Water Quality Monitoring and Parameter Load Estimations in
Lake Conway Point Remove Watershed and
L’Anguille River Watershed
Presented by: Dan DeVun, Equilibrium
09/19/2013
Projects Primary Goal
By collecting, analyzing and reporting water quality and discharge data; provide monthly and annual parameter loadings, as well as unit area loadings in numerous 12 digit HUCs.
• Monitoring Structure – Similar activities are implemented in each monitored watershed that support each project’s primary goal.
• Water Quality Requirements – Incorporates project design, collection methodology and analytical methodology to generate representative data and allow for an evaluation of water chemistry within the selected watersheds.
• Discharge Requirements – Estimate the volume of water that passes the monitoring station during the sampling period.
• Data Compilation and Statistical Analysis – Compile and statistically analyze the collected data to provide monthly, annual, and unit area loadings, as well as, compare results between monitoring stations.
• Reporting Requirements – Provide the project participants with the project outcomes and make the results readily available to the natural resource and watershed professionals and the general public.
Equilibrium’s Monitoring RequirementsWater Quality
• Sample Types – Discrete grab samples, when possible we collect depth integrated samples at the mid point of the stream
• Collection Frequency – Once per week (Typically LCPR is collected on Monday and L’Anguille is Thursday)
• In-situ Parameters – Temperature, dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, pH, and stage.
• Record Field Notes – documentation that includes type of sample, time and date, site location, name of sampler, climatic characteristics during site visit, recognized problems, and corrective actions required or taken.
Equilibrium’s Monitoring RequirementsWater Quality (Continued)
• Laboratory Parameters – TSS, Turbidity, Total Phosphorus, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen, Nitrate-Nitrogen, Ammonia-Nitrogen, Total Nitrogen, Chloride and Sulfate.
• QAQC Samples – Samples taken to insure representativeness of collected data. (include replicate, field blanks, split and spiked samples)
• Ouachita Water Laboratory – a state certified laboratory, which was established in 1969.
Equilibrium’s Monitoring RequirementsDischarge
• Monitoring Station Location – When possible, locate monitoring stations where existing USGS stations are located.
• Discharge Parameters – Stage, Profile, and Velocity Stage – Utilize pressure transducers to continuously measure stage.
Additionally, manually measure stage at the time of water quality collection.
Profile – survey and record the stream’s cross sectional profileVelocity – utilize numerous instruments (electromagnetic and
acoustic doppler methodologies) to calculate stream velocities
Equilibrium’s Monitoring RequirementsDischarge (Continued)
• Discharge Measurements – Stream discharge is measured at numerous points throughout the hydrograph. We attempt to measure discharge at a minimal of three different stages of each categorical flow.
Low Flow, Mid Flow, High Flow
• Develop the Stage Rating Discharge Curve – determine the mathematical relationship between stage and discharge for the measured discharge points.
• Utilize the Stage Rating Discharge Curve – estimate daily discharge from the continuously collected stage data.
Data Compilation and Statistical Analysis
• Compilation of collected data Laboratory Water Quality Data In-situ Water Quality Data Historical Water Quality Data QAQC Water Quality Data Stage Data Discharge Data Historical Discharge Data Precipitation Data
• Statistical Analysis Statistical relationship between stage and discharge Calculation of parameter loadings Statistical comparison between monitoring stations.
Reporting
• Provide all project participants with a final report.
• Provide public access of our data through WQX.
• Our collected data and analysis can be beneficial to numerous persons working in fields related to water quality and water quantity.
Lake Conway Point Remove WatershedTen monitoring stations
Project Period is July 2011 – October 2014
Monitoring the “outfalls” of 12 digit HUC
Currently in data collection phase.
LCPR scored 91 in the Final Risk Assessment Matrix Percentile of the Arkansas’ Nonpoint Source Pollution Watershed Risk Matrix and has been selected as a priority watershed.
NRCS identified LCPR as a priority in the Mississippi River Basin Healthy Watershed Initiative.
L’Anguille River Watershed
Five monitoring stations
Previous Project Period July 2011 – June 2012Current Project PeriodJuly 2012 – September 2015
Monitoring the “outfalls” of 12 digit HUC
• The L'Anguille River was included on the Arkansas 1998 303(d) list for not supporting aquatic life due to siltation/turbidity and has been on each subsequent 303(d) list. • ANRC has designated the watershed as a priority watershed.• NRCS also identified the L'Anguille River as a priority in the Mississippi River Basin Healthy Watershed Initiative.
Priority Ranking by SWAT Model
12-Digit HUC NameDrainage
Size (Acres)
Sediment Load
(Percentile)
Total Phosphorus
Load (Percentile)
Erosion Rate
Cartographic Score
Copper Creek 12,056 80-100 60-80 Critical CriticalPrairie Creek 11,626 0-20 0-20 Critical Critical
Indian Creek 21,034 20-40 20-40 Moderate Critical
Upper Brushy Creek 21,718 40-60 0-20 Slight SlightMiddle Brushy Creek 31,947 0-20 40-60 Slight Slight
Saraswat, et.al
2011 – 2012 Hydrographs
9/12/2011
9/24/2011
10/6/2011
10/18/2011
10/30/2011
11/11/2
011
11/23/2011
12/5/2011
12/17/2011
12/29/2
011
1/10/2012
1/22/2012
2/3/2
012
2/15/2012
2/27/2012
3/10/2012
3/22/2012
4/3/2
012
4/15/2012
4/27/2012
5/9/2
012
5/21/2012
6/2/2
012
6/14/2012
6/26/2012
7/8/2
012
7/20/2012
8/1/2
012
8/13/2012
8/25/2012
9/6/2
012024681012141618
10
100
1000
10000
MB Hydrograph
QStage
Stag
e (ft
)Q
(CFD
)
9/12/2
011
9/25/2011
10/8/2011
10/21/2011
11/3/2011
11/16/2011
11/29/2011
12/12/2011
12/25/2011
1/7/2012
1/20/2
012
2/2/2012
2/15/2
012
2/28/2
012
3/12/2
012
3/25/2
012
4/7/2012
4/20/2
012
5/3/2012
5/16/2
012
5/29/2
012
6/11/2012
6/24/2012
7/7/2012
7/20/2
012
8/2/2012
8/15/2012
8/28/2012
9/10/2
0121.00
10.00
100.00
1000.00
10000.00
0123456789
PC Hydrograph
Q
Stage
Q (C
FD)
Stag
e (ft
)
2011 – 2012Results
Computed Annual Loading
Station Cubic Feet per YearTP TKN Ammonia TSS NO3-N Chloride Sulfate TN
LBS/Year LBS/Year LBS/Year LBS/Year LBS/Year LBS/Year LBS/Year LBS/Year
UB 2,350,000,000 53,700 167,000 11,400 11,100,000 13,600 2,480,000 1,500,000 181,000
MB 4,120,000,000 117,000 345,000 20,300 28,300,000 35,800 3,830,000 3,220,000 381,000
CC 1,060,000, 000 20,600 62,200 6,680 6,840,000 20,100 419,000 699,000 82,300
PC 1,170,000, 000 40,400 61,400 2,770 21,100,000 13,200 323,000 583,000 74,600
IC 2,850,000, 000 85,900 226,000 21,000 21,000,000 55,800 1,570,000 2,140,000 282,000
2011 – 2012Results
Unit Area Loading 2011 - 2012 UB MB CC PC IC
Acres 21,718 31,947 12,056 11,626 21,034 LB/Acre LB/Acre LB/Acre LB/Acre LB/Acre
TP 2.5 2.0 1.7 3.5 4.1TKN 7.7 5.6 5 5.3 10.8
Ammonia 0.5 0.3 0.6 0.2 0.8TSS 512 538 567 1,818 1,001
NO3-N 0.6 0.7 1.7 1.1 2.0Chloride 114.1 42.3 34.7 27.8 75.2Sulfate 69.2 53.8 57.9 50.1 101.6
TN 8.3 6.2 6.8 6.4 12.8
0-20%
0-20%
20-40%
40-60%
80-100%
Sediment Contribution
Swat Model Percentile Contribution
CC IC PC UB MB0
200400600800
100012001400160018002000
Equilibrium’s Reporting (2011 – 2012)Unit Area Loading
TSS (lbs/acre)
CC IC PC UB MB0
2
4
6
8
10
12
F= 1.67p=0.15
AA
A
A A
Statistical Comparison (One way ANOVA +Tukey’s Pairwise Comparison)
amongst sites for TSS
CC IC PC UB MB0
0.51
1.52
2.53
3.54
4.5
Equilibrium’s Reporting (2011 – 2012)Unit Area Loading
TP (lbs/acre)
40-60%
0-20%
0-20%
60-80%
60-80%
Total Phosphorus Contribution
Swat Model Percentile Contribution
CC IC PC UB MB0.000
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.010
0.012
F= 2.35p=0.529
A
A A
A A
Statistical Comparison (One way ANOVA +Tukey’s Pairwise Comparison)
amongst sites for TP
Project Difficulties
• Variable Climatic Patterns• Stream Activities• Unnatural Discharges• Equipment loss• Discharge Measurements
Questions?
?www.equilibrium-ar.org
Thank You
