#  Begin METADATA documentation
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#  DATASET_NAME: louisiana.txt	
#  DATASET_DESCRIPTION:	Text file describing the analysis process, sorted by state.
#			
#  DATA_SET FORMAT: ascii-text	
#  DATA_SET URL: 
#
#-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
#  REPORT TITLE: 
#     Estimated Withdrawals from Stream-Valley Aquifers and Refined 
#     Estimated Withdrawals from Selected Aquifers in the United 
#     States, 2000
#                             
#  REPORT SERIES/NUMBER: Scientific Investigations Report 2008-5003 
#  REPORT URL: URL: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/usgspubs/sir/sir20085003
#
#-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#  NAWQA STUDY:	Alluvial Aquifers
#
#-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#
#  METADATA DATE:   August 28, 2008 
#  METADATA CONTACT: Pierre Sargent, Molly Maupin, Stephen Hinkl
#                    U.S. Geological Survey
#                    3535 South Sherwood Forest Blvd., Suite 120
#                    Baton Rouge, LA 70816
#	 	     
#                    voice: 225-298-5481 x 3211
#                    fax:   225-298-5490
#                    email: psargent@usgs.gov
#
#  SECONDARY CONTACT:  Molly Maupin
#                      U.S. Geological Survey
#                      230 Collins Road
#                      Boise, ID 83702
#
#                    	voice: 208-387-1307
#                    	fax:   208-387-1372
#                    	email: mamaupin@usgs.gov
#
#  TERTIARY CONTACT:   Stephen Hinkle
#                      U.S. Geological Survey
#                      2130 SW %th Ave
#                      Portland, OR 97201
#	
#                      voice: 503-251-3237
#                      fax:   503-251-3470
#                      email: srhinkle@usgs.gov
#
# ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#  METADATA Data Description:  
#
#  ABSTRACT:  
#     The report authors maintained notes detailing the process that 
#     was used to do the analysis for this report. The pertinent 
#     notes were included in the appendix of the report. 
#     Some details that did not warrant publication reside 
#     in these notes. These notes are being archived in the 
#     event that they might be of use to future water-use 
#     efforts aimed at stream-valley aquifers.
#
#  Basic documentation of dataset elements and history
#
# Related_Spatial_and_Tabular_Data_Sets:  
#     There are related text files of notes for all 25 states/territories in this study
#     arizona.txt
#     arkansas.txt
#     colorado.txt
#     illinois.txt
#     indiana.txt
#     kansas.txt
#     kentucky.txt
#     louisiana.txt
#     missouri.txt
#     montana.txt
#     nebraska.txt
#     new_mexico.txt
#     new_york.txt
#     new_jersey.txt
#     north_dakota.txt
#     ohio.txt
#     oklahoma.txt
#     pennsylvania.txt
#     puerto_rico.txt
#     south_dakota.txt
#     tennessee.txt
#     texas.txt
#     utah.txt
#     west_virginia.txt
#     wyoming.txt
#
# ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#  METADATA Basic documentation of dataset elements:
#
#     DATA DESCRIPTION: 
#         Text files describing the analysis process, one text file 
#         for each state
#
#     DATA TYPES: ascii text
#
#     DATA SOURCES: notes taken during data analysis and from correspondance
#
#  End METADATA documentation
#
#  BEGIN DATA: 
# ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOUISIANA FACTS/NOTES -- JANUARY 2005

Withdrawals from Other  none
Data storage source  data base
Site-specific data  yes
Aggregate data at the county level  no
Aggregate data at the state level  no

State aquifer codes and hydrogeologic unit nomenclature  yes
Aquifer codes for Alluvial Aquifer  yes

State aquifer codes within the Pleistocene Series:
Alluvial aquifers, undifferentiated
Alluvial aquifers surficial confining units
Mississippi River alluvial aquifer
Mississippi River alluvial aquifer surficial confining unit
Quachita River alluvial aquifer
Quachita River alluvial aquifer surficial confining unit
Red River alluvial aquifer
Red River alluvial aquifer surficial confining unit

Reference: 
Lovelace, J.K., and Lovelace, W.M., 1995, Hydrogeologic unit nomenclature and computer codes for aquifers and confining units in Louisiana: Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development Water Resources Special Report no. 9, 12 p.

Disaggregation of Alluvial Aquifer withdrawals  from query of the State Water Use Database grouped by State Aquifer codes

Text from Steve that explains the movement of withdrawal water from Alluvial aquifer to Coastal Lowlands aquifer system

1.) PA#13 (Mississippi River Valley alluvial aquifer) has some characteristics of Stream-Valley Alluvium (e.g. according to the Ground Water Atlas of the U.S., page F8, PA#13 is characterized by interconnection with rivers and streams), but other aspects of this PA are not consistent with its being classified as a Stream-Valley Aquifer (e.g. wide areal extent). Thus, water use that is from the aerial extent of PA#13 should, of course, remain attributed to that PA, UNLESS a portion of that water use can be attributed to Stream-Valley Aquifers. (One of the goals of our work is to identify, where possible, Stream-Valley Aquifer water use that is embedded within larger PAs.) It is my understanding, however, that we do not have the requisite information to do this separation for Stream-Valley Alluvium near the main stem Mississippi River.
 
2.) Water use from the Red River alluvial aquifer, Ouachita-Saline River alluvial aquifer, and the Arkansas River alluvial aquifer SHOULD be attributed to Stream-Valley Aquifers. I base this on the Ground Water Atlas of the U.S., page F8, where these three aquifers are defined to be Stream-Valley Aquifers.
 
 There is, then, the question of what to do with water use from the lower reaches of the Ouachita, Saline, and Arkansas Rivers (the reaches that are in/on PA#13). As was discussed above, if water use from these lower reaches can be identified as being Stream-Valley Aquifer water use, then that water use should be attributed to Stream-Valley Aquifer water use. I don't know if any of the water use data that you've compiled is from the lower reaches of the Ouachita, Saline, and Arkansas Rivers, but it is my understanding that you do have water use data attributed to the Ouachita, Saline, and Arkansas River Stream-Valley Aquifers, and thus have data that can and should be attributed to Stream-Valley Aquifers. It is also my understanding that water use currently attributed to PA#13 is not separable by Stream-Valley Alluvium vs. not Stream-Valley Alluvium. 

3.) There is also the question of water use from aquifers that are south of the areal extent of PA#13 in the Ground Water Atlas of the U.S., but are considered by the State of LA to be a continuation (southern extension) of PA#13. I had earlier opined that that water use should be attributed to PA#13. However, I would like to reverse that decision. In the Ground Water Atlas of the U.S., page F8: "Quaternary alluvial and deltaic deposits of the lower Mississippi River Valley generally are lithologically similar to and in good hydraulic connection with the underlying deposits of the coastal lowlands aquifer system and, therefore, are included in that system." (That is, the southern extension of PA#13 is lumped with PA#18, Coastal Lowlands aquifer system.)
 
One of the goals of our work is to separate, if possible, Stream-Valley Aquifer water use from Atlantic Coastal Plain water use. But in this instance, the aquifer and associated water use in question is not Stream-Valley Aquifer embedded in Atlantic Coastal Plain, but PA#13 vs. PA#18. In this instance, I think we need to accept the decision that was explicitly made in the Ground Water Atlas of the U.S. (which was a fine decision, one that was documented and defended).
 
 So, of the water use that was classified as "alluvial" in the working database, that portion that Pierre determined was water use from aquifers that are south of the (Ground Water Atlas of the U.S.) areal extent of PA#13 but considered by the State of LA to be a continuation (southern extension) of PA#13, should, in fact, be attributed to PA#18.
 
Ground Water Atlas of the United States Segment 5  by R.A. Renken
F5 -- The surficial aquifer consists of alluvial aquifers and includes one major and three minor aquifer. In terms of water use and areal extent, the most important aquifer is the highly productive Mississippi River Valley alluvial aquifer. The minor aquifers include the Arkansas River, the Ouachita-Saline Rivers, and the Red River alluvial aquifers. The Arkansas River alluvial aquifer is not as widespread as the other two aquifers, but locally is an important water source.
F8 -- Minors  are less extensive but locally important; sand and gravel deposits of Quaternary age and generally contain ground water under unconfined conditions. Alluvial aquifers are capable of yielding large amounts of water, especially where the saturated thickness of the aquifer is large.

Quaternary alluvial and deltaic deposits of the lower Mississippi River Valley generally are lithologically similar to and in good hydraulic connection with the underlying deposits of the coastal lowlands aquifer system and , therefore are included in that system.

F12  Stream-Valley Alluvial Aquifers:
Arkansas River alluvial aquifer
Quachita-Saline Rivers alluvial aquifer
Red River alluvial aquifer

