Real-Time Data to Estimate Sediment, Nutrient, and Hg Loading from Northshore Lake Superior Streams...

8/14/2019 Real-Time Data to Estimate Sediment, Nutrient, and Hg Loading from Northshore Lake Superior Streams (306-08-08)

1/30

Minnesotas Lake Superior Coastal Program

Real-Time Data to Estimate Sediment, Nutrient, and Hg Loading

from Northshore Lake Superior Streams

Project Richard Axler

Coordinator: Natural Resources Research Institute1

University of Minnesota-Duluth5013 Miller Trunk Highway, Duluth, MN 55811

Project Norm Will1, Elaine Ruzycki

1George Host

1,Cindy Hagley

2

Investigators: Jerry Henneck1, Todd Carlson3 Jesse Schomberg2 Marnie Lonsdale3

Gerry Sjerven1 Chris Kleist3, David Stark4

2University of Minnesota-Sea Grant, Duluth, MN 55812

3 Stormwater Utility, City of Duluth, MN 558024 Cook County Soil & Water Conservation Department, Grand Marais, MN 55

Project Jesse Anderson,Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Duluth, MN


2/30

Real-Time Data to Estimate Sediment, Nutrient, and Hg Loading

from Northshore Lake Superior Streams

I. Background:

An estimated 720 perennial and 127 intermittent streams flow into Lake Superior including 309

trout streams and their tributaries (>2100 miles) along the North Shore (NS) and St. Louis River(SLR) estuary alone. The topography includes steep bedrock escarpments creating a high density

of stream corridors in relatively narrow, forested watersheds with steep gradients, thin erodible

soils, and typically low productivity, high-quality trout streams sensitive to urbanization and

rural development. Streams are particularly susceptible to factors raising water temperature andincreasing runoff of water and sediment, such as openings in riparian cover and canopy,

impervious surface within the watershed, road crossings and the potential increased frequency of

severe storms predicted by climate change models and already in evidence during the pastdecade or so in parts of Minnesota. These streams ultimately discharge into the sensitive coastal

zone of ultra-oligotrophic Lake Superior or its St. Louis River Estuary. From 1992-2001, low-

intensity development increased 33% in the basin with an alarming transition from agriculture tourban/suburban sprawl (Wolter et al. 2007) as indicated by Cook Countys 24% population

increase from 1990-96. Stream fish, amphibians, and the invertebrates that sustain them are

being adversely impacted by increased temperature, excessive peak flows, turbidity and

suspended solids, road salt, organic matter, and nutrients from increased development (MPCA2003); 11 of the 27 major North Shore trout streams are now Listed as Impaired (303d-2008)

primarily for turbidity temperature and fish-Hg (including Miller Amity Lester Talmadge


3/30

and organizations (now ~26) seeking to develop a unified watershed-level approach to educatingthe public and businesses about their role in nonpoint source pollution, prevention, and cures

(Granley and Lonsdale 2005, 2007).

Minnesota streams draining into the Lake Superior coastal zone and St. Louis River Estuary are

typically sensitive, low productivity, high-quality trout streams. Some (Miller, Amity, Lester,

Talmadge, French, Poplar, Brule) are currently listed on the MN Clean Water Act (303d) List ofImpaired Waters - most commonly for turbidity and Fish-Hg (MPCA 2008). Steep topography

and thin, erodible soils make these streams particularly sensitive to development. Effective

management and remediation of these streams requires an understanding of their physical,

chemical, and biological characteristics, which can only be obtained by monitoring, particularlyduring storm and snowmelt runoff events, when the most dramatic impacts occur. These data are

critical for developing and assessing BMPs, particularly in the face of increased development in

the high growth watersheds along the North Shore of Lake Superior (e.g. Anderson et al. 2003;MPCA 2000; IJC 1999). MPCA initiated long-term monitoring of 6 critical streams along the

North Shore in 2002. However, MPCA has lacked the resources to install automated water

quality sensors, which are needed to capture critical pollutant loading events during high flows important for developing cost-effective remediation and mitigation strategies.

FY 04/05 funding from the MNLSCP, MPCA, Duluth, NRRI/Sea Grant and WLSSD allowed

the website to expand to include all RSPT communities, a site design toolkit, contractor trainingmaterials, new educational sections, and a northshore section (leading to renaming the website

LakeSuperiorStreams org ; Axler et al 2006) The Weber Stream Restoration Initiative funded


4/30

The ultimate success of impairment assessments and mitigation and restoration strategiesdepends on having accurate pollutant budgets that account for interannual variability and

establish background concentrations for specific sites as well as having an understanding of howaquatic systems vary across ecoregions, climatic zones, and anthropogenic gradients (see Magnerand Brooks 2008). Success also requires informed citizens and decision makers who then set

appropriate management policies. Additional information is best found by examining

http://lakesuperiorstreams.org .

II. Objectives & Tasks

Major objectives for the project were to (1) Operate the LSS stream monitoring network for

2006-7 and add low level mercury sampling to develop accurate stream discharge/pollutantbudgets and models relating surrogate sensor values to pollutants of interest (especially Hg and

turbidity); and (2) provide an easy access web portal for citizens, businesses, and decision

makers to understand the environmental and public health issues and regulatory frameworkassociated with the actual pollutant monitoring data. The sensor data will be coupled with

manually collected TSS, nutrient, chloride and Hg data to estimate concentrations and

seasonal/annual loadings of these pollutants from the five monitored watersheds and to provide afirst assessment of event-based interannual variability (weather driven) in northshore streams.

The project comprised three specific tasks:

Task 1 -Stream data acquisition and posting - Operate and maintain continuous water quality sensors in

5 northshore streams; collect and analyze water samples for additional water quality parameters from
http://lakesuperiorstreams.org/http://lakesuperiorstreams.org/http://lakesuperiorstreams.org/http://lakesuperiorstreams.org/


5/30

Task 3. Website maintenance and new section development - Develop a new section in the

lakesuperiorstreams.org website providing background material about northshore stream

impairment issues. This section will be a portal for citizens, businesses, and decision-makers toaccess relevant information about:1) Impaired water bodies in the Lake Superior region; 2) The

Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) process (and current status) for addressing impairments in

these and other streams and/or lakes; 3) Mercury related public and environmental health issues

and local, regional, state and federal efforts to mitigate the problem; 4) Maintain Lake Superior

Streams website and continue to collaborate (and expand) with Regional Stormwater Protection

Team member agencies to disseminate relevant new information, market the website to

northshore communities, agencies, businesses and organizations, provide educational tools for

teaching watershed, water quality, and habitat protection, and seek stable funding for thewebsite and for the monitoring network.

III. Approach

The project has built on pre-existing partnerships LakeSuperiorStreams and the Superior

Regional Stormwater Protection Team (www.duluthstreams.org/stormwater/rspt.html ).Additional opportunities for continued relevant discussions and collaborations, as well as

additional expertise, resulted from the Weber Stream Restoration Initiative (WSRI;

www.duluthstreams.org/weber/index.html ) that began in 2005 with an endowment to restore and

protect degraded and threatened Lake Superior Basin trout streams. The project also benefitedfrom MPCA funding via the Lake Superior Beach Monitoring Program to maintain the

www MinnesotaBeaches org website and from Minnesotas Lake Superior Coastal Program that
http://www.duluthstreams.org/stormwater/rspt.htmlhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/stormwater/rspt.htmlhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/weber/index.htmlhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/weber/index.htmlhttp://www.minnesotabeaches.org/http://www.minnesotabeaches.org/http://www.minnesotabeaches.org/http://www.duluthstreams.org/weber/index.htmlhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/stormwater/rspt.html


6/30

collected by the stream monitoring units (SMUs) are intended for both public educationand for inclusion in the City of Duluth (City), Western Lake Superior Sanitary District

(WLSSD), Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA/STORET), and MinnesotaDepartment of Natural Resources (MDNR) databases. Measurements comply with EPAQA guidelines (EPA 1998) and follow previously established and documented QA/QC

plans developed by NRRI, certified by the MN Dept of Health and the MPCA (Ameel et al.

1998; APHA 2003), and used for previous EMPACT projects performed by our group.EPA used our Lake Access EMPACT project as the national model for technology transfer

to other aquatic EMPACT projects (Peterson et al. 2000). Details are at

www.duluthstreams.org/streams/aboutdata.html . Stage height monitoring, maintenance

and calibration are performed by staff at the MPCA-Duluth in cooperation with USGS (seeAnderson et al. 2003 for details)

IV. Task Results

This section summarizes the major elements of the three work tasks that were completed over the

period of the grant. Supporting screen captures from theLakeSuperiorStreams.org website areincluded in the Appendices.

Task 1. Real Time Stream Monitoring:1-1. Continuous data acquisition for flow and water quality continued throughout Fall 2007. TheCity of Duluth was rebuilding the lowest bridge over the Amity Creek on Seven Bridges Rd in

summer 2007 and so the MPCA stage height sensor and NRRI-UMD water quality sensor sonde
http://www.duluthstreams.org/streams/aboutdata.htmlhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/streams/aboutdata.htmlhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/streams/aboutdata.htmlhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/streams/aboutdata.html


7/30

1-3. Water sample collection and analyses for total suspended sediment (TSS), turbidity,nutrients, and chloride were performed for all of the streams by both NRRI and MPCA personnel

following MPCAs Guidance Manual for Assessing the Quality of Minnesota Surface Waters(www.pca.state.mn.us/water/tmdl/index.html ).Similar parameters were collected at the

remaining long-term MPCA monitoring stations

(Talmadge, French, Brule and Brule Rivers) byMPCA-Duluth staff. Water quality data were

added to the website via updatedExcel

spreadsheets that can be viewed via Internet

Browser or downloaded.
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/tmdl/index.htmlhttp://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/tmdl/index.htmlhttp://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/tmdl/index.htmlhttp://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/tmdl/index.html


8/30

Task 2. Data analysis

2-1. Poplar River. NRRI continued to actively participate, on an as-needed basis, in variousdiscussions with the Poplar River Management Board, Lutsen Ski Mountain Resort, CookCounty SWCD, and the MPCA regarding the design and implementation of the TMDL for the

Poplar River and potential monitoring strategies and collaborations. A summary with preliminary

analyses of the 2006 in-stream turbidity sensor data and recommendations for the 2007 fieldseason was previously developed and sent to all interested parties in February 2007 (Axler et al.

2007). It was prepared to assist the MPCA, Cook County SWCD, EPA Region V, and their

subcontracted consultants in the TMDL study and is available in the Poplar River section at

www.duluthstreams.org/northshore/poplar/TMDL/index.html and also via the Stream Reportssection at www.duluthstreams.org/general/reports_NShore.html .
http://www.duluthstreams.org/northshore/poplar/TMDL/index.htmlhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/northshore/poplar/TMDL/index.htmlhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/northshore/poplar/TMDL/index.htmlhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/general/reports_NShore.htmlhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/general/reports_NShore.htmlhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/general/reports_NShore.htmlhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/general/reports_NShore.htmlhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/northshore/poplar/TMDL/index.html


9/30

2-2. Sediment, nutrient and mercury in Western Lake Superior Streams: In-stream turbiditysensors versus grab sampling and modeling.

Results of analyses were presented at two conferences in October 2007 associated with an M.Sthesis funded largely through MN Sea Grant that complements the data collection funded by this

Coastal program grant. It is expected that at least two manuscripts will be subnitted to refereed

journals from this M.S. thesis during the latter half of 2008. Copies will be submitted to Coastalprogram staff and funding from this project will be acknowledged.

The use of in situ continuous (15-30

minute interval sampling) turbidity valuesas a surrogate for total suspended solids

(TSS), total phosphorus, total nitrogen,

and Hg was assessed for each stream.Currently, sediment and nutrient loading

estimates are developed for North Shore

streams based on an analysis thatcombines continuous, stage-height

hydrographs (estimating discharge) with15-30 grab sample measurements of TSS,

TP and TN. Grab sampling is biasedtowards higher flows during snow melt

runoff and rainstorm events and the


10/30

appears that the FLUX modeling approach yields consistently higher estimates for annual andsnowmelt suspended sediment loading in these urban streams. Additional ana;lyses of nutrients

are in progress (Ruzycki, M.S. Thesis, In prep. March 2008).

Total mercury values ranged from 1 to 28 ng/L throughout the 2004-2006 open water season and

show a close relationship with TSS (r2 = 0.82, n = 23) for all four streams. Figure 4 summarizes

these data in relation to the MPCA criterion of 1.3 ng/L for North Shore streams. Table 2 showsa comparison of the differeing mercury species measured in the 5 streams. These results

combine both runoff event and base flow data.


11/30

Table 3. Regression model fit for each stream. Both models are based on

log transformed data. Na = not available yet, there is not enough datafrom Amity Creek.

StreamIn-stream Turbidity vs TSS

(r2)

TSS vs Total Hg

(r2)

Amity 0.98

n = 33

0.93

n = 9Chester 0.61

n = 85

0.87

n = 9

Kingsbury 0.72n = 85

0.91n = 10

Tischer 0.55

n = 85

0.84

n = 10All Streams

0.71 0.85

Annual loads of sediments and mercury were estimated using turbidity as a surrogate .

Preliminary results are shown in Table 3. These preliminary estimates, will be further refinedonce we gain a better understanding of the errors associated with using continuous, instream

turbidity as a surrogate for suspended sediments. We recently purchased a second sonde for a

Sea Grant funded study of the Lester-Amity watershed in 2008 that will enable us to determine

how variable instream turbidity is along each stream cross section We have also developed


12/30

Task 3. Website maintenance and new features

3-1. Website maintenance is on-going, many additions to existing sections have been created

and installed, and several new sections have been created and installed in 2007. Of particularnote:

o The northshore streams section nowhas pages for 14 of the streams(including Amity) including interactive

maps for each watershed. Each stream

section now has additional general

information, and images and text ontheir home pages with links to DNR

for fish and invertebrate data. Other

sources of data, as they are discoveredor contributed by agency staff, are

listed in the referencereports section

that links back to each stream and ahyperlink is made if the report or

datafile is available on-line. In somecases, if not too large in size, the

information is actually made available directly off of the LSS website . The main map withhyperlinks to the stream sections has also been redesigned for increased clarity and ease of

use Most recently we reviewed the Flute Reed Watershed Plan and installed it on the


13/30

o A new publication called the Stream-Line Newsletter was created in 2007 by J. Kallestad atNRRI-UMD with help from several Superior RSPT members and funding from the WeberStream Restoration Initiative. Editions from Spring and Fall 2007 and recently Spring 2008have now been created, mailed to >1500 residences in the Lester-Amity watershed, and

posted on the LSS website at www.duluthstreams.org/weber/StreamLine.htm . Stories are

not linited to the Lester-Amity watersheds and are solicited from WSRI and RSPT partners.Considerable guidance and review has been contributed by Mindy Granley, the NPS

Program Coordinator for Minnesotas Lake Superior Coastal Program.
http://www.duluthstreams.org/weber/StreamLine.htmhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/weber/StreamLine.htmhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/weber/StreamLine.htm


14/30


15/30

A Duluth Stormwater Infrastructure tour slide presentation was added with links from theCOMMUNITIES section (Duluth Stormwater Information) and the UNDERSTANDING

section (Urban Hydrology); see caption in Chester Creek image athttp://duluthstreams.org/stormwater/duluth/stormwater_plan .

The 2007 Duluth MS4 Annual Public Meeting Presentation slideshow is now downloadableat http://duluthstreams.org/stormwater/duluth/stormwater_plan.html

o A Fats, Oils and Grease (FOG) section based on a slideshow developed by DuluthStormwater was created (http://duluthstreams.org/citizen/fatsOilGrease.html in the

CITIZENS & SCHOOLS / Home & Garden / Waste disposal section)

o The south shore section was greatly expanded during the previous three quarters and nowincludes extensive information regarding the Nemadji River, the City of Superior streammonitoring efforts, a Lake Superior Clay brochure, trout streams of WI links, and

incorportation of WI DNR information on stormwater and the Lake Superior Basin

throughout. We are awaiting additional information from RSPT Wisconsin Partners and areseeking collaborative grant opportunties to further develop the South Shore section.

o We have begun to develop a subsection for information from Fortin Consulting CompanysParking Lot Maintenance training workshops (MPCA 319 funded with NRRI and RSPTagreeing to collaborate) this past winter and will be incorporating them into the

STORMWATER and CITIZEN sections of the website over the next 2 months This effort
http://duluthstreams.org/stormwater/duluth/stormwater_planhttp://duluthstreams.org/stormwater/duluth/stormwater_planhttp://duluthstreams.org/stormwater/duluth/stormwater_plan.htmlhttp://duluthstreams.org/citizen/fatsOilGrease.htmlintheCITIZENS&SCHOOLS/Home&Garden/Wastedisposalsectionhttp://duluthstreams.org/citizen/fatsOilGrease.htmlintheCITIZENS&SCHOOLS/Home&Garden/Wastedisposalsectionhttp://duluthstreams.org/citizen/fatsOilGrease.htmlintheCITIZENS&SCHOOLS/Home&Garden/Wastedisposalsectionhttp://duluthstreams.org/citizen/fatsOilGrease.htmlintheCITIZENS&SCHOOLS/Home&Garden/Wastedisposalsectionhttp://duluthstreams.org/citizen/fatsOilGrease.htmlintheCITIZENS&SCHOOLS/Home&Garden/Wastedisposalsectionhttp://duluthstreams.org/stormwater/duluth/stormwater_plan.htmlhttp://duluthstreams.org/stormwater/duluth/stormwater_plan


16/30

maintenance, we have linked to a number of agency websites that are likely to continue to becurrent (although sudden external website changes in navigation (i.e. URLs) remains a

frustrating challenge. The new Hg website sections are inserted below.


17/30


18/30

3-5. The Flute Reed River Watershed Partnership

The Flute Reed River has an active citizen watershed partnership and volunteer monitoringprogram and the Cook County Water Plan Coordinator requested that we develop a websectionfor this stream. Over the past six months we have expanded this section to include a weblog for

Partnership meeting minutes , photographs and reports. We are currently in the process of adding

photographs of the stream taken during different times of year.


19/30

wetlands within a 100 m riparian buffer of 2nd andhigher order streams) and to create tabular and

mapped summaries of the results. Spatial dataanalyses performed for this project in cooperationwith other projects in the region included

hydrography, transportation, landuse/landcover,

geology and soils, ownership and administrativeboundaries (see www.nrri.umn.edu/coastalgis ). The

DATA INDEX link opens a main index for water

quality and other information about all of the

streams covered by theLakeSuperiorStreams project. It provides a map divided in Duluth, North

Shore and South Shore subregions that allows the

user to link to a particular stream section viamouse-rollover and or via a comprehensive table

that summarizes all information available for each

stream, with appropriate links(www.duluthstreams.org/streams/stream_selector.html).

3-8. Website navigation & structure improvements:
http://www.nrri.umn.edu/coastalgishttp://www.nrri.umn.edu/coastalgishttp://www.duluthstreams.org/streams/stream_selector.htmlhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/streams/stream_selector.htmlhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/streams/stream_selector.htmlhttp://www.duluthstreams.org/streams/stream_selector.htmlhttp://www.nrri.umn.edu/coastalgis


20/30

o UNDERSTANDING-Bacteria new information via USGS research and demonstration projects in Ohio- Watersheds- section revised to include Wisconsin DNR information as well as new MPCA

materials

-Impairments & TMDLs (see above discussions and descriptions of TMDL and Mercury

websections)- Fish section - more fishing organization material; articles posted about Weber Initiative

and NRRI Great Lakes Environmental Indicators Project (GLEI) fromAnglermagazine.

- UM volunteer oriented aquatic bug ID website - link added plus a link to an on-line

interactive taxonomic key for Minnesota aquatic invertebrates.-Data Vignettes- A variety of data sequences (vignettes) using real-time data collected from

Tischer, Chester, Kingsbury, Amity and Poplar Creeks from 2002 - 2007 have formed a

unique part of the LSS project to illustrate how regional streams behave and inparticular, how watershed activities and land uses can affect the transport of dissolved

and particulate pollutants into these streams. These vignettes have been developed and

formatted similarly to those developed as part of the Water on the Web (WOW) waterscience curriculum (www.waterontheweb.org) and will be available for viewing on the

website or as downloadable slide shows for teachers or agency staff to use or modify asneeded. Modules or website sections of this kind have been developed for: flow,

temperature, suspended solids/turbidity and conductivity (salt). Not all have yet beeninstalled in a website library but we hope to have this completed by September 30, 2008

if funding permits This is an ongoing process dependent upon staff funding as we
http://www.waterontheweb.org/http://www.waterontheweb.org/http://www.waterontheweb.org/http://www.waterontheweb.org/


21/30

- WHATS NEW section that is linked at the bottom of every page in the website provides asteady stream of new information gleaned from various state and federal agencies. The most

relevant are added to appropriate major sections of the website.

o STREAMS- The most notable additions involve TMDL materials for the Poplar R., Knife R. and

Miller Creek TMDL studies and the expansion of the Flute Reed River websection. Inaddition:

- Work has continued on an updated version of the Data-Visualization Tools, with new

features that will ultimately include:

Data-smoothing (3-point moving average);

More time-scale options the current version was expanded to cover a full year.

More startup parameters allowing complete control over the original plot when theapplets are launched making it easier to use the DVTs to illustrate specific events. This

will facilitate developing data vignettes to easily make use of the most recent data as well

as having the potential to instruct outreach and education professionals and agency todevelop their own materials that are best suited to their specific needs.

-The left-side navigational links on the web pages for each stream were standardized in2007 and now we need information to flesh out the Photographs, Issues, and Historysections. This will apparently take longer than anticipated and will require a commitment

by the County Water Plan Coordinators and other local or state agencies


22/30

Monitoring impacts (in terms of drainage area and stream miles):

Summary of total watershed areas and associated total stream lengths per watershed for sites

with automated water quality monitoring stations. Data from Fitzpatrick et al. 2006,

Anderson et al. 2003) andwww.LakeSuperiorStreams.org . Note that the watershed areasupstream of the in stream sensors represented 97-99% of total area for each monitored

watershed.

Kingsbury Chester Tischer Amity Poplar Total

Area

(km2) 23.3 17.4 18.9 43.3 83.1 186.0 km2Area

(acres)5755 4298 4668 10,695 20,545 45,961 acres

Stream

Length

(km)

18.8 18.4 18.1 53.1 40.6 149.0 km

Stream

Length

(mi)

11.7 11.4 11.3 33.0 25.2 92.6 miles

Awards:

The project won a number of awards in the past three years that it has received funding from
http://www.lakesuperiorstreams.org/http://www.lakesuperiorstreams.org/http://www.lakesuperiorstreams.org/


23/30

V.EvaluationWebsite usage:

Web activity is tracked automatically andsummarized at ~6 month intervals. As of

December 31, 2007 the site had achieved more

than 458,000 hits/month as a monthly high inMay 2007(~247,000 when the current MN LSCP

grant proposal was written) and >85,000 page

requests/mo (May/June 2007; ~ 57,000 when the

current proposal was written) with a regional andnational target audience that includes: the general

public; students and teachers; contractors,

consultants and developers; decision makers; andagencies (local, state, and federal). There are

some additional useful measures from new

website tracking software that we acquired in2007 that suggest that ~40% of the requests are

from computers or Internet Service Providers inMN with perhaps another 5% in WI- but these

estimates are preliminary. Website requestshave come from more than 120 countries to

date; it is likely that this wide range is due in


24/30

By measuring these indicators over time, water quality managers can target their projectactivities and assess whether their projects are accomplishing changes expected to improve and

protect water quality. Monitoring social indicators, like monitoring environmental indicators,will provide valuable information about how well management strategies are working. As part ofa collaboration with a City of Duluth/NRRI/MN Sea Grant EPA 319 NPS project involving

retrofits of a residential neighborhood to reduce runoff that has just begun (March 2008), the

Minnesota SI team is alsodeveloping practical, informal

evaluation tools that will applied in

the proposed project and will make

use of the LSS website in addition toproviding valuable evaluation of it.

PresentationsA running list of presentations, reports, journal manuscripts, articles, and awards is maintained

on theLakeSuperiorStreams.org website in the ABOUT US section linked from the bottom ofevery page.

VI. Conclusions and Summary Evaluation


25/30

and agency staff and iv) providing a critical link between academic scientists and educators anddecision makers. Enhancing this synergy was a continuing goal of this proposal.

The project has generated water quality data needed to assess, model and manage threatenedtrout streams as well as the coastal zone of Lake Superior. It provides the data needed to allow

resource agencies to better estimate seasonal, year-to-year and stream-to-stream variability in

water quality and contribute to regulatory work plans for addressing impairments. The projectbuilt on pre-existing partnerships -LakeSuperiorStreams, the RSPT, and the Weber Stream

Restoration Initiative with significant in-kind effort and funding from MPCA, WLSSD, City of

Duluth Stormwater Utility, and the University of Minnesota-Duluth. Additional collaborators

included Lutsen Mountain Ski Area, South St Louis/Cook/Lake County SWCDs, and the PoplarRiver Management Board. Objectives evolved from discussions between LSS, RSPT and WSRI

partners, and between NRRI, Sea Grant, MPCA, MDNR and EPA-MED (Duluth) aquatic

scientists studying Superior Basin watersheds, surface waters, and biological communities andcollaborating on numerous applied research and water science education projects for >15 yrs.

Effective monitoring of seasonal pollutant levels and loading rates are also important elements of

the Superior Basin Plan and are essential to track trends, estimate background, and evaluate theefficacy of BMPs for mitigation and restoration projects (Magner and Brooks 2008).

LakeSuperiorStreams staff also created MPCAs MNBeaches.org website and interactive datavisualization tools, a websection for St. Louis River Watch, and have discussed with various

agencies how to make complex data sets interesting and interpretable to the public.

The use of real-time intensive stream data allows for more accurate measurements of water


26/30

Western Lake Superior Sanitary District (10%); (4) field sampling, sensor maintenance, webmaterials development, RSPT coordination and website operation funding by City of Duluth

stormwater staff (~23%). Dave Stark of the Cook County SWCD helped with field work andsensor maintenance and calibration at the Poplar River site and by providing Poplar River TMDLmaterials and relevant reports. Jerry Walker of the Duluth Stormwater Utility helped with field

maintenance of water quality sensors. Mindy Granley, now with the MN Lake Superior Coastal

Program, provided review and materials from workshops and also continued to help with the sitedesign toolkit section and with web section review. We also thank the entire Superior Regional

Stormwater Protection Team (RSPT) for its ideas and dedication to minimizing the impacts of

stormwater on regional water resources.


27/30

VII.References

Ameel, J., E. Ruzycki and R.P. Axler. 1998. Analytical chemistry and quality assuranceprocedures for natural water samples. 6th edition. NRRI Tech. Rep. NRRI/TR98/03.Anderson, J., M. Evenson, T. Estabrooks, and B. Wilson. 2003. An assessment of representative

L. Superior Basin tributaries. MN Pollution Control Agency, St. Paul 55155.

APHA. 2003. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. Amer. Publ.Health Assoc. Washington, D.C.

Axler, R., J.Henneck, E.Ruzycki and N.Will. 2007. Poplar River, MN (Cook County), 2006

Automated, in situ, Water Quality Data: Preliminary Analysis. January 31, 2007. Unpubl.

Report submitted to MPCAs Poplar River TMDL Study.Axler, R., C.Hagley, G.Host and J.Schomberg. 2006. LakeSuperiorStreams.org: Making

stormwater and stream data come alive for citizens, students, teachers, contractors, resource

agencies, decision-makers and scientists. Proceedings U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S.Geological Survey 5th National Water Quality Monitoring Conference, San Jose, CA May

7-11, 2006.

Axler, R. and M. Lonsdale. 2003.Duluth Streams: Community Partnerships For UnderstandingWater Quality and Stormwater Impacts at the Head of the Great Lakes

(www.duluthstreams.org) . Coastline Issue 13.1: 10-15.www.epa.gov/owow/estuaries/coastlines ), February 2003.

Duluth. 2000. Duluth Vision 2000 Duluth in the 21st

Century. City of Duluth PlanningDepartment, December 2000.

EPA 1999a National pollution discharge elimination system regulations for revision of the
http://www.duluthstreams.org/http://www.duluthstreams.org/http://www.epa.gov/owow/estuaries/coastlineshttp://www.epa.gov/owow/estuaries/coastlineshttp://www.epa.gov/owow/estuaries/coastlineshttp://www.duluthstreams.org/


28/30

IJC. 1999. Lake Superior Binational Program. Final. 1999. Protecting Lake SuperiorLakewideManagement Plan, Stage 2. Load Reduction Targets for Critical Pollutants. Prepared by the

Superior Work Group: Chemical Committee. 162 pages. Thunder Bay and Chicago.Lonsdale, M., T.Carlson, R.Axler, J.Walker, C.Hagley, J.Schomberg, M.Granley and G.Host,Linking data, public outreach and education: The City of Duluth Stream Outreach Program

- www.lakesuperiorstreams.org. Water Environment Federation Proceedings of Annual

Meeting: WEFTEC.06 - The Water Quality Event, 79th Annual Conference andExhibition, Oct 21-25, 2006, Dallas, Texas USA. INVITED.

Magner, J. A. and K. N. Brooks. 2008. Integrating sentinel watershed-systems into the

monitoring and assessment of Minnesotas (USA) waters quality. Environmental

Monitoring and Assessment 138: 149-158.MPCA.2006. Minnesota's Impaired Waters and Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL):2006

Final List of Impaired Waters (approved by the U.S. EPA on May 13, 2006).

www.pca.state.mn.us/water/tmdl/index.html#tmdl

MPCA. 2000. North Shore land use issues: The real costs of growth. Publication WQ/Lake

Superior Basin #2.03.

Munson, B., R. Huber, R. Axler, G. Host, C. Hagley, C. Moore and G. Merrick. 2003.Investigating water quality through the Internet. The Science Teacher 70(1): 44-49.

Peterson, D. (EPA ed). 2000. Delivering timely water quality information to your community:TheLake Access-Minneapolis project. EPA/625/R-00/012, September 2000, U. S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, OH,45268, USA (contributing authors: R. Axler, J. Barten, J. Goin, C.Hagley, G.Host, B.

Liukkonen B Munson B Peichel C Owen B Vlach N Will) EPA-625/R-00/012 104 p
http://www.lakesuperiorstreams.org/http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/tmdl/index.html#tmdlhttp://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/tmdl/index.html#tmdlhttp://www.lakesuperiorstreams.org/


29/30

2001- 2007 N. Shore Stream Monitoring ProgramFLUX Model loading estimates

Jesse Anderson, MPCA, 3/08

Total Suspended Solids TSS Total Phosphorus Total Nitro en TKN + NO2 + NO3 Total Chlor

Stream

Drainage Area

( sq . m il es ) Y ea r

Total Flow Volume

(HM3; Open Water

Season) Generalized Climate Note Mass load (pounds)

Mass

(tons)

Flow WeightedMean Conc.

(mg /L ) Y ie ld ( lbs/mi2)

Coefficient

of Variat ion Mass (pounds) Mass (tons)

FlowWeighted

Mean Conc.

( ug /L ) Y ie ld ( l bs /m i2)

Coefficient

of Variation Mass (pounds) Mass (tons)

FlowWeighted

Mean Conc.

(mg/L)

Yield

(lbs/mi2)

Coefficient

of Variation Mass (pounds) Mass (tons)

FlowWeighted

MeanConc.

(mg /L )

Amity 16.39 2002 12.32 Big Snow Year 1,969,457 984 72.6 120,092 0.37 3,306 1.60 122 201.0 0.37 28,730 14.3 1.0 1,751 0.4 434,477 217.0 16.02003 6.37 Dry Summer 404,993 202 29.0 24,695 0.10 1,260 0.63 89 76.8 0.27 17,162 8.5 1.2 1,046 0.2 340,340 170.0 24.22004 11.07 slightly wetter than average 2,080,111 1,040 85.3 126,840 0.03 1,810 0.90 74 110.0 0.35 567,670 283.8 23.3

2005 10.16 Dry Summer 554,435 277 24.8 33,808 0.24 1,438 0.71 64 87.7 0.15 406,885 203.4 18.22006 6.58 Significant Summer Drought 370,026 185 25.5 22,563 0.16 932 0.46 65 56.8 0.16 243,170 121.5 16.82 00 7 n o l oa d c al cu la ti on s - mi ss in g f lo w d at a; br id ge re co ns tr uc ti on

Talmadge 5.45 2001 2.96 118,583 59 18.2 21,758 0.33 400 0.20 62 73.5 0.182002 3.62 343,089 171 43.0 62,952 0.37 759 0.37 95 139.0 0.22 8,521 4.2 1.0 1,563 0.4 52,403 26.2 6.62003 2.47 89,623 45 16.0 16,444 0.11 455 0.22 83 83.5 0.09 7,528 3.7 1.3 1,381 0.1 64,314 32.1 11.82004 5.87 134,211 67 10.3 24,625 0.40 591 0.29 45 108.0 0.18 129,364 64.6 10.0

2005 5.35 78,245 39 6.6 14,356 0.23 558 0.27 47 102.5 0.09 113,995 56.9 9.62006 4.3 104,889 52 10.8 19,245 0.40 380 0.19 39 69.8 0.08 82,979 41.4 8.52007 5.45 extreme midsummer drought; big rains in Oct. 104,889 52 19.0 19,246 0.42 605 0.30 64 111.0 0.18 68,490 34.2 7.3

French 19.6 2002 14.02 1,296,064 648 42.0 66,125 0.33 1,912 0.95 62 97.5 0.14 24,366 12.1 0.8 1,243 0.3 113,197 56.5 3.62003 6.76 221,667 111 14.8 11,309 0.37 704 0.35 47 35.9 0.18 12,740 6.3 0.9 650 0.1 81,171 40.5 5.4

2004 13.37 258,990 129 8.8 13,213 0.23 939 0.46 31 47.9 0.11 148,401 74.2 5.02005 14.2 761,750 381 24.2 38,864 0.28 1,447 0.72 46 73.8 0.13 146,784 73.3 4.62006 16.3 410,086 205 11.4 20,922 0.17 1,163 0.58 32 59.4 0.06 159,040 79.5 4.42 00 7 n o lo ad ca lc ula tio ns - mi ss in g 5 we ek s o f s pr in g fl ow da ta

Sucker 39 2001 30.64 3,362,311 1,681 49.8 86,213 0.23 6,403 3.20 95 164.2 0.112002 28.38 955,270 477 15.3 24,494 0.25 3,309 1.65 53 84.8 0.15 55,568 27.7 0.9 1,424 0.3 127,369 63.6 2.02003 17.46 683,388 342 17.7 17,522 0.37 2,175 1.00 56 55.7 0.19 37,939 18.9 1.0 972 0.1 86,977 43.4 2.2

2004 23.9 624,179 312 11.8 16,004 0.23 1,848 0.92 35 47.3 0.16 142,846 71.4 2.72005 25.23 1,446,203 723 26.0 37,082 0.34 3,579 1.70 64 91.7 0.17 135,236 67.6 2.42006 23.5 1,338,984 669 25.9 34,332 0.60 2,646 1.30 51 67.9 0.26 85,087 42.5 1.62007 26.99 significant summer drought, big fall rains 791,837 871 29.3 44,668 0.39 3,553 1.78 60 91.1 0.20 111,012 55.5 7.3

Poplar- Up 112.3 2002 42.88 503,754 251 5.3 4,482 0.11 2,289 1.14 24 20.4 0.08 74,525 37.2 0.8 663 0.1 145,277 72.6 1.52003 45.61 442,547 221 4.4 3,937 0.17 2,501 1.25 25 22.2 0.10 88,946 44.4 0.9 791 0.1 173,082 86.5 1.72004 69.1 ~ 25 yr. rain event in May 807,659 404 5.3 7,186 0.21 4,639 2.30 30 41.2 0.25 199,047 99.5 1.3

2005 56.12 678,315 339 5.4 6,035 0.19 3,069 1.50 25 27.3 0.05 150,099 75.0 1.22006 59.9 1,038,785 519 7.8 9,243 0.25 3,335 1.66 25 29.7 0.08 166,524 83.2 1.22007 47.1 significant summer drought, big fall rains 1,121,956 561 10.8 9,984 0.12 3,546 1.77 34 31.6 0.08 194,601 97.3 1.9

Poplar- Down 114 2002 43.51 2,949,769 1,474 30.8 25,872 0.29 5,214 2.60 54 45.7 0.22 80,406 40.2 0.8 705 0.3 193,358 96.6 2.02003 47.02 1,976,112 988 19.1 17,332 0.39 4,019 2.00 39 35.2 0.33 100,102 50.0 1.0 878 0.1 212,168 106.0 2.02004 71.3 ~ 25 yr. rain event in May 3,364,596 1,682 21.4 29,511 0.26 5,918 2.90 37 51.9 0.22 236,858 118.4 1.6

2005 57.85 1,351,326 676 10.6 11,852 0.25 4,285 2.10 34 37.5 0.14 195,252 97.6 1.52006 61.7 1,769,726 885 13.0 15,522 0.26 4,129 2.06 30 36.2 0.13 195,192 97.5 1.42007 48.6 significant summer drought, big fall rains 1,513,415 757 14.1 13,274 0.27 3,876 1.94 36 34.0 0.18 266,922 133.5 2.4

Brule 270.1 2002 82.83 1,201,416 600 6.5 4,447 0.37 3,826 1.91 21 14.1 0.18 123,913 61.9 0.7 458 0.4 260,583 130.0 1.42003 102.2 1,077,443 539 4.7 3,988 0.26 6,166 3.00 27 22.8 0.20 170,656 85.3 0.8 631 0.1 345,710 172.8 1.52004 309 ~ 25 yr. rain event in May 2,749,331 1,375 6.3 10,178 0.23 9,944 4.90 22 36.8 0.09 469,486 234.7 1.1

2005 194.9 2,410,162 1,205 5.6 8,923 0.13 9,264 4.60 22 34.3 0.13 503,811 251.9 1.12006 165.6 2,247,465 1,123 6.1 8,320 0.19 9,319 4.65 26.0 34.5 0.11 392,482 196.2 1.02 00 7 3 15 v er y h ig h f lo w i n O ct . ~ 6 0 % o f T SS l oa d f ro m on e e ve nt 1 2, 40 8, 81 8 6,204 17.8 45,941 0.30 26,024 13.0 37.5 96.3 0.16 1,034,620 517.3 1.5


30/30

TSS

Year Poplar_Up Poplar_Down TSS Load (pounds) TSS Load (tons)2002 503,754 2,949,769 2,446,015 1,223.01

2003 442,547 1,976,112 1,533,565 766.78

2004 807,659 3,364,596 2,556,937 1,278.47

2005 678,315 1,351,326 673,011 336.51

2006 1,038,785 1,769,726 730,941 365.47

2007 1,121,956 1,513,415 391,459 195.73

Date post:	30-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	minnesotas-lake-superior-coastal-program
View:	217 times
Download:	0 times

Real-Time Data to Estimate Sediment, Nutrient, and Hg Loading from Northshore Lake Superior Streams...

Documents