Dan Child CEE 5440/6440 Utah State University Fall 2003 Utilizing BASINS to Calculate Pollutant Loads in the Logan River and Their Effect on Bonneville Cutthroat Trout Distribution Dan Child CEE 5440/6440 Utah State University Fall 2003

Introduction The Logan River in northern Utah is home to four trout species: Rainbow trout Brook trout Brown trout Bonneville cutthroat trout Trout species are unevenly distributed throughout the river, with cutthroat being largely confined to the middle and upper reaches. Bonneville Cutthroat (source: fish.g2gm.com) The Logan River (source: Webshots.com)

Cutthroat Distribution No existing extent-of-species data! Headwaters of Logan River Logan City Rough southerly extent of cutthroat range Approximately 6 miles of river in which cutthroat are scarce or completely excluded End of Logan River

Objectives Estimate nonpoint source pollution in the Logan River. Use the results to assess whether the distribution of Cutthroat trout in the Logan River is related to pollutant loading. Address other factors that may affect Cutthroat trout distribution.

Methods BASINS (Better Assessment Science Integrating point and Nonpoint Sources) BASINS Models: PLOAD – calculates nonpoint source pollution in watersheds and subwatersheds Qual2E – enhanced stream water quality model HSPF – hydrologic simulation program SWAT – soil and water analysis tool intended for watersheds having agriculture as the primary land

PLOAD Strengths Limitations Simulates annual pollutant loads based on land use classification Evaluates the effectiveness of Best Management Practices (BMPs) Effective planning level model Doesn’t account for other pollution sources Cannot simulate daily or monthly pollutant loads Cannot simulate instream processes such as hydraulics and nutrient decay PLOAD data is often used by more complex models for more site-specific analysis

Project Area HUC# 16010203 The Little Bear River watershed. (source: National Hydrography Dataset)

Project Area Beginning of project analysis End of project analysis Logan River

Data Sources National Elevation Dataset National Hydrography Dataset BASINS (Better Assessment Science Integrating point and Nonpoint Sources)

Digital Elevation Map

NHD River Reach Data

Shrub and brush rangeland Land Use Predominant Land Uses Upper & Middle Reaches Shrub and brush rangeland Mixed rangeland Mixed forestland Deciduous forestland Evergreen forestland Lower Reaches Cropland and pasture Residential Industrial Nonforested wetland

BASINS Utilities Watershed Delineation

PLOAD Subwatersheds selected for analysis

Export Coefficient Method PLOAD Export Coefficient Method LP= ∑U ( LPU * AU ) LP = Pollutant load ,lbs LPU = Pollutant loading rate for land use type U, lbs/acre/yr AU = Area of land use type u, acres

PLOAD Pollutant Selection BOD COD NOX NH3 TP DP TSS TDS TKN

PLOAD EMC Table

PLOAD Output Output Format Annual pollutant loads for each subwatershed Per acre pollutant loads for each subwatershed Output Format Tabular form Layout maps for each specific pollutant Interactive map / table

Selected subwatershed PLOAD Output Map / Table Selected subwatershed

PLOAD Pollutant Layout – NH3 Tabular Data Annual loads

PLOAD Pollutant Layout – NH3 Tabular Data Per acre loads

Summary of Results Conclusions The Logan River contains significant accumulation of the following pollutants: BOD, COD, NOX, NH3, TP, DP, TSS, TDS, TKN. Pollutants of particular concern: Ammonia (NH3): 60,000 lbs added to the river each year (total length of river ~ 40 miles) 20,000 lbs accumulated over the lowest 6 miles of the river. Phosphorus (TP): 71,000 lbs added to the river each year 40,000 lbs accumulated over the lowest 6 miles of the river. Nitrogen Oxides (NOX): 115,000 lbs added to the river each year. Conclusions Pollutant accumulation in the river’s lower reaches may play a role in the exclusion of Cutthroat trout. More research is necessary to validate this hypothesis.

Notes This project was intended to provide a broad analysis of pollutant loading in the Logan River. Other sources of pollution exist which were not analyzed in this project, including: U.S. Highway 91, other roads, point source pollution, etc. Aside from pollution, other potential factors affecting Cutthroat trout distribution include: gamefish stocking, competition from other trout species, hydraulics, and biological factors.

Possible Future Work Thank You ! Conduct enhanced water quality modeling to better estimate pollution content in the river. Create extent of species data for Bonneville cutthroat trout in the river (currently nonexistent). Integrate gamefish stocking data from the Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR) into the project. Collaborate with other disciplines to assess biological impacts on Cutthroat distribution. Thank You !