DOCSLIB.ORG

Lake Mary Regional TMDL for Mercury in Fish Tissue

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lake Mary Regional TMDL for Mercury in Fish Tissue Lake Mary Regional TMDL For Mercury in Fish Tissue Upper Lake Mary, Lower Lake Mary, Soldiers Lake, Soldiers Annex Lake, and Lower Long Lake Little Colorado River Watershed Coconino County Arizona Department of Environmental Quality June 16, 2010 Open File Report #OFR 10-02 Lake Mary Regional TMDL Page Intentionally Left Blank Page i Lake Mary Regional TMDL Acknowledgements: EPA Region 9 for funding support via Clean Water Act Section 104(b)(3) grant monies. Malcolm Pirnie for data analysis and modeling support. Paul Gremillion and his students for sediment core collection and analysis and lake bathymetry development. Amanda Fawley and Jennifer Hummer for project design and sampling in all weather. Jason Sutter, Debra Daniel, and Linda Taunt for review, edits and insight. Page ii Lake Mary Regional TMDL Table of Contents List of Tables................................................................................................................... v List of Figures.................................................................................................................. v List of Acronyms..............................................................................................................vi I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.............................................................................................. 1 II. INTRODUCTION AND PROBLEM STATEMENT ....................................................... 3 A. Description of TMDL Process.................................................................................. 3 B. Clean Water Act Section 305 (b), 303 (d) and significance ..................................... 3 III. WATERSHED CHARACTERIZATION ....................................................................... 4 A. Description of Study Area........................................................................................ 4 Figure 1. Vicinity Map (adapted from Malcolm Pirnie, 2006)1. Upper and Lower Lake Mary ................................................................................................................ 5 1. Upper and Lower Lake Mary................................................................................ 6 2. Soldiers and Lower Long Lake Complex.............................................................. 6 3. Background Lakes ............................................................................................... 7 B. Climate .................................................................................................................... 7 1. Upper and Lower Lake Mary................................................................................ 7 2. Soldiers and Lower Long Lake Complex.............................................................. 8 C. Hydrology................................................................................................................ 8 D. Geology................................................................................................................. 12 E. Land Cover/Vegetation.......................................................................................... 12 IV. DATA COLLECTION & DATA SUMMARY .............................................................. 12 A. Fish Tissue Sampling ............................................................................................ 13 B. Lake and Tributary Sampling ................................................................................ 14 1. Thermal Stratification ......................................................................................... 15 2. Dissolved Oxygen .............................................................................................. 15 3. Mercury .............................................................................................................. 15 4. Other Water Quality Constituents....................................................................... 15 5. Correlations Between Constituents.................................................................... 16 C. Lake Sediment Results ......................................................................................... 16 1. Mercury .............................................................................................................. 17 2. Other Sediment Constituents ............................................................................. 17 3. Correlations Between Constituents.................................................................... 17 D. Watershed Sub-surface and Surficial Soil Results................................................ 18 E. Runoff and Stream Flow Results........................................................................... 20 V. SOURCE ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................... 23 A. Atmospheric Deposition ........................................................................................ 23 B. Summary of Lake Coring Study............................................................................. 25 Page iii Lake Mary Regional TMDL C. Watershed Source ................................................................................................ 27 VI. MERCURY CYCLING AND SITE CONCEPTUAL MODEL ..................................... 28 VII. MODEL DEVELOPMENT ....................................................................................... 31 A. Watershed Hydrologic and Sediment Loading Model............................................ 31 B. Runoff and Groundwater Inputs ............................................................................ 32 C. Solids in Runoff..................................................................................................... 33 D. Lake Hydrologic Model.......................................................................................... 34 E. Mercury Cycling Model.......................................................................................... 35 F. Mercury Bioaccumulation Estimation..................................................................... 36 VIII. TMDL CONSIDERATIONS.................................................................................... 37 A. Numeric Targets.................................................................................................... 37 B. Narrative Targets................................................................................................... 37 C. Critical Conditions ................................................................................................. 37 D. TMDL Targets ....................................................................................................... 38 IX. LINKAGE ANALYSIS............................................................................................... 38 X. INITIAL MODELING RESULTS ................................................................................ 40 A. Watershed Runoff and Sediment Yield ................................................................. 40 B. Lake Hydrology ..................................................................................................... 41 XI. MODEL REFINEMENTS ......................................................................................... 43 A. Mercury Loads....................................................................................................... 43 B. Model Simulated Lake Water Column Total and Methyl-mercury.......................... 46 C. Model Forecasts of Fish Tissue Concentrations in Response to Decreases in Anthropogenic Mercury Loads.............................................................................. 47 D. Modeling Summary ............................................................................................... 48 XII. TMDL CALCULATIONS.......................................................................................... 51 A. Fish Tissue Criterion and Trophic Considerations................................................. 51 B. Load Reductions ................................................................................................... 52 XIII. CONCLUSION....................................................................................................... 53 XIV. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN .................................................................................... 54 XV. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ...................................................................................... 55 REFERENCES.............................................................................................................. 57 Page iv Lake Mary Regional TMDL List of Tables Table 1. LMR Lakes ....................................................................................................... 4 Table 2. Summary of Fish Tissue Data ........................................................................ 13 Table 3. Comparison of Water Quality Between Lakes................................................ 16 Table 4. Average Lake Sediment Mercury Concentrations .......................................... 17 Table 5. Surface Soil/Sediment Collected During Runoff............................................. 18 Table 6. Sub-surface Background Soil Data ................................................................ 19 Table 7. Total Mercury in Runoff as Suspended Solids................................................ 22 Table 8. Average Tissue Concentrations, Water Column and Sediment Methyl-mercury, and BAFs ..............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Conservation Assessment and Strategy for the Bald Eagle in Arizona
    CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT AND STRATEGY FOR THE BALD EAGLE IN ARIZONA James T. Driscoll, Arizona Game and Fish Department Kenneth V. Jacobson, Arizona Game and Fish Department Greg Beatty, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Jorge S. Canaca, Biologist John G. Koloszar, Biologist Technical Report 173 Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program Arizona Game and Fish Department 2221 West Greenway Road Phoenix, Arizona 85023-4399 July 2006 Photo by B. Taubert CIVIL RIGHTS AND DIVERSITY COMPLIANCE The Arizona Game and Fish Commission receives federal financial assistance in Sport Fish and Wildlife Restoration. Under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, the U.S. Department of the Interior prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex, or disability. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility as described above, or if you desire further information please write to: Arizona Game and Fish Department Office of the Deputy Director, DOHQ 2221 West Greenway Road Phoenix, Arizona 85023-4399 And The Office for Diversity and Civil Rights U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 4040 North Fairfax Drive, Room 300 Arlington, Virginia 22203 AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT COMPLIANCE The Arizona Game and Fish Department complies with all provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This document is available in alternative format by contacting the Arizona Game and Fish Department, Office of the Deputy Director at the address listed above or by calling (602) 789-3290 or TTY 1-800-367-8939.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Fishing Regulations 3 Fishing License Fees Getting Started
    2019 & 2020 Fishing Regulations for your boat for your boat See how much you could savegeico.com on boat | 1-800-865-4846insurance. | Local Offi ce geico.com | 1-800-865-4846 | Local Offi ce See how much you could save on boat insurance. Some discounts, coverages, payment plans and features are not available in all states or all GEICO companies. Boat and PWC coverages are underwritten by GEICO Marine Insurance Company. GEICO is a registered service mark of Government Employees Insurance Company, Washington, D.C. 20076; a Berkshire Hathaway Inc. subsidiary. TowBoatU.S. is the preferred towing service provider for GEICO Marine Insurance. The GEICO Gecko Image © 1999-2017. © 2017 GEICO AdPages2019.indd 2 12/4/2018 1:14:48 PM AdPages2019.indd 3 12/4/2018 1:17:19 PM Table of Contents Getting Started License Information and Fees ..........................................3 Douglas A. Ducey Governor Regulation Changes ...........................................................4 ARIZONA GAME AND FISH COMMISSION How to Use This Booklet ...................................................5 JAMES S. ZIELER, CHAIR — St. Johns ERIC S. SPARKS — Tucson General Statewide Fishing Regulations KURT R. DAVIS — Phoenix LELAND S. “BILL” BRAKE — Elgin Bag and Possession Limits ................................................6 JAMES R. AMMONS — Yuma Statewide Fishing Regulations ..........................................7 ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT Common Violations ...........................................................8 5000 W. Carefree Highway Live Baitfish
    [Show full text]
  • Geologic Resources Inventory Ancillary Map Information Document
    U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Directorate Geologic Resources Division Walnut Canyon National Monument GRI Ancillary Map Information Document Produced to accompany the Geologic Resources Inventory (GRI) Digital Geologic Data for Walnut Canyon National Monument waca_geology.pdf Version: 5/7/2019 I Walnut Canyon National Monument Geologic Resources Inventory Map Document for Walnut Canyon National Monument Table of Contents Geologic Resourc..e..s.. .I.n..v..e..n..t.o...r.y.. .M...a..p.. .D...o..c..u..m...e..n...t............................................................................ 1 About the NPS Ge..o..l.o..g..i.c... .R..e..s..o..u...r.c..e..s.. .I.n..v..e..n...t.o..r.y.. .P...r.o..g...r.a..m............................................................... 3 GRI Digital Map an...d.. .S..o..u...r.c..e.. .M...a..p.. .C...i.t.a..t.i.o...n...................................................................................... 5 Index Map .................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Map Unit List ............................................................................................................................. 6 Map Unit Descript.i.o...n..s...................................................................................................................... 7 Qcc - Volcan..ic.. .a..s..h.. .(.Q...u..a..t.e..r.n..a..r.y..)....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • North Central Arizona Water Supply Study
    North Central Arizona Water Supply Study Report of Findings U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Denver, Colorado October 2006 Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to protect and provide access to our Nation’s natural and cultural heritage and honor our trust responsibilities to Indian Tribes and our commitments to island communities. ___________________________ The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. North Central Arizona Water Supply Study Report of Findings U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Denver, Colorado October 2006 Disclaimer The water demand assumptions and resulting future conditions described in this Report of Findings reflect the position of the study’s partners and stakeholder groups. The use of these assumptions and resulting future conditions in the Report of Findings does not reflect any agreement by the Bureau of Reclamation and has no bearing on the position the Department of the Interior may take with respect to the Indian water rights settlement negotiations or litigation. North Central Arizona Water Supply Study—Report of Findings Executive Summary Study Purpose As the result of ongoing drought conditions in the Coconino Plateau region and the findings of the North Central Arizona Regional Water Study Phase One Report, stakeholders in the region requested that the Bureau of Reclamation conduct a regional water study to: • Determine if water demand in the demand areas is unmet (projected to the year 2050) • If the demand is unmet, determine if there is at least one regional alternative to meet future demands • Determine if there is a Federal objective in which there exists at least one regional plan that can be recommended to be carried forward into a Feasibility Study.
    [Show full text]
  • Resource Name (Heading 1)
    Botany Specialists Report Travel Management Travel Management Rule Botany Specialist’s Report for: Travel Management Rule Coconino National Forest Prepared by: Debra L. Crisp _____________________________________________ September 17, 2008 Botanist Coconino National Forest Reviewed by: Barbara G. Phillips _____________________________________________ September 17, 2008 Zone Botanist, Coconino, Kaibab and Prescott National Forests Revised January 27, 2010 Travel Management Botany Specialists Report Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 Regulatory Direction ................................................................................................................... 1 Methodology for Analysis ............................................................................................................. 1 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences .............................................................. 3 Noxious or invasive weeds .............................................................................................................. 3 Affected Environment ................................................................................................................. 3 Environmental Consequences ...................................................................................................... 8 No Action ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Coconino National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan Document the Analysis and Decisions Resulting from the Planning Process
    ' " United States (. Il). Department of \~~!J'~~':P Agriculture CoconinoNational Forest Service ForestPlan Southwestern Region -""""" IU!S. IIIII.IIIIII... I I i I--- I I II I /"r, Vicinity Map @ , " .. .' , ",', '. ',,' , ". ,.' , ' ' .. .' ':':: ~'::.»>::~: '::. Published August 1987 Coconino N.ational Forest Land and Resource Management Plan This Page Intentionally Left Blank Coconino Foresst Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION Purpose of the Plan. 1 Organization of the Forest Plan Documentation. 2 Planning Area Description. 2 2. ISSUES Overview . 5 Issues . 5 Firewood . 6 Timber Harvest Levels. 7 The Availability of Recreation Options . 8 Off-Road Driving . 9 Wildlife Habitat . 9 Riparian Habitat . 11 Geothermal Development . .. 11 Management of the Transportation System . 12 Use of the Public Lands . 13 Law Enforcement . 13 Landownership Adjustment . 14 Opportunities . 14 Public Affairs . 14 Volunteers . 15 3. SUMMARY OF THE ANALYSIS OF THE MANAGEMENT SITUATION Overview . 17 Prior Allocations . 18 4. MANAGEMENT DIRECTION Overview . 21 Mission . 21 Goals . 21 Objectives . 26 Regional Guide/Forest Plan . 26 Outputs & Range of Implementation . 26 Management Prescriptions . 46 Management Area Description . 46 Management Emphasis . 46 Program Components . 46 Activities . .. 47 Standards and Guidelines . 47 How to Apply Prescriptions . .. 47 Coordinating Requirements . .. 47 Coconino National Forest Plan – Partial Cancellation of Amendment No. 15 -3/05 Replacement Page i Coconino Forest Plan Table of Contents continued Standards and Guidelines . 51 Forest-wide . 51 MA 1 Wildernesses . 98 MA 2 Verde Wild and Scenic River . .. 113 MA 3 Ponderosa Pine and Mixed Conifer, Less Than 40 Percent Slopes. .. 116 MA 4 Ponderosa Pine and Mixed Conifer, Greater Than 40 Percent Slopes. 138 MA 5 Aspen . 141 MA 6 Unproductive Timber Land .
    [Show full text]
  • Written Statement of the Honorable Elizabeth Archuleta Supervisor
    Written statement of The Honorable Elizabeth Archuleta Supervisor Coconino County, Arizona On behalf of the National Association of Counties Hearing to Examine Deferred Maintenance Needs and Potential Solutions Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources June 18, 2019 Washington, D.C. Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Manchin and distinguished members of the Committee, thank you for holding today’s hearing to examine deferred maintenance needs on our nation’s public lands and potential solutions, and for inviting me to testify on behalf of the National Association of Counties (NACo) and our nation’s 3,069 counties. My name is Elizabeth Archuleta. I am a fourth-generation resident of Flagstaff, Arizona and I am currently serving my sixth term on the Coconino County, Arizona Board of Supervisors. I have previously served as President of the County Supervisors Association of Arizona and as Chair of the NACo Public Lands Steering Committee, and currently serve as Vice Chair of the Steering Committee. Through my years of experience in local government, I know very well the challenges public lands counties face as we seek to provide our residents and public lands visitors with the first-class experience they deserve. Coconino County serves as a proud gateway community to some of the most important places in our nation’s public lands system, including Grand Canyon National Park, Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, the Coconino National Forest, which includes popular destinations like the Sedona Red Rock Ranger District, and the Kaibab National Forest. The county seat is in the city of Flagstaff, which is located about 140 miles north of Phoenix.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 6 LITTLE COLORADO RIVER WATERSHED Chapter 6 Little Colorado River Watershed
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arizona Game and Fish Department Little Colorado River Watershed Chapter 6 LITTLE COLORADO RIVER WATERSHED Chapter 6 Little Colorado River Watershed ............................................................................ 6-410 Lower Little Colorado River Sub-Watershed ...................................................................... 6-416 Jacks Canyon Complex .................................................................................................... 6-416 Soldiers Lake ............................................................................................................... 6-420 Soldiers Annex Lake .................................................................................................... 6-426 Tremaine Lake ............................................................................................................. 6-431 Long Lake .................................................................................................................... 6-434 Jacks Canyon Complex Analysis ..................................................................................... 6-439 Canyon Diablo Complex Description .............................................................................. 6-443 Kinnikinick Lake ......................................................................................................... 6-448 Morton Lake................................................................................................................. 6-455 Mud Lake ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]