chowan river tmdl development raccoon/sappony area 09/8/04
TRANSCRIPT
Chowan River TMDL DevelopmentRaccoon/Sappony Area
09/8/04
Impaired Waters in the Blackwater River Drainage
Raccoon Creek – Fecal Coliform Sappony Creek – Fecal Coliform Spring Branch – General Standard (Benthic)
Fecal Coliform ImpairmentsImpaired Stream Segments in the Nottoway River watershed
TMDL Development
Historical data analysis Source assessment
Bacterial source tracking Modeling Allocation
Water Quality Data AnalysisLocation of VADEQ water quality monitoring stations used for TMDL assessment in the Nottoway River watershed
Water Quality Data Analysis
Fecal Coliform Concentrations
Impairment Station Id Sampled
Dates Count Minimum Maximum Mean Median
% Violations
1000
% Violations
400
Raccoon Creek 5ARCN003.36 7/90-3/04 72 4 16,000 742 100 7 14
Raccoon Creek 5ARCN012.80 7/03-3/04 9 25 580 114 25 0 11
Sappony Creek 5ASAP005.54 11/03-3/04 5 10 150 74 80 0 0
Sappony Creek 5ASAP013.69 9/94-3/04 44 20 16,000 635 100 7 11
Spring Creek 5ASGC004.15 7/03-3/04 9 25 250 73 50 0 0
Water Quality Data AnalysisLocation of BST water quality monitoring stations in the Nottoway River watershed
Water Quality Data Analysis
E. coli concentrations
Station Id Sampled
Dates Count Minimum Maximum Mean Median
% Violations
235
5ARCN003.36 11/03-3/04 5 1 88 29 14 0
5ARCN012.80 7/03-3/04 9 10 140 31 20 0
5ASAP005.54 11/03-3/04 5 20 112 50 34 0
5ASAP013.69 7/03-3/04 13 10 60 32 25 0
5ASGC004.15 7/03-3/04 9 10 120 40 20 0
Water Quality Data Analysis
Statistical Analysis of Water Quality Measurements versus Precipitation to determine the relationship between rainfall and water quality
Analyzed relationships for seasonal trends No seasonal trends found
Source Assessment
Identification of Sources DEQ/DCR/Locality records Ag Census Habitat Analysis Stakeholders, local knowledge – improve estimates BST
Delivery Mechanisms Direct Land-applied Exported Out of Watershed
Temporal Variation Migration Patterns/Resident Populations Import/Export of agricultural/STP waste?
Human (2004)
Impairment PopulationHousing
Units (HU)
HU with Sewer
HU with Septic
HU with Other
Raccoon CreekSappony Creek
773998
394448
4967
311352
3429
Human
Sanitary sewer Overflows - reported to DEQ Exfiltration – rate from literature
Failing septic systems Rate based on age of house
Straight pipes U.S. Census and VDH consultation
Pets (2004)
Impairment Dogs CatsRaccoon Creek 210 235Sappony Creek 239 268
Livestock - 1997
Impairment All Cattle Beef Dairy Hog Horse Sheep
Raccoon Creek 224 115 0 1,813 18 14Sappony Creek 396 178 40 140 17 14
Wildlife Population
Impairment DeerTurke
yGoose Duck Muskrat
Raccoon
Beaver
Raccoon CreekSappony Creek
1,272654
274177
165115
421216
18,94710,603
3,0382,480
287189
Bacterial Source TrackingLocation of BST stations in the Nottoway River watershed
Modeling
Hydrologic model Runoff model HSPF
Water Quality model Source Assessment Results HSPF
Model Calibration and Validation Based on data availability, period of
interest
Modeling
$
Modeling
VADEQ Station 5ARNC003.36 and USGS Station #02045500
1
10
100
1,000
10,000
100,000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Flow Duration Interval (%)
Fec
al C
olif
orm
(cf
u/1
00m
l)
Listing Standard New Instantaneous Standard Observed FC
High Flow Moist Conditions Mid-Range Flow Dry Conditions Low Flow
Modeling
VADEQ Station 5ASAP013.69 and USGS Station #02045500
1
10
100
1,000
10,000
100,000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Flow Duration Interval (%)
Fec
al C
olif
orm
(cf
u/1
00m
l)
Listing Standard New Instantaneous Standard Observed FC
High Flow Moist Conditions Mid-Range Flow Dry Conditions Low Flow
Hydrologic Calibration
$
Observed vs. Modeled (10/1/1990-9/30/1995)
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
10/0
1/19
90
11/2
3/19
90
01/1
5/19
91
03/0
9/19
91
05/0
1/19
91
06/2
3/19
91
08/1
5/19
91
10/0
7/19
91
11/2
9/19
91
01/2
1/19
92
03/1
4/19
92
05/0
6/19
92
06/2
8/19
92
08/2
0/19
92
10/1
2/19
92
12/0
4/19
92
01/2
6/19
93
03/2
0/19
93
05/1
2/19
93
07/0
4/19
93
08/2
6/19
93
10/1
8/19
93
12/1
0/19
93
02/0
1/19
94
03/2
6/19
94
05/1
8/19
94
07/1
0/19
94
09/0
1/19
94
10/2
4/19
94
12/1
6/19
94
02/0
7/19
95
04/0
1/19
95
05/2
4/19
95
07/1
6/19
95
09/0
7/19
95
Date
Flo
w (
cfs)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Pre
cip
itat
ion
(in
.)
Precip Observed Modeled
$
Hydrologic Calibration
Observed Modeled Error Target Total In-stream Flow: 50.14 53.26 6.24% 10.00% Upper 10% Flow Values: 25.59 28.48 11.28% 15.00% Lower 50% Flow Values: 3.55 3.58 0.86% 10.00% Winter Flow Volume 27.24 29.67 8.89% 30.00% Spring Flow Volume 14.39 13.96 -3.00% 30.00% Summer Flow Volume 4.14 4.65 12.27% 30.00% Fall Flow Volume 4.36 4.99 14.38% 30.00% Total Storm Volume 49.59 53.26 7.40% 20.00% Winter Storm Volume 27.11 29.67 9.43% 30.00% Spring Storm Volume 14.25 13.96 -2.07% 30.00% Summer Storm Volume 4.00 4.65 16.08% 30.00% Fall Storm Volume 4.23 4.99 18.04% 30.00%
Modeling Source Loads
Source Characterization Fecal production / densities / distribution
Delivery Mechanisms Direct Land-applied Exported Out of Watershed
Temporal Variation
Load CharacteristicsAnimal Waste Load
(lb/an-day) Fecal Coliform Density
(cfu/lb) # Dairy Cow Equivalents
Dairy 120.4 1.23E+08 1 Beef 46.4 4.58E+07 7
Horse 51.0 4.26E+07 7 Swine 11.3 1.81E+08 7 Sheep 2.4 1.95E+07 316 Goat 5.7 6.80E+06 382
Broiler 0.2 2.66E+08 328 Layer 0.3 2.66E+08 214
Human 0.9 2.91E+08 58 Dog 1.0 2.18E+08 69 Cat 0.0 4.08E+03 84,765,882
Raccoon 1.0 9.53E+08 16 Muskrat 0.2 8.62E+08 78 Beaver 0.4 4.54E+05 74,001 Deer 1.7 1.72E+08 50
Turkey 0.7 6.04E+05 34,723 Goose 0.5 1.13E+08 263
Mallard 0.3 1.59E+06 28,191
Model Load Characterization “Direct to Stream” Loads
Point Sources: Design Flow/Fecal Discharge Overflows: Reported overflow volume Characterize Volume and Duration Human: Straight pipes
“Land Applied” Loads Wildlife, Livestock, Pets Transported to stream during runoff producing event Use measured waste characteristics Compute die-off in between events Human: Failing septic systems
Application timing
Wildlife
Animal Type Portion of Day in Stream Access Areas
Direct Deposition
Time of Day Loads Produced
(%) (%) (hr) Deer 5 1 6PM – 6AM Raccoon 5 5 6PM – 6AM Muskrat 90 5 6AM – 6PM Beaver 100 100 6AM – 6PM Turkey 5 1 6AM – 6PM Goose 50 5 6AM – 6PM Duck 75 5 6AM – 6PM
Livestock
Average percentage of collected livestock waste applied throughout year
Month Applied % of Total Land use Dairy Beef Swine Poultry January 1.50 8.33 0.00 0.00 Cropland February 1.75 8.33 0.00 5.00 Cropland March 17.00 8.34 20.00 25.00 Cropland April 17.00 8.34 20.00 20.00 Cropland May 17.00 8.33 20.00 5.00 Cropland June 1.75 8.33 0.00 5.00 Pasture July 1.75 8.33 0.00 5.00 Pasture August 1.75 8.33 0.00 5.00 Pasture September 5.00 8.34 0.00 10.00 Cropland October 17.00 8.34 20.00 10.00 Cropland November 17.00 8.33 20.00 10.00 Cropland December 1.50 8.33 0.00 0.00 Cropland
Livestock
Average time dairy milking cows spend in different areas per day
Livestock
Average time dry cows and replacement heifers spend in different areas per day
Livestock
Average time beef cows not confined in feedlots spend in areas per day
Allocation
Quantify Current Source Conditions Run model with present-day sources
Develop reduction scenarios that will meet water quality standards 100% reduction in straight pipes, 25%
reduction in failed septic systems 100% reduction in straight pipes, 50%
reduction in livestock direct deposition Allocate loads to each source
Livestock - 2002
Impairment All Cattle Beef Dairy Hog Horse Sheep
Raccoon Creek 292 172 0 1,592 41 3Sappony Creek 412 188 39 3,690 54 19
Allocation
Time, (days)
FC
Con
c., (
cfu/
100m
l)
Historical Data
TMDL