

[Shading indicates values not within ± 10 percent of the most probable value. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; MPV, most probable value; --, not determined or 

not applicable; <, less than; LOD, limit of detection. Reference samples from Fisher Scientific]

Sample code

Cadmium Lead Zinc

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

Results obtained during analyses of tributary flood-plain samples—Continued

524 4.8 429 -14.2 36 --

545 9.0 452 -9.6 40 --

522 4.4 460 -8.0 44 --

528 5.6 478 -4.4 45 --

547 9.4 478 -4.4 48 --

543 8.6 461 -7.8 53 --

522 4.4 497 -0.6 58 --

507 1.4 455 -9.0 47 --

529 5.8 431 -13.8 35 --

539 7.8 467 -6.6 49 --

525 5.0 482 -3.6 45 --

GBW MPV 28.2 -- 2,700 -- 3,800 --

Results obtained during analyses of Spring River flood-plain samples

46 63.1 2,641 -2.2 3,511 -7.6

41 45.4 2,642 -2.1 3,706 -2.5

43 52.5 2,626 -2.7 3,638 -4.3

45 59.6 2,462 -8.8 3,233 -14.9

40 41.8 2,593 -4.0 3,687 -3.0

48 70.2 2,700 0 3,684 -3.1

37 31.2 2,641 -2.2 3,779 -0.6

35 24.1 2,723 0.9 3,911 2.9

45 59.6 2,326 -13.9 3,243 -14.7

40 41.8 2,697 -0.1 3,574 -5.9

41 45.4 2,635 -2.4 3,672 -3.4

43 52.5 2,710 0.4 3,716 -2.2

52 84.4 2,735 1.3 3,810 0.3

46 63.1 2,647 -2.0 3,755 -1.2

46 63.1 2,563 -5.1 3,578 -5.8

40 41.8 2,769 2.6 3,777 -0.6

38 34.8 2,653 -1.7 3,843 1.1

37 31.2 2,690 -0.4 3,751 -1.3

50 77.3 2,671 -1.1 3,583 -5.7

43 52.5 2,626 -2.7 3,638 -4.3

45 59.6 2,462 -8.8 3,233 -14.9

53 87.9 2,693 -0.3 3,889 2.3

37 31.2 2,617 -3.1 3,683 -3.1

43 52.5 2,706 0.2 3,757 -1.1
46 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 1–4. Results of x-ray fluorescence analysis of standard reference samples and comparison to most probable values.—Continued

[Shading indicates values not within ± 10 percent of the most probable value. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; MPV, most probable value; --, not determined or 

not applicable; <, less than; LOD, limit of detection. Reference samples from Fisher Scientific]

Sample code

Cadmium Lead Zinc

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

Results obtained during analyses of Spring River flood-plain samples—Continued

43 52.5 2,682 -0.7 3,700 -2.6

30 6.4 2,743 1.6 3,923 3.2

36 27.7 2,753 2.0 3,891 2.4

37 31.2 2,261 -16.3 3,229 -15.0

46 63.1 2,861 6.0 3,853 1.4

37 31.2 2,767 2.5 3,770 -0.8

-- -- 2,759 2.2 3,826 0.7

41 45.4 2,682 -0.7 3,676 -3.3

38 34.8 2,760 2.2 3,677 -3.2

48 70.2 2,660 -1.5 3,885 2.2

38 34.8 2,534 -6.1 3,670 -3.4

48 70.2 2,762 2.3 3,799 0

38 34.8 2,647 -2.0 3,827 0.7

46 63.1 2,567 -4.9 3,765 -0.9

40 41.8 2,659 -1.5 3,759 -1.1

45 59.6 2,610 -3.3 3,670 -3.4

35 24.1 2,659 -1.5 3,641 -4.2

41 45.4 2,706 0.2 3,502 -7.8

47 66.7 2,672 -1.0 3,580 -5.8

Results obtained during analyses of tributary flood-plain samples

25 -11.3 2,588 -4.1 3,358 -11.6

20 -29.1 2,574 -4.7 3,351 -11.8

21 -25.5 2,602 -3.6 3,405 -10.4

19 -32.6 2,549 -5.6 3,379 -11.1

26 -7.8 2,579 -4.5 3,390 -10.8

20 -29.1 2,574 -4.7 3,353 -11.8

17 -39.7 2,625 -2.8 3,409 -10.3

19 -32.6 2,610 -3.3 3,430 -9.7

26 -7.8 2,593 -4.0 3,319 -12.7

20 -29.1 2,535 -6.1 3,437 -9.6

21 -25.5 2,618 -3.0 3,413 -10.2

19 -32.6 2,664 -1.3 3,378 -11.1

25 -11.3 2,564 -5.0 3,392 -10.7

34 20.6 2,534 -6.1 3,331 -12.3

23 -18.4 2,484 -8.0 3,368 -11.4

22 -22.0 2,550 -5.6 3,446 -9.3

21 -25.5 2,533 -6.2 3,329 -12.4
Appendixes 47

Table 1–4. Results of x-ray fluorescence analysis of standard reference samples and comparison to most probable values.—Continued

[Shading indicates values not within ± 10 percent of the most probable value. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; MPV, most probable value; --, not determined or 

not applicable; <, less than; LOD, limit of detection. Reference samples from Fisher Scientific]

Sample code

Cadmium Lead Zinc

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

Results obtained during analyses of tributary flood-plain samples—Continued

23 -18.4 2,491 -7.7 3,395 -10.7

19 -32.6 2,520 -6.7 3,400 -10.5

20 -29.1 2,571 -4.8 3,419 -10.0

22 -22.0 2,477 -8.3 3,319 -12.7

18 -36.2 2,541 -5.9 3,334 -12.3

<17.1 -- 2,532 -6.2 3,327 -12.4

<16.9 -- 2,559 -5.2 3,426 -9.8

27 -4.3 2,545 -5.7 3,380 -11.1

20 -29.1 2,490 -7.8 3,315 -12.8

31 9.9 2,577 -4.6 3,388 -10.8

27 -4.3 2,640 -2.2 3,348 -11.9

25 -11.3 2,556 -5.3 3,338 -12.2

20 -29.1 2,505 -7.2 3,387 -10.9

28 -0.7 2,520 -6.7 3,362 -11.5

27 -4.3 2,556 -5.3 3,404 -10.4

23 -18.4 2,555 -5.4 3,374 -11.2

22 -22.0 2,478 -8.2 3,330 -12.4

22 -22.0 2,587 -4.2 3,437 -9.6

28 -0.7 2,504 -7.3 3,322 -12.6

NCS MPV 1.12 -- 27 -- 46 --

Results obtained during analyses of Spring River flood-plain samples

10 793 18 -33.3 24 -47.8

<LOD -- 28 3.7 27 -41.3

<12.9 -- <14.8 -- 48 4.3

<12.5 -- 19.9 -26.3 28 -39.1

<16.8 -- <16.8 -- 35 -23.9

<17.7 -- <17.8 -- 42 -8.7

<17.6 -- <16.9 -- 30 -34.8

<16.4 -- 19 -29.6 46 0

<17.4 -- <18.1 -- 28 -39.1

Results obtained during analyses of tributary flood-plain samples

<14.0 -- 105 289 26 -43.5

<14.1 -- 55 104 25 -45.7

<13.5 -- 53 96.3 30 -34.8

<13.3 -- 59 119 28 -39.1

<13.8 -- 58 115 25 -45.7

<13.7 -- 60 122 20 -56.5
48 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 1–4. Results of x-ray fluorescence analysis of standard reference samples and comparison to most probable values.—Continued

[Shading indicates values not within ± 10 percent of the most probable value. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; MPV, most probable value; --, not determined or 

not applicable; <, less than; LOD, limit of detection. Reference samples from Fisher Scientific]

Sample code

Cadmium Lead Zinc

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

Concentration 

(mg/kg)

Percent difference 

from MPV

Results obtained during analyses of tributary flood-plain samples—Continued

<13.9 -- 53 96.3 28 -39.1

<13.6 -- 51 88.9 30 -34.8

<14.0 -- 53 96.3 26 -43.5

<14.2 -- 53 96.3 30 -34.8

<13.8 -- 51 88.9 19 -58.7

<13.6 -- 53 96.3 28 -39.1

<13.8 -- 27 0 23 -50.0

<14.1 -- 22 -18.5 33 -28.3

<14.1 -- 20 -25.9 29 -37.0

<14.0 -- 20 -25.9 19 -58.7

<13.6 -- 20 -25.9 22 -52.2

<14.1 -- 17 -37.0 21 -54.3

<13.6 -- 18 -33.3 23 -50.0

<13.9 -- 18 -33.3 24 -47.8

<14.0 -- 20 -25.9 23 -50.0

<13.8 -- 26 -3.7 29 -37.0

<14.1 -- 21 -22.2 25 -45.7

<14.0 -- 25 -7.4 26 -43.5

<13.9 -- 15 -44.4 28 -39.1

<13.9 -- 17 -37.0 33 -28.3

<14.0 -- 15 -44.4 21 -54.3

<14.2 -- 21 -22.2 24 -47.8

<14.2 -- 23 -14.8 23 -50.0

<14.2 -- 13 -51.9 30 -34.8

<14.0 -- 22 -18.5 24 -47.8

<14.1 -- 24 -11.1 24 -47.8

<14.5 -- 17 -37.0 31 -32.6

<14.0 -- 14 -48.1 31 -32.6

<14.1 -- 19 -29.6 21 -54.3

<13.7 -- 17 -37.0 15 -67.4
Appendixes 49

Table 1–5. Percentage of silt and clay and constituent concentrations determined by combustion and spectroscopic methods for six 

surficial-soil samples (BC2-1, SB2-2, SnC2-1, StC1-2, TrC1-3, WC2-1) collected from tributary flood plains, Cherokee County, Kansas, 

March, April, and May 2011.

[Location of sampling sites shown in figure 2A. Values in parentheses are concentrations in the less than 63-micrometer fraction. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; %, percent dry weight; <, less than]

Constituent and unit of 

measurement

Constituent concentration

Sample 

BC2-1

Sample 

SB2-2

Sample 

SnC2-1

Percentage of silt and clay in 

bulk sample

54 57 90

Nutrients

Total nitrogen, mg/kg 1,900 (2,500) 7,500 (6,900) 1,400 (1,100)

Total phosphorus, mg/kg 580 (790) 1,100 (1,100) 400 (430)

Carbon

Carbon (total organic), % 2.3 (2.8) 10 (9) 1.4 (1.1)

Carbon (total), % 2.2 (2.6) 9.5 (8.2) 2.4 (1.1)

Trace elements

Aluminum, % 3.1 (4.8) 2.7 (3.1) 3.8 (4.2)

Antimony, mg/kg 0.6 (0.7) 1.5 (1.8) 0.7 (0.7)

Arsenic, mg/kg 5.6 (7.6) 12 (13) 6.9 (7.0)

Barium, mg/kg 300 (460) 300 (360) 390 (430)

Beryllium, mg/kg 1.2 (1.6) 1.2 (1.4) 1.3 (1.4)

Cadmium, mg/kg 0.5 (0.9) 24 (22) 0.1 (0.2)

Chromium, mg/kg 45 (61) 55 (56) 53 (58)

Cobalt, mg/kg 11 (16) 14 (13) 14 (13)

Copper, mg/kg 11 (15) 47 (50) 11 (12)

Iron, % 1.9 (2.7) 3.1 (3.2) 2.2 (2.3)

Lead, mg/kg 24 (36) 670 (740) 28 (35)

Lithium, mg/kg 27 (39) 22 (27) 31 (34)

Manganese, mg/kg 520 (710) 710 (730) 660 (600)

Molybdenum, mg/kg <1 (1) 1 (1) <1 (1)

Nickel, mg/kg 18 (23) 29 (29) 17 (18)

Selenium, mg/kg 0.4 (0.5) 0.9 (0.9) 0.4 (0.4)

Silver, mg/kg <0.5 (<0.5) <0.5 (0.5) <0.5 (<0.5)

Strontium, mg/kg 64 (86) 57 (64) 64 (70)

Sulfur, % 0.03 (0.04) 0.18 (0.17) 0.02 (0.02)

Thallium, mg/kg <50 (<50) <50 (<50) <50 (<50)

Tin, mg/kg 1 (2) 10 (11) 2 (2)

Titanium, % 0.36 (0.50) 0.26 (0.33) 0.47 (0.54)

Uranium, mg/kg <50 (<50) <50 (<50) <50 (<50)

Vanadium, mg/kg 54 (77) 55 (62) 66 (71)

Zinc, mg/kg 170 (250) 3,400 (3,500) 75 (97)
50 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 1–5. Percentage of silt and clay and constituent concentrations determined by combustion and spectroscopic methods for six 

surficial-soil samples (BC2-1, SB2-2, SnC2-1, StC1-2, TrC1-3, WC2-1) collected from tributary flood plains, Cherokee County, Kansas, 

March, April, and May 2011.—Continued

[Location of sampling sites shown in figure 2A. Values in parentheses are concentrations in the less than 63-micrometer fraction. mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; %, percent dry weight; <, less than]

Constituent and unit of 

measurement

Constituent concentration

Sample

StC1-2

Sample

TrC1-3

Sample

WC2-1

Percentage of silt and clay in 

bulk sample

68 43 62

Nutrients

Total nitrogen, mg/kg 4,000 (3,300) 1,500 (1,900) 2,300 (2,200)

Total phosphorus, mg/kg 2,900 (3,200) 960 (800) 670 (770)

Carbon

Carbon (total organic), % 5.6 (4.0) 2.0 (2.7) 3.0 (2.5)

Carbon (total), % 5.3 (3.9) 2.8 (3.3) 3.1 (2.5)

Trace elements

Aluminum, % 2.9 (3.4) 2.6 (2.5) 4.1 (5.3)

Antimony, mg/kg 10 (12) 2.3 (1.8) 0.7 (0.8)

Arsenic, mg/kg 17 (19) 18 (13) 7.5 (8.6)

Barium, mg/kg 380 (450) 180 (170) 360 (480)

Beryllium, mg/kg 2.4 (2.1) 2.0 (1.7) 1.4 (1.8)

Cadmium, mg/kg 80 (78) 100 (93) 9.9 (8.9)

Chromium, mg/kg 55 (62) 74 (63) 53 (67)

Cobalt, mg/kg 23 (21) 18 (14) 14 (16)

Copper, mg/kg 330 (320) 300 (250) 23 (26)

Iron, % 2.1 (2.2) 2.7 (2.0) 2.4 (2.8)

Lead, mg/kg 5,600 (6,100) 8,300 (8,000) 260 (280)

Lithium, mg/kg 22 (24) 46 (32) 40 (50)

Manganese, mg/kg 1,000 (980) 1,000 (700) 750 (870)

Molybdenum, mg/kg 3 (3) 3 (2) 1 (1)

Nickel, mg/kg 33 (32) 46 (41) 25 (30)

Selenium, mg/kg 2.2 (2.3) 2.9 (2.4) 0.7(0.7)

Silver, mg/kg 2.4 (2.4) 0.5 (<0.5) <0.5 (<0.5)

Strontium, mg/kg 59 (67) 49 (38) 110 (110)

Sulfur, % 0.21 (0.20) 0.75 (0.53) 0.10 (0.07)

Thallium, mg/kg <50 (<50) <50 (<50) <50 (<50)

Tin, mg/kg 270 (370) 3 (2) 2 (2)

Titanium, % 0.27 (0.36) 0.21 (0.21) 0.38 (0.50)

Uranium, mg/kg <50 (<50) <50 (<50) <50 (<50)

Vanadium, mg/kg 57 (65) 73 (64) 67 (85)

Zinc, mg/kg 11,000 (11,000) 26,000 (26,000) 1,700 (1,600)
Appendixes 51

Table 1–6. Cadmium concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil samples collected from the Spring River flood 

plain and tributary flood plains, Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2011.

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; μm, micrometer; <, less than]

Surficial-soil sampling 

site identifier 

(figs. 2A–2U)

Cadmium concentration, mg/kg

Bulk sample <63-μm fraction

Spring River

SRF-1 <12.3 <13.8

SRF-2 <11.3 <21.8

SRF-3 <11.3 <7.4

SRF-4 <11.2 <13.0

SRF-5 <11.2 <8.6

SRF-6 <11.2 <11.9

SRF-7 <11.4 <14.2

SRF-9 <11.4 <12.0

SRF-10 <12.0 <14.6

SRF-11 <11.1 <17.4

SRF-13 <10.3 <10.0

SRF-14 <10.9 <10.0

SRF-15 20 <18.9

SRF-16 <11.3 <14.4

SRF-17 <10.7 <12.2

SRF-18 <11.1 <10.5

SRF-19 31 22

SRF-20 <11.0 <10.1

SRF-21 <10.6 <16.8

SRF-22 <11.1 <11.4

SRF-23 <11.2 <11.4

SRF-24 <10.8 <10.4

SRF-25 <10.4 <10.3

SRF-26 <11.5 <6.3

SRF-27 <11.6 <11.8

SRF-28 <11.4 <17.1

SRF-29 <11.4 <14.5

SRF-31 <10.9 <15.1

SRF-32 <11.4 <14.0

SRF-33 <11.2 <16.4

Surficial-soil sampling 

site identifier 

(figs. 2A–2U)

Cadmium concentration, mg/kg

Bulk sample <63-μm fraction

Brush Creek

BC1-1 <13.1 <12.3

BC1-2 <12.7 <12.3

BC1-3 <12.8 <11.9

BC1-4 <12.6 <11.7

BC2-1 <12.9 <12.3

BC2-2 <12.4 <13.1

Cow Creek

CC1-1 <12.7 <11.6

CC1-2 <13.1 <11.9

CC1-3 <13.0 <12.7

CC2-1 <13.1 <12.1

CC2-2 <13.2 <11.6

Shawnee Creek

SnC1-1 <13.3 <11.6

SnC1-2 <12.7 <11.2

SnC1-3 <12.8 <11.8

SnC2-1 <12.9 <11.8

SnC2-2 <13.1 <11.3

Shoal Creek

ShC1-1 <12.8 <12.5

ShC1-2 <12.8 <12.6

ShC1-3 <12.5 <11.7

ShC2-1 <13.9 <12.5

ShC2-2 <13.4 <10.8

ShC2-3 <12.6 <12.6

ShC2-4 <12.5 <10.5

Short Creek

StC1-1 55 <14.1

StC1-2 48 28

StC1-3 77 19

StC2-1 30 <16.0

StC2-2 27 <13.5
52 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 1–6. Cadmium concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for surficial-soil samples collected from the Spring River flood 

plain and tributary flood plains, Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2011.—Continued

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; μm, micrometer; <, less than]

Surficial-soil sampling 

site identifier 

(figs. 2A–2U)

Cadmium concentration, mg/kg

Bulk sample <63-μm fraction

Spring Branch

SB1-1 36 <18.1

SB1-2 38 <14.3

SB2-1 <13.9 <14.2

SB2-2 <13.1 <13.3

SB2-3 <12.8 <11.2

SB3-1 <13.8 <13.1

SB3-2 32 <14.2

Tar Creek

TrC1-1 67 <14.4

TrC1-2 70 <14.9

TrC1-3 54 <9.4

TrC1-4 69 54

TrC2-1 16 <13.6

TrC2-2 20 <13.5

TrC2-3 <13.4 <13.6

TrC2-4 <13.1 <13.2

TrC3-1 <12.0 <11.7

TrC3-2 <12.3 <12.2

Surficial-soil sampling 

site identifier 

(figs. 2A–2U)

Cadmium concentration, mg/kg

Bulk sample <63-μm fraction

Tar Creek—Continued

TrC3-3 <12.7 <11.4

TrC3-4 <12.4 <12.0

Turkey Creek

TkC1-1 19 <13.6

TkC1-2 18 <13.3

TkC1-3 <13.7 <13.5

Willow Creek

WC1-1 <13.6 <11.7

WC1-2 <13.0 <13.8

WC1-3 <12.8 <13.3

WC2-1 <13.2 <13.0

WC2-2 <13.4 <11.2

WC2-3 <13.1 <8.8

WC2-4 <12.9 <12.6

WC3-1 <12.2 <12.0

WC3-2 <12.0 <12.1
Appendixes 53

Table 1–7. Constituent concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from the Spring River flood plain, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2010.

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available] 

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T1-1

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 6”

0’ 6”

0’ 6”

0’ 10”

1’ 2”

1’ 6”

1’ 10”

2’ 2”

2’ 6”

2’ 10”

3’ 2”

3’ 6”

3’ 10”

4’ 2”

4’ 6”

4’ 10”

5’ 2”

5’ 6”

5’ 10”

6’ 2”

6’ 6”

6’ 10”

7’ 2”

7’ 2”

7’ 2”

7’ 6”

7’ 10”

8’ 2”

8’ 6”

8’ 10”

9’ 2”

9’ 6”

9’ 10”

10’ 2”

10’ 6”

11’ 2”

11’ 6”

28

20

21

21

<13.7

17

25

16

19

25

20

21

26

18

19

21

22

20

<16.1

25

20

37

20

21

23

20

23

26

35

16

38

20

21

31

29

19

24

27

30

24

33

29

18

<15.3

16

17

<14.7

19

26

<18.8

<13.7

<17.2

<16.6

19

<16.1

<16.2

22

<15.4

24

<17.6

105

<18.6

18

<14.5

18

<12.2

18

<14.9

<17.2

19

<13.1

23

19

<13.6

17

<13.2

<14.5

21

<14.5

29

79

86

104

39

37

<23.3

<25.0

<24.0

32

<30.1

56

<27.5

34

38

34

35

32

<27.9

<31.4

43

35

41

<24.2

34

<28.6

39

41

35

<27.6

<26.3

<27.4

<25.9

<24.0

<26.4

45

35

<25.2

46

39

64

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

11’ 10”

Cadmium Lead 

concentration concentration 

(mg/kg) (mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T1-1—Continued

25 25 39

12’ 2” 40 <20.5 63

12’ 6” 28 19 64

12’ 10” <14.5 <16.2 37

13’ 2” 31 <16.8 <28.1

13’ 2” 25 <15.7 42

13’ 2” 31 26 34

13’ 6” 25 <14.4 52

13’ 10 34 25 46

14’ 2” 22 28 34

14’ 6” 28 <15.9 41

14’ 10” 18 <13.3 <21.9

15’ 2” 21 <14.1 32

15’ 6” 22 <18.6 <28.4

15’ 10”

0’ 2”

45 <16.8 <36.8

Coring site T1-2

56 275 4,158

0’ 2” 62 257 4,692

0’ 2” 75 248 5,701

0’ 6” 45 146 1,871

0’ 10” 48 127 2,793

1’ 2” 35 377 2,148

1’ 6” 52 1,226 1,302

1’ 10” 73 179 4,984

2’ 2” 20 55 408

2’ 6” 21 39 224

2’ 10” 27 21 99

3’ 2” 25 <23.2 <44.4

3’ 6” 30 <18.0 82

3’ 10” 26 40 71

4’ 2” <14.2 <12.9 38

4’ 6” 22 <15.3 44

4’ 10” 17 16 45

5’ 2” 25 <13.2 44

5’ 2” 25 <14.2 <28.3

5’ 2” 19 <17.3 35

5’ 6” 25 <14.6 41

5’ 10” 26 <18.6 45

6’ 2” 23 <14.7 42

6’ 6” 17 <16.6 <26.9
54 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 1–7. Constituent concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from the Spring River flood plain, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2010.—Continued

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available] 

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T1-2—Continued

6’ 10” 30 <15.5 46

7’ 2” <14.9 24 74

7’ 6” 15 <15.9 52

7’ 10” 27 30 68

8’ 2” 20 40 67

8’ 6” 35 29 60

8’ 10” 17 35 62

9’ 2” 18 26 62

9’ 6” 16 22 71

9’ 10” 29 20 87

10’ 2” 19 26 81

10’ 6” 23 20 59

10’ 10” 18 18 68

11’ 2” 23 <15.3 103

11’ 6” -- -- --

11’ 10” -- -- --

12’ 2” 20 <17.6 <29.5

12’ 6” 22 20 64

12’ 10” 23 23 71

13’ 2” 29 18 66

13’ 6” 29 <16.6 86

13’ 6” 20 31 59

13’ 6” 19 24 63

13’ 10” 28 <13.8 52

14’ 2” 28 <16.8 47

14’ 6” 31 <19.0 <37.2

14’ 10” 64 <22.2 <54.3

15’ 2” 30 <26.6 <56.0

15’ 6” 38 31.1 <68.3

15’ 10” 53 <23.7 <46.3

Coring site T1-3

0’ 1” 21 28 63

0’ 1” 18 28 74

0’ 1” 29 22 61

0’ 6” 27 32 90

0’ 11” 30 41 93

1’ 3” 23 22 100

1’ 6” 24 35 51

1’ 9” 22 <15.9 47

2’ 3” 18 23 55

2’ 6” 24 20 <27.3

2’ 9” 27 39 34

3’ 3” 24 22 38

3’ 6” 22 <15.5 41

3’ 9” 24 <16.8 51

4’ 2” <17.6 42 <37.4

4’ 6” -- -- --

4’ 10” -- -- --

5’ 3” 40 34 <40.1

5’ 6” 26 21 48

5’ 9” 46 <20.1 38

6’ 2” 29 <16.5 31

6’ 6” 44 <20.2 <38.9

6’ 10” 32 <15.6 52

7’ 2” 27 26 68

7’ 6” 31 18 56

7’ 10” 31 45 <43.6

8’ 2” 32 26 <36.5

8’ 6” 40 <14.9 <24.5

8’ 10” 31 26 <30.0

9’ 2” 56 24 46

9’ 6” -- -- --

9’ 10” -- -- --

10’ 3” 48 <23.0 79

10’ 3” 50 <21.2 72

10’ 3” 48 <21.7 90

10’ 6” 36 <20.0 <36.0

10’ 9” 40 <30.0 <66.7

11’ 2” 46 <18.8 <43.7

11’ 6” 28 <28.3 <60.8

11’ 10 19 <20.1 <44.4

12’ 2” 41 <12.7 <24.5

12’ 6” 30 28 49

12’ 6” 39 20 <36.3

12’ 6” 33 <18.0 69

12’ 10” 34 22 54

13’ 2” <25.2 <37.5 <73.6

13’ 6” 51 <38.0 <69.0

13’ 10” 63 <35.7 <78.1

14’ 2” 34 <41.8 <77.9

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T1-3—Continued
Appendixes 55

Table 1–7. Constituent concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from the Spring River flood plain, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2010.—Continued

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available] 

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T1-3—Continued Coring site T1-4—Continued

14’ 6”

14’ 10”

15’ 2”

15’ 6”

15’ 10”

45

40

44

44

36

<40.9

<24.5

<14.6

<16.3

<20.4

<63.6

<49.6

82

<34.2

<42.7

10’ 1”

10’ 6”

10’ 10”

11’ 2”

11’ 6”

34

26

<15.4

<15.1

24

<15.7

<19.6

<14.9

30

43

43

<34.1

45

<32.8

45

Coring site T1-4 11’ 10” 30 <16.4 <25.8

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 5”

0’ 10”

1’ 2”

1’ 6”

1’ 10”

2’ 2”

2’ 6”

2’ 10”

24

17

18

23

25

20

29

<14.3

<14.9

19

20

27

<16.4

<16.8

32

<17.5

<16.5

<17.0

22

<16.0

19

23

76

79

77

60

61

37

43

<24.2

<21.0

<23.4

<23.5

12’ 2”

12’ 6”

12’ 10”

13’ 2”

13’ 6”

13’ 6”

13’ 6”

13’ 10”

14’ 2”

14’ 4”

14’ 7”

15 <12.3

27 17

28 <15.2

15 <13.8

18 21

<16.6 <21.3

18 25

<15.8 <17.0

19 <16.3

23 <18.2

16 <15.4

<21.5

25

41

<25.9

<42.3

<41.0

<39.5

<35.7

40

33

42

3’ 2” 34 <16.2 <23.3 Coring site T1-5

3’ 6”

3’ 10”

4’ 2”

4’ 6”

4’ 10”

5’ 2”

5’ 6”

5’ 10”

6’ 2”

6’ 6”

6’ 6”

6’ 6”

6’ 10”

7’ 2”

7’ 6”

7’ 10”

8’ 2”

8’ 6”

8’ 10”

9’ 2”

9’ 6”

9’ 10”

23

17

21

16

17

15

14

24

32

22

29

26

16

17

17

15

28

18

23

20

26

18

<16.6

<16.6

<16.0

<16.7

33

<17.4

<13.4

<18.0

<17.9

17

<17.5

<15.5

24

<13.5

18

21

<15.5

19

20

<15.1

23

25

28

30

32

28

40

45

50

37

38

<27.2

<26.7

<26.4

31

51

43

43

36

40

<24.3

46

46

34

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 6”

0’ 10”

1’ 2”

1’ 6”

1’ 10”

2’ 2”

2’ 6”

2’ 10”

3’ 2”

3’ 6”

3’ 10”

4’ 2”

4’ 2”

4’ 2”

4’ 6”

4’ 10”

5’ 2”

5’ 6”

5’ 10”

22 30

<13.6 23

20 37

20 43

16 <15.7

22 21

42 58

17 35

19 46

26 <17.2

15 17

19 22

16 <17.6

24 <19.0

18 <15.6

<14.2 20

21 <15.3

24 25

27 19

21 26

21 24

18 22

139

142

176

157

72

88

212

151

106

37

44

<26.0

<27.3

<30.7

<24.4

<26.0

<24.5

30

<25.2

<25.8

26

51
56 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 1–7. Constituent concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from the Spring River flood plain, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2010.—Continued

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available] 

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T1-5—Continued Coring site T2-1—Continued

6’ 2”

6’ 6”

6’ 10”

7’ 2”

7’ 6”

7’ 10”

8’ 2”

8’ 6”

8’ 10”

9’ 2”

9’ 6”

9’ 10”

10’ 2”

10’ 6”

10’ 10”

11’ 2”

11’ 6”

11’ 10”

<15.4

34

29

27

24

23

22

27

27

29

30

37

28

36

38

19

28

18

28

21

<14.9

<15.2

<19.8

16

17

<14.6

<13.0

18

<18.2

<17.0

17

<16.1

17

<16.0

<17.9

<18

<30.5

<29.1

39

29

49

<22.4

26

<24.5

<20.2

<23.0

55

<28.3

<26.5

39

<24.2

<23.3

<25.9

24

2’ 1”

2’ 5”

2’ 9”

3’ 1”

3’ 5”

3’ 9”

4’ 1”

4’ 5”

4’ 9”

5’ 1”

5’ 5”

5’ 9”

6’ 1”

6’ 5”

6’ 10”

7’ 1”

7’ 6”

7’ 10”

26 22

19 <15.5

10 <16.5

19 <17.5

21 <15.8

24 <14.4

26 25

<14.8 <16.6

15 <16.6

21 <13.6

23 <17.8

18 <15.2

34 <16.8

17 <12.6

<13.9 <12.9

<19.1 <13.2

30 <12.4

29 16

822

705

62

605

343

321

595

491

462

439

409

454

413

470

465

502

415

342

12’ 2” 23 <14.6 <23.2 Coring site T2-2

12’ 6”

12’ 10”

12’ 10”

12’ 10”

13’ 2”

13’ 6”

13’ 10”

14’ 2”

14’ 6”

14’ 10”

15’ 2”

15’ 6”

15’ 10”

37

32

32

28

34

<17.3

38

44

35

26

45

16

<15.9

<26.3

20

26

23

27

<20.1

<22.3

<20.0

43

<19.4

<18.3

<19.1

<14.6

52

37

37

33

<51.2

<36.1

<41.2

45

<63.6

61

<46.1

<33.6

42

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 6”

0’ 10”

1’ 1”

1’ 5”

1’ 10”

2’ 1”

2’ 5”

2’ 10”

3’ 1”

3’ 5”

3’ 9”

37 52

27 27

19 28

27 49

18 30

21 <15.9

30 <19.3

25 <16.3

28 21

22 24

27 25

24 28

25 31

634

549

323

375

72

65

56

47

<31.6

<30.7

42

52

38

Coring site T2-1 4’ 1” <16.4 <16.7 <32.3

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 6”

0’ 10”

1’ 2”

1’ 5”

1’ 9”

54

54

53

215

134

25

24

172

202

75

644

810

19

23

5,201

4,110

5,912

9,728

11,500

1,495

864

4’ 1”

4’ 5”

4’ 8”

5’ 1”

5’ 5”

5’ 8”

6’ 1”

23

25

29

39

20

17

41

28

<15.2

<15.5

<13.1

<16.3

<13.4

22

<31.8

<24.2

43

70

<23.9

43

61
Appendixes 57

Table 1–7. Constituent concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from the Spring River flood plain, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2010.—Continued

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available] 

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T2-2—Continued Coring site T2-4—Continued

6’ 5”

6’ 9”

7’ 2”

7’ 5”

7’ 10”

34

26

18

28

14

31

<16.9

<16.4

16

<13.2

62

47

40

59

72

2’ 1”

2’ 5”

2’ 10”

3’ 1”

3’ 5”

26

24

19

<13.8

22

<15.0

<13.5

18

<14.4

<13.6

<26.7

<20.4

<24.9

<19.9

<20.7

Coring site T2-3 3’ 11” 23 <14.4 <26.5

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 5”

0’ 10”

1’ 1”

1’ 5”

1’ 10”

2’ 1”

2’ 5”

2’ 10”

3’ 1”

3’ 5”

3’ 9”

20

17

20

16

17

21

23

16

17

<14.1

21

19

21

<20.0

<18.7

21

25

32

31

45

21

22

<15.1

30

<13.7

<16.1

38

34

44

60

87

84

<14.5

<25.9

32

28

33

36

36

4’ 1”

4’ 5”

4’ 10”

5’ 1”

5’ 5”

5’ 10”

6’ 1”

6’ 5”

6’ 10”

7’ 1”

7’ 5”

7’ 5”

7’ 10”

21 22

32 28

<14.1 20

<14.5 <14.7

18 <15.9

23 20

31 22

20 <14.6

31 <16.0

34 19

30 29

33 24

33 <18.2

<29.2

<31.6

<27.6

29

<28.3

<24.5

<25.4

<23.3

<23.9

<23.0

32

<30.3

<33.7

4’ 1” 32 <18.6 <28.8 Coring site T2-5

4’ 5”

4’ 9”

5’ 1”

5’ 5”

5’ 10”

6’ 1”

6’ 5”

6’ 10”

7’ 1”

7’ 1”

7’ 5”

7’ 10”

16

20

20

22

22

22

19

<15.3

29

28

22

21

28

20

16

<18.2

17

22

23

23

<16.4

26

23

20

<24.9

41

35

37

39

36

<28.1

<30.5

50

42

48

59

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 5”

0’ 11”

1’ 1”

1’ 5”

1’ 9”

2’ 1”

2’ 5”

2’ 10”

3’ 1”

3’ 5”

19 25

<13.8 21

<13.4 18

22 <17.9

33 20

22 <13.9

<14.0 <16.0

20 21

<13.9 16

18 18

20 <16.0

15 23

34

33

33

45

36

41

39

33

29

<23.5

38

32

Coring site T2-4 3’ 10” 16 18 <22.0

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 5”

0’ 10”

1’ 1”

1’ 5”

1’ 10”

16

20

20

18

29

23

<14.6

25

28

19

24

20

<14.0

<16.5

53

42

41

40

53

34

<26.0

4’ 1”

4’ 5”

4’ 10”

5’ 1”

5’ 5”

5’ 10”

6’ 1”

23

22

32

<12.1

22

17

21

21

<14.6

<16.7

<11.9

18

<12.3

<16.8

34

29

43

<18.6

40

33

<27.7
58 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 1–7. Constituent concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from the Spring River flood plain, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2010.—Continued

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available] 

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T2-5—Continued

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T3-1—Continued

1’ 6” 19 24 44

1’ 10” 35 19 <22.2

2’ 2” 26 <16.4 <24.0

2’ 6” <13.9 <15.6 <24.0

2’ 10” 32 22 <25.0

3’ 2” 31 72 46

3’ 6” 28 19 31

3’ 10” 18 20 50

4’ 2” 22 <13.2 41

4’ 6” 17 19 53

4’ 10” 24 <15.2 28

5’ 2” 36 18 39

5’ 6” 24 15 <24.9

5’ 10” 31 <16.8 <26.9

6’ 2” 21 <15.7 33

6’ 2” 26 <13.9 34

6’ 2” 15 <15.2 <26.8

6’ 6” 19 <15.3 <24.3

6’ 10” 29 <16.6 <27.3

7’ 2” <14.3 <15.3 42

7’ 6” 30 <21.5 <41.3

7’ 10” 17 <12.8 48

8’ 2” 22 20 31

8’ 6” <14.6 <15.6 48

8’ 10” 22 28 59

9’ 2” 14 <14.9 49

9’ 6” 17 46 79

9’ 10” 17 20 <26.6

10’ 2” <15.1 20 66

10’ 6” 21 31 66

10’ 10” 19 20 32

11’ 2” 24 27 47

11’ 6” 29 32 60

11’ 10” <13.0 <14.9 35

12’ 2” 27 25 36

12’ 6” 27 <19.8 <36.1

12’ 10” 31 <15.5 30

13’ 2” 22 <17.5 69

13’ 2” 24 20 54

13’ 2” 20 <15.8 44

6’ 5” 21 <14.5 28

6’ 5” 19 <13.0 <23.8

6’ 10” <14.9 27 <28.4

7’ 1” 23 19 37

7’ 5” 28 <14.2 47

7’ 10” 17 <17.1 <25.3

Coring site T2-6

0’ 2” <13.3 25 37

0’ 2” 17 17 30

0’ 6” 22 20 48

0’ 11” 12 21 13

1’ 1” 25 26 <24.1

1’ 6” 24 <15.6 32

1’ 9” 21 20 33

2’ 1” <14.0 21 37

2’ 5” 16 31 35

2’ 9” 17 17 <22.9

3’ 1” 15 25 <25.4

3’ 5” 20 <16.9 <29.5

3’ 9” 27 <17.6 <27.8

4’ 1” <14.7 23 <26.0

4’ 5” 17 25 <26.9

4’ 9” 20 29 <24.0

5’ 1” 27 24 33

5’ 5” 17 56 <29.7

5’ 9” <15.5 <19.0 <30.8

5’ 9” 23 28 42

6’ 1” 20 <14.0 <26.6

6’ 5” 37 <17.5 <29.3

6’ 9” 20 62 <33.1

7’ 1” 24 26 <33.6

7’ 5” 31 <17.0 40

7’ 9” 29 28 <44.1

Coring site T3-1

0’ 2” 28 50 177

0’ 2” 28 <24.9 186

0’ 2” <18.2 51 188

0’ 6” 20 51 118

0’ 10” 27 29 161

1’ 2” <14.1 <16.0 101
Appendixes 59

Table 1–7. Constituent concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from the Spring River flood plain, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2010.—Continued

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available] 

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T3-1—Continued Coring site T3-2—Continued

13’ 6”

13’ 10”

14’ 2”

14’ 6”

14’ 10”

15’ 2”

21

29

17

25

25

27

<16.2

43

25

<19.0

30

<18.3

61

37

66

70

74

54

9’ 2”

9’ 6”

9’ 10”

10’ 2”

10’ 6”

10’ 10”

<14.5 <16.5

21 <14.4

37 <20.0

46 <15.4

28 <16.7

24 26

49

32

<33.7

44

45

53

15’ 6” 42 <26.4 <59.6 Coring site T3-3

15’ 10” 30 <17.5 39 0’ 2” 19 48 281

Coring site T3-2 0’ 2” 23 50 260

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 6”

0’ 10”

1’ 2”

1’ 6”

1’ 10”

2’ 2”

2’ 6”

2’ 10”

3’ 2”

3’ 6”

3’ 10”

4’ 2”

4’ 6”

4’ 10”

5’ 2”

5’ 2”

5’ 2”

5’ 6”

5’ 10”

6’ 2”

6’ 6”

6’ 10”

7’ 2”

7’ 6”

7’ 10”

8’ 2”

8’ 6”

8’ 10”

24

<19.6

<19.4

23

20

26

32

25

25

24

<14.3

17

22

20

19

20

27

28

15

21

23

26

24

26

16

25

17

21

18

27

19

34

62

39

47

36

<15.4

<15.6

<13.9

<16.4

<15.6

25

<14.8

20

<16.9

23

<15.0

<16.0

<16.4

<16.5

<17.4

17

<16.3

<15.6

19

<15.5

19

17

20

<17.6

30

<14.9

221

138

152

195

188

29

36

<26.7

<23.0

<23.1

26

<22.9

31

39

28

29

45

34

35

40

38

<26.0

59

49

60

60

52

43

57

57

73

0’ 2”

0’ 6”

0’ 10”

1’ 2”

1’ 6”

1’ 10”

2’ 2”

2’ 6”

2’ 10”

3’ 2”

3’ 6”

3’ 10”

4’ 2”

4’ 6”

4’ 10”

5’ 2”

5’ 6”

5’ 10”

6’ 2”

6’ 6”

6’ 6”

6’ 6”

6’ 10”

7’ 2”

7’ 6”

7’ 10”

8’ 2”

8’ 6”

8’ 10”

9’ 2”

9’ 6”

19

--

--

24

22

18

28

37

16

27

23

26

25

17

23

<14.6

26

25

30

25

<14.5

20

<14.8

22

31

16

22

<14.9

18

19

25

54

--

--

<16.0

37

<16.7

<16.2

21

<13.9

27

<14.6

<13.4

18

<13.0

<14.1

19

21

18

25

21

<16.7

<14.7

<17.0

<14.3

26

<12.1

<11.3

26

<14.7

<15.9

18

267

--

--

28

<27.6

30

<25.0

<27.4

<22.9

32

<22.9

28

<20.7

<21.8

<21.7

30

33

35

<25.0

33

<27.5

28

<25.2

27

<31.2

<22.0

<23.8

<24.0

23.2

<20.5

28
60 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 1–7. Constituent concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from the Spring River flood plain, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2010.—Continued

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available] 

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T3-3—Continued Coring site T3-4—Continued

9’ 10”

10’ 2”

10’ 6”

10’ 10”

26

30

42

41

<15.1

<7.8

<17.4

28

37

<26.2

35

52

10’ 6”

10’ 10”

11’ 2”

11’ 6”

<18.0

27

25

36

<18.0

<21.9

<16.4

<17.7

<34.8

<36.2

<29.3

49

Coring site T3-4 11’ 10” 39 <16.2 39

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 6”

0’ 10”

1’ 2”

1’ 6”

1’ 10”

2’ 2”

2’ 6”

2’ 10”

3’ 2”

3’ 6”

3’ 10”

19

16

15

22

19

20

26

<14.1

18

<14.7

15

20

19

17

55

44

52

36

<15.5

23

19

20

28

<14.8

17

<14.1

19

<13.8

249

266

249

168

<27.8

38

<26.9

38

<24.2

39

<24.1

<21.5

<24.3

<21.8

12’ 2”

12’ 6”

12’ 10”

13’ 2”

13’ 6”

13’ 10”

14’ 2”

14’ 2”

14’ 2”

14’ 6”

14’ 10”

15’ 2”

15’ 6”

15’ 10”

22 20

32 <20.6

45 <19.5

33 <19.8

<14.5 <15.5

20 <13.8

20 <17.8

20 <17.0

26 <15.8

<15.1 32

18 <15.7

25 <8.1

25 <20.6

49 <15.9

39

148

<40.7

54

<28.5

<23.4

<34.9

<34.9

<29.9

56

<28.5

63

<43.0

51

4’ 2” 29 22 <24.3 Coring site T3-5

4’ 6”

4’ 10”

5’ 2”

5’ 2”

5’ 2”

5’ 6”

5’ 10”

6’ 2”

6’ 6”

6’ 10”

7’ 2”

7’ 6”

7’ 10”

8’ 2”

8’ 6”

8’ 10”

9’ 2”

9’ 6”

9’ 10”

10’ 2”

17

17

19

26

21

28

23

17

40

24

20

20

14

21

43

25

30

33

39

40

<15.2

<12.7

<15.3

<15.3

<14.4

<14.2

<15.2

24

21

21

19

<15.7

<15.2

22

<17.4

<19.7

<13.3

<18.0

<16.3

21

27

25

<23.4

<22.9

36

33

<26.1

<26.0

<19.5

<21.7

<23.2

<24.2

27

<20.5

<30.1

50

<28.2

<29.9

39

42

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 6”

0’ 10”

1’ 2”

1’ 6”

1’ 10”

2’ 2”

2’ 6”

2’ 10”

3’ 2”

3’ 6”

3’ 10”

4’ 2”

4’ 6”

4’ 10”

5’ 2”

5’ 2”

5’ 2”

32 45

23 26

24 44

24 22

26 <15.0

17 <15.0

22 <17.6

22 <19.0

21 25

29 <15.4

24 21

17 16

<37.7 <15.9

21 <14.9

19 <14.9

23 <15.4

18 <14.3

28 20

16 <12.1

20 <14.4

212

183

221

261

<26.3

<27.4

<28.2

<29.9

<27.5

44

35

34

28

32

<24.2

<22.3

<23.4

<26.0

35

37
Appendixes 61

Table 1–7. Constituent concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from the Spring River flood plain, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2010.—Continued

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available] 

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T3-5—Continued Coring site T3-6—Continued

5’ 2”

5’ 6”

6’ 2”

6’ 6”

6’ 10”

7’ 2”

7’ 6”

7’ 10”

27

<15.0

25

21

23

23

35

32

<15.8

<14.9

23

28

<15.8

28

<23.9

<15.5

<18.8

<23.8

38

<33.7

<33.5

78

<38.6

<31.0

6’ 2”

6’ 6”

6’ 10”

7’ 4”

7’ 8”

8’ 2”

8’ 6”

8’ 10”

39 27

33 <28.5

35 <17.3

37 <21.5

57 <14.5

44 <18.2

53 <15.4

22 <15.4

54

<49.9

<31.1

<35.3

<48.9

<33.5

<29.3

<30.3

8’ 2” 35 <22.6 <50.8 Coring site T4-1

8’ 6”

8’ 10”

9’ 2”

9’ 6”

9’ 10”

10’ 2”

10’ 6”

10’ 10”

11’ 2”

11’ 6”

11’ 10”

32

36

19

25

34

32

28

18

29

39

62

<14.0

<25.4

<17.1

<20.1

<19.0

<18.8

18

<14.9

44

<24.8

<36.3

<28.1

<47.6

44

55

51

<34.7

50

61

113

77

106

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 4”

0’ 8”

1’ 1”

1’ 4”

1’ 7”

2’ 1”

2’ 4”

2’ 7”

3’ 1”

21 54

21 61

29 63

25 56

22 34

<14.1 25

24 18

22 <15.4

23 <14.2

19 <14.8

23 18

529

538

694

465

541

94

<29.3

50

27

33

48

Coring site T3-6 3’ 4” 26 19 38

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 6”

0’ 10”

1’ 2”

1’ 6”

1’ 10”

2’ 2”

2’ 6”

2’ 10”

3’ 6”

4’ 4”

4’ 8”

33

29

22

28

19

28

43

42

42

26

28

28

34

50

48

45

43

49

28

<18.3

<23.9

<25.1

31

24

<17.7

<13.1

27

<16.8

325

317

328

325

166

<31.7

<39.7

<34.6

<37.1

<37.7

93

<20.7

47

<29.2

3’ 7”

4’ 1”

4’ 5”

4’ 5”

4’ 9”

5’ 1”

5’ 5”

5’ 10”

6’ 1”

6’ 6”

6’ 10”

7’ 1”

7’ 5”

7’ 10”

16 <16.8

20 <16.1

18 <16.6

15 <13.8

15 <17.2

20 <16.6

30 <16.8

26 <16.7

19 <12.8

15 25

16 24

20 <14.7

21 31

30 <16.4

46

33

<27.7

36

44

<27.8

30

30

<22.6

<23.7

26

<23.5

<25.3

37

5’ 2” 29 <26.0 62 Coring site T4-2

5’ 6”

5’ 10”

6’ 2”

6’ 2”

41

32

46

40

<20.0

28

<21.1

<20.7

<32.9

<36.8

55

<40.1

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 5”

0’ 11”

30 136

16 169

15 157

16 36

626

635

522

276
62 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 1–7. Constituent concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from the Spring River flood plain, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2010.—Continued

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available] 

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T4-2—Continued Coring site T4-3—Continued

1’ 1”

1’ 5”

1’ 10”

2’ 1”

2’ 5”

2’ 10”

3’ 1”

3’ 5”

3’ 10”

21

19

18

19

19

19

17

23

24

38

20

25

25

<14.7

<15.6

19

<15.6

20

159

64

75

75

47

77

42

49

32

5’ 1”

5’ 5”

5’ 10”

6’ 1”

6’ 5”

6’ 10”

7’ 1”

7’ 5”

7’ 10”

<12.5 35

<12.7 36

<13.1 61

<13.8 59

<12.5 75

<12.5 35

13 42

<12.2 34

<12.2 29

125

137

115

144

99

99

117

59

67

4’ 1” <14.6 32 46 Coring site T4-4

4’ 5”

4’ 5”

4’ 9”

5’ 1”

5’ 5”

5’ 10”

6’ 1”

6’ 5”

6’ 10”

7’ 1”

7’ 5”

7’ 10”

<14.1

<14.2

26

25

30

19

19

17

17

28

<12.5

20

17

<13.9

<16.9

<16.1

22

22

<16.2

<16.1

<15.8

23

17

<13.1

35

38

60

56

44

35

39

40

58

50

31

40

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 4”

0’ 8”

1’ 1”

1’ 5”

1’ 9”

2’ 1”

2’ 4”

2’ 8”

3’ 1”

3’ 5”

<12.5 51

<12.2 51

<12.7 57

<12.4 52

<12.5 40

15 21

14 24

9 38

19 18

<13.1 32

21 <14.3

<13.9 33

461

414

399

283

228

118

64

69

66

88

65

77

Coring site T4-3 3’ 8” <17.6 28 51

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 4”

0’ 9”

1’ 1”

1’ 4”

1’ 8”

2’ 1”

2’ 4”

2’ 8”

3’ 1”

3’ 4”

23

24

14

17

<13.2

20

<13.0

14

<12.1

<12.2

<12.1

<12.5

169

251

97

22

45

35

39

48

57

88

38

53

760

1,423

495

97

87

85

90

88

107

103

91

88

4’ 1” 28 90 69

4’ 5” 27 28 70

4’ 10” <15.0 36 50

5’ 1” 24 81 111

5’ 5” <14.4 42 75

5’ 10” 33 79 107

6’ 1” 21 73 114

6’ 5” <14.4 89 158

6’ 9” <14.3 115 145

7’ 1” 21 94 217

7’ 5” 16 65 129

7’ 10” 28 73 126

3’ 8” <12.3 62 72 Coring site T4-5 (rocky and cherty, difficult to analyze)

4’ 1”

4’ 1”

4’ 5”

4’ 10”

13

<12.9

<12.3

13

89

88

60

39

107

112

102

111

0’ 1” <14.2 57 381

0’ 1” <14.0 <17.1 366

0’ 5” <13.5 39 219

0’ 10” 35 29 29
Appendixes 63

Table 1–7. Constituent concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from the Spring River flood plain, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2010.—Continued

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available] 

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T4-5 (rocky and cherty, difficult to analyze)—Continued Coring site T5-2—Continued

1’ 1” <13.8 24 35

1’ 7” 20 147 45

3’ 10” 20 82 73

4’ 5” <14.1 80 96

5’ 4” 16 95 95

7’ 3” <15.2 116 116

1’ 8”

2’ 1”

2’ 4”

3’ 1”

3’ 4”

3’ 7”

30 28

29 21

27 21

30 25

22 19

27 34

83

82

72

50

57

88

Coring site T5-1 4’ 1” 18 24 45

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 5”

0’ 10”

1’ 1”

1’ 5”

1’ 9”

2’ 1”

2’ 5”

2’ 10”

3’ 1”

3’ 5”

<12.9

<11.9

13

<12.0

16

17

15

<12.7

14

<12.9

13

16

<12.6

15

<12.8

<12.0

<12.1

<10.5

<13.4

<12.5

<12.5

<10.9

<12.4

16

24

36

<19.8

<18.5

<19.5

<20.6

27

<22.7

<19.1

<21.1

<18.5

<23.2

4’ 5”

4’ 9”

5’ 1”

5’ 1”

5’ 5”

5’ 9”

6’ 1”

6’ 5”

6’ 8”

7’ 1”

7’ 5”

7’ 9”

19 17

24 30

31 <16.2

22 <14.8

24 33

15 24

37 20

20 18

23 34

26 27

<13.1 25

15 72

93

102

81

79

70

122

108

88

90

123

117

156

3’ 10” 14 <14.3 <23.2 Coring site T5-3

4’ 1”

4’ 5”

4’ 10”

4’ 10”

5’ 1”

5’ 5”

5’ 10”

6’ 1”

6’ 5”

6’ 10”

7’ 1”

7’ 5”

7’ 10”

14

<12.7

<12.8

<12.9

<15.4

48

<16.2

<13.3

30

21

19

40

23

17

18

<12.3

<11.4

<15.4

<19.5

<20.1

<12.5

19

<19.3

23

32

<18.8

26

<20.9

<20.8

<22.3

<24.3

<28.4

<30.8

<25.4

<32.8

<40.4

<29.3

<36.1

<34.3

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 4”

1’ 1”

1’ 4”

2’ 1”

2’ 4”

3’ 1”

3’ 4”

4’ 1”

4’ 6”

4’ 10”

5’ 1”

25 40

15 99

<14.0 106

23 23

23 38

24 23

<14.5 <16.4

16 23

30 20

21 <16.7

<13.6 17

<14.2 <15.0

16 28

537

957

723

131

126

110

86

43

31

42

52

71

61

Coring site T5-2 5’ 6” <14.1 <16.0 73

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 4”

0’ 7”

1’ 1”

36

24

22

22

<13.9

72

55

66

62

49

513

528

426

356

197

5’ 10”

6’ 1”

6’ 1”

6’ 6”

6’ 11”

18

32

22

15

15

<15.3

43

26

19

22

84

94

68

63

106

1’ 4” 27 32 142 7’ 1” 18 25 71
64 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 1–7. Constituent concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from the Spring River flood plain, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2010.—Continued

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available] 

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T5-3—Continued Coring site T5-5—Continued

7’ 6”

7’ 10”

18

24

18

26

68

88

7’ 4”

7’ 8”

23

40

23

<20.6

106

106

Coring site T5-4 Coring site T5-6

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 6”

0’ 10”

1’ 1”

1’ 5”

1’ 9”

2’ 1”

2’ 5”

2’ 9”

3’ 1”

3’ 6”

3’ 6”

4’ 2”

4’ 8”

23

19

15

25

<13.6

16

29

19

18

23

24

25

28

34

67

74

59

54

47

<14.3

23

<16.5

<16.0

27

23

<15.8

18

<15.1

20

65

538

587

296

185

98

81

88

55

51

52

73

74

86

78

157

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 5”

0’ 8”

1’ 1”

1’ 5”

1’ 9”

2’ 1”

2’ 5”

2’ 8”

3’ 1”

3’ 5”

3’9 “

4’ 4”

4’ 7”

21

<13.3

18

26

18

24

32

26

21

17

31

19

27

25

25

67

48

<17.8

<14.7

30

34

24

19

29

23

<12.7

21

24

<14.9

44

312

345

72

32

<24.4

<23.2

<22.2

<27.9

39

43

46

44

<32.9

63

83

Coring site T5-5 4’ 11” 21 33 76

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 5”

0’ 9”

1’ 1”

1’ 5”

1’ 9”

2’ 1”

2’ 5”

2’ 9”

28

29

15

17

<14.4

37

20

27

15

<15.6

50

47

41

<17.1

33

42

27

28

30

<18.1

199

212

230

125

103

66

61

55

42

57

5’ 1”

5’ 6”

5’ 11”

6’ 1”

6’ 6”

6’ 11”

7’ 1”

7’ 1”

7’ 5”

7’ 10”

<15.5 31

23 22

28 20

38 28

22 24

21 20

25 <17.9

36 <15.2

28 <15.9

23 <14.6

104

112

75

75

79

63

<27.9

34

39

54

3’ 1” 29 <16.2 35 Coring site T5-7

3’ 5”

4’ 2”

4’ 8”

5’ 2”

5’ 5”

5’ 5”

6’ 1”

6’ 4”

6’ 9”

7’ 1”

22

32

22

37

30

28

42

35

<19.6

23

21

27

21

18

<24.1

<24.4

31

<19.2

26

28

48

81

70

81

66

65

62

104

112

88

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 5”

0’ 10”

1’ 1”

1’ 5”

1’ 11”

2’ 1”

2’ 1”

2’ 5”

<13.9 18

<14.1 32

<13.1 23

21 <16.4

23 27

<14.4 19

19 <15.1

15 16

14 <14.4

14 <12.8

78

82

60

<26.9

<27.6

45

34

<26.4

35

32
Appendixes 65

Table 1–7. Constituent concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from the Spring River flood plain, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2010.—Continued

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available] 

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T5-7—Continued Coring site T6-1—Continued

2’ 10”

3’ 1”

3’ 5”

3’ 10”

4’ 1”

4’ 5”

4’ 10”

5’ 1”

5’ 5”

5’ 10”

6’ 1”

6’ 5”

6’ 9”

7’ 1”

7’ 5”

7’ 10”

24

<16.0

16

20

31

24

26

<14.6

17

26

19

17

25

25

23

28

21

33

20

28

<18.1

<14.4

21

25

62

13

<15.8

29

22

45

<13.0

<14.9

<26.5

54

48

36

71

58

45

44

40

69

52

41

46

<28.4

<24.5

41

6’ 4”

6’ 8”

7’ 1”

7’ 4”

7’ 8”

8’ 1”

8’ 5”

8’ 9”

9’ 1”

9’ 4”

9’ 7”

10’ 1”

10’ 5”

10’ 9”

11’ 1”

11’ 5”

19

<14.0

16

24

17

20

20

28

<13.9

<13.4

14

22

25

31

20

25

23

20

28

17

113

<15.5

30

23

<13.3

24

24

21

21

30

29

<17.4

127

139

149

126

20

101

87

96

91

61

61

109

76

125

119

119

Coring site T6-1 11’ 9” 38 25 149

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 4”

0’ 8”

1’ 2”

1’ 5”

1’ 9”

2’ 1”

2’ 1”

2’ 1”

2’ 4”

2’ 8”

3’ 1”

41

32

37

58

45

42

36

46

47

45

45

44

40

24

117

113

117

141

213

212

212

167

757

774

731

166

129

91

1,411

1,378

1,517

1,654

1,475

1,503

1,868

1,651

3,086

3,033

2,989

1,599

1,478

1,345

12’ 1”

12’ 6”

12’ 10”

13’ 1”

13’ 1”

13’ 1”

13’ 6”

13’ 10”

14’ 1”

14’ 6”

14’ 10”

15’ 1”

15’ 3”

15’ 8”

27 27

24 25

15 22

19 <20.7

22 43

22 <20.1

23 33

18 19

15 20

23 27

22 27

<14.0 24

22 35

29 <16.5

103

98

96

132

116

112

150

105

84

62

53

69

79

96

3’ 5” 27 30 622 Coring site T6-2

3’ 8”

4’ 1”

4’ 4”

4’ 8”

5’ 1”

5’ 5”

5’ 9”

6’ 1”

25

27

24

15

21

24

17

16

27

27

33

17

<15.7

26

25

<15.9

429

252

172

179

139

177

179

184

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 2”

0’ 5”

1’ 1”

1’ 5”

2’ 2”

2’ 5”

24 59

32 74

27 76

27 32

20 43

26 31

22 29

<22.6 <37.4

361

353

274

172

224

101

72

87
66 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 1–7. Constituent concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from the Spring River flood plain, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2010.—Continued

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available] 

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T6-2—Continued Coring site T6-3—Continued

3’ 1”

3’ 5”

4’ 1”

4’ 6”

4’ 11”

5’ 1”

5’ 6”

5’ 10”

6’ 1”

6’ 6”

6’ 10”

7’ 2”

7’ 6”

7’ 11”

7’ 11”

7’ 11”

8’ 1”

8’ 5”

32

20

25

20

<15.7

37

29

22

37

27

34

28

53

42

32

37

44

95

23

<18.4

39

22

24

<20.0

<15.7

<14.2

22

<15.9

20

33

24

<16.4

<15.3

<12.9

<23.7

<21.2

62

46

43

49

39

40

37

47

<39.2

<33.4

45

68

96

46

<25.9

35

54

<43.2

4’ 10.5”

5’ 1.5”

5’ 6”

5’ 11”

6’ 1”

6’ 1”

6’ 1”

6’ 5”

6’ 10”

7’ 1”

7’ 5.5”

7’ 10”

8’ 2”

8’ 6”

8’ 11”

9’ 2”

9’ 6”

9’ 11”

25 21

35 22

17 18

16 23

<14.0 35

<14.9 21

<14.2 <14.9

<13.9 49

18 40

26 27

15 20

16 29

28 44

25 <17.1

26 19

<15.4 38

19 <13.9

24 <15.1

36

36

61

69

59

52

69

66

69

40

41

58

62

55

68

45

40

58

8’ 8” 26 <15.0 <32.6 Coring site T6-3 (duplicate) 

9’ 1”

9’ 5”

9’ 8”

10’ 1”

28

44

32

32

<15.6

<17.6

<16.2

<15.1

47

146

<33.5

<27.9

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 6”

<12.5 21

<12.0 23

<12.4 23

<13.7 20

52

54

63

27

Coring site T6-3 0’ 10.5” <25.8 <37.5 <66.0

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 1”

0’ 6”

0’ 10”

1’ 1.5”

1’ 6”

1’ 8.5”

2’ 1.5”

2’ 6”

2’ 10”

3’ 2”

3’ 6”

3’ 10”

4’ 1.5”

4’ 6”

<13.3

15

<12.9

<14.1

24

17

18

23

<14.0

27

<13.9

20

16

<14.2

19

<14.6

24

29

24

25

<15.7

<16.2

<18.4

<15.4

20

20

21

25

24

22

16

25

56

75

53

40

33

<29.5

40

52

39

69

43

27

44

58

49

63

1’ 1.5”

1’ 6”

1’ 9”

2’ 1.5”

2’ 5”

2’ 9”

3’ 1.5”

3’ 5”

3’ 10”

4’ 1.5”

4’ 6”

4’ 11”

5’ 1.5”

5’ 5.5”

5’ 11”

6’ 1.5”

32

30

28

17

10

17

18

29

26

29

<14.0

31

23

<13.9

14

<13.8

18

24

21

<15.7

<17.1

<14.3

<16.2

25

31

32

31

49

23

47

<13.2

46

<27.8

41

<33.0

54

22

35

47

44

40

47

47

44

58

34

51

43
Appendixes 67

Table 1–7. Constituent concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from the Spring River flood plain, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2010.—Continued

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available] 

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T6-3 (duplicate)—Continued Coring site T6-4—Continued

6’ 5.5”

6’ 5.5”

6’ 5.5”

6’ 10”

7’ 1.5”

7’ 6”

7’ 10.5”

8’ 1.5”

8’ 6”

8’ 11”

9’ 1.5”

9’ 5.5”

9’ 11”

10’ 1.5”

10’ 5.5”

10’ 11”

11’ 1.5”

11’ 5.5”

11’ 5.5”

11’ 5.5”

11’ 10.5”

12’ 1.5”

12’ 5.5”

12’ 10”

13’ 2”

13’ 6”

13’ 10”

14’ 2”

14’ 6”

14’ 10”

15’ 2”

15’ 7”

15’ 10”

22

21

23

<14.0

28

20

29

22

23

22

50

36

<15.3

<13.5

15

18

<14.3

21

15

<13.9

<22.4

21

25

19

<14.2

22

26

21

25

16

<14.6

31

32

21

<14.5

16

34

27

<15.5

48

60

<17.1

23

24

17

<19.1

20

24

<11.8

27

22

<14.2

27

<19.5

27

37

<16.8

18

<16.5

18

34

<15.2

26

22

<12.1

17

72

71

44

95

45

53

59

58

57

47

36

59

41

63

65

61

66

57

52

58

84

44

82

77

79

39

49

73

64

59

60

<34.3

60

1’ 4.5”

1’ 7.5”

2’ 1”

2’ 4”

2’ 7”

3’ 4”

3’ 8”

4’ 1.5”

4’ 6”

4’ 10.5”

5’ 1”

5’ 4”

5’ 11”

6’ 1”

6’ 5.5”

6’ 10.5”

7’ 1”

7’ 5”

7’ 9”

8’ 2”

8’ 6”

8’ 10”

9’ 1.5”

9’ 7”

9’ 10”

9’ 10.5”

10’ 2.5”

10’ 5.5”

10’ 10”

11’ 1.5”

11’ 5.5”

11’ 10”

12’ 2”

<16.2

25

23

17

<14.4

20

37

<15.1

28

21

25

19

22

22

35

22

25

19

20

26

23

27

27

38

30

32

<16.7

21

23

22

34

17

38

<15.6

<15.2

<17.2

22

<17.5

<15.2

<18.9

44

<16

21

<16.3

19

<13.1

18

32

21

20

20

<18.9

<16.8

<16

<17.2

21

<17.7

19

<15.1

<17.9

31

27

29

27

26

<18.8

<29.9

29

34

55

<26.5

37

<34.4

<30.7

54

<22.9

33

29

28

30

49

47

47

56

<33.1

56

51

37

59

59

38

<36.8

58

82

44

77

<39.8

<34.4

79

Coring site T6-4 12’ 6” 32 <18.5 62

0’ 1.5”

0’ 1.5”

0’ 1.5”

0’ 5”

0’ 8.5”

1’ 2”

<13.9

17

14

<14.4

16

22

29

28

37

32

25

<15

64

59

77

58

37

41

12’ 11”

13’ 1.5”

13’ 6”

13’ 11”

14’ 1.5”

14’ 1.5”

26

35

22

19

20

<19.4

<20.5

<57

21

16

24

<12.2

50

57

46

54

95

<37.2
68 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 1–7. Constituent concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from the Spring River flood plain, 

Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009, 2010.—Continued

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available] 

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Core depth interval (in feet 

and inches)

Cadmium 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Lead 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Zinc 

concentration 

(mg/kg)

Coring site T6-4—Continued Coring site T6-5—Continued

14’ 1.5”

14’ 7”

14’ 11”

15’ 2”

15’ 6”

15’ 11”

20

27

36

37

41

35

32

32

24

24

23

<14.6

85

52

49

43

50

<34.8

3’ 4”

3’ 4”

3’ 8”

4’ 2”

4’ 7” 

4’ 10”

<16.4

22

28

17

17

25

22

<16

21

<15.3

17

20

31

<29.5

<30.1

39

29

<27.6

Coring site T6-5 5’ 2” 15 28 <27.9

0’ 3”

0’ 3”

0’ 3”

1’ 1–1.4”

1’ 1.4–1.8”

1’ 3-7”

2’ 4”

2’ 8”

<11.9

<11.9

<11.9

37

40

<14.0

30

25

20

19

<13

<22.6

53

14

39

<19.2

149

153

148

<37.9

<36.3

40

30

49

5’ 6”

5’ 11”

6’ 2”

6’ 6”

6’ 10”

7’ 2”

7’ 6”

7’ 10”

23

<13.6

23

23

25

21

45

34

<15.1

30

20

22

<13.2

22

<17.4

35

42

45

39

47

31

<27.3

<33.2

89
Appendixes 69

Table 1–8. Cadmium concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from tributary flood plains, Cherokee 

County, Kansas, 2011.

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available]

Coring site identifier

(figs. 2A–2U)

Sample depth,

inches

Cadmium 

concentration, 

mg/kg

Brush Creek

BC1-1 6 <12.6

12 <12.7

BC1-2 6 <12.7

12 <12.7

BC1-3 6 <12.8

12 <13.3

BC1-4 6 <12.6

12 <13.0

BC2-1 6 <12.3

12 <12.3

BC2-2 6 <12.4

12 <12.8

Cow Creek

CC1-1 4 <12.7

10 <12.5

CC1-2 6 <13.0

12 <12.7

CC1-3 6 <12.8

12 <12.7

CC2-1 6 <13.3

12 52

CC2-2 6 <12.3

12 <13.0

Shawnee Creek

SnC1-1 6 <12.5

12 <13.0

SnC1-2 6 <13.0

12 <13.1

SnC1-3 6 <13.0

12 <13.2

SnC2-1 6 <13.2

12 <13.0

SnC2-2 6 <12.9

12 <12.7

Coring site identifier

(figs. 2A–2U)

Sample depth,

inches

Cadmium 

concentration, 

mg/kg

Shoal Creek

ShC1-1 6 <12.8

12 <12.9

ShC1-2 6 <12.2

12 <12.7

ShC1-3 6 <13.0

12 <12.8

ShC2-1 6 <13.5

12 <13.5

ShC2-2 5 <12.7

ShC2-3 6 <12.5

12 <12.7

ShC2-4 -- --

Short Creek

StC1-1 6 78

12 <14.2

StC1-2 6 <14.3

9 34

12 <14.1

StC1-3 6 66

StC2-1 6 17

StC2-2 -- --

Spring Branch

SB1-1 4 32

10 <14.7

SB1-2 -- --

SB2-1 4 <14.9

10 <13.9

SB2-2 6 <13.8

12 <13.2

SB2-3 -- --

SB3-1 6 <12.9

10 <13.0

SB3-2 -- --
70 Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas

Table 1–8. Cadmium concentrations determined by x-ray fluorescence for cores collected from tributary flood plains, Cherokee 

County, Kansas, 2011.—Continued

[mg/kg, milligrams per kilogram; <, less than; --, not available]

Coring site identifier

(figs. 2A–2U)

Sample depth,

inches

Cadmium 

concentration, 

mg/kg

Tar Creek

TrC1-1 6 89

12 84

TrC1-2 6 66

12 110

TrC1-3 6 53

12 60

TrC1-4 6 54

12 <14.0

TrC2-1 4 <13.2

10 16

TrC2-2 4 <13.6

10 <13.5

TrC2-3 4 <13.9

10 129

TrC2-4 4 <14.5

10 214

TrC3-1 6 <12.7

12 <12.9

TrC3-2 6 <12.5

12 <12.8

TrC3-3 6 <12.9

12 <12.8

TrC3-4 6 <12.5

12 <12.8

Coring site identifier

(figs. 2A–2U)

Sample depth,

inches

Cadmium 

concentration, 

mg/kg

Turkey Creek

TkC1-1 6 21

12 53

TkC1-2 6 19

12 35

TkC1-3 6 <12.7

12 <12.4

Willow Creek

WC1-1 6 <12.8

12 <13.4

WC1-2 6 <13.3

12 <13.7

WC1-3 6 <13.5

WC2-1 6 <13.5

12 <13.8

WC2-2 6 <13.3

12 <13.5

WC2-3 6 <14.0

12 <13.3

WC2-4 6 <13.2

12 <12.8

WC3-1 6 <12.6

12 <12.6

WC3-2 6 <12.6

12 <12.4

Publishing support provided by: 

Rolla Publishing Service Center

For additional information concerning this publication, contact: 

Director, USGS Kansas Water Science Center 

4821 Quail Crest Place 

Lawrence, KS 66049 

(785) 842–9909

Or visit the Kansas Water Science Center Web Site at: 

http://ks.water.usgs.gov
Back Cover. Top—Collection of a soil core near Cow Creek, Cherokee County, Kansas (photograph by Kyle Juracek, U.S. Geological 

Survey). Bottom—Collection of a surficial-soil sample near Empire Lake, Cherokee County, Kansas (photograph by Kyle Juracek, 

U.S. Geological Survey). 
Juracek— Occurrence and Variability of Mining-Related Lead and Zinc in the Spring River Flood Plain, Cherokee County, Kansas, 2009–11—SIR 2013–5028