DOCSLIB.ORG

Century West Engineering, Aqua-Tex Scientific Consulting, Ltd., Summit

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

COMPREHENSIVE WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN FOR THE KOOTENAI RIVER BASIN BRITISH COLUMBIA, MONTANA AND IDAHO June 2000 COMPREHENSIVE WATER QUALITY MONITORING PLAN FOR THE KOOTENAI RIVER BASIN BRITISH COLUMBIA, MONTANA AND IDAHO Prepared for: KOOTENAI RIVER NETWORK, Inc. Prepared by: Century West Engineering - Portland, OR Aqua-Tex Scientific Consulting, Ltd. - Kimberley, BC Summit Environmental - Boise, ID EcoAnalysts, Inc. - Moscow, ID June 2000 Kootenai River Basin Water Quality Monitoring Plan The Kootenai River Network, Inc. Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTROUCTION .........................................................................................1-1 1.1 OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................1-1 1.2 MONITORING PLAN GOALS AND OBJECTIVES....................................................1-2 1.3 PLAN/STUDY OBJECTIVES .................................................................................1-3 2.0 KOOTENAI RIVER BASIN ........................................................................2-1 2.1 LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION............................................................................2-1 2.2 HISTORY OF LAND USE .....................................................................................2-2 2.3 EXISTING AND HISTORIC MONITORING PROJECTS...........................................2-15 3.0 POLLUTANTS AND HABITAT REDUCTION........................................3-1 3.1 SOURCES OF POLLUTANTS AND HABITAT REDUCTION ......................................3-1 3.2 DATA GAP ANALYSIS........................................................................................3-4 4.0 MONITORING STRATEGY.......................................................................4-1 4.1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................4-1 4.2 DEFINITION OF WATER QUALITY MONITORING ................................................4-2 4.3 COMPLEXITY OF WATER QUALITY MONITORING..............................................4-6 4.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF WATER QUALITY MONITORING ............................................4-7 4.5 WATER QUALITY MONITORING NETWORKS .....................................................4-7 4.6 SHORTCOMINGS OF CURRENT MONITORING PRACTICES .................................4-12 4.7 CURRENT METHODS IN THE DESIGN OF WATER QUALITY MONITORING NETWORKS .....................................................................................................4-14 4.8 REQUIREMENTS FOR BETTER DESIGNS............................................................4-16 4.9 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF WATER QUALITY MONITORING SYSTEMS.........................................................................................................4-18 5.0 SAMPLING PLAN........................................................................................5-1 5.1 BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................5-1 5.2 PROPER FUNCTIONING CONDITION....................................................................5-6 5.3 GROUND-BASED PHOTOGRAPHIC MONITORING..............................................5-11 5.4 PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITY ..............................................5-11 5.5 TYPES, NUMBERS AND LOCATIONS OF SAMPLES TO BE COLLECTED...............5-12 5.6 FIELD DOCUMENTATION .................................................................................5-21 5.7 METHODS........................................................................................................5-21 5.8 BIOLOGICAL ....................................................................................................5-22 5.9 FIELD SAMPLING PROTOCOLS .........................................................................5-34 5.10 SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION ................................................................................5-35 5.11 SUMMARY .......................................................................................................5-42 5.12 RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................5-43 6.0 ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES..................................................................6-1 Kootenai River Basin Water Quality Monitoring Plan The Kootenai River Network, Inc. Page ii 7.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN..............................................7-1 7.1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................7-1 7.2 PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND RESPONSIBILITY................................................7-2 7.3 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES .............................................................................7-5 7.4 QUALITY CONTROL PROCEDURES FOR SAMPLE COLLECTION, HANDLING AND PRESERVATION .................................................................................................7-7 7.5 QUALITY CONTROL SAMPLES ...........................................................................7-9 7.6 QUALITY CONTROL PROCEDURES FOR SAMPLE CUSTODY ..............................7-13 7.7 QUALITY CONTROL PROCEDURES FOR SAMPLE ANALYSIS .............................7-14 7.8 DATA REDUCTION AND VALIDATION .............................................................7-16 7.9 DATABASE MANAGEMENT ..............................................................................7-21 7.10 RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................7-23 8.0 DATA USE AND REPORTING ..................................................................8-1 8.1 REPORTING........................................................................................................8-1 8.2 MAXIMIZING THE USEFULNESS OF INFORMATION .............................................8-3 8.3 REPORTING CHECKLIST.....................................................................................8-5 REFERENCES............................................................................................................ AI-1 BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................AII-1 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1-1. KOOTENAI RIVER BASIN MONITORING PLAN PROJECT AREA ..................1-4 FIGURE 2-1. THE KTUNAXA TERRIRTORIES ................................................................2-17 FIGURE 5-1. SAMPLING PLAN FLOW CHART ...............................................................5-45 FIGURE 5-2. WATER QUALITY MONITORING NETWORK DESIGN SCHEME ..................5-46 FIGURE 7-1. FOURTEEN-ELEMENT ITERATIVE CYCLE MODEL OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY PROCESS .....................................................................................7-24 FIGURE 7-2. SOURCES OF TOTAL ASSAY ERROR; TOTAL ASSAY ERROR IS THE SUM OF SAMPLING ERROR PLUS ANALYTICAL ERROR ........................................7-25 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 2-1. THE USGS HYDROLOGIC UNIT CODES FOR THE US PORTION OF THE KOOTENAI RIVER BASIN .........................................................................2-18 TABLE 2-2. AGENCIES RESPONSIBLE FOR WATER QUALITY MONITORING IN THE KOOTENAI RIVER WATERSHED ...............................................................2-18 TABLE 3-1. CRESTBROOK FOREST INDUSTRIES’ ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE...3-16 TABLE 3-2. SUMMARY OF DATA AVAILABILITY FOR STREAMS IN THE EAST KOOTENAY REGION ...................................................................................................3-17 TABLE 3-3. UPPER KOOTENAI WATERSHED - WATERSHED HEALTH INDEX ..............3-20 TABLE 3-4. FISHER WATERSHED - WATERSHED HEALTH INDEX ...............................3-20 TABLE 3-5. YAAK WATERSHED - WATERSHED HEALTH INDEX.................................3-21 TABLE 3-6. UPPER KOOTENAI WATERSHED - TMDL ................................................3-22 Kootenai River Basin Water Quality Monitoring Plan The Kootenai River Network, Inc. Page iii TABLE 3-7. FISHER WATERSHED – TDML ................................................................3-25 TABLE 3-8. YAAK WATERSHED – TMDL..................................................................3-26 TABLE 3-9. LOWER KOOTENAI WATERSHED - WATERSHED HEALTH INDEX.............3-29 TABLE 3-10. MOYIE WATERSHED - WATERSHED HEALTH INDEX ..............................3-29 TABLE 3-11. SUMMARY OF ACTIVE USGS MONITORING STATIONS IN IDAHO HUCS OF THE KOOTENAI RIVER BASIN ..................................................................3-30 TABLE 3-12. BULL TROUT HABITAT INFORMATION FOR THE IDAHO SEGMENT OF THE KOOTENAI RIVER BASIN .........................................................................3-31 TABLE 3-13. PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF IDAHO SEGMENTS OF THE KOOTENAI RIVER BASIN ...................................................................................... 3-34 TABLE 3-14. KOOTENAI RIVER BASIN IDAHO LISTED LIMITED WATER QUALITY SEGMENTS...............................................................................................3-37 TABLE 3-15. KOOTENAI RIVER BASIN IDAHO WATER BODIES PROPOSED FOR DELISTING FROM THE 1996 303(D) LIST ...................................................................3-38 TABLE 4-1. IMPLICATIONS OF ALTERNATIVE GOALS FOR DESIGN AND OPERATION OF A ROUTINE MONITORING SYSTEM..............................................................4-21 TABLE 4-2. POTENTIAL EFFECTS ON WATER QUALITY OF COMMON WASTE DISCHARGES AND LAND USES ................................................................4-22
Recommended publications
  • Montana and Idaho Recovery Unit Name: Kootenai River

    Montana and Idaho Recovery Unit Name: Kootenai River

    Chapter 4 State(s): Montana and Idaho Recovery Unit Name: Kootenai River Region 1 U S Fish and Wildlife Service Portland, Oregon DISCLAIMER PAGE Recovery plans delineate reasonable actions that are believed necessary to recover and/or protect the species. Recovery plans are prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and, in this, case with the assistance of recovery unit teams, State agencies, Tribal agencies, and others. Objectives will be attained and any necessary funds made available subject to budgetary and other constraints affecting the parties involved, as well as the need to address other priorities. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor the official positions or approval of any individuals or agencies involved in the plan formulation, other than the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Recovery plans represent the official position of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service only after they have been signed by the Director or Regional Director as approved. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks. Literature Citation: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Chapter 4, Kootenai River Recovery Unit, Oregon. 89 p. In: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) Draft Recovery Plan. Portland, Oregon. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The following groups and individuals contributed to the development of this Kootenai River Recovery Unit Chapter, either by active participation in the recovery unit team or through contributions to previous planning efforts: The Montana Bull Trout Scientific Group Chris Clancy, Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Gary Decker, Bitterroot National Forest Les Evarts, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes Wade Fredenberg, U.S.
  • Ch1 Overview

    Ch1 Overview

    4 FOCAL AND TARGET SPECIES 4.1 Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus) 4.1.1 Background Reasons for Selection as Focal Species Globally, the bull trout has a G3 ranking: very rare and local throughout its range, or found locally (even abundantly at some of its locations) in a restricted For more information on the range, or vulnerable to extinction throughout its range because of other factor(s). federal listing, go to the The federal government listed bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) in the coterminous USFWS bull trout website at: United States as threatened on November 1, 1999 (64 FR 58910) (go to: http:/ http://pacific.fws.gov/bulltrout/ /pacific.fws.gov/bulltrout/). Earlier rulemakings had listed distinct population segments of bull trout as threatened in the Columbia River and Klamath River (June 1998; 63 FR 31647, 63 FR 42757), and Jarbidge River basins (November The lexicon for describing bull 1999; 64 FR 17110). trout population units has The USFWS recovery priority number for bull trout in the contiguous evolved. In the USFWS Draft United States is 9C, on a scale of 1 to 18, indicating that (1) taxonomically, these Bull Trout Recovery Plan populations are distinct population segments of a species; (2) the populations are (USFWS 2002a), the bull subject to a moderate degree of threat(s); (3) the recovery potential is high; and trout population units are hierarchically described, from (4) the degree of potential conflict during recovery is high (USFWS 2002). the Columbia River Basin The U.S. Forest Service lists bull trout as a sensitive species, primarily to distinct population segment emphasize habitat protection.
  • East Kootenay Basin

    East Kootenay Basin

    STATE OF THE PLAY: East Kootenay Basin August 2011 About the BC Oil and Gas Commission The BC Oil and Gas Commission is an independent, single-window regulatory agency with responsibilities for regulating oil and gas operations in British Columbia, including exploration, development, pipeline transportation and reclamation. The Commission’s core roles include reviewing and assessing applications for industry activity, consulting with First Nations, ensuring industry complies with provincial legislation and cooperating with partner agencies. The public interest is protected through the objectives of ensuring public safety, protecting the environment, conserving petroleum resources and ensuring equitable participation in production. 3 BC Oil and Gas Commission State of the Play: East Kootenay Basin Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary Page 5 2. Overview of the East Kootenay Basin Page 7 2.1 Environmental Setting Page 7 2.2 Geography and Geology Page 7 2.3 Coal Bed Gas Page 8 2.3.1 Coal Bed Gas Formation Page 8 2.3.2 Coal Bed Gas Development Page 8 3. First Nations Engagement Page 10 4. Oil and Gas Development Page 11 4.1 Tenures Page 11 4.2 Oil and Gas Activity Page 12 4.2.1 Geophysical Exploration Activity Page 12 4.2.2 Well Activity Page 12 4.2.3 Pipeline Activity Page 13 4.2.4 Oil and Gas Footprint Analysis Page 13 4.2.5 Compliance and Enforcement Activity Page 14 4.3 Active CBG Projects Page 15 4.3.1 Mist Mountain CBG Project Page 15 4.3.2 Green Hills CBG Project Page 17 5.
  • Outdoor Recreation

    Outdoor Recreation

    Province of British Columbia Ministry of Environment ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING DIVISION APD Bulletin 8 BIOPHYSICAL RESOURCES OF THE EAST KOOTENAY AREA: OUTDOOR RECREATION L.E. (Beth) Collins TERRESTRIAL STUDIES BRANCH Victoria, B.C. 1981 Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data Collins, Beth, 1939- Biophysical resources of the Eas.t Kootenay area outdoor recreation (APD bulletin, ISSN 0228-5304 8) Bibliography: p. ISBN 0-7719-8732-3 1. Outdoor recreation - British Columbia ­ Kootenay region. 2. Land use, Rural - British Columbia - Kootenay region. I. British Columbia. Ministry of Environment. Assessment and Planning Division. II. Title. III. Series. GV191. 46 .B7c65 333.78'11'0971145 C81-092349-1 ©Copyright 1981. B.C. Ministry of Environment First Printing 1981. III PREfACE This report is one of a series of Assessment and Planning Division (APD)l bulletins that describes and analyzes the biophysical resources of the East Kootenay area. Individual bulletins focus on terrain, soils, climate, vegetation, wildlife, aquatics, and outdoor recreation, but are closely interrelated and rely on cross-referencing rather than duplication of material. A set of base data maps at 1:50 000 is also available for each discipline. The East Kootenay study was initiated in 1975 in response to increasing pressure on land resources and the development of land-use conflicts. Forestry, mining, ranching, farming and tourism are all major contributors to the economic well-being of the region. General population growth and maintenance of these industries requires that land be allocated for urban and industrial expansion and transportation corridors, and yet at the same time, areas be preserved for wildlife and recreational purposes.