Laserfiche WebLink
declined since 1989. The ma,iority of this water-level response is • <br />thought to be due to recovery of the aquifer since mining in A`pit <br />moved away from this area. Levels probably recovered in this area <br />much faster due to the high precipitation during 1983 through 1986. <br />I <br />The stabilising of the levels and the recent declines could) be <br />partially caused by the der_line in recharge since 1936 (see Figure <br />2-1, page 2-17, for variation in precipitation). <br />The GC wells are greater than two miles fmm the neariest <br />mining in the H and I coal seams. We11 GC1 has shown considerable <br />water-level fluctuation, which is thought to be .all naturlll. <br />Fisure A-6 shows that water levels have demonstrated little <br />variation since 1987. indicating very little change in storagelin <br />the HI aquifer in this area. Water levels responded to the • <br />increase in recharge during 1984 and 1985. <br />The water levels from the Third White Sandstone well (GC3) <br />show that water levels had been fairly steady from 1984 throigh <br />1987. The hydrograph for this well shows an overall decline from <br />1988 through 199©. The ?991 water levels indicate that the <br />recharge to this aquifer may lag the above normal precipitationlby <br />one year. The hydrographs for both GC1 and (zC2 flur_tuate <br />seasonally, which indicates the changes in water levels ale <br />sensitive to natural influences. <br />The static w__=ter-Level elevations for flowina_' well GD2 aro <br />presented in Figure A-9. Water levels had beer_ risin? at well GD3 <br />(OR aquifer? for roost of 1986. The water 1?eels from November 198h <br />through September 1989 show a decline to levels below those if <br />-~ <br />