Research highlights:


Tri-State Water Resource Coalition / Missouri Department of Natural Resources / Corps of Engineers, Kansas City and Little Rock Districts/ Southwest Missouri Water Resource Study – Phase I: Forecast of Regional Water Demands, 2010 through 2060 (CDM Smith)– November, 2012

An investigation of regional water demand across the 16 county footprint for Tri-State Water Resource Coalition: Barry, Barton, Cedar, Christian, Dade, Greene, Hickory, Jasper, Lawrence, McDonald, Newton, Polk, St. Claire, Stone, Taney, and Vernon. This study incorporated the cooperative efforts of two Corps of Engineer district offices (KC and Little Rock), the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (especially the Water Resources Center), Tri-State Water Resource Coalition, and other regional stakeholders, exemplifying effective regional water supply planning.

Supplemental Reservoir Screening Study (Freese & Nichols) – June, 2010
The preferred sites identified in the original reservoir study would not provide economical water for the Pittsburg and Lamar areas so the consultant was asked to further investigate sites which would. Addendum to Supplemental Reservoir Study 09-16-2010

  • Three potential reservoir sites were investigated in more detail (two north of Joplin, between Lamar and Pittsburg, and one south of Joplin) along with the possibility of withdrawal of water from below Stockton Dam.


Tri-State Water Resource Coalition / Missouri Department of Natural Resources Reservoir Screening Study (Freese & Nichols)– July, 2009
Although Tri-State Water’s preference is to gain access to already impounded water and build pumping stations and pipelines to supply our regional water needs, one or more new reservoirs may become a necessity at some time in the future. This study identified potential sites for new reservoirs.

  • It would not be economically feasible to construct one reservoir to serve the entire region.
  • Fourteen potential sites were defined – 10 to supply the western side of Tri-State Water’s footprint and 4 potential sites to supply the eastern side of the footprint.


Corps of Engineers Study (Black & Veatch) – October, 2006
This study investigated the need for additional water, and potential sources of additional water for the region.

  • Rivers and streams do not have sufficient flow to meet long-term demand without the construction of an additional reservoir.
  • Ground water (the Ozark Aquifer) is not a strong option due to decreasing levels and potential contamination in some parts of the footprint.
  • Additional source options included Grand Lake, Table Rock Lake, Stockton Lake, Truman Lake, a combination of those lakes, or one or more new reservoirs. The best opportunities for additional regional water supply were defined as Grand Lake, Table Rock Lake, Stockton Lake, and/or a new reservoir.


The Wittman Study – January, 2003
This study developed a hydro-geologic model of the Ozark Aquifer.

  • Additional pumping and water level data is needed to manage the ground water supply.
  • The Ozark Aquifer may be unable to satisfy demand, during an extended drought. That limit may come within 10 – 15 years for some parts of the Tri-State Water footprint.
  • Ideally, the aquifer should be used as a peaking supply versus a sole source of water supply.
  • An additional long term water supply source should be developed.


Additional documents:

Comments are closed.