GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 361

SUMMARY OF ANNUAL RECORDS OF 

CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER OF 

THE ARKANSAS RIVER IN 

OKLAHOMA AND ARKANSAS 

1945-52

Prepared in cooperation with the University of Arkansas Engineering 

Experiment Station, Oklahoma Planning and Resources Board, Division 

of Water Resources, and the Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical 

College, Division of Engineering Research.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Douglas McKay, Secretary

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

W. E. Wrather, Director

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 361

SUMMARY OF ANNUAL RECORDS OF CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER OF 

THE ARKANSAS RIVER IN OKLAHOMA AND ARKANSAS, 1945-52

By T. B. Dover and J. W. Geurin

A PROGRESS REPORT

Prepared in cooperation with the University of Arkansas Engineering 

Experiment Station, Oklahoma Planning and Resources Board, Division of 

Water Resources, and the Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical 

College, Division of Engineering Research

Washington, D. C.,1955

Free on application to the Geological Survey, Washington 25, D. C.
SUMMARY OF ANNUAL RECORDS OF CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER OF 

THE ARKANSAS RIVER IN OKLAHOMA AND ARKANSAS, 1945-52

A PROGRESS REPORT 

By T. B. Dover and J. W. Geurin

CONTENTS

Abstract....................................

Introduction...............................

Purpose and scope of report......

Personnel and acknowledgments. 

Arkansas River drainage basin......

Location and extent..................

Physical and geologic features... 

Oklahoma............................

Arkansas.............................

C lima te.................................

Streamflow records..................

Chemical quality........................

Definition of terms...................

Page

1

4

4

4

4

4

5

5

5

7

Page

Chemical quality Continued

Collection and examination of samples... 

Oklahoma-Kansas State line to Tulsa.....

Influence of Salt Fork Arkansas River. 

Influence of Cimarron River..............

Tulsa to Van Buren.............................

Influence of Verdigris, Neosho, and 

Illinois Rivers.............................

Influence of Canadian River....... .......

Van Buren to Little Rock.....................

Conelusions.........................................

14

14

14

17

17

18

18

19

ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure 1.

2.

3.

4.

Page 

Map showing location of Arkansas River basin in Oklahoma and Arkansas...................................... 2

Years of operation of sampling stations, 1946-52................................................................... ... 3

Normal annual isohyetal map of Arkansas River basin................................................................ 6

Weighted average analyses for some streams in the Arkansas River basin, October 1950 to

September 1951................................................................................................................ 15

Range and weighted averages of dissolved solids and chloride, water year 1950............................... 16

TABLES

Table

Page

1. Summary of analyses, 1946-52.............................................................................................. 9

2. Runoff, chloride, and dissolved solids for water year 1950......................................................... 17

ABSTRACT

The Arkansas River is subject to many types of pollution downstream from the Oklahoma-Kansas State 

line, and its inferior quality together with its erratic 

flow pattern has caused it to be largely abandoned as a 

source of municipal and industrial water supply. Currently, the Arkansas River is not directly used as a 

source of public supply in any part of the basin in either 

Oklahoma or Arkansas.

In general, the chemical concentration of the river 

water increases downstream from the Oklahoma-Kansas 

State line to Tulsa because of tributary inflow from the

Salt Fork Arkansas River and the Cknarron River, 

both streams being sources of large amounts of natural salts and industrial wastes. A decrease in concentration of dissolved solids is noted downstream from 

Tulsa due to tributary inflow from the Verdigris, 

Neosho, and Illinois Rivers; another increase in concentration occurs with tributary inflow from the Canadian River, which is largely oilfield wastes. A progressive decrease in concentration is noted as the 

river flows through Arkansas to the Mississippi River, 

because all major tributaries below the Canadian River 

have a dilution effect upon the chemical concentration 

of the Arkansas River water.
CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER, ARKANSAS RIVER
STREAMS AND LOCATION 1945-46 1946-47 1947-48 1948-49 1949-

ARKANSAS RIVER AT ARKANSAS CITY, KANS. 

ARKANSAS RIVER AT KAW CITY, OKLA. 

ARKANSAS RIVER AT RALSTON, OKLA. 

CIMARRON RIVER AT MANNFORD, OKLA. 

ARKANSAS RIVER AT SANDS SPRINGS, OKLA. 

ARKANSAS RIVER AT BIXBY, OKLA. 

ARKANSAS RIVER AT WEBBERS FALLS, OKLA.

CANADIAN RIVER NEAR WHITEFIELD, OKLA. 

ARKANSAS RIVER AT VAN BUREN, ARK.

ARKANSAS RIVER AT DARDANELLE, ARK. 

ARKANSAS RIVER AT LITTLE ROCK, ARK.

YEARS OF OPERATION OF SAMPLING STATIONS 1946-52

Figure 2. --Years of operation of sampling stations, 1946-52.
CHEMICAL QUALITY CF WATER, ARKANSAS RIVER

Proposals for storage and regulating reservoirs on 

the Arkansas River in both Oklahoma and Arkansas 

have been made by the Corps of Engineers and others. 

Additional proposals are being considered in the present Arkansas-White-Red River Basin Inter-Agency 

Sub-Committee studies. If constructed, these reservoirs will provide an opportunity for control of flow 

and beneficial use of Arkansas River water both at and 

downstream from these sites. Impoundment alone will 

greatly reduce the extremes in water quality, and by 

reasonable control of municipal and industrial wastes, 

the water at some points on the river would be comparable in quality to many existing municipal and industrial supplies in the basin.

INTRODUCTION 

Purpose and Scope of Report

The U. S. Geological Survey has carried on a program for the investigation of the quality of water resources in cooperation with the States of Arkansas 

(since 1945) and Oklahoma (since 1946). This program 

has included the collection of data in the Arkansas 

River basin which embraces about two-thirds of the 

area of Oklahoma and about one-fifth of the area of 

Arkansas. Results of these investigations in the respective States are published annually by the States of 

Arkansas and Oklahoma and are also included in the 

series of annual Water-Supply Papers of the U. S. 

Geological Survey, "Quality of surface waters of the 

United States. " This report presents a summation of 

data collected under these cooperative programs in the 

Arkansas River basin and an evaluation of the effect of 

tributary inflow on chemical quality of the Arkansas 

River.

In Oklahoma, during the period from October 1946 

to September 1952, daily records of chemical quality 

were collected at six locations on the Arkansas River 

and at 22 locations on its tributaries. In Arkansas, 

during the period from October 1945 to September 

1952, daily records were collected at three locations 

on the Arkansas River and at three locations on its 

tributaries. Figure 1 indicates the locations of these 

34 daily sampling stations. Figure 2 indicates the 

years of available records for the nine stations on the 

Arkansas River and on the Cimarron and Canadian 

Rivers, the two most important tributaries insofar as 

the effect on the chemical quality of the water in the 

Arkansas River is concerned. It is important to note 

that these records were not collected for the specific 

purpose of evaluating the quality of water of the Arkansas River, but rather as part of a general evaluation of the quality of water resources of Oklahoma and 

Arkansas. Hence, there are current deficiencies in 

records necessary for full evaluation of the quality of

the Arkansas River. These areas where further study 

seems to be worthwhile will be pointed out along with 

the areas where present information seems adequate 

to support reasonable conclusions.

Personnel and Acknowledgments

The cooperative investigations of water resources 

in the States of Arkansas and Oklahoma on which this 

report is based were conducted by the Water Resources 

Division of the U. S. Geological Survey, Carl G. 

Paulsen, Chief Hydraulic Engineer. Investigations of 

water quality were under the general supervision of 

S. K. Love, Chief, Quality of Water Branch.

The program in Arkansas was carried on in cooperation with the University of Arkansas Engineering Experiment Station, Dr. W. W. Grigorieff, Director; 

the program in Oklahoma was in cooperation with the 

Division of Water Resources of the Oklahoma Planning 

and Resources Board, Ira C. Husky, Director, and 

the Oklahoma Agricultural and Mechanical College, 

Division of Engineering Research, Dr. Clark A. Dunn, 

Executive Director.

Geological Survey offices contributed information 

used in parts of the report and the assistance is acknowledged of S. K. Jackson, District Engineer, Oklahoma City, Okla.; John L. Saunders, District Engineer, 

Fort Smith, Ark. ; S. L. Schoff, District Geologist, 

Norman, Okla.; and Roger C. Baker, District Geologist, Little Rock, Ark.

ARKANSAS RIVER DRAINAGE BASIN 

Location and Extent

The Arkansas River and its tributaries drain an area 

of 160, 640 square miles in parts of Colorado, Kansas, 

New Mexico, Texas, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Arkansas. Of this total, about 44,800 square miles lie in 

Oklahoma and about 12, 100 square miles in Arkansas. 

Thus, the area included in this report comprises about 

35 percent of the drainage area of the Arkansas River.

The principal tributaries of the Arkansas River 

downstream from the Oklahoma-Kansas State line are 

the Salt Fork Arkansas, Cimarron, Verdigris, Neosho, Illinois, Canadian, and Poteau Rivers in Oklahoma and Mulberry River, Illinois Bayou, Petit Jean 

Creek, Fourche La Fave River, and Bayou Meto in 

Arkansas. The following table lists the drainage area 

and average discharge for these tributaries, during 

the period October 1946 to September 1952, at locations near their junction with the Arkansas River.
ARKANSAS RIVER DRAINAGE BASIN

Drainage area and average discharge of principal tributaries to the Arkansas River in Oklahoma and Arkansas,

October 1946 to September 1952

Stream and location of measurements

Salt Fork Arkansas River at Tonkawa, 

Okla. ..............................................

Cimarron River at Mannford, Okla.........

Verdigris River near Inola, Okla.... .......

Neosho River near Wagoner, Okla..........

Illinois River near Gore, Okla...............

Canadian River near Whitefield, Okla.. ... 

Poteau River near Wister, Okla.............

Mulberry River near Mulberry, Ark.......

Illinois Bayou near Scottsville, Ark........

Petit Jean Creek at Danville, Ark..... .....

Fourche La Fave River near Nimrod, 

Ark................................................

Bayou Meto near Stuttgart, Ark..... ........

Drainage 

area 

(sq mi)

4,528 

18,849 

7, 911 

12,307 

1,622 

47,576 

1,012 

372 

242 

741

680 

560

Average discharge for water year 

(acre -feet)

1947

1, 720 

3,460 

8,920 

16, 930 

3,810 

17,850 

3,270 

1,330

1,230

1, 190 

664

1948

1,510 

2,410 

10, 120 

18,870 

3,510 

12,700 

2,070 

831 

668 

1,690

1,780 

1,440

1949

4,640 

5,210 

11,330

4,370 

15,840 

2,900 

1,540 

1,020 

2,130

2,340 

1,550

1950

1, 120 

3,390 

8,400

5,080 

19,760 

3,210 

1, 730 

1,370 

2,910

3, 160 

2,530

1951

3,560

12,880 

27,960 

2,870 

9, 110 

1,710 

1,050 

607 

1, 110

1, 140 

1,070

1952

1,040

7,220 

14,850 

2,320 

5,200 

2, 180 

1,480 

1,070 

2,230

2,460 

994

Physical and Geologic Features

The Arkansas River enters Oklahoma at the northern 

boundary near Newkirk, just east of the 97th meridian, 

crosses the State in a southeasterly direction, flows 

past Tulsa, and enters Arkansas at its western boundary near Fort Smith, north of the 35th parallel. The 

river flows in a southeasterly direction past Little 

Rock near the center of the State, and empties into the 

Mississippi River east of Dumas, Ark., west of the 

91st meridian.

Oklahoma

The Arkansas River flows across alternating beds 

of sandstone and shale of Pennsylvanian age totaling 

several thousand feet in thickness. The shale beds 

predominate and generally are dark in color. The 

sandstone beds are fine to medium in texture and 

brown in color. Most of these rocks are carboniferous to a degree. Included are at least seven beds of 

workable coal, ranging in thickness from 2 to 6 feet, 

and ranging in character from bituminous to semianthracite. Petroleum and natural gas are found throughout the basin, except in the northeastern part.

From about the longitude of Muskogee eastward, the 

river flows through the major physiographic division 

known as the Interior Highlands, which is divided into 

the Ouachita province on the south and the Ozark 

Plateaus on the north. The river is in the Arkansas 

Valley section of the Ouachita province. The highest 

ridges rise more than 2, 000 feet above sea level and 

as much as 1, 500 feet above the valleys. The bedrock 

is of Pennsylvanian age; we 11-indurated sandstone 

forms the ridges and gray shale forms the valleys.

North of the Arkansas Valley section lies the 

Springfield-Salem plateaus of the Ozark Plateaus 

province. The rocks underlying this portion of the 

State belong principally to the Boone formation, a 

series of chert and limestone beds of Mississippian 

age. The maximum height of the hills above their

bases is about 400 feet, and the average is about 250 

feet. Solution of the limestone bedrock has resulted 

in an underground drainage system, and springs abound 

in the valleys.

From about the longitude of Muskogee westward to 

the Oklahoma Panhandle, the drainage basin of the 

Arkansas River lies in the Central Lowland province 

of the major physiographic division known as the Interior Plains. In Oklahoma this province includes the 

Osage Plains section. From about the longitude of 

Shawnee eastward, bedrocks of the Osage Plains consist principally of shale and sandstone with a few limestone beds. The average dip is westward and ranges 

from about 30 feet to the mile near the Kansas border 

to about 60 feet to the mile in the southern part of the 

region. The surface slope is southeastward, and the 

relief is rarely more than 300 feet. Extending westward from Shawnee for a distance of approximately 

100 miles is the part of the Osage Plains known as 

the redbeds plains region, which consists of soft red 

shale and red sandstone. Over most of this area the 

height of the hills above the streams is not more than 

100 feet. West of the redbeds plains region and extending almost to the Oklahoma Panhandle is the Gypsum Hills region of the Osage Plains. This region is 

similar to the redbeds plains region except that the 

weathering of gypsum beds has produced a somewhat 

more rugged topography.

The major part of the Oklahoma Panhandle is in the 

High Plains section of the Great Plains Province, and 

is on the monocline sloping eastward from the Rocky 

Mountains. The extreme eastern part of the Panhandle 

is in the Plains Border section, which is transitional 

between the High Plains and the Central Lowland. The 

High Plains consist mostly of loose sand, clay, and 

gravel of Tertiary age.

Arkansas

The part of the Arkansas River basin from Fort 

Smith to Little Rock lies in a major physiographic
CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER, ARKANSAS RIVER
ARKANSAS RIVER DRAINAGE BASIN

province known as the Interior Highlands and the part 

below Little Rock is in the West Gulf Coastal Plain.

In the West Gulf Coastal Plain area the Arkansas 

basin is less than 30 miles wide and generally less 

than 250 feet above sea level. The relief is low with 

with indistinct stream divides. The unconsolidated 

deposits immediately underlying the basin consist of 

clay, silt, sand, and gravel of Tertiary and Quaternary age.

In the Interior Highlands area, the Arkansas River 

basin is as much as 85 miles wide, and it lies in the 

three subdivisions of the area. The northern part of 

the basin is in the Boston Mountains. The Boston 

Mountains, consist of a dissected plateau with mountain summits standing from 1, 850 to 2, 250 feet above 

sea level and rising from 500 to 1, 300 feet above the 

adjacent valley areas. The southern part of the Arkansas River basin is in the Ouachita Mountains. 

These mountains consist of long, generally eastwardtrending ridges having altitudes of 1, 500 to 2, 000 feet 

above sea level with linear valleys having altitudes 

from 400 to 1, 100 feet. The bedrock of the Interior 

Highlands province consists of shale, siltstone, sandstone, and some coal of Paleozoic age. In the Interior 

Highlands area the Arkansas River flows through a 

broad valley known as the Arkansas Valley. The Arkansas Valley trends eastward and is from 30 to 40 

miles wide. The valley consists of: flat alluvial areas 

which border the Arkansas River and are only a few 

feet above it; terraces with flat to gently rolling surfaces that make up a considerable part of the valley 

area; asymmetrical, generally eastward-trending 

ridges that stand from 600 to 1, 000 feet above sea 

level; and flat-topped mountains, 1, 800 to 2, 800 feet 

above sea level. The alluvial material in the bottom 

lands bordering the Arkansas River consists of clay, 

silt, and sand. The terrace deposits mostly consist 

of a drab loesslike silt, although sand and gravel deposits occur at some places, particularly on the terraces along the tributary streams near the mountainous areas.

Climate

The Arkansas River basin has ma"ny local variations 

in climate with an increase in precipitation in downstream areas and with large ranges between annual 

maximum and minimum temperatures and amounts of 

precipitation. For the period 1910 to 1949, U. S. 

Weather Bureau records show that the average annual 

rainfall ranges from about 15 inches in the extreme 

western parts of the basin to about 50 inches near the 

mouth of the Arkansas River. Figure 3 indicates an 

average annual rainfall range on the Arkansas River in 

Oklahoma and Arkansas of from about 30 inches along 

the Oklahoma-Kansas border to slightly over 50 inches 

at the mouth. The following table, taken from U. S. 

Weather Bureau records, shows climatic conditions 

at some locations along the Arkansas River in Oklahoma and Arkansas.

u

0)

o

C

*-*

734-1

 rH 

Oj

03

O

5

rt?4<u

a

a

0) **

Ij

OJ c

 H

<!

<ubo

2

0)

^

C iH

n)

4-1

0

£

rt

0) bo

cti

0)

^

C 1-1

rt

S

4-1

O

tn 

?4 

rt 

0)

!*

0)

^

J3n)

<L>

4-1

C 

O

7i

c 

c

rt

75

annu

75

annu

 o

o

o

0)

75 

3M

C

e«

^

T3

f

 o

 o

0 

0 

0)

r»l

0)

1

rt

(0

c

01

0)

a

00

00

o

COm

in

00

m00*

m

CO 

CO*

m

CM 

CM

i-t

N

CO

CM

00

* t

.

(0

C 

n)

PM

rt

i

o

^

CO

co

00

^

o

CM

CM

CO

CM

CO

m

00

o

CO

CO

en

o

ini-t

CM

CO

J

jiij

am

3

CO

co

00

o

co

en

i_|

co

^

m

CO 

CO

m

00

en

CO

CO

^

JH

^

^_j

 -I

1

0 

EL,

m

CM

cd

^

m

i-t

00

o

"Sf

CO 

CO

m

CM

CO

CM

i-t 

1

O

I-t

,_,

t^

m

CM

JUS

JH

^

o

0) I-H

-M

a

0)

 S

0>

trt

CO 

(0 

(0

n rt

i

o

i-H

M 

O

4-1

o

j-<

t^

o

a

0}

 r-i

a

o

m

I

 n

0}

o

a
CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER, ARKANSAS RIVER

Streamflow Records

During the period from October 1946 to September 

1952, the records collected by the U. S. Geological

Survey for the Arkansas River show a wide range in 

streamflow characteristics as indicated in the following table.

Discharge at some gaging stations on the Arkansas River below the Oklahoma-Kansas State

line during the period 1946-52

Location

Arkansas City, Kans. ........

Ralston, Okla. .............. .....

Tulsa, Okla.......................

Van Buren, Ark........... ......

Dardanelle, Ark.................

Little Rock, Ark.......... ......

Drainage 

area 

(sq. miles)

43,713 

54, 465 

74,615 

150,483 

153,707 

158, 201

Daily discharge 

(acre -feet)

Maximum

119,800 

255,900 

295,500 

765,600 

753,700 

704, 100

Minimum

397 

555 

647 

4, 721 

6,050 

6,426

Mean

6,640 

14,800 

19, 150 

77,060 

87,290 

99, 390

gaging station location is just above the Oklahoma-Kansas State line in Kansas.

The average annual runoff for Oklahoma for the 

period 1921-45 was 18, 700, 000 acre-feetof which, 

11, 100,000 acre-feet was contributed by the Arkansas 

River drainage basin in Oklahoma. For Arkansas during the same period the average annual runoff was 

46, 300, 000 acre-feet of which 8, 600, 000 acre-feet 

was contributed by the Arkansas River drainage basin 

in Arkansas.

CHEMICAL QUALITY

The changes in chemical quality of the Arkansas 

River are discussed on the basis of arbitrary division 

of the river into three segments: Oklahoma-Kansas 

State line to Tulsa, Tulsa to Van Buren, and Van 

Buren to Little Rock. These divisions correspond 

roughly to the major changes in chemical quality as 

influenced by tributary inflow.

Definition of Terms

The units in which data are presented and other 

terms used in this report are defined as follows:

Cubic foot per second (cfs) is the rate of discharge 

of a stream whose channel is 1 square foot in crosssectional area and whose average velocity is 1 foot 

per second.

An acre-foot is the quantity of water required to 

cover an acre of land surface to the depth of 1 foot 

and is equivalent to 43, 560 cubic feet. The term is 

commonly used in connection with storage for 

irrigation.

Drainage area of a stream at a specified location is 

that area measured in a horizontal plane which is enclosed by a topographic divide such that direct surface runoff from precipitation normally would drain

1 Langbein, W. B., and others, 1949, Annual runoff 

in the United States: U. S. Geol. Survey Circ. 52.

by gravity into the river basin that lies above the specified location. Areas of drainage basins given herein include all closed basins or noncontributing areas within 

the area.

A part per million (ppm) is a unit weight of a constituent in a million unit weights of water. One part 

per million equals one ten-thousandth of one percent 

(0.0001).

An equivalent per million is a unit chemical combining weight of a constituent in a million unit weights of 

water and is calculated by dividing the concentration in 

parts per million by the chemical combining weight of 

the constituent.

Percent sodium is computed by dividing the equivalent per million of sodium by the sum of the equivalents per million of the cations (calcium, magnesium, 

sodium, and potassium) and multiplying the quotient 

by 100.

A weighted average analysis represents approximately the composition of water that would be found in a 

reservoir that contains all the water passing a given 

station during the year after thoroughly mixing in the 

reservoir.

The Geological Survey's water year is the period 

from October 1 to September 30 of the succeeding 

year. Water year 1952 is the period from October 1, 

1951,to September 30, 1952.

Pollution, as used in this report, defines conditions 

in which the mineral concentration of water exceeds 

acceptable limits for a particular use. Artificial pollution refers to conditions which have been manmade, 

and natural pollution refers te conditions over which 

man has no control, such as natural salt deposits.

Collection and Examination of Samples

Samples of water for chemical analysis were collected daily at sampling stations shown in table 1. Specific
Table 1. Summary of analyses, 1945-52. 

[Chemical analyses in parts per million]

Date of collection

Mean 

discharge 

(cfs)

Silica 

(SiOj)

Iron 

(Fe)

Calcium 

(Ca)

Magnesium 

(Mg)

Sodium 

(Na)

Potassium 

(K)

Carbonate 

(CO,)

Bicarbonate 

(HCO»)

Sulfate 

(SO*)

Chloride 

(Cl)

Fluoride 

(F)

Nitrate 

(NO,)

Dissolved solids

Parts 

par 

million

Tons 

per 

acre -foot

Tons 

per 

day

Arkansas River at Arkansas City, Kans., water year 1952

Minimum, Oct. 1-10, 1951.............

1,255

3,756 

1,907

....... .......

154 

52 

100

43 

12 

28

373 

112 

243

0 

0

323 

152 

234

313

100 

242

550 

135 

316

!!!.'.'."!." 7.6 

3.6 

5.3

1,600. 

501 

1,090

2.18 

.68 

1.48

5,420 

5,080 

5,610

Arkansas River at Kaw City, Okla. , water year 1949

Minimum, Jan. 14-20, 1949............

146 

33

38 

6.7

388 

37

7 

0

241 

94

216 

26

655 

59 ..........

8.0 

3.0

1,580 

241

2.15 

.33

........ 

Arkansas River at Kaw City, Okla. , water year 1950

Minimum, July 26-31, 1950.............

133 

29

45 

5.3

468 

18

0 

0

171 

99

255 

14

795 

26 ..........

8.4 

2.8

1,790 

201

2.43 

.27

Arkansas River at Kaw City, Okla. , water year 1951

152 

37

45 

6.4

359 

37

0 

0

239 

109

347 

29

555

54 ...........

6.3 

4.2

1,650 

254

2.24 

.35 ::::::::

Arkansas River at Ralston, Okla. , January 1950 to September 1950

Minimum, July 21-22, 1950.............

1,345

23,350 

6,819

........ .......

122 

34 

66

41 

5.2 

16

477 

33 

160

0 

0

165 

105 

149

255 

21 

108

785 

47 

240 ...........

3.0 

3.7 

3.1

1,760 

240 

702

2.39 

.33 

.95

6,390 

15, 100 

12, 900

Arkansas River at Ralston, Okla. , water year 1951

Minimum, July 15-17, 1951.............

1,920

102,800 

12,770

......... .......

154 

24 

61

48 

7.2 

15

667 

34 

123

0 

0

260 

82 

145

281 

34 

111

1,080 

42 

174

::::::::::

5.1 

3.5 

3.1

2,530 

208 

593

3.44 

.28 

.81

13, 120 

57,730 

20,450

Arkansas River at Ralston, Okla. , water year 1952

1,300 

20, 100

4,267

137 

1,790

1.707

120 

40 

101

38 

10 

29

536 

44 

240

0 

0

134 

94 

219

212 

47 

204

912 

76 

350

........... 5.0 

3.6 

3.5

2,000 

309 

1,080

2.72 

.42 

1.47

7,020 

16,770 

12,440

Cimarron River at Mannford, Okla. , water year 1950

460 

46 

126

136 

11 

30

3,390 

196 

750

0 

0

160 

92 

157

392 

36 

196

6,050 

335 

1.230 ...........

3.5 

1.9 

5.1

10,500 

739 

2,420

14.28 

1.01 

3.29

3,880 

3,570 

11,200

CimaiTon River at Mannford, Okla. , water year 1951

338

47

105 

11

4,340 

125

0 

0

215

84

630 

22

7,000 

240

.......... 4.1 

2.8

13, 000 

568

17.68 

.77 ::r:::

CimaiTon River at Mannford, Okla. , water year 1952

1.150 

58

282 

15

6,490 

201

0 

0

84 

129

284 

20

12,600 

365 .......... 3.8

22,400 

858

30.46 

1.17

Maximum boron recorded was 0. 07 ppm.
10 CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER, ARKANSAS RIVER

^l0

&4 sn i

4-c(j

0"

"3 o3I#

ssolved soli a

g

a 7E

 4Ie

£ |

t?S1

a Ci

n 

p.E

1 </S1i<ti\ Lj

a J

i?j

fc

(micromhos 

at | 25' C)

1 

* 8

gla lr

Calcium, magnesium

*l* H 0-T)«

i s"2 HB,jj«

««i d. °"g

Igs§

-V0*

52,

I'd4 

J£

|fr

JSi

IsII

1? 

;aI

;?>i2-

1* 

o o

Date ofcollection

c- S

rH

3 

SL 1

rt" 

.S3 £a3

0)

 os

</) 3§t/j

13

1 3

45

: | :

§S°.

COCO CO 

U OI

: :

O CO rH 

00-* 

<N rH COj

UJ O rH 

O C

O in in 

CO rH O

o oi co in"

O inco oot-co

CO rH

OS O IQ 

C-in j*

O O

O O CO 8g§

rH « 00

Maximum, 1946................. Oct. 11, 

July Minimum, 1947.................... 2, 

00it1s\3u9

toIa

 I

t/> sA%13

4!

: :

00 <N

cocn

e- (N

rH O

C£> O

cn oo 

e- IH

o o 

oo 

*m

OSU9 

(N

«*CO * ein

§3?

O in *

o o 

i- i1 I

ow

O i-l 

rH (N

OJ

CO CO 

I- 00 

<N

(N 1-1 

O OS 

(N

010

O UJ

(N 1-1

ss

e-co OJin

IN

!!

! j

00 

000

c-~

rH

1-4, Maximum, Feb. 1948................

a> 33

S.

« 

«' 1S

 S? '& 

81

v>u

 o§CO211

i i

UJ

cnm t- UJ

ssin

IN en 

en co

UJrH

o o 

o o

OJOJ 

COiH

 5 COJO 

COCO *'

^i 034

CO

o o

(Nuj

: : 

: :

O UJ 

(N CO

C- iH

cn co UJC- 

<N

o a> 

cnoa

o o

O U3 o m

>H cn m

COIN

m m

1 j

: :

! i

m o

<N<N m"o"

CO

1949....... Minimum, 25,7-28, May 

o2s

1 </>B

o mO51

«'

Tuls ;ar S

d)

* c

'S. »

 o §

10

River a*

1 i i

O «H O

o cn co 

cn coo

co" <N

OOiH >H 

t- ^* t-

(35 O CO 

<N <NCO

CO iH

CO <N <N 

t- *H CJ5 

t- rH (N

O O O 

OO O 

COO (N c-'i-To"

CO CO CO

^i (N CO in coco

U3 ' >H

O N O

c- coo

O (N (N

V rH

m oo t- 

^i i-i co

i i

: :

o in co in in <N

rH in 

<N

OOOOCJ

o rH m

CO rH

O (N^i S

rHin 

rH rH

O O J

ococn

<N CO

 *

(Nin o

CO <N

cnco TJ! 

o m oo

(N

 : :

: | 1

o gin 

co^co 

cofjo»

July 18-20,950.............. Minimum, 

m

o»8!

H 3gI

in

1 </>

4J «S13!

o * !

00 II

0*0 

com co

00 CO 00 

U7" rH

OJCOCc- in co

CO COCO

co com

cn co* 

o cooo

COrH(N

o o o

O O CO 

O OJ rH co'rHin"

rHrH1*

O OI CO

oo in -5

^' ' rH

o cn o coc- em coo

co" 1-1"

in t- w 

CO'<N" co

: : :

i i i

O O) O) SSS

* cocn

rHin CO 

(N rH

O5 rH CO

o oim 0) rHrH

o o :

O rH O

0 O)

o) cn o

 * (N

in cn rH

C"- CO OO

i 1 1

i 1 

j |

000 

O O OJ 

01- CO m'oo'us

rH O rH

May 1951................. Maximum, 13,Minimum. July 17-18,951..............

<Nin

cn1«3S

to1&113 </>S1

i §1

CO CJ

oo c-' !

o o o

00 ^"-*

co oi cn

in" rH (N

Cn COrH

(N x* (N

m oo-*

 * (N

o 01 oo

cn cn o

in rH-*

O OO 

CO C-OO

o cool 

oo in m

CO O)

rH in *

 * 'oJ

cp cn 01

CO rH

cocn oo. 

oJ oi co

! i i

O 00 *

cnco co 

co o) ec- c- cn

(N rH

CO CO CO in co o

rH rH O)

m o i

O O) CO

0 rH *

O) * O)

in rH CO

rH * rH 

U3 A rH

III

j |

° c S

CO 0! ^T

a in"

5

OSa

water yc«

i"

1 

 a1

12

45

: :

o oo

rH CO 

CO CO *"

CO CO

c- in

rH in 3*-

 * co

CO CO 

CO rH

1 

£ 

o m

<N CO *'

o in cn eo *

CO

0 0 

^i CO

j :

S ;

O CO

rH U7

Tj< rH

r- co cor- 

^*

(N (N

rH CO 

(N rH

O O

S

m

Cn rH

0 0 

IO rH

IN ec- m

rH

: : 

: :

j : 

: :

j :

10,948......... Maximum, Dec. 1-3, 25, 1949....... Minimum, May 22,7. 

194£ year !

§ 

ji

2 §JD1uI

s %M

45

: |

O xf 

<N 00

<n in

OJ"

C- CO

co in

o o 

co m CN

35* rH

j : 

i \

g^

O OJ 

rH UJ

 * CO

o o

CO CO

{)

in co

CO rH

CO^-

CO Tf

CO CO

o o

C- CO

CO

00

cn i-'

OJ

33

: !

: !

I j

: :

: ;

6, 1948................. Maximum, Nov. 21-25, 1949............ Minimum. Feb. 

194 ryear !§

 o"

<a 

.*3S1§

1 

§ o

: : :

I rH O

;^i o

.CO""1

! rH

N 1 i i

! |

^t -<t oo

CO rH OJ

!<=> .

Pi

!« : I s i

! :

Is !

!<N 

0 O * 

(N COIN

! ! !

o coc0 OJ co"

CO O "* cnw*

T*» IO rH 

rHrnS:

o o :

1 !

:»- i

: : 

| 1

: :

:» j

Sir- !

: |

|g i

i ! i

: : :

i i i

o ooc0?Sg

rH CO CO

Mar. 1947................ Maximum, 21,

I £

water a. , 

rf2"

Whitefi(

13

0) 9SO

|

 * 

o c- i

cn

3

^f

U <NI

<N

o' S

O O rH 

C^-* CO

i |

o ^i cn

CO rH (N 

CO CO

c- co cn

IT-rH (N

00 CO (N

rH rH O

O O

So::

.00 

t(N

.^ 

J'-O :

ii1 1 : :

co in oi 

o gje

T)("co
Canadian River near Whitefield, Okla. , water year 1949

Minimum, May 19-20, 1949............. 143, 500 

7,985

........ ......

516 

38 

71

127 

7.8 

18

2,610 

64 

196

0 

0

182 

108 

123

69 

19 

49

5,150 

110 

373

6.5 

2.5 

3.4

8,570 

308 

801

11.66 

.42 

1.09

24, 500 

119, 000 

17. 300

Canadian River near Whitefield, Okla. , water year 1950

Maximum, Dec. 12, 17-19, 1949....... 820 

58,850 

9,964

408 

30 

61

105 

5.8 

16

1,960 

40 

172

0 

0

190 

92 

113

53 

18 

34

Canadian River near Whitefield, Okla.

Maximum, Jan. 18, 1950.................. 2,240 

28,400

4,595

........ ....... 367 

42 

89

97 

9.6 

26

1,690 

76 

269

0 

0

165 

114 

146

81 

38 

65

3,900 

65 

327

5.0 

1.5 

2.8

6,520 

244 

731

8.87 

.33 

.99

14, 400 

38. 800 

19,700

water year 1951

3,370 

124 

510

13 

2.2 

3.4

6.500 

392 

1,170

8.84 

.53 

1.59

39, 310 

30, 060 

14, 520

Canadian River near Whitefield, Okla. , water year 1952

Maximum, July 18, 1952.................. 

Minimum, Apr. 23-24, 26, 1952.......

2,760 

31,530 

2,620

........ ....... 461 

36 

89

127 

9.0 

26

2,500 

66 

360

0 

0

99 

89 

108

47 

14 

35

4,940 

128 

700

........... 1.6

9,730 

380 

1,420

13.23 

.52 

1.93

72,510 

32. 350 

10, 050

Arkansas River at Van Buren, Ark. , water year 1946

Minimum, May 21, 24-26, 28-30,

33,790 43

26

6.2

10

311

36

93

0

0

195

73

105

69

18

35

568

57

161

1.7

1.8

1.9

1,170

217

441

1.59

.30

.60

20, 300

53, 800

66.200

Arkansas River at Van Buren, Ark. , water year 1947 

Minimum, Dec. 12-19, 1946............ 141, 800

38.660

......

28

48

17

9.7

40

108

0

0 82

111

140

17

54

67

174

2.5

2.8

2.4

1,610

239

494

.33

.67

43, 700

91,500

107, 000

Arkansas River at Van Buren, Ark. , water year 1948 

Minimum, July 21-23, 29-31, 1948...... 136,300

34,910 .........

.......

100

31

43

27

5.2

9.1

376

45

104

0

0

123

100

105

55

28

42

722

59

170

..........

2.2

1.9

2.0

1,340

243

463

1.82

.33

.63

20, 300

89, 400

95,471

Arkansas River at Van Buren, Ark. . water year 1949

45.180

........

.........

.....

.......

i nn

19

50

25

11

461

40

116 112

18

63

67

184 .......... 3.3

1,560

241

514 .70

42,460

71.770

62,700

Arkansas River at Van Buren, Ark. , water year 1950

41,620 48

5.7

48

46

95

2.0 89

110

121

19

44

738

77

160

0.1

3.8

2.5

3.0

1,500

264

452

2.04

.36

.62

30, 900

137, 000

50, 800

Arkansas River at Van Buren, Ark., water year 1951

Minimum, July 18-27, 1951............. 188,700 1......... 

45, 960 |.........

....... 38 

53

35

6.5 

12

484

26 

96

.......

6

0

191

112 

126

133

31 

59

852

39 

157

..........

2.8

2.7 

3.2

1,740

216 

474

2.37

.29 

.64

34, 070

110, 000 

58, 820
12 CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER, ARKANSAS RIVER *0

li

0)

JF'

« ! 1

0"yu

Hardness a

iolved solic s

0nE'

j Si

-! ; J

i ci tiJit1

i > i

*ij

t i u

! t'

(micromhos 

at 25' C)

II

il^ n 1

Calcium, magnesium

111S BI* H l

 01 *« !

Sr?

5 fi£

is!! §

!?152-

III

»K

lie

II

|i

i't? 

\&

' 'aT

at

5? 

32-

60

II.? ^

Date ofcollection

Ss

3 £Iia1

rt i*

OOP- S 

p-V j

O i-l 00 

(NO IN 

tO IO O>

(N

O>O tO to LO m

P?S>00 

(N

00 tO CO 

00 to Oi

CO -» TH

oo o

00 O »H c-"r-~o~

(NtO ^f

oo o in O ^ P- 

(N

o p- to

ssss

r-i

(NCO O>

CO »H(N

: j

J9SS

TH CO ,H 

P" CO tO

O5«O PCOC" (N

TH rt

: 

o o : :

Mi J : :

3*3

00

O 00 CO

CO iH

tO tN tO

o cow J

CO O O 

COP- W P-U5 pto p to

00 (N

24-25, 1952........ Maximum, July 22, 13-15,952............ Minimum, Apr. 

S3

s. 

fti

.*' *

Jj"

"3a«js1

J!

o»oo 

od p-' ;

O tO Oi 

(N

: :P- : r"5

(NOO ^ 00 "H tO

O OJO TH to in

CO iH

o o o

00 O O3

co oo m 

m" IH <*"

CO O tO

O O (N 

00 CO tO

O O Oi

coSS

00 O O

CO (N CO

^ CO J

o" ' I

in o en 

co to to

tO rt

m in co o >H in

 * * ^ tN in o:

to o !

rt :

00 TH to 

(N iH CO

££!?,

CO

to to

tN CO Oi 

IN

gss

§5o'

o ^

o o o

889

oa ,H cc-m

23-26, 1949....... Minimum, Jan. 30, 

o

O51i

Jl" 1

«J 

rt1

J!

05 ^ ; 

p-"p-' j:

o in m 00 TJitO 

>H (NtO

(N

to ^" co to m m

O TH p- * (Nin

(N

tO ^ O5

com co

CO TH

o o o 

o o o 

p- m oo

in »H o" co*j- m

O (N CO to com

o o oo

rH TH CO

TH"

(N (N CO

TH rt (N

° ii

0 : :

O» § CO in TH

P- iH CO

to o oi TH ^* O5

O O *I

0 jj rt i :

OOO5O 

 H (» 00 CO

O P-

 <* ^' oo'

(N

in in rH OJ rt-^l §d

to to*

000 g§?

S$5

1949............ Oct. 17-19, Maximum, Minimum, Feb. 12-13,950............

TH

O511is:

0)" aHQ

rt

1 S1

05 m j 

p- t-^ 

0 p- ^<

com * IO COPIN

tO (N *! to coin

iH o tO in co to

(N

00 ^ CO

32S

o o o 

c-o in

TH COO5 

05~ (N C-~

(NO in

p- >H O 

Oi CO tO

O tO TH

3! S3

P- (N O

(N (N CO

CO (N J

o ' :

^55 tO TH

to o tN in tN m S

inos rt TH

(N iH cH

o o ;

to o J

c^^' j

C- tN 00 

CO

o p-'o

CO TH

oo oo en

TH CO^f

to ^ 

o o

0

as

C4 O O in o c- 41 to to

p- e-'oc tor'

24-26, 1950.. Dec 20-21, Maximum, July 21-29, 1951............. Minimum, 

IN

O5 

fHS1s

M 3

a U

ts1*

O 00 

00 CI

O *f 00 

COOJtO 

CO (NP-

(N

oo o in to-* in

o»in co in <NC-

(N

^i coin

't 00 tO

CO TH

o o o

CO C- CO p-p-00

 sf'ftn

OJ^< CO

^)HO IN 

00 <MtO

0 * Cin en in

COfHTf

O tO (N

(N TH (N

COCO

S>

in cow in ^c in to TH

O TH O

p- N in

(NTH (N »H p- TH

O O

»H m

00 CO

OS C- TH "JiCJO

CO

o

O3 U5TH 

(N TH

o in oo

O5 WJ"

co to

O CO o

OJtO

p-'oo

to o o

£38 

"SSS

1951........... Nov 24-27, Minimum, 

to

Oi

>*

l'

J!i14J

rt

1 S*

: : : 

: : :

SSIn

tN CO tO 

(N

(NO (N c- in in

^i 00 iH

o IN in

<M§

coo 

O» CO

CO >H

o o o 

o o o

O O5 O3

inc- to"

(NP- PtO (N 00 to co ^

o M in 

co co in

tN (N CO

(NOO 00

COi-< TH

1 i i

oin ^ in P- o»

tO iH

oto oo m-H co

O O5 00 

INP- O5i

OO }

CO

O TH

C11O CO 

INS

O) CO 

(N CO

O OO O3 O -X' in coo» ^§5

6-10, 1946............ Maximum, Sept. 1946............ 21-31, Minimum, May 

1

1 I§i1!

 M

rt 1

J!

: j j

o ^* to <* o> o»

CO (N Pco

10 in cc- ^ in

(NO5 05

8 *

to in in to P- co

CO »H

O O O

o o in

O TH O

TH" m" of in en en

in in ccoco in

OJ

O p- OS ""5

CO tN CO

 -< IM

i i i

: : :

»H CO CO

to in c00 TH -<ll

S3|

oo ;

 <JI 00 -»

in

coo 

to <* a>

CM

 * COCR 

0 (N CO 

fH

o o o 

go en coin

385iH

24-29, 1946........... Maximum, Oct. 11-20,946............ Dec. Minimum, 

00s

iH

3 £iXI3

 u 

rt

I 2|

i i i

o en oo 

oo o in

(N CO tO 

(N

 <JI TH O

c- P- to

COO 00 

«H CO 

(N

O 00 C0 * -»

CO iH

O O O

o o o

O CO O3 ento'co"

(N TH 00

coooco 

c- ojin

O tO (N 

C-O 00 

(N (N CO

in oj-*

TH OJ (N

: : :

oo to «*

tO fH

TH C- *f

O> iH CO

C- COCo to en

o o {:

c- cocco

co to 

o» ^f' c1

CO

 * CJ-*

I i

i i

: :

o oo

T? 0 Poo'oa ^<"

(N ^<

1947........... 29-30, Maximum, Nov. 1948............ 11-14, Minimum, Jan. 

en 

31

iH^

s. 1%iX12

+j 

rt

1 29*

i ! i

§§£

OJ

hto . ;m

: 

en p- ^c A otto

ooo o in oo in

CO TH

ooo

CO 00 00

CTi CTi CO to'o'ffl" 

oo toto

THtO 00

p- IN to

0 -H ^

o en <» (N iH ^f

co co in

^f CO CO

1 i i

: : :

ooo coto^i

tO »H

Oi 00 00 

O» "H-.JI

IH ^)i m

(NtO O

TH ^<

O O J:

en »H eft

CO

COOJ

 ^ in oa

(N

^ CO to 

OOJ1*

M:

: :

ooo in o <» in in ^

in o a o»i- in

1949.......... Maximum, Sept. 22-23, 1949............... 1-9, Minimum, Feb. 

o to

n £!i:

j? 1

0) an1S3I

Cfc CN ; 

p-' p-' ;

O C"! O 

00 O »H 

p- COtO

CO CO TH 

tO LO to

SS8 

O»

3S2K CO !-«

ooo 

o o o

tO O> tO 

 <* COC-"

co in in

TH O CO 

in CO-"*

rH

0 * CO

aas

r-T

00 00 CO

CO iH CO

«H * °' I !

in to *H

00 to CO

^J1 ,H

^C o in

iH CO CO

o >* oo

C- in CO

O O

3 j

£8°.

o»

fH pto in oo

IN

*J< (N TH 

O3 (N ^

O O

o°

 * 

O3

OOO 

(N O p!

00 O3 00 

00 in

1949..... Dec. 7-11, Maximum, 3-4,1950... 18-20, Minimum, Jan. 11-13, 
CHEMICAL QUALITY 13

1 t 

lO 

OS 

tHsi

x Ii

+j

rt

1 23!

O5 CO 

e- e- ;

§

CO 00 l^ tH m co tcJ

co <H co

CD COU3

O)

O 00 «-<

gas

o o o

O O * 

Oi C- Oi

of *" o"

CO O CO

^1 INOO 

Cl CO 10

o ^ o

9S5

rM

IOIOCO 

N COCO

jco j

i° i

00 «H U5

«3 ^ CO 

«3 ^

to o e»

O) CO^

COO5 i-l 

«H rt O) 

OQ »H rH:

O O ;

I". :

J^i ;

£8S CO

o c-^o

CO i-l

Oi CJ 00 

i-l CO^Ji

jIM

 o:

 O)

o o o

8g9

00 U5O1

co m

Dec. 28-29, 1950........... Maximum, July 1951.............. Minimum, 21-31 

I %

>. sX

it1

% 2a

tsi§I

<N us ; 

od i~ ;

O CMOS N

oo r- ^

US'* U5

OOO O) ^ co to N

\nm & CO <H

OOO 

00 ^i CD 

 * rtU5

c-^o'ci 

o) to **"

O O)1O 

Oi CO U3

o U3 ro coo * 0)-*-

CD O«O 

>H oJ CO H

U5 C- r-t 

U3U5 CO

CO tH

**HO CO 

CO O) ^

§gl

o o ;

ill 

ill

 HOOOJ

U3 COCco

CO CD

oi in 05

O)

^1 00 CO 

O5O) ^

 :

1 1

OOO 

C- 00 CO CM C^ C- r-^"oo"

OJ CO

29-31, 1952....... Maximum, July 27, 26-30, 1951............ Minimum, Nov. 
14 CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER, ARKANSAS RIVER

conductance, expressed as micromhos at 25° C., was 

determined for each daily sample. Composite samples 

for chemical analyses were prepared by mixing equal 

quantities of daily samples based on concentration of 

dissolved solids as indicated by the specific conductance values.

Samples were analyzed according to methods regularly used by the Geological Survey. These methods 

are essentially the same as, or are modifications of, 

methods described in authoritative publications for the 

mineral analysis of water samples. 2

The main constituent causing an increase in concentration of the Arkansas River in Oklahoma and Arkansas is the chloride coming from both natural sources 

and industrial wastes. Other constituents normally 

found in a natural water may decrease in concentration due to chemical changes occurring as a result of 

its environment. For example, silica and nitrate content may be reduced by growing plants, and calcium 

and magnesium may be precipitated as carbonate due 

to loss of carbon dioxide in the water resulting from, 

temperature changes. Sodium may be removed by a 

natural ion exchange process, sulfate may be reduced 

to sulfides or to hydrogen sulfide which is evolved as 

a gas, but the chloride ion is unchanged by natural 

processes and is therefore a good basis for comparison of downstream changes in chemical quality.

Table 1 presents a summary of chemical-quality 

data collected at the nine daily sampling stations on 

the Arkansas River, and collected on the Canadian 

River at Whitefield, and the Cimarron River at 

Mannford.

Oklahoma-Kansas State Line to Tulsa

The Arkansas River shows a substantial increase in 

chloride concentration downstream from the OklahomaKansas State line to Tulsa. (See table 1, and figs. 4 

and 5.) For the water year 1952, the maximum chloride concentration was 685 ppm at Arkansas City, 912 

ppm at Ralston, and 1, 690 ppm at Tulsa. From October 1946 to September 1952, the maximum chloride 

concentration was 795 ppm at Kaw City near the 

Oklahoma-Kansas State line, 1, 080 ppm at Ralston, 

and 5, 030 ppm at Tulsa.

Influence of Salt Fork Arkansas River

The increased chloride concentration noted in the 

Arkansas River downstream toward Tulsa is due to 

both solution of natural salt deposits and to introduction of industrial wastes from many oilfields and refineries within this portion of the basin. The two 

main tributaries within this reach of the river, Salt 

Fork Arkansas River and Cimarron River, contribute 

much chloride picked up by leaching of salt deposits 

in flow through natural salt plains. The Salt Fork 

flows into the Arkansas River at Ponca City, which is

American Public Health Association, 1946, Standard methods for examination of water and sewage, 9th 

ed., and Association of Official Agricultural Chemists, 

1950, Methods of analysis of the association of official 

agricultural chemists, 7th ed.

about 44 miles upstream from Ralston. This stream 

is relatively low in chloride concentration until it flows 

through the Salt Plain area about 20 miles downstream 

from the city of Alva. During the period October 1950 

to September 1951, daily chemical-quality records collected at a sampling station on the Salt Fork Arkansas 

River near Alva show a maximum chloride concentration of 320 ppm and a weighted-average chloride concentration of 77 ppm. Downstream from this location 

on the Salt Fork Arkansas River near Jet, which is 

just below the Great Salt Plains Reservoir, many periodic samples collected during the same time show a 

maximum chloride concentration of 5, 570 ppm and a 

minimum of 940 ppm. There is no evidence to indicate 

that this increase in chloride concentration between 

Alva and Jet is due to any source other than pickup of 

natural salt.

There are many oilfields and refineries located in 

the Salt Fork Arkansas River drainage basin downstream from Jet. However, there has been no collection of daily records near Jet that would give an indication of how much of the increased chloride load in the 

Arkansas River from the Oklahoma-Kansas State line 

to Ralston is due to pickup of natural salt by the Salt 

Fork Arkansas River, and how much is due to wastes 

from these oilfields and refineries.

Influence of Cimarron River

The Cimarron River contributes a large salt load to 

the Arkansas River. This stream enters Oklahoma at 

its extreme western boundary and flows in and out of 

the States of Oklahoma and Kansas twice before entering Oklahoma for the last time, midway between the 

99th and 100th meridians. It flows across the State in 

a southeasterly direction to its junction with the Arkansas River at Keystone, 17-miles upstream from Tulsa. 

The natural chloride concentration of the Cimarron 

River increases as it flows through the Salt Plain in 

the vicinity of Waynoka.

Daily chemical-quality records collected on the 

Cimarron River near Mocane, during the period from 

October 1946 to September 1948, show a maximum 

chloride concentration of 840 ppm and a weightedaverage chloride concentration of 387 ppm and 421 ppm 

for the 1947 and 1948 water years respectively. Periodic samples collected from the Cimarron River upstream from Waynoka indicate that the major part of 

the increased chloride concentration comes from the 

Salt Plain northwest of Waynoka. The following table 

shows chloride concentrations of samples collected 

downstream from Mocane to Waynoka. These samples 

were collected February 12, 1953.

Sampling point Chloride (ppm) 

Mocane.................................... 540

Ross ton.................................... 590

Buffalo.................................... 1, 790

Freedom.................................. 8,080

Waynoka.................................. 15, 600

The sampling site near Buffalo is about 12 miles 

downstream from the Oklahoma-Kansas State line 

where the Cimarron River enters Oklahoma for the 

last time. There is no evidence to indicate that this 

increase in chloride concentration between Mocane 

and Waynoka is due to any cause other than pickup of
CHEMICAL QUALITY 15

1 ARKANSAS RIVER AT RALSTON

2 ARKANSAS RIVER AT SAND SPRINGS

3 CANADIAN RIVER NEAR WHITEFIELD

4 ARKANSAS RIVER AT VAN BUREN

5 ARKANSAS "RIVER AT DARDANELLE

6 ARKANSAS RIVER AT LITTLE ROCK

SODIUM AND 

POTASSIUM

CHLORIDE AND 

NITRATE

Figure 4. --Weighted average analyses for some streams in the Arkansas River basin, October 1950 to September 1951.
16 CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER, ARKANSAS RIVER

O

a EC

 a

W

O

CD

C

a o 

k. 

o 

O

o

o 

or

o in

c

O 

JC

h.

<

cc

o

_§ 

o

r

c 

o

 o 

a

c 

o 

o

ir

a

jf. k.

<
CHEMICAL QUALITY 17

Table 2. --Runoff, chloride, and dissolved solids for water year 1950 at selected locations in the Arkansas River basin

Stream and location

Cimarron River at Mannford, Okla....... ................

Canadian River near Whitefield, Okla............. ......

Arkansas River at Van Buren, Ark.......................

Runoff 

(acre -feet)

4, 140,000

1,236,000

5,603,000

7,214,000

30, 130,000

42,520,000

Chloride 

(total tons)

1, 366,000

2,064,000

3, 978,000

3, 174,000

6,629,000

6,803,000

Dissolved 

solids 

(total tons)

3,933,000

4,066,000

9,133,000

7, 142,000

18,680,000

20,830,000

natural salt by the Cimarron River between these two 

points.

Daily chemical-quality records were collected on the 

Cimarron River at Mannford for the period from October 1948 to September 1952 and since that time have 

been collected at a site near Perkins, 67 miles upstream from Mannford. There are many oilfields and 

refineries located in the Cimarron River drainage 

basin between Waynoka and Mannford, but to date, no 

daily records have been collected at the Waynoka location which would give an indication of how much of 

the chloride load being discharged into the Arkansas 

River from the Cimarron River is due to natural 

causes and how much is due to these oilfield operations.

A comparison of data collected for the period October 1949 to September 1950, shown in table 2, gives 

an indication of the amount of chloride discharged into 

the Arkansas River by the Cimarron River. During 

this period the total runoff of the Arkansas River at 

Tulsa was 5. 603 million acre-feet, of which 22 percent or 1.236 million acre-feet was contributed by the 

Cimarron River. However, the total chloride load for 

the same period was 3. 978 million tons at Tulsa, of 

which 52 percent or 2.064 million tons was contributed 

by the Cimarron River. The total runoff of the Arkansas River at Tulsa was only 35 percent higher than the 

runoff of the Arkansas River upstream at Ralston; yet, 

the chloride load at Tulsa was 191 percent higher than 

at Ralston. Of this increased chloride load from Ralston to Tulsa, 79 percent was contributed by the Cimarron River.

The proposed site of the Keystone Reservoir near 

Tulsa is located on the Arkansas River below its junction with the Cimarron River. Weighted-average analyses for the daily chemical-quality sampling station 

on the Arkansas River at Sand Springs bridge near 

Tulsa should be the approximate average analysis of 

water stored in this reservoir. Even though this proposed reservoir is located below tne junction with the 

Cimarron River, and the resulting chemical quality of 

the water in storage would reflect the large load of 

chloride coming from the Cimarron, storage alone 

would tend to decrease the large variations in daily 

concentrations. As noted in the summary of analyses, 

table 1, a maximum chloride concentration of 5, 030

ppm was observed during the period October 1946 to 

September 1952 for the Tulsa station. However, this 

concentration occurred during a period of relatively 

low runoff, and it would have had a comparatively 

small effect on the concentration of the water stored 

in the proposed reservoir. The weighted-average 

chloride concentration for the above period at Tulsa 

ranged from 422 to 705 ppm. The maximum concentrations and fluctuations in concentration of the resulting stored water would depend to a great extent 

on the amount of stored water, reservoir operation, 

evaporation, and physical features of the reservoir.

A further evidence of the relation of chloride concentration to runoff is noted by comparing the weightedaverage analyses at the Tulsa station for water years 

1947, and 1950-52. During these 4 years the maximum weighted-average chloride concentration of 734 

ppm occurred during the year of lowest runoff, and 

the minimum weighted-average chloride concentration 

of 422 ppm occurred during the period of highest runoff. If this runoff had been equalized by impoundment, 

the annual variation in concentration of all chemical 

constituents would have been greatly reduced.

Although the degree of improvement that might be 

made by the control of industrial wastes in the Arkansas River tributaries cannot be determined from available data, present records should provide an indication of the maximum concentration which would be 

found in the stored water.

Tulsa to Van Buren 

Influence of Verdigris, Neosho, and Illinois Rivers

As the Arkansas River flows downstream from Tulsa, a decrease in dissolved solids and chloride concentration is principally due to tributary inflow from 

the Verdigris, Neosho, and Illinois Rivers. This dilution effect from the Verdigris and Neosho Rivers is 

evident from daily records collected on the Arkansas 

River at Webbers Falls during the period October 

1948 to September 1949 when the maximum observed 

chloride concentration was 665 ppm, while the maximum observed chloride concentration at Tulsa during 

the same period was 1, 720 ppm. The following table
18 CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER, ARKANSAS RIVER

Stream

Verdigris River near Inola, Okla... ...........

Neosho River near Wagoner, Okla... .........

Illinois River near Gore, Okla....... ..........

Runoff 

(million 

acre -ft)

4.134 

1/6.746 

1.286

Chloride (ppm)

Maximum

435 

12 

68

Minimum

27 

5.2 

1.2

Weighted 

average

55 

8.4 

5.9

period October 1948 to July 1949.

gives the chloride concentrations observed at the daily 

sampling stations on the Verdigris and Neosho Rivers 

during the period October 1948 to September 1949 and 

the Illinois River during the period October 1947 to 

September 1948. Each sampling station is located 

near the junction of the particular stream with the 

Arkansas River.

Influence of Canadian River

In the reach of the Arkansas River from Tulsa to 

Van Buren, the Canadian River is the only stream of 

any size which does not have a dilution effect upon the 

Arkansas River water. This stream enters the Arkansas River about 101 miles downstream from Tulsa, 

and 69 miles upstream from Van Buren.

For the period October 1946 to September 1952 daily 

chemical-quality records show the maximum chloride 

concentration of the Canadian River near Whitefield to 

be 5, 150 ppm. Data collected in 1950, table 2, show 

that 3. 174 million tons of chloride was discharged into 

the Arkansas River from this stream. For the same 

year, records show that the Canadian River contributed 24 percent of the runoff of the Arkansas River at 

Van Buren, Ark., and 38 percent of the total chloride 

load.

Present data indicate no pickup of natural salt of 

consequence by streams in the Canadian River basin, 

and practically all the chloride load of the Canadian 

River results from oilfield and industrial wastes, most 

of which occur in the drainage basin east of Oklahoma 

City. The North Canadian River, one of the major 

tributaries to the Canadian River, is the source of 

water supply for Oklahoma City, yet periodic samples 

collected from this stream only 20 miles downstream 

from the intake of the Oklahoma City water supply 

show chloride concentrations at times exceeding 

10, 000 ppm. The State of Oklahoma has initiated steps 

to eliminate the sources of pollution on the North Canadian River, and, if successful, favorable results and 

improvement of chemical quality should be noticeable 

even in the Arkansas River.

Two other tributaries which are responsible for 

large amounts of chloride pollution in the Canadian 

River are the Deep Fork River and Little River. Chloride concentrations as much as 2, 300 ppm have been 

observed in Deep Fork River and as much as 38,'000 

ppm in Little River. Both streams carry large amounts 

of drainage from oilfield operations. In the newer oilfields of Oklahoma, steps are taken to control these 

wastes but some fields in the Deep Fork and Little 

River drainage basins are very old, and up to the 

present, no corrective measures have been taken to 

eliminate this source of pollution.

With the exception of the Canadian River, all major 

tributary streams between Tulsa and Van Buren have 

a dilution effect upon the Arkansas River. The chloride pollution introduced by the Canadian River is 

shown by the fact that during the 1949 water year the 

Arkansas River at Webbers Falls, which is below its 

junction with the Verdigris and Neosho Rivers but 

above the Canadian River, had a maximum chloride 

concentration of 665 ppm. During this same period 

the Arkansas River at Van Buren had a maximum chloride concentration of 778 ppm, even though all tributary streams between Webbers Falls and Van Buren, 

with the exception of the Canadian River, usually have 

chloride concentrations of less than 10 ppm.

The overall dilution effect upon the Arkansas River 

by tributary inflow between Tulsa and Van Buren is 

shown by a comparison of the weighted-average chloride concentrations at these two locations. For the 

period October 1946 to September 1952 the weightedaverage chloride concentrations for the Arkansas River at Tulsa ranged from 422 to 734 ppm. The weightedaverage chloride concentrations for the same period at 

Van Buren ranged from 157 to 192 ppm.

Van Buren to Little Rock

Headwaters of the tributaries to the Arkansas River 

from Van Buren to Little Rock are in the Boston Mountains to the north and in the Ouachita Mountains to the 

south. These streams are all low in mineral content, 

and there is no evidence of excessive chloride concentration due to either pickup of natural salt or to industrial wastes.

The two largest tributaries of the Arkansas River in 

the reach from Van Buren to Dardanelle are Mulberry 

River and Illinois Bayou. A slight decrease in mineral 

concentration was observed in this reach of the Arkansas River in the 1950 water year due to tributary inflow from these two streams. The maximum chloride 

concentration at Van Buren was 738 ppm, while the 

maximum at Dardanelle for the same period was only 

590 ppm, and the weighted-average chloride concentrations for 1950 were 160 ppm at Van Buren, and 134 

ppm at Dardanelle. An analysis of the daily chemicalquality records collected on the Arkansas River at 

Dardanelle during the period October 1948 to September 1952 indicate that with the construction of the proposed Dardanelle Reservoir, the resulting stored water would probably meet qualifications for a municipal 

supply, so far as mineral content is concerned, dependent on capacity of the reservoir, operation, and 

physical features. The table below shows a comparison of selected U. S. Public Health Service drinkingwater standards with the maximum weighted-average 

concentrations observed for the Arkansas River at
CONCLUSIONS 19

Comparison of selected U. S. Public Health Service drinking-water standards with constituents for the Arkansas 

River at Dardanelle, Ark., October 1948 to September 1952

Constituent

Nitrate (NO3 )..... 

Magnesium (Mg). 

Chloride (Cl)......

Sulfate (SO4 )...... 

Dissolved solids.

U. S. Public Health 

Service Standards

Should not exceed 

(ppm)

44 

125 

250

250 

1/500

Arkansas River 

at Dardanelle

Maximum 

weighted-average 

concentration 

(ppm)

3.0 

11 

159

53 

459

_!/!, 000 ppm permitted where water of better quality 

is not available.

Dardanelle for the period October 1948 to September 

1952. The Public Health Service has established no 

standard for nitrate. Studies 3 indicate that nitrate in 

excess of 44 ppm in drinking water may be a. contributing factor or the cause of a condition in infants known 

as methemoglobinemia ("blue babies").

As the Arkansas River flows downstream from Dardanelle to Little Rock, the only two tributaries cor - 

tributing any sizable runoff are Petit Jean Creek and 

Fourche La Fave River. There is a further slight decrease in mineral concentration of the Arkansas River 

between Dardanelle and Little Rock due to the dilution 

effect of the tributaries and direct surface runoff. 

During the water year 1950 the weighted-average chloride concentration of the Arkansas River at Dardanelle 

was 134 ppm and at Little Rock was 121 ppm.

The chemical-quality sampling station on the Arkansas River at Little Rock is the farthest point downstream on the river at which daily chemical-quality 

records have been collected, but daily records have 

been collected for Bayou Meto, one of the tributaries 

to the river below Little Rock, and results indicate 

no highly concentrated waters from this source.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of records collected under the cooperative programs in the States of Arkansas and Oklahoma, 

a comparison of downstream changes or variations in 

chemical quality of water of the Arkansas River can 

be made by using the chloride concentrations. The 

data are incomplete at several places in the basin, but 

present records are sufficient to make preliminary 

observations of the downstream changes.

During the 1952 water year, weighted-average chloride concentrations for six daily sampling stations on 

the Arkansas River point out the extreme fluctuations 

in chemical concentrations due to tributary inflow between the Oklahoma-Kansas State line and Little Rock, 

Ark. During this period the weighted-average chloride

3Waring, F. H., 1949, Significance of nitrate in 

water supplies: Am. Water Works Assoc. Jour., v. 

41, no. 2, p. 147-150.

concentration for the Arkansas City station near the 

Oklahoma-Kansas State line was 316 ppm. For the 

same period the weighted-average chloride concentration for the Ralston station, 115 river miles downstream from Arkansas City, was 350 ppm. One of the 

main factors contributing to this increased chemical 

concentration was inflow from the Salt Fork Arkansas 

River. This stream obtains its high chloride content 

from both pickup of natural salt and from the introduction of oilfield brine and industrial wastes. Additional 

information is needed to determine the proportion of 

the salt load contributed by each source. This could 

be accomplished by the establishment of daily chemicalquality sampling stations to be operated simultaneously 

on Salt Fork Arkansas River near Jet, to show the salt 

load carried by the river due to natural sources, and 

near Ponca City, to show the total salt load contributed 

to the Arkansas River by pickup of natural salt and by 

industrial wastes.

The next point on the Arkansas River downstream 

from Ralston at which a weighted-average chloride 

value is available for the 1952 water year is the Tulsa 

station, a distance of 71 river miles downstream from 

Ralston. At this station the weighted-average chloride 

concentration increased to 734 ppm. This increase is 

due principally to inflow from the Cimarron River 

which carries large amounts of chloride derived from 

natural salt deposits and oilfield operations and industrial wastes. Present data are not sufficient to differentiate between amounts from each source. Additional 

information could be supplied by the establishment of 

daily sampling stations to be operated simultaneously 

on the Cimarron River near Waynoka, to determine 

the amount of chloride load due to pickup of natural 

salt from the salt deposits northwest of Waynoka and 

at Mannford, to determine approximately the total 

chloride load carried by the stream from all sources.

The next downstream location from Tulsa at which 

daily chemical-quality records are available for the 

1952 water year is at Van Buren, Ark., a distance of 

170 river miles. The weighted-average chloride concentration at this point for the 1952 water year was 

192 ppm, a significant decrease in comparison with 

the value of 734 ppm observed for the station at Tulsa 

for the same period. The only tributary stream between Tulsa and Van Buren which carries an appreciable chloride concentration is the Canadian River which
20 CHEMICAL QUALITY OF WATER, ARKANSAS RIVER

empties into the Arkansas River 101 river miles below Tulsa. The weighted-average chloride concentration for the Canadian River near Whitefield, Okla., for 

the 1952 water year was 510 ppm. However, other 

tributary streams between Tulsa and Van Buren, 

namely the Verdigris, Neosho, Illinois, and Poteau 

Rivers, were sufficiently low in chloride concentrations to have a significant dilution effect upon the water in the Arkansas River.

All tributary streams between Van Buren and Little 

Rock are sufficiently low in chloride concentration to 

produce a steady dilution effect on the Arkansas River 

water as it flows downstream. During the 1952 water 

year the weighted-average chloride concentration at 

the Dardanelle station, a distance of 98 river miles 

downstream from Van Buren, was 155 ppm, and 90 

river miles farther downstream at the Little Rock 

station the weighted-average chloride concentration 

showed a further decrease to 131 ppm. At present no 

information is available on the chemical quality of the 

Arkansas River water from Little Rock to the Mississippi River. However, miscellaneous analyses from 

tributary streams in this region indicate that no significant amounts of chloride are introduced into the 

river.

The data for dissolved solids included in this report 

have not been used in discussion of variations in the 

chemical quality of the Arkansas River. There have 

been certain minor discrepancies in the reconciliation 

of the total load at various places in the basin. More 

data are needed for several phases of the program before it is possible to specify causes for these discrepancies. Preliminary studies haVe been made in some 

phases in an attempt to determine the sources of error. However, in any region of complex geology, erratic streamflow characteristics, and diversified industrial activity, many factors have a controlling influence on the quality of water of a stream. This is 

particularly true in the Arkansas River basin of Oklahoma and Arkansas. These factors plus the collecting 

of only one sample a day from streams with wide variations in daily mineral content indicate that the load 

values shown in tables 1 and 2 are well within reasonable limits of error.

Data collected under the cooperative programs for 

Oklahoma and Arkansas were not designed to give a 

complete evaluation of the quality of water of the Arkansas River in the respective States. With an expanded program designed primarily to satisfy the needs 

for data, discrepancies such as have been noted would 

be eliminated.

At the present time there is no place on the Arkansas River from the Oklahoma-Kansas State line to 

Little Rock, Ark., at which the water would be suitable for daily use for a municipal supply, although some 

cities along the river in Arkansas use the water at 

times to supplement their regular supply.

Even if the Arkansas River were impounded at the 

proposed Keystone Reservoir site near Tulsa, Okla., 

the resulting stored water would not meet standards 

desired for a municipal water supply. Because of the 

large amounts of chloride being introduced into the 

stream from natural sources over which there is no 

control, it is doubtful if the chloride concentration 

could be sufficiently reduced to meet these standards 

even if major sources of oilfield brine and industrial 

wastes were substantially abated. However, storage 

at this reservoir would greatly reduce the daily variation in mineral concentration and would show a definite 

leveling off in daily variations downstream.

This leveling-off effect plus tributary inflow from 

less concentrated streams below Tulsa would yield an 

impounded supply at the proposed Dardanelle Reservoir near Dardanelle, Ark., which would meet standards of mineral content for use as a municipal supply, 

though cost of treatment of the water probably would 

be higher than present costs to cities in this vicinity.

It is doubtful that the Arkansas River water upstream 

from Tulsa would be suitable for irrigation uses even 

with the construction of the proposed Keystone Reservoir. However, with the leveling-off effect upon daily 

variation in chemical quality accomplished by this 

reservoir, it is probable that the water in the river 

could be used for irrigation anywhere below the junction of the Arkansas River with the Verdigris River, 

and it should be usable without question downstream 

from Van Buren, Ark. Arkansas River water is being 

used for supplemental irrigation at several places in 

Arkansas between Van Buren and Dardanelle, and with 

the leveling off in daily variations accomplished by the 

proposed Keystone and Dardanelle reservoirs, it should 

be usable at any time and place on the river in 

Arkansas.

At the present time, industrial use of the Arkansas 

River water in Oklahoma and Arkansas is confined 

largely to uses in which chemical quality is no factor, 

such as gravel washing and cooling water. However, 

with the elimination of large daily variations in mineral concentrations, it is probable that more beneficial 

use could be made of the water by industry.

The collection of records at the additional sampling 

sites mentioned together with studies to determine 

causes for discrepancies in present data would provide a more complete evaluation of the changes of 

chemical quality in the Arkansas River in Oklahoma 

and Arkansas.

INT.-DUP. SEC., WASH., D.0. 7ee T«