Technical Report

Assessment of Sediments Impounded by the Burden Pond Dam on the Wynants Kill Creek of New York

Submitted to New York State Water Resources Institute (WRI) at Cornell University and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), Hudson River Estuary Program for the project “Assessment of Sediment Properties in the Impoundment of an Aged Dam in the Hudson River Watershed”

Prepared by

Weiming Wu and Ian Knack

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Clarkson University Box 5710, 8 Clarkson Avenue Potsdam, NY 13699, U.S.A.

March 31, 2016

Summary

Burden Pond Dam is a small old dam located on the Wynants Kill Creek, a tributary of the Lower Hudson River in New York. For safety concern and to connect the upstream and downstream aquatic habitats, removal of this dam may be considered as one of the management plans. The present project aimed to assess the quantity and quality of sediments filled in the impoundment of Burden Pond Dam. Cross-sections were surveyed and sediment core and grab samples were collected, to quantify the sediment deposit amount and analyze the deposit size compositions and the associated chemicals. The data show that the lake sediments consist of gravels and sands in the upper end of the lake, and sand, silt and clay in the area close to the dam. It is estimated that about 28.8 acre-feet sediment deposits will likely be eroded and transported to the downstream if the dam is removed or failed. PCBs and pesticides are not abundant in the lake sediments. However, the lake sediments are enriched with nitrogen and phosphorus, as well as metals including Al (Aluminum), K (Potassium), Mg (Magnesium), Mn (Manganese), Ba (Barium) and Fe (Iron). These data and results are useful for the dam removal feasibility and impact studies in terms of the potential hazards the sediments may pose if reintroduced into the environment.

1

Acknowledgements

This project was supported by NYS Water Resource Institute (WRI) at Cornell University and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC), Hudson River Estuary Program. Clarkson University waivered the indirect costs associated with this project. City of Troy is acknowledged for allowing us to use the Burden Pond Dam as the study site. Mr. Nick Davis at City of Troy Engineering Department is highly appreciated for his help for the field work. NYS DEC and WRI officials Andrew Meyer, Andrew Donovan, Scott W. Cuppett and Christina Tonitto are acknowledged for their kind comments and suggestions for this project, and helping us to find the study site. Dr. Thomas Holsen and Dr. Philip K. Hopke, Professors at Clarkson University, helped analyze the chemicals on the sediment samples.

2

Table of Contents

Chapter 1 – Introduction 4 1.1 Problem Statement 4 1.2 Objective of the Project 4 1.3 Project Team and Student Training 4 1.4 Arrangement of This Report 5

Chapter 2 – Background Information of the Burden Pond Dam 6 2.1 Geomorphological Information 6 2.2 Potential Hazards 7 2.3 Water Quality and Ecosystems 8 2.4 Socio-economics 9

Chapter 3 – Field Surveying and Sampling 11 3.1 Field Surveying of Cross-Section Bathymetry 11 3.2 Sediment Sampling 14 3.3 Geomorphological Features of the Pond and Its Upstream and Downstream Channels 18

Chapter 4 – Size Compositions of the Pond Sediments 28

Chapter 5 – Chemicals Absorbed with the Pond Sediments 34 5.1 Nitrogen and Phosphorus 34 5.2 Mercury 35 5.3 PCBs and Pesticides 36 5.4 Toxic Metals 39

Chapter 6 – Possible Sediment Erosion upon Dam Removal 57 6.1 Sediment Erosion Layer Thickness 57 6.2 Evolution of Cross Sections 59 6.3 Sediment Erosion Volume 64

Chapter 7 – Conclusions 66

References 68

Appendix A – Data of Sediment Size Compositions 69

Appendix B – Bathymetry Data of Cross Sections 76

3

Chapter 1. Introduction

1.1 Problem Statement

In the last centuries, particularly since 1940s, the U. S. has built a large number of dams for flood control, power generation, water supply, recreation and so on. There are over 5,500 dams in New York State. Some of these dams have reached their design life. Because of population growth and land-use changes through time, the impoundments are filling up with sediments, some structural components have deteriorated, safety regulations are stricter, and the hazard classification has changed for some dams (Bennett and Cooper, 2000). The Burden Pond Dam on the Wynants Kill Creek is one of such aged dams. There is an increasing focus on decommission and removal of older dams, to reduce the flood risk imposed by them and connect the aquatic habitats downstream and upstream (Alderson and Rosman, 2014). However, before any rehabilitation strategy is designed and implemented, the quantity and quality of the sediments impounded by those dams should be assessed to determine the potential hazards if the sediments are reintroduced into the environment.

1.2 Objective of the Project

The objective of the present project was to conduct field campaign and laboratory analysis to investigate the quantity and quality of sediments deposited in the reservoir of Burden Pond Dam. The deposited sediment volume and size compositions were measured. The chemicals, such as nutrients, heavy metals (e.g., mercury, chromium, cadmium, zinc), and PCBs/pesticides, absorbed on the fine sediments were analyzed. The collected data and derived results can be used for the future studies on the feasibility of removing the dam and the potential impacts on the downstream stream water quality and habitats.

1.3 Project Team and Student Training

The project PI was Dr. Weiming Wu and Co-PI was Dr. Ian Knack, Professors at Clarkson University. Mr. Chamil Perera, Ms. Zahra Sharifnezhadazizi, and Mr. Brandon Teetsel, graduate students at Clarkson University, participated in the field work and sediment size composition analysis. Miss Amina Grant, a Penn State undergraduate student supported by a NSF-funded REU (Research Experience for Undergraduate) project at Clarkson University, also participated in this project during the summer 2015. The above three graduate students and one REU undergraduate student were trained by participating in this project and conducting the field survey, sediment sampling, laboratory analysis, presentation and report writing.

4

1.4 Arrangement of This Report

This report consists of seven chapters and two appendices. Chapter 1 introduces the general information of this project. Chapter 2 describes the background information of the Burden Pond Dam and the Wynants Kill Creek watershed. Chapter 3 introduces the field campaign conducted by the project team during July 21-23, 2015. Chapter 4 presents the laboratory analysis of the size compositions of the pond sediments. Chapter 5 presents the laboratory analysis of chemicals in the sediment samples. Chapter 6 presents the estimate of sediment amount that will be possibly eroded from the pond if the dam is removed. Chapter 7 gives conclusions from this project. Appendix A tabulates the sediment size composition data, and Appendix B gives the cross-section bathymetry data.

5

Chapter 2. Background Information of the Burden Pond Dam

Existing information and historical records on the study dam and adjacent areas were collected by consulting with the dam owner, Troy Water Authority agencies, NYS DEC, and so on. A NSF-sponsored REU (Research Experience for Undergraduate) student Miss Amina Grant conducted this task, supervised by Dr. Weiming Wu. The preliminary findings are summarized below.

2.1 Geomorphological Information

Burden Pond Dam is a small, old dam on the Wynants Kill Creek, a tributary of the Lower Hudson River (Fig. 2.1). It is located in Rensselaer County of Troy, New York. The dam is 17 feet high and 160 feet in length. The dam was constructed from masonry or stonework (Figure 2). Burden Pond was completed in 1942. The dam had a normal surface area of 19 acres. Its capacity was 153 acre-feet and drains an area of 34 square miles. Now the reservoir has been completely filled with sediments. The City of Troy owns the Burden Pond Dam while the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC) regulates it. Currently, the dam is being used for recreational purposes.

Fig. 2.1. Map of the Burden Pond on the Wynants Kill River, a tributary of the Lower Hudson River

The Wynants Kill Creek is just 14.1 miles long, but it falls some 850 feet, notably down the steps of three shale overthrusts, each providing many excellent sites for the development of waterpower (Harris and DeBlois, 2005). From its headwaters at Crooked Lake in the Town of Sand Lake, the Wynants Kill Creek runs through the towns of Poestenkill and North Greenbush before falling over a series of waterfalls and dumping into the Hudson River at Troy. During that

6

journey, it passes through the villages of West Sand Lake and Wynants Kill, and Troy's Albia and South Troy neighborhoods (Benjamin, 2013).

Fig. 2.2. Photo of Burden Pond Dam

2.2 Potential Hazards

Burden Pond Dam is of low hazardous potential. Hazard potential is used to classify a dam according to the potential impact a dam failure or misoperation would have on the upstream or downstream areas or at locations remote from the dam (FEMA, 2004). Low hazardous potential is defined as dams that fail will result in no probable loss of human life and low economic and environmental losses (FEMA, 2004). Losses are principally limited to the owner’s property (FEMA, 2004). Even though its low hazardous potential, its failure or removal may cause sediment and debris washed downstream and affect the downstream channels. It is unknown whether any contaminant is associated with the lake sediments. Therefore, the quantity and quality of the lake sediments is a question to be answered. The last safety inspection was in February of 2007. New hazards may have formed since then. The dam is constantly being overtopped by water flowing from the lake. This movement may deteriorate the mortar and dislodge stone blocks, which causes dam failure. There are visible cracks and vegetation in the blocks. The drain connected to the dam to help control water flow and flooding is completely blocked and disabled. As time goes, the dam structure will lose integrity and the failure potential will increase. The Wynants Kill Creek watershed has problems with flooding, especially in upstream areas. The flooding has affected nearby roads and highways (Tom Blanchard, NYS DEC, 2015,

7

phone communication). Dam removal has been considered to reduce the flood risk imposed by the dams in adjacent areas.

2.3 Water Quality and Ecosystems

Since Burden Pond Dam is of low hazardous potential, the NYS DEC and the City of Troy have not assessed its water quality recently. The marsh and high amount of sediments cause abundant vegetation growth in the lake. The lake water is shallow and apparently pretty clean, though tinted in some areas due to algae growth. The marsh slows down the water flow in the impoundment, but helps preserve the quality of the surface water by cleaning the pollution. The downstream river channel is fast with occasional small, natural falls. Burden Pond is filled and surrounded by a wide marsh of cattails and other water-loving plants. Muskrats, small fish, ducks, and other wildlife have made use of the marsh and lake habitats. Dam removal will dry up the wetlands as the water level decreases. Since the marsh is greater than 12.4 acres, it is protected under the Freshwater Wetlands Act. The Freshwater Wetlands Act has the intent to preserve, protect and conserve freshwater wetlands and their benefits, consistent with the general welfare and beneficial economic, social and agricultural development of the state (NYS DEC). A permit is required to conduct any regulated activity in a protected wetland or its adjacent area. If dam removal affects the wetland, the benefits gained by allowing it must outweigh the wetland benefits in order for a permit to be issued. Even so, removing the wetland will allow for river restoration, new community activities, and nutrient- rich dry land for new species to adapt to. The dam prevents fish movement and migration upstream. The species of concern along the Wynants Kill Creek are migratory. They include American eel, blueback herring, and alewife. The American eel is catadromous. The blueback herring and alewife are both anadromous. If the dam is removed, the river will be reconnected, migratory species will be able to move freely upstream, and spawning habits will not be disturbed. On the other hand, Burden Pond Dam prevents the spread of undesirable, invasive, and contaminated species from travelling upstream. Since the dam sits in an urban area, there is currently a litter problem in the impoundment, on the shoreline, and travelling through the downstream channel. There are cans, tires, glass, and other trash. It is most likely caused by stormwater runoff from surrounding and upstream areas. Little bubbles seep out from the lake sediments in multiple areas due to the decomposition of organic materials. The Hudson River has a legacy of past pollution remaining in the river sediments. Most infamous are PCBs, or polychlorinated biphenyls, from General Electric plants in Washington County. These toxic chemicals move through food chains and become concentrated in fish. Although the levels of PCBs have declined, concentrations in fish, birds, and mammals remain high enough to affect survival, growth, and reproduction. These contaminants have been spotted in other urban watersheds along the Hudson River (Wall et al., 1998). This raises concern about

8

the sediments deposited in Burden Pond. The sediments consist of clay, silt, sand, gravel and organic materials. Fine-grained sediments, such as silt and clay, absorb chemicals and contaminants in greater quantities than coarser sediments. If the lake sediments are contaminated, they will be detrimental to the downstream river once the dam is removed or failed.

2.4 Socio-economics

The Wynants Kill Creek is known for its history of waterpower because of Merritt vs. Brinkerhoff in 1820 and also for the Burden water wheel, the largest wheel in the world in 1851 (Harris and DeBlois, 2005). These events bracketed the first intense period of industrialization on the stream (Harris and DeBlois, 2005). Dams built along the Wynants Kill Creek served as community and industrial use. The Burden Iron Works built a series of dams in Rensselaer County for waterpower in Troy (Tom Carol, Hudson Mohawk Industrial Gateway, 2015, phone communication). Water-privileged owners purchased a lot of the land and began to build dams to have a water supply. The dams helped mill owners and provided a lot of waterfront property (Tom Carol, Hudson Mohawk Industrial Gateway, 2015, phone communication). Many of the impoundments created by industry back then have been turned into recreational lakes for the public today. Currently, Burden Pond Dam does not cost the City of Troy much money. There haven’t been any cost estimates done on the dam though. If dam removal is considered, there will be a large cost attached to it. Funding will have to be provided for dam deconstruction or decommission, and prevention of soil erosion along the shoreline. A middle-aged Troy native mentioned the activities people used to do in the lake before it was filled with sediments, such as boating and sport fishing. He would be happy if the lake was dredged to bring back his childhood. Another Troy native was disgruntled about the amount of litter in the impoundment since he enjoyed the aesthetic value of Burden Pond. The dam also has a rich history along the Wynants Kill Creek, for which people may be upset if it is removed. However, the dam’s history can be preserved through actions, such as commemorative plaques, educational kiosks, and placing parts of the dam in a museum. Some people enjoy the current recreational opportunities, such as bird watching, feeding the ducks, and looking out at the scenery. The dam shoreline has also become a popular spot to have a picnic with food from the local deli or pizzeria. If the dam is removed, different community activities need to replace some of these. New opportunities have come out after Gov. Andrew Cuomo designated the Wynants Kill Creek an "inland waterway" in July 2013 (Benjamin, 2013). The bill was sponsored by Sen. Kathy Marchione and Assemblyman Steve McLaughlin. This has made the communities along its length eligible for state and federal grants that were previously unavailable. A comprehensive

9

management plan for the inland waterway would include the management of the Burden Pond Dam and other dams in the watershed.

Fig. 2.3. Burden Pond provides wildlife habitats and recreational opportunities

10

Chapter 3. Field Surveying and Sampling

The research team conducted field campaign at the Burden Pond in July 21-23, 2015. It was typical summer weather, sunny with short temporal showers. The team measured the cross- section bathymetry and sampled the sediment deposits. Reported in this chapter are the procedures and devices used in the bathymetry surveying and sediment sampling, as well as typical geomorphological features of the pond observed during this field trip.

3.1 Field Surveying of Cross-Section Bathymetry

The Burden Pond has two branch channels, which meet at the dam site. The main stream, i.e. the Wynants Kill Creek, starts from the water fall downstream of the Smarts Pond (Fig. 2.1). After leaving the deep, narrow valley, the main stream flows west and turns left and then right to the dam site (Fig. 3.1). The main stream is on the left side of the pond. The other branch, called the right branch here, is small and heavily vegetated. The right branch is divided into upper and lower parts by a barrier or knickpoint (possibly a beaver dam formed there). The upper part of the right branch is difficult to access due to dense vegetation and narrow channel near the knickpoint. The sediment deposit in the lower part of the right branch is soft mud, whereas most of the sediment deposit in the main stream has been already compacted and strong enough to allow people to stand on. The main stream was shallow, low flow during the field campaign, so that it can be accessed by a canoe and walking. According to the geomorphological features of the Burden Pond, a total of eighteen cross- sections were measured, which are marked on Fig. 3.1. Fourteen cross-sections were located on the Wynants Kill Creek main stream, and four were on the lower part of the right branch. The labeling number starts from the first cross-section beside the dam and goes upstream to the fourteenth one. The last four labels belong to the four cross sections on the right branch. Surveying farther cross-sections was limited by the accessibility and visibility through the dense vegetation on the wetland and valley slopes. The channel bed profiles along the cross-sections were measured using a total station or TST (total station theodolite) (Figs. 3.2 and 3.3). Considering the wetlands and floodplains in the lake are pretty flat and the valley slopes are very steep, the topography of these parts was not measured. The floodplain and wetland elevations can be roughly represented by the measured elevations of two bank top points on the two ends of each cross-section. Since the water depth was too deep in some parts or the channel bed was too soft to walk over in some other parts, a canoe was used to access the cross-section and sediment sampling sites (Fig. 3.4). Because the measurement points may not be on a straight line at each cross-section, a straight regression line among the measurement points was obtained to represent each cross- section, as shown in Fig. 3.1.

11

Fig. 3.1. Locations of Cross-sections Surveyed

Fig. 3.2. Total Station for measuring the cross-section topography and locating sediment sampling sites

12

Fig. 3.3. A student holding the TST prism for measuring cross-section

13

Fig. 3.4. Students holding the TST prism for measuring cross-section #1 near the dam (Sediment deposits in areas were compacted enough for walking over, whereas cautions were taken for ensuring safety)

3.2 Sediment Sampling

Surface and subsurface sediment samples were obtained by grabbing or coring, to determine the horizontal and vertical variations of sediment properties, following the guidance of Diplas et al. (2008) and EPA (1999). Considering the geomorphological features and hydrological factors affecting the potential spatial variation of sediment deposit properties, a total of thirteen sampling sites were used, as marked in Fig. 3.5. Eleven sites were located on the main stream channel of the Wynants Kill Creek, and two sites were on the right branch. Multiples samples were collected at several sites to obtain good representative when layer structures were found. We took core samples from sites A, B, C, D, E, F, J, K, L and M (Fig. 3.5). An AMS multi- stage sludge and sediment sampler (Fig. 3.6) was used to collect the sediment samples. The sampler can collect cores of 2 in in diameter and up to 4 ft in depth. Figs. 3.7-3.9 show the operation of the core sampler. The collected sediment samples were stored in jars for sieving analysis and in small plastic and glass bottles for chemical analyses. The samples were stored in a cooler with ice during transportation to the laboratories, and in a refrigerator at the Environmental Laboratory of Clarkson University for chemical analyses.

14

The core at site A was 21 inches deep. It showed that the sediment deposit has a layered structure. The top layer is a soft, less compacted layer of a few inches in depth, and the layer below is sandy and compacted. Below the sandy layer there are fine sediments. However, because the core did not reach the deep bottom layer, the layer structure below the core depth was not obtained through this study. In other words, the core at site A covered only the upper part of the deposits there. The same situation occurred for the core at site F, which was close to site A but on the other side of the bar separating the main stream and right branch. The core at site F was 30.5 inches deep. The top layer had a sandy layer of about 7.5 inches and the rest of the core consisted of fine sediments. Site C was located on the bank of the main stream. The core at site C was 36 inches deep. It also had two distinct layers. The top layer had coarser sediments and the bottom layer was of finer sediments. For these three sites, we collected separate samples for the distinct layers. Core samples of sites B, J, L, M, K, D and E did not exhibit distinct layer structures. Core E was 26 inches deep, and was located at the right branch. Core D was 35 inches deep, and was located at a deep pool on the thalweg of the main channel. Core B was 14 inches deep, located at the main channel.

Fig. 3.5. Locations of sediment samples

15

In addition, in shallow, poorly sorted areas (sites G, H and I), we took grab samples using a shovel and stored in buckets (Fig. 3.10). Those samples represent only the bed surface layer. Because those sites are located at shallow riffles with some flow velocity, we did not collect the subsurface layer sample there. The surface grab samples might lose some fine particles due to the shallow riffle flow, but care was taken to minimize the fine sediment loss.

Fig. 3.6. AMS multi-stage sludge and sediment sampling kit (http://www.ams- samplers.com/hand-tooling)

Fig. 3.7. Collect sediment samples by coring

16

Fig. 3.8. Retrieve sediment sample from core

Fig. 3.9. Store clayey and silty sediment sample into a jar

17

Fig. 3.10. Collect coarse sediment samples by grabbing with a shovel

3.3 Geomorphological Features of the Pond and Its Upstream and Downstream Channels

Photos taken during the field campaign are shown in Figs. 3.11-3.26 to illustrate the key geomorphological features of the Burden Pond and its upstream and downstream channels. Fig. 3.11 shows the water fall downstream of the Smarts Pond, which is located upstream of the Burden Pond. This was the farthest point we could reach through the channel upstream of the Burden Pond. Figs. 3.12-3.15 show the features of the channel from the water fall to the Burden Pond. The valley slopes are steep, occupied by dense forests. The channel consists of pools and riffles, and the bed sediments are gravels and sands. Fallen trees lie over in many places. Fig. 3.15 shows the residue of a broken beaver dam. Because the Total Station could not see through the dense vegetation and this reach had not been affected by the Burden Pond Dam, the bathymetry of this reach was not measured. Figs. 3.16-3.18 show the features of the channel reach where cross-sections 9-14 were located. This reach consists of shallow riffles mostly, with steep gravel beds. One exception is a deep pool between cross-sections 10 and 11, where fine sediments are found on the bed. Fig. 3.19 shows the main stream reach where cross-sections 5-7 were located, and Fig. 3.20 shows the main stream reach where cross-sections 2 and 3 were located. In these two reaches, the channel bed slope becomes gentle, and the bed sediments are mainly sands in the surface layer and fine sediments (clay and silt) in the subsurface layer. A small island is formed in the reach between cross-sections 2 and 3. Fig. 3.21 shows the typical vegetation on the floodplains and wetlands there. Cattail is the primary vegetation species. Fig. 3.22 shows the view to the pool on the right branch. The pool water is relatively deeper and has less sediment deposit, compared with the main stream. The bar separating the main

18

stream and the right branch has extended to the dam (Fig. 3.4). The right branch channel beyond the pool is shallow and small; it was difficult to access and thus not surveyed in this study. Fig. 3.23 shows the protection component on the upper dam surface which is old and has some damage. The sediment deposition has already reached the dam site (also see Fig. 3.4). The reservoir has reached the equilibrium state and does not have any storage capacity. Fig. 3.24 shows the channel immediately downstream of the dam. Bare rocks are found on the channel bed. Fig. 3.25 shows the culvert downstream of the dam, and Fig. 3.26 shows a small water fall downstream of the culvert. The downstream channel has steep side slopes and steep bed slope. The Wynants Kill Creek flows through a narrow, deep valley in this reach. The downstream channel is difficult to access due to buildings, dense forests, steep bank slopes, and highway traffics.

Fig. 3.11. Water fall in the upstream end of the Burden Pond

19

Fig. 3.12. Shallow riffles in the channel upstream of the Burden Pond

Fig. 3.13. Pool and bar structures and fallen trees in the channel upstream of the Burden Pond

20

Fig. 3.14. Straight reach in the channel upstream of the Burden Pond

Fig. 3.15. Residue of a beaver dam in the channel upstream of the Burden Pond (upstream of cross-section 14)

21

Fig. 3.16. Rapid shallow riffle over gravel bed in the Burden Pond (near cross-sections 12 and 13, view downstream)

Fig. 3.17. Pool in the Burden Pond (downstream of cross-section 11) (view downstream)

22

Fig. 3.18. Channel downstream of cross-section 10 (view downstream)

Fig. 3.19. Channel at cross-sections 5, 6 and 7 (view upstream)

23

Fig. 3.20. Small island in the main stream near cross-sections 2 and 3 (view upstream)

Fig. 3.21. Cattails on the floodplains and wetlands

24

Fig. 3.22. Look over to the right branch upstream of the dam (view upstream)

Fig. 3.23. Aged protection components of the dam

25

Fig. 3.24. Rapid flow downstream of the dam

Fig. 3.25. Culvert for the highway downstream of the dam

26

Fig. 3.26. Water fall just downstream of the culvert of Fig. 3.25

27

Chapter 4. Size Compositions of the Pond Sediments

The physical properties of the pond sediments were investigated in this task. The original concerns in our proposal were the sediment size composition and shear strength. During the on- site field survey, we found that most of the surface bed sediments are silt, sand and gravel and fine sediments with clay appear mostly in the deposit bottom. Though care was taken to collect core samples and transport them to laboratory, it was difficult to have an undisturbed sample of fine sediments to measure the shear strength through triaxial shearing test as planned. Therefore, our focus was only on the size compositions of the pond sediments. Sieve analysis was conducted to determine the size compositions of the collected sediment samples. The sieve analysis gives only the sizes above 0.052 mm. Usually, sediments less than 0.0625 mm are classified as fine sediments, including clay and silt. Figs. 4.1-4.13 show the cumulative size frequency curves of these samples, and Table 4.1 summarizes the characteristic sizes of all the sites. The sites are arranged from upstream to downstream, not in alphabetical order. On the main stream channel, cores at sites I, H, J, G and L consisted of mainly gravels and some sands, whereas cores at sites B and M were dominated by sands. Cores at sites A and F were located near the dam, and core at site C was located on a floodplain. These three sites exhibited layered structures, with an upper layer of coarse sediments and a lower layer of fine sediments. The coarse sediments were dominated by sands, and the fine sediments were composed of sand, silt and clay. Core D was located at a deep pool, core K was at the confluence of a small tributary on a floodplain, and core E was at the deep pool on the right branch. These three sites were dominated by fine sediments, which consisted of sand, silty and clay. For a small reservoir like the Burden Pond with a nearly constant pool water level, coarse sediments usually deposited in the upper end of the lake and fine sediments transported to the deep pool area in the lake and deposited there in the initial period of reservoir deposition. As time went on, the coarse sediment deposit wedge at the upper end of the reservoir migrated downstream towards the dam and covered the fine-grained bottom layer. Thus, a distinct layered structure formed in the pool area near the dam. In the Burden Pond, the sediment size along the main stream shows a tendency of downstream fining, varying from gravel bed at the upper end of the lake to sand bed at the lower end. Near the dam, a mixture of sand, silt and clay lie at the lake bottom, whereas sands appear at the upper layer.

28

Fig. 4.1 Cumulative size frequency curve of site I

Fig. 4.2 Cumulative size frequency curve of site H

Fig. 4.3 Cumulative size frequency curve of site D

29

Fig. 4.4 Cumulative size frequency curve of site J

Fig. 4.5 Cumulative size frequency curve of site G

Fig. 4.6 Cumulative size frequency curves of site C

30

Fig. 4.7 Cumulative size frequency curve of site K

Fig. 4.8 Cumulative size frequency curve of site L

Fig. 4.9 Cumulative size frequency curve of site B

31

Fig. 4.10 Cumulative size frequency curve of site M

Fig. 4.11 Cumulative size frequency curves of site A

Fig. 4.12 Cumulative size frequency curve of site E

32

Fig. 4.13 Cumulative size frequency curves of site F

Table 4.1 Characteristic Sizes and Compositions of the Lake Sediments Clay & Sand Gravel Sampling d15.9 d50 d84.1 d90 Standard silt d=0.063- d>2 mm sites (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) deviation d<0.063 2 mm (%) mm (%) (%) I 0.81 10.48 29.78 35.29 6.06 0.55 23.64 75.81 H 0.59 8.63 28.95 36.49 7.02 3.15 25.68 71.18 D - 0.11 0.51 0.62 - 38.36 61.64 0.00 J 0.65 8.25 20.25 22.77 5.58 0.78 28.31 70.91 G 0.55 14.51 28.39 32.15 7.15 4.70 14.82 80.48 C (Coarse) 0.43 4.26 15.76 18.21 6.07 4.15 34.85 61.00 C (Fine) - 0.29 1.05 1.49 - 26.16 68.92 4.92 K - 0.20 0.54 0.68 - 24.21 71.88 3.91 L 0.59 5.05 13.01 15.39 4.70 1.34 28.52 70.14 B 0.32 0.57 2.26 4.65 2.63 1.33 81.81 16.85 M 0.37 1.59 9.17 11.33 4.95 0.65 52.89 46.46 A (Coarse) 0.24 0.56 2.03 3.24 2.92 3.46 80.48 16.06 A (Fine) - 0.07 0.43 0.53 - 48.55 51.45 0.00 E - 0.19 0.62 0.98 - 28.65 68.13 3.22 F (Coarse) 0.15 0.28 0.59 0.83 1.96 6.30 90.21 3.49 F (Fine) - 0.09 0.45 0.61 - 37.64 62.36 0.00

33

Chapter 5. Chemicals Absorbed with the Pond Sediments

Normally chemicals are associated mainly with fine-grained, cohesive sediments, such as clay and silt. Fine sediment samples were collected from the pond and brought back to the Environmental Lab of Clarkson University to conduct chemical analyses. The chemicals considered include: total nitrogen, total phosphorus, mercury, PCBs, pesticides, and toxic metals. The measured concentrations of these chemicals absorbed on the sediment samples are reported in this chapter.

5.1 Nitrogen and Phosphorus

A total of eleven samples were used to measure the concentrations of total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) in the pond sediments. One sample was from the fine sediment layer at site A. Four samples were from site C: one from the top layer, two from the middle layer, and one from the bottom layer. Two samples were from each of the sites D, E and F. TN and TP were measured using the method 4500-N Nitrogen and 4500-P Phosphorus outlined in Standard Methods (APHA, AWWA, WEF, 2005). Tables 5.1 and 5.2 show the measured concentrations of TN and TP in the eleven sediment samples, respectively. The TN concentration ranges from 12.7 mg/g to 53.0 mg/g, and the TP concentration ranges from 7.4 mg/g to 270.5 mg/g. These concentrations are considerably high. On sites D, E and F, the bottom sediments of the cores have more TN and TP than the upper layer sediments. On site C, the middle layers of the core have higher TP than the top and bottom layers, while the TN concentrations in the middle and bottom layers are quite uniform and higher than the top layer.

Table 5.1 Concentrations of Total Nitrogen Absorbed on Sediments Total Organic TN Dilution Density Final TN Sample ID Carbon Analyzer Concentration factor [g/L] [mg/g] number [mg /L] A 50 0.85 42.5 1.33 31.8 C (Top) 50 0.40 19.8 1.33 14.9 C (Middle 1) 50 0.62 31.0 1.33 23.3 C (Middle 2) 50 0.57 28.6 1.33 21.5 C (Bottom) 50 0.69 34.7 1.33 26.1 D (Top) 50 0.40 20.1 1.33 15.1 D (Bottom) 50 1.41 70.5 1.33 53.0 E (Top) 50 0.48 23.9 1.33 18.0 E (Bottom) 50 1.02 51.1 1.33 38.4 F (Middle) 50 0.34 16.9 1.33 12.7 F (Bottom) 50 0.93 46.4 1.33 34.9

34

Table 5.2 Concentrations of Total Phosphorus Absorbed on Sediments Spechtropho- TP Dilution Density Final TP Sample ID tometer Concentration factor [g/L] [mg/g] number [mg P/L] A 33 2.9 95.7 1.33 72.0 C (Top) 33 0.7 23.1 1.33 17.4 C (Middle 1) 33 10.9 359.7 1.33 270.5 C (Middle 2) 33 4.5 148.5 1.33 111.7 C (Bottom) 33 1.4 46.2 1.33 34.7 D (Top) 33 2.5 82.5 1.33 62.0 D (Bottom) 33 6.0 198.0 1.33 148.9 E (Top) 33 1.9 62.7 1.33 47.1 E (Bottom) 33 3.4 112.2 1.33 84.4 F (Middle) 33 0.3 9.9 1.33 7.4 F (Bottom) 33 4.4 145.2 1.33 109.2

5.2 Mercury

The eleven samples used in Section 5.1 were also used to measure the concentrations of mercury in the pond sediments. Total mercury was determined using a Milestone Direct Mercury Analyzer. A small amount of the solid material (around 0.1 gram for this experiment) was weighed into a nickel sample boat. The boat was heated in an oxygen rich furnace, to release all the decomposition products, including mercury. These products are then carried in a stream of oxygen to a catalytic section of the furnace. Any halogens or oxides of nitrogen and sulfur in the sample are trapped on the catalyst. The remaining vapor is then carried to an amalgamation cell that selectively traps mercury. After the system is flushed with oxygen to remove any remaining gases or decomposition products, the amalgamation cell is rapidly heated to 650 oC, releasing mercury vapor. Flowing oxygen carries the mercury vapor through an absorbance cell positioned in the light path of a single wavelength atomic absorption spectrophotometer. Absorbance is measured at the 253.7 nm wavelength as a function of the mercury concentration in the sample. The detection limit is 0.005 ng (nanogram) of mercury. The measured concentration of mercury ranges from 0.048 mg/kg to 2.24 mg/kg. The highest concentration is found in the middle layer of site C. The top layer of core D also has high mercury concentration. On sites E and F, the bottom sediments of the cores have higher mercury concentration than the upper layers.

35

Table 5.3 Concentrations of Mercury Absorbed on Sediments First Duplicate Average Relative Weight Weight Sample ID conc. conc. conc. standard (g) (g) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) deviation A 0.048 0.30 0.062 0.29 0.29 2.7% C (Top) 0.045 0.72 0.052 0.79 0.76 6.7% C (Middle 1) 0.064 2.31 0.062 2.16 2.24 4.9% C (Middle 2) 0.067 0.40 0.048 0.38 0.39 3.8% C (Bottom) 0.047 0.22 0.048 0.24 0.23 6.2% D (Top) 0.047 1.11 0.062 1.21 1.16 6.0% D (Bottom) 0.065 0.045 0.057 0.051 0.048 9.1% E (Top) 0.075 0.16 0.054 0.18 0.17 7.5% E (Bottom) 0.043 0.44 0.037 0.52 0.48 11.6% F (Middle) 0.076 0.19 0.049 0.18 0.18 6.6% F (Bottom) 0.037 0.20 0.068 0.22 0.21 7.9%

5.3 PCBs and Pesticides

Four samples were used to quantify PCBs and pesticides in the pond sediments. Two samples were from the top and middle parts of the core at site D, and two samples from the middle and bottom parts of the core at site C. The sample from D top represents recent sediment deposits, while the other three samples are older deposits. The samples were analyzed for PCB congeners, DDTs (the sum of p-p′ DDD, p-p′ DDE, o-p′ DDT and p-p′ DDT) and OC pesticides by gas chromatography equipped with an electron capture detector (GC-ECD, Agilent 7890A, Palo Alto, California). Compound identification was confirmed with a mass spectrometry detector in electron capture negative ion mode (GC/MS-ECNI, Agilent 7890/5975 MSD). The measured concentrations of PCBs and pesticides are shown in Table 5.4. The measured PCBs include 92 congeners and the total PCBs. The pesticide compounds include HCB, OCS, DDE-pp, and Mirex. The concentrations of PCBs in the four samples are less than 120 ng/g (wet weight), which are not significant. Nor are the concentrations of the measured pesticides. Among the four samples, the top layer sample of core D has much more PCBs and pesticides than the other three samples.

Table 5.4 Concentrations of PCBs and Pesticides Absorbed on Sediments Concentration (ng/g wet weight) at sample site No. Congener C (Middle 1) C (Bottom) D (Top) D (Middle) 1 PCB-tot 7.87 2.44 114.30 3.20 2 PCB_001 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

36

3 PCB_003 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4 PCB_004+010 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 PCB_007+009 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6 PCB_006 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7 PCB_005+008 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.00 8 PCB_019 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 PCB_011 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10 PCB_012+013 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11 PCB_018 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.00 12 PCB_015+017 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.00 13 PCB_024+027 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14 PCB_016+032 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.00 15 PCB_034 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 16 PCB_029+054 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17 PCB_026 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.00 18 PCB_025 0.18 0.08 0.09 0.00 19 PCB_031 0.14 0.00 0.84 0.00 20 PCB_028 0.14 0.00 1.00 0.00 21 PCB_020+033+053 0.13 0.00 0.82 0.00 22 PCB_051 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 23 PCB_022 0.00 0.00 0.22 0.00 24 PCB_045 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.00 25 PCB_046 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 26 PCB_052 0.25 0.00 2.97 0.12 27 PCB_043+049 0.32 0.00 6.66 0.10 28 PCB_047+048+075 0.00 0.00 0.68 0.00 29 PCB_035 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 30 PCB_044 0.12 0.00 1.39 0.07 31 PCB_037+042+059 0.00 0.00 0.51 0.00 32 PCB_041+064+071 0.00 0.00 0.75 0.00 33 PCB_096 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 34 PCB_040 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.00 35 PCB_067 0.05 0.10 0.32 0.03 36 PCB_074 0.07 0.00 0.61 0.00 37 PCB_070 0.24 0.09 2.03 0.10 38 PCB_066+095 0.47 0.17 4.04 0.20 39 PCB_091 0.00 0.00 0.38 0.00 40 PCB_056+060+092 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.00 41 PCB_084 0.12 0.00 2.88 0.06 42 PCB_089+101 0.46 0.19 4.60 0.22 43 PCB_099 0.16 0.00 2.25 0.08 44 PCB_119 0.03 0.00 0.16 0.00 45 PCB_083 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.00 46 PCB_097 0.12 0.00 1.11 0.06 47 PCB_087+115+117 0.23 0.17 1.08 0.13 48 PCB_085 0.00 0.00 0.82 0.00

37

49 PCB_136 0.00 0.00 1.19 0.00 50 PCB_077+110+154 0.44 0.19 4.12 0.19 51 PCB_082+151 0.07 0.00 1.63 0.00 52 PCB_124+135+144 0.07 0.06 0.81 0.00 53 PCB_109+147 0.00 0.00 0.72 0.00 54 PCB_123+149 0.35 0.13 3.79 0.13 55 PCB_118 0.31 0.12 3.37 0.13 56 PCB_134 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 57 PCB_114+133 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 58 PCB_122+131 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 59 PCB_146 0.05 0.00 0.91 0.00 60 PCB_153 0.36 0.10 4.59 0.15 61 PCB_132+105 0.25 0.00 1.93 0.00 62 PCB_141 0.07 0.00 0.71 0.00 63 PCB_179 0.08 0.00 1.49 0.00 64 PCB_137 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 65 PCB_130+176 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 66 PCB_138+163+164 0.43 0.16 4.84 0.34 67 PCB_158 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 68 PCB_129+178 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.00 69 PCB_182+187 0.16 0.07 4.91 0.14 70 PCB_183 0.07 0.05 1.44 0.00 71 PCB_128+167 0.06 0.00 0.87 0.00 72 PCB_185 0.00 0.00 0.68 0.00 73 PCB_174 0.14 0.00 2.53 0.06 74 PCB_177 0.06 0.00 1.11 0.00 75 PCB_156+171+202 0.00 0.00 1.64 0.00 76 PCB_157+173+201 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.00 77 PCB_172 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 78 PCB_197 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 79 PCB_180 0.26 0.08 6.14 0.19 80 PCB_193 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 81 PCB_191 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.00 82 PCB_200 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 83 PCB_170+190 0.10 0.00 1.43 0.00 84 PCB_198 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.00 85 PCB_199 0.11 0.04 4.03 0.13 86 PCB_196+203 0.14 0.07 4.57 0.11 87 PCB_189 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 88 PCB_195+208 0.00 0.00 2.59 0.00 89 PCB_207 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.04 90 PCB_194 0.33 0.46 2.98 0.28 91 PCB_205 0.03 0.06 0.26 0.08 92 PCB_206 0.13 0.06 4.76 0.07 93 PCB_209 0.39 0.13 6.19 0.15 94 HCB 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

38

95 OCS 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 96 DDE-pp 0.32 0.11 6.44 0.12 97 Mirex 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.4 Toxic Metals

Though some metals are essential as nutrients, all metals can be toxic at some level. Harmful damages on aquatic ecosystems can occur when metals are biologically available at toxic concentrations. Therefore, metals absorbed on the Burden Pond sediments were analyzed in this study. A total of twelve sediment samples were used, including one sample from site A, three samples from site C (top, middle and bottom), three samples from site D (top, middle and bottom), three samples from site E (top, middle and bottom), and two samples from site F (middle and bottom). The sediment samples were analyzed by Microwave assisted acid digestion (Method 3052). 0.5 g of sediment sample (fresh weight basis) was weighed, and 8 mL of concentrated nitric acid and 3 mL H2O2 were added into it. Then it was heated 185 oC by microwave digestion unit (MARS 5, CEM). Instead of hydrofluric acid, hydrogen peroxide was added. After 20 minutes digestion time the metal containing acidic solution was filtered by normal filter paper. Then the volume of the acid solution made 50 mL by adding deionized water. Finally, the metals were analyzed by ICP-MS (X series ICP-MS, Thermo Elemental). The analytical method adopted for this analysis was checked by analyzing SRM (Standard Reference Material) 1571 (Orchard leaves), US department of commerce, National Bureau of Standards (NIST). The results are within ±5-8% of variation with the certified values. A total of thirty two metals were identified, including Al (Aluminum), Sb (Antimony), As (Arsenic), Ba (Barium), Be (Beryllium), Bi (Bismuth), Cd (Cadmium), Ca (Calcium), Cr (Chromium), Co (Cobalt), Cu (Copper), Ga (Gallium), Ge (Germanium), In (Indium), Fe (Iron), Pb (Lead), Li (Lithium), Mg (Magnesium), Mn (Manganese), Hg (Mercury), Mo (Molybdenum), Ni (Nickel), K (Potassium), Rb (Rubidium), Se (Selenium), Ag (Silver), Na (Sodium), Sr (Strontium), Tl (Thallium), U (Uranium), V (Vanadium), and Zn (Zinc). Table 5.5 summarizes the ranges of concentrations of these metals absorbed on the core sediments in the Burden Pond. The concentrations of each metal on the 12 samples are given in detail in Figs. 5.6-5.37. Among these metals, Al, K, Mg, Mn, Ba and Fe have the six highest concentrations on the pond sediments. Note that mercury (Hg) was also measured using the Milestone Direct Mercury Analyzer method described in Section 5.2. The direct analyzer method gave the mercury concentrations ranging 0.048 mg/kg to 2.24 mg/kg, while the digest method here obtained a range of 0.17-3.16 mg/kg. The overall orders of magnitude by the two measurement methods are close. However,

39

on sites A, E and F, the digestion method obtained much higher mercury concentration than the direct analyzer method.

Table 5.5 Summary of Concentrations of Metals Absorbed on Sediments Concentration Concentration No. Metal No. Metal (mg/kg) (mg/kg) 1 Al (Aluminum) 4004 – 15226 17 Li (Lithium) 5.07 – 21.29 2 Sb (Antimony) 0.0008 – 0.0123 18 Mg (Magnesium) 728 – 2082 3 As (Arsenic) 1.32 – 2.29 19 Mn (Manganese) 77.94 – 267.72 4 Ba (Barium) 53.19 – 136.15 20 Hg (Mercury) 0.17 – 3.06 5 Be (Beryllium) 0.16 – 0.52 21 Mo (Molybdenum) 0.08 – 0.23 6 Bi (Bismuth) 0.01 – 0.09 22 Ni (Nickel) 2.44 – 11.49 7 Cd (Cadmium) 0.024 – 0.224 23 K (Potassium) 974 – 4406 8 Ca (Calcium) 5.88 – 18.92 24 Rb (Rubidium) 5.18 – 19.78 9 Cr (Chromium) 5.22 – 19.14 25 Se (Selenium) 0.08 – 0.88 10 Co (Cobalt) 1.62 – 5.10 26 Ag (Silver) 0.02 – 0.32 11 Cu (Copper) 1.42 – 8.05 27 Na (Sodium) 25.46 – 87.71 12 Ga (Gallium) 1.40 – 4.34 28 Sr (Strontium) 3.00 – 10.37 13 Ge (Germanium) 2.54 – 6.96 29 Tl (Thallium) 0.045 – 0.090 14 In (Indium) 0.03 – 0.22 30 U (Uranium) 0.12 – 0.78 15 Fe (Iron) 36.62 – 133.46 31 V (Vanadium) 5.22 – 18.48 16 Pb (Lead) 0.20 – 2.80 32 Zn (Zinc) 26.31 – 74.58

Table 5.6 Concentrations of Al (Aluminum) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 5621 5785 5730 5712 83 C (Top) 5168 5276 5128 5191 76 C (Middle 2) 6014 7928 6984 6975 957 C (Bottom) 6852 6584 6484 6640 190 D (Top) 5339 5897 5123 5453 400 D (Middle) 11754 12812 11911 12159 571 D (Bottom) 15477 15019 15180 15226 233 E (Top) 3780 4480 3751 4004 413 E (Middle) 7323 7624 6483 7143 591 E (Bottom) 8208 8417 8877 8501 342 F (Middle) 8554 8122 8413 8363 221 F (Bottom) 10083 10192 11088 10454 552

40

Table 5.7 Concentrations of Sb (Antimony) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 0.0021 0.0022 0.0022 0.0022 0.000 C (Top) 0.0126 0.0121 0.0121 0.0123 0.000 C (Middle 2) 0.0027 0.0023 0.0027 0.0026 0.000 C (Bottom) 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.000 D (Top) 0.0174 0.0187 0.0180 0.0180 0.001 D (Middle) 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 0.000 D (Bottom) 0.0011 0.0011 0.0011 0.0011 0.000 E (Top) 0.0024 0.0022 0.0024 0.0023 0.000 E (Middle) 0.0012 0.0012 0.0024 0.0016 0.001 E (Bottom) 0.0064 0.0067 0.0060 0.0064 0.000 F (Middle) 0.0009 0.0009 0.0007 0.0008 0.000 F (Bottom) 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.000

Table 5.8 Concentrations of As (Arsenic) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 1.24 1.57 1.16 1.32 0.22 C (Top) 1.82 1.37 1.65 1.61 0.22 C (Middle 2) 1.85 1.41 1.64 1.63 0.22 C (Bottom) 1.65 1.45 1.36 1.48 0.15 D (Top) 2.11 1.43 1.95 1.83 0.36 D (Middle) 2.05 1.43 1.91 1.79 0.33 D (Bottom) 1.83 1.58 1.56 1.66 0.15 E (Top) 1.58 1.35 1.17 1.37 0.21 E (Middle) 2.50 1.41 2.01 1.98 0.54 E (Bottom) 2.57 1.40 2.44 2.14 0.64 F (Middle) 2.11 1.71 1.92 1.91 0.20 F (Bottom) 2.81 1.48 2.59 2.29 0.71

41

Table 5.9 Concentrations of Ba (Barium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 68.09 59.02 58.04 61.72 5.54 C (Top) 58.53 53.07 47.98 53.19 5.28 C (Middle 2) 77.51 70.83 61.73 70.03 7.92 C (Bottom) 52.45 63.06 54.04 56.52 5.72 D (Top) 59.36 63.72 55.61 59.56 4.06 D (Middle) 105.95 105.13 97.38 102.82 4.73 D (Bottom) 139.81 142.44 126.20 136.15 8.72 E (Top) 60.81 69.38 57.70 62.63 6.05 E (Middle) 63.04 75.06 63.42 67.17 6.83 E (Bottom) 88.24 98.95 84.02 90.40 7.70 F (Middle) 80.82 77.08 71.28 76.39 4.81 F (Bottom) 127.60 125.40 113.51 122.17 7.58

Table 5.10 Concentrations of Be (Beryllium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 0.22 0.21 0.18 0.20 0.020 C (Top) 0.19 0.16 0.12 0.16 0.039 C (Middle 2) 0.23 0.24 0.19 0.22 0.023 C (Bottom) 0.17 0.22 0.19 0.19 0.027 D (Top) 0.21 0.17 0.20 0.19 0.020 D (Middle) 0.32 0.33 0.29 0.31 0.023 D (Bottom) 0.52 0.55 0.50 0.52 0.025 E (Top) 0.15 0.18 0.14 0.16 0.019 E (Middle) 0.40 0.28 0.20 0.29 0.099 E (Bottom) 0.30 0.32 0.27 0.30 0.027 F (Middle) 0.32 0.31 0.30 0.31 0.010 F (Bottom) 0.40 0.38 0.39 0.39 0.010

42

Table 5.11 Concentrations of Bi (Bismuth) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 0.052 0.040 0.043 0.045 0.006 C (Top) 0.092 0.067 0.059 0.073 0.017 C (Middle 2) 0.063 0.037 0.025 0.042 0.019 C (Bottom) 0.018 0.009 0.005 0.011 0.007 D (Top) 0.080 0.083 0.068 0.077 0.008 D (Middle) 0.033 0.022 0.016 0.024 0.008 D (Bottom) 0.042 0.035 0.029 0.035 0.006 E (Top) 0.010 0.009 0.006 0.008 0.002 E (Middle) 0.078 0.060 0.070 0.069 0.009 E (Bottom) 0.090 0.081 0.067 0.079 0.012 F (Middle) 0.051 0.040 0.034 0.042 0.008 F (Bottom) 0.090 0.091 0.077 0.086 0.008

Table 5.12 Concentrations of Cd (Cadmium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 0.119 0.111 0.122 0.117 0.006 C (Top) 0.117 0.118 0.110 0.115 0.004 C (Middle 2) 0.032 0.033 0.037 0.034 0.003 C (Bottom) 0.021 0.025 0.026 0.024 0.002 D (Top) 0.177 0.197 0.164 0.179 0.017 D (Middle) 0.044 0.040 0.037 0.040 0.004 D (Bottom) 0.073 0.067 0.062 0.067 0.006 E (Top) 0.054 0.051 0.053 0.053 0.002 E (Middle) 0.107 0.107 0.102 0.105 0.003 E (Bottom) 0.178 0.182 0.162 0.174 0.011 F (Middle) 0.108 0.097 0.080 0.095 0.015 F (Bottom) 0.225 0.227 0.218 0.224 0.005

43

Table 5.13 Concentrations of Ca (Calcium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 7.90 6.89 6.85 7.21 0.60 C (Top) 23.69 18.98 16.98 19.88 3.45 C (Middle) 11.14 8.30 7.21 8.88 2.03 C (Bottom) 14.07 10.93 9.03 11.34 2.54 D (Top) 22.69 18.24 15.84 18.92 3.47 D (Middle) 17.16 13.74 12.76 14.55 2.31 D (Bottom) 14.71 12.91 11.64 13.09 1.54 E (Top) 8.56 4.97 4.12 5.88 2.36 E (Middle) 14.19 9.68 8.28 10.72 3.09 E (Bottom) 21.06 15.97 13.36 16.80 3.92 F (Middle) 11.54 9.86 9.12 10.17 1.24 F (Bottom) 16.88 14.42 13.01 14.77 1.96

Table 5.14 Concentrations of Cr (Chromium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 6.75 6.73 6.59 6.69 0.09 C (Top) 5.47 5.85 5.17 5.50 0.34 C (Middle 2) 8.18 8.86 7.75 8.26 0.56 C (Bottom) 8.05 8.43 7.25 7.91 0.60 D (Top) 5.18 6.55 5.70 5.81 0.69 D (Middle) 13.19 13.88 12.76 13.28 0.56 D (Bottom) 19.58 19.00 18.85 19.14 0.38 E (Top) 5.56 5.53 4.56 5.22 0.57 E (Middle) 8.59 9.27 7.76 8.54 0.76 E (Bottom) 10.68 11.55 9.75 10.66 0.90 F (Middle) 8.40 9.70 9.00 9.03 0.65 F (Bottom) 11.72 12.48 11.36 11.86 0.57

44

Table 5.15 Concentrations of Co (Cobalt) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 2.54 2.19 2.17 2.30 0.21 C (Top) 1.37 1.84 1.65 1.62 0.24 C (Middle 2) 2.36 2.43 2.12 2.30 0.16 C (Bottom) 2.24 2.45 2.11 2.27 0.17 D (Top) 2.96 2.40 2.07 2.48 0.45 D (Middle) 3.73 3.85 3.52 3.70 0.17 D (Bottom) 5.12 5.40 4.77 5.10 0.31 E (Top) 2.53 2.02 1.68 2.08 0.43 E (Middle) 3.08 3.51 2.96 3.18 0.29 E (Bottom) 3.84 3.56 3.00 3.46 0.43 F (Middle) 3.41 3.79 3.52 3.58 0.20 F (Bottom) 5.23 5.27 4.80 5.10 0.26

Table 5.16 Concentrations of Cu (Copper) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 2.78 2.40 2.28 2.49 0.26 C (Top) 1.63 1.01 1.62 1.42 0.35 C (Middle 2) 4.14 4.03 5.35 4.51 0.73 C (Bottom) 5.56 5.41 6.53 5.83 0.61 D (Top) 5.25 5.15 5.86 5.42 0.38 D (Middle) 3.30 3.11 3.94 3.45 0.43 D (Bottom) 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.25 0.25 E (Top) 6.10 6.19 7.26 6.52 0.65 E (Middle) 1.80 1.29 1.15 1.42 0.34 E (Bottom) 6.60 6.95 5.80 6.45 0.59 F (Middle) 3.87 3.60 2.80 3.42 0.55 F (Bottom) 8.22 8.37 7.56 8.05 0.43

45

Table 5.17 Concentrations of Ga (Gallium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 1.76 1.50 1.50 1.59 0.15 C (Top) 1.76 1.40 1.26 1.47 0.26 C (Middle 2) 2.83 2.03 1.78 2.22 0.55 C (Bottom) 2.54 1.93 1.69 2.05 0.44 D (Top) 1.93 1.53 1.35 1.60 0.30 D (Middle) 3.98 3.26 3.01 3.42 0.50 D (Bottom) 4.86 4.34 3.83 4.34 0.52 E (Top) 2.04 1.17 0.98 1.40 0.57 E (Middle) 2.99 2.01 1.71 2.24 0.67 E (Bottom) 3.69 2.68 2.30 2.89 0.72 F (Middle) 2.52 2.13 1.96 2.20 0.29 F (Bottom) 3.42 2.93 2.67 3.00 0.38

Table 5.18 Concentrations of Ge (Germanium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 2.88 3.02 2.40 2.77 0.32 C (Top) 3.89 3.33 2.59 3.27 0.65 C (Middle 2) 3.75 4.08 3.34 3.72 0.37 C (Bottom) 4.80 3.92 3.76 4.16 0.56 D (Top) 2.39 2.04 3.19 2.54 0.59 D (Middle) 6.78 6.43 5.53 6.25 0.65 D (Bottom) 7.80 6.56 6.52 6.96 0.73 E (Top) 4.94 3.45 3.85 4.08 0.77 E (Middle) 4.68 4.38 3.42 4.16 0.66 E (Bottom) 3.91 3.94 3.94 3.93 0.02 F (Middle) 4.87 4.76 4.44 4.69 0.22 F (Bottom) 6.41 6.18 5.72 6.10 0.35

46

Table 5.19 Concentrations of In (Indium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 0.14 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.014 C (Top) 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.004 C (Middle 2) 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.003 C (Bottom) 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.003 D (Top) 0.19 0.20 0.16 0.18 0.017 D (Middle) 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.004 D (Bottom) 0.07 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.006 E (Top) 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.002 E (Middle) 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.11 0.004 E (Bottom) 0.19 0.18 0.16 0.18 0.014 F (Middle) 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.009 F (Bottom) 0.22 0.23 0.21 0.22 0.006

Table 5.20 Concentrations of Fe (Iron) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 51.14 50.71 50.13 50.66 0.50 C (Top) 38.11 37.77 33.98 36.62 2.30 C (Middle 2) 57.85 56.14 49.16 54.38 4.61 C (Bottom) 55.54 57.81 49.90 54.42 4.08 D (Top) 51.43 48.98 42.80 47.74 4.45 D (Middle) 98.77 88.82 81.36 89.65 8.74 D (Bottom) 131.73 142.67 125.98 133.46 8.48 E (Top) 48.88 45.44 37.87 44.06 5.63 E (Middle) 79.79 81.53 68.82 76.71 6.89 E (Bottom) 72.81 81.87 69.57 74.75 6.38 F (Middle) 94.25 96.77 88.90 93.30 4.02 F (Bottom) 115.73 115.21 105.20 112.05 5.94

47

Table 5.21 Concentrations of Pb (Lead) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 1.71 1.47 1.42 1.53 0.152 C (Top) 2.18 2.19 1.96 2.11 0.128 C (Middle 2) 1.30 1.22 1.25 1.26 0.040 C (Bottom) 0.61 0.48 0.58 0.55 0.069 D (Top) 2.71 2.91 2.76 2.80 0.104 D (Middle) 0.60 0.50 0.46 0.52 0.071 D (Bottom) 0.21 0.16 0.23 0.20 0.037 E (Top) 1.13 1.12 1.19 1.15 0.040 E (Middle) 1.34 1.54 1.47 1.45 0.103 E (Bottom) 2.35 2.43 2.36 2.38 0.048 F (Middle) 1.34 1.15 1.25 1.25 0.098 F (Bottom) 2.06 2.56 2.34 2.32 0.254

Table 5.22 Concentrations of Li (Lithium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 7.30 6.23 6.05 6.53 0.68 C (Top) 5.60 5.08 4.53 5.07 0.54 C (Middle 2) 7.01 7.94 6.94 7.30 0.56 C (Bottom) 8.07 8.35 7.18 7.87 0.61 D (Top) 6.18 6.52 5.65 6.12 0.44 D (Middle) 11.09 12.97 12.00 12.02 0.94 D (Bottom) 21.66 21.49 20.73 21.29 0.50 E (Top) 5.75 5.44 4.44 5.21 0.68 E (Middle) 9.02 9.68 8.06 8.92 0.81 E (Bottom) 11.01 11.76 9.87 10.88 0.95 F (Middle) 10.11 10.22 9.31 9.88 0.50 F (Bottom) 13.11 14.36 13.09 13.52 0.72

48

Table 5.23 Concentrations of Mg (Magnesium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 1083 1019 1013 1038 39 C (Top) 702 780 702 728 45 C (Middle 2) 1188 1219 1064 1157 82 C (Bottom) 1111 1233 1052 1132 92 D (Top) 958 925 805 896 81 D (Middle) 1976 1930 1884 1930 46 D (Bottom) 1810 1913 1964 1896 78 E (Top) 968 1011 838 939 90 E (Middle) 1681 1674 1580 1645 56 E (Bottom) 1399 1321 1369 1363 39 F (Middle) 1868 1980 1813 1887 85 F (Bottom) 2121 2113 2013 2082 61

Table 5.24 Concentrations of Mn (Manganese) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 133.86 116.03 114.46 121.45 10.77 C (Top) 98.63 76.75 69.09 81.49 15.33 C (Middle 2) 140.28 99.98 87.39 109.21 27.63 C (Bottom) 125.92 95.98 81.73 101.21 22.55 D (Top) 115.53 91.64 79.65 95.60 18.27 D (Middle) 136.98 169.97 156.51 154.49 16.59 D (Bottom) 259.89 288.16 255.11 267.72 17.86 E (Top) 74.21 87.35 72.26 77.94 8.21 E (Middle) 249.03 234.83 198.18 227.35 26.24 E (Bottom) 147.63 143.96 121.85 137.81 13.95 F (Middle) 259.48 252.97 232.52 248.32 14.07 F (Bottom) 240.78 288.01 258.84 262.54 23.83

49

Table 5.25 Concentrations of Hg (Mercury) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 1.71 1.47 1.42 1.53 0.15 C (Top) 2.78 2.19 1.96 2.31 0.42 C (Middle 2) 1.30 0.93 0.81 1.01 0.26 C (Bottom) 0.61 0.48 0.38 0.49 0.11 D (Top) 3.71 2.91 2.56 3.06 0.59 D (Middle) 0.70 0.50 0.46 0.55 0.13 D (Bottom) 0.21 0.16 0.13 0.17 0.04 E (Top) 1.13 0.62 0.49 0.75 0.34 E (Middle) 2.34 1.54 1.27 1.72 0.55 E (Bottom) 3.35 2.43 2.06 2.61 0.66 F (Middle) 1.34 1.15 1.05 1.18 0.15 F (Bottom) 3.06 2.56 2.34 2.65 0.37

Table 5.26 Concentrations of Mo (Molybdenum) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 0.11 0.10 0.09 0.10 0.01 C (Top) 0.16 0.15 0.11 0.14 0.03 C (Middle 2) 0.15 0.11 0.08 0.11 0.04 C (Bottom) 0.14 0.09 0.07 0.10 0.03 D (Top) 0.29 0.23 0.18 0.23 0.05 D (Middle) 0.17 0.13 0.11 0.14 0.03 D (Bottom) 0.23 0.21 0.17 0.20 0.03 E (Top) 0.10 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.02 E (Middle) 0.20 0.14 0.10 0.14 0.05 E (Bottom) 0.25 0.18 0.16 0.20 0.05 F (Middle) 0.11 0.09 0.11 0.10 0.01 F (Bottom) 0.21 0.17 0.17 0.19 0.02

50

Table 5.27 Concentrations of Ni (Nickel) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 4.44 3.77 3.83 4.01 0.37 C (Top) 2.11 2.78 2.43 2.44 0.33 C (Middle 2) 4.19 4.33 3.34 3.95 0.54 C (Bottom) 4.78 4.82 3.81 4.47 0.57 D (Top) 4.66 3.52 3.25 3.81 0.75 D (Middle) 8.04 7.11 6.60 7.25 0.73 D (Bottom) 11.61 12.19 10.67 11.49 0.77 E (Top) 3.33 3.82 2.45 3.20 0.69 E (Middle) 6.26 6.92 5.54 6.24 0.69 E (Bottom) 6.22 6.93 5.84 6.33 0.55 F (Middle) 8.17 8.14 7.08 7.80 0.62 F (Bottom) 10.95 10.85 9.18 10.33 0.99

Table 5.28 Concentrations of K (Potassium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 1609 1614 1678 1634 38 C (Top) 1257 1396 1245 1299 84 C (Middle 2) 2140 2287 1984 2137 152 C (Bottom) 1745 1890 1616 1750 137 D (Top) 1143 1365 1182 1230 118 D (Middle) 3342 3509 3225 3358 143 D (Bottom) 4472 4486 4260 4406 127 E (Top) 995 933 993 974 35 E (Middle) 1681 1562 1547 1597 73 E (Bottom) 2176 2281 2187 2215 58 F (Middle) 1930 1988 1810 1909 90 F (Bottom) 2232 2470 2232 2311 137

51

Table 5.29 Concentrations of Rb (Rubidium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 7.55 7.25 7.19 7.33 0.19 C (Top) 6.08 6.15 5.44 5.89 0.39 C (Middle 2) 8.31 9.72 8.36 8.80 0.80 C (Bottom) 8.87 8.87 7.57 8.44 0.75 D (Top) 6.62 6.68 5.91 6.41 0.43 D (Middle) 13.79 14.10 13.94 13.94 0.16 D (Bottom) 19.02 20.95 19.36 19.78 1.03 E (Top) 5.69 5.48 4.38 5.18 0.70 E (Middle) 9.85 9.72 7.91 9.16 1.08 E (Bottom) 12.49 12.33 10.38 11.73 1.18 F (Middle) 8.52 8.97 8.14 8.54 0.41 F (Bottom) 12.54 13.03 11.79 12.46 0.62

Table 5.30 Concentrations of Se (Selenium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 0.73 0.79 0.63 0.72 0.085 C (Top) 0.98 0.80 0.84 0.88 0.096 C (Middle 2) 0.79 0.60 0.66 0.69 0.096 C (Bottom) 0.37 0.32 0.43 0.37 0.055 D (Top) 0.16 0.12 0.15 0.14 0.018 D (Middle) 0.76 0.83 0.79 0.79 0.033 D (Bottom) 0.50 0.54 0.69 0.58 0.098 E (Top) 0.39 0.42 0.36 0.39 0.029 E (Middle) 0.09 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.012 E (Bottom) 0.26 0.23 0.26 0.25 0.016 F (Middle) 0.30 0.31 0.33 0.31 0.017 F (Bottom) 0.72 0.89 0.83 0.81 0.089

52

Table 5.31 Concentrations of Ag (Silver) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 0.07 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.01 C (Top) 0.20 0.19 0.17 0.19 0.02 C (Middle 2) 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.01 C (Bottom) 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 D (Top) 0.33 0.34 0.30 0.32 0.02 D (Middle) 0.04 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.01 D (Bottom) 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.05 0.00 E (Top) 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.01 E (Middle) 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.01 E (Bottom) 0.31 0.28 0.24 0.28 0.03 F (Middle) 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.01 F (Bottom) 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.00

Table 5.32 Concentrations of Na (Sodium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 44.55 47.50 47.07 46.38 1.59 C (Top) 39.97 37.50 33.48 36.98 3.28 C (Middle 2) 54.25 53.78 46.71 51.58 4.23 C (Bottom) 42.38 46.40 39.66 42.81 3.39 D (Top) 46.55 44.45 40.73 43.91 2.95 D (Middle) 84.61 83.00 78.21 81.94 3.33 D (Bottom) 84.75 94.22 84.15 87.71 5.65 E (Top) 23.54 29.07 23.77 25.46 3.13 E (Middle) 46.87 43.03 45.84 45.25 1.99 E (Bottom) 68.90 65.96 55.41 63.42 7.09 F (Middle) 42.47 45.00 41.47 42.98 1.82 F (Bottom) 54.67 62.08 56.86 57.87 3.81

53

Table 5.33 Concentrations of Sr (Strontium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 4.42 4.01 4.23 4.22 0.20 C (Top) 3.10 2.90 3.00 3.00 0.10 C (Middle 2) 3.14 3.88 2.86 3.29 0.53 C (Bottom) 3.54 3.42 2.62 3.20 0.50 D (Top) 4.18 3.07 4.04 3.76 0.60 D (Middle) 6.89 6.40 6.51 6.60 0.26 D (Bottom) 10.12 10.02 10.41 10.18 0.20 E (Top) 3.59 3.60 3.75 3.65 0.09 E (Middle) 8.03 8.28 7.06 7.79 0.65 E (Bottom) 7.67 7.56 6.24 7.16 0.80 F (Middle) 7.21 7.01 6.11 6.78 0.58 F (Bottom) 10.79 10.95 9.37 10.37 0.87

Table 5.34 Concentrations of Tl (Thallium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 0.050 0.048 0.049 0.049 0.001 C (Top) 0.057 0.051 0.049 0.053 0.004 C (Middle 2) 0.073 0.060 0.062 0.065 0.007 C (Bottom) 0.063 0.058 0.054 0.058 0.004 D (Top) 0.058 0.053 0.050 0.054 0.004 D (Middle) 0.095 0.090 0.086 0.090 0.004 D (Bottom) 0.100 0.059 0.089 0.083 0.021 E (Top) 0.066 0.051 0.053 0.057 0.008 E (Middle) 0.068 0.031 0.055 0.051 0.019 E (Bottom) 0.097 0.088 0.085 0.090 0.006 F (Middle) 0.051 0.037 0.047 0.045 0.007 F (Bottom) 0.087 0.083 0.081 0.084 0.003

54

Table 5.35 Concentrations of U (Uranium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.13 0.01 C (Top) 0.18 0.14 0.12 0.15 0.03 C (Middle 2) 0.26 0.19 0.16 0.20 0.05 C (Bottom) 0.22 0.17 0.15 0.18 0.04 D (Top) 0.22 0.18 0.15 0.18 0.04 D (Middle) 0.33 0.27 0.25 0.28 0.04 D (Bottom) 0.89 0.77 0.68 0.78 0.10 E (Top) 0.18 0.10 0.08 0.12 0.05 E (Middle) 0.30 0.20 0.17 0.22 0.07 E (Bottom) 0.38 0.28 0.24 0.30 0.07 F (Middle) 0.20 0.17 0.16 0.18 0.02 F (Bottom) 0.31 0.26 0.23 0.27 0.04

Table 5.36 Concentrations of V (Vanadium) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 6.75 6.73 6.59 6.69 0.09 C (Top) 5.47 5.85 5.17 5.50 0.34 C (Middle 2) 8.18 8.86 7.75 8.26 0.56 C (Bottom) 7.05 8.43 7.25 7.58 0.75 D (Top) 5.18 6.55 5.70 5.81 0.69 D (Middle) 13.19 13.88 12.76 13.28 0.56 D (Bottom) 18.58 19.00 17.85 18.48 0.58 E (Top) 5.56 5.53 4.56 5.22 0.57 E (Middle) 9.59 9.27 8.76 9.20 0.42 E (Bottom) 11.68 11.55 10.75 11.33 0.50 F (Middle) 9.40 9.70 9.00 9.37 0.35 F (Bottom) 12.72 12.48 11.36 12.19 0.73

55

Table 5.37 Concentrations of Zn (Zinc) in the 12 Samples Average conc Sample Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Conc (mg/kg) Std (mg/kg) A 36.34 35.44 35.15 35.64 0.62 C (Top) 50.41 47.92 43.26 47.20 3.63 C (Middle 2) 27.75 27.23 23.95 26.31 2.06 C (Bottom) 18.55 18.86 16.09 17.83 1.52 D (Top) 67.29 62.37 54.60 61.42 6.40 D (Middle) 27.13 30.43 28.67 28.74 1.65 D (Bottom) 37.11 32.88 29.47 33.15 3.83 E (Top) 50.83 53.26 44.51 49.53 4.51 E (Middle) 38.05 46.86 39.50 41.47 4.72 E (Bottom) 59.58 66.59 57.46 61.21 4.77 F (Middle) 43.21 45.56 42.83 43.87 1.48 F (Bottom) 72.27 79.02 72.45 74.58 3.84

56

Chapter 6. Possible Sediment Erosion upon Dam Removal

The Burden Pond reservoir has been completely filled up with sediments. If the dam is removed, a significant part of the sediment deposit will be eroded and transported to the downstream. The possible sediment erosion amount was estimated using the measured bathymetry and core depths, as described in this chapter.

6.1 Sediment Erosion Layer Thickness

Fig. 6.1 shows the longitudinal profile of average bed and thalweg elevations along the main stream. One can see that the deepest location in the pond is the thalweg of cross-section (CS) 10. The average bed slope or the slope of the average bed is almost flat or even negative in the reach between the dam and cross-section 10. The average bed slope is about 0.83% between CS 10 and 12, and becomes negative in the reach upstream of CS 12. Considering such a steep bed slope between CS 10 and 12, this reach is very likely the upper end of the reservoir deposit wedge. In order to estimate the erosion amount, it is needed to know the original bed elevation before the dam was constructed. This can be done by using the coring information. Because the core sampler used in this study can only reach up to a 4 ft depth, we could not detect the possible erosion depth in the lower area of the pond. Our upmost core was located at site D, between CS 10 and 11. The core depth was 35 inches below the bed. Because site D was located at the upper end of the sediment deposit wedge, the core depth can be a good estimate of the erodible layer thickness at that location. Using this information and assuming a straight slope starting from the dam toe, the longitudinal profile of the hard bottom of the pond is shown in Fig. 6.1. This straight hard bottom profile intercepts the current bed profile near CS 13. Thus, the erodible layer thickness at each cross-section is obtained by subtracting the current average bed and the hard bottom, as shown in the last column of Table 6.1. The estimated hard bottom has a slope of 1.4%, which is larger than the 0.83% slope between CS 10 and 12. This is a reasonable estimate, because the equilibrium bed slope of a reservoir’s upper end is usually gentler than the original bed before the dam was constructed. This hard bottom slope is assumed to be valid in the right branch channel, and thus used to estimate the erodible layer thickness there, as shown in Table 6.1.

57

Fig. 6.1 Bed elevation profiles along the main stream

Table 6.1 Erodible sediment layer thickness along the main stream and right branch

Cross Distance from Average bed Hard Sediment Thalweg (m) Section dam (m) (m) bottom (m) thickness (m)

14 392.31 142.60 142.80

13 368.40 142.65 142.78 142.65 0.14 12 335.85 142.81 143.00 142.19 0.81 11 284.42 142.52 142.68 141.47 1.21 Site D 264.00 142.07 142.46 141.18 1.28 10 243.57 141.61 142.23 140.89 1.34 9 191.40 141.94 142.50 140.16 2.34 8 170.64 141.77 142.49 139.87 2.62 7 137.94 141.68 142.17 139.41 2.76 6 97.31 142.24 142.47 138.84 3.63 5 84.17 142.29 142.51 138.66 3.85 4 60.07 142.21 142.52 138.32 4.20 3 46.18 142.22 142.49 138.12 4.37 2 24.69 142.19 142.50 137.82 4.68 1 8.73 142.22 142.40 137.60 4.81 Dam 0.00 142.66 142.66 137.47 5.18 15 11.04 142.38 142.45 137.63 4.82 16 31.47 142.29 142.41 137.92 4.49 17 53.11 142.42 142.48 138.22 4.26 18 85.04 142.22 142.50 138.67 3.84

58

6.2 Evolution of Cross Sections

The morphological evolution of cross sections in the main stream and right branch channel depends on the flow conditions, geotechnical properties of bed and bank sediments, vegetation and human activities. Even though computational modeling of sediment transport and morphology evolution upon dam removal is still being developed by many researchers (Wu, 2007), it is desirable to use an advanced computer model to simulate the morphology evolution of the pond if the dame is removed. Here, due to the budget limit, we used a very simple approach to estimate the future bed profile of the cross sections. First, it is assumed that the bed will be uniformly lowered to the hard bottom at each cross section, as shown in Figs. 6.2-6.18. In this way, the current bed shape of each cross section is kept but just lowered evenly. Second, each cross section widens by erosion on two bank slopes. The bank slope is assumed to be 45o, except where bank erosion is restrained by hard boundary or human interference. The bank slope of 45o is steeper than the repose angle of noncohesive sediments, which is about 30-40o (Wu, 2007). Use of a steeper bank slope is to consider the effects of cohesive portion in the sediment deposits and vegetation on the banks. This 45o bank slope is applied for the reaches upstream of cross section 8 in the main stream and cross section 18 in the right branch, as well as for the right banks of cross section 3-7 and left banks of cross section 17. The left banks of cross sections 1-7 and right banks of cross sections 15 and 16 will be protected or have already been hard boundary, so that bank retreat is restrained or a steeper bank slope is used in those places. If the dam is removed, the cross-sections 1 and 15 will be merged and thus the right bank of cross section 1 and the left bank of cross section 15 will disappear, as shown in Figs. 6.14 and 6.18. This will also occur for cross sections 2 and 16, as shown in Fig. 6.13 and 6.17. Note that because the measurement points may not be on a straight line at each cross- section, a straight regression line among the measurement points was obtained to represent each cross-section, as shown in Fig. 3.1. The cross sections shown in Figs. 6.2-6.18 are based on the straight regression line for each cross section. The measurement points and the corresponding bed elevations are tabulated in Appendix B, for the convenience of use by other researchers.

59

Fig. 6.2 Bed profile along cross section 13 on the main stream (Z is bed elevation, and Y is the distance from the left bank of the cross section; the same for the following figures)

Fig. 6.3 Bed profile along cross section 12 on the main stream

Fig. 6.4 Bed profile along cross section 11 on the main stream

Fig. 6.5 Bed profile along cross section 10 on the main stream

60

Fig. 6.6 Bed profile along cross section 9 on the main stream

Fig. 6.7 Bed profile along cross section 8 on the main stream

Fig. 6.8 Bed profile along cross section 7 on the main stream

Fig. 6.9 Bed profile along cross section 6 on the main stream

61

Fig. 6.10 Bed profile along cross section 5 on the main stream

Fig. 6.11 Bed profile along cross section 4 on the main stream

Fig. 6.12 Bed profile along cross section 3 on the main stream

Fig. 6.13 Bed profile along cross section 2 on the main stream

62

Fig. 6.14 Bed profile along cross section 1 on the main stream

Fig. 6.15 Bed profile along cross section 18 on the right branch

Fig. 6.16 Bed profile along cross section 17 on the right branch

Fig. 6.17 Bed profile along cross section 16 on the right branch

63

Fig. 6.18 Bed profile along cross section 15 on the right branch

6.3 Sediment Erosion Volume

After considering the erodible layer thickness estimated in Section 6.1 and the lateral widening and vertical deepening of cross sections described in Section 6.2, the sediment erosion volume is estimated as shown in Table 6.2. The cross-sectional area change is calculated for each cross section based on the evolution patterns described in Figs. 6.2-6.18. For each cross section, its representative reach length is a half of the length of the reach between its adjacent upstream and downstream cross sections, and its reach volume change is the product of the area change and the representative reach length. Then the subtotal erosion volumes are obtained by summing all the reach volume changes in the main stream and right branch separately. The subtotal erosion volumes of the main stream and the right branch are 21,893.5 and 13,656.7 m3, respectively. The total sediment erosion volume is 35,550.2 m3 (=28.8 acre-feet). Assuming a porosity of 0.4 and a sediment density of 2.65 tons/m3, the total sediment erosion volume is equal to a sediment mass of 56,525 tons. Note that the above estimated sediment erosion volume may have uncertainties. First, the estimate assumes that the channels will not change their current locations if the dam is removed. This indicates that channel meandering is not considered in the estimate. It is expected that the main channel between cross section 8 and 10 will have intensive bank erosion and meandering on the right side due to the channel curvature near CS 10. The flow near CS 10 will hit towards the right bank and may even cut off the floodplain. If this occurs, the main channel below CS 10 will be downsized or abandoned and the current right branch below CS 18 will become the main channel. If the channel meandering and possible cutoff are considered, the sediment erosion volume may be larger than the above estimate. Second, the above estimate assumes that both the main stream and right branch have enough flow to erode the sediments. This is a good assumption for the main stream where flow is usually strong. However, the flow in the right branch is small and slow due to the dense vegetation and knickpoint contraction. Moreover, the reach between CS 16-18 is a pool and has large flow area, so that the flow velocity is small and the erosion will be slow there. Therefore, the erosion

64

volume of 13,656.7 m3 in the right branch may be overestimated, or at least will take much longer time to erode than that in the main stream.

Table 6.2 Sediment erosion volume estimate Cross Cross-sectional Reach Reach section area change volume length (m) ID (m2) change (m3) 13 1.19 28.23 33.70 12 12.40 41.99 520.53 11 17.16 46.14 791.73 10 13.56 46.51 630.60 9 49.11 36.47 1790.92 8 66.21 26.73 1769.70 7 42.11 36.66 1544.04 6 89.38 26.89 2403.17 5 108.93 18.62 2028.13 4 120.03 19.00 2280.04 3 124.80 17.69 2207.52 2 167.21 18.72 3130.36 1 165.33 16.71 2763.11 15 40.77 15.73 641.54 16 88.42 21.04 1860.05 17 133.68 26.79 3580.79 18 291.72 25.96 7574.30 Subtotal volume in the main stream (m3) 21893.54 Subtotal volume in the right branch (m3) 13656.68 Total sediment erosion volume (m3) 35550.22

65

Chapter 7. Conclusions

Burden Pond Dam is a small old dam located on the Wynants Kill Creek, a tributary of the Lower Hudson River in New York. It now has been filled up with sediments. It used to provide waterpower for industries nearby, and now serves only for recreational purposes. For safety concern and to connect the upstream and downstream aquatic habitats, removal or rehabilitation of this dam needs to be considered soon or later. The project team conducted a field campaign during July 21-23, 2015 to assess the sediment quality and quantity in the lake. Eighteen cross-sections were surveyed using a Total Station. The cross-sectional average bed profile along the main stream channel shows an almost flat bed slope in the lake close to the dam and a steep slope of 0.86% in the upper end of the reservoir. This indicates that the reservoir has already reached the equilibrium state. This is also supported by the photos showing the sediment deposition has reached the dam site. Using the bathymetry of the eighteen cross-sections, it is estimated that a total of 35,550.2 m3 (i.e., 28.8 acre-feet) will be eroded to the downstream if the dam is removed or failed. This total amount includes subtotals of 21,893.5 and 13,656.7 m3 in the main stream and the right branch, respectively. This estimate uses a simple approach and may have uncertainties, but it can be a reference for engineers to make a decision on the sediment management. Thirteen sediment core and grab samples were collected during this field study. The sieving analysis of these samples shows that the sediments in the upstream end of the lake are mainly gravels and sands. In the lower end of the lake the sediments exhibit distinct layered structures. The upper layer has usually coarse sediments and the lower layer has fine sediments. The coarse sediments are mainly sands, and the fine sediments are sand, silt and clay. The fine sediments deposited early when the lake water was deep, whereas the coarse sediments appeared later when the deposit delta wedge extended from the upstream end of the reservoir to the dam. The sediment size along the main stream exhibits a tendency of downstream fining. The fine sediment samples were used to conduct chemical analysis. The results show that PCBs and pesticides are not abundant in the lake sediments. However, the lake sediments are enriched with nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) and some metals. A total of 32 metals are identified, among which Al (Aluminum), K (Potassium), Mg (Magnesium), Mn (Manganese), Ba (Barium) and Fe (Iron) are the most abundant ones. It is worthy to note that due to the limited depth of the sediment cores, we did not obtain the fine sediment deposits in the lake bottom close to the dam. There may be other chemicals missed, or the chemical concentrations may be higher. Even with this limitation, these data are useful information for the dam removal feasibility and impact studies in terms of the potential hazards the sediments may pose if reintroduced into the environment. Note that removal of the dam or not is beyond the scope of the current project. Removal of a dam involves many engineering, geomorphological, environmental, ecological and socio- economic factors. There can always be cost and benefit for each such factor. It needs state

66

agencies, engineers, researchers, dam owner, and local community to work together to decide which one weighs more. The goal should be developing a sustainable water system there for human, fish and wildlife.

67

References

Alderson, C. and Rosman, L. (2014). “Assessment of Fish Passage Opportunities in Lower Hudson River Tributaries (2009-2014).” Presentation to Hudson River Inaugural Fish Passage Coordination Meeting, Albany NY, Oct. 29, 2014. APHA, AWWA, WEF (2005). Standard Methods for Examination of Water & Wastewater. Centennial Edition, 21st Edition. Benjamin, I. (2013). “Wynantskill Creek designated an inland waterway.” The Record, News, http://www.troyrecord.com/general-news/20130718/wynantskill-creek-designated-an-inland- waterway Bennett, S.J. and Cooper, C.M. (2000). “Assessing Sedimentation Issues within Aging Flood Control Dams, Oklahoma.” Research Report No. 15, USDA National Sedimentation Laboratory, Oxford, MS. Diplas, P., Kuhnle, R., Gray, J., Glysson, D., and Edwards, T. (2008). “Sediment Transport Measurements.” Chapter 5, in Sedimentation Engineering, Manual 110, M. H. Garcia (ed.), ASCE, p. 305-352. Federal Emergency Management Agency (2004). “Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety: Hazard Potential Classification System for Dams.” http://www.fema.gov/media-library- data/20130726-1516-20490-3952/fema_333_1_.txt Harris, R. D. and DeBlois, D. (2005). “Geographic Integration of Industry on the Wynants Kill, 1816-1911.” Business and Economic History, Vol. 3, online: http://www.thebhc.org/sites/default/files/harrisanddeblois_0.pdf NYS DEC (2008). “The Lower Hudson River Basin Waterbody Inventory and Priority Waterbodies List.” Bureau of Watershed Assessment and Management, Division of Water, NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). NYS DEC. Freshwater Wetlands Program. http://www.dec.ny.gov/lands/4937.html, accessed in July 2015. U.S. EPA (1999). Sediment Sampling, Field Sampling Guidance Document #1215, U.S. EPA Region 9 Laboratory, Richmond, CA. Wall, G., Riva-Murray, K., and Phillips, P. (1998). “Water Quality in the Hudson River Basin, New York and Adjacent States, 1992-95.” http://ny.water.usgs.gov/projects/hdsn/report/Circular1165.pdf. Wu, W. (2007). Computational River Dynamics, Taylor & Francis, UK, p. 494.

68

Appendix A: Data of Sediment Size Compositions

The size compositions of the sediment samples are tabulated in this appendix.

Table A-1. Size composition of site I Sieve Sieve Mass Cumulative Sieve Sediment opening opening percent weight % number mass (g) (in) (mm) (%) finer 2.6 64.8 0.00 100.00

1.5" 1.5 38.1 2071.3 7.34 92.66 1" 1 25.4 3979.7 14.10 78.56 0.75" 0.75 19.05 3180.8 11.27 67.30 0.5" 0.5 12.7 3660.4 12.97 54.33 0.25" 0.25 6.35 4416.9 15.65 38.68 4 0.187 4.75 1223.5 4.33 34.35 10 0.079 2.0 2868.1 10.16 24.19 20 0.033 0.84 2258.2 8.00 16.19 30 0.023 0.59 809.2 2.87 13.32 40 0.017 0.42 1155.7 4.09 9.23 50 0.012 0.29 1121.6 3.97 5.26 100 0.006 0.147 1193.1 4.23 1.03 120 0.005 0.124 7.6 0.03 1.00 200 0.0029 0.074 109.9 0.39 0.61 270 0.0021 0.053 37.9 0.13 0.48 Tray 135.4 0.48 0.00

Total 28229.3

69

Table A-2. Size composition of site H Sieve Sieve Mass Cumulative Sieve Sediment opening opening percent weight % number mass (g) (in) (mm) (%) finer 2.1 52.1 0 100.00

1.5" 1.5 38.1 1725.7 8.79 91.21 1" 1 25.4 2059.9 10.49 80.72 0.75" 0.75 19.05 1866.4 9.51 71.21 0.5" 0.5 12.7 2454.6 12.50 58.70 0.25" 0.25 6.35 3061.9 15.60 43.11 4 0.187 4.75 897.4 4.57 38.53 10 0.079 2.0 1906.4 9.71 28.82 20 0.033 0.84 1700.0 8.66 20.16 30 0.023 0.59 798.8 4.07 16.09 40 0.017 0.42 1017.3 5.18 10.91 50 0.012 0.29 775.5 3.95 6.96 100 0.006 0.147 589.3 3.00 3.96 120 0.005 0.124 6.9 0.04 3.92 200 0.0029 0.074 140.3 0.71 3.21 270 0.0021 0.053 25.2 0.13 3.08 Tray 604.7 3.08 0.00

Total 19630.3

Table A-3. Size composition of site D Sieve Sieve Mass Cumulative Sieve Sediment opening opening percent weight % number mass (g) (in) (mm) (%) finer 10 0.079 2.00 0.1 0.00 99.98 20 0.033 0.84 2.3 0.45 99.53 30 0.023 0.59 56.3 10.91 88.62 40 0.017 0.42 53.2 10.31 78.31 50 0.012 0.29 38.8 7.52 70.79 100 0.006 0.147 76.9 14.90 55.89 120 0.005 0.124 20.5 3.97 51.92 200 0.0029 0.074 51.8 10.04 41.88 270 0.0021 0.053 36.3 7.03 34.84 Tray 179.8 34.84 0.00

Total 516.0

70

Table A-4. Size composition of site J Sieve Sieve Mass Cumulative Sieve Sediment opening opening percent weight % number mass (g) (in) (mm) (%) finer 1.5" 1.5 38.1 0.0 0.00 100.00 1" 1 25.4 71.6 4.51 95.49 0.75" 0.75 19.05 229.7 14.45 81.04 0.5" 0.5 12.7 296.3 18.65 62.39 0.25" 0.25 6.35 316.7 19.93 42.46 4 0.187 4.75 75.9 4.78 37.69 10 0.079 2.0 136.6 8.60 29.09 20 0.033 0.84 152.7 9.61 19.48 30 0.023 0.59 76.7 4.83 14.66 40 0.017 0.42 82.3 5.18 9.48 50 0.012 0.29 57.3 3.61 5.87 100 0.006 0.147 66.5 4.18 1.69 120 0.005 0.124 1.1 0.07 1.62 200 0.0029 0.074 11.7 0.74 0.88 270 0.0021 0.053 3.3 0.21 0.67 Tray 10.7 0.67 0.00

Total 1589.1

Table A-5. Size composition of site G Sieve Sieve Mass Cumulative Sieve Sediment opening opening percent weight % number mass (g) (in) (mm) (%) finer 2.5 63.3 0.0 0.00 100.00

1.5" 1.5 38.1 345.0 1.94 98.06 1" 1 25.4 3415.0 19.24 78.82 0.75" 0.75 19.05 2945.0 16.59 62.23 0.5" 0.5 12.7 3235.0 18.23 44.00 0.25" 0.25 6.35 2815.0 15.86 28.14 4 0.187 4.75 570.0 3.21 24.93 10 0.079 2.0 960.0 5.41 19.52 20 0.033 0.84 375.0 2.11 17.41 30 0.023 0.59 175.0 0.99 16.42 40 0.017 0.42 470.0 2.65 13.77 50 0.012 0.29 660.0 3.72 10.06 100 0.006 0.147 835.0 4.70 5.35 120 0.005 0.124 5.0 0.03 5.32 200 0.0029 0.074 90.0 0.51 4.82 270 0.0021 0.053 40.0 0.23 4.59 Tray 815.0 4.59 0.00

Total 17750.0

71

Table A-6. Size composition of site C Coarse layer Fine layer Sieve Sieve Sieve Mass Cumulative Mass Cumulative opening opening Sediment Sediment number percent weight % percent weight % (in) (mm) mass (g) mass (g) (%) finer (%) finer 1" 1 25.4 0.0 0.00 100.00 0.75" 0.75 19.05 16.2 8.15 91.85 0.5" 0.5 12.7 32.9 16.56 75.29 0.25" 0.25 6.35 37.7 18.97 56.32 4 0.187 4.75 9.4 4.73 51.59 0.0 0.00 100.00 10 0.079 2.0 25.0 12.58 39.00 20.5 4.92 95.08 20 0.033 0.84 21.3 10.72 28.28 62.0 14.88 80.21 30 0.023 0.59 10.9 5.49 22.80 49.3 11.83 68.38 40 0.017 0.42 14.6 7.35 15.45 43.2 10.36 58.01 50 0.012 0.29 9.7 4.88 10.57 32.0 7.68 50.34 100 0.006 0.147 9.7 4.88 5.69 59.1 14.18 36.16 120 0.005 0.124 0.3 0.15 5.54 3.9 0.94 35.22 200 0.0029 0.074 2.4 1.21 4.33 24.9 5.97 29.25 270 0.0021 0.053 0.7 0.35 3.98 25.7 6.17 23.08 Tray 7.9 3.98 0.00 96.2 23.08 0.00

Total 198.7 416.8

Table A-7. Size composition of site K Sieve Sieve Mass Cumulative Sieve Sediment opening opening percent weight % number mass (g) (in) (mm) (%) finer 4 0.187 4.7498 0.0 0.00 100.00 10 0.079 2.00 34.3 3.91 96.09 20 0.033 0.84 14.8 1.68 94.41 30 0.023 0.59 63.3 7.22 87.19 40 0.017 0.42 91.8 10.46 76.73 50 0.012 0.29 120.7 13.76 62.97 100 0.006 0.147 203.4 23.19 39.78 120 0.005 0.124 6.0 0.68 39.10 200 0.0029 0.074 98.0 11.17 27.93 270 0.0021 0.053 65.4 7.45 20.48 Tray 179.6 20.48 0.00

Total 877.2

72

Table A-8. Size composition of site L Sieve Sieve Mass Cumulative Sieve Sediment opening opening percent weight % number mass (g) (in) (mm) (%) finer 1" 1 25.4 0.0 0.00 100.00 0.75" 0.75 19.05 19.2 2.48 97.52 0.5" 0.5 12.7 110.4 14.27 83.25 0.25" 0.25 6.35 206.1 26.64 56.61 4 0.187 4.75 65.0 8.40 48.21 10 0.079 2.0 142.0 18.35 29.86 20 0.033 0.84 80.6 10.42 19.44 30 0.023 0.59 26.5 3.43 16.01 40 0.017 0.42 35.8 4.63 11.39 50 0.012 0.29 32.4 4.19 7.20 100 0.006 0.147 36.0 4.65 2.55 120 0.005 0.124 0.8 0.10 2.44 200 0.0029 0.074 7.5 0.97 1.47 270 0.0021 0.053 2.1 0.27 1.20 Tray 9.3 1.20 0.00

Total 773.7

Table A-9. Size composition of site B Sieve Sieve Mass Cumulative Sieve Sediment opening opening percent weight % number mass (g) (in) (mm) (%) finer 1" 1 25.4 0.0 0.00 100.00 0.75" 0.75 19.05 9.6 0.88 99.12 0.5" 0.5 12.7 21.8 2.00 97.12 0.25" 0.25 6.35 52.8 4.84 92.28 4 0.187 4.75 22.9 2.10 90.18 10 0.079 2.0 76.7 7.03 83.15 20 0.033 0.84 172.5 15.82 67.33 30 0.023 0.59 150.8 13.83 53.50 40 0.017 0.42 273.9 25.12 28.38 50 0.012 0.29 188.4 17.28 11.10 100 0.006 0.147 82.4 7.56 3.55 120 0.005 0.124 1.7 0.16 3.39 200 0.0029 0.074 18.7 1.71 1.68 270 0.0021 0.053 7.5 0.69 0.99 Tray 10.8 0.99 0.00

Total 1090.5

73

Table A-10. Size composition of site M Sieve Sieve Mass Cumulative Sieve Sediment opening opening percent weight % number mass (g) (in) (mm) (%) finer 1" 1 25.4 0.0 0.00 100.00 0.75" 0.75 19.05 22.8 1.21 98.79 0.5" 0.5 12.7 106.0 5.63 93.16 0.25" 0.25 6.35 363.1 19.27 73.89 4 0.187 4.75 111.5 5.92 67.98 10 0.079 2.0 272.0 14.44 53.54 20 0.033 0.84 250.5 13.29 40.25 30 0.023 0.59 147.8 7.84 32.40 40 0.017 0.42 247.0 13.11 19.30 50 0.012 0.29 200.7 10.65 8.65 100 0.006 0.147 138.4 7.34 1.30 120 0.005 0.124 0.4 0.02 1.28 200 0.0029 0.074 10.2 0.54 0.74 270 0.0021 0.053 3.3 0.18 0.56 Tray 10.6 0.56 0.00

Total 1884.3

Table A-11. Size composition of site A Coarse layer Fine layer Sieve Sieve Sieve Mass Cumulative Mass Cumulative opening opening Sediment Sediment number percent weight % percent weight % (in) (mm) mass (g) mass (g) (%) finer (%) finer 0.75" 0.75 19.05 0.0 0.00 100.00 0.5" 0.5 12.7 3.8 0.55 99.45 0.25" 0.25 6.35 15.2 2.18 97.27 4 0.187 4.75 16.9 2.43 94.85 10 0.079 2.0 76.0 10.91 83.94 0.0 0.00 100.00 20 0.033 0.84 137.1 19.68 64.25 0.3 0.22 99.78 30 0.023 0.59 79.3 11.38 52.87 8.7 6.46 93.31 40 0.017 0.42 119.1 17.10 35.77 13.2 9.81 83.51 50 0.012 0.29 109.1 15.66 20.11 10.1 7.50 76.00 100 0.006 0.147 94.6 13.58 6.53 17.0 12.63 63.37 120 0.005 0.124 1.6 0.23 6.30 1.0 0.74 62.63 200 0.0029 0.074 16.7 2.40 3.90 13.0 9.66 52.97 270 0.0021 0.053 6.2 0.89 3.01 11.9 8.84 44.13 Tray 21.0 3.01 0.00 59.4 44.13 0.00

Total 696.6 134.6

74

Table A-12. Size composition of site E Sieve Sieve Mass Cumulative Sieve Sediment opening opening percent weight % number mass (g) (in) (mm) (%) finer 4 0.187 4.7498 0.0 0.00 100.00 10 0.079 2.00 15.4 3.22 96.78 20 0.033 0.84 39.4 8.23 88.56 30 0.023 0.59 24.2 5.05 83.50 40 0.017 0.42 27.2 5.68 77.82 50 0.012 0.29 73.0 15.24 62.58 100 0.006 0.147 98.7 20.61 41.97 120 0.005 0.124 2.2 0.46 41.51 200 0.0029 0.074 43.7 9.13 32.39 270 0.0021 0.053 35.8 7.48 24.91 Tray 119.3 24.91 0.00

Total 478.9

Table A-13. Size composition of site F Coarse layer Fine layer Sieve Sieve Sieve Mass Cumulative Mass Cumulative opening opening Sediment Sediment number percent weight % percent weight % (in) (mm) mass (g) mass (g) (%) finer (%) finer 0.75" 0.75 19.05 0.0 0.00 100.00 0.5" 0.5 12.7 0.6 0.07 99.93 0.25" 0.25 6.35 3.2 0.37 99.56 4 0.187 4.75 4.2 0.49 99.08 10 0.079 2.0 22.2 2.57 96.51 0.0 0.00 100.00 20 0.033 0.84 54.8 6.34 90.17 4.3 1.68 98.32 30 0.023 0.59 51.4 5.94 84.23 23.6 9.22 89.10 40 0.017 0.42 104.6 12.09 72.14 16.7 6.52 82.58 50 0.012 0.29 161.2 18.64 53.50 14.4 5.63 76.95 100 0.006 0.147 349.0 40.35 13.15 39.4 15.39 61.56 120 0.005 0.124 3.0 0.35 12.80 2.9 1.13 60.43 200 0.0029 0.074 45.6 5.27 7.53 40.9 15.98 44.45 270 0.0021 0.053 21.2 2.45 5.08 34.9 13.63 30.82 Tray 43.9 5.08 0 78.9 30.82 0

Total 864.9 256.0

75

Appendix B: Bathymetry Data of Cross Sections

The cross-section bathymetry was measured using a Total Station, and then the horizontal coordinates were converted to the GIS coordinate system. The horizontal coordinates of the measurement points and the corresponding bed elevations are tabulated in this appendix.

Table B-1. Cross-section 14 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607712.85 4728960.72 143.46 607712.82 4728961.76 142.98 607713.07 4728963.12 142.84 607713.23 4728964.86 142.76 607713.23 4728966.55 142.60 607713.34 4728968.11 142.63 607713.29 4728969.60 142.79

Table B-2. Cross-section 13 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607690.21 4728956.26 143.40 607690.39 4728956.74 142.99 607690.19 4728957.35 142.80 607689.97 4728958.51 142.79 607689.83 4728959.95 142.70 607689.50 4728961.35 142.65 607689.14 4728962.65 142.68 607689.01 4728963.78 142.82 607689.14 4728964.44 142.89 607689.25 4728964.83 143.17

Table B-3. Cross-section 12 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607655.49 4728955.57 143.22 607656.34 4728959.30 142.81 607656.89 4728961.77 142.88 607657.31 4728964.28 142.93 607658.04 4728966.06 142.98 607658.51 4728967.37 143.14 607658.93 4728968.51 143.37 607659.13 4728969.54 143.04

76

Table B-4. Cross-section 11 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607613.24 4728936.96 143.15 607611.89 4728938.56 142.62 607611.00 4728940.13 142.70 607610.12 4728941.37 142.64 607608.99 4728942.94 142.53 607608.69 4728944.85 142.52 607607.62 4728946.41 142.74 607607.19 4728947.92 142.71 607607.22 4728948.40 143.06

Table B-5. Cross-section 10 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607577.06 4728922.15 142.79 607577.56 4728922.53 142.82 607575.98 4728923.08 142.66 607574.88 4728923.43 142.44 607573.80 4728923.78 142.23 607572.13 4728924.48 141.88 607570.88 4728924.87 141.61 607569.98 4728925.36 141.81 607569.77 4728925.85 142.60

Table B-6. Cross-section 9 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607593.96 4728874.72 142.73 607595.62 4728875.18 142.47 607597.70 4728876.43 142.76 607599.02 4728877.40 142.75 607600.64 4728878.50 142.72 607603.35 4728880.69 142.54 607604.95 4728882.36 142.34 607606.33 4728883.32 142.19 607607.16 4728884.71 141.94 607607.67 4728885.86 142.01 607607.99 4728886.22 142.57 607607.93 4728887.15 142.63

77

Table B-7. Cross-section 8 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607617.24 4728858.49 142.81 607615.39 4728858.83 142.36 607613.39 4728859.13 141.77 607612.44 4728859.96 141.94 607611.10 4728860.37 142.21 607608.92 4728860.92 142.43 607606.51 4728861.26 142.59 607603.92 4728861.67 142.66 607601.69 4728862.01 142.62 607597.48 4728862.47 142.94 607598.81 4728862.53 142.53 607599.90 4728862.56 142.44

Table B-8. Cross-section 7 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607585.27 4728835.73 142.68 607585.02 4728837.15 142.07 607584.25 4728838.03 141.91 607583.89 4728839.01 141.68 607583.31 4728840.56 141.68 607582.24 4728841.95 142.02 607581.20 4728843.08 142.28 607579.79 4728844.34 142.48 607578.91 4728845.59 142.55 607578.14 4728846.84 142.85

Table B-9. Cross-section 6 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607547.91 4728817.54 142.76 607547.01 4728819.13 142.24 607546.03 4728821.48 142.27 607545.02 4728824.11 142.34 607543.55 4728827.30 142.53 607542.72 4728829.82 142.53 607542.09 4728832.07 142.55 607541.31 4728834.34 142.61 607540.51 4728838.15 142.60

78

Table B-10. Cross-section 5 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607533.45 4728811.49 142.68 607533.22 4728813.42 142.31 607532.92 4728815.84 142.29 607532.43 4728819.31 142.44 607531.56 4728822.59 142.53 607530.79 4728825.80 142.58 607530.74 4728825.86 142.58 607530.11 4728828.71 142.61 607529.64 4728831.54 142.55 607529.12 4728833.92 142.62 607528.91 4728836.45 142.68

Table B-11. Cross-section 4 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607508.70 4728808.69 142.81 607508.49 4728810.56 142.65 607508.17 4728812.39 142.48 607507.96 4728815.08 142.21 607507.70 4728818.38 142.39 607507.16 4728821.91 142.57 607506.86 4728825.64 142.52 607506.38 4728828.72 142.58 607505.96 4728831.71 142.62 607505.78 4728833.92 142.74

Table B-12. Cross-section 3 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607494.15 4728807.28 142.73 607494.02 4728809.69 142.56 607493.92 4728812.93 142.25 607493.53 4728816.62 142.22 607493.51 4728820.08 142.86 607493.26 4728822.74 142.44 607493.06 4728826.19 142.46 607492.76 4728829.50 142.55 607492.55 4728832.47 142.61

79

Table B-13. Cross-section 2 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607473.84 4728807.69 142.76 607473.09 4728809.35 142.53 607472.68 4728810.96 142.21 607472.62 4728813.10 142.22 607471.78 4728814.65 142.19 607471.66 4728816.59 142.25 607471.67 4728818.34 142.42 607471.73 4728819.66 142.70 607471.80 4728820.67 142.94 607471.83 4728822.72 142.71 607471.96 4728824.92 142.59 607471.77 4728826.59 142.48 607471.76 4728828.59 142.42 607471.68 4728830.77 142.45 607471.63 4728833.13 142.49 607471.70 4728835.81 142.59 607471.90 4728837.32 142.69 607472.01 4728839.07 142.81

Table B-14. Cross-section 1 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607462.74 4728809.77 142.43 607461.77 4728811.97 142.33 607459.35 4728814.76 142.34 607458.80 4728817.12 142.22 607457.87 4728819.95 142.32 607456.35 4728822.74 142.37 607454.81 4728826.18 142.44 607453.75 4728828.82 142.47 607452.66 4728831.66 142.46 607452.01 4728834.13 142.44 607451.14 4728836.55 142.56 607450.20 4728838.76 142.64

80

Table B-15. Cross-section 18 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607534.22 4728864.68 142.72 607531.50 4728867.15 142.61 607526.30 4728871.87 142.59 607520.63 4728876.37 142.46 607516.52 4728880.45 142.54 607513.19 4728883.80 142.53 607510.43 4728887.09 142.56 607506.14 4728890.77 142.52 607502.67 4728893.62 142.51 607499.77 4728896.07 142.47 607497.24 4728897.74 142.56 607494.59 4728899.17 142.55 607492.89 4728900.96 142.50 607491.11 4728903.18 142.52 607488.83 4728905.67 142.45 607486.55 4728908.18 142.28 607485.36 4728910.94 142.22 607484.11 4728913.96 142.39 607482.99 4728915.59 142.30

Table B-16. Cross-section 17 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607494.35 4728855.10 142.76 607492.73 4728856.70 142.60 607491.77 4728857.88 142.57 607491.15 4728858.54 142.54 607489.59 4728860.33 142.43 607488.32 4728862.68 142.46 607486.69 4728864.73 142.44 607484.83 4728867.09 142.43 607481.62 4728870.68 142.47 607478.41 4728874.13 142.42 607476.09 4728876.26 142.45 607474.14 4728879.21 142.53

81

Table B-17. Cross-section 16 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607471.26 4728846.42 142.52 607469.50 4728850.25 142.36 607468.83 4728852.11 142.40 607467.38 4728853.70 142.37 607465.83 4728855.60 142.29 607464.83 4728857.00 142.34 607463.85 4728858.75 142.38 607462.78 4728860.16 142.47 607460.70 4728862.05 142.57

Table B-18. Cross-section 15 Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607449.63 4728843.72 142.47 607448.82 4728844.65 142.44 607447.96 4728845.65 142.38 607447.09 4728847.08 142.41 607446.38 4728848.30 142.48 607445.46 4728849.05 142.52 607444.50 4728850.05 142.50

Table B-19. Cross-section at dam Easting (m) Northing (m) Bed elevation (m) 607438.82 4728839.64 142.64 607457.10 4728815.03 142.67

82