Report 190 By Donald G. Jorgensen, U.S. Geological Survey | February 1975 (second printing August 1975)

Note: The oversize fold out map figures below were scanned separately from the report, so "missing pages" are these figures.

  • figure 4 - Approximate Altitude of the Base of the Chicot Aquifer
  • figure 5 - Approximate Altitude of the Base of the Upper Unit of the Chicot Aquifer
  • figure 6 - Estimated Transmissivity and Storage Coefficient of the Lower Unit of the Chicot Aquifer and the Chicot Aquifer Undifferentiated
  • figure 7 - Approximate Altitude of the base of the Evangeline Aquifer
  • figure 8 - Estimated Transmissivity and Storage Coefficient of the Evangeline Aquifer
  • figure 9 - Withdrawals of Ground Water From 1890 to 1970 and Predicted Withdrawals From 1971 to 1980
  • figure 10 - Approximate and Simulated Decline in the Altitude of the Potentiometric Surface in the Lower Unit of the Chicot Aquifer and the Chicot Aquifer Undifferentiated, 1890-1953
  • figure 11 - Approximate and Simulated Decline in the Altitude of the Potentiometric Surface in the Lower Unit of the Chicot Aquifer and the Chicot Aquifer Undifferentiated, 1890-1960
  • figure 12 - Approximate and Simulated Decline in the Altitude of the Potentiometric Surface in the Lower Unit of the Chicot Aquifer and the Chicot Aquifer Undifferentiated, 1890-1970
  • figure 13 - Approximate and Simulated Decline in the Altitude of the Potentiometric Surface in the Evangeline Aquifer, 1890-1953
  • figure 14 - Approximate and Simulated Decline in the Altitude of the Potentiometric Surface in the Evangeline Aquifer, 1890-1960
  • figure 15 - Approximate and Simulated Decline in the Altitude of the Potentiometric Surface in the Evangeline Aquifer, 1890-1970
  • figure 16 - Hydrograph Showing Depth to Water in Wells in the Houston Area
  • figure 17 - Hydrograph Showing Depth to Water in Wells in the Pasadena Area
  • figure 25 - Land-Surface Subsidence, 1943-64
  • figure 31 - Simulated Decline in the Altitude of the Potentiometric Surface in the Lower Unit of the Chicot Aquifer and the Chicot Aquifer Undifferentiated, 1890-1980, Alternative A
  • figure 32 - Simulated Decline in the Altitude of the Potentiometric Surface in the Evangeline Aquifer, 1890-1980, Alternative A
  • figure 33 - Simulated Decline in the Altitude of the Potentiometric Surface in the Lower Unit of the Chicot Aquifer and the Chicot Aquifer Undifferentiated, 1890-1990, Resulting From Pumping From 1890-1980, Alternative A
  • figure 34 - Simulated Decline in the Altitude of the Potentiometric Surface in the Evangeline Aquifer, 1890-1990, Resulting From Pumping From 1890-1980, Alternative A
  • figure 35 - Simulated Decline in the Altitude of the Potentiometric Surface in the Lower Unit of the Chicot Aquifer and the Chicot Aquifer Undifferentiated, 1890-1980, Alternative B
  • figure 36 - Simulated Decline in the Altitude of the Potentiometric Surface in the Evangeline Aquifer, 1890-1980, Alternative B
  • figure 37 - Simulated Decline in the Altitude of the Potentiometric Surface in the Lower Unit of the Chicot Aquifer and the Chicot Aquifer Undifferentiated, 1890-1990, Alternative C
  • figure 38 - Simulated Decline in the Altitude of the Potentiometric Surface in the Evangeline Aquifer, 1890-1990, Alternative C
  • figure 39 - Simulated Decline in the Altitude of the Potentiometric Surface in the Evangeline Aquifer, 1890-1990, Alternative D
  • figure 40 - Simulated Decline in the Altitude of the Potentiometric Surface in the Lower Unit of the Chicot Aquifer and the Chicot Aquifer Undifferentiated, 1890-1990, Alternative D