Tucannon/Pataha Watershed Tucannon/Pataha Watershed TMDL TMDL Where are we at & Where are we going Photo of Tucannon River near Territorial Road Bridge taken by HDR, 7/25/2005
WHY DO TMDL’ ’S? S? WHY DO TMDL • It’s the law • EPA lawsuit • Clean Water !
WHAT IS A TMDL? WHAT IS A TMDL? • Total Maximum Daily Load Pollution Reduction Required Total Pollutant Water Quality Standard • Water Clean-up Plan
THE POLLUTION PIE THE POLLUTION PIE Point- -source source Point Non- -point point Non source source
ISSUES WITH TMDLs ISSUES WITH TMDLs • More time spent planning, less • More time spent planning, less doing doing • Duplicative of other planning • Duplicative of other planning processes processes • Regulator centric = stretched • Regulator centric = stretched resources resources
STREAMLINED TMDL STREAMLINED TMDL •Data Collection •TMDL Reports •Management Focused •Implementation Ongoing
WHY HERE? WHY HERE? • Mostly non Mostly non- -point sources point sources • • Small watersheds Small watersheds • • Data already exists Data already exists • • Implementation happening Implementation happening •
TMDL Development Strategy TMDL Development Strategy Address comments on the 2005 HDR study. • Analysis of existing data for Pataha Creek. • Complete the required TMDL elements. •
Comments on 2005 Study Comments on 2005 Study Discussion needed for system potential Discussion needed for system potential • • vegetation analysis. vegetation analysis. Question about water withdrawls Question about water withdrawls • • assumptions. assumptions. What was the effect of the 2005 ‘ ‘School School What was the effect of the 2005 • • House’ ’ fire. House fire. ò The Qual2K model analysis needed a The Qual2K model analysis needed a • • verification model run. verification model run.
Why was the 2005 study not ready Why was the 2005 study not ready for submittal? for submittal? A TMDL requirements not included: A TMDL requirements not included: • • – A discussion of seasonal variation and – A discussion of seasonal variation and address potential issues related to climate address potential issues related to climate change. change. – Load and waste load allocations – Load and waste load allocations – Margin of Safety – Margin of Safety – Summary Implementation Strategy – Summary Implementation Strategy
So what do we know so far? So what do we know so far?
Stream Temperatures Stream Temperatures Warmest day (7/31) vs. Model Day (7/13) Warmest day (7/31) vs. Model Day (7/13) • • Tributary affect on Tucannon Tributary affect on Tucannon • • Temperatures During Schoolhouse Fire Temperatures During Schoolhouse Fire • •
Comparison of Daily Maximum (DMax) Stream Temperatures for Tucannon River and Tributaries 30 25 20 July 2005 Daily Average Streamflow Temperature (C) 80 4 70 3.5 15 Pataha Streamflow (cfs) Tucannon Streamflow (cfs) 60 3 50 2.5 40 2 10 30 1.5 20 1 10 0.5 5 0 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 July Day 2005 Tucannon Streamflow Pataha Streamflow 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 River Kilometer (RKm) Tucannon Dmax on 7/13/05 Tucannon Dmax on 7/31/05 Tributary DMax on 7/13/05 Tributary DMax on 7/31/05
Burn Period Burn Period
Seepage Survey Data Seepage Survey Data Comments about the seepage survey Comments about the seepage survey • • have been addressed have been addressed – Estimated sprinkler usage vs. water right – Estimated sprinkler usage vs. water right claims and metering database claims and metering database – Seepage results make sense with the existing – Seepage results make sense with the existing knowledge of the watershed’ ’s hydrogeology s hydrogeology knowledge of the watershed
Comparison of Daily Average (DAve) Stream Temperature and Groundwater Gain and Loss Volumes Using HDR and Ecology Seepage values 30 20 Major Fault Monocline Anticline Anticline Syncline Syncline 15 25 Hite Fault 10 20 Seepage gain/loss (+/-cfs) Stream Temperature (C) 5 15 0 -5 10 Lil' Tucannon Creek -10 Cummings Creek Pataha Creek Panjab Creek Hixon Creek 5 Cold Creek -15 0 -20 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 River Kilometer (RKm) Tucannon DAve 7/31/05 Tucannon DAve 7/13/05 Tributary DAve 7/13/05 HDR Seepage estimates Ecology Seepage estimates Geologic Faults and Folds
Comparison of Tucannon River Streamflow and Seepage as Percent of Total 100% 70 80% 60 60% 40% 50 Streamflow (cfs) 32% 20% 26% 24% 40 17% 14% 14% 0% 10% 0% -3% -3% 30 -9% -20% -10% -12% -19% -40% 20 -35% -39% -60% 10 -80% 0 -100% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 RKm Mainstem Discharge (cfs) DAve on 7/13/05 Zero Seepage Line Seepage as % of total flow
Anticline Anticline S S y y n n c c l l i i n n e e t t l l u u a a F F r r o o j a j a M M
Major Fault Major Fault t t l l u u a a F F e e t t i i H H Hixon Creek
Riparian Vegetation Analysis Riparian Vegetation Analysis Checked vegetation coding in HDR HDR’ ’s s Checked vegetation coding in • • analysis against better aerial imagery. analysis against better aerial imagery. Pataha Creek vegetation analysis is in Pataha Creek vegetation analysis is in • • process process
Delineated Riparian Vegetation Delineated Riparian Vegetation 200ft Buffer on both sides of Tucannon River 200ft Buffer on both sides of Tucannon River
Tucannon River Burned Riparian Areas Tucannon River Burned Riparian Areas ∆ DMax Stream Temperature on 7/13/05 ∆ DMax Stream Temperature on 7/13/05 Schoolhouse Fire 8/5/05 - - 8/13/05 Schoolhouse Fire 8/5/05 8/13/05 Temperature Accuracy ± ±0.2 0.2º ºC C Temperature Accuracy Burned Vegetation Burned Vegetation Wooten Hatchery Outlet Wooten Hatchery Outlet Intake Intake -0.05 0.05º ºC C - 0.19º ºC C 0.19 0.15º ºC C 0.15 0.37º ºC C 0.37 0.75º ºC C 0.75
Next Steps for Vegetation Analysis Next Steps for Vegetation Analysis Define and Validate values used for Define and Validate values used for • • system potential vegetation system potential vegetation Rerun SHADE for current vegetation Rerun SHADE for current vegetation • • Define Load Allocations for effective shade Define Load Allocations for effective shade • •
Next Steps for TMDL Submittal Next Steps for TMDL Submittal
Recommend
More recommend
