ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS ENGINEERING DESIGN PROJECT & COMMUNICATIONS ENEV 415 Nutrient Loading into the Lower Qu’Appelle Watershed Elena Diebel (200320025) Parker Trimp (200326372) Faculty Supervisors: Kevin McCullum & Stephanie Young (University of Regina) External Supervisors: Etienne Shupena-Soulodre, Alice Davis, Ryan Evans, Don Turner, and Dave Vandergucht (Water Security Agency) Table of Contents List of Figures .................................................................................................................................. i List of Tables .................................................................................................................................... i Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... ii 1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1 2.0 Background Information and Project Motivation .................................................................... 2 2.1 State of the Watershed Report, 2010 ................................................................................... 2 2.2 The 25 Year Saskatchewan Water Security Plan ................................................................... 5 2.3 Lower Qu’Appelle Watershed Plan ....................................................................................... 6 2.4 Project Motivation ................................................................................................................ 7 3.0 Objectives and Scope ............................................................................................................... 7 3.1 Objectives ............................................................................................................................. 7 3.2 Scope .................................................................................................................................... 8 5.0 Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 10 5.1 Selecting Communities ....................................................................................................... 10 5.2 Volume of Effluent Discharged ........................................................................................... 10 5.2.1 Depth Determination using Freeboard Heights ........................................................... 13 5.3 Water Quality Test Results ................................................................................................. 13 5.4 Per Capita Calculation ......................................................................................................... 14 6.0 Results and Discussion ........................................................................................................... 15 6.1 Total Nutrient Mass Loading into the Qu’Appelle Watershed ........................................... 15 6.2 Nutrient Management Strategy .......................................................................................... 20 6.2.1 Indian Head Lagoon ..................................................................................................... 20 6.2.2 Options to Reduce Nutrient Loading from Indian Head Lagoon .................................. 25 7.0 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 38 8.0 Recommendations ................................................................................................................. 40 Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................... 43 Appendix A: Mass Nutrient Loading Results Appendix B: Mass Nutrient Loading Per Capita Appendix C: Condition-Stress-Response Model Indicators Appendix D: Watershed Report Card Appendix E: Indian Head Lagoon Design Plan Appendix F: Loading Results from The Qu’Appelle Mass Balance Project Appendix G: Percent Contribution of Phosphorous and Nitrogen from each Municipality List of Figures Figure 1: Generalized Condition-Stress-Response Model for a Watershed Figure 2: Indian Head Lagoon System Figure 3: Facultative Lagoon Figure 4: Lemna Minor Figure 5: Lemna Gibba List of Tables Table 1: Communities contributing to each Tributary Table 2: Contribution of Nutrient Loading into Tributaries Table 3: Contribution of Nutrient Loading from Municipal Sources to Pasqua Lake Table 4: Indian Head Wastewater Nitrogen Concentration Table 5: Compiled Results on Duckweed Nutrient Uptake Table 6: Removal of Heavy Metals via Duckweed Table 8: Recommendations i Abstract This study determined the mass nutrient loading from municipal wastewater treatment systems that discharge effluent to the entire Qu’Appelle basin. The mass loading into the watershed from 53 communities over a three-year period (March 2013-March 2016) was 93,119 kg phosphorous and 3,189,514 kg nitrogen. Eleven tributaries in the Lower Qu’Appelle Watershed were further examined to determine what percent of the total nutrient loading potentially attributed to municipal sources. This examination showed that the tributaries with the highest percent contributions from municipal sources had major cities, specifically Regina, Moose Jaw and Humboldt, discharging into them. Nutrient reduction strategies were designed for the Town of Indian Head to determine ways of reducing nutrient loading into the watershed. The proposed design strategies included the chemical precipitation of lagoon phosphorous, and the implementation of aquatic plants to naturally remove nutrients. The effectiveness of the chemicals ferric chloride and aluminum sulfate were investigated and found to be able to reduce effluent phosphorus concentrations to less than 1mg/L. Research was done on how the aquatic plant, Duckweed, performs in wastewater. It was determined that duckweed can remove 0.426g N/m2•day and 0.142gP/m2•day. The benefits of nutrient trading by mitigating runoff from livestock confinement facilities was also determined. It was found that for every upgraded confinement facility of 300 animal units in size, 46.42 kg N/yr and 18.69 kg P/yr was prevented from entering the watershed. ii 1.0 Introduction In 2010, the Water Security agency published a State of the Watershed Report for the Lower Qu’Appelle Watershed which determined the surface water quality, ground water quality, riparian areas and overall health grade of the watershed to be stressed. High nutrient loading into the Qu’Appelle Lakes have resulted in eutrophication causing excessive algal blooms. This report will help to develop a better understanding of the significance municipal sewage effluent has on the water quality of the Qu’Appelle watershed compared to other nutrient sources by determining relative contributions from point and non-point sources. This will be done by comparing the magnitude of nutrient loading from municipal effluent in the Lower Qu’Appelle Watershed to the total nutrient loading from March 2013-March 2016. This report will also discuss nutrient reduction strategies, designed with the goal of reducing nutrient loading into the watershed. Reduction strategies were designed for the Town of Indian Head lagoon, taking into consideration the financial constraints of small communities. Some cost effective options for enhancing lagoon wastewater treatment include the application of the aquatic plant duckweed, and the chemical precipitation of phosphorus. Nutrient trading through upgrades to confined cattle feeding sites to reduce nutrient loading into the watershed will also be discussed. 1 2.0 Background Information and Project Motivation 2.1 State of the Watershed Report, 2010 In 2006, the Saskatchewan Watershed Authority developed a framework for reporting the state of the watershed called ‘State of The Watershed Reporting Framework’. This Framework was developed for the consistent reporting of a standardized set of indicators combined with a rating system to assess and communicate the condition of Saskatchewan's watersheds (Watershed Authority, 2006). “The State of the Watershed Report 2010”, released March 29th, 2010 includes a number of changes to the methods that had previously been used to assess the state of the watershed. This new report uses a modified Stress-Condition-Response Model to better reflect how water provides multiple services to society and our natural environment (Watershed Authority, 2010) The new model was created to more accurately reflecting the ways in which human activity and watershed health are related and the impacts the former may have on the latter (Watershed Authority, 2010). Figure 1 depicts a generalized Stress-Condition-Response model 2 Figure 1: Generalized Condition-Stress-Response Model for a Watershed Based on previous findings, the Water Security Agency (preveiously Saskatchewan Watershed Authority) determined that there are 5 major categories under which the stressor based indicators could be grouped. Including: • Water Uses, i.g. Surface Water and Groundwater; • Human Influences, i.g. Urban Development; • Agricultural Influences i.g. Crops and Livestock; • Natural Resource Extractions, and; • Industrial Influences. (Watershed Authority, 2010) 3 The full tables detailing the model and it’s criteria for assigning watershed health grades to stressor, condition and response indicators,