k atalyst inc · 2020. 8. 27. · photograph 7. looking south at wcp5 between crater lake hwy (left...

BASELINE MONITORING: WHETSTONE CREEK

2012-2013 SEASON WHITE CITY, OREGON

Prepared for: Rogue Valley Council of Governments and

Bear Creek Watershed Council Prepared by: Katalyst, Inc.

Date: September 20, 2014

K ATALYST , INC. adding value to our natural resources… facilitating community change… (541) 227-9024 * [email protected]

BASELINE MONITORING: WHETSTONE CREEK 2012-2013 SEASON

WHITE CITY, OREGON

Prepared for: Mr. Craig Tuss Rogue Valley Council 0f Governments 155 N 1st St Central Point, OR 97502 and Bear Creek Watershed Council PO Box 1548 Medford, OR 97504 Prepared by: Robert Coffan, President Katalyst, Inc.

2499 Happy Valley Dr. Medford, OR 97501

________________________ 541-227-9024 [email protected]

Contributing Authors: Dr. Charles Lane, R.G., SOU PI Eric Dittmer, Katalyst Associate Dr. Peter Schroeder, SOU Professor Jack Blackham, SOU Student Heather Shepherd, SOU Student

The authors wish to also acknowledge the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board who contributed a significant portion of the funding for this project.

Date: September 20, 2014

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ........................................................................................... 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................4

2.0 OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................5

3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION..............................................................................5

4.0 2013 BASELINE MONITORING FIELD PROGRAM ............................6 4.1. Water Quality ............................................................................... 6 4.2. Flow Monitoring ............................................................................ 8 4.3. Aquatic Macroinvertebrate Assessment ....................................... 8

5.0 RESULTS ..............................................................................................8 5.1. Temperature ................................................................................ 8 5.2. Flow ............................................................................................. 9 5.3. Turbidity and Total Phosphorous................................................ 10 5.4. E Coli Bacteria ........................................................................... 11 5.5. Hydrocarbons............................................................................. 11 5.6. Aquatic Macroinvertebrates ........................................................ 12

6.0 FINDINGS ............................................................................................12

7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................13

8.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS....................................................................14

9.0 LIMITATIONS ......................................................................................15

Tables

Table 1. 2013 Parameter Suite and Monitoring Schedule Table 2. Monitoring Results

Figures

Figure 1. Base Map, 2013 Whetstone Baseline Monitoring Figure 2. Land Cover Figure 3. Impervious Surface Figure 4. Comparison of Temperature at Selected Sites Figure 5a. Flow: Summer, June 26, 2013 Figure 5b. Flow: First Flush Rain Event, September 18, 2013 Figure 5c. Flow: High Flow Event, February 15, 2014 Figure 6. Comparison of Flow, Turbidity and Total P at WCP2 Figure 7. Coliform Bacteria Comparison: Summer (7-10-2013) vs First Flush (9-18-2013) Figure 8. TPH-Dx Comparison: No Runoff, First Flush, and High Flow Events

Photographs

Cover Images: TOP: Looking north across Whetstone Creek at Monitoring Station WCP2 on Whetstone Creek just below the confluence of with Swanson Creek. 5-22-2013. BOTTOM: Approximately the same view during a high flow event. The T-post stake marking the south channel edge is seen in center. 2-15-2014.

Photograph 1. Looking west from a plane at vernal pools in pasture land at the corner of Table

Rock and Antelope Rd. Whetstone Creek (background) flows from left to right. 1-23-2011. Photograph 2. Looking upstream (south) at WCP1. 5-22-2013. Photograph 3. Looking downstream (west) at WCP2 below the confluence of Whetstone and

Swanson creeks. 5-22-2013. Photograph 4. Flow measurement at WCP3 on Swanson Creek just above confluence with

Whetstone Creek. 5-22-2013. Photograph 5. Looking downstream (west) at WCP4 just above a braided portion of Whetstone

Creek above its confluence with Swanson Creek. 5-22-2013. Photograph 6. Looking downstream (west) during macroinvertebrate training session collection

at WCP6 just below Denman Pond in the Denman Wildlife area. 9-10-2013. Photograph 7. Looking south at WCP5 between Crater Lake Hwy (left background) and Agate

Rd (right background). 9-25-2013. Photograph 8. Looking north during a stakeholder kickoff meeting at WCP7, the culvert outfall

selected by stakeholders that drains an industrial park (background). 4-23-2013. Photograph 9. Looking north at WCP8 on the SE corner of Crater Lake Hwy and Antelope Rd,

which drains a residential area and a section of Crater Lake Hwy during a high-flow storm event. 2-14-2014.

Photograph 10. Measuring field parameters and collecting water samples at site WCP7 along Table Rock Rd. 9-17-2013.

Photograph 11. Collecting flow measurements using a pygmy flow meter at the cross section at site WCP3. 9-25-2013.

Photograph 12a (above on 2-15-2014) and 12b (below on 4-3-2014). Looking downstream (north) at WCP1 on Whetstone Creek near its mouth with the Rogue River. It was too dangerous to measure flow here during the high flow storm event. However flow was measured at 323 cfs upstream at WCP2, and is likely similar or greater here.

Photograph 13. Looking across the Rogue River near WCP1 during the “high flow” field event. The line of leaves and debris near Heather’s foot (foreground) illustrates the highest flow several hours prior to the field event. 2-15-2014.

Photograph 14. Looking south at WCP6 during the high flow event. Most flow (from left to right) was routed through the main channel (center), but some flow also ran through the wetland and onto an access road (background) shown more closely in the next photograph. 2-15-2014.

Photograph 15. Looking downstream (west) at the side channel during the high flow event at WCP6. 2-15-2014.

Photograph 16. This was the first time runoff flow was observed in this side ditch running alongside the eastern edge of Crater Lake Hwy (back center) at WCP8. 2-15-2014.

Photograph 17. Looking upstream where most of the flow was measured during the “high flow” event at WCP2. Additional flow was also measured in a side channel shown in the following photograph. 2-15-2014.

Photograph 18. About 27 cfs of the 323 cfs measured at WCP2 was flowing through this newly planted riparian area adjacent to the main channel of Whetstone Creek (below the bridge in upper right). 2-15-2014.

Appendices

Appendix A. QA/QC Summary Appendix B. Field Data Sheets Appendix C. Macroinvertebrate Assessment Appendix D. Laboratory Results

Baseline Monitoring: Whetstone Creek Page 1 of 15 File: Whetstone Report Text Final Katalyst, Inc.

Executive Summary The Bear Creek Watershed Council, in conjunction with the Rogue Valley Council of Governments (RVCOG) received a grant from the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board to establish baseline conditions related to water quality and discharge flow patterns along the lower five miles of Whetstone Creek in May, 2013. RVCOG retained Katalyst, Inc. to design the monitoring plan, and to work with Southern Oregon University students in the field to provide technical oversight for data collection and reporting. Field work was carried out from April 2013 – February 2014, and included deployment of temperature dataloggers flow measurements, water quality samples for lab analysis, collection of field parameters, and macroinvertebrate sampling at eight monitoring stations in the watershed. Assistance with site selection and data quality assurance was provided by RVCOG, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality and Rogue Valley Sewer Services. It is our hope that this information will guide future restoration projects designed to provide benefits to Steelhead, Coho and Chinook salmon, and other native riparian species. Findings: The results of this assessment illustrate that the Whetstone Creek drainage adversely

contributes to the water quality in the Rogue River, specifically by increased temperatures, total phosphorous, hydrocarbons and other related compounds from urban runoff.

Temperature: Water temperatures throughout Whetstone Creek system often exceed the

regional summer standard of 64.4 oF (18C) for salmonid fish habitat and rearing from late May through August. Water in the Swanson Creek tributary is warmer than water in Whetstone Creek. Water temperatures continue to increase along the lower reach of Whetstone, from the confluence of Swanson and Whetstone (WCP2) on down to the mouth at the Rogue River (WCP1), with maximum temperatures often exceeding 80 oF (26.6C) in the summer. Maximum temperatures in shaded reaches upstream were often more than 5 oF cooler. Furthermore, the maximum temperature spikes observed in open areas, such as Swanson Creek and the mouth near the Rogue River, are attenuated in wooded areas along Whetstone Creek (Photograph 5). This information provides strong support for the need to increase shade along the lower 5 miles of Whetstone Creek.

Flow: Urban runoff provides a major contribution to the overall flow in the Whetstone drainage

system in the fall. Flow during significant high flow events spreads out over wide wooded and grassy riparian areas where it has not been artificially channelized by people. The spreading tends to slow the flow, reduce the energy gradient, and encourages soil wetting and groundwater recharge. The “flashy” nature of flow during precipitation events also contributes added sediment to the system, and reduces infiltration to the shallow subsurface and subsequent baseflow during the summer months. Turbidity and total phosphorous (total P) remained relatively low during the entire season at WCP6, the outlet of Denman Pond. This suggests that the ponds serve as bio-retention filters for the system. However, during high flow events, turbidity and total P increase significantly. This may be due to overland flow through nearby fields. But it could also be due, in part, to the mobilization of sediment in the pond system.


E Coli Bacteria: The “first flush” type storm events contribute E Coli bacteria to the riparian system, both from the urban runoff outfalls that feed Whetstone Creek, as well as the agricultural areas along Swanson Creek. The increased concentrations can be seen down to the confluence with the Rogue River. E Coli counts are used to indirectly assess the possibility of pathogens in the water, and can lead to a stream being listed as “water-quality limited” for human health.

Hydrocarbons: Total petroleum hydrocarbons in the diesel range (TPH-Dx), the indicator

parameter representing potential contribution of hydrocarbons from surface runoff, was not detected during the dry season. However, it was detected in each of the wet season events. During the “high flow’ event, TPH-Dx was detected at 7 of the 8 site locations and concentrations increased downstream. This indicates that the “flushing spike” of concentrations in the runoff may have been in the process of passing through the Whetstone drainage, entering the Rogue River. The detection of TPH-Dx on Swanson Creek was also of interest, indicating that runoff in this area is also of concern.

Recommendations: The following recommendations are suggested for implementation. 1. Restoration/Riparian Planting of the Lower five Miles of Whetstone Creek. The

shaded, braided, riparian area of Whetstone Creek just above the confluence with Swanson Creek serves as an excellent restoration reference area for the degraded area just downstream of it. Significant restoration planting has recently been performed along the Rogue River at the confluence with Whetstone, and landowners in this area have supported and participated in this project. Restoration of the lower 5 miles will provide habitat connectivity and shade from the mouth (bottom of the 5-mile reach) to this reference area (upper end of the 5-mile reach), as well as the Denman Wildlife area further upstream. This could be performed in phases.

2. Review of planting/shade potential along Swanson Creek. The Swanson Creek tributary

contributes to high temperatures and other water quality issues in lower Whetstone Creek, yet little is known about the drainage, or the interest of agricultural landowners in participating in any restorative effort. A review should be performed to assess the potential for restoration. The review should include a “bang for the buck” hierarchy of areas contributing to high temperatures and adverse runoff issues. Another driver to area selection would be an assessment of potential landowner interest and participation.

3. Consider Stormwater Treatment Best Management Practices at Key Outfalls in White

City. Untreated stormwater runoff from industrial, commercial, and residential lands contributes significantly to the poor water quality and flashy nature of flow in Whetstone Creek during the wet season. An assessment should be performed to identify areas where best management practices (BMPs) could be implemented to treat stormwater runoff from key areas before it flows into Whetstone Creek. BMPs might include: bioswales in selected areas, check dams in the drainage ditches, shading of existing ditches, and others. Based on this assessment, areas might include: the industrial sector to the north, sections of the Crater Lake Hwy corridor that bisect the Whetstone drainage, and the residential area to the northeast. Aside from runoff treatment, the BMPs would also serve to reduce peak flows during rain events, allowing more precipitation to recharge the alluvial soils providing base flow during the warm summer months.


4. Macroinvertebrate assessment would be a good long-term measure of success criteria

following any riparian restoration work performed in the Whetstone watershed. Current baseline information illustrates that biotic integrity is severely impaired, strongly suggesting that this is due to low summer flows, high temperature, low gradient, and sparse canopy. Implementation of the other recommendations above would likely improve macroinvertebrate health considerably over time.


1.0 INTRODUCTION Whetstone Creek is a tributary of the Rogue River that flows through agricultural, industrial, and rural residential land in Southern Oregon. The 13,400-acre (21 sq.-mile) watershed drains the Whetstone Industrial Park and urbanized areas of White City before meeting the Rogue River at river mile 128.5. The creek is naturally intermittent; however, it conveys irrigation flows in the summer (making it “perennial” in its current state). Whetstone Creek also flows through ecologically valuable tracts of land such as the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (ODFW) Denman Wildlife Management Area and the Agate Desert (Figure 1). The lower five miles of Whetstone Creek have been identified as a candidate for habitat restoration by ODFW and the Bear Creek Watershed Council (BCWC). Whetstone Creek is an important tributary to the Rogue River, with the potential for significantly increased salmonid fish populations if these habitat limitations are addressed. Although the creek currently is suffering from degraded habitat and water quality issues, it has excellent restoration potential because of its relatively undeveloped floodplain. Preliminary field research regarding the nature of Whetstone Creek was performed in 2012 through a cooperative effort by the Bear Creek Watershed Council (BCWC), and the Rogue Valley Council of Governments (RVCOG), funded by the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board (OWEB) (Project#: 211-2040, ID#: 8472). Much of the field work was performed by Southern Oregon University (SOU) student volunteers. The 2012 report identified the lower five miles of Whetstone Creek as being subject to excessively high water temperatures, impacts from summer irrigation flows and threats from such invasive species as Reed Canary Grass (Phalaris arundinacea) and Armenian Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus). In addition, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) is concerned that urban and industrial runoff during the wet season may also be affecting flow and water quality. The BCWC, in conjunction with the RVCOG, subsequently received a second grant from OWEB to establish baseline conditions related to water quality and discharge flow patterns along the lower five miles of Whetstone Creek for a summer irrigation season and the winter wet season starting in May, 2013 (project number 213-2037). RVCOG retained Katalyst, Inc. (Katalyst) to design the monitoring plan, and to work with SOU students in the field and provide technical oversight for data collection and reporting. Findings from the 2013 baseline monitoring assessment are presented in this report. It is our hope that this information will guide future restoration projects designed to provide benefits to Steelhead, Coho and Chinook salmon, and other native riparian species.


2.0 OBJECTIVES Based on the overarching goal for riparian restoration, coupled with what is already known about Whetstone Creek, the following objectives were identified by the project partners:

· Collect baseline water-quality information for a full season to determine current conditions including: impacts caused by summer irrigation practices; issues associated with winter storm runoff; possible sources of bacteria from human and/or animal waste in the water; and spatial and temporal changes in water temperature.

· Assess any flow impacts caused by summer irrigation practices and/or urban runoff during high water events.

· Determine a baseline level of macroinvertebrates in the Project Site. · Report findings in an easy to understand format, including presentations and a

written report. · Provide recommendations to aid those interested in fine-tuning plans for

upcoming restoration plans to enhance Whetstone Creek.

3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The Project Site includes both the lower five miles of Whetstone Creek and the portions of the watershed receiving runoff from the City and Industrial areas. Land cover types in the Whetstone watershed are shown in Figure 2. Low, medium and high-intensity development land cover, shown in pink and red, exists in a significant portion of the watershed, including the Crater Lake Hwy corridor, and White City and the industrial complex to the north. This developed area is covered by many impervious surfaces such as arterial streets, roads, parking lots, and roofs. Much of the remaining land cover is pasture or cultivated crops. Vernal pools dot much of the pasture land (Photograph 1). A relatively small amount of land in the upper regions of the watershed to the southeast is covered with grassland and shrub land. Ponds and other open-water areas in the Denman Wildlife area are shown in blue in Figure 2. The percent of impervious surface for land in the watershed is shown in Figure 3, and ranges from a low of 0-20% impervious (shown in green) to 80%-100% impervious (shown in white). Areas of high impervious land correlate with road, industrial, and community development. For example a half-mile wide swath of land ranging from 60%-100% impervious runs north-south through the entire Whetstone watershed along Crater Lake Hwy. Likewise, much of the area north of the North Fork Whetstone tributary, comprised of the residential and industrial areas of White City, is 60%-100% impervious.


4.0 2013 BASELINE MONITORING FIELD PROGRAM Baseline monitoring in 2013 consisted of three components: water quality, flow, and macroinvertebrates. The locations of each of the eight monitoring sites are shown in Figure 1. Two of the locations, Whetstone Creek Project (WCP7 and WCP8) were only accessed during the wet season, as they are culvert outlets receiving stormwater runoff from industrial or residential areas. The other locations (WCP1 – WCP6) were monitored for the entire season. Special care was placed on obtaining access to these sites and obtaining property owner permission for periodic monitoring runs. The following is the rationale for the selection of each location:

WCP1 Near confluence with the Rogue, great restoration potential, ongoing restoration nearby (Photograph 2).

WCP2 Directly below confluence with Whetstone and Swanson creeks; combined flows at this point (Photograph 3).

WCP3 On Swanson Creek just above confluence with Whetstone Creek; agricultural-related land upstream(Photograph 4).

WCP4 On Whetstone Creek just above confluence with Swanson Creek; White City upstream (Photograph 5).

WCP5 On a tributary (North Fork Whetstone Creek) near the intersection of Crater Lake Hwy and Agate Rd. Assess a smaller tributary (Photograph 6).

WCP6 On Whetstone Creek, just downstream from Denman Pond at Denman Wildlife Area; possible treatment benefits from the pond (Photograph 7).

WCP7 Wet Season location, below culvert that drains approx. 260 acres of White City Industrial Complex; Assess runoff contribution to flows and water quality (Photograph 8).

WCP8 Wet Season location; below culverts that drain approx. 770 acres residential area and a portion of Crater Lake Hwy. (Photograph 9).

A brief discussion of methods is presented in this section. Specific quality control and quality assurance measures taken during this project are included in Appendix A.

4.1. Water Quality The 2013 water quality and flow monitoring followed the schedule shown in Table 1. The rationale and basic protocol and sampling plan are discussed here. Field parameters included flow rate, pH, conductivity, turbidity, and temperature with spot checks to calibrate the thermographs. In order to determine the presence of human contribution and/or animal waste, water samples were collected for analysis of total phosphorous and the bacterium Escherichia coli (E Coli). In addition, total petroleum hydrocarbons in the diesel range (TPH-Dx) and biological oxygen demand (BOD) (replaced by dissolved oxygen in the summer) were collected as “indicator” parameters to assess the contribution to water quality in runoff from the urban and industrial areas.


To save costs, some laboratory analyses were not performed at each sampling event. As shown in Table 1, lab analyses were only performed every other month during the summer season. Thermograph dataloggers were deployed at each of the six “summer sites” during the first field visit on 5-22-2013. Thermographs were attached with cable and nylon line to a tree or bush and placed in a deep, shaded location just upstream of the cross section measuring area at each monitoring site. The dataloggers were programmed to record water temperature every 30 minutes. The dataloggers were removed on 10-17-2013. Water quality monitoring during the wet season occurred at all six of the “summer” sites, as well as two additional sites, to assess potential impacts from stormwater runoff. The two locations for wet season monitoring shown in Figure 1 were selected based on input from ODEQ, Rogue Valley Sewer Services, RVCOG and summer observations (Photograph 8). Three sampling events were scheduled to catch three high water periods during the wet season of 2013 - 2014 to capture the “first flush’ concept of runoff from industrial and urban areas. First flush is the initial surface runoff of a rainstorm. During this phase, water pollution entering storm drains in areas with high proportions of impervious surfaces is typically more concentrated compared to the remainder of the storm. Consequently these high concentrations of urban runoff result in high levels of pollutants discharged from storm sewers to surface waters. The first flush is not always from the first precipitation event of the wet season. The planned timing of the three “wet season” events were:

1. Within 24 hrs of the first precipitation event that generates runoff. 2. During a significant precipitation event, after the first event of the

season. “Significant” roughly meaning more than 1 inch of rainfall on the first day of the event.

3. A high-flow rainfall event, such as => 1-year flow event. Field parameters were collected at each location (Table 1; Photograph 10), standard collection and transporting protocols were used for each of the field parameters collected. All meters were calibrated using standard procedures before use in the field for each sampling run. Sampling containers were prepared and cleaned to meet requirements of each parameter. Where required, samples were stored in iced coolers and transported within 12 hours using the standard Chain of Custody protocols. All field staff were familiar with standard procedures for each parameter collected. A separate field training session for all field staff detailing macroinvertebrate collection protocols was provided by Dr. Peter Schroeder, professor of Biology at Southern Oregon University (Photograph 6). Copies of all field data sheets are included in Appendix B.


4.2. Flow Monitoring Discharge was measured at the sites shown in Figure 1. Monthly flow discharge measurements were recorded from May 2013 through October 2013 as shown in Table 1. This information was collected concurrently with water quality sampling, including the three “wet season” events. The smaller size of Whetstone Creek lends itself well to flow measurement using a pygmy flow meter (Photograph 11). Each cross section was marked with rebar stakes and GPS coordinates were recorded for spatial and temporal continuity. A tape was strung across the cross section, and the wetted width was divided into 10-20 sub-areas (prisms) for flow measurement. The depth and flow rate of each prism were recorded. Copies of the stream flow field data sheets are included in Appendix B.

4.3. Aquatic Macroinvertebrate Assessment Aquatic macroinvertebrate surveys, monitoring, and analysis provides an effective means for assessing the biotic integrity of streams (i.e., capacity of streams to support stable native fish populations). This study sought to assess, together with the simultaneous assessment of other water quality measures, the biotic integrity of 6 stream sites in Whetstone Creek using a family-level analysis of aquatic macroinvertebrates. Macroinvertebrates were sampled in October of 2013 with analyses performed in the SOU Deportment of Biology under the direction of Dr. Peter Schroeder. Methods, assessment protocol and the complete discussion of results are included in Appendix C, and results are summarized in the following section.

5.0 RESULTS Results are summarized in Table 2, which includes field parameters such as flow measurements and turbidity, as well as laboratory results such as total phosphorous and TPH-Dx. Copies of laboratory results are included in Appendix D. Temperature readings collected during field monitoring are also shown, however the temperature data downloaded from the thermograph dataloggers were too voluminous to present in a table and are not included in the report.

5.1. Temperature A comparison of the seven-day averages of maximum daily water temperature values recorded by the dataloggers is shown in Figure 4. The upper graph provides a comparison of water temperatures at the three sites at the confluence of Swanson Creek and Whetstone Creek; WCP3 on Swanson Creek, WCP4 on Whetstone Creek, and WCP2 just below the confluence. Water temperatures for WCP4 and WCP2 are very similar, often overlapping one another on the graph. However, water temperatures


on Swanson Creek (WCP3) are significantly higher (peaks often more than 5oF higher) than the other two sites. Additionally, the “temperature spikes” observed in the summer months on Swanson Creek, do not appear, or are significantly dampened on Whetstone Creek. Examples of the high spikes vs the dampened “flattening” are highlighted by the dotted circles on the upper graph in Figure 4. The lower graph in Figure 4 compares the seven-day average daily maximum water temperatures from the confluence of Swanson and Whetstone (WCP2), to the temperatures further down Whetstone near the mouth (WCP1). Water temperatures are even higher along this lower reach of Whetstone, with several temperature readings in June well above 80oF.

5.2. Flow Flow measured at each site for the 2013 season is shown in Table 2. As mentioned earlier, flow throughout the Whetstone drainage is impacted significantly by anthropogenic activity, such as irrigation use and urban runoff. Flow down near the mouth (WCP1) throughout the dry season ranged from a low of 1.5 cfs (10-13-2013) to a high of 5.3 cfs (6-26-2013). Flows at WCP1 during the first two “first flush” rain events on 9-18-2013 and 9-25-2013 were 5.2 cfs and 9.5 cfs, respectively. Flow during the “high flow” rain event could not be measured due to safety issues, but likely was similar to or greater than the flow successfully measured upstream at WCP2 at 323 cfs on 2-15-2014. Flow at each site varied widely during each field event. Flow measurements from the dry season (6-26-2013), the first flush event (9-18-2013), and the high flow event (2-15-2014) are shown in figures 5a, 5b, and 5c, respectively. The flow recorded for the Rogue River at the nearest USGS gaging station is also shown in each figure for comparison. In the dry season, flow ranged from 0.0 (standing water) at WCP5 to 5.3 cfs downstream at both WCP1 and WCP2. The two wet season locations (WCP7 and WCP8) were dry. Flow emanating from Denman Pond (WCP6) was relatively low at 0.9 cfs, whereas flow emanating from the rest of the Denman pond system (WCP4) was 4.6 cfs. Flow during the “first flush” event is shown in Figure 5b. Per the National Weather Service 0.20 inches of rainfall were received at the Medford weather station on the evening of 9-17-2014. Interestingly, though significant runoff was measured from the industrial outlet (WCP8 at 3.2 cfs) and the commercial/residential outfall (WCP7 at 1.1 cfs), overall flow in the system was lower than the dry season event. For example, flow at the mouth (WCP1) was 5.2 cfs, WCP5 was actually dry, WCP6 was only 0.3 cfs. Therefore, the urban runoff from impervious areas apparently provided a major contribution to the overall flow in the Whetstone drainage system. As a side note, the Rogue River also exhibited reduced flow (1600 cfs) as compared to dry season (2300 cfs). However, this is likely due to flow management of the Lost Creek Reservoir upstream, i.e. fluctuating flows in the Rogue River should not be used as a guide for flows in Whetstone Creek.


Flow conditions measured and observed during the “high flow” event on 2-15-2014 provide a stark contrast to all previous conditions. Per the National Weather Service, 3.54 inches of rainfall were received from 2/12-15/2014. Flow could not be measured due to safety concerns at many of the sites, including WCP1 (compare photographs 12a and 12b). The Rogue River was flowing at 12,000 cfs at this time (Photograph 13). Flow emanating from Denman Pond was measured as 74.2 cfs, about 250 times greater than the 0.3 cfs during the “first flush” event. This is a conservative value because the flow had overtopped the channel, and a second side channel of flow along an access road had to be measured as part of the total (Photographs 14 and 15). Flow at the commercial/residential outfall (WCP8) was 21.2 cfs, and there were signs (debris lines and matted grass) that flow had recently been higher (Photo insert in Figure 5c). Though flow could not be measured at WCP1, it was successfully measured upstream at WCP2 at 323 cfs. Significant flow discharging from culverts and drainage ditches along Crater Lake Hwy near WCP8 was also observed (Photograph 16). Flow at WCP2 running in a side channel across a newly planted riparian area was also measured (Photographs 17 and 18). Flow in the wooded area with braided streams near WCP3 and WCP4 had overtopped the channel banks and was widely spread throughout the wooded areas precluding accurate measurements.

5.3. Turbidity and Total Phosphorous With the exception of the “high flow” event, turbidity was consistently the lowest at WCP6, just below Denman Pond, ranging from 1.58 to 8.5 Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTUs). Turbidity at WCP6 increased tenfold during the high flow event to 80.8 NTU, which was twice as high as turbidity recorded at the two runoff outfalls (WCP7 and WCP8) during the same event. Likewise, total phosphorous (total P) was relatively low and consistent at WPC6, ranging from 0.094 mg/L to 0.16 mg/L. However, during the high flow event, total P increased four-fold to 0.44 mg/L. Increases in concentrations of both of these parameters are likely due to sediment entrainment during the overland flow through nearby fields observed during the high flow event at WCP6. But it could also be due, in part, from liberation of sediment within the ponds. A comparison of flow to both turbidity and total P at WCP2 for the field season is shown in Figure 6. Turbidity tends to follow flow rates, fluctuating from 14.6 NTU to 28.5 NTU as flow fluctuated from 1.0 cfs to 9.4 cfs through the season. However, turbidity more than tripled during the high flow event on 2-15-2014, when flow rose to 323 cfs at WCP2. Total P concentrations (shown in the lower graph on Figure 6) do not appear to correlate with flow rates. However total P concentrations almost double during the high flow event on 2-15-2014. More importantly, total P concentrations consistently exceed the ODEQ’s suggested comparative standard of 0.08 mg/L.


5.4. E Coli Bacteria A comparison of E Coli bacteria measured in water samples from a summer sampling event (7-10-2013) to the “first flush event (9-18-2013) is shown in Figure 7. E Coli counts are used to indirectly assess the possibility of pathogens in the water, and can lead to a stream being listed as “water-quality limited” for human health. Concentrations from the July event ranged from a low of 102 colony-forming units (CFUs)/100ml (WCP2) to a high of 579 CFUs/100ml (WCP6). A marked increase in bacteria levels is readily apparent during the first flush event. The total bacteria count (>2419 CFUs/100ml) is found at both the industrial runoff site (WCP7) and the commercial/residential runoff site (WCP8). E Coli in Swanson Creek (WCP3) is also elevated at 1120 CFUs/100ml. Concentrations diminish slightly as water flows down to the mouth at WCP1 with 613 CFUs/100ml.

5.5. Hydrocarbons TPH-Dx was selected for analysis as an “indicator parameter” for hydrocarbon-related compounds that may be entering the Whetstone drainage area through runoff from residential and commercial streets, parking lots, and industrial areas. TPH-Dx was analyzed at all sites for two of the summer field events and all three of the “wet season” field events. Results are shown in Table 2. The laboratory further segregated both TPH-Dx and total petroleum hydrocarbons in the lube oil range (TPH-Oil). Both values are shown in Table 2. However, they are lumped as one parameter for discussion. TPH-Dx was not detected in any of the samples during the two summer field events (5-22-2013 and 7-10-2013). However, TPH-Dx was detected at one or more sites during each of the wet season field events. A comparison of TPH-Dx for one “summer event (7-10-2014), the “first flush” event (9-18-2013) and the “high flow” event (2-15-2014) is shown in Figure 8. During the first flush event, TPH-Dx was detected in water samples collected from both the industrial stormwater outfall site (WCP7) and the commercial/residential outfall site (WCP8) at 0.35 mg/L and 0.25 mg/L, respectively. However, TPH-Dx was not detected further downstream at any other site during the first flush event. Interestingly, during the “high flow” event, TPH-Dx was detected at a lower concentration at WCP7 and not detected at WCP8. However, TPH-Dx was detected at every other site downstream, including Swanson Creek. The highest concentration (0.33 mg/L) was detected down near the mouth at WCP1. This is likely because sampling was performed about a day later than the onset of high flow, and the TPH-Dx may have already moved down through the system by then.


5.6. Aquatic Macroinvertebrates Biotic indices indicate that the biotic integrity was severely impaired at each of the Whetstone Creek sample sites. The general lack of mayfly, stonefly and caddisfly taxa strongly suggests the presence of stream stressors, notably high (>65°F) summer water temperatures (common for streams with sparse canopy cover, low summer flow, and a low gradient). Other stressors, such as low substrate complexity (possibly due to a high preponderance of small substrate types or high substrate embeddedness by smaller substrate fines such as sand and silt) may also have contributed to the low macroinvertebrate diversity found at the sample sites. Biotic indices tended to sequentially increase toward the more downstream sites, suggesting a slight cumulative organic enrichment of Whetstone Creek toward the mouth. A slightly lower HBI score at WCP2 compared to WCP1 and WCP3 may indicate a dilution of organic enrichment from Swanson Creek. Organic enrichment typically leads to an abundance and/or dominance of tolerant taxa, especially when coupled with warm summer water temperatures.

6.0 FINDINGS The results of this assessment illustrate that the Whetstone Creek drainage adversely contributes to the water quality in the Rogue River, specifically by increased temperatures, total phosphorous, hydrocarbons and other related compounds from urban runoff. Temperature

Water temperatures throughout Whetstone Creek system often exceed the regional summer standard of 64.4 oF (18 oC) for salmonid fish habitat and rearing from late May through August. Water in the Swanson Creek tributary is warmer than water in Whetstone Creek. Water temperatures continue to increase along the lower reach of Whetstone, from the confluence of Swanson and Whetstone (WCP2) on down to the mouth at the Rogue River (WCP1), with maximum temperatures often exceeding 80oF (26.6C) in the summer. Maximum temperatures in shaded reaches upstream were often more than 5oF cooler. Furthermore, the maximum temperature spikes observed in open areas, such as Swanson Creek and the mouth near the Rogue River, are attenuated in wooded areas along Whetstone Creek (Photograph 5). This information provides strong support for the need to increase shade along the lower 5 miles of Whetstone Creek.

Flow

Urban runoff provides a major contribution to the overall flow in the Whetstone drainage system in the fall.


Flow during significant high flow events spreads out over wide wooded and grassy riparian areas where it has not been artificially channelized by people. The spreading tends to slow the flow, reduce the energy gradient, and encourages soil wetting and groundwater recharge. The “flashy” nature of flow during precipitation events also contributes added sediment to the system, and reduces infiltration to the shallow subsurface and subsequent baseflow during the summer months. Turbidity and total P remained relatively low during the entire season at WCP6, the outlet of Denman Pond. This suggests that the ponds serve as bio-retention filters for the system. However, during high flow events, turbidity and total P increase significantly. This may be more due to overland flow through nearby fields. But it could also be due, in part, to the mobilization of sediment in the pond system.

E Coli Bacteria

The “first flush” type storm events contribute E Coli bacteria to the riparian system, both from the urban runoff outfalls that feed Whetstone Creek, as well as the agricultural areas along Swanson Creek. The increased concentrations can be seen down to the confluence with the Rogue River. E Coli counts are used to indirectly assess the possibility of pathogens in the water, and can lead to a stream being listed as “water-quality limited” for human health.

Hydrocarbons

TPH-Dx, the indicator parameter representing potential contribution of hydrocarbons from surface runoff, was not detected during the dry season. However, it was detected in each of the wet season events. During the “high flow’ event, TPH-Dx was detected at 7 of the 8 site locations and concentrations increased downstream. This indicates that the “flushing spike” of concentrations in the runoff may have been in the process of passing through the Whetstone drainage, entering the Rogue River. The detection of TPH-Dx on Swanson Creek was also of interest, indicating that runoff in this area is also of concern.

7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are suggested to address the issues identified above.

1. Restoration/Riparian Planting of the Lower 5 Miles of Whetstone Creek. The shaded, braided, riparian area of Whetstone Creek just above the confluence with Swanson Creek (Photograph 3) serves as an excellent restoration reference area for the degraded area just downstream (Photograph 2). Significant restoration planting has recently been performed along the Rogue River at the confluence with Whetstone, and landowners in this area have supported and participated in this project. Restoration of the lower 5 miles of Whetstone Creek will provide habitat connectivity and shade from the mouth to


this reference area, as well as the Denman Wildlife area further upstream. This could be performed in phases depending on funding.

2. Review of planting/shade potential along Swanson Creek. The Swanson

Creek tributary contributes to high temperatures and other water quality issues in lower Whetstone Creek, yet little is known about the nature of the drainage, or the interest of agricultural landowners to participate in any restorative effort. A review should be performed to assess the potential for restoration. The review should include a “bang for the buck” hierarchy of areas contributing to high temperatures, adverse runoff issues, and an assessment of potential landowner interest and participation.

3. Consider Stormwater Treatment Best Management Practices at Key

Outfalls in White City. Untreated stormwater runoff from industrial, commercial, and residential lands contributes significantly to the poor water quality and flashy nature of flow in Whetstone Creek during the wet season. An assessment should be performed to identify areas where best management practices (BMPs) could be implemented to treat stormwater runoff from key areas before it flows into Whetstone Creek. BMPs might include: bioswales in selected areas, check dams in the drainage ditches, shading of existing ditches, and others. Areas might include: the industrial sector to the north, sections of the Crater Like Hwy corridor that bisect the Whetstone drainage, and the residential area to the northeast. Aside from runoff treatment, the BMPs would also serve to reduce peak flows during rain events, allowing more precipitation to recharge the alluvial soils providing base flow during the warm summer months.

4. Macroinvertebrate assessment would be a good long-term measure of success criteria following any riparian restoration work performed in the Whetstone watershed.

8.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors wish to also acknowledge the following people and entities who helped to bring this baseline monitoring to fruition: v The Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board who contributed a significant

portion of the funding for this project.

v The Bear Creek Watershed Council for administering the project and providing a venue to share results.

v Mr. and Mrs. Bill Leavens for allowing access on their property.

v Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) for assistance with

monitoring station locations and water quality expertise.


v Rogue Valley Sewer for assistance with monitoring station locations and

reporting feedback. v Rogue Valley Council of Governments for field and lab support.

9.0 LIMITATIONS The conclusions presented in this report are professional opinions based on data described in this report. They are intended only for the purpose, site location, and project indicated, and are based on the assumption that Site conditions do not change significantly from those observed during the investigation. This report is not a definitive study of the Whetstone subwatershed and should not be interpreted as such.

Table 1. Parameter Suite and Monitoring Schedule: Whetstone Baseline Data CollectionAnalysis Parameter

Type Suite May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct 1 2 3DO/BOD x x x x x x xTPH-Dx x x x x x x xTotal P x x x x x x xTurbidity x x x x x x x x xpH x x x x x x x x xConductivity x x x x x x x x xTemp x x x x x x x x xFlow x x x x x x x x x

RVCOG E Coli x x x x x x xSOU Macroinvertebrates x

DO/BOD = dissolved oxygen in summer, and biologic oxygen demand in wet seasonTPH-Dx = total petroleum hydrocarbons in the diesel rangeTotal p = total phosphorousTemp = Field check of water temperature and installation of data loggersE Coli = will be analyzed in the RVCOG LabMacro Invert = Aquatic macroinvertebrates will be assessed by SOU macroinvertebrate lab

Summer 2013 Wet Season (Event Driven)

Lab

Field

Table 2. Monitoring Results, 2013

pH Conductivity Temperature Turbidity DO(cfs) (uS/cm) °F (NTU) (mg/L) (mg/L) mg/L coliforms avg mg/L (mg/L)

05/22/2013 2.5 8.33 240 59 22.5 0.0999 ND ND >2419.2 - 7.806/26/2013 5.3 7.9 130.8 64.04 20.8 - - - - - -07/10/2013 1.7 7.86 132.5 73.58 16 0.159 ND ND 260.2 - 6.9508/14/2013 3.8 7.76 130.2 66.02 15.2 - - - - - -09/11/2013 3.1 7.71 135.6 65.12 17.4 0.163 - - 248.1 - 9.910/13/2013 1.5 7.83 207 49.64 7.1 0.087 - - 150 - 9.7709/18/2013 5.2 7.45 176.7 60.8 15.2 0.194 ND ND 613.1 4.04 NA09/25/2013 9.5 8.07 174 59.54 20.5 0.121 ND ND 228.2 3.82 11.5302/15/2014 NM 6.82 146 45.5 62.3 0.344 ND 0.326 2.03 9.6205/22/2013 4.2 7.75 239 53.78 28.5 0.105 ND ND 90.6 - 7.2506/26/2013 5.3 7.55 121.1 62.24 27.2 - - - - - -07/10/2013 1 7.38 140 69.08 19.5 0.184 ND ND 101.7 - 5.808/14/2013 3.1 7.52 145 64.04 14.6 - - - - - -09/11/2013 3.2 7.45 22.5 64.76 22.5 0.125 - - 387.3 - 10.2110/13/2013 1.3 7.58 183.3 47.48 11.8 0.093 - - 179.3 - 10.2109/18/2013 4.2 6.95 165.6 59.36 22 0.201 ND ND 980.4 3.25 NA09/25/2013 9.4 7.02 177.2 56.66 23.4 0.116 ND ND 204.6 3.54 9.4202/15/2014 322.9 6.6 147.1 48.6 62.9 0.351 ND 0.276 ND 8.7605/22/2013 2.1 7.8 163.4 54.68 47.3 0.175 ND ND 209.8 - 8.0506/26/2013 3.3 7.53 94.9 63.14 33.1 - - - - - -07/10/2013 0.7 7.39 112.2 71.06 28.2 0.151 ND ND 125.9 - 4.7508/14/2013 1.2 7.4 120.4 66.56 20.4 - - - - - -09/11/2013 1.5 7.35 119.2 66.2 125* 0.199 - - 290.9 - 6.7110/13/2013 0.7 7.4 65.4 69.26 9 0.101 - - 214.2 - 10.0509/18/2013 3.9 6.75 125.3 59.54 26.9 0.194 ND ND 1119.9 3.55 NA09/25/2013 4.9 7.32 138.4 57.92 34.5 0.148 ND ND 218.7 3.84 9.7502/15/2014 NM 6.9 141.3 48.7 98.7 0.411 ND 0.254 2.44 9.3305/22/2013 3.8 7.67 224 52.52 21.4 0.0953 ND ND 128.1 - 6.906/26/2013 4.6 7.57 119.8 62.06 27 - - - - - -07/10/2013 1.2 7.44 140 68 18.9 0.199 ND ND 104.6 - 4.708/14/2013 2.5 7.54 175 63.5 13.7 - - - - - -09/11/2013 2.9 7.4 141 64.22 23.4 0.297 - - 461.1 - 6.9410/13/2013 1.2 7.33 181.3 48.56 11.9 0.084 - - 104.6 - 9.9509/18/2013 4 6.85 168.4 58.82 21 acked conta ND ND 307.6 3.78 NA09/25/2013 9 7.07 178.2 56.3 20.5 0.128 ND ND 290.9 3.91 8.8502/15/2014 NM 6.98 155.8 49.5 45.5 0.271 ND 0.296 ND 7.3905/22/2013 0.4 7.25 24.7 48.74 10.2 0.152 ND ND 365.4 - 6.6506/26/2013 0 7.3 198 61.34 3.55 - - - - - -07/10/2013 0 7.55 21 65.12 3.16 0.237 ND ND 113.7 - 3.7508/14/2013 0 7.57 168 62.24 3.51 - - - - - -09/11/2013 0 7.19 160 63.68 3.17 0.168 - - 1046.2 - 4.3210/13/2013 0 6.87 460 47.3 8.06 0.557 - - >2419.2 - 4.3209/18/2013 DRY DRY DRY DRY DRY DRY - - DRY DRY DRY09/25/2013 0.1 7.04 284 54.86 19.3 0.314 ND ND >2419.2 4.92 5.7402/15/2014 19.8 7.23 186.3 48 169 0.459 ND 0.186 3.05 8.9405/22/2013 2.1 7.34 132.3 60.26 8.5 0.0938 ND ND 165.8 - 506/26/2013 0.9 7.55 135.5 62.24 4.8 - - - - - -07/10/2013 0.2 7.3 151 70.88 7.01 0.155 ND ND 579.4 - 1.5508/14/2013 1.2 7.38 130 66.74 2.77 - - - - - -09/11/2013 2.1 7.35 142 67.28 2.25 0.14 - - 209.8 - 6.7510/13/2013 0.4 7.51 239 48.56 1.65 0.093 - - 18.7 - 6.7509/18/2013 0.3 6.69 179.2 59.72 2.07 0.149 ND ND 37.9 3.79 NA09/25/2013 1.5 6.87 136.5 58.1 1.58 0.079 ND ND 30.9 3.85 6.0902/15/2014 74.2 7.08 140.5 47.5 80.8 0.438 ND 0.154 2.64 9.02

WCP7 09/17/2013 1.1 6.1 57 67.1 31.5 0.154 0.35 ND >2419.2 6.19 NA09/25/2013 0 6.97 156 61.7 32 0.214 ND 0.124 435.2 3.95 6.8502/15/2014 3.6 6.84 107.7 49 41.2 0.194 ND 0.122 ND 10.15

WCP8 09/17/2013 3.2 6.9 123.6 67.28 21.1 0.123 0.252 ND >2419.2 5.85 NA09/25/2013 1.9 7.42 27.3 62.42 18 0.096 ND ND 770.1 3.12 6.3702/15/2014 21.2 7.15 21.6 48.4 41.2 0.263 ND ND ND 10.1

shaded color denotes the wet season events. ND = not detected above the laboratory method reporting limit for the compound9/17/2013: 24 hour preciptaion for Central Point = 0.33 inches. (NOAA)9/25/2013: 24 hour precip = 0.39inches. (NOAA) "-" = not analyzed2/15/2014: 24hour precip - 1.63 inches (NOAA) * this value is suspect, but was recorded in the field

WCP6

NM = not measured due to

WCP1

WCP2

WCP3

WCP4

WCP5

Lab AnalysesSite ID Date Flow Field ParametersTotal P TPH-Dx TPH-Oil Bacteria BOD

Figure 1. Base Map, 2013 Whetstone Baseline Monitoring Whetstone Creek Baseline Monitoring

Approximate Scale (in miles)

0 0.2 1.0 2.0

Source: Adapted from 2012aerial on Google Earth

K atalyst , Inc.

Denman Pond

WCP1

WCP2 WCP4

WCP3 WCP5

WCP6

WCP7 WCP8

ß N Fork Whetstone Ck ß

white city

Industrial Complex Urban Residential

Agricultural

Whetstone Pond

Figure 2. Land Cover, 2013 Whetstone Baseline Monitoring Whetstone Creek Baseline Monitoring

Source: Adapted from USGS Land Cover Database 2006 Homer C

K atalyst , Inc.

Figure 3. Impervious Surface, 2013 Whetstone Baseline Monitoring Whetstone Creek Baseline Monitoring

Source: Adapted from USGS Land Cover Database 2006 Homer C

K atalyst , Inc.

Figure 4. Comparison of Temperature at Selected Sites

K atalyst, Inc. Whetstone Creek Baseline Monitoring

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

5/22

/13

5/29

/13

6/5/

13

6/12

/13

6/19

/13

6/26

/13

7/3/

13

7/10

/13

7/17

/13

7/24

/13

7/31

/13

8/7/

13

8/14

/13

8/21

/13

8/28

/13

9/4/

13

9/11

/13

9/18

/13

9/25

/13

10/2

/13

10/9

/13

10/1

6/13

Tem

pera

ture

(F)

Daily Max WCP-2 Daily Max WCP-1

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

5/22

/13

5/29

/13

6/5/

13

6/12

/13

6/19

/13

6/26

/13

7/3/

13

7/10

/13

7/17

/13

7/24

/13

7/31

/13

8/7/

13

8/14

/13

8/21

/13

8/28

/13

9/4/

13

9/11

/13

9/18

/13

9/25

/13

10/2

/13

10/9

/13

10/1

6/13

Tem

pera

ture

(F)

Daily Max WCP-2 Daily Max WCP-3 Daily Max WCP-4

Summer Maximum: 64.4 F for trout and salmon rearing and migration

Summer Maximum: 64.4 F for trout and salmon rearing and migration

Confluence of Swanson and Whetstone Creeks

From Confluence Down to Mouth at WCP1

Figure 5a. Flow: Summer June 26, 2013 (cubic feet per second)

Whetstone Creek Baseline Monitoring


0 0.2 1.0 2.0


K atalyst , Inc.

Denman Pond

WCP1 5.3

WCP2 5.3

WCP4 4.6

WCP3 3.3 WCP5

0.0 WCP6 0.9

WCP7 (nm)

WCP8 (nm)


white city


Agricultural

Whetstone Pond

Figure 5b. Flow: First Flush Rain Event September 18, 2013 (cubic feet per second)



K atalyst , Inc.

Denman Pond

WCP1 5.2

WCP2 4.2

WCP4 4.0

WCP3 3.9

WCP6 0.3

WCP7 1.1

WCP8 3.2


white city


Agricultural

Whetstone Pond WCP5

dry


0 0.2 1.0 2.0

Figure 5c. Flow: High Flow Event February 15, 2014 (cubic feet per second)



K atalyst , Inc.

Denman Pond

WCP1 nm

WCP2 322.9

WCP4 nm

WCP3 nm

WCP6 74.2

WCP7 3.6

WCP8 21.2


white city


Agricultural

Whetstone Pond WCP5

19.8

nm = not measured due to excessive flow


0 0.2 1.0 2.0


Figure 6. Comparison of Flow, Turbidity, Total P at WCP2

K atalyst, Inc.

4.2 5.3 1 3.1 3.2 4.2

9.4

1.3 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Turb

idity

(NTU

)

Flow

(cfs

)

Flow Turbidity

323

4.2 5.3 1 3.1 3.2 4.2

9.4

1.3

0.105

0

0.184

0

0.125

0.093

0.201

0.116

0.351

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Tota

l P (m

g/L)

Flow

(cfs

)

Flow Total P

323


total phosphorous standard (0.08 mg/L)

Figure 7. E Coli Bacteria Comparison: Summer (7/10/2013) vs First Flush (9/18/2013) Whetstone Creek Baseline Monitoring


0 0.2 1.0 2.0


K atalyst , Inc.

Denman Pond

WCP1 260 613

WCP2 102 980

WCP4 105 308

WCP3 126

1120

WCP6

579 38

WCP7 dry

>2419

WCP8 dry

>2419 ß N Fork Whetstone Ck ß

White City


Agricultural

Whetstone Pond WCP5

114 >2419*

(9/25/2013)

WCP1 260 613

= site location = site ID = summer 7/10/2013 = first flush, 9-18-2013 (units = # colonies))

~ L E G E N D ~

Figure 8. TPH-Dx Comparison: No Runoff, First Flush, and High Flow Events Whetstone Creek Baseline Monitoring


0 0.2 1.0 2.0


K atalyst , Inc.

Denman Pond

WCP1 ND ND 0.33

WCP2 ND ND 0.28

WCP4 ND ND 0.3 WCP3

ND ND 0.25

WCP6

ND ND 0.15

WCP7 (dry) 0.35 0.12

WCP8 (dry) 0.25 ND


White City


Agricultural

Whetstone Pond WCP5

ND (dry) 0.19

WCP1 ND ND 0.33

= site location = site ID = no runoff summer 2013 = first flush, 9-18-2013 = high flow, 2-15-2014 (milligrams per liter) ND=not detected

~ L E G E N D ~

Photos Page 1 of 10 2013 Whetstone Baseline Monitoring Katalyst, Inc.

Photograph 1. Looking west from a plane at vernal pools in the pasture land at the corner of Table Rock and Antelope Rd. Whetstone Creek (background) flows from left to right. 1-23-2011.

Photograph 2. Looking upstream (south) at WCP1. 5-22-2013.


Photograph 3. Looking downstream (west) at WCP2 below the confluence of Whetstone and Swanson creeks. 5-22-2013.

Photograph 4. Flow measurement at WCP3 on Swanson Creek just above confluence with Whetstone Creek. 5-22-2013.


Photograph 5. Looking downstream (west) at WCP4 just above a braided portion of Whetstone Creek above its confluence with Swanson Creek. 5-22-2013.

Photograph 6. Looking south at WCP5 between Crater Lake Hwy (left background) and Agate Rd (right background). 9-25-2013.


Photograph 7. Looking downstream (west) during macro-invertebrate training session collection at WCP6 just below Denman in the Denman Wildlife area. 9-10-2013.

Photograph 8. Looking north during a stakeholder kickoff meeting at WCP7, the culvert outfall selected by stakeholders that drains an industrial park (background). 4-23-2013.


Photograph 9. Looking north at WCP8 on the SE corner of Crater Lake Hwy and Antelope Rd, which drains a residential area and a section of Crater Lake Hwy during a high-flow storm event. 2-14-2014.

Photograph 10. Measuring field parameters and collecting water samples at site WCP7 along Table Rock Rd. 9-17-2013.


Photograph 11. Collecting flow measurements using a pygmy flow meter at the cross section at site WCP3. 9-25-2013.

Photograph 12a (above on 2-15-2014) and 12b (below on 4-3-2014). Looking downstream (north) at WCP1 on Whetstone Creek near its mouth with the Rogue River. It was too dangerous to measure flow here during the high flow storm event. However flow was measured at 323 cfs upstream at WCP2, and is likely similar or greater here.


Photograph 13. Looking across the Rogue River near WCP1 during the “high flow” field event. The line of leaves and debris near Heather’s foot (foreground) illustrates the highest flow several hours prior to the field event. 2-15-2014.


Photograph 14. Looking south at WCP6 during the high flow event. Most flow (from left to right) was routed through the main channel (center), but some flow also ran through the wetland and onto an access road (background) shown more closely in the next photograph. 2-15-2014.

Photograph 15. Looking downstream (west) at the side channel during the high flow event at WCP6. 2-15-2014.


Photograph 16. This was the first time runoff flow was observed in this side ditch running alongside the eastern edge of Crater Lake Hwy (back center) at WCP8. 2-15-2014.

Photograph 17. Looking upstream where most of the flow was measured during the “high flow” event at WCP2. Additional flow was also measured in a side channel shown in the following photograph. 2-15-2014.


Photograph 18. About 27 cfs of the 323 cfs measured at WCP2 was flowing through this newly planted riparian area adjacent to the main channel of Whetstone Creek (below the bridge in upper right). 2-15-2014.

k atalyst inc · 2020. 8. 27. · photograph 7. looking south at wcp5 between crater lake hwy (left...

Documents