Filters: Tags: Allegany County (X) > Types: Map Service (X)
4 results (17ms)|
Filters
Date Range
Types Contacts
Categories Tag Types
|
From July through December 2016, 56 environmental samples were collected from the Mohawk and Western New York River Basins. Samples were collected from nine production wells and 13 domestic wells in the Mohawk River Basin, and 17 production wells and 17 domestic wells in the Western New York River Basins. Samples were collected and processed using standard USGS methods and analyzed for 320 constituents including physicochemical properties, dissolved gases, major ions, nutrients, trace elements, pesticides, volatile organic compounds, radionuclides, and indicator bacteria. Analytical methods are described and referenced in Gaige and others (2023). Five of the Mohawk River Basin wells (HE 622, HE 624, OE1468, SA1501,...
Categories: Data;
Types: Map Service,
OGC WFS Layer,
OGC WMS Layer,
OGC WMS Service;
Tags: Albany County,
Allegany County,
Ambient Monitoring,
Cattaraugus County,
Chautauqua County,
From July through November 2018, 48 environmental samples and four quality-control samples were collected throughout the Lower Hudson, Chemung, and Eastern Lake Ontario River Basins. Samples were collected from seven production wells and eight domestic wells in the Eastern Lake Ontario Basin, 13 production wells and 12 domestic wells in the Lower Hudson River Basin, and four production wells and four domestic wells in the Chemung River Basin. Of the wells sampled, 27 were completed in bedrock and 21 were completed in sand and gravel. Approximately 20 percent of samples were collected from wells that were previously sampled in 2003, 2008, and 2013. Groundwater samples were collected prior to any treatment or filtration...
Categories: Data;
Types: Map Service,
OGC WFS Layer,
OGC WMS Layer,
OGC WMS Service;
Tags: Albany County,
Allegany County,
Ambient Monitoring,
Chemung County,
Chemung River Basin,
This dataset includes spreadsheets with statistical data (mean and median absolute error) used in deciding which interpolation method best fit the corresponding dataset. All statistical data were paired with a visual inspection of the interpolation prior to determining the final raster product. All spreadsheets were generated using an automated python script (Jahn, 2020).
This dataset includes georeferenced TIFF files from three separate reports for the Olean study area that have been digitized into feature classes within ArcGIS. Not all digitized and georeferenced data was necessarily used in the final interpolations, however they may have contributed to understanding the local hydrogeology.
|
|
