1 / 17

Big Eau Pleine Reservoir Water Quality

Big Eau Pleine Reservoir Water Quality. Where are we?. History. UWSP 1970’s and 80’ (Shaw et al.) WVIC Annual Tri-annual DNR 2005-06 CBM Proposed BEP Monitoring Special Project 2009-2010 as a result of PACR denial. Wisconsin River TMDL.

rufus
Download Presentation

Big Eau Pleine Reservoir Water Quality

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Big Eau Pleine ReservoirWater Quality Where are we?

  2. History • UWSP 1970’s and 80’ (Shaw et al.) • WVIC • Annual • Tri-annual • DNR • 2005-06 • CBM • Proposed BEP Monitoring Special Project 2009-2010 as a result of PACR denial

  3. Wisconsin River TMDL • Intent was to create a TMDL for the Wisconsin River • Huge task • Ultimately denied due to funding needs • Decided to piece it out. • BEP best candidate due to previous studies started long before 2008-09 fish kill

  4. What is a TMDLAnd WHY? • Total Maximum Daily Load What is the maximum load a water body can receive and still meet water quality standards • Monitoring needed to capture MASS! • Tie land use into water quality results • Locate sources of nutrients

  5. Watershed Characterization Land management variations determined within each subwatershed FIND THE SOURCES!!!!

  6. We Know….. • BOD and Nutrients affect water quality and ultimately fish health on BEP • Runoff is the major source of BOD and Nutrients • Controlling runoff will improve water quality and fish health • Confirmed in 2007

  7. BEP Winter Runoff Study • 2006-2007 studied compared BEP to Spirit Flowage • Runoff events vs. non-runoff event • Basic difference is land use • Spirit (11%) vs. BEP (77%) • Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) and Total Phosphorus (TP)

  8. Results

  9. Other Results • BOD 4x’s higher in BEP than Spirit • TP 8x’s higher in BEP than Spirit • During runoff events, BOD 14x’s higher than Wausau Treatment Plant • Actual values expected to be higher

  10. What we need to know • What [BOD] load causing oxygen depletion • What [TP] fueling algal blooms • Need to indentify sources • Target sources and remediate • Need $$$ to remediate • Amount of green habitat

  11. Where do we go now?Need Current Data with Land Use • 2007 the BEP project was beginning • Funding was an issue • Tried and was successful in 2008 • Fish Kill • Monitoring starts in 10/2009 • Finish in 2011

  12. BEP Special ProjectNOT just another study! • Monitor BOD, TP and Q 2009-2010 • Model 358 mi2 of land use • Find the tolerable [c] • Implement land use practices to reach [c] Like it or not, this is needed first. Need to identify the problem (WHERE) to fix the problem.

  13. After Project • Implement • Proof to secure funding for cost share • See slow improvements • Continue band-aids while healing Will need involvement and cooperation for project to work!!!!

  14. Upper Big Eau Pleine Watershed

  15. Lower Big Eau Pleine watershed

  16. Results will show • What effects changes in land use have • Minor changes in land use can have major effects • What levels are tolerable • What will be the target levels • Priority areas • Identify, plan and implement*** • Flow changes can be evaluated

  17. QUESTIONS Thank You!

More Related