LAKE CAPACITY MODELING The GOOD, the BAD and the UGLY.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Lawyer Creek Steelhead Trout Habitat Improvement Project presented by: Lewis Soil Conservation District.

Advertisements

O&G Activities and the Charlie Lake Watershed Presentation by Allan Blair OGC SCEK Fund Workshop June 10, 2004.

Nutrient Retention Model Water Supply Model Precipitation Evapotranspiration Soil Depth and Plant available water Land cover Topography (slope/runoff)

Togus Pond Development Surveys Lauren Wolpin. Development Overview Shoreland Zoning Regulations Wastewater Disposal Development Survey Buffer Strip Survey.

Implications for the Recovery of Lake Okeechobee, Florida, USA Karl Havens, Hans Paerl, K. Ramesh Reddy and R. Thomas James.

Wetland Functions and Values Fundamentals for Conservation Commissioners Training Program - Unit 5 Fundamentals for Conservation Commissioners Training.

Rideau Lakes Watershed Plan The Rideau Lakes Watershed  Is 50 km long  Covers an area of 490 km 2  Has 25 lakes (127 km 2 )  3 communities –

Questions to answer What is the overall modeling approach (after calibration and background scenarios)? What are the WLA assumptions? How will Avista’s.

Riparian Buffers for Water and Stream Protection Hal O. Liechty Arkansas Forest Resources Center School of Forest Resources, UAM Hal.

Nutrient Trading Framework in the Coosa Basin April 22, 2015.

Importance of Protecting Lake Trout. 250,000 lakes in Ontario 1% of these contain lake trout Central/eastern Ontario has >1/3 of lakes Provincial responsibility.

The Effect of Soil Hydraulic Properties and Deep Seepage Losses on Drainage Flow using DRAINMOD Debjani Deb 26 th April, 2004.

Determining the effectiveness of best management practices to reduce nutrient loading from cattle grazed pastures in Utah Nicki Devanny Utah State University,

Fundamentals of River Restoration and Salmonid Fisheries OWEB, 1999, Fundamentals of River Restoration and Salmonid Fisheries OWEB, 1999, Fundamentals.

Pomme de Terre Lake Water Quality Summary Pomme de Terre Lake Water Quality Summary US Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Resources Section.

Successful Watershed Planning Forrest Bell, FB Environmental Associates.

Planning Case Study: Charleston Lake. Case Study: Charleston Lake Official Plan and Zoning /by-law processes & technical issues 1993 lake trout report.

Vulnerability of freshwater fish communities to human mediated impacts Jenni McDermid 1 and David Browne 1,2 1 Wildlife Conservation Society Canada, Peterborough,

Kathleen A. Garland EIH Envirothon Teacher Workshop February 18, 2012.

Lake Huron Initiative: A Work in Process Presented by: Jim Bredin - Michigan Office of the Great Lakes.

Nutrient Management in the Urban Landscape Rebecca Kluckhohn, P.E. Watershed Engineer West Metro Water Alliance Forum, May 18 th 2011 W W e n c k Engineers.

IMPACTS OF LAND DEVELOPMENT ON OREGON’S WATERS 2001 This slide show was borrowed from the internet but we added our own research when we presented it.

KATLYND REESE AQUATIC ECOLOGY 9 NOVEMBER 2011 Hypoxia or “Dead Zones” in Aquatic Systems.

Impacts of Land Development on Oregon’s Waters 2001.

Suggested Guidelines for Geomorphic aspects of Anadromous Salmonid Habitat Restoration proposals G. Mathias Kondolf.

Animal Agriculture and Water Resources in Texas Ned Meister Director of Commodity and Regulatory Activities Texas Farm Bureau Steel Maloney Principal Hydrologist.

Effects of Nutrient Enrichment on Rivers and Streams Ohio EPA 2006.

 Casey Lake, North St. Paul CE 5511 Urban Hydrology and Land Development Instructor: John S. Gulliver Presented by: Joshua Balzer Stephanie Hatten Maria.

Mississippi Lake Association Annual General Meeting June 1, 2013 Lynn Preston, Centre for Sustainable Watersheds.

Water Quality Short Course April 11, 2007 Lake and Reservoir Dynamics Dan Obrecht – UMC

Local Response to Climate Change: Swinomish Case Study Swinomish Indian Tribal Community.

Streams (Rivers). Runoff: H 2 0 that does not sink into ground Most ends up in streams.

LOTIC ECOSYSTEMS Flowing water Moving continuously in one direction. Headwaters- Where the river or streams begin. Rivers are created in two ways: 1.

Barr-Milton Watershed Modeling Project - Workshop #4 David Pillard, Ph.D. – Project Manager, Ft. Collins, CO Ken Heim, Ph.D. – Lead Modeler, Westford,

Timeline Impaired for turbidity on Minnesota’s list of impaired waters (2004) MPCA must complete a study to determine the total maximum daily load (TMDL)

Ecosystem Disturbances and Ecosystem Services Chapter 3.

Conceptual Modeling as a Tool for Developing a Watershed Management Plan An aid to understanding linkages Barbara Washburn California Watershed Assessment.

Lake Independence Phosphorus TMDL Critique Stephanie Koerner & Zach Tauer BBE 4535 Fall 2011.

Relating Surface Water Nutrients in the Pacific Northwest to Watershed Attributes Using the USGS SPARROW Model Daniel Wise, Hydrologist US Geological Survey.

Reitz Lake TMDL. Goal Setting for Reitz Lake Reasonable Expectations 1 Phase II Adaptive Management MPCA Water Quality Standards 40 µg/L Natural Background.

Waterbody Classification Project A project of the Lakes and Watershed Commission, Dane County Department of Planning and Development, and the Dane County.

Fish Habitat Enhancement. Fish Habitat Enhancement: Bass Provide near shore cover for young bass Provide near shore cover for young bass –Fell trees into.

Nutrient Issues Review of Nutrient Management Issues Addressed by EPA NODA for Proposed CAFO Regulations.

1. 2 Indicators used 1.An integrator: the habitat of the lake trout  Living habitat  Reproduction habitat 2.A precursor: phosphorus concentration in.

Riparian Buffers And Their Role In Coastal Georgia By Jackie Jackson & Bethany Jewell Water Resource Planners.

Land Uses & Water Pollution Sources By Joan Schumaker Chadde, Western U.P. Center for Science, Mathematics and Environmental Education. All photos by Chadde,

Development of Nutrient Water Quality Standards for Rivers and Streams in Ohio Ohio EPA ORSANCO, October 20, 2009 George Elmaraghy, P.E., Chief.

Freshwater Ecosystems

WATERSHEDS Concepts and Curriculum Review LAKE MONITORING AND ANALYSIS Tony Thorpe and Dan Obrecht Lakes of Missouri Volunteer Program – Univ. of Missouri.

Human Activities in Ecosystems. Human Activities Cut down forests to make way for new houses, malls and parking lots. There is usually many of us in a.

Request approval to proceed to EMC with 2014 Tar-Pamlico River Basin Plan.

The Bear Creek Watershed Association protects & restores water & environmental quality within the Bear Creek Watershed from the effects of land use. Bear.

Nordlaw Cottage Inc. Site Plan Control Agreement

COLUMBIA RIVER SALMON CUMULATIVE IMPACTS EXAMPLE.

Fish and Game Commission Meeting February 11, 2016 Karen Mitchell Fisheries Branch Fisheries at Risk Proposed Regulatory Action.

Aquatics. Aquatic Habitats Lentic Lentic –Standing water habitats (lakes, ponds, wetlands) Lotic Lotic –Moving water habitats (rivers, streams)

Aquatics. Aquatic Habitats Lentic Lentic –Standing water habitats (lakes, ponds, wetlands) Lotic Lotic –Moving water habitats (rivers, streams)

High Rock Lake Nutrient Modeling Update Pam Behm - NC Division of Water Resources Environmental Management Commission Water Quality Committee Information.

Fundamentals of River Restoration and Salmonid Fisheries OWEB, 1999, Fundamentals of River Restoration and Salmonid Fisheries Dylan Castle.

Iowa Department of Natural Resources

Our Mission We work with landowners, communities, and organizations to protect lakes and rivers through developing effective, transferable, long-term solutions.

Estuaries are dynamic environments where rivers flow into the ocean.

Public Meeting February 19, 2009

Lake Clear Victor Castro Eastern Region

Estuaries are dynamic environments where rivers flow into the ocean.

Introduction to Fisheries Management

Using ArcGIS Pro to Evaluate the Impacts of In-Stream Barriers on Fish Habitats Case study: Bonneville cutthroat trout (BCT) habitats in the Bear River.

VITAL HABITATS GOAL Restore, enhance and protect a network of land and water habitats to support fish and wildlife, and to afford other public benefits,

Kristel Riddervold Environmental Sustainability Manager

4.5 Changes in Ecosystems pgs

Presentation transcript:

LAKE CAPACITY MODELING The GOOD, the BAD and the UGLY

Lake Capacity Model  Just a tool not a solution to planning issues / concerns  Help to identify those lakes where water quality impacts may be a concern

Problems with Models  Expectations are for an exact number in an imperfect science  many modeling assumptions  many different export coefficients (always evolving)  retention coefficients for phosphorus in septic beds now being applied  evolution of the way the LCSM is applied – 50% rule

Changing PWQO(s)  10 ug/L TP cold water or 20 ug/L TP warm water  also background + 50 % rule for TP; lake at 8 ug/L can go to 12 ug/L; new objective becomes 12 ug/L.  Oxygen PWQO was 5.0 mg/L then 6.0 mg/L now MVWHDO value of 7.0 mg/L.

Implementation Problems: What do we do with at capacity lakes?  Stop Development or have more Strict Protective Measures for development  Larger lot frontages  Larger setbacks more restrictive building code requirements re: septics.

Implementation Problems: What do we do with at capacity lakes?  What about development on upstream lakes – often in different municipalities with different planning rules in their OP(s).  Do we stop development on the upstream lakes based on nutrient loading arguments?

Implementation Problems: What do we do with at capacity lakes?  What about existing vacant lots of record?  What about lots where:  septic beds are >300 metres from the water  or achieve a surficial flow > 300 metres to the lake  or have drainage to a different watershed?

What If:  Water quality improves such that the PWQO(s) are not exceeded, say from 11 ug/L TP to 9 ug/L  The science becomes conclusive that nutrient migration away from septic beds on Precambrian Shield lakes is negligible.

What Capacity Models do not address:  Models do not address urbanization of shorelines  Incremental near shore habitat loss both in-water and on land  Vegetation removal (nursery habitat for fish)  Substrate alteration – spawning for bass, lake trout pike etc.  Visual impacts  Tree removal etc. etc.