DOCSLIB.ORG

Source Assessment Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Source Assessment Report Burnt Bridge Creek Watershed Fecal Coliform Bacteria, Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, and pH Source Assessment Report October 2020 Publication 20-03-016 Publication Information This report is available on the Department of Ecology’s website at: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/2003016.html. Data for this project are available in Ecology’s EIM Database. Study ID: STEB0002. The Activity Tracker Code for this study is 19-001. Suggested Citation McCarthy, S. 2020. Burnt Bridge Creek Watershed Fecal Coliform Bacteria, Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, and pH: Source Assessment. Publication 20-03-016. Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia. https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/2003016.html. Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) and 8-digit Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) numbers for the study area: WRIA 28, HUC number 17080003. Contact Information Publications Coordinator Environmental Assessment Program Washington State Department of Ecology P.O. Box 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7600 Phone: 360-407-6764 Washington State Department of Ecology – https://ecology.wa.gov • Headquarters, Olympia 360-407-6000 • Northwest Regional Office, Bellevue 425-649-7000 • Southwest Regional Office, Olympia 360-407-6300 • Central Regional Office, Union Gap 509-575-2490 • Eastern Regional Office, Spokane 509-329-3400 COVER PHOTO: Burnt Bridge Creek near sampling site BBC04.3 from 2008–2009 fieldwork. Any use of product or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the author or the Department of Ecology. To request ADA accommodation for disabilities, or printed materials in a format for the visually impaired, call the Ecology ADA Coordinator at 360-407-6831 or visit ecology.wa.gov/accessibility. People with impaired hearing may call Washington Relay Service at 711. People with speech disability may call 877-833-6341. Burnt Bridge Creek Watershed Fecal Coliform Bacteria, Temperature, Dissolved Oxygen, and pH Source Assessment by Sheelagh McCarthy Environmental Assessment Program Washington State Department of Ecology Olympia, Washington Burnt Bridge Cr…FC, Temp, DO, and pH: Source Assessment Page 1 This page is purposely left blank. Burnt Bridge Cr…FC, Temp, DO, and pH: Source Assessment Page 2 Table of Contents Acknowledgments ..............................................................................................................9 Executive Summary .........................................................................................................10 Summary of Technical Approach ................................................................................10 Key Findings ................................................................................................................11 Fecal Coliform Bacteria .........................................................................................11 Temperature and Shade..........................................................................................12 Dissolved Oxygen and pH .....................................................................................12 Introduction ......................................................................................................................13 Water Quality Standards ..............................................................................................14 Bacteria ..................................................................................................................15 Temperature ...........................................................................................................15 Dissolved Oxygen ..................................................................................................16 pH ...........................................................................................................................16 Watershed Description .................................................................................................17 Hydrology & Hydrogeology ..................................................................................17 Climate ...................................................................................................................18 Land Use ................................................................................................................20 Other Nonpoint Sources .........................................................................................25 Habitat and Vegetation ..........................................................................................26 Current Restoration Work ......................................................................................26 Field Methods ...................................................................................................................28 Fixed-Network Sampling .............................................................................................28 Storm Sampling ...........................................................................................................30 Hemispherical Photographs .........................................................................................30 Continuous streamflow and groundwater studies ........................................................30 Analytical Methods ..........................................................................................................31 Bacteria Analytical Framework ...................................................................................31 Statistical Rollback Analysis .................................................................................31 Loading Summary ..................................................................................................32 Shade Analysis .............................................................................................................32 Current Effective Shade .........................................................................................33 System Potential Effective Shade ..........................................................................33 HemiView Analysis ...............................................................................................34 Data Quality Assessment .................................................................................................35 Data Quality .................................................................................................................35 Field Measurements .....................................................................................................35 Hydrolab Measurements ........................................................................................35 Flow and Channel Measurements ..........................................................................36 Burnt Bridge Cr…FC, Temp, DO, and pH: Source Assessment Page 3 Continuous Temperature ........................................................................................36 Winkler DO Samples .............................................................................................37 Lab Results...................................................................................................................37 Precision for Bacteria Field Replicates ..................................................................37 Precision for Lab Duplicates ..................................................................................38 Results ...............................................................................................................................39 Fecal Coliform Bacteria ...............................................................................................39 Loading Summary ..................................................................................................41 Storm Events Results .............................................................................................43 Statistical Rollback Results ....................................................................................44 Streamflow and Hydrogeometry ..................................................................................47 Temperature .................................................................................................................48 SEH America Facility ............................................................................................50 Shade Results ...............................................................................................................52 Dissolved Oxygen Summary .......................................................................................56 pH Summary ................................................................................................................57 City of Vancouver Water Quality Monitoring .............................................................58 City of Vancouver Annual Monitoring Data and Report.......................................58 Watershed Health Assessment Report ...................................................................60 Subbasin Summary ..........................................................................................................61 Upper Burnt Bridge Creek ...........................................................................................61 Fecal Coliform Bacteria .........................................................................................62 Temperature and Shade..........................................................................................64
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Integrated Scientific Assessment Report Vancouver Watershed Health
    INTEGRATED SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENT REPORT VANCOUVER WATERSHED HEALTH ASSESSMENT Prepared for City of Vancouver, Washington Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. and Pacific Groundwater Group Note: Some pages in this document have been purposely skipped or blank pages inserted so this document will copy correctly when duplexed. INTEGRATED SCIENTIFIC ASSESSMENT REPORT VANCOUVER WATERSHED HEALTH ASSESSMENT Prepared for City of Vancouver Surface Water Management 4500 Southeast Columbia Way Vancouver, Washington 98661 Prepared by Herrera Environmental Consultants, Inc. 1001 Southeast Water Avenue, Suite 290 Portland, Oregon 97214 Telephone: 503-228-4301 and Pacific Groundwater Group 2377 Eastlake Avenue East Suite #200 Seattle, Washington 98102 Telephone: 206-329-0141 February 20, 2019 CONTENTS Abbreviations and Acronyms ..................................................................................................................................... v Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................................... vii 1. Introduction.............................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1. Overview ......................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2. Study Area and Vicinity ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Clark County, Washington: a Preliminary Report
    Portland State University PDXScholar Anthropology Faculty Publications and Presentations Anthropology 1999 Archaeological Investigations at 45CL1 Cathlapotle (1991-1996) , Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Clark County, Washington: a Preliminary Report Kenneth M. Ames Portland State University, [email protected] Cameron M. Smith Portland State University William L. Cornett Portland State University Elizabeth A. Sobel Portland State University Stephen C. Hamilton Portland State University SeeFollow next this page and for additional additional works authors at: https:/ /pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/anth_fac Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Citation Details Ames, K. M., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service., & Portland State University. (1999). Archaeological investigations at 45CL1 Cathlapotle (1991-1996), Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge, Clark County, Washington: A preliminary report. Portland, Or: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This Technical Report is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Anthropology Faculty Publications and Presentations by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Authors Kenneth M. Ames; Cameron M. Smith; William L. Cornett; Elizabeth A. Sobel; Stephen C. Hamilton; John Wolf; Doria Raetz; United States. Department of the Interior; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1; and Portland State University. Department of Anthropology This technical report is available at PDXScholar: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/anth_fac/61 Archaeological Investigations at 45CL1 Cathlapotle (1991-1996) , Ridgefield National Wildlife Refuge Clark County, Washington A Preliminary Report by Kenneth M. Ames, Cameron M. Smith, William L.
    [Show full text]
  • Explore Your Watershed Answer
    Welcome teachers! This work booklet is based on the Stormwater Partners new online tool, ‘Explore Your Watershed’, an ArcGIS StoryMap. This StoryMap was created by Eric Lambert of Clark County Public Works with a grant from the Lower Columbia Fish Recovery Board to be an immersive learning experience based on information about the ten major watersheds in Clark County. These asynchronous, self-paced worksheets can be added to your Google classroom, or printed in packets for physical distribution, and can be used in lieu of the Student Watershed Monitoring Network’s in class introductory presentation to prepare students to understand how watersheds function while setting the stage for collecting and interpreting their monitoring site’s water quality data. These worksheets can be done in the order and/or subject matter you choose. To explore this StoryMap, follow this link: https://arcg.is/iGXrq If you have any questions, contact Eric Lambert at [email protected] or Rainy Rau at [email protected] Chapter 1 – Clark County Watersheds! 1. What is a watershed? Hint: Watch the video in the ‘What is a watershed?’ section. a. An area of land that drains to a common stream, river or lake. b. A shed that holds water. c. A place in the forest where water comes from. 2. How many miles of streams are in Clark County? Hint: Look in the ‘Our streams’ section. a. 1,000 miles b. 2,000 miles c. More than 2,400 miles 3. What is the largest watershed that is entirely in Clark County? Hint: Watersheds along the border of Clark County also encompass other counties.
    [Show full text]
  • Burnt Bridge Creek Watershed
    Burnt Bridge Creek Watershed • The Burnt Bridge Creek Watershed is the area of land in Clark County where all of the water drains into Burnt Bridge Creek. • It is a mostly flat area and it covers about 28 square miles. About two-thirds of this area is in the City of Vancouver. • It starts in large wetland area, then forms ditches and channels. Eventually it flows as a creek on its way into Vancouver Lake. • This watershed is a highly developed area with a lot of paved surfaces. • Only 4% of the watershed is left as a forest. • Coho salmon are only found in the very lowest segments of the creek, west of Interstate 5. • Clark County hopes to improve the health of this creek by making greenspaces along the creek. • All of the trees and vegetation will help absorb stormwater and any non-point source pollution that it has picked up while flowing over the watershed. Cedar Creek Watershed • The Cedar Creek watershed is the area of land in Clark County where all of the water drains into Cedar Creek. • This creek is a major tributary of the North Fork Lewis River which starts on Mount Adams. • Cedar Creek drains about 56 square miles of land and is mostly privately owned. • The watershed contains about 8% developed land and 55% forested land. • The upper watershed is in good to excellent health. • The lower part of the watershedis impacted by forestry and agricultural practices. • Cedar Creek supports populations of coho salmon, Chinook salmon, steelhead trout, Pacific lamprey, and freshwater mussels.
    [Show full text]
  • Salmon Creek and Lakeshore
    VancouverVancouver LakeLake andand LakeLake RiverRiver WatershedsWatersheds SalmonSalmon CreekCreek andand LakeshoreLakeshore RonRon WierengaWierenga ClarkClark CountyCounty PublicPublic WorksWorks WaterWater ResourcesResources ProgramProgram PresentationPresentation OutlineOutline ¾¾ VancouverVancouver LakeLake andand LakeLake RiverRiver WatershedsWatersheds ¾¾ SalmonSalmon CreekCreek WatershedWatershed andand WaterWater QualityQuality ¾¾ LakeshoreLakeshore WatershedWatershed andand WaterWater QualityQuality ¾¾ DiscussionDiscussion ofof SignificanceSignificance ofof InputsInputs toto VancouverVancouver LakeLake GeneralGeneral DepictionDepiction ofof WaterWater QualityQuality ProblemsProblems Washington Department of Ecology 303d Listed Waterways in Lake River System ¾ Vancouver Lake z Phosphorus, fecal coliform, PCB’s ¾ Lake River z Temperature, fecal coliform ¾ Salmon Creek z Oxygen, pH, temperature, fecal coliform, turbidity ¾ Whipple Creek z Fecal coliform ¾ Burnt Bridge Creek z Oxygen, fecal coliform, temperature Area of 90 square miles Mixed land use Five major tributaries and many smaller streams Extensive storm water infrastructure in lower watershed Impervious surfaces greater than 50% in lower watershed Annual Volume 105,000 acre-ft per year Average flow = 145 cfs Range = 15 to 1,510 cfs SalmonSalmon CreekCreek InputsInputs toto LakeLake RiverRiver Parameter Median Value Range Comment Typically higher 80 bac-t per Fecal Coliform 2 to 500 concentration at low 100mL flow Total 0.034 to Higher concentration 0.055 mg/L Phosphorus
    [Show full text]
  • Recommendations Report
    Vancouver Lake Partnership Planning Process and Recommendations Report Prepared by: The Vancouver Lake Watershed Partnership December 2013 Table of Contents Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................... 1 Glossary ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 7 Why is Vancouver Lake Important? .................................................................................................... 7 What are cyanobacteria and why is it a problem? ............................................................................ 7 What has the Partnership accomplished? ........................................................................................... 7 What are the Partnership’s major findings? ....................................................................................... 8 What happens next? .............................................................................................................................. 8 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 9 Partnership Organization and Vision ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Explore Your Watershed Activity Sheet
    Explore Your Watershed Chapter 1 - Clark County Watersheds Greetings and welcome to a new virtual adventure! Did you know that you can learn about and explore so much of our county’s nature from your device? What a great way to get to know our watersheds before heading out to explore! Here’s what we are going to do – first, follow this link: https://arcg.is/iGXrq Next, explore the Clark County Watersheds chapter to learn the basics of watersheds, how land and water work together to create important habitat, and ways that YOU can help protect Clark County’s watersheds! 1. What is a watershed? Hint: Watch the video in the ‘What is a watershed?’ section. a. An area of land that drains to a common stream, river or lake. b. A shed that holds water. c. A place in the forest where water comes from. 2. How many miles of streams are in Clark County? Hint: Look in the ‘Our streams’ section. a. 1,000 miles b. 2,000 miles c. More than 2,400 miles 3. What is the largest watershed that is entirely in Clark County? Hint: Watersheds along the border of Clark County also encompass other counties. a. Burnt Bridge Creek b. Salmon Creek c. East Fork Lewis River 4. Which watershed is Fifth Plain Creek a part of? Hint: This watershed drains into the Washougal River just before meeting with the Columbia River. a. West Slope b. Gibbons Creek c. Lacamas Watershed 5. What river flows southwest through Clark County for its final 12 miles? Hint: Most of this 33-mile river is in Skamania County.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Review and Analysis
    Technical Review and Analysis Date: December 21, 2020 Subject: Technical Review and Analysis of Proposed Revision to Shoreline Jurisdiction City of Vancouver Shoreline Master Program Periodic Review From: Brian Carrico, WSP USA To: Rebecca Kennedy, City of Vancouver Route To: Matt Harding, Port of Vancouver USA INTRODUCTION The City of Vancouver (City) is undertaking a periodic review of the City’s Shoreline Master Program (SMP) as required by the Washington State Shoreline Management Act (SMA).1 The purpose of periodic review is to ensure the SMP (1) stays current with changes in laws and rules, (2) remains consistent with other city plans and development regulations, and (3) is responsive to changed circumstances, new information, and improved data. For amendments proposed under (3), the City must complete a review and analysis of the changed circumstances, new information, and/or improved data to support the amendments.2 As part of their review, the City is considering a modification to the definition of “shorelands” in Section 2.1 of the SMP in order to address one of the primary issues that emerged from ongoing stakeholder coordination with the Port of Vancouver. Outside of certain shorelines along the Columbia River where the standard shoreline jurisdiction3 already applies, the proposed revision would change the jurisdiction for High and Medium Intensity shoreline environment designations (SEDs), which are intended to support some level of development, to the standard jurisdiction. The revisions would maintain shoreline jurisdiction as the full extent of the 100-year floodplain within the SEDs that are intended for conservancy. The modification is described in the following section and is intended to strike a balance between accommodating primarily 1 The Shoreline Management Act of 1971, Revised Code of Washington (RCW) Chapter 90.58, and Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 173-26, as amended.
    [Show full text]
  • Nutrient Budget for Vancouver Lake
    Prepared in cooperation with the Vancouver Lake Watershed Partnership and Clark County Environmental Services Division Water and Nutrient Budgets for Vancouver Lake, Vancouver, Washington, October 2010–October 2012 Scientific Investigations Report 2014–5201 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Front Cover: Photograph showing U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) hydrologist collecting a width and depth-integrated water quality sample across the mouth of Burnt Bridge Creek, Washington. (Photograph taken by James Foreman, USGS, November 2010.) Back Cover: Satellite image of Vancouver Lake, Washington. Imagery from U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2011 National Agriculture Imagery Program. Water and Nutrient Budgets for Vancouver Lake, Vancouver, Washington, October 2010–October 2012 By Rich W. Sheibley, James R. Foreman, Cameron A. Marshall, and Wendy B. Welch Prepared in cooperation with the Vancouver Lake Watershed Partnership and Clark County Environmental Services Division Scientific Investigations Report 2014-5201 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior SALLY JEWELL, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2014 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Lewis River & Vancouver Lake
    LEWIS RIVER–VANCOUVER LAKE WATER TRAIL P ADDLING GUIDE table Of cOntents overview Map/legend ............................................. 1 welcome .................................................................... 2 How to Use guide ..................................................... 3 safety ......................................................................... 4 etiquette .................................................................... 5 Trail Maps .............................................................. 6-21 n. Fork lewis river: woodland ........................6-7 e. Fork lewis river: la center ..........................8-9 lake river: n. ridgefield ................................ 10-11 Bachelor Island slough/ridgefieldr efuge ....12-13 lake river: s. ridgefield ................................14-15 lake river: s. green lake ...............................16-17 vancouver lake: west ....................................18-19 vancouver lake: east .....................................20-21 gear checklist ......................................................... 22 resources ................................................................ 23 credits & acknowledgements .............................. 24 notes ....................................................................... 25 Overview Map shOwing all rOutes he 32 river miles in this water trail include Vancouver TLake (more than 5 miles to circumnavigate), the full extent of Lake River (~11.5 miles), a section of the Columbia River along the west side of Bachelor
    [Show full text]
  • Lewis River to Vancouver Lake Water Trail Report
    Lewis River - Vancouver Lake Water Trail Plan Report and Recommendations October 2012 Lewis River - Vancouver Lake Water Trail Plan Acknowledgements Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation Staff Laura Hudson, Interim Director Jean Akers, park planner Partnering Agency Staff Michael Linde Dan Miller Stakeholders Gail Alexander Eric D. Anderson Jon Babcock Katy Brooks Brian Calkins Rob Carpenter Bill Dygert Chuck Frayer Brent Grening Chris Hathaway Lehman Holder Mike Houck Carolyn Johnson Patrick Lee Cheri Martin Dale Miller Jeff Mize David Morgan Ron Onslow Jim Presser Anita Roberts William Robison Chris Robison Eric Rosewall Alan Stewart Steven Wall Toni Wise and others... Lewis River - Vancouver Lake Water Trail Plan October 2012 Lewis River - Vancouver Lake Water Trail Plan Table of Contents Executive Summary.......................................1 Frequently Asked Questions.........................3 Scope and Purpose.......................................7 River Inventory, Maps and Conditions........13 Economic and Program Opportunities....... 31 Recommendations..................................... 35 October 2012 Lewis River - Vancouver Lake Water Trail Plan Lewis River - Vancouver Lake Water Trail Plan Executive Summary The Vancouver-Clark Parks and Recreation While the project planning began in the summer of Department (VCPRD) in collaboration with 2010 with a grant application to the National Park the National Park Service: Rivers, Trails, and Service RTCA for technical assistance, recognition Conservation Assistance Program led a
    [Show full text]
  • G2-30649 March 24, 2015
    PORT OF VANCOUVER WATER RIGHT APPLICATION G2-30649 PHASE I REPORT March 24, 2015 PORT OF VANCOUVER WATER RIGHT APPLICATION G2-30649 PHASE I REPORT Prepared for: Port of Vancouver 3103 NW Lower River Road Vancouver, Washington 98660 360.693.3611 www.portvanusa.com Prepared by: Pacific Groundwater Group 2377 Eastlake Avenue East, Suite 200 Seattle, Washington 98102 206.329.0141 www.pgwg.com March 24, 2015 JM1307 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................................. 1 2.1 PLACE OF USE ................................................................................................................................ 2 2.2 POINTS OF WITHDRAWAL .............................................................................................................. 3 3.0 HYDROGEOLOGIC SETTING ................................................................................................... 3 3.1 UPPER SEDIMENTARY SUBSYSTEM ................................................................................................ 4 3.1.1 Recent Alluvial Aquifer ............................................................................................................. 4 3.1.2 Pleistocene Alluvial Aquifer ..................................................................................................... 4 3.1.3 Troutdale
    [Show full text]