USGS Kansas Water Science Center

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
West Virginia Department of Agriculture Water Quality Monitoring Program 2009 Photo by Paul Morley.
Advertisements

Water Cycle Water Quality. About the Hydrologic Cycle Hydrology is the study of movements and characteristics of water.Hydrology is the study of movements.
SWAMP Team Members Contact Information Karen Taberski: , Nelia White:
Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation Water Quality, Sustainability, and Sovereignty Heidi E. Mehl.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey The Use of Calculated Stream Metabolism in Understanding Nutrients and Algal Measures in Agricultural.
2009 Water Quality Monitoring Report – Fish Creek Vaughn Hauser, B.Sc. Naomi Parker, B.Sc., BIT, CEPIT.
Stream Monitoring in Loudoun County David Ward, Water Resources Engineer Department of Building and Development, Department of Building and Development,
Michael J. Brayton MD/DE/DC Water Science Center Hydrologic Controls on Nutrient and Pesticide Transport through a Small Agricultural Watershed, Morgan.
DESIGNING MONITORING PROGRAMS TO EVALUATE BMP EFFECTIVENESS Funded by grants from USDA- CSREES, EPA 319, NSF Nancy Mesner - Utah State University, Dept.
Koktuli River Instream Flow Reservation Cathy Flanagan Bristol Bay Native Association.
0 The National Hydrography Dataset Plus a tool for SPARROW Watershed Modeling Richard Moore (presented by Alan Rea)
Spatial and temporal trends in dissolved oxygen concentrations and dissolved oxygen depletion (hypoxia) in the Delaware River Basin Demonstration Area.
SENSORS, CYBERINFRASTRUCTURE, AND EXAMINATION OF HYDROLOGIC AND HYDROCHEMICAL RESPONSE IN THE LITTLE BEAR RIVER OBSERVATORY TEST BED Jeffery S. Horsburgh.
SENSORS, CYBERINFRASTRUCTURE, AND WATER QUALITY IN THE LITTLE BEAR RIVER Jeffery S. Horsburgh David K. Stevens, Amber Spackman Jones, David G. Tarboton,
Common Monitoring Parameters. Step 1 Consider purpose/objectives of monitoring Assess use attainment Characterize watershed Identify pollutants and sources.
West Virginia Non-tidal Monitoring Network: 2010 Update West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection West Virginia Department of Agriculture USGS.
Real-Time Water Quality Monitoring for Investigating the Strengths and Weaknesses of Existing Monitoring Techniques Little Bear River Basin Jeffery S.
Determining the effectiveness of best management practices to reduce nutrient loading from cattle grazed pastures in Utah Nicki Devanny Utah State University,
 How are the data used  New data collection technologies  New ways to make the data available.
Brian Haggard Arkansas Water Resources Center UA Division of Agriculture Arkansas Water Resources Center.
Water Quality Monitoring and Parameter Load Estimations in Lake Conway Point Remove Watershed and L’Anguille River Watershed Presented by: Dan DeVun, Equilibrium.
Compliance Monitoring─Ensuring Effective Results Jim Younk Idaho Power Company.
Management Issues in the Lake Michigan Basin  Aquatic invasive species  Nutrient enrichment  Beach Health  Contaminants – in Sediments, Fish and Drinking.
Overview of Continuous Water-Quality Monitoring. Purpose of Monitoring Define the objectives of the water quality monitoring project 1. Environmental.
Water Quality Monitoring : Galla Creek Bayou Bartholomew L’Anguille River Presented By: The Ecological Conservation Organization.
Water-Quality Monitoring for Environmental Management and Source-Water Protection U.S. Geological Survey New England Water Science Center in cooperation.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Assessing Watershed Scale Responses to BMP Implementation - Fairfax County, VA - John Jastram Hydrologist.
USGS Water Resource Monitoring and Assessment Activities Salinity and other topics presented to the Garfield County Energy Advisory Board Dec. 1, 2005.
Variability in Multi-Parameter Sensor Responses in the Distribution System and Source Water of a Water Utility for a Prototype Real Time Early Warning.
Continuous Water-Quality Field Methods Micelis Doyle & Joe Rinella U.S. Geological Survey &
Nutrient Trends in the Des Moines River Donna S. Lutz Des Moines River Water Quality Network.
The Non-tidal Water Quality Monitoring Network: past, present and future opportunities Katie Foreman Water Quality Analyst, UMCES-CBPO MASC Non-tidal Water.
Development of a Watershed-to- Very-Near-Shore Model for Pathogen Fate and Transport Sheridan K. Haack Atiq U. Syed Joseph W. Duris USGS, Lansing, MI.
By Mary Waters, Texas Stream Team. Outline  About the Arroyo Colorado  Basic information (geography)  History  Major uses  Water quality summary.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Water-Quality Monitoring: Data Collection and Analysis Strategies for Designing Program.
BacteriALERT: A Program for Monitoring and Real-time Estimation of Indicator Bacteria By Stephen J. Lawrence, Atlanta, Georgia.
Cathy, Phil, Keith, Calvin, Manoj, and Todd Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, Iowa State University 2011 The Potential for Agricultural Land.
Water Quality Monitoring and Constituent Load Estimation in the Kings River near Berryville, Arkansas 2009 Brian E. Haggard Arkansas Water Resources Center.
USGS Overview Workshop on Improved Quality of Data and Data Exchange for Climate Research and Analysis NOAA National Climatic Data Center Bill Hazell,
Applications of Regression to Water Quality Analysis Unite 5: Module 18, Lecture 1.
1 Factors influencing the dynamics of excessive algal blooms Richard F. Ambrose Environmental Science and Engineering Program Department of Environmental.
Redwood River TMDL Critique David De Paz, Alana Bartolai, Lydia Karlheim.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Using Monitoring Data from Multiple Networks/Agencies to Calibrate Nutrient SPARROW* Models, Southeastern.
Dennis Demcheck, Scott Mize, & Stan Skrobialowski USGS Louisiana Water Science Center In cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers June 13, 2008.
An assessment of water quality in tropical streams located in primary and secondary rainforest By Emily Schultz Supervisor: Cheryl Baduini.
STORET 1001 and the State of Utah Monitoring Strategy Today you will see: –What kind of attributes are available in STORET –How results, stations, and.
Water Quality Monitoring in the Upper Illinois River Watershed and Upper White River Basin Project Brian E. Haggard University of Arkansas.
Streamflow Information in Texas David R. Maidment Director, Center for Research in Water Resources University of Texas at Austin USGS Workshop, Fort Worth,
Deep River-Portage Burns Watershed TMDL Stakeholder Meeting March 13, 2013.
Dam Removal as a Solution to Increase Water Quality Matthew Nechvatal, Tim Granata Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Geodetic Science.
Adem.alabama.gov ADEM’s Monitoring Summary Reports Alabama – Tombigbee CWP Stakeholders Meeting Montgomery, Alabama 3 February 2010 Lisa Huff – ADEM Field.
Delaware’s Non-Tidal Monitoring Update for CY 2011 February 8,
NWQMC San Jose, CA May 8, 2006 Combining Dynamic Assessment with Traditional Monitoring Approaches to Improve Understanding of NPS Pollution Impacts William.
Integrating the NAWQA approach to assessments in rivers and streams By Donna Myers, Bill Wilber, Anne Hoos, and Charlie Crawford U.S. Geological Survey,
Co-Occurrence of Toxins and Taste-and-Odor Compounds in Cyanobacterial Blooms from the Midwestern United States USGS Kansas Water Science Center Algal.
North Creek Water Quality Prepared by Jon Rogers and Carie McCoy.
SPARROW: A Model Designed for Use With Monitoring Networks Richard A. Smith, Gregory E. Schwarz, and Richard B. Alexander US Geological Survey, Reston,
Integrating a Continuous Water Quality Monitoring Network into Texas’ Surface Water Quality Monitoring Program Jill D. Csekitz, Aquatic Scientist Texas.
STREAM MONITORING CASE STUDY. Agenda  Monitoring Requirements  TMDL Requirements  OCEA Initial Monitoring Program  Selection of Parameters  Data.
Continuous Water- Quality Monitoring. Continuous Water Quality Monitoring Advantages Needed in rapidly changing systems Provides better understanding.
Abstract Man-made dams influence more than just the flow of water in a river. The build up of sediments and organic matter, increased residence times,
Water Quality Sampling, Analysis and Annual Load Determinations for the Illinois River at Arkansas Highway 59 Bridge, 2008 Brian E. Haggard Arkansas Water.
The Importance of Groundwater in Sustaining Streamflow in the Upper Colorado River Basin Matthew Miller Susan Buto, David Susong, Christine Rumsey, John.
Annual Membership Meeting Water Quality Report 2010
Characterization of Dissolved Solids in the Ohio River
Emily Saad EAS 4480 Oral Presentation 27 April 2010
Middle Fork Project AQ 11 – Water Quality Technical Study Plan Report Overview March 10, 2008.
Nebraska Water Quality Index
Flood Monitoring Tools 2011 OFMA Annual Conference
Water Quality Planning Division Monitoring & Assessment Section
Presentation transcript:

USGS Kansas Water Science Center Real-Time Continuous In-Stream Monitoring to Measure and Estimate Water-Quality Concentrations and Loads Andy Ziegler USGS Kansas Water Science Center with contributions from Teresa Rasmussen Trudy Bennett, Casey Lee, Pat Rasmussen, Xiaodong Jian, Vicki Christensen, Walt Aucott, Tim Cohn, Bob Hirsch, and many others National Water-Quality Monitoring Council Conference San Jose, California, May 9, 2006

Why monitor water quality continuously? Improves our understanding of hydrology and water quality and can lead to more effective resource management Captures seasonal, diurnal, and event-driven fluctuations Provides warning for water supply and recreation Improves concentration and load estimates with defined uncertainty (8,760 hourly values per year) Optimizes the collection of samples

Types of continuous water-quality monitors Electrometric Gage height, temperature, pH, DO, SC Electromagnetic spectrum Streamflow, turbidity, chlorophyll, nitrate In-stream analyzers (bench chemistries) Nitrate, silicate, phosphorus, chloride, …. Labs in field at gage house Aqualab (TCEQ), GC/MS- ORSANCO, etc…

Improved tools now are available-- In-stream continuous monitors… pH Water Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Specific Conductance Turbidity ORP Fluorescence PAR Nitrate, ammonia, etc. New gizmos every year

USGS streamflow network of 7,000+ http://water.usgs.gov/waterwatch/

Where is USGS operating continuous “turbidity”? 211 sites. Most sites are in Oregon (34), Georgia (34), Kansas (17), and 10 each in California, Kentucky, and Virginia

http:// ks.water.usgs.gov/Kansas/rtqw/

Approach: http://ks.water.usgs.gov/Kansas/rtqw/ Add water-quality monitors at streamgages and transmit data “real” time Collect water samples over the range of hydrologic and chemical conditions Develop site-specific regression models using samples and sensor values Estimate concentrations and loads Publish regression models Display estimates, uncertainty, and probability on the Web Continued sampling to verify Little Arkansas River near Sedgwick, Kansas http://ks.water.usgs.gov/Kansas/rtqw/

http:// ks.water.usgs.gov/Kansas/rtqw/ Directly measured Estimated Gage Height/Stage Streamflow (discharge) Specific Conductance Chloride, alkalinity, fluoride, dissolved solids, sodium, sulfate, nitrate, atrazine Turbidity Total suspended solids, suspended sediment, fecal coliform, E. coli, total nitrogen, total nitrogen, total phosphorus, geosmin http:// ks.water.usgs.gov/Kansas/rtqw/

Turbidity estimates E. Coli reliably Rasmussen, Ziegler, and Rasmussen, 2005 6

Bacteria frequently exceed water-quality standards 2,358 262 http:// ks.water.usgs.gov/Kansas/rtqw/

E.Coli densities generally largest at Topeka. E.Coli bacteria, col/100mL During the spring, the primary contact criterion was exceeded 80% of the time and the secondary contact criterion was exceeded 25% of the time. E.Coli bacteria, col/100 mL Rasmussen, Ziegler, and Rasmussen 2005

Turbidity to estimate probability of exceeding E. coli criteria Probability of exceedance, percent Turbidity, FNU, YSI 6026 sensor Rasmussen and Ziegler, 2003

Kansas River TMDL incorporates continuous turbidity data Kansas River TMDL incorporates continuous turbidity data. When turbidity > 350 FNU, E. coli criteria likely to be exceeded. Establishes range of conditions when criterion is likely to be exceeded - when turbidity is greater than 350 FNUs. Establishes TMDL goals that incorporate continuous data - less than 10% of estimated geometric means are to exceed primary criterion and exceedences occur at flows exceeded less than 20% of the time. (Figure from KDHE, E.Coli Bacteria TMDL for Kansas-Lower Republican Basin, 2005)

Streamflow relation to water quality is complex and variable 78 events (flow exceeded 100 cfs)—comprised 99 percent of the load for the 6-year period Largest event was 8 percent of the load for the 6-year period and occurred over 8 days (0.3 percent of time) Only 5 events exceeded the 2-year flood Average event --6 days, maximum --25 days 2-Year flood Turbidity, FNU Streamflow

Little Arkansas River nr. Halstead 1999-2004 90 percent of the load occurs in 7 percent of the time Little Arkansas River nr. Halstead 1999-2004 Percentage of load from 1999-2004 Percentage of time load is equaled or exceeded

2. new trib or bank collapse 1 Continuous data is necessary to understand the water-quality response to streamflow 2 3 0. Q inc. within 15 min. 1. source limit reached 2. new trib or bank collapse source 3. response to precip and new tribs Mill Creek April 28-29, 2006 hysteresis

Future: Real-time estimation of geosmin in Cheney Reservoir (2005) log10(geosmin)=7.2310-1.0664log10(turbidity)-0.0097(conductivity) r2=0.71 Geosmin was detected in a near shore surface accumulation of cyanobacteria, but not in open water samples The model predicted the elevated geosmin levels that occurred in the surface accumulation of cyanobacteria; had the accumulation not been sampled, the model would have appeared to give an incorrect estimation of geosmin concentration Spatial (both vertical and horizontal) changes in the distribution of cyanobacteria may substantially influence the occurrence of taste and odor episodes http://ks.water.usgs.gov/Kansas/rtqw/sites/07144790/htmls/ytd/p62719_ytd_all_uv.shtml

Benefits of Real Time Water Quality Improve our understanding of the hydrology and water quality of streams Identify source areas and evaluate trends for NPDES, BMPs and TMDLs Provide notification of changes in water-quality conditions for water treatment and recreation in real time Comparison to water-quality criteria Continuously measure water quality in real time like streamflow Better estimate selected constituent concentrations and loads with defined uncertainty Optimize timing of sample collection

Future Challenges for Continuous Water Quality Detection of water-quality trends and BMPs effectiveness More installations nationwide to better understand variability Need more direct measurement sensors Reduce O&M costs/time Ice and shallow water installations Continued sampling to document that relations remain representative Improve ways to estimate and communicate uncertainty

Real-time continuous concentrations and loads on the Web— http://ks.water.usgs.gov/Kansas/rtqw/ Andy Ziegler aziegler@ usgs.gov