Clark Fork Voluntary Nutrient Reduction Program (VNRP):

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Applying Nutrient Standards in Wadeable Streams in Montana Vicki Watson, University of Montana Michael Suplee, Montana DEQ Presented at Nitrate in Montana.
Advertisements

The Barton Springs Part of the Edwards Aquifer: Basic physical and hydrologic characteristics pertinent to permitted discharges Raymond Slade, Jr, Certified.
Truckee River Water Quality: Current Conditions and Trends Relevant to TMDLs and WLAs Prepared for: Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility. City of.
Overview of the Development and Implementation of Montana’s Numeric Nutrient Standards Michael Suplee, Ph.D. Water Quality Standards Section MT Dept. of.
Nutrient Loading in the Klamath Basin K.A. Rykbost B.A. Charlton Oregon State University Klamath Experiment Station.
Overview of Montana’s Draft Numeric Nutrient Criteria and their Implementation Michael Suplee, Ph.D. Water Quality Standards MT Dept. of Environmental.
Alan Pollock VA DEQ, Office of Water Programs Water Quality Planning Regulation Unused Allocations in Shenandoah-
Imperial River: Water Quality Status and Basin Management Action Plan.
Nutrient Trading Framework in the Coosa Basin April 22, 2015.
Spokane River PCB Source Assessment Washington State Department of Ecology Spokane River Forum May
Pomme de Terre Lake Water Quality Summary Pomme de Terre Lake Water Quality Summary US Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Resources Section.
LONG-TERM WATER QUALITY DATA AND BIOGEOCHEMICAL FILTERING ALONG THE UPPER CLARK FORK RIVER, MT, USA. H. Maurice Valett 1 Marc Peipoch 1 Mike DeGrandpre.
West Fork of the White River Stream Restoration Monitoring Dan DeVun Ecological Conservation Organization (501)
Overview of Numeric Nutrient Criteria Development and Implementation in Montana Michael Suplee, PhD Water Quality Standards Section Montana Department.
Florida Numerical Nutrient Criteria Southwest Florida Water Resources Conference Scott I. McClelland Vice President November 20, 2009.
WATERSHED PERMITTING IN NORTH CAROLINA NPDES PERMIT NCC BECAME EFFECTIVE JAN 1, 2003 NEUSE RIVER COMPLIANCE ASSOCIATION MORRIS V. BROOKHART, P.E.
Crystal River / Kings Bay SWIM Plan Sky Notestein Springs & Environmental Flows Section Quantifiable Objectives and Available Data.
Department of the Environment Maryland’s Nutrient Trading Program Phase I- Trading between point sources and trading involving connecting on-site septic.
Centennial of the Clark Fork’s Great Flood June 1908 – June 2008.
Water Quality Sampling, Analysis and Annual Load Determinations for Nutrients and Solids on the Ballard Creek, 2008 Arkansas Water Resources Center UA.
This is Julie’s (and my) 2003 data. The location is Foster Park and the graph shows TDN and Chla concentrations as the 2003 algal bloom waxed and waned.
Water Quality Monitoring in the Upper Illinois River Watershed and Upper White River Basin Project Brian E. Haggard University of Arkansas.
Main Creek Water Quality Report Sandy Wingert UDWQ PRWC October 8,
Kakanui Rachel Ozanne, Water Quality Scientist. Long-term (SOE) monitoring Water quality ~78 sites Monthly sampling.
Critique of North Branch of Sunrise River TMDL Nate Topie and Taylor Hoffman.
Watershed and water quality assessment of the Allen’s Creek watershed David A. Tomasko, Ph.D. Cheryl Propst, M.S. May 16, 2012.
Focus Group Meeting: November 12, 2013 Truckee River Water Quality Standards Review.
Missoula County Commissioners and City Council formed the Missoula Valley Water Quality District (MVWQD) Missoula County Commissioners.
Request approval to proceed to EMC with 2014 Tar-Pamlico River Basin Plan.
BMAP Forward & Septic Tanks 2012 Environmental Symposium John P. Pappas, P.E. Department of Public Works.
New York’s Chesapeake Bay WIP
Sources of Oxygen Demand in the Lower San Joaquin River, California
Proposed Lower Silver Creek Sewer Project
October 19, 2006 Oklahoma Water Resources Board City of Tulsa
Mulberry River Watershed
Reducing sediment & nutrient losses from intensive agriculture Restoring eutrophic shallow lakes Pastoral agriculture is the dominant land use in New.
It’s The Final Countdown To The Mid-point Assessment:
Geochemistry of nutrients in Silver Bow Creek
Dave Clark and Michael Kasch
2016 Water Quality Assessment Update (thru Sep. 2016)
Project Schedule Final SWIM Plans GEBF Funding Request
Confined Growth of Water Hyacinth for Bio-remediation in Caohai, Dianchi Lake , China: The Effects on Water Quality The topic of my presentation today.
Jacob Petersen-Perlman University of Montana Department of Geography
MACo Winter Conference
Nitrate in the Clark Fork Basin (special emphasis on the ground water and surface water in the Summit Valley) As you may or may not know , the GWA program.
Connections Between Community and Environment
Building a Phase III WIP for Wastewater, Stormwater & Septic Systems
Clark Fork River Metals TMDL Development
Stream Connectivity in the Clark Fork Watershed
Water Quality in the Animas Watershed 1/24/18
Updates 2014 Tar-Pamlico River Basin Plan
Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake TMDL Water Quality Monitoring Update – Summary August 15, 2017.
Lake Spokane 2012 Nutrient Monitoring Data
TIME CRITICAL REMOVAL ACTION IN RESPONSE TO CONTAMINATED SOILS ALONG THE EASTSIDE DITCH NEAR DEER LODGE, MONTANA G.S. Vandeberg1, D.J. Dollhopf1, D.R.
Environmental Studies Program
Public Meeting February 19, 2009
State of the Basin 2005 Doc Watson UM Watershed Clinic.
John Babcock, Bruce Anderson, and Gary Ingman,
Defining and Targeting High Flows
Big Sky Wastewater Facility Plan Update
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
Bay Grass Abundance 42% Bay Grass Abundance of Goal Achieved
Maryland’s Phase III WIP Planning for 2025 and beyond
TOWARDS THE GOAL OF SETTING NUTRIENT CRITERIA FOR THE DELAWARE ESTUARY
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
Little River Ditches Watershed Monitoring
Validation of Trading Program: Scenario Simulations
Upper Clark Fork Watershed Restoration and TMDLs
Space Coast TPO State Road (S.R.) 528 Update
VIRGINIA MUNICIPAL LEAGUE OCTOBER 7, 2019
Presentation transcript:

Clark Fork Voluntary Nutrient Reduction Program (VNRP): Final Report, 1998-2008

VNRP basics: Montana’s first large-river TMDL Goal: “restore beneficial uses and eliminate nuisance algae growth in the Clark Fork from Warm Springs to the Flathead…” Negotiated by dischargers, DEQ, and environmental groups from 1994 to 1998. Agreement signed in 1998 for 10 years Ended October, 2008.

Long-term (1984-2004) Total Phosphorus Levels in the Clark Fork above the Flathead (mg/L) Total P > 0.045 mg/L Total P =0.035 -0.044 Total P < 0.035

VNRP Algae and Nutrient Targets VNRP Algae Targets: 100 milligrams/meter2 chlorophyll a (summertime mean), and 150 milligrams/m2 (peak), chlorophyll a VNRP Nutrient Targets: 20 micrograms/Liter of Total Phosphorus (upstream of Missoula) 39 micrograms/Liter of Total Phosphorus (downstream of Missoula) 300 micrograms/Liter of Total Nitrogen (anywhere in river)

Nutrient Dischargers: *Butte WWTP *Deer Lodge WWTP *Missoula WWTP *Missoula County (septics) *Smurfit-Stone *Non-point (all) *Minor point sources: Alberton, Superior, Drummond, Philipsburg, Rocker, Hamilton, Stevensville, other industries, etc.

Missoula City and County also reduced nutrient discharge to the aquifer and river by connected existing and new residences to sewer: Over 3,100 existing homes, apartments, mobile homes connected to sewer 1998-2007. This reduced nitrogen discharge to the aquifer by at least 260 lbs/day, much of which would have ended up in the river.

SUMMARY of POINT SOURCE Summer Nutrient Reduction: 1988-2008 Discharger: 1988-90 TN, TP Load: (lbs/day) 2006/08 TN, TP Load (lbs/day): Reduction N Load (%): Reduction P Load (%): Butte WWTP: 449 N 114 P 473 N 48 P - 5% 58% Deer Lodge WWTP: 78 N 19 P 69 N 9 P 11% 53% Missoula WWTP: 841 N 173 P 652 N 42 P 22% 76% Smurfit-Stone Mill: 309 N 116 P 182 N 45 P 41% 61% Total Point Source Load: 1677 N 422 P 1376 N 144 P 18% 66%

So how’s the river?

Compliance with algae targets, 1998-2008 Site: Percent samples in compliance with the target (100 mg/M2) : Percent samples exceeding the algae target: Algae density trend (PBSJ, 2007): Clark Fork above Little Blackfoot 29% 71% Increasing Clark Fork below Missoula 30% 70% Decreasing Clark Fork at Huson 74% 26% Static

Some conclusions: VNRP signatories decreased nutrient discharge in all areas of the river, including decreases of 30% in total nitrogen and 72% in total phosphorus from 1988 to 2008. River nutrient concentrations decreased significantly at all sites, and in both the 1990s and in this decade. Algae concentrations appear to be in a decreasing trend in the middle river (below Missoula), are static in the lower river (Huson) and may be increasing slightly in the upper river. Nutrient targets set in 1998 appear to correspond with actual levels of algae in the river, i.e. areas with nutrients above targets also tend to exceed algae targets, and vice versa. The type of algae (Cladophora) predominating in the upper river is notoriously hard to control. There is a need to better understand the river ecology in that complex situation.