Deschutes River, Capitol

Lake, and Budd Inlet

Total Maximum Daily Load

Briefing for CLAMP Steering Committee

November 6, 2008
Mindy Roberts (Ecology)
 Topics covered
• Project purpose
• Project background
• Model and data results
– Budd Inlet and Capitol Lake water quality
– Deschutes River
– Tributaries
• Focus on scientific findings (vs.
implementation)
• Where do we go91 from here? (Lydia) x
waterbodies
 Project purpose
• How much ____ can the Deschutes
River or Capitol Lake or Budd Inlet
take and still meet the water quality
standards?
– Data collection
– Model development (several)
Project Background
 Water Quality Standards
• Clean Water Act
• Developed to protect beneficial uses
of waterbodies
– Human health (bacteria)
– Aquatic life (DO, pH, temperature,
sediment)
• Numeric values (thresholds, changes)
• Waterbody-specific standards
• Related parameters (DO vs.
 Project area and WQS

Outer Budd
Inlet
De
Inner Budd sc
(u hu
InletCapitol ps te
c i Of tr s
r Lake fu ea R
e l t L m ive
P va ak of r
e)
 Impaired waters (CWA
§303(d) list)
• Budd Inlet
• Capitol Lake
• Percival Creek and Black Lake Ditch
• Deschutes River
• Budd Inlet tributaries: Indian, Moxlie,
Adams, Schneider, Butler, Mission
creeks
• Deschutes River tributaries: Reichel,
Ayer (Elwanger), Spurgeon,
Huckleberry, Tempo Lake outlet,
91 waterbodies x
 Parameters included
• Fecal coliform bacteria
• Temperature (heat)
• Dissolved oxygen (nutrients)
• pH
• Fine sediment

91 waterbodies x
 Parameters not included
• Budd Inlet toxics (Toxics Cleanup
Program)
• Ward Lake and Budd Inlet PCBs
• Deschutes River flow and large
woody debris
– Flow scenarios for temperature effects
– Large woody debris links with other
parameters
• Lawrence Lake phosphorus
 Why so many parameters at
once???
• Comprehensive community
strategies are needed
• Management activities that improve
conditions in the Deschutes River
and Percival would benefit Capitol
Lake and Budd Inlet
• Capitol Lake or Deschutes Estuary
influence Budd Inlet
Paramete
r
Budd Inlet and Capitol
Lake
(models and data)
 calibration and verification

Budd Inlet
Scientific Study
(1998)
BF-2

BE-2

BD-2
• Data
BC-2
• Model
Station 1C
BB-2

Station 1C
BA-2
BI-3
BI-4 BI-2
BI-5 BI-1
BI-6
 2008 updates
• Macrophyte
s (rooted
(no plants)
change) • Herbicide
application
(calibration)

*
new
Capitol Lake Water Quality

Critical conditions: summer

 Lake standards
• No more than 0.2
mg/L change in DO
from natural
conditions
• Effect of current
nonpoint sources
causes >0.2 mg/L
depletion
throughout Capitol
Lake
Duration of depletion, days

0.4 - 15
16 - 38
39 - 56
57 - 60
61 - 63
 Science 101
n
it n
s r n it
n
u o it r
wind it
n g r o
o r
li e o g
x o
Mixed g
y n g e
g
h e n
upper g e
t n n
layer e

o
Isolated n

r
watersh

g
Budd Inlet

a
lower ed

n
ic
layer o
o
x
x
y
Puget y
g
u

h
p

h
p
o

o
s

s
r
g
e
Sound e
n …or Capitol Lake or Deschutes River
n
Capitol Lake model
calibration
 Nonpoint sources of nutrients are
too high

• Scenario 1: natural
conditions
• Scenario 2: current
nonpoint sources in
Deschutes River
and Percival Creek
• Scenario 2 –
Scenario 1 = effect
of nonpoint sources
Max DO difference, mg/L

0.2 - 0.3
0.3 - 0.4
0.4 - 0.5
 Factors affecting Capitol
Lake
• Low circulation
• Shallow water depths
• Warm temperatures
• High phosphorus from sediments,
watershed
• High macrophyte biomass
• Algae blooms
• Ideal growing conditions
Budd Inlet Dissolved
Oxygen
Critical conditions: summer

g
e n
itro

g
e n
itro
wind
lig
h n
u

g
e n
itro
t s

g
e n
itro
Mixed upper
g
n
e
o
y
x

layer

Isolated
lower layer Budd Inlet

Puget
g
n
e
no

phosphorus
g
e
o
y
xy
x

Sound
Water Quality Scenarios
Standards
• 1: natural
conditions (no
>6 mg/L point or nonpoint
(if <6 mg/L, sources)
<0.2
difference) • 2: current nonpoint
sources and no
point sources
x • 3: current
>5 mg/L nonpoint and
(if <5 mg/L, current point
<0.2
difference)
sources
• 4: current nonpoint
and maximum
 Example: Scenario 3 at a single cell off Olympia Peninsula
with Capitol Lake

Natural Current nonpoint and point

conditions sources
Magnitude (mg/L DO
difference)
 Summary of Findings
• Under the Lake or Estuary
alternative, the combined effect of
current nonpoint (river) and point
source (wastewater treatment plant)
nitrogen loads violate the water
quality standards for dissolved
oxygen in Budd Inlet.
 Summary of Findings
(cont’d)
• Maximum permitted loads would
cause further violations.
• Current loads must be reduced for a
healthy Budd Inlet.
• Nonpoint source loads must be
reduced for a healthier Capitol Lake.
– Deschutes watershed = large source of
sediment
– Capitol Lake sediments release large
amounts of phosphorus
 Summary of Findings
(cont’d)
• Based on current nonpoint (river) and
point source (wastewater treatment
plant) loads:
– An estuary would…
• reduce the area violating water quality
standards compared with a lake
• reduce the number of days Budd Inlet
violates water quality standards
– … compared with the current lake
• How this translates to nutrient load
reductions will be evaluated in the
Other Parameters

Fecal Coliform Bacteria

Temperature
DO and pH
Fine Sediment
Fecal Coliform Bacteria

(data and calculations)

Fecal coliform bacteria reduction
targets
Winter Summer
Deschutes River
Temperature
(data and model)
 Temperature profile
Deschutes River (7/24/2004) downstream
30 100%

25
80%

20
Temperature(C)

60%

Shade(%)
15

Capitol Lake
Deschutes

40%
10
Falls

20%
5

0 0%
0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Longitudinal distancedownstreamof Deschutes falls (km)

Temp(ºC) AveragePredicted MeanTemp-data Temp(ºC) MinPredicted Temp(ºC) Max Predicted

MinimumTemp-data MaximumTemp-data Tribs Shade(06:00-18:00)
Deschutes River shade
improvements
 Temperature benefits of management
actions
29 downstream

Capitol Lake
Deschutes

27
Falls

25
Tmax (C)

23

21

19

17

15
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Longitudinal distance downstream from Deschutes falls (km)
Base Case WQS
SCEN1: mature veg SCEN2: mat veg + microclimate
SCEN3A: S2+NSDZ,WW<30m SCEN3B: S2+NSDZ,WW<20m
SCEN3C: S3B+NSDZ,WW-10% SCEN3D: S3B+BotW-10%
SCEN4B: S3C+HW,tribs<WQS SCEN5A: S4B+7Q10B
Percival Creek shade
improvements
100%
Percival Creek

80%

60%

40% CURRENT reach averaged effective shade (%)

(%
)S
d
h
a E
fe
tiv
c
20% POTENTIAL reach averaged effective shade (%) daily ave solar
radiation

0%
0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4
River kmupstreamof percival Creek mouth

Black Lake Ditch

100%

80%

60%

40%
(%
)S
d
h
a E
fe
tiv
c

20%

0%
0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4
River kmupstreamof Percival Creek mouth
Deschutes River Dissolved
Oxygen and pH
(data and model)
 Deschutes River DOmin
improvements (temperature
10 downstream

9
DOmin (mg/L)

Capitol Lake
Deschutes
Falls

WQS Base ScenDO1 ScenDO2 ScenDO3 ScenDO4 ScenDO5

6
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Longitudinal distance downstream of Deschutes falls (km)

 Deschutes River DOmin
improvements (nutrient
10
downstream
10

9
DOmin (mg/L)

Capitol Lake
Deschutes

8
Falls

7
WQS Base ScenDO6 ScenDO7 Scen DO8

6
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Longitudinal distance downstream of Deschutes falls (km)

 Deschutes River nutrient
loads
DIN (kg/d) 1.150.14 0.85
OP (kg/d) 1.56 6.38

0.35

e)

5.04

DIN (kg/d) OP (kg/d) 0.14 0.85

1.56 1.15 6.38

0.35

Headwaters
Tributaries (base)

169.90
Tributaries (current-base)
Groundwater
169.90 5.04
Deschutes River Fine
Sediment
(data, model, sediment
budget)
 Fine Sediment
• Squaxin Island
Tribe
• EPA $$
• QA Project Plan
• Re-occupy
historical stations
• Gravel samples
• Percent fines
(<0.85 mm)
*other* Source: Konovsky and Puhn,
parameter 2005
 Konovsky and Puhn (2005)
• No trend with time downstream

• High levels 40

throughout 30

• Weak trend

Percent Fines
(decreasing fines) 20

downstream 10

• Do not meet Year

1995

healthy levels
2004
0

19 22 28 31 36
Site

Source: Konovsky and Puhn,

2005
 Sediment Budget
Natural sources Human sources
• Landslides • Landslides
• Bank erosion associated with
roads
• Unpaved roads
Fine Sediments (<2 mm) Fine and Coarse Sediments

Human Human
sources, Unaccount sources,
Unaccount
19-23% ed, 29% 18-23%
ed, 29%

Other Other
sources, sources,
48-53% 49-53%

Source: Raines, 2007

 Summary of findings
Budd Inlet Deschutes River
• Current nutrient • Temperatures are
loads are too high too hot
• Lake vs. estuary • DO levels are too
• Tributary bacteria low
levels are too high • Fine sediment too
Capitol Lake high
• Current watershed Percival Creek
nutrient loads are • Temperatures are
too high too hot
Reductions are needed– How much?
Where do we go from here?
• CLAMP steering committee meeting
• External review comments due
November 17 to Lydia Wagner (
lbla461@ecy.wa.gov)
• Finalize technical study
• (more model runs)
Where do we go from here?

Your
This report invol
vem
ent
Next report
Questions?