Water Quality Monitoring and Constituent Load Estimation in

the Upper White River Basin, 2009

Brian HaggardDirector

Arkansas Water Resources Center

Funding provided by ANRC through Beaver Water District

2009 Summary Loads and Flow-Weighted Concentrations

Summary of calculated total loads (kg) for each parameter at the sampled sites in the Upper White River Basin for the period, January through December 2009.

Site Cl- SO4 NH3-N NO3-N SRP TN TP TSS Brush Creek 153,000 313,000 1,200 41,000 1,000 48,000 5,400 3,031,000 Richland CreekA -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Town Branch 22,000 47,000 330 1,300 130 1,900 360 213,000 Town Branch Tributary 74,000 148,000 1,300 14,000 150 15,000 480 129,000 War Eagle Creek 1,947,000 2,610,000 37,000 501,000 17,400 582,000 78,000 37,803,000 West Fork White River 844,000 3,280,000 18,000 91,000 3,200 136,000 30,000 12,697,000 White River 2,024,000 6,815,000 71,000 313,000 12,000 442,000 98,000 35,851,000 Summary of calculated flow weighted concentrations (FWC, mg L-1) for each parameter at the sampled sites in the Upper White

River Basin for the period, January through December 2009. Site Cl- SO4 NH3-N NO3-N SRP TN TP TSS Brush Creek 7.52 14.03 0.06 2.03 0.05 2.38 0.27 149 Richland CreekA -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Town Branch 15.06 31.92 0.22 0.87 0.07 1.29 0.26 145 Town Branch Tributary 16.26 32.76 0.28 3.00 0.03 3.38 0.11 29 War Eagle Creek 4.31 5.77 0.08 1.11 0.04 1.29 0.17 84 West Fork White River 4.09 15.88 0.09 0.44 0.02 0.66 0.14 61 White River 2.84 9.55 0.10 0.44 0.02 0.62 0.14 50

Water samples were collected at seven sites within UWRB

War Eagle Creek

Brush Creek

Richland CreekWhite RiverWest Fork White RiverTown Branch

Tributary

Town Branch

Stage recorded in 30 minute intervals by USGS to estimate discharge.

Water samples were collected once a week and storm events were targeted

Water samples were analyzed at the AWRC Water Quality Lab for:• Chloride• Sulfate• Nitrate-N• Ammonia-N• Soluble reactive P• Total N• Total P• Total Suspended Solids

Load Determination and Mean Concentration

Linear regression was used to determine the relationship between daily load, flow, and even seasonal factors:• ln(Ld) = βo + β1ln(Qd) —or—• ln(Ld) = βo + β1ln(Qd) + β2sin(2πT) + β3cos(2πT)

BCF was used to remove bias from log transformations:BCF= ∑er

n

Load Determination and Mean ConcentrationBCF R2

NH3 1.27-1.94 0.79-0.93Cl 1.03-1.28 0.80-0.97NO3 1.02-1.35 0.83-0.98SRP 1.15-1.67 0.74-0.96SO4 1.02-1.22 0.71-0.99TN 1.01-1.24 0.88-0.99TP 1.13-1.62 0.83-0.96TSS 1.16-4.14 0.82-0.96

Daily loads were variable…

Days during Calendar Year 2009

0 100 200 300

Load

s (k

g)

1e-2

1e-1

1e+0

1e+1

1e+2

1e+3

1e+4

1e+5

1e+6

1e+7

1e+8

Chloride

Days during Calendar Year 2009

0 100 200 300

Load

s (k

g)

1e-2

1e-1

1e+0

1e+1

1e+2

1e+3

1e+4

1e+5

1e+6

1e+7

1e+8

Total Phosphorus

Days during Calendar Year 2009

0 100 200 300

Load

s (k

g)

1e-2

1e-1

1e+0

1e+1

1e+2

1e+3

1e+4

1e+5

1e+6

1e+7

1e+8

Total Suspended Solids

Days during Calendar Year 2009

0 100 200 300

Load

s (k

g)

1e-2

1e-1

1e+0

1e+1

1e+2

1e+3

1e+4

1e+5

1e+6

1e+7

1e+8

Total Nitrogen

White River

Monthly loads were least during drier, summer months…

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

Total Nitrogen

0

2000000

4000000

6000000

8000000

10000000

12000000

14000000

Total Suspended Solids

050000

100000150000200000250000300000350000400000450000

Chloride

White River

Annual Total Nitrogen Loads

White River

Annual Total Phosphorus Loads

White River

Annual Total Suspended Solids Loads

White River

At UWRB… We looked at how

loads changed across these sites

We also looked at how flow-weighted concentrations changed across these sites

War Eagle Creek

Brush CreekRichland Creek

White RiverWest Fork White River

Town Branch Tributary

Town Branch

Catchment area is related to annual phosphorus loads…

Catchment Drainage Area (km2)

e0 e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 e7 e8

Tota

l Pho

spho

rus

Load

(kg)

e5

e6

e7

e8

e9

e10

e11

BC

TBTBT

WEC

WF

WR

But, FWC were greater from two urban and agricultural streams

Catchment Drainage Area (km2)

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

Tota

l Pho

spho

rus

FWC

(mg

L-1 )

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

BCTB

TBT

WEC

WF WR

The monitoring program design was successful at estimating loads across these sites

This monitoring program allowed us to sample several more sites, including some urban streams

It would be possible to reduce the sampling frequency to estimate loads…• REDUCE COSTS