Lower Fox River Suspended Sediment and Phosphorus Load Allocations and Reduction Strategies to Green Bay utilizing the

Lower Fox River Suspended Sediment and Phosphorus Load Allocations and Reduction Strategies to Green...
1 / 29
0
0
789 days ago, 231 views
PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Presentation Transcript

Slide 1

Bring down Fox River Suspended Sediment and Phosphorus Load Allocations and Reduction Strategies to Green Bay utilizing the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) Fox-Wolf Watershed Alliance Research Symposium November 8, 2007 Lawrence University Appleton, Wisconsin Paul Baumgart and Kevin Fermanich University of Wisconsin – Green Bay Lower Fox River Watershed Monitoring Program – www.uwgb.edu/watershed With extra support from EPA subsidizing of the Integrated Watershed Approach Demonstration Project A Pollutant Reduction Optimization Analysis for the Lower FoxRiver Basin and the Green Bay Area of Concern (Laura Blake of The Cadmus Group and Sam Ratick of Clark University) Full report: www.uwgb.edu/watershed/reports/LFox_Load-Allocation.pdf

Slide 2

Primary target Utilize watershed reproductions to support watershed TMDL stack portions and foresee effect of residue and phosphorus lessening procedures inside Lower Fox River Sub-bowl (1580 km 2 )

Slide 3

Watershed foundation: Soil Permeability Clay soils High % spillover 730 mm precip avg ~ 200-240 mm stream ~ 16-27% baseflow

Slide 4

Lower Fox River watersheds & subwatersheds Calibration Sites

Slide 5

Lower Fox River watersheds & subwatersheds LFRWMP Validation Sites

Slide 6

Lower Fox River Year 2000 Landuse and Land cover

Slide 7

Soil and Water Assessment Tool - SWAT USDA – ARS display: J.G. Arnold, J.R. Williams, Temple Texas Continuous every day time step, stream bowl/watershed scale display - physically based Routes water, silt, supplements and pesticides to watershed and bowl outlets Predict effects of administration on water, residue and substance yields Long-term recreations of numerous decades Tracks trim development, culturing, compost/excrement application, supplement cycling consistently Conservation Effects Assessment Project Tool (CEAP) Applied adjusted variant of SWAT 2000 code GIS > spreadsheet > SWAT 2000: to permit more adaptable/complex administration records

Slide 8

Modeled Simulations 1977-2000 climatic period "2004" landuse Baseline conditions Alternative administration situations 2004 landuse conditions with changes

Slide 9

Model Inputs – GIS layers Landuse – arrive cover WDNR Wiscland arrive cover - 1992 Brown County, ECWRPC – 2000 to 2001 Trends: above in addition to USGS 1:24k topographic maps Soils – County SSURGO sub-watershed range weighted midpoints 4 soil layers AWC, mass thickness, sat. cond, K, hydro-bunch, and so on Slope – 30 m Digital Elevation Model Watershed limits - WDNR, USGS, BLRPC WNDR Stream hydrology 1:24k, Brown County Buffers ARC-INFO, ARCVIEW, Spatial Analyst (ESRI) Climate: 1976-2000 every day Green Bay NWS, Appleton, Brillion, 3 long haul stations Plus 15 UWGB & USGS tipping basins & lumberjacks Point source loads from WDNR

Slide 10

Model Inputs – Rain Gage Network

Slide 11

Model Calibration & Assessment Calibrate: 1) stream 2) edit yields and supplement levels 3) suspended silt 4) phosphorus 5) diss. P Validate/survey: stream, SS, P at various time as well as site Daily, occasion, month to month, yearly, add up to premise Primary Calibration site: USGS/WDNR - Upper Bower Cr. (36 km 2 ) Primary Validation locales (Lower Fox River Watershed Monitoring Program Watersheds - in addition to USGS, GBMSD, Oneida Nation financing): Apple Creek at Campground - 117 km 2 Ashwaubenon Creek at Creamery Rd. - 48 km 2 Baird Creek at Superior - 54 km 2 Duck Creek at FF - 276 km 2 East River at Monroe St. – 374 km 2

Slide 12

Calibration & Validation Examples

Slide 13

Calibrate – Validate: Stream Flow Upper Bower Creek occasions Untransformed: R 2 = 0.80, NSE = 0.80 Untransformed: R 2 = 0.95, NSE = 0.94 for n = 12, not ice-influenced occasions

Slide 14

Calibrate Monthly stream Upper Bower Creek R 2 =.87, NS=0.86 Validate Monthly stream Upper Bower Creek R 2 =0.76, NS=0.76

Slide 15

Calibrate – Validate: Suspended Sediment Upper Bower Creek occasions Untransformed: R 2 = 0.96, NSE = 0.95 Untransformed: R 2 = 0.85, NSE = 0.85

Slide 16

Assessment/Validation Summary: unadjusted model connected to LFRWMP watersheds (2004-05 information) Initially 2006 information not used on the grounds that not finished at time (Nov 06 to April 07) Validation criteria objective: R 2 or NSCE of 0.6 or more noteworthy (with a few capabilities)

Slide 17

Assessment/Validation Summary: adjusted* Duck Cr. & East River (2004-05) * Duck Creek: P sorption coefficient and P dividing coef. * East River: residue transport calculate (800 mg/L to 500 mg/L)

Slide 18

Assessment/Validation Summary: adjusted* Duck Cr. & East River (2004-06) * Duck Creek: P retention coefficient and P parceling coef. * East River: residue transport consider (800 mg/L to 500 mg/L) When 2006 information included, demonstrate did not execute also, which diminished factual measures

Slide 19

Model Assessment Summary by and large, a genuinely decent correspondence amongst mimicked and watched stream and heaps of phosphorus and suspended silt (month to month, yearly, sums) Model reaction worthy for prescient reproductions in sub-bowl Model slightest ready to anticipate stream and loads: from little occasions, influenced phosphorus stacks most after delayed dry periods amid snow dissolve periods from East River as of now (dregs loads)

Slide 20

Model Results – Baseline Conditions stream and loads at sub-bowl, watershed and sub-watershed scales Total, and by HRU/landuse class

Slide 21

Simulated P Load to Lower Green Bay from LFR Basin: 2004 Baseline versus Select. Situation of Ag BMPs and Point Source Reductions (note: Winn stack ~ 288,000 kg/yr) From: Integrated Watershed Approach Demonstration Project A Pollutant Reduction Optimization Analysis for the Lower Fox River Basin and the Green Bay Area of Concern (Table 6). Arranged by Laura Blake of The Cadmus Group for U.S. EPA (with commitments by P. Baumgart of UW-Green Bay and Sam Ratick of Clark University)

Slide 22

Simulated effects and cost of Optimal Scenario on phosphorus non-pt source burdens to Green Bay from LFR subbasin. Improved for P diminishment. From: Integrated Watershed Approach Demonstration Project A Pollutant Reduction Optimization Analysis for the Lower Fox River Basin and the Green Bay Area of Concern (Table 6). Arranged by Laura Blake of The Cadmus Group for U.S. EPA (with commitments by P. Baumgart of UW-Green Bay and Sam Ratick of Clark University)

Slide 23

Simulated effects and cost of Optimal Scenario on silt and phosphorus non-guide source loads toward Green Bay from LFR subbasin. Improved for P decrease. From: Integrated Watershed Approach Demonstration Project A Pollutant Reduction Optimization Analysis for the Lower Fox River Basin and the Green Bay Area of Concern (Table 6). Arranged by Laura Blake of The Cadmus Group for U.S. EPA (with commitments by P. Baumgart of UW-Green Bay and Sam Ratick of Clark University)

Slide 24

Next Steps Refine SWAT stream bank disintegration gauges - Sediment source following with radionuclides

Slide 25

Sediment Tracer Preliminary Investigation Objective: decide relative commitments of suspended dregs sources to streams in Lower Fox watersheds Sources: provincial spillover, stream bank, development site, urban UW-Milwaukee (Val Klump) radionuclide examination (Cs-137, Pb-210, Be-7) UW-Green Bay testing & handling & other compound examination (GBMSD as well as UWGB) 66 tests gathered/dissected from 2006 to Oct. 2007 Suspended residue (streams – 9 tests) including Spring snowmelt tests from Baird North & South branches Soils (surface, best, base for aggregate of 36) Sub-soil (3 tests) Stream bank (6 tests - Baird Creek) Huron-Sitka Detention lake (2 centers, 12 tests) Lab comes about because of UW-Milw. done, yet not completely broke down yet

Slide 26

Sediment Tracer Preliminary Investigation Time-coordinated suspended dregs sampler

Slide 27

Sediment Tracer Preliminary Investigation: Only exceptionally preparatory results right now

Slide 28

Acknowledgments Dave Graczyk, Paul Reneau, Dale Robertson and Troy Rutter - U.S. Topographical Survey John Kennedy and Tracy Valenta, GBMSD Oneida Nation Outagamie LCD (Sue McBurney, Jim Poweleit, Ann Francart Laura Ward Good (UW-Madison) Bud Harris, Dave Dolan - UWGB Jesse Baumann, Jessie Fink, Jon Habeck, Nick Reckinger, Erika Sisal, Zach Zachariah - UWGB Arjo Wiggins Appleton, Inc. Unique because of the accompanying individuals for their help with this venture:

Slide 29

Questions? Email: baumgarp@uwgb.edu Full reports: www.uwgb.edu/watershed

SPONSORS