1. Comal Springs Mapping Project Texas Parks and Wildlife Department United States Fish and Wildlife Service

2. Why map Comal Springs? Identify precise locations of GW inputs Provides basis for future comparison at varying flows Provides basis for systematic sampling of springs for inverts Provide info on habitat associations

3. Comal Springs Mapping Project Goal – to map, describe, and document the various spring outlets that comprise Comal Springs Objectives Gather geospatial data with submeter accuracy Gather elevation, WQ, flow, and photos Describe physical habitat of each spring Compile data into a geodatabase Disseminate info to interested parties

4. Results 425 Springs mapped 333 point springs 92 groups of springs Landa Lake – 176 (42%) W. Shore – 142 (32%) SR 1 – 21 (5%) SR 2 – 14 (3%) SR 3 – 57 (13%) SR 4-6, OC, SFP – 1-5 (≤ 1%)

5. Comal Springs Mapping Project

6. Results Spring types – 165 (39%) alluvial, 195 (46%) upwelling, 40 (9%) single orifice 17 veg types associated with spring openings – Associated with 132 (31%) of springs – Anacua (27%), Elephant Ear (23%), and Ligustrum (19%) most common Total discharge ranged from 244 to 224 cfs – Historical average (1934-2011) is 290 cfs

7. Results SR 1 - 20 cfs SR2 – 4.6 cfs SR3 – 31.3 cfs 19.2 cfs 99.4 cfs LocationDischarge (cfs) Spring Run 120 Spring Run 24.6 Spring Run 331.3 Upper Landa Lake19.2 W Shoreline/Spring Island Area80.2 W Shoreline/Landa Lake Area84.7 Total Discharge (Comal River)240

8. Discussion Map provides basis for future work Future mapping efforts at varying flows Reveal changes in spring habitats and system as a whole Targets (cfs) – 290, 196, 150, 120, 100, 90-30 at 10 cfs increments Sampling of CSRB and other rare inverts in Comal Springs system Systematic sampling of springs to define distribution of organisms in system Provide information on habitat associations Estimating surface population size