State of the Red River of the North Annual Report 2006
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
State of the Red River of the North Assessment of the 2003 and 2004 Water Quality Data for the Red River and its Major Minnesota Tributaries April 2006 2 Cover photo: Tamarac River By Wayne Goeken State of the Red River of the North Assessment of the 2003/2004 Water Quality Data for the Red River and its Major Minnesota Tributaries Bruce Paakh, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Wayne Goeken, Red River Watershed Management Board Danni Halvorson, Red River Watershed Management Board April 2006 This document, State of the Red River of the North – Assessment of the 2003/2004 Water Quality Data for the Red River and its Major Minnesota Tributaries, is also available on the MPCA Web site: www.pca.state.mn.us in the water quality and Red River Basin sections. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Detroit Lakes Regional Office 714 Lake Avenue Plaza, Suite 220 Detroit Lakes, MN 56501 (218) 847-1519 Printed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency using no less than 20 percent recycled paper. 3 Acknowledgements This report is the result of the work of many individuals from a large array of water management agencies. The authors express a deep appreciation to those who contributed to the study. Principle technical contributors in all aspects of the project were Mark Evenson and Pat Baskfield (MPCA). Their advice and support in the areas of program design, data assessment, modeling, and report review and comment were invaluable. Their expertise and experience in this arena and their willingness to assist when overloaded with other responsibilities is greatly appreciated. Those contributing during program development and design include: Steve Heiskary, Louise Hotka, Greg Johnson, Jim Klang, Sylvia McCollar, Molly MacGregor, Joe Magner, Bill Thompson, Bruce Wilson and Jim Ziegler (MPCA), and Mike Ell (ND Department of Health). Assistance in data collection was provided by Corey Hanson and Jim Blix (Red Lake River Watershed District); Janine Lovold, Roseau SWCD; Darrell Schindler (Red Lake Band of Chippewa); and Tim Olson (MPCA). Assistance with data analysis and modeling was provided by Dave Christopherson and Bruce Wilson, (MPCA); and Corey Hanson. Program funding was provided by the RRWMB, MPCA and the Red River Basin Flood Damage Reduction Work Group. Thanks to Dan Wilkens (Red River Watershed Management Board) and Jim Ziegler (MPCA) for handling budget matters. Report review and comment provided by: Pat Baskfield, Tim James, Molly MacGregor (MPCA); Dan Money (Two River Watershed District); Chuck Fritz (International Water Institute); Corey Hanson; and Bethany Bolles (University of North Dakota Energy & Environmental Research Center). Final editing and report processing: Dan Olson, MPCA. This water quality study has been steered by the Red River Basin Monitoring Advisory Committee: Dan Wilkens, Co Chair Red River Watershed Management Board Jim Ziegler, Co Chair Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Bruce Paakh, Monitoring Program Lead Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Wayne Goeken, Monitoring Coordinator Red River Watershed Management Board Danni Halvorson, Monitoring Technician Red River Watershed Management Board Lisa Botnen and Bethany Bolles UND Energy & Environmental Research Center Brian Dwight MN Board of Soil and Water Resources Mike Ell and Mike Hargiss North Dakota Department of Health Charles Fritz, Joe Courneya and Derek Crompton International Water Institute Tom Groshens and Don Buckhout MN Department of Natural Resources Corey Hanson Red Lake River Watershed District Tanya Hanson Red Lake Soil & Water Conservation Dist. Linda Kingery Northwest Minnesota Regional Sustainable Development Partnership Ruth Lewis Red River Basin Commission Daniel Money Two River Watershed District Darrell Schindler Red Lake Band of Chippewa 4 State of the Red River of the North Table of Contents Page I. Acknowledgements 4 II. Abstract 8 III. Introduction 10 A. Purpose and Scope 12 B. Red River Basin Background 13 IV. Methods 18 A. Monitoring Sites 18 B. Sample Collection and Analysis 21 C. QAQC 22 D. Data Analysis 23 V. Results and Discussion 25 A. Climate Data 25 B. Hydrology Summary 27 C. Concentration Data 30 D. Constituent Correlations 37 E. Effect of Hydrograph Dynamics on Pollutant Concentrations 40 F. Ecoregion IQ Range Comparison for TP, TSS and Turbidity 41 G. Impairment Assessment for Turbidity and Dissolved Oxygen 43 H. Load Estimates for TP and TSS 45 1. FWMC 50 2. Yield 53 VI. Conclusions 56 References 59 Appendix A Parameter Explanation Water Quality Indicators 63 Appendix B Statistics Summary Tables 66 Appendix C QA/QC Results & Assessment 77 Appendix D Field Data Figures 85 Appendix E Red River Basin Monitoring Network and River Watch 93 Appendix F Coefficient of Variance for Load Calculations 99 Appendix G Ecoregion IQ Range Comparison for TP, TSS, Turbidity 104 5 List of Figures Page Figure 1 Minnesota Ecoregions and Basins Map 13 Figure 2 Land Use in Minnesota Portion of Red River Basin 14 Figure 3 Red River Basin Minnesota Portion Hydrologic Features 15 Figure 4 TP, TN, Water Contributions to Lake Winnipeg by Source 17 Figure 5 Map of Red River Basin and Minnesota Primary Monitoring Sites 19 Figure 6 2003 Precipitation Totals for Minnesota 26 Figure 7 2003 Precipitation – Departure from Average Annual 26 Figure 8 2004 Precipitation Totals for Minnesota 26 Figure 9 2004 Precipitation – Departure from Average Annual 26 Figure 10 2003 Hydrograph for Red River at Emerson 28 Figure 11 2004 Hydrograph for Red River at Emerson 28 Figure 12 2003 Red River Sites Stacked Hydrographs 29 Figure 13 2004 Red River Sites Stacked Hydrographs 30 Figure 14 TSS Concentration at Tributary Sites for 2003 & 2004 31 Figure 15 TSS Concentration at Red River Sites for 2003 & 2004 32 Figure 16 TP Concentration at Tributary Sites for 2003 & 2004 33 Figure 17 TP Concentration at Red River Sites for 2003 & 2004 34 Figure 18 Turbidity vs. Transparency Correlation 37 Figure 19 TSS vs. Transparency Correlation 38 Figure 20 TSS vs. Turbidity Correlation 38 Figure 21 Constituent Correlation Analysis for Red River and Minnesota Tributaries 39 Figure 22 2003 RR3 Hydrograph with TP Concentration 40 Figure 23 2003 RR3 Hydrograph with TSS Concentration 40 Figure 24 2003 RR3 Hydrograph with Turbidity Levels 41 Figure 25 Ecoregion IQ Range Comparison for TP 42 Figure 26 Ecoregion IQ Range Comparison for TSS 42 Figure 27 Ecoregion IQ Range Comparison for Turbidity 43 Figure 28 TSS Load for Red River 47 Figure 29 TSS Load for Minnesota Tributaries 48 Figure 30 TP Load for Red River 49 Figure 31 TP Load for Minnesota Tributaries 49 Figure 32 TSS FWMC for Red River 50 Figure 33 TSS FWMC for Minnesota Tributaries 51 Figure 34 TP FWMC for Red River 52 Figure 35 TP FWMC for Minnesota Tributaries 52 Figure 36 TSS Yields for Red River 53 Figure 37 TSS Yields for Minnesota Tributaries 54 Figure 38 TP Yields for Red River 54 Figure 39 TP Yields for Minnesota Tributaries 55 Figure 40 NO3NO2 Concentration for Tributary Sites for 2003 & 2004 86 Figure 41 NO3NO2 Concentration for Red River Sites for 2003 & 2004 86 Figure 42 OP Concentration for Tributary Sites for 2003 & 2004 87 Figure 43 OP Concentration for Red River Sites for 2003 & 2004 87 Figure 44 Temperature for Minnesota Tributaries 88 Figure 45 Temperature for Red River 88 Figure 46 pH for Minnesota Tributaries 89 Figure 47 pH for Red River 89 Figure 48 Dissolved Oxygen for Minnesota Tributaries 90 6 List of Figures (continued) Page Figure 49 Dissolved Oxygen for Red River 90 Figure 50 Conductivity for Minnesota Tributaries 91 Figure 51 Conductivity for Red River 91 Figure 52 Turbidity for Minnesota Tributaries 92 Figure 53 Turbidity for Red River 92 Figure 54 River Watch Monitoring Site Locations 97 Figure 55 Sand Hill River Turbidity IQ Ranges at River Watch Sites 98 Figure 56 Sand Hill River Turbidity IQ Ranges for Impairment Assessment 98 Figure 57 Red River 2003 TSS Load and CV Load Range 99 Figure 58 Red River 2004 TSS Load and CV Load Range 100 Figure 59 Tributary 2003 TSS Load and CV Load Range 100 Figure 60 Tributary 2004 TSS Load and CV Load Range 101 Figure 61 Red River 2003 TP Load and CV Load Range 101 Figure 62 Red River 2004 TP Load and CV Load Range 102 Figure 63 Tributary 2003 TP Load and CV Load Range 102 Figure 64 Tributary 2004 TP Load and CV Load Range 103 List of Tables Page Table 1 R2 Values for Constituent Correlations 39 Table 2 Impairment Assessment for Turbidity and Dissolved Oxygen 44 Table 3 TP and TSS 2003 and 2004 Load Estimates 46 Table 4 TSS Summary for 2003 & 2004 66 Table 5 TP Summary for 2003 & 2004 67 Table 6 OP Summary for 2003 & 2004 68 Table 7 NO3NO2 Summary for 2003 & 2004 69 Table 8 Turbidity Summary for 2003 & 2004 70 Table 9 Temperature Summary for 2003 & 2004 71 Table 10 pH Summary for 2003 & 2004 72 Table 11 Dissolved Oxygen Summary for 2003 & 2004 73 Table 12 Conductivity Summary for 2003 & 2004 74 Table 13 Transparency Summary for 2003 & 2004 75 Table 14 Summary Statistics for Lab Results 76 Table 15 Summary Statistics for Field Results 76 Table 16 2003 TP Performance Evaluation Results 77 Table 17 2004 TP Performance Evaluation Results 78 Table 18 Field Duplicate - TP & OP Assessment 79 Table 19 Field Duplicate - NO3NO2 &TSS Assessment 80 Table 20 Field Blank Assessment 82 Table 21 Laboratory Split Sample Study 84 Table 22 RRBMN Primary and Secondary Site List 96 Table 23 Ecoregion IQ Range Comparison for TP, TSS and Turbidity 104 7 Abstract The Red River Flood Damage Reduction/Natural Resource Enhancement Work Group established the Red River Basin Monitoring Advisory Committee to develop a condition monitoring program for the Minnesota portion of the Red River basin. This report presents results and analysis of the first two years of this program.