Cassi L. Crow Emily C. Pease Diana E. Pedraza Stephen P. Opsahl 2018 Esri personal geodatabase, shapefiles, text, and excel files Denver, Colorado U.S. Geological Survey Prepared in cooperation with San Antonio River Authority (SARA) https://doi.org/10.5066/F74J0DDQ Cassi L. Crow Stephen P. Opsahl Diana E. Pedraza Emily C. Pease Ross K. Kushnereit 2018 document Scientific Investigations Report 5119 Reston, Virginia U.S. Geological Survey Prepared in cooperation with the San Antonio River Authority (SARA) https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20185119 The extensive development of oil and natural-gas resources in south Texas during the past 10 years has led to questions regarding possible environmental effects of processes associated with oil and natural-gas production, in particular the process of hydraulic fracturing, on water and other natural resources. Part of the lower San Antonio River watershed intersects an area of oil and natural-gas production from the sedimentary rocks that compose the Eagle Ford Group. The rapid expansion of infrastructure associated with oil and natural-gas production increases potential pathways for inorganic and organic contaminants to enter surface-water systems. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the San Antonio River Authority, analyzed geospatial data from different years (2008 and 2015) to evaluate changes in land cover associated with oil and natural-gas production activities in the lower San Antonio River watershed. Additionally, during 2015-17 surface-water samples collected from 5 sites and streambed-sediment samples collected from 17 sites in the lower San Antonio River watershed were analyzed for a broad range of constituents that might be associated with oil and natural-gas production. These data depict changes in land cover associated with oil and natural-gas production between 2008 and 2015 and document detections and concentrations of inorganic and organic constituents measured in surface-water and streambed-sediment samples collected during 2015-17 from selected stream sites located upstream from and within the area evaluated for land-cover change in the lower San Antonio River watershed in south Texas. Map political location: Bexar, Comal, Guadalupe, Wilson, Karnes, and DeWitt Counties, Tex. Metadata_SIR185119.xml: Project metadata file SIR185119_SAMPLES.zip: CodeDefinitions.txt DataDictionary.xlsx FieldDefinitions.txt ReadMe.txt Sampling_sites.txt Sampling_sites.xlsx Streambed-sediment_data.txt Streambed-sediment_data.xlsx Water_data.txt Water_data.xlsx Surface-water-quality_and_Streambed-sediment-quality_Metadata.xml SIR185119_GIS.zip: shapefiles directory: oilgas2008_poly.shp (polygon) oilgas2015_poly.shp (polygon) OilGas_Xtnt_poly.shp (polygon) SIR185119_GIS.gdb (file geodatabase of geospatial data listed above) Metadata_SIR185119_GIS.xml (metadata file) 2008 2017 ground condition Complete None planned -98.2505 -97.6489 29.4484 28.7426 USGS Thesaurus Oil Resources Petroleum Urbanization None Sediment-quality Water-quality Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons USGS Metadata Identifier USGS:5a95b893e4b06990606a7eda Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) Sutherland Springs Floresville Poth Falls City Karnes City Runge Kenedy Stockdale Elmendorf Selma St. Hedwig Karnes County Wilson County DeWitt County Bexar County Comal County Guadalupe County Cibolo Creek Ecleto Creek San Antonio River Texas none none Public Information Officer U.S. Geological Survey mailing and physical

1505 Ferguson Lane

Austin TX 78754 United States 512-927-3500 gs-w-txpublicinfor@usgs.gov Microsoft Windows 7 Version 6.1 (Build 7601) Service Pack 1; Esri ArcGIS 10.5.0.6491 All feature attribute values were peer reviewed. Values were checked for correct data type and for presence and/or absence. For quality-assurance purposes, quality-control (QC) samples were collected and analyzed to help assess the amount of variability and bias found in the environmental sample results. The QC samples submitted to the analytical laboratories included streambed-sediment sample replicates and matrix spikes. All QC samples were analyzed by using the same analytical methods that were used for analysis of the environmental samples. Analysis of the replicate samples indicated that, overall, variability in the analysis of all compounds was low, which is indicative of proper sampling and analytical processes that allow comparability between sites and sample sets and no environmental data were rejected from the data set based on variability. Map elements were inspected for topological errors (overshoots, undershoots, and duplicate features. Features were not duplicated, but coincident lines may exist between data features where appropriate. Quality-control (QC) samples submitted to the analytical laboratories included streambed-sediment sample replicates and matrix spikes. All QC samples were analyzed by using the same analytical methods that were used for analysis of the environmental samples. In addition to the QC samples submitted from the field, the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory analyzed internal laboratory blanks, replicates, and spikes. No environmental data were rejected or adjusted on the basis of the results obtained from QC samples. The amount of error introduced to the spatial data analysis from comparing imagery with different resolutions was not quantified but was expected to be negligible considering the small number of features available for digitization during the 2008 analysis when most of the land in the study area was undeveloped compared to the large number of man-made features available for digitizing during the 2015 analysis. Because of an analytical issue that occurred at the NWQL, major and trace element data associated with streambed-sediment samples collected during the first round of sampling in 2015 were rejected, and therefore are not reported. The dataset is considered complete for the information presented, as described in the abstract. Users are advised to read the metadata carefully for the information it provides about the dataset. No process steps have been described for this dataset Unknown U.S. Geological Survey - ScienceBase mailing and physical

Denver Federal Center, Building 810, Mail Stop 302

Denver CO 80225 United States 1-888-275-8747 sciencebase@usgs.gov U.S. Geological Survey data release Unless otherwise stated, all data, metadata and related materials are considered to satisfy the quality standards relative to the purpose for which the data were collected. Although these data and associated metadata have been reviewed for accuracy and completeness and approved for release by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data for other purposes, nor on all computer systems, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although these data have been processed successfully on a computer system at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data for other purposes, nor on all computer systems, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty. The USGS or the U.S. Government shall not be held liable for improper or incorrect use of the data described and/or contained herein. 20200827 Cassi L. Crow U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologist mailing and physical

5563 De Zavala Rd., Ste. 290

San Antonio TX 78249 United States 210-691-9217 ccrow@usgs.gov Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata FGDC-STD-001-1998